Alfred Russel Wallace 



Thayer's demonstration of the value of such colouring for 

 the purposes of concealment among environment. Wallace 

 accepted Thayer's view at once when it was subsequently 

 put forward ; as do most naturalists at the present time. 



To Prof. Meldola 



Frith Hill, Godalming. April 8, 1885. 



My dear Meldola, — Your letter in Nature last week " riz 

 my dander," as the Yankees say, and, for once in a way, we 

 find ourselves deadly enemies prepared for mortal combat, 

 armed with steel (pens) and prepared to shed any amount of 

 our own — ink. Consequently I rushed into the fray with a 

 letter to Nature intended to show that you are as wrong (as 

 wicked) as are the Kussians in Afghanistan. Having, how- 

 ever, the most perfect confidence that the battle will soon 

 be over, . . . — Yours very faithfully, 



Alfred R. Wallace. 



The following letter refers to the theory of physio- 

 logical selection which had recently been propounded by 

 Romanes, and which Prof. Meldola had criticised in Nature^ 

 xxxix. 384. 



To Prof. Meldola 



Frith Hill, Godalming. August 28, 1886. 



My dear Meldola, — I have just read your reply to 

 Romanes in Nature^ and so far as your view goes I agree, but 

 it does not go far enough. Professor Newton has called my 

 attention to a passage in Belt's '' Nicaragua," pp. 207-8, in 

 which he puts forth very clearly exactly your view. I find I 

 had noted the explanation as insufficient, and I hear that in 

 Darwin's copy there is " No ! No ! " against it. It seems, 

 however, to me to summarise all that is of the slightest value 

 in Romanes' wordy paper. I have asked Newton (to whom 

 I had lent it) to forward to you at Birmingham a proof of 

 my paper in the Fortnightly, and I shall be much obliged 



36 



