248 Luck, or Cunning ? 
(July 13, 1876), or in some one of his subsequent books. 
If his attitude towards those who worked in the same field as 
himself had been the generous one which his admirers 
pretend, he would have certainly come forward, not neces- 
sarily as adopting Professor Hering’s theory, but still as 
helping it to obtain a hearing. 
His not having done so is of a piece with his silence 
about Buffon, Erasmus Darwin, and Lamarck in the early 
editions of the ‘‘ Origin of Species,’ and with the meagre 
reference to them which is alone found in the later ones. 
It is of a piece also with the silence which Mr. Darwin 
invariably maintained when he saw his position irretriev- 
ably damaged, as, for example, by Mr. Spencer’s objection 
already referred to, and by the late Professor Fleeming 
Jenkin in the North British Review (June 1867). Science, 
after all, should form a kingdom which is more or less not of 
this world. The ideal scientist should know neither self nor 
friend nor foe—he should be able to hob-nob with those 
whom he most vehemently attacks, and to fly at the 
scientific throat of those to whom he is personally most 
attached ; he should be neither grateful for a favourable 
review nor displeased at a hostile one; his literary and 
scientific life should be something as far apart as possible 
from his social ; it is thus, at least, alone that any one will 
be able to keep his eye single for facts, and their legitimate 
inferences. We have seen Professor Mivart lately taken to 
task by Mr. Romanes for having said* that Mr. Darwin 
was singularly sensitive to criticism, and made it impossible 
for Professor Mivart to continue friendly personal relations 
with him after he had ventured to maintain his own opinion. 
I see no reason to question Professor Mivart’s accuracy, 
and find what he has said to agree alike with my own 
personal experience of Mr. Darwin, and with all the light 
that his works throw upon his character. 
The most substantial apology that can be made for his 
* “ Fortnightly Review,” Jan., 1886, 
