1 859-] NAUDIN. 247 



how big it is : I shall not be able to read it very soon. It 

 was very good of you to send Naudin, for I was very curious 

 to see it. I am surprised that Decaisne should say it was 

 the same as mine. Naudin gives artificial selection, as well 

 as a score of English writers, and when he says species were 

 formed in the same manner, I thought the paper would cer- 

 tainly prove exactly the same as mine. But I cannot find 

 one word like the struggle for existence and natural selection. 

 On the contrary, he brings in his principle (p. 103) of finality 

 (which I do not understand), which, he says, with some authors 

 is fatality, with others providence, and which adapts the forms 

 of every being, and harmonises them all throughout nature. 



He assumes like old geologists (who assumed that the forces 

 of nature were formerly greater), that species were at first 

 more plastic. His simile of tree and classification is like 

 mine (and others), but he cannot, I think, have reflected 

 much on the subject, otherwise he would see that genealogy 

 by itself does not give classification ; I declare I cannot see a 

 much closer approach to Wallace and me in Naudin than 

 in Lamarck we all agree in modification and descent. If 

 I do not hear from you I will return the ' Revue ' in a few 

 days (with the cover). I dare say Lyell would be glad to see 

 it. By the way, I will retain the volume till I hear whether 

 I shall or not send it to Lyell. I should rather like Lyell 

 to see this note, though it is foolish work sticking up for 



independence or priority. 



Ever yours, 



C. Darwin. 



A. Sedgwick* to C. Darwin. 



Cambridge, December 24th, 1859. 



My DEAR Darwin, I write to thank you for your work on 

 the ' Origin of Species.' It came, I think, in the latter part 



* Rev. Adam Sedgwick, Wood- the University of Cambridge. Born 

 vardian Professor of Geology in 1785, died 1873. 



