My dear Hooker

I received last night your “Introduction”, for which very many thanks:¹ I am surprised to see how big it is: I shall not be able to read it very soon.—

It was very good of you to send Naudin, for I was very curious to see it.² I am surprised that Decaisne sh^d say it was same as mine. Naudin gives artificial selection as well as a a score of English writers; & when he says species were formed in same manner I thought the paper would certainly prove exactly the same as mine. But I cannot find one word like the Struggle for existence & Natural Selection. On the contrary he brings in his principle (p. 103) of Finality (which I do not understand) which he says with some authors is fatality, with others Providence, & which adapts the forms of every Being, & harmonises them all througout nature.—

He assumes (like old geologists assumed the forces of nature were formerly greater) that species were at first more plastic. His simile of tree & classification is like mine (& others), but he cannot, I think, have reflected much on subject, otherwise he would see that genealogy by itself does not give classification.— I declare I cannot see much closer approach to Wallace & me in Naudin than in Lamarck—we all agree in modification & descent.—³

If I do not hear from you I will return Revue in a few days (with the cover).— I daresay Lyell would be glad to see it.— By the way I will retain the volume, till I hear whether I shall not send it to Lyell. I sh^d. rather like Lyell to see this note; though it is foolish work sticking up for independence or priority.—

Ever yours | C. Darwin