278 LUCK, OR CUNNING? 



Lamarck's weak places, then, but not till then, may he 

 complain of those who try to replace Mr. Darwin's 

 doctrine by Lamarck's. - 



Professor Kay Lankester concludes his note thus: — 

 " That such an attempt should be made is an illus- 

 tration of a curious weakness of humanity. Not infre- 

 quently, after a long contested cause has triumphed, 

 and all have yielded allegiance thereto, you will find, 

 when few generations have passed, that men have 

 clean forgotten what and who it was that made that 

 cause triumphant, and ignorantly will set up for 

 honour the name of a traitor or an impostor, or attri- 

 bute to a great man as a merit deeds and thoughts 

 which he spent a long life in opposing." 



Exactly so ; that is what one rather feels, but surely 

 Professor Eay Lankester should say " in trying to 

 filch while pretending to oppose and to amend." He 

 is complaining here that people persistently ascribe 

 Lamarck's doctrine to Mr. Darwin. Of course they do ; 

 but, as I have already perhaps too abundantly asked, 

 whose fault is this ? If a man knows his own mind, 

 and wants others to understand it, it is not often that 

 he is misunderstood for any length of time. If he 

 finds he is being misapprehended in a way he does not 

 like, he will write another book and make his meaning 

 plainer. He will go on doing this for as long time as 

 he thinks necessary. I do not suppose, for example, 

 that people will say I originated the theory of descent 

 by means of natural selection from among fortunate 

 accidents, or even that I was one of its supporters as 

 a means of modification ; but if this impression were to 



