18591863] REVIEWS 169 



the discovered series is, which Falconer thought years ago Letter 112 

 was nearly perfect. 



I will send to-day or to-morrow two articles by Asa Gray. 

 The longer one (now not finally corrected) will come out in 

 the October Atlantic Monthly, and they can be got at 

 Triibner's. Hearty thanks for all your kindness. 



Do not hurry over Asa Gray. He strikes me as one of 

 the best reasoners and writers I ever read. He knows my 

 book as well as I do myself. 



To C. Lyell. Letter 113 



15, Marine Parade, Eastbourne, Oct. 3rd [1860]. 



Your last letter has interested me much in many ways. 



I enclose a letter of Wyman's * which touches on brains. 

 Wyman is mistaken in supposing that 1 did not know that 

 the Cave-rat was an American form ; I made special en- 

 quiries. He does not know that the eye of the Tucutuco 

 was carefully dissected. 



With respect to reviews by A. Gray. I thought of 

 sending the Dialogue 2 to the Saturday Review in a week's 



existence, do not accord in arrangement. The species extreme in 

 character are not the oldest, or the most recent ; nor are those which 

 are intermediate in character intermediate in age. But supposing for an 

 instant, in this and other such cases, that the record of the first appear- 

 ance and disappearance of the species was perfect, we have no reason to 

 believe that forms successively produced necessarily endure for corre- 

 sponding lengths of time. A very ancient form might occasionally last 

 much longer than a form elsewhere subsequently produced, especially 

 in the case of terrestrial productions inhabiting separated districts " 

 (pp. 334-5). The same words occur in the later edition of the Origin 

 (Ed. vi., p. 306). 



1 Jeffries Wyman (1814-74) graduated at Harvard in 1833, and after- 

 wards entered the Medical College at Boston, receiving the M.D. degree 

 in 1837. In 1847 Wyman was appointed Hervey Professor of Anatomy 

 at Harvard, which position he held up to the time of his death. His con- 

 tributions to zoological science numbered over a hundred papers. (See 

 Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts and Sciences, Vol. II., 1874-75, PP- 49^ 55-) 



2 " Discussion between two Readers of Darwin's Treatise on the 

 Origin of Species, upon its Natural Theology " (Amer. Journ. Sci., 

 Vol. XXX., p. 226, 1860). Reprinted in Darwiniana, 1876, p. 62. 

 The article begins with the following question : " First Reader Is 

 Darwin's theory atheistic or pantheistic ? Or does it tend to atheism 

 or pantheism ? " The discussion is closed by the Second Reader, who 



