skip to content

Darwin Correspondence Project

From T. H. Huxley   3 February 1880

Science and Art Department | South Kensington

Feby. 3. 1880

My dear Darwin

I read Butler’s letter & your draft and Litchfield’s letter last night; slept over them, and after lecturing about Dogfish & Chimæræ (subjects which have a distinct appropriateness to Butler) I have read them again—and I say, without the least hesitation, burn your draft & take no notice whatever of Mr Butler until the next edition of your book comes out—when the briefest possible note explanatory of the circumstances—will be all that is necessary1

Litchfield ought hereafter to be called ‘the judicious’ as Hooker was (I don’t mean Sir Joe but the divine)—2 To my mind nothing can be sounder than his advice and “I am a man of (sor)rows and acquainted with (coming to) grief”3

I am astounded at Butler—who I thought was a gentleman though his last book appeared to me to be supremely foolish— Has Mivart bitten him & given him Darwinophobia?4 It is a horrid disease & I would kill every son of a diagram I found running loose with it—without mercy—

But dont you worry as to these things   Recollect what old Goethe said about his Butlers & Mivarts

“Hat doch der Wallfisch seine Laus Muss auch die meine haben.”5

We are as jolly as people can be who have been living in the dark for a week & I hope you are all flourishing

Ever Yours | T H Huxley

Footnotes

See letter to T. H. Huxley, 2 February 1880. CD enclosed a copy of the Athenæum containing Samuel Butler’s letter, CD’s second draft letter to the Athenæum (see letter to H. E. Litchfield, 1 February [1880], enclosures 1 and 3), as well as the first enclosure of the letter from H. E. Litchfield, [1 February 1880]. Dogfish sharks and chimaeras are types of cartilaginous fishes; Huxley grouped sharks and chimaeras into a single class, Chondrichthyes (T. H. Huxley 1880b, p. 660). Huxley also alludes to the Chimaera of Greek mythology, since the term, used figuratively, refers to a wild fancy or unfounded conception (OED).
Richard Buckley Litchfield had advised against responding to Butler, arguing that no reply was needed (letter from H. E. Litchfield, [1 February 1880], enclosure 1). Joseph Dalton Hooker was a close friend of both CD and Huxley. The theologian Richard Hooker had been characterised as ‘judicious’ by many different religious groups (ODNB).
Huxley alludes to the biblical verse, ‘He was despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief’ (Isaiah 53:3).
Butler’s book was Evolution, old and new (Butler 1879). CD had had a similar falling out with St George Jackson Mivart after Mivart suggested in an anonymous essay review in the Quarterly Review that, in an article on marriage, George Howard Darwin spoke in an approving strain of the encouragement of vice to check population growth ([Mivart] 1874, p. 70, G. H. Darwin 1873; see Correspondence vols. 22 and 23).
After all, the whale has its louse, so I must also have mine (German; Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, in ‘Pseudo-Wanderer’; see, for example, Goethe 1845–6, 1: 138). The poem refers to Johann Friedrich Wilhelm Pustkuchen. On Pustkuchen’s critique of Goethe and Goethe’s response, see Bahr 1998, pp. 7–8, 52–5.

Bibliography

Bahr, Ehrhard. 1998. The novel as archive: the genesis, reception, and criticism of Goethe’s Wilhelm Meister’s Wanderjahre. Columbia, SC: Camden House.

Butler, Samuel. 1879. Evolution, old and new: or, the theories of Buffon, Dr. Erasmus Darwin, and Lamarck, as compared with that of Mr. Charles Darwin. London: Hardwicke and Bogue.

Darwin, George Howard. 1873b. On beneficial restrictions to liberty of marriage. Contemporary Review 22: 412–26.

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. 1845–6. Goethe’s poetische und prosaische Werke. [Edited by F. W. Riemer and J. P. Eckermann.] 2d edition. 2 vols. Stuttgart; Tübingen: J. G. Cotta.

Huxley, Thomas Henry. 1880b. On the application of the laws of evolution to the arrangement of the Vertebrata and more particularly of the Mammalia. [Read 14 December 1880.] Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1880): 649–61.

[Mivart, St George Jackson.] 1874b. Primitive man: Tylor and Lubbock. [Essay review of the works of John Lubbock and Edward Burnett Tylor.] Quarterly Review 137 (1874): 40–77.

Summary

Has read Butler’s letter and CD’s draft reply and Litchfield’s letter. Has no hesitation in saying CD should take no notice. Litchfield’s advice is judicious.

Letter details

Letter no.
DCP-LETT-12457
From
Thomas Henry Huxley
To
Charles Robert Darwin
Sent from
Science and Art Department, South Kensington
Source of text
DAR 92: B82–3
Physical description
ALS 4pp & CC 4pp

Please cite as

Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 12457,” accessed on 14 October 2024, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-12457.xml

letter