1868 i i MOE I'll' >LOG \ 377 



like it much ; but you lo 1. down so sharp on me that 1 i 



shall never be bold enough to wriggle myself out of any 

 contradiction. 



( >w<-n pitches into me and Lyell in grand style in the last 

 chapter of vol. 3 of Anat. <>/ Vertebrates. He is a cool 



hind. He puts words from me in inverted commas and 

 alter them. 1 



1*0 j. 1 >. Hooker. I etter 698 



1 1 wn, Dec. 29th, 1868. 



Your letter is quite invaluable, for Nageli's essay 2 is - 

 clever that it will, and indeed 1 know it has produced at 



( ffect ; so that I shall devote three or four pages to an answer. 

 1 have been particularly .struck by your statements about 

 erect and suspended ovules. You have given me heart, and 

 I will fight my battle better than I should otherwise have 



1 The passage referred to seems to be in Owen's Anatomy of 

 Vertebrate III., pp. 798, 799, note. "I deeply regretted, therefore, to 

 see in a ' Historical Sketch 1 of the Progress of Enquiry into the origin 

 of species, prefixed to the fourth edition of that work (1866), that 

 Mr. Darwin, after affirming inaccurately and without evidence, that 1 

 admitted Natural Selection to have done something toward that end, 

 to wit, the 'origin of species,' proceeds to remark : ' It is surprising that 

 this admission should not have been made earlier, as Prof. Owen now 

 believes that he promulgated the theory of Natural Selection in a 

 pa sage read before the Zoological Society in February, 1S50, {Tran 

 Vol. IV., p. i The first of the two passages quoted by Owen from 



the fourth edition of the Origin runs: "Yet he [Prof. Owen] at the 

 same time admits that Natural Selection may [our italics] have done 

 something towards this end." In the sixth edition of the Origin, p. xviii., 

 Darwin, after referring to a correspondence in the London Revie, 

 between the Editor of that Journal and Owen, goes on : "It appeared 

 manifest to the editor, as well as to myself, that Prof. Owen chained 

 to have promulgated the theory of Natural Selection before I had 

 done so ; . . . but as far as it is possible to understand certain recently 

 published passages {Ibid. [Anat, of Vert.], Vol III., p. 798), I have 

 either partly or wholly again fallen into error. It is consolatory to 

 me that others find Prof. Owen's controversial writings as difficult to 

 understand and to reconcile with each other, as I do. As far as the 

 mere enunciation oi the principle of Natural Selection is concerned, it 

 is quite immaterial whether or no Prof. Owen preceded me. for both 

 of us, as shown in this historical sketch, were long ago preceded by 

 Dr. Wells and Mr. Matthews.' 



■ See preceding Letter. 



