290 Life and Letters of Francis Galton 



Looking back on it now, I think Huxley was morally wrong ; he used all the force of his 

 name and position to get a younger man, who was really responsible for the movement, out of 

 the way in order that he might carry out a different scheme. I was formally wrong, but morally 

 right, and nobody saw, not even Weldon, that I, having taken a false step, was doing what was 

 painful to me to put myself right with men whom I had induced — often by much talk and 

 persuasion — to join a movement for a great ideal of academic reform. 



Now you will see that I cannot put all this directly into Weldon's Life. But it was a re- 

 markable instance in which his admiration for his hero, and personal affection for a friend came 

 into opposition, and he succeeded in preserving both, and this although I never gave him as I 

 have given you the grounds for what I did. It is this element in the whole matter which makes 

 the account of Weldon's relation to the University movement, as you find it, obscure. 



I have put in six more lines about the Evolution Committee emphasising what your aims 

 were and how they were rendered unavailing by the members pulling in different directions and 

 the struggle of different schools. To my mind the absence of such an experimental farm as you 

 suggested has been the great drawback of the past years. We want a land "Marine Biological 

 Association." But it would never have been possible to combine the thoroughness of Weldon 

 with the slipshod character of the rival school. Friction would have destroyed everything. The 

 only hope is that a Dohrn may arise some day, a man with the energy and force of character to 

 carry it out which marked him. The worst of it is that the Americans have already got such 

 a station under the Carnegie Institution, but so far they have done nothing very profitable with 

 it ; it needs as chief a very clear strong thinker. The success of these things always lies in the 

 strength of the individual who dominates the whole. Dohrn must have been splendid 



I enclose a letter to you, which seems to me to confirm my version of the first origin of the 

 1893 Committee. In 1896 Nov. or Dec. you were so weary of Z.'s incessant letters to the 

 Committee — the originals or copies occupy an entire box in Weldon's papers — that you suggested 

 Z. should be added to the Committee. Now was the old Committee dissolved and a new one formed, 

 or as I suggest were Bateson, Dyer and myself* added to the old Committee and shortly after 

 many others? There is no definite statement in Weldon's letters, but between Nov. 1896 and 

 February 1 897 the Committee appears to have taken a new lease of life, the old statistical object is 

 dropped, many new members appear and the whole scheme of breeding and inquiry by circulars 

 to breeders comes into being. Can you throw any light on these points 1 I enclose the circular 

 that Weldon in his letter says he has sent to Darwin, Poulton and Macalister, and received 

 their assent to. Weldon in a letter of Dec. 4, 1893, says : 



" I am writing to ask people to meet on Saturday at 3.0 (Dec. 9th) as you (F. G.) suggested, 

 but at the Savile Club, 107 Piccadilly." He states that as the Royal Society is not available on 

 Saturdays he has chosen the Savile. Perhaps the locus was changed later 1 



Might I have the enclosed back, so that all the papers may be in order and together, if there 

 is need for any further reference ? Also will you return the enclosed poem in W. F. R. W.'a 

 handwriting ? Is it a translation and if so of what 1 It reads rather as if it were. If not, what 

 made him choose this metre, and what is it the prologue to 1 It is the only poem I have found. 

 What is the reference to Macrobius ] Affectionately yours, Karl Pearson. 



42, Rutland Gate, S.W. July 16, 1906. 



My dear Karl Pearson, I have found my (scanty) diaries of 1891-1897, and have been 

 to the R. Soc. to read the minute book of the Evol. Cttee and refresh my memory. The sequence 

 of affairs was I think this, so far as I was cognisant. — First Michael Foster's call on me — 

 I have no record of this, — about the then talked of Cttee. Second the Savile Club meeting, 

 of which I have no recollection, but believe it must have been just an informal ratification of 

 views previously well discussed. My diary notes the engagement. Third the appointment of 

 a R. Soc. Cttee, in the Minutes of whose first meeting Jan. 25, 1896, a letter was read from 

 me to the R. Soc. " suggesting the desirability of appointing a Cttee for conducting statistical 

 inquiries into the measurable characteristics of plants and animals." Also, a letter from the 

 R. Soc. appointing us, myself (as chairman), F. Darwin, Profs. A. Macalister, Meldola, Poulton 

 and Weldon, giving us £50 to start with, and recommending us to apply to the Govt Grant 

 Cttee for any further sums we might think necessary. 



* The R.S. records show that I was added in 1896: see p. 126 above. 



