1890 USE AND DISUSE 171 



word — is that pp. 128-137 seem to me to require 

 reconsideration, partly from a siibstantial and partly from 

 a tactical point of view. There is much that is disputable 

 on the one hand, and not necessary to your argument on 

 the other. 



Otherwise it seems to me that the case could hardly 

 be better stated. Here are a few notes and queries that 

 have occurred to me. 



P. 41. Extinction of Tasmanians — rather due to the 

 British colonist, who was the main agent of their 

 extirpation, I fancy. 



P. 67. Birds' sternums are a great deal more than 

 surfaces of origin for the pectoral muscles — e.g. movable 

 Ud of respiratory bellows. This not taken into account 

 by Darwin. 



P. 85. "Inferiority of senses of Europeans" is, I 

 believe, a pure delusion. Prof Marsh told me of feats 

 of American trappers equal to any savage doings. It is a 

 question of attention. Consider wool-sorters, tea-tasters, 

 shepherds who know every sheep personally, etc. etc. 



P. 85. I do not understand about the infant's sole ; 

 since all men become bipeds, all must exert pressure on 

 sole. There is no disuse. 



P. 88. Has not " muscardine " been substituted for 

 " pebrine " ? I have always considered this a very striking 

 case. Here is apparent inheritance of a diseased state 

 through the mother only, quite inexplicable till Pasteur 

 discovered the rationale. 



P. 155. Have you considered that State Socialism 

 (for which I have little enough love) may be a product of 

 Natural Selection ? The societies of Bees and Ants 

 exhibit socialism in excelsis. 



The unlucky substitution of "survival of fittest" for 

 " natural selection " has done much harm in consequence 

 of the ambiguity of " fittest " — which many take to mean 

 " best " or " highest " — whereas natural selection may work 

 towards degradation : vide epizoa. 



