“Then it strikes me we ought to be doing something
always hear you when you speak to him; but no doubt that's because he's thinking o' something else. He's not what you call deaf, not in the least."
“The world will lit-tle note, nor long re-mem-ber, what we say here; but it can nev-er for-get what they did here. It is for us, the liv-ing, rath-er to be ded-i-ca-ted here to the great task re-main-ing be-fore us—that, from these hon-ored dead, we take in-creased de-vo-tion to that cause for which they gave the last full meas-ure of de-vo-tion; that we here high-ly re-solve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this na-tion, un-der God, shall have a new birth of free-dom, and that gov-ern-ment of the peo-ple, by the peo-ple, for the peo-ple shall not per-ish from the earth.”
And crossed on the railing one o’er one
“Made three years ago. Dated March 25; and the time is given also—11 a.m.—that is very suggestive. It narrows the field of search. Assuredly it is another will we have to seek for. A will made even half-an-hour later would upset this. Eh bien, mademoiselle, it is a problem charming and ingenious that you have presented to me here. I shall have all the pleasure in the world in solving it for you. Granted that your uncle was a man of ability, his grey cells cannot have been of the quality of Hercule Poirot’s!”
“Yes?” he said. “I understand what he means. I—even I—had been thinking that something of the sort—might be a good thing.”
"Not sorry! That's not polite. Why are you not sorry?"
suggested objections to such views, these objections were usually little regarded, and in fact reflections of this kind on the real meaning of the natural system did not often make their appearance; the most intelligent men turned away with an uncomfortable feeling from these doubts and difficulties, and preferred to devote their time and powers to the discovery of affinities in individual forms. At the same time it was well understood that the question was one which lay at the foundation of the science. At a later period the researches of Nägeli and others in morphology resulted in discoveries of the greatest importance to systematic botany, and disclosed facts which were necessarily fatal to the hypothesis, that every group in the system represents an idea in the Platonic sense; such for instance were the remarkable embryological relations, which Hofmeister discovered in 1851, between Angiosperms, Gymnosperms, Vascular Cryptogams and Muscineae; nor was it easy to reconcile the fact, that the physiologico-biological peculiarities on the one hand and the morphological and systematic characters on the other are commonly quite independent of one another, with the plan of creation as conceived by the systematists. Thus an opposition between true scientific research and the theoretical views of the systematists became more and more apparent, and no one who paid attention to both could avoid a painful feeling of uncertainty with respect to this portion of the science. This feeling was due to the dogma of the constancy of species, and to the consequent impossibility of giving a scientific definition of the idea of affinity.
[Pg 63]详情 ➢
Copyright © 2020