ffS53-] LAMARCK, THE ' VESTIGES.' 39 



thanks for your attempt to get me a copy of ' L'Espece,' * and 

 almost equal thanks for your criticisms on him : I rather 

 misdoubted him, and felt not much inclined to take as gospel 

 his facts. I find this one of my greatest difficulties with 

 foreign authors, viz. judging of their credibility. How pain- 

 fully (to me) true is your remark, that no one has hardly a 

 right to examine the question of species who has not minutely 

 described many. I was, however, pleased to hear from Owen 

 (who is vehemently opposed to any mutability in species), 

 that he thought it was a very fair subject, and that there 

 was a mass of facts to be brought to bear on the question, 

 not hitherto collected. My only comfort is (as I mean to 

 attempt the subject), that I have dabbled in several branches 

 of Natural History, and seen good specific men work out my 

 species, and know something of geology (an indispensable 

 union) ; and though I shall get more kicks than half-pennies, 

 I will, life serving, attempt my work. Lamarck is the only 

 exception, that I can think of, of an accurate describer of 

 species, at least in the Invertebrate Kingdom, who has dis- 

 believed in permanent species, but he in his absurd though 

 clever work has done the subject harm, as has Mr. Vestiges, 

 and, as (some future loose naturalist attempting the same 

 .speculations will perhaps say) has Mr. D. . . . 



C. DARWIN. 



C. Darwin to J. D. Hooker. 



Down, September 25th [1853]. 



MY DEAR HOOKER, I have read your paper with great 

 interest ; it seems all very clear, and will form an admirable 

 introduction to the New Zealand Flora, or to any Flora in the 

 -world. How few generalizes there are among systematists ; 



* Probably Godron's essay, pub- in 1848-49, and afterwards as a 

 Wished by the Academy of Nancy separate book in 1859. 



