512 * OEIGIN ' AND ' TASMANIAN FLOEA ' 



dogs before you revealed Nat. Selection, what d — d ignorant 

 ones we must surely be now we do know that law.^ 



The reviews of the ' Origin' were for the most part consistent 

 in passing over the strongest hnes of the argument, and either 

 fixing 'solely on the confessed difficulties or making simple 

 appeals to prejudice. Eeasoned opposition was worthy of re- 

 spect, and could be met with argument ; but such effusions as 

 Dr. Haughton's ^ address to the Geological Society of Dubhn on 

 Darwin and Wallace's papers evoked the exclamation to Harvey 

 (May 27, 1860), ' What a conceited puppy H. must be and how 

 deplorably ignorant of the first principles of Natural Science, 

 to see nothing in the papers, let them be ever so wrong.' And 

 later, ' it will do Haughton a lot of mischief.' 



Again (March 24, 1860) : 



What a splutter and mess Whateley is making about 

 Darwin's book in the Spectator ; he is bent on widening the 

 breach between science and religion. To me such exhibi- 

 tions of fatuous prejudice are truly melancholy. What 

 will be thought of them 50 years hence ! 



Against the attacks made at Cambridge, especially the 

 impetuous assault of Sedgwick, full of odium fheohgicum, a 

 firm stand was made by Henslow, as described in his letter 

 which follows : 



7 Downing Terrace, Cambridge : May 10, 1860. 



My dear Joseph, — I don't know whether you care to 

 hear PhiUips, who delivers the Eede Lecture in the Senate 

 House next Tuesday at 2 p.m. It is understood that he 

 means to attack the Darwinian hypothesis of Natural 

 Selection. 



Sedgwick's address last Monday was temperate enough 

 for his usual mode of attack, but strong enough to cast a 



1 Cp. further letters of 1862: C. D. to J. D. H. (November 20, 1862), 

 M.L. i. 212 ; and December 12, 1862, M.L. i. 222. 



2 The Rev. Samuel Haughton (1821-97) was a Fellow of Trinity College, 

 Dublin, and from 1851-81 Professor of Geology in Dublin University ; specially 

 distinguished for his work in mathematical physics, and later in Animal 

 Mechanics (publ. 1873), the outcome of his bold step in entering the medical 

 school as a student when he was thirty-eight, in order to equip himself with 

 anatomical knowledge for dealing with fossils. His vehement opposition to 

 evolutionary doctrine no doubt sprang from his religious views. 



