384 Darwin and Geology 
their friendship comes out very strikingly in their correspondence. 
When Darwin first conceived the idea of writing a book on the 
“species question,” soon after his return from the voyage, it was 
“by following the example of Lyell in Geology” that he hoped to 
succeed!; when in 1844, Darwin had finished his first sketch of the 
work, and, fearing that his life might not be spared to complete 
his great undertaking, committed the care of it in a touching letter 
to his wife, it was his friend Lyell whom he named as her adviser and 
the possible editor of the book?; it was Lyell who, in 1856, induced 
Darwin to lay the foundations of a treatise® for which the author 
himself selected the Principles as his model; and when the dilemma 
arose from the receipt of Wallace’s essay, it was to Lyell jointly 
with Hooker that Darwin turned, not in vain, for advice and help. 
During the later years of his life, I never heard Darwin allude to 
his lost friend—and he did so very often—without coupling his name 
with some term of affection. For a brief period, it is true, Lyell’s 
excessive caution when the Origin was published, seemed to try 
even the patience of Darwin; but when “the master” was at last 
able to declare himself fully convinced, he was the occasion of more 
rejoicing on the part of Darwin, than any other convert to his views. 
The latter was never tired of talking of Lyell’s “magnanimity” and 
asserted that, “To have maintained in the position of a master, one 
side of a question for thirty years, and then deliberately give it up, 
is a fact to which I much doubt whether the records of science offer 
a parallel+.” 
Of Darwin himself, I can safely affirm that I never knew anyone 
who had met him, even for the briefest period, who was not charmed 
by his personality. Who could forget the hearty hand-grip at meet- 
ing, the gentle and lingering pressure of the palm at parting, and 
above all that winning smile which transformed his countenance—so 
as to make portraits, and even photographs, seem ever afterwards 
unsatisfying! Looking back, one is indeed tempted to forget the 
profoundness of the philosopher, in recollection of the loveableness 
of the man. 
83 2 ZL. Lu. pp. 17-18. 
8 
1L.L.1 p. 83. 
3. L.1. p. 84, 41. L. 11. pp. 229—830. 
