196 ON THE RECEPTION OF 



man of science, and " creational " to draw the orthodox. So 

 I took refuge in that " tJidtige Skepsis " which Goethe has so 

 well defined ; and, reversing the apostolic precept to be all 

 things to all men, I usually defended the tenability of the 

 received doctrines, when I had to do with the transmuta- 

 tionists ; and stood up for the possibility of transmutation 

 among the orthodox thereby, no doubt, increasing an already 

 current, but quite undeserved, reputation for needless com- 

 bativeness. 



I remember, in the course of my first interview with 

 Mr. Darwin, expressing my belief in the sharpness of the lines 

 of demarcation between natural groups and in the absence 

 of transitional forms, with all the confidence of youth and 

 imperfect knowledge. I was not aware, at that time, that he 

 had then been many years brooding over the species-ques- 

 tion ; and the humorous smile which accompanied his gentle 

 answer, that such was not altogether his view, long haunted 

 and puzzled me. But it would seem that four or five years' 

 hard work had enabled me to understand what it meant ; 

 for Lyell,* writing to Sir Charles Bunbury (under date of 

 April 30, 1S56), says: 



" When Huxley, Hooker, and Wollaston were at Darwin's 

 last week they (all four of them) ran a tilt against species 

 further, I believe, than they are prepared to go." 



I recollect nothing of this beyond the fact of meeting Mr. 

 Wollaston ; and except for Sir Charles' distinct assurance 

 as to " all four," I should have thought my ontrectiidance was 

 probably a counterblast to Wollaston's conservatism. With 

 regard to Hooker, he was already, like Voltaire's Habakkuk, 

 "capable de tout" in the way of advocating Evolution. 



As I have already said, I imagine that most of those of my 

 contemporaries who thought seriously about the matter, were 

 very much in my own state of mind inclined to say to 

 both Mosaists and Evolutionists, " a plague on both your 



* ' Life and Letters/ vol. ii. p. 212. 



