Admires his paper ["On the credibility of Darwinism", J. Trans. Victoria Inst. 2 (1867): 39–62, and discussion 63–125].
Ridicules William H. Ince and Admiral FitzRoy on their naive ideas about Noah's ark.
Down. | Bromley. | Kent. S.E.
I hope that you will not think me presumptuous if I cannot resist the pleasure of
telling you how much I admire your argument of the origin of species in the
Transact. of the Victoria Institute. The whole case
strikes me as placed in the clearest & most spirited light; & I have no
where seen so good an abstract. I quite agree with your Chairman that you have put the
whole argument better than I have done. But I disagree with
you, & it is the only point on which I do disagree, when you say that there is
nothing in your article original. As I am writing I will ask
you two questions, but if you cannot answer them easily, pray do not take any trouble on
the subject; Firstly. Where have you seen an account of inherited baldness &
deficient nails; & 2
With sincere admiration of your powers of reasoning & illustration I beg leave to remain dear Sir | yours faithfully | Charles Darwin
P.S. I am charmed with M
- f1 5642.f1The year is established by the reference to Warington 1867 (see n. 2, below).
- f2 5642.f2CD refers to Warington's paper `On the credibility of Darwinism', read on 4 March 1867 and published in the Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute (Warington 1867); CD's annotated copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection--CUL. For more on the Victoria Institute, see the letter to A. R. Wallace, 12 and 13 October  and n. 20.
- f3 5642.f3In Warington 1867, p. 62, the chairman of the meeting is reported as having commented, `I think he [Warington] has done more justice to Darwinism than the book of Darwin himself.'
- f4 5642.f4CD refers to Warington's statement, `the present paper makes no claim to originality' (Warington 1867, p. 61).
- f5 5642.f5See Warington 1867, pp. 46--7. The descriptions of these cases are scored in CD's copy.
- f6 5642.f6Warington's paper was discussed at three subsequent meetings of the Victoria Institute. At the second of these, William Ince commented on the size of Noah's Ark and the fact that it must have been `a great deal too large for eight or ten species only' (Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 2 (1867): 95).
- f7 5642.f7CD probably refers to Robert FitzRoy's `A very few remarks with reference to the Deluge' in Narrative 2: 657--82. FitzRoy wrote, `The small number of enormous animals that have existed since the Deluge, may be a consequence of this shutting out of all but a very few' (Narrative 2: 671 n.).