CIRRIPEDES. 347 



work. That he was a thinker all along is true enough, and 

 there is a vast deal in his writings previous to the Cirripedes 

 that a trained naturalist could but emulate. . . . He often 

 alluded to it as a valued discipline, and added that even the 

 'hateful' work of digging out synonyms, and of describing, 

 not only improved his methods but opened his eyes to the 

 difficulties and merits of the works of the dullest of cataloguers. 

 One result was that he would never allow a depreciatory 

 remark to pass unchallenged on the poorest class]of scientific 

 workers, provided that their work was honest, and good of its 

 kind. I have always regarded it as one of the finest traits cf 

 his character, this generous appreciation of the hod-men of 

 science, and of their labours . . . and it was monographing 

 the Barnacles that brought it about." 



Professor Huxley allows me to quote his opinion as to the 

 value of the eight years given to the Cirripedes : 



" In my opinion your sagacious father never did a wiser 

 thing than when he devoted himself to the years of patient 

 toil which the Cirripede-book cost him. 



" Like the rest of us, he had no proper training in biological 

 science, and it has always struck me as a remarkable instance 

 of his scientific insight, that he saw the necessity of giving 

 himself such training, and of his courage, that he did not 

 shirk the labour of obtaining it. 



" The great danger which besets all men of large specula- 

 tive faculty, is the temptation to deal with the accepted 

 statements of fact in natural science, as if they were not only 

 correct, but exhaustive ; as if they might be dealt with 

 deductively, in the same way as propositions in Euclid may 

 be dealt with. In reality, every such statement, however 

 true it may be, is true only relatively to the means of observa- 

 tion and the point of view of those who have enunciated it. 

 So far it may be depended upon. But whether it will bear 

 every speculative conclusion that may be logically deduced 

 from it, is quite another question. 



