I849-] LAMARCK, THE 'VESTIGES.' 39Q 



to sink into the depths of ocean, within the period of existing 

 species, so large a tract of surface. But there is no amount 

 or extent of change of level, which I am not fully prepared 

 to admit, but I must say I should like better evidence, than 

 the identity of a few plants, which possibly (I do not say 

 probably) might have been otherwise transported. Particu- 

 lar thanks for your attempt to get me a copy of ' L'Espece,'* 

 and almost equal thanks for your criticisms on him : I rather 

 misdoubted him, and felt not much inclined to take as gospel 

 his facts. I find this one of my greatest difficulties with 

 foreign authors, viz. judging of their credibility. How pain- 

 fully (to me) true is your remark, that no one has hardly a 

 right to examine the question of species who has not minutely 

 described many. I was, however, pleased to hear from Owen -; 

 (who is vehemently opposed to any mutability in species), ' 

 that he thought it was a very fair subject, and that there was \ 

 a mass of facts to be brought to bear on the question, not 

 hitherto collected. My only comfort is (as I mean to attempt 

 the subject), that I have dabbled in several branches of Natu- 

 ral History, and seen good specific men work out my species, 

 and know something of geology (an indispensable union) ; 

 and though I shall get more kicks than half-pennies, I will, 

 life serving, attempt my work. Lamarck is the only excep- 

 tion, that I can think of, of an accurate describer of species 

 at least in the Invertebrate Kingdom, who has disbelieved in 

 permanent species, but he in his absurd though clever work 

 has done the subject harm, as has Mr. Vestiges, and, as (some 

 future loose naturalist attempting the same speculations will 

 perhaps say) has Mr. D. , . . 



C. Darwin. 



* Probably Godron's essay, published by the Academy of Nancy in 

 1848-49, and afterwards as a separate book in 1859. 



