eters!"

Mr. Atkinson supposes that success in the new experiment "was rendered
possible by the rise of new powers in nascent man." Here I do not
follow him. "The germ of altruism," which he sees as "already having
risen to make its force felt" was, indeed, as he says "an important
factor." But is it credible that this altruism existed in the father?
I can conceive him being won over through his own emotional dependence
on some specially pleasing woman; he may well have had favourites
among his wives. I cannot accept "altruism" as a reason for his
conduct, under conditions acting in an exact opposite way in fostering
and increasing egoism. Much more probable is the supposition that he
"must have reached the age when the fire of desire had become somewhat
dulled."

I must also take exception to a further statement of Mr. Atkinson,
"that with such prolonged infancy there had been opportunity for the
development of paternal philoprogenitiveness." And again: "It is
evident that such long-continued presence of sons could but result in
a certain mutual sympathy, however inevitable the eventual exile." It
is unnecessary for me to labour this question. I may, however, point
out, that the identical conditions of the family among the anthropoid
apes (on whom Mr. Atkinson bases his patriarchy) do not afford any
proof of paternal altruism. The polygamous jealous father never enters
into friendly union with the other males. He is strong and sexually
beautiful, but he is never social in his domestic conduct. He is the
tyrant in the family, and the young are guarded from his attacks by
the mothers. With the mothers there is protection and safety, with the
father ownership. The whole argument of the patriarchal theory is
based on the fact of the jealous conduct of the male. Driven to live
in solitary enmity, the patriarch could not voluntarily tolerate the
presence of a rival, if he was to maintain his position as ruler. It
is impossible to get away from this. Mr. Atkinson comes very near to
this essential truth, when he suggests (though he does not fully
acknowledge) that the first step in social development came through
the mother's love for her child; but at once he turns aside from this,
drawn, I think unconsciously, to the common opinion of the complete
subjection of the females to the male, an opinion always making it
difficult to accept the initiative in reform as coming from the woman.

The exclusive and persisting idea of M