18, 1867. {iii} I wrote
to the _Athenaeum_ (Jan. 26, 1884) and pointed out that _Nature_ did not
begin to appear till nearly three years after the date given by Mr.
Romanes, and that there was nothing from Canon Kingsley on the subject of
instinct and inherited memory in any number of _Nature_ up to the date of
Canon Kingsley's death. I also asked for the correct reference.
This Mr. Romanes has not thought it incumbent upon him to give. I am
told I ought not to have expected him to give it, inasmuch as it is no
longer usual for men of any but the lowest scientific standing to correct
their misstatements when they are brought to book. Science is made for
Fellows of the Royal Society, and for no one else, not Fellows of the
Royal Society for science; and if the having achieved a certain position
should still involve being obliged to be as scrupulous and accurate as
other people, what is the good of the position? This view of the matter
is practical, but I regret that Mr. Romanes should have taken it, for his
having done so has prevented my being able to tell the reader what Canon
Kingsley said about memory and instinct, and this he might have been glad
to know.
I suspect, however, that what Canon Kingsley said was after all not very
important. If it had been, Mr. Romanes would have probably told us what
it was in his own book.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25