NATURAL SELECTION CRITICISED. 259 



f esses to Hooker (p. 390) that, " his present work leading 

 him to believe rather more in the direct action of 

 physical conditions," he " regrets it, because it lessens 

 the glory of natural selection." He laments to T. 

 Davidson (p. 369) that he has not been able to weigh 

 and compare the one influence with the other ; but his 

 whole desire is to limit the action of conditions to mere 

 variability in organisms. 1 



But if conditions can do, as they are above quoted to 

 do, why supererogatorily have recourse to any more 

 machinery ? I am sure that there is not an evolutionist 

 in the kingdom who will not be quite glad to get to his 

 goal with never a rag to his proteine unless conditions. 



This proteine, even as imagined, is itself a form. 

 Whether as created or appeared, it is a concrete.: In 

 the abandonment of his " Pentateuchal truckle," Mr. 

 Darwin had no advantage. A form that appears is as 

 awkward for him, as a form that is created. We have 

 still no more than a middle before us. Mr. Darwin 

 does not, as the algebraist does, apply his machinery to a 

 mere x. His x is already an ax : it is a form, an 

 organism, a concrete, even a life. That there is an a 

 with his x, that always for him species already are, 

 is no mere " logical quibble ; " and it is not met by the 

 ingenuous propos, " as if any one doubted their temporary 

 existence ! " 



We pass now to (2), which is the check of adapta- 

 tions what precedes is (1); the whole statement (i. 

 82-84) gives five points. 



1 The following references to the Life and Letters will be found 

 exhaustive and not a little instructive, on the whole subject of 

 conditions : i. 22, 82 ; ii. 3, 14, 28, 29, 82, 87, 90, 92, 96, 97, 121, 

 122, 123, 143, 109, 174, 212, 231, 232, 259, 295, 317, 319, 369, 390 ; 

 iii. 24, 25, 70, 71, 111, 158, 159, 232, 236, 344. It is also discussed 

 in the Lectures. 



