The Wallace-Darwin Correspondence 



could be given up, and with all its faults I should be sorry 

 to see the attempt made. Whether it will be rejected must 

 now depend on the '' survival of the fittest.'' 



As in time the term must grow intelligible, the objec- 

 tions to its use will grow w^eaker and weaker. I doubt 

 whether the use of any term would have made the subject 

 intelligible to some minds, clear as it is to others; for do 

 we not see, even to the present day, Malthus on Popula- 

 tion absurdly misunderstood ? This reflection about Mal- 

 thus has often comforted me when I have been vexed at the 

 misstatement of my views. 



As for M. Janet,' he is a metaphysician, and such 

 gentlemen are so acute that I think they often misunder- 

 stand common folk. Your criticism on the double sense 

 in which I have used Natural Selection is new to me and 

 unanswerable; but my blunder has done no harm, for I 

 do not believe that anyone excepting you has ever ob- 

 served it. Again, I agree that I have said too much about 

 ** favourable variations," but I am inclined to think you 

 put the opposite side too strongly; if every part of every 

 being varied, I do not think we should see the same end 

 or object gained by such wonderfully diversified means. 



I hope you are enjoying the country and are in good 

 health, and are w^orking hard at your Malay Archipelago 

 book, for I will always put this wish in every note I write 

 to you, like some good people always put in a text. My 

 health keeps much the same, or rather improves, and I am 

 able to work some hours daily. — With many thanks for 

 your interesting letter, believe me, my dear Wallace, yours 

 sincerely, Oh. Darwin. 



P.S. — I suppose you have read the last number of H. 

 Spencer; I have been struck with astonishment at the 



^ This no doubt refers to Janet's " Mat^rialisme Contemporain." 



175 



