Part 3 (1/2)

In October 1838, that is, fifteen un my systematic enquiry, I happened to read for a well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on fro-continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed The result of this would be the forot a theory by which to work; but I was so anxious to avoid prejudice, that I determined not for some time to write even the briefest sketch of it In June 1842 I first alloweda very brief abstract ofthe sues, which I had fairly copied out and still possess

But at that tireat i to , how I could have overlooked it and its solution This probles descended froe in character as they becoreatly is obvious from the enera, genera under families, families under sub-orders and so forth; and I can ree, when toafter I had come to Down The solution, as I believe, is that theforhly diversified places in the economy of nature

Early in 1856 Lyell advised an at once to do so on a scale three or four times as extensive as that which was afterwards followed in in of Species;' yet it was only an abstract of the h about half the work on this scale But my plans were overthrown, for early in the suo, sent me an essay ”On the Tendency of Varieties to depart indefinitely froinal Type;” and this essay contained exactly the same theory as ht well of his essay, I should sent it to Lyell for perusal

The circumstances under which I consented at the request of Lyell and Hooker to allow of an abstract froether with a letter to Asa Gray, dated September 5, 1857, to be published at the saiven in the 'Journal of the Proceedings of the Linnean Society,' 1858, page 45 I was at first very unwilling to consent, as I thought Mr Wallaceso unjustifiable, for I did not then kno generous and noble was his disposition The extract from my MS and the letter to Asa Gray had neither been intended for publication, and were badly written Mr

Wallace's essay, on the other hand, was admirably expressed and quite clear Nevertheless, our joint productions excited very little attention, and the only published notice of thehton of Dublin, whose verdict was that all that was new in them was false, and as true was old This sho necessary it is that any ne should be explained at considerable length in order to arouse public attention

In Septe advice of Lyell and Hooker to prepare a volume on the transmutation of species, but was often interrupted by ill-health, and short visits to Dr Lane's delightful hydropathic establisher scale in 1856, and completed the volume on the same reduced scale It cost me thirteen months and ten days' hard labour It was published under the title of the 'Origin of Species,' in Noveh considerably added to and corrected in the later editions, it has remained substantially the same book

It is no doubt the chief work of hly successful The first small edition of 1250 copies was sold on the day of publication, and a second edition of 3000 copies soon afterwards

Sixteen thousand copies have now (1876) been sold in England; and considering how stiff a book it is, this is a large sale It has been translated into ales as Spanish, Bohe to Miss Bird, been translated into japanese (Miss Bird is mistaken, as I learn from Prof Mitsukuri--FD), and is there much studied Even an essay in Hebrew has appeared on it, showing that the theory is contained in the Old Testament! The revieere very numerous; for soin' and onnewspaper reviews) to 265; but after a tiave up the attempt in despair Many separate essays and books on the subject have appeared; and in Gerraphy on ”Darwinismus” has appeared every year or two

The success of the 'Origin'before written two condensed sketches, and to er manuscript, which was itself an abstract By thisfacts and conclusions I had, also, during olden rule, namely, that whenever a published fact, a new observation or thought caeneral results, to make a memorandum of it without fail and at once; for I had found by experience that such facts and thoughts were farto this habit, very few objections were raised against my viehich I had not at least noticed and attempted to answer

It has soin' proved ”that the subject was in the air,” or ”that men's minds were prepared for it”

I do not think that this is strictly true, for I occasionally sounded not a few naturalists, and never happened to cole one who seemed to doubt about the perh they would listen with interest to ree I tried once or twice to explain to able nally failed What I believe was strictly true is that innumerable well-observed facts were stored in the minds of naturalists ready to take their proper places as soon as any theory which would receive them was sufficiently explained Another element in the success of the book was its moderate size; and this I owe to the appearance of Mr Wallace's essay; had I published on the scale in which I began to write in 1856, the book would have been four or five tiin,' and very feould have had the patience to read it

I gainedfrom about 1839, when the theory was clearly conceived, to 1859; and I lost nothing by it, for I cared very little whether inality to me or Wallace; and his essay no doubt aided in the reception of the theory I was forestalled in only one iret, namely, the explanation by means of the Glacial period of the presence of the same species of plants and of some few aniions This view pleased me so much that I wrote it out in extenso, and I believe that it was read by Hooker some years before E Forbes published his celebratedSurvey Mem,' 1846) on the subject In the very few points in which we differed, I still think that I was in the right I have never, of course, alluded in print toindependently worked out this view

Hardly any point gave in,' as the explanation of the wide difference in many classes between the embryo and the adult animal, and of the close resemblance of the embryos within the same class No notice of this point was taken, as far as I rein,' and I recollect expressing my surprise on this head in a letter to Asa Gray Within late years several reviewers have given the whole credit to Fritz Muller and Hackel, who undoubtedly have worked it out much more fully, and in some respects more correctly than I did I had ht to have er; for it is clear that I failed to i so deserves, in my opinion, all the credit

This leads me to remark that I have al over those without scientific knowledge as not worthy of notice My views have often been grossly misrepresented, bitterly opposed and ridiculed, but this has been generally done, as I believe, in good faith On the whole I do not doubt that reatly overpraised I rejoice that I have avoided controversies, and this I owe to Lyell, who ly advised led in a controversy, as it rarely did any good and caused a miserable loss of time and temper

Whenever I have found out that I have blundered, or that my work has been imperfect, and when I have been contemptuously criticised, and even when I have been overpraised, so that I have felt reatest comfort to say hundreds of times to myself that ”I have worked as hard and as well as I could, and no man can do more than this” I re (and, I believe, that I wrote home to the effect) that I could not e a little to Natural Science

This I have done to the best of my abilities, and critics may say what they like, but they cannot destroy this conviction

During the two lasta second edition of the 'Origin,' and by an enoran arranging my notes for my work on the 'Variation of Animals and Plants under Do of 1868; the delay having been caused partly by frequent illnesses, one of which lasted seventempted to publish on other subjects which at the time interested me more

On May 15th, 1862, my little book on the 'Fertilisation of Orchids,'

which cost me ten months' work, was published:several previous years During the su the previous summer, I was led to attend to the cross-fertilisation of flowers by the aid of insects, froin of species, that crossing played an i specific for every subsequent su procured and read in Noveh the advice of Robert Brown, a copy of CK

Sprengel's wonderful book, 'Das entdeckte Geheimniss der Natur' For some years before 1862 I had specially attended to the fertilisation of our British orchids; and it seemed to roup of plants as well as I could, rather than to utilise the great mass of matter which I had slowly collected with respect to other plants

My resolve proved a wise one; for since the appearance ofnumber of papers and separate works on the fertilisation of all kinds of flowers have appeared: and these are far better done than I could possibly have effected Theoverlooked, are now fully recognisedthe same year I published in the 'Journal of the Linnean Society'

a paper ”On the Two For the next five years, five other papers on di inout theof the structure of these plants I had noticed in 1838 or 1839 the diht that it wasthe common species of Priular and constant to be thus viewed I therefore became almost convinced that the coh road to become dioecious;--that the short pistil in the one for towards abortion The plants were therefore subjected under this point of view to trial; but as soon as the floith short pistils fertilised with pollen from the short stamens, were found to yield more seeds than any other of the four possible unions, the abortion-theory was knocked on the head After some additional experih both were perfect hermaphrodites, bore almost the same relation to one another as do the two sexes of an ordinary animal With Lythrum we have the stillin a similar relation to one another I afterwards found that the offspring fro to the say with hybrids from the union of two distinct species

In the autu Plants,' and sent it to the Linnean Society The writing of this paper cost me four months; but I was so unhen I received the proof-sheets that I was forced to leave them very badly and often obscurely expressed The paper was little noticed, but when in 1875 it was corrected and published as a separate book it sold well I was led to take up this subject by reading a short paper by Asa Gray, published in 1858 He sentsome plants I was somovements of the tendrils and ste at first sight very co plants, and studied the whole subject I was all theat all satisfied with the explanation which Henslow gave us in his lectures, about twining plants, narow up in a spire This explanation proved quite erroneous So Plants are as beautiful as those of Orchids for ensuring cross-fertilisation

My 'Variation of Aniun, as already stated, in the beginning of 1860, but was not published until the beginning of 1868 It was a big book, and cost ives all my observations and an immense number of facts collected from various sources, about our domestic productions