( Ixxxix ) 



that a belief in evolation would entirely alter its character. 

 Thus he wrote to Hooker, Sept. 25, 1853 :— " In my own 

 work 1 have not felt conscious that disbelieving in the mere 

 permanence of species has made much diiierence one way or 

 the other ; in some few cases (if publishing avowedly on the 

 doctrine of non-permanence) I should not have affixed names, 

 .ind in some few cases should have affixed names to remark- 

 able varieties. Certainly I have felt it humihating, discussing 

 and doubting, and examining over and over again, when in my 

 own mind the only doubt has been whether the form varied 

 to-day or yesterday (not to put too fine a point on it, as 

 Snagsby would say). After describing a set of forms as 

 distinct species, tearing up my MS., and making them one 

 species, tearing that up and making them separate, and then 

 making them one again (which has happened to me), I have 

 gnashed my teeth, cursed species, and asked what sin I had 

 committed to be so punished. But I must confess that perhaps 

 nearly the same thing would have happened to me on any 

 scheme of work." * 



The essentially subjective character of the results reached by 

 the systematist stands out with remarkable force in this as in 

 other passages of Darwin's letters. 



A few years later, on July 30, 1856, he wrote to the same 

 friend : — "I differ from him [Lyell] greatly in thinking that 

 those who believe that species are not fixed will multiply 

 specific names : I know in my own case my most frequent 

 source of doubt was whether others would not think this or 

 that was a God-created Barnacle, and surely deserved a name. 

 Otherwise I should only have thought whether the amount of 

 difference and permanence was sufficient to justify a name." t 



Disregarding for the moment the term species, it is 

 convenient to consider the various groupings of individual 

 animals and plants. 



1. Forms having certain structural characters in common 

 distinguishing them from the forms of other groups. Groups 

 thus defined by Diagnosis may be conveniently called Syndi- 

 agnostic (o-i'v, together ; Siayi'ojo-is, distinction). 



* "Life and Letters," voL ii, p. 40. 

 t Ibid. voL ii, p. 81. 



