194 MISCELLANEA. [ l ^7S- 



as much deduction as you please. This may be very narrow- 

 minded ; but the result is that such parts of H. Spencer as I 

 have read with care impress my mind with the idea of his 

 inexhaustible wealth of suggestion, but never convince me ; 

 and so I find it with some others. I believe the cause to lie 

 in the frequency with which I have found first-formed 

 theories [to be] erroneous. I thank you for the honourable 

 mention which you make of my works. Parts of the 

 1 Descent of Man ' must have appeared laughably weak to 

 you : nevertheless, I have sent you a new edition just 

 published. Thanking you for the profound interest and 

 profit with which I have read your work, I remain, 



My dear Sir, yours very faithfully, 



Ch. Darwin. 



1875. 



[The only work, not purely botanical, which occupied my 

 father in the present year was the correction of the second 

 edition of ' The Variation of Animals and Plants,' and on this 

 he was engaged from the beginning of July till October 3rd. 

 The rest of the year was taken up with his work on in- 

 sectivorous plants, and on cross-fertilisation, as will be shown 

 in a later chapter. The chief alterations in the second edition 

 of 'Animals and Plants' are in the eleventh chapter on " Bud- 

 variation and on certain anomalous modes of reproduction ; ' ! 

 the chapter on Pangenesis "was also largely altered and re- 

 modelled." He mentions briefly some of the authors who 

 have noticed the doctrine. Professor Delpino's ' Sulla Dar- 

 winiana Teoria della Pangenesi ' (1869), an adverse but fair 

 criticism, seems to have impressed him as valuable. Of 

 another critic my father characteristically says,* " Dr. Lionel 

 Beale ('Nature,' May 11, 1871, p. 26) sneers at the whole 

 doctrine with much acerbity and some justice." He also 



* 1 



Animals and Plants,' 2nd edit. vol. ii. p. 350. 



