7. 65.] TO G. FREDERICK WRIGHT. 657 
that when I sit down to Darwin’s “ Insectivorous 
Plants,” by way of relaxation, of an evening, I f: 
asleep over it. And so have not finished that book 
yet, as it cannot be read with the eyes shut. I put off 
thought of all but my daily work till my task is done. 
I thought I might have got up to see you, but I 
cannot now. 
I see in the last “ Nation” an article, which was 
evidently to have been continued, by Chauncey Wright, 
in which he points out clearly the essential difference 
between Darwinism, which is scientific, and Spencer- 
ism, which is “ philosophical.” Save the mark 
Poor Wright, — your namesake — died suddenly of 
apoplexy, Sunday morning. He was a stanch Mill- 
ite, and very acute and clear-headed. 
f 
September 15. 
. . . A minister out in Illinois has written me, tak- 
ing me seriously to task for altering my opinion after 
the age of forty-five, and for abetting disorder, by sup- 
porting theories that disturb the harmony of opinion 
that ought to prevail among scientific men. 
He is one of those people who think that if you 
shut your eyes hard, it will answer every purpose; 
indeed, from the ease with which he confutes Darwin- 
ism, I suppose he finds no call even to shut his eyes. 
November 10. 
. Species, as I have said (in “ Silliman’s Jour- 
onl = baiticlas are not facts or things, but judgments, 
and, of course, fallible judgments; how fallible the 
working naturalist knows and feels more than any one 
else. 
That the pages of a Flora or Fauna should give 
