384 Darwin and Geology 



their fi-iendsliip comes out very strikingly in their correspondence. 

 When Darwin first conceived the idea of -writing a book on the 

 "species question," soon after his return from the voyage, it was 

 "by following the example of Lyell in Geology" that he hoped to 

 succeed^; when in 1844, Darwin had finished his first sketch of the 

 work, and, fearing that his life might not be spared to complete 

 his great undertaking, committed the care of it in a touching letter 

 to his wife, it was his friend Lyell whom he named as her adviser and 

 the possible editor of the book 2; it was Lyell who, in 1856, induced 

 Darwin to lay the foundations of a treatise^ for which the author 

 himself selected the Principles as his model ; and when the dilemma 

 arose from the receipt of Wallace's essay, it was to Lyell jointly 

 with Hooker that Darwin turned, not in vain, for advice and help. 



During the later years of his life, I never heard Darwin allude to 

 his lost friend — and he did so very often — without coupling his name 

 with some term of affection. For a brief period, it is true, Lyell's 

 excessive caution when the Origin was published, seemed to try 

 even the patience of Darwin; but when "the master" was at last 

 able to declare himself fully convinced, he was the occasion of more 

 rejoicing on the part of Darwin, than any other convert to his views. 

 The latter was never tired of talking of Lyell's "magnanimity" and 

 asserted that, " To have maintained in the position of a master, one 

 side of a question for thirty years, and then deliberately give it up, 

 is a fact to which I much doubt whether the records of science offer 

 a parallel*." 



Of Darwin himself, I can safely affirm that I never knew anyone 

 who had met him, even for the briefest period, who was not charmed 

 by his personality. Wlio could forget the hearty hand-grip at meet- 

 ing, the gentle and lingering pressure of the palm at parting, and 

 above all that winning smile which transformed his countenance — so 

 as to make portraits, and even photogi-aphs, seem ever afterwards 

 unsatisfying ! Looking back, one is indeed tempted to forget the 

 profoundness of the philosopher, in recollection of the loveableness 

 of the man. 



1 L. L. I, p. 83. 2 L. L. II. pp. 17—18. 



» L. L. I. p. 84, * L. L. II. pp. 229—30. 



