To Andrew Murray 5 May 1
Down Bromley Kent
My dear Sir
I must thank you again for your kindness,—or rather I should say generosity. I find that I did not understand you about “prepotency”;2 I thought that you referred to fertility,— with respect to resemblance I fully believe there is often the greatest difference both in crossed species (as has been proved) & in crossed varieties in impressing likeness on offspring. I do not yet understand about marrying hermaphrodite opposites.
It is very kind in you to put in a note about the “abominable animal”—3 the case has been struck out in my 2d. Edition,—the main fact left in as illustration of diversified habits.—
With respect to the cave animals, reflect on the cave-Rat, the fish Amblyopsis & Astacus in America—the Proteus in caves of Europe,4 & you will admit that on creation doctrine, there has been surprising diversity for such similar habitations.— Thank you very much for famous list of references.—
I blundered about the Ant-insect— I remembered that some were blind & thought it was Paussus. What a noble thing would natural science be, if all its followers were actuated by your kind & liberal spirit. If ever I feel inclined to write spitefully about an antagonist, I will try & remember & learn a lesson from you, my antagonist.
My dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | Charles Darwin
Since last writing I have heard from capital Geologist Count Keyserling & he makes no difficulty about imperfection of Geological Record.—5
Thanks for AM’s kindness.
CD did not understand him about "prepotency".
With respect to cave animals CD believes that on reflection AM will admit "that on creation doctrine, there has been surprising diversity for such similar habitation".
Has heard from A. von Keyserling who "makes no difficulty about imperfection of Geological Record".
Please cite as
Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 2784,” accessed on 6 December 2016, http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/DCP-LETT-2784