follows that memory enters also as a fundamental principle into
development of body. For mind and body are so closely connected
that nothing can enter largely into the one without correspondingly
affecting the other.

On a later page Mr. Romanes speaks point-blank of the new-born child
as "EMBODYING the results of a great mass of HEREDITARY EXPERIENCE"
(p. 77), so that what he is driving at can be collected by those who
take trouble, but is not seen until we call up from our own
knowledge matter whose relevancy does not appear on the face of it,
and until we connect passages many pages asunder, the first of which
may easily be forgotten before we reach the second. There can be no
doubt, however, that Mr. Romanes does in reality, like Professor
Hering and myself, regard development, whether of mind or body, as
due to memory, for it is now pretty generally seen to be nonsense to
talk about "hereditary experience" or "hereditary memory" if
anything else is intended.

I have said above that on page 113 of his recent work Mr. Romanes
declares the analogies between the memory with which we are familiar
in daily life, and hereditary memory, to be "so numerous and
precise" as to justify us in considering them as of one and the same
kind.

This is certainly his meaning, but, with the exception of the words
within inverted commas, it is not his language. His own words are
these:-

"Profound, however, as our ignorance unquestionably is concerning
the physical substratum of memory, I think we are at least justified