The Wallace-Darwin Correspondence 



but to each form. If you work it out, and suppose the two 

 incipient species A, B to be divided into two groups, one 

 of which contains those which are fertile when the two are 

 crossed, the other being slightly sterile, you will find that 

 the latter will certainly supplant the former in the struggle 

 for existence, remembering that you have shown that in such 

 a cross the offspring would be more vigorous than the pure 

 breed, and would therefore certainly soon supplant them, and 

 as these would not be so well adapted to any special sphere 

 of existence as the pure species A and B, they would cer- 

 tainly in their turn give way to A and B. 



I am sure all naturalists will be disgusted at the malicious 

 and ignorant article in the Athenwum, It is a disgrace to 

 the paper, and I hope someone will publicly express the 

 general opinion of it. We can expect no good reviews of 

 your book till the quarterlies or best monthlies come out. 

 ... I shall be anxious to see how Pangenesis is received. — 

 Believe me yours very faithfully, Alprkd R. Wallace. 



Down, Bromley, Kent, S.E. February 27, 1868. 



My dear Wallace, — You cannot well imagine how much 

 I have been pleased by what you say about Pangenesis. 

 None of my friends will speak out, except, to a certain 

 extent, Sir H. Holland," who found it very tough reading, 

 but admits that some view ^* closely akin to if will have 

 to be admitted. Hooker, as far as I understand him, which 

 I hardly do at present, seems to think that the hypothesis 

 is little more than saying that organisms have such and 

 such potentialities. What you say exactly and fully ex- 

 presses my feeling, viz. that it is a relief to have some 

 feasible explanation of the various facts, which can be 

 given up as soon as any better hypothesis is found. It has 



^ Sir Henry Holland, Bart., M.D., F.R.S., a writer on Mental Physiology 

 and other scientific subjects (b. 1788, d. 1873). 



197 



