ch. xiv.] 18611871. 275 



" The history of science hardly presents so striking an 

 instance of youthfulness of mind in advanced life as is 

 shown by this abandonment of opinions so long held and so 

 powerfully advocated ; and if we bear in mind the extreme 

 caution, combined with the ardent love of truth which char- 

 acterise every work which our author has produced, w r e shall 

 be convinced that so great a change was not decided on 

 without long and anxious deliberation, and that the views 

 now adopted must indeed be supported by arguments of 

 overwhelming force. If for no other reason than that Sir 

 Charles Lyell in his tenth edition has adopted it, the theory 

 of Mr. Darwin deserves an attentive and respectful consid- 

 eration from every earnest seeker after truth." 



The incident of the Copley Medal is interesting as giv- 

 ing an index of the state of the scientific mind at the time. 



My father wrote : " some of the old members of the 

 Royal are quite shocked at my having the Copley." In the 

 Reader, December 3, 18G4, General Sabine's ]n*esidential 

 address at the Anniversary Meeting is reported at some 

 length. Special w T eight was laid on my father's work in 

 Geology, Zoology, and Botany, but the Origin of Species 

 was praised chiefly as containing a " mass of observations," 

 &c. It is curious that as in the case of his election to the 

 French Institute, so in this case, he was honoured not for 

 the great work of his life, but for his less important work 

 in special lines. 



I believe I am right in saying that no little dissatisfac- 

 tion at the President's manner of allusion to the Origin was 

 felt by some Fellows of the Society. 



My father spoke justly when he said that the subject was 

 " safe in foreign lands." In telling Lyell of the progress of 

 opinion, he wrote (March, 1863) : 



" A first-rate German naturalist * (I now forget the 

 name ! ), who has lately published a grand folio, has spoken 

 out to the utmost extent on the Origin. De Candolle, in a 

 very good paper on ' Oaks,' goes, in Asa Gray's opinion, as 

 far as he himself does ; but De Candolle, in writing to me, 

 says tve, ' we think this and that ; ' so that I infer he really 

 goes to the full extent with me, and tells me of a French 

 good botanical palaeontologist f (name forgotten), who 



* No doubt Haeckel, whose monograph on the Kadiolaria was published in 

 1862. 



+ The Marquis de Saporta. 



