1869.] MR. HUXLEY ON HAECKEL. 299 



as you infer that I believe that the Parus and the Nuthatch 

 (or Sitta) are related by direct filiation. I wished only to 

 show by an imaginary illustration, how either instincts or 

 structures might first change. If you had seen Canis Magel- 

 lanicus alive you would have perceived how foxlike its appear- 

 ance is, or if you had heard its voice, I think that you would 

 never have hazarded the idea that it was a domestic dog run 

 wild ; but this does not much concern me. It is curious how 

 nationality influences opinion ; a week hardly passes without 

 my hearing of some naturalist in Germany who supports my 

 views, and often puts an exagg rated value on my works ; 

 whilst in France I have not heard of a single zoologist, except 

 M. Gaudry (and he only partially), who supports my views. 

 But I must have a good many readers as my books are trans- 

 lated, and I must hope, notwithstanding your strictures, that 

 I may influence some embryo naturalists in France. 



You frequently speak of my good faith, and no compli- 

 ment can be more delightful to me, but I may return you the 

 compliment with interest, for every word which you write 

 bears the 'stamp of your cordial love for the truth. Believe 

 me, dear Sir, with sincere respect, 



Yours very faithfully, 



Charles Darwin. 



C. Darwin to T. H. Huxley. 



Down, October 14 [1869]. 

 Mv dear Huxley, — I have been delighted to see your 

 review of Hackel,* and as usual you pile honours high on my 

 head. But I write now (requiring no answer) to groan a little 

 over what you have said about rudimentary organs. f Many 

 heretics will take advantage of what you have said. I cannot 



* A review of Haeckel's ' Schopfungs-Geschichte.' The Academy, 1869. 

 Reprinted in * Critiques and Addresses,' p. 303. 



f In discussing Teleology and Haeckel's " Dysteleology," Prof. Huxley 

 says : — " Such cases as the existence of lateral rudiments of toes, in the 

 foot of a horse, place us in a dilemma. For either these rudiments are of 

 no use to the animals, in which case . . . they surely ought to have dis- 



