i«47-] GLEN ROY. 329 



day, and I reached home only last night, much knocked up. 

 Without I hear to-morrow (which is hardly possible), and if 

 I am feeling pretty well, I will drive over to Kew on Monday 

 morning, just to say farewell. I will stay only an hour. . . . 



C. Dai'win to J. D. Hooker. 



[November, 1847.] 

 My dear Hooker, — I am very unwell, and incapable of 

 doing anything. I do hope I have not inconvenienced you. 

 I was so unwell all yesterday, that I was rejoicing you were 

 not here ; for it would have been a bitter mortification to me 

 to have had you here and not enjoyed your last day. I 

 shall not now see you. Farewell, and God bless you. 



Your affectionate friend, 



C. Darwin. 

 I will write to you in India. 



[In 1847 appeared a paper by Mr. D. Milne,* in which 

 my father's Glen Roy work is criticised, and which is referred 

 to in the following characteristic extract from a letter to Sir 

 J. Hooker :] " I have been bad enough for these few last days, 

 having had to think and write too much about Glen Roy. . . . 

 Mr. Milne having attacked my theory, which made me horri- 

 bly sick." I have not been able to find any published reply 

 to Mr. Milne, so that I imagine the "writing" mentioned was 

 confined to letters. Mr. Milne's paper was not destructive 

 to the Glen Roy paper, and this my father recognises in the 

 following extract from a letter to Lyell (March, 1847). The 

 reference to Chambers is explained by the fact that he ac- 

 companied Mr. Milne in his visit to Glen Roy. " I got R. 

 Chambers to give me a sketch of Milne's Glen Roy views, 

 and I have re-read my paper, and am, now that I have heard 

 what is to be said, not even staggered. It is provoking and 

 humiliating to find that Chambers not only had not read 



* Now Mr. Milne Home. The essay was published in Transactions 

 of the Edinburgh Royal Society, vol. xvi. 



