1 847.] GLEN ROY. 361 



the greatest proof of friendship I ever received from mortal 

 man. My conscience would have upbraided me in not having 

 come to you on Thursday, but, as it turned out, I could not, 

 for I was quite unable to leave Shrewsbury before that day, 

 and I reached home only last night, much knocked up. With- 

 out I hear to-morrow (which is hardly possible), and if I am 

 feeling pretty well, I will drive over to Kew on Monday 

 morning, just to say farewell. I will stay only an hour. . . . 



C. Damvin to J. D. Hooker. 



[November 1847.] 



MY DEAR HOOKER, I am very unwell, and incapable of 

 doing anything. I do hope I have not inconvenienced you. 

 I was so unwell all yesterday, that I was rejoicing you were 

 not here ; for it would have been a bitter mortification to me 

 to have had you here and not enjoyed your last day. I 

 shall not now see you. Farewell, and God bless you. 



Your affectionate friend, 



C. DARWIN. 

 I will write to you in India. 



[In 1847 appeared a paper by Mr. D. Milne,* in which my 

 father's Glen Roy work is criticised, and which is referred 

 to in the following characteristic extract from a letter to 

 Sir J. Hooker : " I have been bad enough for these few last 

 days, having had to think and write too much about Glen 

 Roy. . . . Mr. Milne having attacked my theory, which made 

 me horribly sick." I have not been able to find any published 

 reply to Mr. Milne, so that I imagine the " writing" mentioned 

 was confined to letters. Mr. Milne's paper was not destructive 

 to the Glen Roy paper, and this my father recognises in the 

 following extract from a letter to Lyell (March, 1847). The 

 reference to Chambers is explained by the fact that he ac- 



* Now Mr. Milne Home. The of the Edinburgh Royal Society, 

 essay was published in Transactions vol. xvi. 



