ch. xiv.] 18611871. 271 



men would have been so. . . . As you say that you have 

 gone as far as you believe on the species question, I have 

 not a word to say ; but I must feel convinced that at times, 

 judging from conversation, expressions, letters, &c, you 

 have as completely given up belief in immutability of 

 specific forms as I have done. I must still think a clear 

 expression from you, if you could have given it, would have 

 been potent with the public, and all the more so, as you 

 formerly held opposite opinions. The more I work, the 

 more satisfied I become with variation and natural selection, 

 but that part of the case I look at as less important, though 

 more interesting to me personally. As you ask for criticisms 

 on this head (and believe me that I should not have made 

 them unasked), I may specify (pp. 412, 413) that such 

 words as " Mr. D. labours to show," " is believed by the 

 author to throw light," would lead a common reader to 

 think that you yourself do not at all agree, but merely 

 think it fair to give my opinion. Lastly, you refer re- 

 peatedly to my view as a modification of Lamarck's doc- 

 trine of development and progression. If this is your de- 

 liberate opinion there is nothing to be said, but it does not 

 seem so to me. Plato, Buffon, my grandfather before 

 Lamarck, and others, propounded the obvious view that if 

 species were not created separately they must have de- 

 scended from other species, and I can see nothing else in 

 common between the Origin and Lamarck. I believe this 

 way of putting the case is very injurious to its acceptance, 

 as it implies necessary progression, and closely connects 

 Wallace's and my views with what I consider, after two 

 deliberate readings, as a wretched book, and one from 

 which (I well remember my surprise) I gained nothing. 

 But I know you rank it higher, which is curious, as it did 

 not in the least shake your belief. But enough, and more 

 than enough. Please remember you have brought it all 

 down on vourself ! ! 



I am very sorry to hear about Falconer's " reclamation." * 

 I hate the very word, and have a sincere affection for 

 him. 



Did you ever read anything so wretched as the Atlie- 



* " Falconer, whom 1 [Lyell] referred to ol'tener than to any other author, 

 says I have not done justice* to the part he took in resuscitating the cave ques- 

 tion, and says he shall come out with a separate paper to prove it. I ottered 

 to alter anvthing in the new edition, but this he declined." C. Lyell to C. 

 Darwin, March 11, 1863 ; Lyell's Life, vol. ii. p. 364. 



