a 868.] PANGENESIS. 83 



merely as a provisional hypothesis, but with the secret expect- 

 ation that sooner or later some such view will have to be 

 admitted. 



... I do not expect the reviewers will be so learned as 

 you : otherwise, no doubt, I shall be accused of wilfully 

 stealing Pangenesis from Hippocrates, for this is the spirit 

 :some reviewers delight to show. 



C. Darwin to Victor Cams. 



Down, March 21 [1868]. 



. . .1 am very much obliged to you for sending me so 

 frankly your opinion on Pangenesis, and I am sorry it is 

 unfavourable, but I cannot quite understand your remark on 

 pangenesis, selection, and the struggle for life not being more 

 methodical. I am not at all surprised at your unfavourable 

 verdict ; I know many, probably most, will come to the same 

 conclusion. One English Review says it is much too com- 

 plicated. . . . Some of my friends are enthusiastic on the 

 liypothesis. . . . Sir C. Lyell says to every one, " You may 

 not believe in ' Pangenesis,' but if you once understand it, you 

 will never get it out of your mind." And with this criticism 

 I am perfectly content. All cases of inheritance and reversion 

 -and development now appear to me under a new light. . . . 



[An extract from a letter to Fritz Miiller, though of later 

 'date (June), may be given here : 



"Your letter of April 22 has much interested me. I am 

 'delighted that you approve of my book, for I value your 

 opinion more than that of almost any one. I have yet hopes 

 that you will think well of Pangenesis. I feel sure that our 

 minds are somewhat alike, and I find it a great relief to have 

 some definite, though hypothetical view, when I reflect on the 

 wonderful transformations of animals, the re-growth of 

 parts, and especially the direct action of pollen on the 



G 2 



