RECEPTION OF THE ' ORIGIN ' 301 



attention (on the part of Naturalists) to the papers and 

 their bearing on the future of Nat. Hist. &c., &c., &c., but 

 there was no semblance of discussion. 



The interest excited was intense, but the subject too 

 novel and too ominous for the old School to enter the lists 

 before armouring. It was talked over after the meeting, 

 * with bated breath.' Lyell's approval, and perhaps in a 

 small way mine, as his Lieutenant in the affair, rather 

 overawed those Fellows who would otherwise have flown 

 out against the doctrine, and this because we had the vantage 

 ground of being familiar with the authors and their themes. 

 Bell, the President, in the Chair, was, though a personal 

 friend of your father's, hostile to the end of his life. Busk, 

 who was present as Secretary, said nothing, nor did Bennett, 

 the Bot. Sec. Bentham was also there, and silent. 



I do not remember Huxley being present, you might 

 ask him. 



Huxley has sent me the proof of his contribution to 

 the * Life.' I do not think it too severe. The Quarterly 

 then held the highest place amongst the first class Eeviews 

 and was most bound to be fair and judicious, but proved 

 unjust and malicious and ignorant. It went indefinitely 

 beyond ' severity ' and into scurrility, and for all Huxley 

 says he cites abundant proof. It is not for us, who repeat 

 ad nauseam our contempt for the persecutors of Galileo and 

 the sneerers at Franklin, to conceal the fact that our own 

 great discoverers met the same fate at the hands of the 

 highest in the land of Literature and Science, as represented 

 by its most exalted organ, the Q.B. 



I talked to X. about it in as strong terms as I 

 could, when he turned round to me and asked if I really 

 believed the doctrine, and on my response he pointed to the 

 poker, and with fatuous solemnity said, * Dr. Hooker ! I 

 would as soon believe that that poker bred rabbits.' It 

 amused me to think, that if the Apocalypse had said that 

 pokers bred rabbits he would have believed it devoutly, 

 and thought your father wicked to disbelieve. 



To return to Huxley, I suggested his replacing the 

 word ' person ' by ', reviewer,' in the bottom of the first slip, 

 and to omit ' tricks of ' in alluding to Owen's style, because 

 it weakened the force of the passage. As for the rest, if 



