i860.] CAMBRIDGE PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY. loi 



As you said you were curious to hear Thomson's * opinion, 

 I send his kind letter. He is evidently a strong opposer 

 to us 



C. Darivin to J. D. Hooker. 



Down [May 15th, 1S60]. 



How paltry it is in such men as X, Y and Co. 



not reading your essay. It is incredibly paltry.f They 

 may all attack me to their hearts' content. I am got case- 

 hardened. As for the old fogies in Cambridge, it really signi- 

 fies nothing. I look at their attacks as a proof that our work 

 is worth the doing. It makes me resolve to buckle on my 

 armour. I see plainly that it will be a long uphill fight. \ 

 But think of Lyell's progress with Geology. One thing I 

 see most plainly, that without Lyell's, yours, Huxley's, and 

 Carpenter's aid, my book would have been a mere flash in 

 the pan. But if we all stick to it, we shall surely gain the 

 day. And I now see that the battle is worth fighting. I 

 deeply hope that you think so. Does Bentham progress at 

 all ? I do not know what to say about Oxford. J I should 

 like it much with you, but it must depend on health. . . . 



Yours most affectionately, 



C. Darwin. 



C. Darwin to C. Lyell. 



Down, May i8th [i860]. 



My dear Lyell, — I send a letter from Asa Gray to show 

 how hotly the battle rages there. Also one from Wallace, 

 very just in his remarks, though too laudatory and too modest, 

 and how admirably free from envy or jealousy. He must be 



* Dr. Thomas Thomson the Indian Botanist. He was a collaboi-a- 

 teur in Hooker and Thomson's Flora Indica. 1855. 



f These remarks do not apply to Dr. Harvey, who was, however, in a 

 somewhat similar position. See p. IC7. 



X His health prevented him from going to Oxford for the meeting of 

 the British Association. 



