igS LUCK, OR CUNNING? 



him with the same good faith as a writer that we 

 knew in ourselves as readers ; it never so much as 

 crossed our minds to suppose that the head which he 

 was holding up all dripping before our eyes as that 

 of a fool, was not that of a fool who had actually lived 

 and written, hut only of a figure of straw which had 

 been dipped in a bucket of red paint. Naturally 

 enough we concluded, since Mr. Darwin seemed to 

 say so, that if his predecessors had nothing better to 

 say for themselves than this, it would not be worth 

 while to trouble about them further ; especially as we 

 did not know who they were, nor what they had 

 written, and Mr. Darwin did not tell us. It would 

 be better and less trouble to take.- the goods with 

 which it was plain Mr. Darwin was going to provide 

 us, and ask no questions. We have seen that even 

 tolerably obvious conclusions were rather slow in 

 occurring to poor simple-minded Mr. Darwin, and 

 may be sure that it never once occurred to him that 

 the British public would be likely to argue thus ; he 

 had no intention of playing the scientific confidence 

 trick upon us. I dare say not, but unfortunately the 

 result has closely resembled the one that would have 

 ensued if Mr. Darwin had had such an intention. 



The claim to originality made so distinctly in the 

 opening sentences of the " Origin of Species '' is 

 repeated in a letter to Professor Haeckel, written 

 October 8, 1 864, and giving an account of the develop- 

 ment of his belief in descent with modification. This 

 letter, part of which is quoted by Mr. Allen,* is 

 * Charles Darwin, p. 67. 



