Skip to main content

Full text of "The life and letters of George John Romanes"

See other formats 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  CALIFORNIA 

DAVIS 

C  K.  OGDEN  COLLECTION 


GEOEGE     JOHN    EOMANES 


j  .    y .       (/ 


THE 

LIFE    AND    LETTERS 

OF 

GEORGE   JOHN   ROMANES 

M.A.,   LL.D.,    F.R.S. 

LATE 
HONORARY    FELLOW    OF    GONVILLE    AND    CAIUS    COLLEGE,   CAMBRIDGE 


WRITTEN    AND    EDITED    BY    HIS     WIFE 


NEW     EDITION 


LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
DAVIS 


LONGMANS,    GKEEN,    AND    CO. 

LONDON,  NEW  YORK,  AND  BOMBAY 
1896 

Alt    rigfiti    reserved 


LIBERIS     NOSTEIS 

EECORDATIO 
PATBIS     DESIDEKATISSIMI 

MEMORIA.    JUSTI   CUM   LAUDIBUS 


PBEFACE 

TO 

THE     SECOND    EDITION 


IN  sending  out  this  Second  Edition  of  my  husband's 
Life,  I  cannot  but  acknowledge  the  extreme  kindness 
with  which  it  has  been  received.  But  I  think  it  is 
also  due  to  his  memory  to  say  a  word  in  view  of 
various  statements  that  have  been  made  in  America 
and  elsewhere,  to  the  effect  that  his  mental  vigour 
and  powers  were  impaired  before  his  death.  These 
statements  are  absolutely  untrue. 

I  can  best  jefute  them  by  calling  attention  to 
the  obituary  notice  written  by  Professor  Burdon 
Sanderson  for  the  Eoyal  Society. 

In  this  paper  it  is  said :  *  Up  to  the  end  he 
I  Romanes]  preserved  not  only  his  mental  vigour,  but 
the  keenness  of  his  interest  in  his  scientific  pursuits.' 

This,  I  think,  needs  no  additional  comment  from 
me. 

E.  R. 

OXFORD  :  March  1896. 


x  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES 

express  my  thanks  to  Mr.  Francis  Darwin  for 
generously  allowing  me  to  print  portions  of  the 
correspondence  which  for  seven  or  eight  years  was 
one  of  the  chief  pleasures  and  privileges  of  my 
husband's  life.  I  must  also  thank  my  brother  and 
sister-in-law,  the  Dean  of  Christ  Church,  Professor 
Poulton,  Professor  Schafer,  Professor  Le  Conte, 
Mr.  Thiselton-Dyer,  and  others  for  like  permission. 

And  I  must  express  my  most  sincere  gratitude 
to  the  Kev.  P.  N.  Waggett,  to  Professor  C.  Lloyd 
Morgan,  and  to  my  cousin  Mrs.  St.  George  Keid 
(formerly  of  Newnham  College,  Cambridge),  for  their 
constant  help  and  advice. 

To  Mrs.  Reid  I  owe  more  than  I  can  well  express. 
Her  scientific  knowledge  and  ability  have  been  simply 
invaluable,  and  have  been  used  with  ever-ready  and 
ungrudging  generosity  and  kindness. 

There  are  other  aspects  of  my  husband's  life 
which  are  interesting,  but  again  I  think  he  has  told 
his  own  story,  and  it  is  needless  for  me  here  to  speak 
of  what,  to  some  extent,  he  has  laid  bare — of  mental 
perplexity  and  of  steadfast  endurance  and  loyalty  to 
Truth.  It  may  be  that  others,  wandering  in  the 
twilight  of  this  '  dimly  lighted  world,'  may  be  stimu- 
lated and  encouraged  and  helped  to  go  on  in  patience 
until  on  them  also  dawns  that  Light.  If  this  be  so 
it  will  not  be  altogether  in  vain  that  he  bore  long 
years  of  very  real  and  very  heavy  sorrow. 

E.  R 

OXFORD:  1895. 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

I.    BOYHOOD— YOUTH -E ABLY  MANHOOD,  1848-1878      .         .  1 

II.    LONDON,  1879-1890 92 

III.  LONDON— GEANIES,  1881-1890 142 

IV.  OXFOED,  1890-1894 260 

INDEX 389 


ILLUSTBATIONS 

PORTRAIT  OF  MR.  EOMANES Frontispiece 

GEANIES,  ROSS-SHIRE To  face  p.  152 

94  ST.  ALDATE'S  270 


GEOBGE    JOHN   EOMANES 


CHAPTEE  I 

BOYHOOD— YOUTH— EAELY  MANHOOD 

BOYHOOD.    1848-1867 

GEOEGE  JOHN  ROMANES  was  born  at  Kingston, 
Canada,  on  May  20,  1848,  the  third  son  of  the 
Rev.  George  Romanes,  D.D.,  then  Professor  of  Greek 
in  the  University  of  that  place. 

The  Professor  had  come  out  to  Canada  some  years 
previously,  and,  after  a  short  experience  of  work  in 
country  parishes,  had  settled  down  to  teach  Greek  to 
the  alumni  of  the  little  University. 

Dr.  Romanes  was  descended  from  an  old  Scottish 
family  settled  since  1586  in  Berwickshire  :  he  had 
been  educated  at  the  High  School  and  University  of 
Edinburgh,  and  was  an  excellent  classic  and  learned 
theologian,  with  views  of  a  strictly  '  Moderate ''  type. 
From  him  his  distinguished  son  inherited  the 
sweetness  of  temper  and  calmness  of  manner  which 
characterised  George  John  Romanes  through  life,  and 
which  earned  for  him  amongst  his  friends  the  playful 
sobriquet  of  '  The  Philosopher.' 

Dr.  Romanes  married,  after  his  arrival  in  Canada, 

B 


2  GEOBGE  JOHN  ROMANES 

Miss  Isabella  Gair  Smith,  daughter  of  the  Eev.  Eobert 
Smith,  for  many  years  parish  minister  of  Cromarty. 
Mrs.  Romanes  was  connected  with  several  old  High- 
land families,  and  was  a  thorough  Highlander.  Hand- 
some, vivacious,  unconventional,  and  clever,  she  was 
in  all  respects  a  great  contrast  to  her  husband,  who, 
as  years  went  on,  seems  to  have  lived  mainly  the  life 
of  a  student,  and  to  have  left  the  care  of  mundane 
things  to  his  wife.  Three  sons  and  two  daughters 
were  born.  Of  these,  only  two,  the  eldest  son  and 
youngest  daughter,  now  survive. 

In  1848,  the  inheritance  of  a  considerable  fortune 
relieved  Dr.  Eomanes  from  any  necessity  to  continue 
the  duties  of  his  chair,  and  the  family  returned  home, 
wandering  about  for  a  few  years  and  finally  settling 
in  18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Regent's  Park.  There  was  a 
good  deal  of  continental  travel  during  these  first  years 
after  their  return,  and  as  he  grew  into  boyhood  George 
Romanes  spent  several  months  at  various  times  in 
Heidelberg  and  other  German  towns,  and  the  family 
performed  a  journey  from  Nice  to  Florence  in  a 
delightful  and  now  bygone  fashion,  travelling  with  a 
vetturino. 

Probably  the  beauty  of  the  scenery,  the  fascination 
of  travel,  and  the  charm  of  the  beautiful  surroundings 
exercised  an  unconscious  influence  over  the  boy,  and 
did  something  to  rouse  the  poetic  sense  which  was 
to  be  so  great  an  element  in  his  life.  Otherwise  there 
seems  to  have  been  little  or  no  sense  of  pleasure  in 
the  art  treasures  or  the  historic  associations  of  Italy, 
and  at  no  time  of  his  life  did  he  ever  care  for  pictures 
to  anything  like  the  same  extent  as  poetry  or  music. 

After  the  family  settled  in  London,  George  Romanes 
was  sent  to  a  preparatory  school  near  his  own  home. 
Two  of  his  schoolfellows  became  in  after  life  intimate 


1860  EAELY  LIFE  8 

friends.  These  were  Francis  Paget,  the  present  Dean 
of  Christ  Church,  and  his  brother,  Henry  Luke  Paget, 
now  Vicar  of  St.  Pancras,  London. 

An  attack  of  measles  put  a  stop  once  and  for  all 
to  his  preparatory  school  career,  and  the  idea  of  a 
public  school  was  never  entertained. 

He  was  educated  in  a  desultory  and  aimless  fashion 
at  home,  and  was  regarded  by  his  family  as  a  shock- 
ing dunce.  Parts  of  two  years  were  spent  in  Heidel- 
berg, and  here  he  picked  up  some  German,  and  had  a 
few  lessons  on  the  violin,  and  saw  as  he  grew  up 
something  of  student  life  in  Germany.  Music  was 
always  a  perfect  passion  with  George  Romanes,  and  if 
a  little  wholesome  discipline  had  been  exercised,  the 
boy  might  have  become  a  very  good  musician. 

Heidelberg  and  the  days  at  Heidelberg  represented 
to  the  younger  Romanes  the  l  golden  age.' 

They  lived  in  an  old  house  outside  the  town,  sur- 
rounded by  woods,  and  here  the  children,  George  and 
his  younger  sister,  roamed  about  to  their  hearts'  con- 
tent, making  collections  and  keeping  pets,  like  the 
born  naturalists  they  were.  Shockingly  idle  children 
but  marvellously  happy  ones,  and  in  the  peculiar  '  let 
alone  '  system  of  their  household,  they  grew  up,  neither 
of  them  remembering  any  reproof,  far  less  any  punish- 
ment, nor  any  attempt  to  make  them  learn  lessons 
or  carry  on  studies  for  which  they  were  not  inclined. 
A  long  interval  of  years  separated  the  brothers,  now 
only  two  in  number,1  and  the  younger  brother  and 
sister  were  looked  on  and  treated  as  children  long 
after  they  had  emerged  from  childhood. 

The  father  and  mother  seem  to  have  attended 
resbyteriaii  and  Anglican  churches  with  entire  im- 

1  Robert,  the  second  son,  died  in  childhood. 

Bfl 


4  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES  1867- 

partiality,  but  the  younger  members  of  the  family  pre- 
ferred the  English  church,  and  were  confirmed  in  it. 
Keligion  was  a  potent  influence  with  the  boy  in  quite 
early  years,  and  there  grew  up  in  him  a  purpose  of 
taking  Holy  Orders,  a  purpose  which  met  with  no  en- 
couragement from  either  of  his  parents. 

If  of  intellectual  achievement  he  gave  as  yet  no 
promise,  at  least  there  were  the  signs  of  a  singularly 
pure  and  unselfish  nature  which  seemed  to  grow 
and  develope  with  the  growing  years.  All  through 
his  life  he  was  peculiarly  tender,  gentle,  and  unselfish, 
and  his  younger  sister  describes  a  little  scene  of  how, 
while  a  children's  party  was  going  on  downstairs, 
George  found  her  upstairs  alone  and  miserable,  suffer- 
ing from  some  odd  childish  misery  of  nerves,  unable 
to  go  down,  and  yet  hating  to  be  alone ;  how  he  at 
once  soothed  and  petted  her,  sat  by  her  the  whole 
evening,  telling  her  stories  and  successfully  driving 
away  her  unhappiness.  The  most  characteristic  bit 
appears  at  the  end.  This  sort  of  unselfish  conduct  was 
so  usual,  that  his  little  sister  really  forgot  to  thank 
him,  nor  did  it  occur  to  her  till  long  after  that  there  was 
anything  unusual  in  his  willingness  to  sacrifice  a 
whole  evening's  amusement  to  what  most  boys  would 
have  regarded  as  mere  fancifulness,  only  deserving  a 
due  amount  of  severe  teasing. 

During  these  years  the  Eomanes  family  spent 
their  summers  at  Dunskaith,  on  the  shores  of  the 
Cromarty  Firth.  Here  George  Eomanes  had  his  first 
lessons  in  sport  at  the  hands  of  Dr.  Brydon,  the  well- 
known  survivor  of  the  fatal  retreat  from  Cabul,  1842.1 

1  Dr.  Brydon  resided  on  a  small  but  beautiful  property  overlooking 
the  Cromarty  Firth,  and,  after  his  death,  Dr.  Eomanes  rented  the  place 
from  its  owners,  who  were  distant  cousins  of  Mrs.  Komanes,  in  order  that 
'  George  might  have  some- shooting.' 


1870  CAMBEIDGE  5 

He  soon  became  an  ardent  sportsman  and  excellent 
shot,  and  rarely  until  his  fatal  illness  began  did  he 
ever  fail  to  keep  the  Twelfth  of  August  and  the  First 
of  September  in  the  proper  way. 

When  George  Eomanes  was  about  seventeen,  he 
was  sent  to  a  tutor  to  read  in  preparation  for  the 
University,  his  mother  having  suddenly  awakened  to 
the  fact  that  he  was  nearly  grown  up  and  not  at  all 
ready  for  college.  One  of  his  fellow  pupils  was  Mr. 
Charles  Edmund  Lister,  brother  of  the  present  owner 
of  Shibden  Hall,  Halifax.  With  Mr.  Lister  he  formed 
a  friendship  destined  to  be  only  broken  by  Mr.  Lister's 
premature  death  in  1889.  This  friendship  had  impor- 
tant results  for  George  Eomanes.  He  had  been  in- 
tended for  Oxford,  and  his  name  had  been  entered  at 
Brasenose  College,  but  Mr.  Lister  was  to  go  to  Cam- 
bridge, and  he  easily  persuaded  his  friend  to  follow 
him. 

In  October  1867  George  John  Komanes  entered 
Gonville  and  Caius  College,  Cambridge. 


CAMBEIDGE.     1807-1873 

Most  men  feel  that  their  University  life  is  one  of 
the  most  marked  phases  of  their  career.  Even 
those  who  come  up  from  a  public  school,  with  all  the 
prestige  and  with  all  the  friendships,  the  sense  of 
fellowship,  the  hundred  and  one  influences,  the  cus- 
toms of  a  great  school '  lying  thick  '  upon  them,  realise 
more  and  more,  as  time  goes  on,  how  great  a  part 
Oxford  or  Cambridge  plays  in  their  lives ;  how  it  is 
in  their  University  life  they  make  their  intellectual 
choice,  and  receive  the  bias  which,  for  good  or  for  evil, 
will  influence  their  whole  life. 


6  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES 

And  to  this  raw  boy,  fresh  from  a  secluded  and 
somewhat  narrow  atmosphere,  plunged  for  the  first 
time  into  a  great  society,  brought  for  the  first  time 
under  some  of  the  influences  of  the  then  '  Zeitgeist,' 
into  contact  with  some  of  the  leaders  of  thought, 
entrance  into  the  University  was  the  beginning  of  an 
entirely  new  life. 

He  entered  Cambridge,  half-educated,  utterly  un- 
trained, with  no  knowledge  of  men  or  of  books.  He 
left  it,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  a  trained  worker 
and  earnest  thinker,  with  his  life  work  begun — that 
work  which  was  an  unwearied  search  after  truth,  a 
work  characterised  by  an  ever-increasing  reverence 
for  goodness,  and,  as  years  went  on,  by  a  disregard 
for  applause  or  for  reward.  His  Cambridge  life  was 
happy ;  he  made  several  friends,  chief  of  whom  was 
Mr.  Proby  Cautley,  the  present  rector  of  Quainton 
near  Aylesbury. 

He  enjoyed  boating,  and  once  narrowly  escaped 
drowning  in  the  Cam. 

At  first  George  Komanes  fell  completely  under 
Evangelical  influences,  at  that  time  practically  the 
most  potent  religious  force  in  Cambridge.  He  was  a 
regular  communicant,  and  it  is  touching  to  look  at 
the  little  Bible  he  used  while  at  Cambridge,  worn, 
and  marked,  and  pencilled,  with  references  to  sermons 
which  had  evidently  caught  the  boy's  attention.  He 
used  to  attend  meetings  for  Greek  Testament  study, 
and  enjoyed  hearing  the  distinguished  preachers  who 
visited  the  University. 

But  of  the  intellectual  influences  in  the  religious 
world  of  the  University  he  knew  nothing.  F.  D. 
Maurice  was  still  in  Cambridge,  but  he  seems  to  have 
repelled  rather  thaii  to  have  attracted  George  Eo- 


1873  CAMBEIDGE  7 

manes,  nor  did  he  ever  come  under  the  influence  of 
Westcott,  or  of  Lightfoot,  or  of  Hort. 

And,  when  the  intellectual  struggles  began,  he 
seems  in  early  years  to  have  owed  very  little  to  any 
Christian  writer,  Bishop  Butler  alone  excepted. 

His  summers  were  spent  in  Eoss-shire,  and  there 
is  no  doubt  these  months  were  of  great  use  to  him. 
He  was  perfectly  unharassed  so  far  as  pecuniary  cares 
or  family  ambition  were  concerned,  and  he  had  abun- 
dant time  to  think.  Years  afterwards,  Mr.  Darwin 
said  to  him  :  '  Above  all,  Eomanes,  cultivate  the  habit 
of  meditation,'  and  Mr.  Eomanes  always  quoted  this 
as  a  most  valuable  bit  of  advice.  His  intellectual 
development  was  rapid  in  these  Cambridge  years,  and 
it  is  not  improbable  that  his  slowly  growing  mind  had 
not  been  ill  served  by  being  allowed  to  mature  in 
absolute  freedom,  although  he  himself  bitterly  re- 
gretted and,  through  his  whole  life,  deplored  the  lack 
of  early  training,  and  of  mental  discipline. 

Through  these  early  Cambridge  years  he  still 
cherished  the  idea  of  Holy  Orders,  and  with  his  friend, 
Mr.  Cautley,  he  had  many  talks  about  the  career  they 
both  intended  to  choose.  They  spent  a  part  of  one  long 
vacation  together,  and  occupied  themselves  in  reading 
theology — such  books  as  *  Pearson  on  the  Creed,' 
Hooker's  '  Ecclesiastical  Polity,'  Bishop  Butler's 
1  Analogy,'  and  in  writing  sermons.  Some  of  Mr. 
Eomanes'  are  still  extant,  and  are  curious  bits  of 
boyish  composition— crude,  unformed  in  style,  and 
yet  full  of  thought,  and  showing  a  remarkable  know- 
ledge of  the  Bible. 

He  seems  to  have  been,  for  the  rest,  a  bright,  good- 
tempered,  popular  lad,  always  much  chaffed  for  absent- 
minded  mistakes,  for  his  long  legs,  for  his  peculiar 
name  j  and  he  certainly  gave  no  one  the  faintest  idea 


8  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES  isro- 

of  any  particular  ability,  any  likelihood  of  future  dis- 
tinction.1 Some  slight  chance,  as  it  seemed,  turned 
his  attention  to  natural  science  ;  one  or  two  friends 
were  reading  for  the  Natural  Science  Tripos,  and 
George  Romanes  ceased  to  read  mathematics  and 
began  to  work  at  natural  science,  competing  for  and 
winning  a  scholarship  in  that  subject. 

Eighteen  months  only  remained  for  him  to  work 
for  his  Tripos,  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  he  only 
obtained  a  Second  Class.  In  the  Tripos  of  1870,  in 
the  same  list  among  the  First-Class  men,  Mr.  Francis 
Darwin's  name  appears. 

Mr.  Romanes  had  gone  but  a  little  distance  along 
the  road  on  which  he  was  destined  to  travel  very  far. 
He  had  up  to  this  time  read  none  of  Mr.  Darwin's 
books,  and  to  a  question  on  Natural  Selection  which 
occurred  in  the  Tripos  papers  he  could  give  no  answer. 
vBy  this  time  he  had  abandoned  the  idea  of  Holy 
Orders,  perhaps  on  account  of  the  opposition  at 
home,  perhaps  because  of  the  first  beginnings  of  the 
intellectual  struggles  of  doubt  and  of  bewilderment. 
He  began  to  study  medicine,  and  made  a  lifelong 
friendship  with  Dr.  Latham,  the  well-known  Cam- 
bridge physician,  of  whose  kindness  Mr.  Romanes 
often  spoke,  and  to  whom  he  dedicated  his  first  book, 
which  was  the  Burney  Prize  for  1873.  But  he  also 
began  to  study  physiology  under  the  direction  of  Dr. 
Michael  Foster,  the  present  Professor  of  Physiology  at 
Cambridge,  to  whom  she  owes  her  famous  medical 
school,  at  that  time  in  its  very  early  beginnings. 

Science  entirely  fascinated  him  ;  his  first  plunge 


1  Mr.  Cautley  writes  :  '  I  have  never  seen  Eomanes,  under  the  greatest 
provocation,  out  of  temper.  Always  gentle,  always  kind,  never  over- 
bearing .  .  .  never  forgetful  of  friends,' 


1873  BUENEY  PEIZE  9 

into  real  scientific  work  opened  to  him  a  new  life,  gave 
him  the  first  sense  of  power  and  of  capacity.  Now  he 
read  Mr.  Darwin's  books,  and  it  is  impossible  to  over- 
rate the  extraordinary  effect  they  had  on  the  young 
man's  mind.  Something  of  the  feeling  which  Keats 
describes  in  the  sonnet  '  On  Looking  into  Chapman's 
Homer  '  seems  to  have  been  his  : 

'  Then  felt  I  like  some  watcher  of  the  skies 
When  a  new  planet  swims  into  his  ken  ; 

Or  like  stout  Corfcez  when,  with  eagle  eyes, 
He  stared  at  the  Pacific — and  all  his  men 

Looked  at  each  other  with  a  wild  surmise 
Silent,  upon  a  peak  in  Darien.' 

About  the  spring  of  1872  Mr.  Eomanes  began  to 
show  signs  of  ill-health.  He  was  harassed  by  faint- 
ness  and  incessant  lassitude,  but  struggled  on,  going 
up  to  Scotland  in  the  summer  and  beginning  to 
shoot,  under  the  belief  that  all  he  wanted  was  hard 
exercise.  At  last  he  broke  down  and  was  declared  to 
be  suffering  from  a  bad  attack  of  typhoid  fever.  He 
had  a  very  hard  struggle  for  life,  and  owed  a  great 
deal  to  Dr.  Latham,  who  from  Cambridge  kept  up  a 
constant  telegraphic  communication  with  the  Boss- 
shire  doctors.  It  was  a  long  and  weary  convales- 
cence, beguiled  in  part  by  writing  an  essay  on 
'  Christian  Prayer  and  General  Laws,'  the  subject 
assigned  for  the  Burney  Prize  Essay  of  1873. 

Much  of  this  essay  was  dictated  to  one  or  other  of 
his  sisters,  and  it  is  a  curious  fact  that  his  first  book 
and  his  last  should  have  been  on  theological  subjects. 
Both  were  written  when  he  was  struggling  with  great 
bodily  weakness,  and  in  these  months  of  early  man- 
hood he  showed  the  same  almost  pathetic  desire  to 
work,  the  same  activity  of  thought  which  he  displayed 


10  GEOEGE  JOHN   KOMANES  1873 

more  than  twenty  years  later  in  the  last  days  of  his 
life. 

The  essay  was  successful,  and  its  author  was  more 
than  once  claimed  as  a  champion  of  faith  on  the 
strength  of  it. 

It  is  a  very  hard  bit  of  reading,  and  of  course  has 
to  some  extent  the  drawback  of  a  prize  essay,  a  work 
written  not  simply  to  convince  the  public,  but  to 
impress  examiners.  It  is  full  of  knowledge  and  of 
intellectual  agility,  but  is  perhaps  needlessly  difficult 
in  style.  His  success  was  absolutely  unexpected  by 
his  family,  and  made  him  very  happy,  as  the  following 
letters  show,  written  in  the  first  glow  of  success. 

To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace. 

My  dearest  Mother, — Your  letter  of  surprise  and 
rejoicing  has  been  to  me  one  of  the  best  parts  of  the 
result.  All  the  letters  of  congratulation  which  are 
now  coming  in  mention  you :  '  How  delighted  your 
mother  will  be,'  &c. ;  and  it  is  a  great  thing  for  me 
to  find  that  you  are  so.  Without  appreciative  sym- 
pathy success  soon  palls  ;  but  the  two  combined  go 
to  make  up  the  best  happiness. 

I  went  to  Cambridge  yesterday  to  get  the 
manuscript,  and  as  there  happened  to  be  a  congrega- 
tion in  the  afternoon,  I  also  took  my  degree.  I  saw 
all  my  friends,  who  were  overflowing  with  delight. 
Indeed,  I  never  before  realised  how  great  the  compe- 
tition is,  for  I  never  had  an  opportunity  of  knowing 
how  the  successful  man  is  lionised.  The  Caius  dons 
especially  are  up  in  the  air  about  it,  as  this  is  the  first 


1873  BUENEY  PRIZE  11 

time  in  the  history  of  the  college  that  one  of  its 
members  has  got  the  Burney ;  so  that,  as  Ferrers 
writes  to  me,  '  when  the  same  year  produces  a  Senior 
Wrangler  and  a  Burney  Prizeman,  the  college  may 
be  said  to  be  looking  up.'  I  was  invited  to  breakfast 
with  the  Professor  of  Divinity  (who  is  the  principal 
adjudicator),  and  I  found  him  very  pleasant  indeed. 
Afterwards  I  went  to  the  Vice- Chancellor,  from  whom 
I  got  the  well-remembered  4  pages  '  (but  now  with 
Prize  I.  written  across  them) ;  and  lastly,  to  the  third 
adjudicator,  the  master  of  Christ's.  They  all  said 
more  in  praise  of  the  essay  than  I  would  care  to 
repeat,  but,  to  tell  you  the  simple  truth,  I  was  perfectly 
astonished.  For  example,  '  In  the  history  of  the 
Burney  Prize  there  have  only  been  two  equals  and 
110  superiors.' 

The  Vice-Chancellor  told  me  that  there  was  another 
essay  well  deserving  of  a  prize  which  was  written 
by  a  man  of  whom  I  dare  say  you  will  remember  I 
said  I  was  most  afraid,  viz.,  Mr.  Cunningham.1  I  knew 
him  very  well  when  we  were  undergraduates,  and 
three  years  ago  he  obtained  the  Trinity  Scholarship 
in  Philosophy,  open  to  all  competitors,  and  ended 
up  eighteen  months  ago  by  graduating  as  Senior  of 
the  Moral  Science  Tripos.  It  is  a  great  satisfaction 
to  me  that  the  man  who  was  universally  admitted  to 
be  the  best  of  the  Cambridge  metaphysicians  should 
have  written,  and  that,  notwithstanding,  the  decision 
should  have  been  given  unanimously  in  my  favour. 

1  The  Rev.  W.  Cunningham,  Fellow   and  Lecturer  of  Trinity   Col- 
lege, Cambridge,  and  Hon.  Fellow  of  Caius. 


12  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1873- 


To  James  Romanes,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace  :  April  24. 

My  dearest  James, — I  am  sure  you  will  be  as  much 
pleased  with  the  result  of  my  labours  as  I  am  myself. 
I  remember  so  well  our  speculating  upon  the  probable 
chances  of  success,  and  how  low  we  set  them  down. 
Had  I  known  for  certain  that  Cunningham  was  going 
to  compete,  I  think  I  should  have  given  up  altogether. 
His  essay  does  seem  to  have  been  extraordinarily 
good,  and  yet  he  cannot  get  a  second  prize,  because 
the  foundation  requires  that  every  penny  of  the 
interest  shall  go  to  the  first  man.  As  this  seems 
rather  hard  lines  for  Cunningham,  I  have  to-day 
written  to  the  Divinity  Professor  offering  to  share 
the  prize  money,  on  condition  that  the  University 
recognise  Cunningham  as  a  prizeman. 

The  extraordinary  thing  about  the  whole  affair  is, 
not  so  much  the  award,  as  the  opinion  which  the 
adjudicators  entertain  of  the  work.  I  do  not  know  how 
it  is  that,  stranded  on  a  sandbank  and  in  a  half  dead- 
and-alive  state,  without  thinking  I  was  doing  any- 
thing unusual,  I  should  have  written  the  prize  essay. 

But  I  don't  care  how  it  is  so  long  as  it  is  so,  as 

writes,  '  You  certainly  have  achieved  a  great  success, 
handicapped  as  you  were  in  so  many  ways.'  This, 
of  course,  relates  to  the  award ;  but,  as  I  said  before, 
what  surprised  me  most  is  that  I  should  not  only  be 
first,  but  such  a  good  first.  The  praise  given  by  each 
of  the  adjudicators  separately,  in  as  strong  terms  as 
it  is  possible  in  donnish  phraseology  to  convey  it,  was 


1875  FIEST  MEETING  WITH  DAEWIN  13 

very  gratifying  to  me,  especially  as  pronounced  in  the 
studiously  dignified  manner  of  the  Vice-Chancellor. 

I  hope  soon  to  see  you  and  tell  you  more  about 
the  whole  thing ;  for  one  of  the  best  parts  of  it  is, 
that  '  if  one  member  be  honoured,  all  the  members 
rejoice  with  it.' 

Ever  your  loving  Brother, 

GEO.  J.  KOMANES. 

During  his  convalescence  Mr.  Romanes  finally 
abandoned  the  idea  of  a  profession  and  resolved  to 
devote  himself  to  scientific  research. 

It  was  about  this  time  that  a  letter  of  his  in 
'  Nature '  (see  l  Nature,'  vol.  viii.  p.  101)  attracted 
Mr.  Darwin's  attention,  and  caused  him  to  send  a 
friendly  little  note  to  the  youthful  writer. 

Probably  Mr.  Darwin  had  little  idea  of  the  effect 
his  letter  produced  on  its  recipient,  who  was  then 
recovering  from  his  long  illness.  That  Darwin  should 
actually  write  to  him  seemed  too  good  to  believe.  It 
was  a  great  encouragement  to  go  on  with  scientific 
work. 

Up  to  1873  or  1874  Mr.  Romanes  had  been  work- 
ing, when  at  Cambridge,  in  Dr.  Michael  Foster's 
laboratory,  and  was  a  member  of  that  band  who 
formed  the  nucleus  of  what  was  destined  to  be  the 
famous  physiological  school  of  Cambridge.  Side  by 
side  with  Mr.  Romanes  were  working  Mr.  Gaskell,  Mr. 
Dew  Smith,  and  others  now  well  known  for  their  work 
and  achievements. 

In  some  ways  Mr.  Romanes  suffered  from  not 
remaining  at  Cambridge  and  becoming  a  permanent 
member  of  the  band. 

It  is  impossible  not  to  feel  that  had  he  stayed  on 


14  GEOEGE    JOHN  ROMANES  1873- 

at  the  University  he  would  have  devoted  himself 
more  and  more  to  strictly  experimental  work  and  less 
to  what  may  be  called  philosophical  natural  history. 
Some  will  regard  his  removal  as  a  misfortune,  and 
others  as  a  happy  accident,  but  the  might-have-beens 
of  life  are  never  very  profitable  subjects  for  specula- 
tion. 

In  order  to  be  with  his  now  widowed  mother,  he 
returned  to  London,  and  made  his  home  with  her  and 
his  sisters.  They  spent  their  summers  at  Dunskaith, 
and  Mr.  Romanes  embarked  on  researches  on  the 
nervous  system  of  the  Medusa.  He  began  also  to  work 
in  the  physiological  laboratory  of  University  College 
under  Dr.  Sharpey  and  Dr.  Burdon  Sanderson.  Both 
he  regarded  as  masters  and  friends,  and  perhaps, 
next  to  Mr.  Darwin,  Dr.  Sanderson  was  the  scientific 
friend  George  Romanes  most  valued  and  loved, 
although  it  is  impossible  to  overrate  what  he  owed 
to  Cambridge,  and  to  those  early  longings  for  bio- 
logical study  which  were  inspired  by  Dr.  Foster. 

As  has  been  said,  a  letter  in  '  Nature  '  attracted 
Mr.  Darwin's  notice,  and  somewhere  about  1874  he 
invited  Mr.  Romanes  to  call  on  him. 

From  that  time  began  an  unbroken  friendship, 
marked  on  one  side  by  absolute  worship,  reverence, 
and  affection,  on  the  other  by  an  almost  fatherly  kind- 
ness and  a  wonderful  interest  in  the  younger  man's 
work  and  in  his  career.  That  first  meeting  was  a 
real  epoch  in  Mr.  Romanes'  life.  Mr.  Darwin  met 
him,  as  he  often  used  to  tell,  with  outstretched  hands, 
a  bright  smile,  and  a '  How  glad  I  am  that  you  are  so 
young ! ' 

Perhaps  no  hero-worship  was  ever  more  unselfish, 
more  utterly  loyal,  or  more  fully  rewarded.  As  time 
went  on,  and  intimacy  increased,  and  restraint  wore 


1875  EAELY  SCIENTIFIC  WORK  15 

off,  Mr.  Komanes  found  that  the  great  master  was  as 
much  to  be  admired  for  his  personal  character  as  for 
his  wonderful  gifts,  and  to  the  youth  who  never,  in  the 
darkest  days  of  utter  scepticism,  parted  with  the  love 
for  goodness,  for  beauty  of  character,  this  was  an  over- 
whelming  joy. 

In  a  poem  written  about  1884  Mr.  Eomanes  has 
expressed  something  of  what  he  felt  for  Mr.  Darwin, 
and  in  this  he  has  poured  out  his  '  hero-worship  '  in 
terms  which  were  to  him  the  expressions  of  simple 
truth. 

It  is  interesting  to  look  over  the  long  series  of 
letters  from  1874  to  1882  and  notice  how  the  formal 
'  Dear  Mr.  Romanes  '  drops  into  the  familiar  i  Dear 
Eomanes,'  and  the  letters  become  more  and  more 
affectionate,  intimate,  personal. 

About  this  time  also  Mr.  Romanes  made  many 
other  scientific  friends,  Professor  Schafer,  Professor 
Cossar  Ewart,  Mr.  Francis  Darwin,  Dr.  Pye  Smith, 
Professor  R.  Lankester,  Professor  Clifford,  Dr.  Lauder 
Brunton,  and  many  more ;  and  as  his  work  became 
known  it  is  pleasant  to  see  with  what  kindness  of 
welcome  the  new  recruit  was  welcomed  to  the  scien- 
tific army  by  such  men  as  Professor  Huxley,  Sir  John 
Lubbock,  Sir  Joseph  Hooker,  Mr.  Busk,  Mr.  F.  Galton, 
and  Mr.  Spottiswoode,  then  President  of  the  Royal 
Society. 

Just  at  that  time  there  was  a  set  of  rising  young 
biologists  who  all  seemed  destined  to  do  good  work, 
and  it  is  melancholy  to  look  back  and  to  see  '  how  of 
that  not  too  numerous  band  a  number  have  been 
taken  from  us  in  the  prime  of  life,  Garrod,  Frank 
Balfour,  Moseley,  H.  Carpenter,  Mimes  Marshall, 
Romanes.' l 

1  Prof.  E.  K.  Lankester  in  Nature,  May  1894, 


16  GEOBGE  JOHN  ROMANES 

At  Dunskaith  a  little  laboratory  was  fitted  up  in 
an  adjoining  cottage,  and  here  during  the  summer 
Mr.  Eomanes  worked  constantly  for  some  years,  diver- 
sifying his  labours  by  shooting.  It  was  in  his  country 
home  also  that  he  began  those  series  of  observations 
on  animals  which  he  worked  up  into  the  <  Animal 
Intelligence '  of  the  International  Scientific  Series, 
perhaps  the  most  popular  of  his  books.  The  terrier 
Mathal  was  his  special  companion,  and  he  observed 
various  traits  of  her  intelligence  which  are  recorded 
in  <  Mental  Evolution  in  Animals,'  pp.  156,  157,  158. 
It  was  also  at  Dunskaith  that  he  began  his  first 
attempts  at  verse  making,  but  for  some  years  these 
did  not  come  to  much. 

His  scientific  work  at  Dunskaith  led  to  a  paper 
communicated  to  the  Royal  Society  in  1875,  and 
entitled  '  Preliminary  Observations  on  the  Locomotor 
System  of  Medusae.' 

This  paper  the  Royal  Society  honoured  by  making 
it  the  Croonian  Lecture,  an  honour  awarded  to  the 
best  biological  paper  of  each  year. 

And  he  also  communicated  a  paper  to  the  Royal 
Society  entitled,  '  The  Influence  of  Injury  on  the 
Excitability  of  Motor  Nerves.'  Of  this  paper  Pro- 
fessor Burdon  Sanderson  says  that  the  observations 
were  made  with  great  care,  and  that  the  new  facts 
recorded  have  been  fully  confirmed  by  later  observers. 
This  work  was  done  at  Cambridge. 

Mr.  Romanes  had  worked  for  two  years,  or  rather 
two  summers,  very  constantly  and  very  strenuously 
on  the  Medusae.  He  set  himself  to  try  to  discover 
whether  or  not  the  rudiments  of  a  nervous  system 
existed  in  these  creatures.  Agassiz  had  maintained  it 
did,  others  considered  his  deductions  premature,  and 
Huxley,  in  his  '  Classification  of  Animals,'  summed 


]87r,  EXPEEIMENTS   ON   MEDUSAE  17 

up  the  much-debated  question  by  saying  that 
'  no  nervous  system  had  yet  been  discovered  in 
Medusae.' 

Microscopically,  it  had  already  been  shown  that 
in  some  forms  of  Medusae  there  are  present  certain 
fine  fibres  running  along  the  margin  of  the  swimming 
bell,  from  their  appearance  said  to  be  nerves,  but 
in  no  case  had  it  been  shown  that  they  functioned 
as  such.  Thus  it  was  to  solve  this  question,  whether 
or  not  a  nervous  system,  known  to  be  present  in  all 
animals  higher  in  the  zoological  scale,  makes  its 
first  appearance  in  the  Medusae,  that  Mr.  Komanes 
entered  upon  a  long  series  of  physiological  experi- 
ments, first  on  the  group  of  small  '  naked-eyed ' 
Medusae,  and  then  on  the  larger  '  covered-eyed  '  form, 
the  latter  division  containing  the  common  jelly-fish. 
These  names,  'naked-eyed7  and  'covered-eyed,'  are 
given  to  the  two  groups  on  account  of  a  difference  in 
their  sense  organs,  which  are  situated  on  the  margin 
of  the  umbrella  or  swimming  bell,  and  are  protected 
by  a  hood  of  gelatinous  matter  in  the  '  covered-eyed  ' 
forms,  so  called  in  contradistinction  to  the  '  naked- 
eyed  '  group,  where  the  hood  is  absent. 

Romanes  first  carefully  observed  the  movements 
of  the  Medusae,  which,  it  will  be  remembered,  are 
effected  by  the  dilatation  and  contraction  of  the 
entire  swimming  bell,  and  he  found  that  if,  in  the 
4  naked-eyed'  group,  the  extreme  margin  of  this 
swimming  bell  be  excised,  immediate,  total,  and  per- 
manent paralysis  of  the  whole  organ  took  place.  This 
result  was  obtained  with  every  species  of  this  group 
which  he  examined ;  he  therefore  concluded  that  in 
the  margin  of  all  these  forms  there  is  situated  a 
localised  system  of  centres  of  spontaneity,  having 
for  one  of  its  functions  the  origination  of  impulses  to 

c 


18  GEOKGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1874- 

which  the  contraction  of  the  swimming  bell  is,  under 
ordinary  circumstances,  exclusively  due.  This  deduc- 
tion was  confirmed  by  the  behaviour  of  the  severed 
thread-like  portion  of  the  margin,  which  continued 
its  rhythmical  contractions  quite  unimpaired  by  its 
severance  from  the  main  organism,  the  latter  remain- 
ing perfectly  motionless.  In  the  '  covered-eyed ' 
forms  Komanes  found  that  excision  of  the  margin 
of  the  umbrella,  or  rather  excision  of  the  sense  organs 
or  marginal  bodies,  produced  paralysis  ;  in  this  case, 
the  paralysis  was  of  a  temporary  character,  as  in  the 
great  majority  of  cases  contractions  were  resumed 
after  a  variable  period.  From  this  series  of  experi- 
ments he  was  led  to  believe  that  in  the  (  covered- 
eyed  '  Medusa  the  margin  is  the  principal,  but  not 
the  exclusive,  seat  of  spontaneity,  there  being  other 
locomotor  centres  scattered  throughout  the  general 
contractile  tissue  of  the  swimming  bell. 

Having  demonstrated  the  existence  of  a  central 
nervous  system  capable  of  originating  impulses, 
Romanes  had  yet  to  prove  the  identity  of  this  nervous 
tissue  of  the  Medusae  with  that  of  nervous  tissues  in 
general :  therefore,  he  next  proceeded  to  test  whether 
it  was  also  capable  of  responding  to  external  stimu- 
lation by  light,  heat,  electricity,  &c. 

As  regards  appreciation  of  light,  he  was  able  to 
prove  conclusively  for  at  least  two  species  of  the 
'  naked-eyed '  forms  that  as  long  as  their  marginal 
bodies  remained  intact  they  would  always  respond  to 
luminous  stimulation,  and  would  crowd  along  a  beam 
of  light  cast  through  a  darkened  bell  jar  in  which 
they  were  swimming ;  if  their  marginal  bodies  were 
removed,  they  remained  indifferent  to  light.  With 
regard  to  the  '  covered-eyed '  forms,  he  obtained 
sufficient  evidence  to  induce  him  to  believe  they 


1875  EXPERIMENTS   ON   MEDUSAE  19 

possessed  a  visual  sense  localised  in  their  marginal 
sense  organs. 

The  effects  of  electrical  stimulation  agreed  in  all 
respects  with  those  produced  on  the  excitable  tissues 
of  other  animals.  He  next  experimentally  investi- 
gated in  the  jelly-fish  the  paths  along  which  the 
nervous  impulses  must  pass  in  their  passage  from  the 
locomotor  centres,  where  they  originate,  to  the  general 
contractile  tissues  of  the  animal. 

The  results  of  these  experiments  led  him  to  infer 
the  existence  of  a  very  fine  plexus  of  nerve  fibres,  in 
which  the  constituent  threads  cross  and  re-cross  one 
another  without  actually  coalescing.  This  conclusion, 
which  he  arrived  at  from  purely  experimental  grounds, 
was  some  years  afterwards  confirmed  by  minute  his- 
tological  research. 

Finally,  the  effect  of  various  poisons,  chloroform, 
alcohol,  &c.,  was  tried,  and  the  striking  resemblance 
of  their  action  on  the  nervous  system  of  the  Medusa3 
with  that  which  they  exert  on  that  of  higher  animals 
supports  the  belief  that  nerve  tissue  when  it  first 
appears  in  the  scene  of  life  has  the  same  fundamental 
properties  as  it  has  in  higher  animals. 

This  piece  of  work  was  important,  as  the  facts 
threw  light,  as  Professor  Sanderson  has  said,  on  ele- 
mentary questions  of  physiology  relating  to  excita- 
bility and  conduction,  and  it  was  a  characteristic  of 
Mr.  Romanes  that  in  all  his  work,  of  whatever  kind, 
he  was  always  searching  for  principles.  The  minutest 
detail  never  escaped  his  attention  if  it  appeared  at  all 
likely  in  any  way  to  throw  light  on  some  biological 
or  psychological  problem.  Only  a  trained  scientific 
worker  can  appreciate  the  amount  of  labour  these 
Royal  Society  papers  represented.  In  1875  he  gave 


20  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1875 

a  Friday  evening  lecture  at  the  Eoyal  Institution  on 
his  work  on  Medusae. 

He  was  also  at  this  time  working  on  the  subject 
of  <  Pangenesis,' *  and  a  series  of  letters  to  Mr. 
Darwin  and  to  Professor  Schafer  may  interest  some 
readers. 

1  The  following  extract  from  *  An  Examination  of  Weissmannism,' 
pp.  2,  3,  will  possibly  explain  the  theory  of  Pangenesis,  which  assumes  : 

1.  That  all  the  component  cells  of  a  multicellular  organism  throw  off 
inconceivably  minute  germs,  or  *  gemmules,'  which  are  then  dispersed 
throughout  the  whole  system. 

2.  That  these  gemmules,  when  so  dispersed  and  supplied  with  proper 
nutriment,  multiply  by  self- division,  and,  under  suitable  conditions,   are 
capable  of  developing  into  physiological  cells  like  those  from  which  they 
were  originally  and  severally  derived. 

3.  That,  while  still  in  this  gemmular  condition,  these  cell-seeds  have 
for  one  another  a  mutual  affinity,  which  leads  to  their  being  collected 
from  all  parts  of  the  system  by  the  reproductive  glands  of  the  organism  ; 
and  that,  when  so  collected,  they  go  to  constitute  the  essential  material  of 
the  sexual  elements — ova  and  spermatozoa  being  thus  aggregated  packets 
of  gemmules,  which  have  emanated  from  all  the  cells  of  all  the  tissues  of 
the  organism. 

4.  That  the  development  of  a  new  organism  out  of  the  fusion  of  two 
such  packets  of  gemmules  is  due  to  a  summation  of  all  the  developments 
of  some  of  the  gemmules  which  these  two  packets  contain. 

5.  That  a  large  proportional  number  of  the  gemmules  in  each  packet, 
however,  fail  to  develop,  and  are  then  transmitted  in  a  dormant  state  to 
future  generations,  in  any  of  which  they  may  be  developed  subsequently, 
thus  giving  rise  to  the  phenomena  of  reversion  or  atavism. 

6.  That  in  all  cases  the  development  of  gemmules  into  the  form  of 
their  parent  cells  depends  on  their  suitable  union  with  other  partially 
developed  gemmules  which  precede   them    in   the    regular    course    of 
growth. 

7.  That  gemmules  are  thrown  off  by  all  physiological  cells,  not  only 
during  the  adult  state  of  the  organism,  but  during  all  stages  of  its  develop- 
ment.    Or,  in  other  words,  that  the  production  of  these  cell-seeds  depends 
upon  the  adult  condition  of  parent  cells,  not  upon  that  of  the  multi- 
cellular  organism  as  a  whole. 


1875  PANGENESIS  21 


18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Regent's  Park,  N.W.: 
January  14,  1875. 

Dear  Mr.  Darwin, — I  should  very  much  like  to 
see  the  papers  to  which  you  allude.  A  priori  one 
would  have  thought  the  bisecting  plan  the  more 
hopeful,  but  if  the  other  has  yielded  positive  results, 
in  the  case  of  an  eye  and  tubers,  I  think  it  would  be 
worth  while  to  try  the  effect  of  transplanting  various 
kinds  of  pips  into  the  pulps  of  kindred  varieties  of 
fruit ;  for  the  homological  relations  in  this  case  would 
be  pretty  much  the  same  as  in  the  other,  with  the 
exception  of  the  bud  being  an  impregnated  one.  If 
positive  results  ensued,  however,  this  last-mentioned 
fact  would  be  all  the  better  for  '  Pangenesis.' 

You  have  doubtless  observed  the  very  remarkable 
case  given  in  the  '  Gardener's  Chronicle '  for  January  2 
-I  mean  the  vine  in  which  the  scion  appears  to  have 
notably  affected  the  stock.  Altogether  vines  seem 
very  promising ;  and  as  their  buds  admit  of  being 
planted  in  the  ground,  it  would  be  much  more  easy 
to  try  the  bisecting  plan  in  their  case  than  in  others, 
where  one  half-bud,  besides  requiring  to  be  fitted  to 
the  other  half,  has  also  to  have  its  shield  fitted  into 
the  bark.  All  one's  energies  might  then  be  expended 
in  coaxing  adhesion,  and  if  once  this  were  obtained, 
I  think  there  would  here  be  the  best  chance  of 
obtaining  a  hybrid ;  for  then  all,  or  nearly  all,  the 
cells  of  the  future  branch  would  be  in  the  state 
of  gemmules.  I  am  very  sanguine  about  the  buds 
growing  under  these  circumstances,  for  the  vigour 


22  GEOBGE  JOHN  ROMANES  1675- 

with  which  bisected  seeds  germinate  is  perfectly 
astonishing. 

Yery  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

P.S. — I  have  been  to  see  Dr.  Hooker,  and  found 
his  kindness  and  courtesy  quite  what  you  led  me  to 
expect.  Such  men  are  rare. 

April  21,  1875. 

In  returning  you 's  papers,  I  should  like  to  say 

that  the  one  on  '  Inheritance  '  appears  to  me  quite  de- 
stitute of  intelligible  meaning.  It  is  a  jumble  of  the 
same  confused  ideas  upon  heredity  about  which  I 
complained  when  you  were  at  this  house.  How  in 
the  world  can  '  force '  act  without  any  material  on 
which  to  act  ?  Yet,  unless  we  assume  that  it  can, 
the  whole  discussion  is  either  meaningless,  or  else 
assumes  the  truth  of  some  such  theory  as  l  Pangene- 
sis.'  In  other  words,  as  it  must  be  '  unthinkable  ' 
that  force  should  act  independently  of  matter,  the 
doctrine  of  its  persistence  can  only  be  made  to  bear 
upon  the  question  of  heredity,  by  supposing  that 
there  is  a  material  connection  between  corporeal  and 
germinal  cells — i.e.  by  granting  the  existence  of 
force-carriers,  call  them  gemmules,  or  physiological 
units,  or  what  wre  please. 

Lawson  Tait  says  (p.  60) — c  The  process  of  growth 
of  the  ovum  after  impregnation  can  be  followed  only 
after  the  assumption  either  expressed  ox  unconsciously 
accepted  of  such  a  hypothesis  as  is  contained  in  Mr. 
Darwin's  "  Pangenesis ;  "  '  and  it  is  interesting,  as 
showing  the  truth  of  the  remark,  to  compare,  for  ex- 


1876  PANGENESIS  23 

ample,  p.  29  of  the  other  pamphlet — for,  of  course, 
'  Pangenesis  '  assumes  the  truth  of  the  persistence  of 
force  as  the  prime  condition  of  its  possibility.  If 
ever  I  have  occasion  to  prepare  a  paper  about 
heredity,  I  think  it  would  be  worth  while  to  point 
out  the  absurdity  of  thinking  that  we  explain  any- 
thing by  vague  allusions  to  the  most  ultimate 
generalisation  of  science.  We  might  just  as  well  say 
that  Canadian  institutions  resemble  British  ones 
because  force  is  .persistent.  This  doubtless  is  the 
ultimate  reason,  but  our  explanation  would  be  scien- 
tifically valueless  if  we  neglected  to  observe  that  the 
Canadian  colony  was  founded  by  British  individuals. 

The  leaf  from  *  Nature  '  arrived  last  night.  I  had 
previously  intended  to  try  mangold- wurzel,  as  I  hear 
it  has  well-marked  varieties.  The  reference,  there- 
fore, will  be  valuable  to  me. 

Before  closing,  I  should  like  to  take  this  oppor- 
tunity of  thanking  you  again  for  the  very  pleasant 
time  I  spent  at  Down.  The  place  was  one  which  I 
had  long  wished  to  see,  and  now  that  I  have  seen  it, 
I  am  sure  it  will  ever  remain  one  of  the  most  agree- 
able and  interesting  of  memory's  pictures. 

With  kind  regards  to  Mrs.  Darwin,  I  remain,  very 
sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

To  Professor  E.  S  chafer. 

Dunskaith,  Ross- shire. 

My  dear  Schafer, — I  am  glad  to  hear  that  your 
rest  has  been  beneficial,  and  also  about  all  the  other 
news  you  give. 


24  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES 

I  should  like  to  have  your  opinion  about  the 
meaning  of  the  following  facts. 

In  Sarsia  gentle  irritation  of  a  tentacle  or  an  eye- 
speck  causes  the  polypite  to  respond,  but  not  the 
bell  (stronger  irritation,  of  course,  causes  both  to 
respond) ;  this  seems  to  show  that  there  are  nervous 
connections  between  the  eye-specks  and  the  polypite. 
By  introducing  cuts  between  former  and  latter,  these 
connections  may  be  destroyed — the  tolerance  of  the 
tissue  to  such  sections  being  variable  in  different 
cases,  but  never  being  anything  remarkable.  So  far, 
then,  the  matter  seems  favourable  to  the  nerve-plexus 
theory. 

In  another  disc-shaped  species  of  naked-eyed 
Medusa  with  a  long  polypite,  which  I  have  called 
Tiaropsis  indicans,  from  its  habit  of  applying  this 
long  polypite  to  any  part  of  the  bell  which  is  being 
injured,  the  localising  function  of  the  polypite  is  de- 
stroyed as  regards  any  area  of  bell-tissue  between 
which  and  the  polypite  a  circumferential  section  has 
been  introduced.  In  other  words,  the  connections 
between  the  bell  and  the  polypite,  on  which  localis- 
ing function  of  the  latter  depends,  are  exclusively 
radial.  But  not  so  the  connections  between  the  bell 
and  the  polypite,  which  render  it  possible  for  the 
one  to  be  aware  that  something  is  wrong  somewhere 
in  the  other.  For  if  the  whole  animal  be  cut  into 
a  spiral  with  the  polypite  at  one  end,  irritation  of 
the  other  end  of  the  spiral,  or  any  part  of  its  length, 
causes  the  polypite  to  sway  about  from  side  to  side 
trying  to  find  the  offending  body.  And  here  it  is 
important  to  observe  that  wherever  a  portion  of  one 


J876  MEDUSAE  25 

of  the  radial  tubes  occurs  in  the  course  of  the  spiral, 
irritation  of  that  portion  causes  a  much  stronger  re- 
sponse on  the  part  of  the  polypite  than  does  irrita- 
tion of  any  of  the  general  bell-tissue,  even  though 
this  be  situated  much  nearer  to  the  polypite.  This 
seems  to  show  that  the  nervous  plexus,  if  present, 
has  its  constituent  fibres  aggregated  into  trunks  in 
the  course  of  the  nutriment  tubes. 

Thus  far,  then,  I  should  be  inclined  to  adopt  the 
nerve-plexus  theory.    But  lastly,  we  come  to  another 
species  with  a  very  large  bell  and  a  very  small  polypite. 
Irritation  of  margin  or  radial  tubes  causes  the  animal  to 
go  into  a  violent  spasm,  but  irritation  of  the  general 
muscular   layer   only  causes  an   ordinary  locomotor 
contraction.  On  cutting  the  whole  animal  into  a  spiral, 
and  irritating  the  extreme  end  of  several  marginal 
strips,  the   entire   muscular  part  of  the  spiral  goes 
into    spasm.      On  interposing   a    great    number    of 
interdigitating   cuts    in    the    course    of    the    spiral, 
there   is  no  difference   in   these   results.     Now   the 
question  is,  What  is  the  nature  of  the  tissue  that 
conducts   impressions  from  the  ganglionic  tissue  to 
the  muscular,  making  the  latter  go  into  a  spasm  ? 
A  spasm  is  as  different  as  possible  from  an  ordinary 
contraction,  and  will  continue  to  pass  long  after  the 
ordinary  contractions  have  been  blocked  by  severity 
of   section.      It   is    scarcely   possible   to    suppose    a 
nerve-plexus    here — the    tolerance    towards    section 
being  so  great,  although  it  varies  in  different  cases. 
Besides,  suppose  this  to  be  a  segment  of  animal  cut  as 
represented.     On  irritating  margin  at  a  all  the  bell 
goes  into  a  spasm,  and  it  is  evident  that  whatever  the 


28  GEOUGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1875- 

nature  of  the  conductile  tissue,  all  the  connections 
must  pass  through  the  tract  of  tissue  at  b.  Yet  on 
irritating  that  tract  no  spasm  is  given.  I  cannot 
understand  this  on  any  view  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
conductile  tissue. 

Altogether,  then,  this  part  of  the  inquiry  is  very 
perplexing.  Other  parts  are  definite  enough.  All  the 
poisons,  for  instance,  yield  very  definite  results,  which 
are  in  conformity  with  their  actions  elsewhere. 

I  have  had  no  time  to  do  anything  at  the  histology 
as  yet.  Would  it  be  worth  while  for  me  to  send  you 

various    species    in    a 
b  little  sea  water  ?    They 

would  arrive  in  a  toler- 
ably fresh  condition, 
but  would  require  to  be 
examined  at  once.  I 
might  try  sending  some 
in  spirit  and  others  in 
Fm  x  chromic  acid.  I  have 

made  a  few  preliminary 

experiments  with  the  galvanometer  on  Sarsia,  placing 
one  electrode  on  the  margin  and  another  on  the 
muscular  sheet,  but  without  any  decided  results.  I 
also  tried  placing  a  Sarsia  in  one  beaker  and  simple 
sea  water  in  another,  connecting  by  means  of  the 
electrodes,  but  no  disturbance  was  observable. 

June  4. 

I  am  working  very  hard  just  now,  as  there  are  so 
many  irons  to  keep  hot  at  once.  It  is  too  soon  yet 
to  see  the  results  of  spring  grafting  on  the  many 


1876  MEDUSA  27 

plants  I  have  operated  on,  and  I  have  not  had  time 
to  do  anything  with  animals  since  I  left  London. 

The  Medusae  have  now  come  on  in  their  legion, 
and  occupy  my  undivided  attention.  The  results  so 
far  have  proved  as  definite  as  they  are  interesting 
and  important.  The  following  is  a  summary  of  the 
principal. 

All  genera  of  naked-eyed  yet  examined  become 
immediately  and  permanently  paralysed  (except 
polypite)  upon  excision  of  margin,  but  not  so  with 
the  covered-eyed. 

The  organism  thus  mutilated  responds  with  a 
single  contraction  to  a  nip  with  the  forceps,  also  to 
various  chemical  stimuli.  The  chain  of  ganglia  do 
the  same,  and  further  resemble  the  mutilated  organism 
in  contracting  once  to  both  make  and  break  of  direct 
or  of  induced  shock.  They  differ,  however,  in  one 
important  particular  :  the  severed  margin  retains  its 
sensibility  to  the  induced  shock  much  longer  than  to 
the  direct,  while  with  the  necto-calyx  the  converse 
is  the  case — the  latter  responding  vigorously  to  make 
and  break  of  direct  current  after  it  has  ceased  to  be 
affected  by  even  interrupted  current  with  secondary 
coil  pushed  up  to  zero  (one  cell). 

A  strange  and,  so  far  as  I  am  aware,  an  unparalleled 
phenomenon  is  sometimes  manifested  by  Sarsia  after 
removal  of  ganglia.  It  only  happens  in  about  one 
case  out  of  ten,  and  never  except  in  response  to  either 
chemical  or  electrical  stimulation.  A  bell  quite 
paralysed,  and  which  may  have  responded  normally 
enough  to  stimulation  for  a  number  of  times,  sud- 
denly begins  an  active  shivering  motion,  which  may 


m  GEOKGE  JOHN   EOMANEB  1875- 

last  from  a  minute  to  half  an  hour.  This  motion  is 
totally  different  from  anything  exhibited  by  the 
animal  when  alive,  and  after  ceasing  never  recom- 
mences without  fresh  stimulation.  The  shivering 
appearance,  I  think,  is  due  to  the  various  systems  of 
muscles  contracting  without  co-ordination,  but  why 
it  should  take  place  in  some  cases  and  not  in  others, 
I  am  quite  unable  to  determine. 

Irritability  of  bell  to  shocks  increases  progres- 
sively from  centre  to  circumference,  and  is  greatest 
when  electrodes  are  placed  on  marginal  canal.  Also 
a  similar  progressive  increase  is  observable  on  ap- 
proaching one  of  the  radial  canals,  and  is  greatest 
when  electrodes  are  placed  on  one  of  these.  (I  may 
observe  that  however  neat  a  person's  fingers  may  be 
it  would  be  simply  impossible  to  conduct  these 
and  other  observations  of  the  same  nature  without 
a  mechanical  stage.  The  electrodes  must  be  needle- 
points passed  through  cords,  the  latter  being  sup- 
ported by  a  copper  wire  fixed  to  the  stage,  and 
therefore  moveable  with  it ;  and  I  defy  anybody  to 
get  the  electrodes  into  the  field,  and  at  the  same 
time  upon  the  marginal  canal,  unless  they  all  move 
together.) 

Sarsia  stands  an  astonishing  amount  of  section 
without  losing  nervous  conductibility.  For  instance, 
the  whole  organism  may  be  cut  into  a  three-turned 
spiral,  and  on  irritating  the  end,  the  whole  contracts  ; 
yet  a  moment's  thought  will  show  how  trying  this 
mode  of  section  is  to  nervous  connections.  As  the 
animal  may  be  cut,  as  in  the  following  diagram, 
which  represents  the  whole  organism  in  projection— 


1876 


MEDUSAE 


29 


the  dotted  lines  being  the  canals,  and  the  thick  ones 
the  cuts — on  now  irritating  any  part  of  the  animal, 
the  whole  contracts,  but  the  co-ordination  power  is 
lost,  both  in  spontaneous  contraction  and  for  those  in 
response  to  stimuli. 

If  the  entire  margin  be  cut  out  in  a  continuous 
piece  save  a  small  portion  to  unite  it  with  the  bell, 
and  if  the  distal  end  be  now  irritated,  a  main  of 
contraction  runs  along  the  entire  severed  part  till  it 
arrives  at  the  small  united  part,  when  the  whole  bell 
contracts.  I  should  like 
to  try  whether  under 
such  circumstances  the 
margin  would  be  thrown 
into  a  state  of  electro- 
tonus,  but  only  having 
one  cell  I  am  not  able  to 
make  out  this  point  satis- 
factorily. 

The  severed  margin 
continues  its  rhythmical 
contractions  for  two  or 
three  days.  I  am  now  trying  the  effect  of  different 
chemical  stimuli,  and  if  you  can  suggest  any  further 
line  of  experimentation,  of  course  I  shall  be  very 
pleased.  Only,  if  you  can  think  of  anything  which 
might  be  tried  and  which  is  not  mentioned  in  this 
letter,  please  write  soon,  as  the  Sarsia  will  not  last 
much  longer,  and  they  are  the  best  adapted  for  my 
purposes. 

I  remain,  very  sincerely  yours, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 


FIG.  2. 


30  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1875- 

P.S. — I  should  have  said  that  neither  gold  nor 
silver  brings  out  any  nervous  tissue. 

Medusa  muscle  is  not  doubly  refracting,  but  then 
none  that  I  have  here  seen  is  striated,  and  unstriated 
muscle  is  not  doubly  refracting  anywhere,  is  it  ? 


Dunskaith :  June  24. 

Many  thanks  for  your  long  and  suggestive  letter. 
The  poisons  also  are  most  acceptable.  I  have 
waited  before  writing  to  try  effect  of  the  latter,  but 
the  weather  has  been  so  stormy  that  no  jelly-fish 
could  be  got. 

The  most  interesting  observations  I  have  made 
since  writing  before  are  the  following.  Unmutilated 
Sarsia  in  a  dark  room  seek  a  beam  of  light  thrown 
into  the  bell- jar  containing  them,  and  this  as  keenly 
as  do  moths.  But  when  the  so-called  eye-specks  are 
cut  out,  the  animal  no  longer  cares  for  light. 

I  have  only  come  across  two  species  of  luminous 
Medusae — both,  I  believe,  as  yet  uridescribed — and  in 
these  the  light  is  emitted  from  the  margin  alone,  and, 
with  electrical  stimulus,  is  strictly  confined  to  the 
intra-polar  regions,  being  strongest  at  the  two 
poles. 

There  is  no  doubt  at  all  about  the  muscular 
nature  of  the  fibres  we  saw.  In  the  larger  kinds  of 
Medusa?  (the  covered-eyed)  these  fibres  are  much 
coarser,  and  are  clearly  seen  to  be  arranged  in  con- 
centric bundles,  having  four  or  five  fibres  in  each 
bundle.  Alternating  with  these  bundles,  and  about 
the  same  width  as  these,  are  strands  of  uiidifferen- 


1876  MEDUSAE  31 

tiated  protoplasm.  These  strands  are  not  sponta- 
neously contractile,  although  their  dimensions  are 
altered  by  the  contraction  of  the  muscular  branch 
on  each  of  their  sides.  No  part  of  the  tissue  is 
doubly  refracting  in  the  fresh  state.  Is  there  any 
way  of  treating  it  with  a  view  of  bringing  out  this 
property  if  latent,  so  to  speak  ?  The  peculiarity  is 
not  due  to  the  transparency  of  the  tissue,  for  I  find 
that  the  muscular  fibre  of  the  transparent  osseous 
fish  Leptocephalus  is  as  doubly-refracting  as  could  be 
wished.  There  are  no  signs  of  striae,  but  Agassiz 
says  that  in  some  of  the  Mediterranean  species  striae 
are  well  marked.  But  if  both  striated  and  unstriated 
fibres  are  elsewhere  doubly-refracting,  it  does  not,  I 
suppose,  much  signify  whether  or  not  the  muscles  of 
Medusae  are  striated — so  far,  I  mean,  as  the  pecu- 
liarity in  question  is  concerned. 

I  wish  you  would  say  what  you  think  about  this 
peculiarity  in  relation  to  a  subject  that  I  have  been 

working  up.     You  no  doubt  remember  that  in 's 

paper  that  we  heard  read,  he  said  that  the  snail's  heart 
had  no  nerves  or  ganglia,  but  nevertheless  behaved 
like  nervous  tissue  in  responding  to  electrical  stimula- 
tion. He  hence  concluded  that  in  undifferentiated 
tissue  of  this  kind,  nerve  and  muscle  were,  so  to 
speak,  amalgamated.  Now  it  was  principally  with 
the  view  of  testing  this  idea  about  '  physiological 
continuity '  that  I  tried  the  mode  of  spiral  and  other 
sections  mentioned  in  my  last  letter.  The  result  of 
these  sections,  it  seems  to  me,  is  to  preclude,  on  the 
one  hand,  the  supposition  that  the  muscular  tissue 
of  Medusae  is  merely  muscular  (for  no  muscle  would 


32  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1875- 

respond  to  local  stimulus  throughout  its  substance 
when  so  severely  cut),  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
supposition  of  a  nervous  plexus  (for  this  would 
require  to  be  so  very  intricate,  and  the  hypothesis  of 
scattered  cells  is  without  microscopical  evidence  here 
or  elsewhere).  I  think,  therefore,  that  we  are  driven 
to  conclude  that  the  muscular  tissue  of  Medusae, 
though  more  differentiated  into  fibres  than  is  the 
contractile  tissue  of  the  snail's  heart,  is,  as  much  as 
the  latter,  an  instance  of  'physiological  continuity.' 
(Whether  or  not  the  interfascicular  protoplasmic 
substance  before  spoken  of  is  the  seat  of  this  physio- 
logical continuity  is  here  immaterial.)  Dr.  Foster 
fully  agrees  with  me  in  this  deduction  from  my  ex- 
periments, and  is  very  pleased  about  the  latter,  thus 
affording  additional  support  to  his  views.  But  what 
I  want  to  ask  you  is,  supposing  the  interfascicular 
substance  to  have  no  share  in  conducting  stimulus 
(and  I  have  no  evidence  of  its  presence  in  Sarsia), 
and  hence  that  the  properties  of  nerve  and  muscle 
are  united  in  the  contractile  fibres  of  Medusae — sup- 
posing this,  do  you  think  that  the  peculiarity  you 
observed  in  the  molecular  conformation  of  this  tissue, 
considered  as  muscular,  is  likely  to  have  anything  to 
do  with  this  peculiarity  in  its  function  ? 

I  know  you  do  not  like  theory,  so  I  shall  return 
to  fact.  There  can  be  no  doubt  whatever  that  the 
seat  of  spontaneity  is  as  much  localised  in  the 
margin  as  the  sensibility  to  stimulus  is  diffused 
throughout  the  bell.  There  must,  therefore,  be  some 
structural  difference  in  the  tissue  here  to  correspond 
to  this  great  functional  difference.  Agassiz  is  very 


1876  MEDUSA  33 

positive  in  describing  a  chain  of  cells  running  round 
the  inner  part  of  the  marginal  canal.  Now,  although 
I  sometimes  see  a  thin  cord-like  appearance  here,  I 
should  not  dare  to  say  it  was  nervous.  Gold  cer- 
tainly stains  it,  but  it  also  stains  many  other  parts 
of  the  tissue,  and  until  I  can  see  cells  here  I  cannot 
be  sure  about  a  visible  nervous  cord.  The  cord  I  do 
see  may  be  the  wall  of  the  marginal  canal.  I  intend 
to  persevere,  however,  trying  your  suggestions,  also 
osmic  acid. 

I  can  get  nJo  indications  of  electrical  disturbance 
during  contraction  in  the  way  you  suggest — at  least 
not  with  Sarsia ;  but  I  intend  to  try  with  some  of 
the  larger  Medusae. 

Some  apparatus  is  coming  from  Cambridge  to 
enable  me  to  test  for  electrotonus  and  Pfluger's  law. 
I  shall  apply  it  to  the  luminous  Medusae  also,  whose 
light,  I  forgot  to  say,  is  seen  under  the  micro- 
scope in  the  dark  to  proceed  not  only  from  the 
margin  alone,  but  from  that  particular  part  of  the 
margin  where  Agassiz  describes  his  chain  of  nervous 
cells. 

GEO.  J.  KOMANES. 

From  C.  Darwin  to  Gr.  J.  Romanes. 

Down,  Beckenham,  Kent :  July  18,  1875. 

I  have  been  much  interested  by  your  letter,  and 
am  truly  delighted  at  the  prospect  of  success.  Such 
energy  as  yours  is  almost  sure  to  command  victory. 
The  world  will  be  much  more  influenced  by  experi- 
ments on  animals  than  on  plants.  But  in  any  case 


34  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  1875- 

I  think  a  large  number  of  successful  results  will  be 
necessary  to  convince  physiologists.  It  is  rash  to 
be  sanguine,  but  it  will  be  splendid  if  you  succeed. 
My  object  in  writing  has  been  to  say  that  it  has 
only  just  occurred  to  me  that  I  have  not  sent  you  a 
copy  of  my  '  Insectivorous  Plants ;  '  if  you  would 
care  to  have  a  copy,  and  do  not  possess  one,  send 
me  a  postcard,  and  one  shall  be  sent.  If  I  do  not 
hear,  I  shall  understand. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DARWIN. 


Dunskaith,  Nigg  P.O.,  Ross-shire,  N.B. :  JuJy  20,  1875. 

My  dear  Mr.  Darwin, — Your  letter  arrived  just  in 
time  to  prevent  my  sending  an  order  to  my  book- 
seller for  '  Insectivorous  Plants,'  for,  of  course,  it  is 
needless  to  say  that  I  shall  highly  value  a  copy  from 
yourself.  At  first  I  intended  to  wait  until  I  should  have 
more  time  to  enjoy  the  work,  but  a  passage  in  this 
week's  '  Nature  '  determined  me  to  get  a  copy  at  once. 
This  passage  was  one  about  reflex  action,  and  I  am 
very  anxious  to  see  what  you  say  about  this,  because 
in  a  paper  I  have  prepared  for  the  i  B.A.'  on  Medusae 
I  have  had  occasion  to  insist  upon  the  occurrence 
of  reflex  action  in  the  case  of  these,  notwithstand- 
ing the  absence  of  any  distinguishable  system  of 
afferent  and  efferent  nerves.  But  as  physiologists 
have  been  so  long  accustomed  to  associate  the  pheno- 
mena of  reflex  action  with  some  such  distinguishable 
system,  I  was  afraid  that  they  might  think  me  rather 
audacious  in  propounding  the  doctrine,  that  there  is 


1876  BEFLEX  ACTION   IN   MEDUSA  35 

such  a  thing  as  reflex  action  without  well-defined 
structural  channels  for  it  to  occur  in.  But  if  you 
have  found  something  of  the  same  sort  in  plants,  of 
course  I  shall  be  very  glad  to  have  your  authority  to 
quote.  And  I  think  it  follows  deductively  from  the 
general  theory  of  evolution,  that  reflex  action  ought 
to  be  present  before  the  lines  in  which  it  flows  are 
sufficiently  differentiated  to  become  distinguishable  as 
nerves. 

I  am  very  glad  that  you  are  pleased  with  my  pro- 
gress so  far. 

From  G.  Darwin  to  Gr.  J.  Romanes. 

Down,  Beckenham,  Kent :  Sept.  24. 

I  shall  be  very  glad  to  propose  you  for  Linnean 
Soc.,  as  I  have  just  done  for  my  son  Francis.  There 
is  no  doubt  about  your  election.  I  have  written  for 
blank  form.  Please  let  me  have  your  title,  B.A.  or 
M.A.,  and  title  of  any  book  or  papers,  to  which  I  could 
add  <  various  contributions  to  "  Nature."  '  Also  shall 
I  say  '  attached  to  Physiology  and  Zoology  '  ?  When 
I  have  signed  whole,  shall  I  send  a  paper  to  Hooker 
and  others  at  Kew ;  or  do  you  wish  it  sent  to  some  one 
else  for  signature?  Three  signatures  are  required. 
The  paper  will  have  to  be  read  twice  or  thrice  when 
Soc.  meets  in  November.  But  you  could  get  books 
out  of  library  or  out  of  that  of  Eoyal  Soc.  by  my 
signature  or  that  of  any  other  member. 

I  am  terribly  sorry  about  the  onions,  as  I  expected 
great  things  from  them,  the  seeds  coming,  I  believe, 
always  true.  As  tubers  of  potatoes  graft  so  well, 

D  2 


36  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES  1875- 

would  it  not  be  good  to  try  other  tubers  as  of  dahlias 
and  other  plants  ?  I  have  been  re-writing  a  large 
portion  of  the  chapter  on  Pangenesis,  and  it  has  been 
awfully  hard  work.  I  will,  of  course,  send  you  a  copy 
when  the  work  is  printed.  How  I  do  hope  that  your 
fowls  will  survive  !  F.  Galton  was  here  for  a  few  hours 
yesterday  ;  I  see  that  he  is  much  less  sceptical  about 
Pangenesis  than  he  was. 


Dunskaith,  Nigg,  Koss-shire,  N.B.,  Sept.  29,  1875. 

My  dear  Mr.  Darwin, — Many  thanks  for  your  kind 
letter.  I  am  an  M.A.  and  a  fellow  of  the  Philosophi- 
cal Society  of  Cambridge,  but  otherwise  I  am  nothing, 
nor  have  I  any  publication  worth  alluding  to.  I  sup- 
pose, however,  this  will  not  matter  if  I  am  proposed 
by  yourself,  Dr.  Hooker,  and  Mr.  Dyer.  I  think  there 
would  be  no  harm  in  saying  i  attached  to  Physiology 
and  Zoology.'  I  may  read  a  paper  before  the  Linnean 
next  November  on  some  new  species  of  Medusae,  but 
I  think  it  is  better  not  to  allude  to  any  contributions 
in  advance. 

Your  letter  about  Pangenesis  made  me  long  for 
success  more  even  than  does  the  biological  importance 
of  the  problem.1  Yesterday  I  dug  up  all  my  potatoes. 

1  The  experiments  in  graft-hybridisation  were  to  prove  that  formative 
material  (or  gemmules)  was  actually  present  in  the  general  tissues  of 
plants  and  was  capable  of  uniting  with  the  gemmules  of  another  plant 
and  thus  of  reproducing  the  entire  organism.  For  if  the  hybrid,  afterwards 
produced,  presents  equally  the  characters  of  the  scion  and  the  stock, 
then  formative  material  must  have  been  present  in  the  tissues  of  the 
scion,  and  it  is  demonstrated  that  the  somatic  tissues  of  the  scion  have 
exercised  an  effect  011  the  germinal  elements  of  the  stock,  inasmuch  as  it 


1876  PANGENESIS  37 

Some  of  the  produce  looked  suspicious,  but  more  than 
this  I  should  not  dare  to  say.  By  this  post  I  send 
you  a  box  containing  some  of  the  best  specimens, 
thinking  you  may  like  to  see  them.  The  lots  marked 
A  and  B  are  sent  for  comparison  with  the  others, 
being  the  kinds  I  grafted  together.  If  you  think  it 
worth  while  to  have  the  eyes  of  any  of  the  other  lots 
planted,  you  might  either  do  so  yourself  or  send  them 
back  to  me.  Lot  C  is  the  queerest,  and  to  my  perhaps 
too  partial  eye  looks  very  like  a  mixture.  In  the  case 
of  this  graft  the  seed  potato  was  rotten  when  dug  up 
yesterday,  and  this  may  account  for  the  small  size  of 
the  tubers  sent. 

I  did  try  dahlias  and  peonies,  but  in  the  former  the 
'  finger  and  toe '  shape  of  the  tubers,  with  the  eyes 
situated  in  the  worst  parts  for  cutting  out  clearly, 
prevented  me  from  getting  adhesion  in  any  one  case. 
With  the  peonies  I  was  too  late  in  beginning.  It  was 
also  too  late  in  the  year  when  I  began  Pangenesis  to 
try  the  spring  flowers,  but  I  hope  to  do  so  extensively 
this  winter.  Next  year  I  shall  try  grafting  beets  and 
mangolds  by  cutting  the  young  white  root  into  .a 
square  shape  and  placing  four  red  roots  all  round.  In 
this  way  the  white  one  will  have  a  maximum  surface 
exposed  to  the  influence  of  the  red  ones.  I  shall  also 
try  grafting  the  crown  of  the  red  in  the  root  of  the 
white  variety,  and  vice  versa.  I  have  already  done 
this  very  successfully  with  carrots — making  a  little 

has  caused  their  offspring  in  part  to  resemble  it.  Such  facts  Eomanes 
considered  to  be  fully  in  harmony  with  the  theory  of  Pangenesis,  and 
inconsistent  with  any  theory  which  supposes  that  no  part  of  the  parent 
organism  generates  any  of  the  formative  material. 


38  GEORGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1875- 

hole  in  the  top  of  the  root,  and  fitting  in  the  crown 
like  a  cork  in  a  bottle. 

I  shall  look  forward  with  great  interest  to  the 
appearance  of  the  new  edition  of  the  'Variation.'  I 
only  wish  I  had  begun  -Pangenesis  a  year  earlier, 
when  perhaps  by  this  time  the  graft-hybrid  question 
might  have  been  settled.  Perhaps,  however,  it  is  as 
well  to  have  this  question  once  more  presented  in  its 
a  priori  form,  for  if  it  can  soon  afterwards  be  proved 
that  a  graft  hybrid  is  possible,  the  theoretical  import- 
ance of  the  fact  may  be  more  generally  appreciated. 

A  day  or  two  ago  I  saw  on  a  farm  near  this  a 
beautiful  specimen  of  striping  on  a  horse.  The 
animal  is  a  dark  dun  cob,  with  a  very  divided  shoulder 
stripe  coming  off:  from  the  spinal  one  on  either  side. 
Each  shoulder  stripe  then  divides  into  three  prongs, 
and  each  prong  ends  in  a  sharp  point.  All  the  legs 
are  black  as  far  as  the  knees  (carpi  and  tarsi),  and 
above  the  black  part  for  a  considerable  distance  all 
four  legs  are  deeply  marked  with  numerous  stripes. 
I  can  get  no  history  of  parentage.  If  you  would  like 
a  drawing  I  can  send  one,  but  perhaps  you  have 
already  as  many  cases  as  you  want  in  the  'Variation.' 

Very  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

To  Professor  E.  Schafer. 

Dunskaith :  Sept.  1875. 

My  dear  Schafer, — I  have  to  apologise  for  having 
left  your  last  letter  so  long  unanswered,  but  there 
has  really  been  nothing  going  on  here  to  make  it 
worth  while  writing. 


1876  THE   WOEK  ON   MEDUSAE  39 

I  gave  my  careful  consideration  to  all  you  said 
about  publishing,  and  at  one  time  nearly  decided  to 
wait  another  year.  But  eventually  I  sent  in  the 
paper.1  It  seems  to  me  that  the  histology  can  very 
well  wait  for  future  treatment — that  its  absence  is 
not  sufficient  justification  for  withholding  the  results 
I  have  already  observed.  These  results,  after  all,  are 
the  most  important ;  for  they  prove  that  some  struc- 
tural modification  there  must  be ;  whether  or  not  this 
modification  is  visible  is  of  subordinate  interest. 
Besides,  I  do  not,  of  course,  intend  to  abandon  the 
microscopical  part  of  the  subject  altogether.  In  my 
view,  inquiry  into  function  in  this  case  must  cer- 
tainly always  precede  inquiry  into  structure ;  for 
although,  when  all  the  work  shall  have  been  collected 
into  one  monograph,  the  histology  must  occupy  the 
first  place  in  order  of  presentation,  very  little  way 
could  have  been  made  by  following  this  order  of  in- 
vestigation. 

I  also  had  to  reflect,  that  if  I  postponed  publica- 
tion, it  would  be  impossible  to  expect  the  R.S.  to 
publish  the  results  in  extenso, — i.e.,  I  should  have  to 
bring  out  the  work  through  some  other  medium. 

And  in  addition  to  all  this,  there  came  a  letter 
from  Foster  preaching  high  morality  about  it  being 
the  duty  of  all  scientific  workers  to  give  their  results 
to  others  as  soon  as  possible. 

As  I  said  before,  I  thank  you  very  much  for  the 
consideration  and  advice  you  have  given,  but  I  know 
that  you  would  not  like  me  to  feel  that  the  expression 

1  To  the  Koyal  Society. 


40  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1875- 

of  your  opinion  in  a  matter  with  which  you  are  not  so 
fully  acquainted  as  myself  should  lay  me  under  any 
obligation  to  be  led  by  it,  after  mature  consideration 
seemed  to  show  that  the  best  course  for  me  to  follow 
was  the  one  which  I  took. 

Hoping  soon  to  see  you,  I  remain,  very  sincerely 
yours, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

P.S. — I  forgot  to  say  that  I  acted  upon  yo*ur  sug- 
gestion about  the  Linnean,  and  have  been  proposed 
by  Darwin,  Hooker,  and  Huxley. 


From  C.  Darwin  to  G.  J.  Romanes. 

Down,  Beckenham,  Kent  :  July  12,  1875. 

I  am  correcting  a  second  edition  of  *  Yar.  under 
Dom.,'  and  find  that  I  must  do  it  pretty  fully.  There- 
fore I  give  a  short  abstract  of  potato  graft  hybrids, 
and  I  want  to  know  whether  I  did  not  send  you  a 
reference  about  beet.  Did  you  look  to  this,  and  can 
you  tell  me  anything  about  it  ?  I  hope  with  all  my 
heart  that  you  are  getting  on  pretty  well  with  your 
experiments  ;  I  have  been  led  to  think  a  good  deal  on 
the  subject,  and  am  convinced  of  its  high  importance, 
though  it  will  take  years  of  hammering  before  physio- 
logists will  admit  that  the  sexual  organs  only  collect 
the  generative  elements. 

The  edition  will  be  published  in  November,  and 
then  you  will  see  all  that  I  have  collected,  but  I 
believe  that  you  saw  all  the  more  important  cases. 
The  case  of  vine  in  '  Gardeners'  Chronicle  '  which  I 


1876  GRAFTING  41 

sent  you  I  think  may  only  be  a  bud- variation,  not 
due  to  grafting. 

I  have  heard  indirectly  of  your  splendid  success 
with  nerves  of  Medusae.  We  have  been  at  Abinger 
Hall  for  a  month  for  rest  which  I  much  required,  and 
I  saw  there  the  cut-leaved  vine,  which  seems  splendid 
for  graft  hybridisation. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DAKWIN. 

To  G.  Darwin,  Esq. 

Dunskaith  :  July  14,  1875. 

I  was  very  glad  to  receive  your  letter,  having  been 
previously  undecided  whether  to  write  and  let  you 
know  how  I  am  getting  on,  or  to  wait  until  I  got  a 
veritable  hybrid. 

In  one  of  your  letters  you  advised  me  to  look  up 
the  'beet '  case,  but  I  could  nowhere  find  any  references 
to  it.  Dr.  Hooker  told  me  that  although  he  could 
not  then  remember  the  man's  name,  he  remembered 
that  the  experimenter  did  not  save  the  seed,  but  dug 
up  his  roots  for  exhibition.  I  forget  whether  it  was 
Dr.  Masters,  Bentliam,  or  Mr.  Dyer  who  told  me 
that  the  experiment  had  been  performed  in  Ireland, 
although  they  could  not  remember  by  whom.  But  if 
the  experimenter  did  not  save  the  seed,  the  mere  fact 
of  his  sticking  two  roots  together  would  have  no 
bearing  on  Pangenesis,  and  so  I  did  not  take  any 
trouble  to  find  out  who  the  experimenter  was. 

As  you  have  heard  about  the  Medusae,  I  fear  you 
will  infer  that  they  must  have  diverted  my  attention 
from  Pangenesis  ;  but  although  it  is  true  that  they 


42  GEOKGE  JOHN  EOMANES  1875- 

have  consumed  a  great  deal  of  time  and  energy,  I  have 
done  my  best  to  keep  Pangenesis  in  the  foreground. 

The  proximate  success  of  my  grafting  is  all  that  I 
can  desire,  although,  of  course,  it  is  as  yet  too  early 
in  the  year  to  know  what  the  ultimate  success  will 
be.  I  mean  that,  although  I  cannot  yet  tell  whether 
the  tissue  of  one  variety  is  affecting  that  of  the  other, 
I  have  obtained  intimate  adhesion  in  the  great 
majority  of  experiments.  Potatoes,  however,  are  an 
exception,  for  at  first  I  began  with  a  method  which  I 
thought  very  cunning,  and  which  I  still  think  would 
have  been  successful  but  for  one  little  oversight.  The 
method  was  to  punch  out  the  eyes  with  an  electro- 
plated cork-borer,  and  replace  them  in  a  flat-bottomed 
hole  of  a  slightly  smaller  size  made  with  another 
instrument  in  the  other  tuber.  The  fit,  of  course, 
was  always  perfect ;  but  what  I  went  wrong  in  was  not 
having  the  cork-borers  made  of  the  best  steel  ;  for 
after  I  got  about  one  hundred  potatoes  planted  out, 
I  found  that  the  inserted  plugs  did  not  adhere.  I 
therefore  tried  some  sections  with  an  exceedingly 
sharp  knife  that  surgeons  use  for  amputating,  and 
the  surfaces  cut  with  this  always  adhered  under 
pressure.  The  knife,  however,  must  be  set  up  in  a 
guide,  in  order  to  get  the  surfaces  perfectly  flat.  Next 
year  I  shall  get  cork-borers  made  of  the  same  steel 
as  this  knife  is  made  of,  and  then  hope  to  turn  out 
graft-hybrids  by  the  score.  Even  this  year,  however, 
a  great  many  of  my  potatoes  are  coming  up,  so  I  hope 
that  some  of  the  eyes  may  have  struck.  I  think  it 
is  desirable  to  get  some  easy  way  of  experimenting 
with  potatoes  (such  as  the  cork-boring  plan),  and  one 


1876  GBAFTING  43 

independent  of  delicacy  in  manipulation,  for  then 
everybody  could  verify  the  results  for  himself,  and  not, 
as  now,  look  with  suspicion  upon  the  success  of  other 
people. 

With  beans  I  get  very  good  adhesion  of  the  young 
shoots,  but  the  parts  which  grow  after  the  operation 
always  continue  separate.  In  some  cases  I  am  trying 
a  succession  of  operations  as  the  plant  grows. 

With  beetroots  and  mangold-wurzel  of  all 
varieties,  adhesion  is  certain  to  occur  with  my  method 
of  getting  up  great  pressure  by  allowing  the  plants 
to  grow  for  a  few  days  inside  the  binding.  I  have 
therefore  made  grafts  of  all  ages,  beginning  with 
roots  only  an  inch  or  two  long  and  as  thin  as  threads. 
The  other  vegetables  also  are  doing  well,  but  with 
flowers  I  have  had  no  success.  The  vine-cuttings 
were  too  young  to  do  anything  with  this  year,  but  I 
hear  from  my  cousin,  who  has  charge  of  them,  that 
they  are  doing  well.  They  certainly  have  very  extra- 
ordinary leaves. 

This  year  I  never  expected  to  be  more  than  one 
in  which  to  gain  experience,  for  embryo  grafting, 
as  it  has  never  been  tried  by  anybody,  cannot  be 
learned  about  except  by  experiments.  But  as  I  am 
a  young  man  yet,  and  hope  to  do  a  good  deal  of 
1  hammering,'  I  shall  not  let  Pangenesis  alone  until 
I  feel  quite  sure  that  it  does  not  admit  of  being  any 
further  driven  home  by  experimental  work ;  and  even 
if  I  never  get  positive  results,  I  shall  always  continue 
to  believe  in  the  theory. 

I  am  very  sorry  to  hear  that  you  i  much  needed 
rest,'  and  do  earnestly  hope  that  you  will  not  work 


44  GEOBGE   JOHN   ROMANES  1875- 

too  hard  over  the  new  edition  of  one  of  the  most 
laborious  treatises  in  our  language — a  treatise  to 
which  we  always  refer  for  every  kind  of  information 
that  we  cannot  find  anywhere  else. 

Dunskaith:  November  7. 

I  have  to-day  sent  you  a  beautifully  successful 
graft.  It  is  of  a  red  and  white  carrot,  each  bisected 
longitudinally,  and  two  of  the  opposite  halves  joined. 
You  will  see  that  the  union  is  very  intimate,  and 
that  the  originally  red  half  has  become  wholly  white. 
The  graft  was  made  about  three  months  ago,  at  which 
time  the  carrots  were  very  small,  but  the  colours  very 
decided.  I  think,  therefore,  that  unless  red  carrots 
ever  turn  into  white  ones — which,  I  suppose,  is  absurd 
—the  specimen  I  send  is  a  graft-hybrid  so  far  as  the 
parts  in  contact  are  concerned.  It  will  be  of  great 
importance,  as  you  observed  in  your  last  letter,  in  a 
case  like  this,  to  see  if  the  other  parts  are  affected— 
i.e.  to  get  the  plant  to  seed  if  possible.  This,  I 
suppose,  can  only  be  done  at  this  late  season  with  so 
young  a  plant  by  putting  it  in  a  greenhouse.  Per- 
haps, therefore,  you  might  pot  it,  as  soon  as  it  arrives, 
and  keep  it  till  I  go  up.  If  you  do  not  care  to  take 
charge  of  it  altogether,  I  can  then  get  a  home  for  it 
somewhere  in  the  South.  It  will  not  require  a  deep 
pot,  for  I  see  that  I  have  cut  through  the  end  of  one 
of  the  roots.  It  would  be  as  well,  before  potting,  to 
cut  off  the  end  of  the  other  root  also,  so  that  the  one 
half  may  not  grow  longer  than  the  other,  and  thus 
perhaps  assert  an  undue  amount  of  influence  during 
the  subsequent  history  of  the  hybrid.  If  the  plant 


1876  GKAFTING  45 

when  you  get  it,  or  after  potting,  shows  signs  of 
drooping,  I  should  suggest  clipping  off  the  older 
leaves  to  check  evaporation  :  having  found  this  a 
good  plan  with  beets,  &c. 

In  the  same  box  with  the  hybrid  there  is  another 
carrot.  This  is  for  comparison,  it  having  been  from 
the  same  seed  and  grafted  (upon  the  crown)  at  the 
same  time  as  the  originally  red  half  of  the  hybrid. 

I  am  doubtful  about  the  potatoes  I  sent.  On 
looking  over  a  number  of  '  red  flukes,'  I  find  some 
here  and  there  are  mottled.  At  any  rate,  I  shall  try 
other  varieties  next  year,  and  not  say  anything 
about  this  doubtful  case. 

I  forgot  to  say  that  the  hybrid  carrot  is  the  only 
specimen  of  longitudinal  grafting  which  I  tried  with 
carrots,  having  been  somewhat  disheartened  with 
this  method  by  the  persistent  way  in  which  beets  and 
mangolds  refuse  to  blend  when  grafted  longitudinally. 
There  have  thus  been  no  failures  with  carrots  grafted 
in  this  way. 

If  it  is  not  too  late,  I  may  suggest  that  the 
passage  in  the  '  Variation  '  about  the  deformity  of  the 
sternum  in  poultry  had  better  be  modified.  I  have 
this  year  tried  some  experiments  upon  Brahma 
chickens,  and  find  that  the  deformity  in  question  is 
caused  by  lazy  habits  of  roosting — the  constantly 
recurring  pressure  of  the  roost  upon  the  cartilaginous 
sternum  causing  it  to  yield  at  the  place  where  the 
pressure  is  exerted.  The  experiments  consisted 
merely  in  confining  some  of  a  brood  of  young 
chickens  in  a  place  without  any  roost,  and  allowing 
the  others  to  go  about  with  all  the  March  chickens. 


46  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1875- 

The  former  lot  have  the  sternum  quite  straight,  and 
the  latter  lot  have  it  deeply  notched. 

I  write  to  thank  you  for  the  copy  of  the  new 
edition  of  the  '  Variation  '  which  I  received  a  few  days 
ago.  I  am  very  glad  to  see  that  you  have  thought 
my  views  about  rudimentary  organs  worth  a  place, 
and  that  you  speak  so  well  of  them. 

The  chapter  on  Pangenesis  is  admirable.  The 
case  is  so  strong,  that  it  makes  me  more  anxious  than 
ever  to  get  positive  results  in  this  year's  experiments. 
I  mean  there  seems  less  doubt  than  ever  that  such 
results  must  be  obtainable  if  one  hammers  long 
enough.  I  did  not  know  that  there  were  so  many 
cases  of  graft-hybridisation  in  potatoes.  Perhaps  it 
will  be  better  this  year  to  give  one's  main  energies  to 
other  vegetables. 

I  find  that  a  German,  Dr.  Eimer,  is  on  the  scent 
of  the  jelly-fish,  but  he  does  not  seem  to  have  done 
much  work  as  yet.  It  is  arranged  that  I  am  to  have 
a  Friday  evening  at  the  Institution  soon  after  Easter, 
to  tell  the  people  about  my  own  work. 

From  C.  Darwin  to  G.  J.  Romanes. 

6  Queen  Anne  Street :  April  29,  1876. 

I  must  have  the  pleasure  of  saying  that  I  have 
just  heard  that  your  lecture  was  a  splendid  success  in 
all  ways.  I  further  hear  that  you  were  as  cool  as 
the  Arctic  regions.  It  is  evident  that  there  is  no 
occasion  for  you  to  feel  your  pulse  under  the  circum- 
stances which  we  discussed. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DAB  WIN. 


1876  GBAFTING  47 


To  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

I  write  to  thank  you  for  the  slip  about  graft 
hybrids,  and  to  say  that  as  yet  I  have  obtained  no 
results  myself.  This  place  is  too  far  north  to  admit 
of  the  seeds  ripening  properly  after  the  plants  have 
been  thrown  back  several  weeks  by  the  operation. 
This  applies  especially  to  onions,  so  next  year — the 
neck  of  Medusae  having  now  been  broken — I  intend  to 
wait  in  London  till  all  the  grafting  and  planting  out 
is  finished.  I  do  not  think  you  will  regret  my  not 
having  followed  such  a  course  this  year  when  you 
come  to  read  the  paper  I  am  now  writing.  I  never 
did  such  a  successful  four  months'  work,  and  if  as 
many  years  suffice  to  answer  all  the  burning  questions 
that  are  raised  by  it,  I  think  they  will  require  to  be 
years  well  spent. 

And  this  makes  me  remember  that  I  have  to 
apologise  for  the  inordinate  time  I  have  kept  your 
copy  of  Professor  Hackel's  essay  on  Perigenesis. 
Since  you  sent  it  I  have  scarcely  had  any  time  for 
reading,  and  as  you  said  there  was  no  hurry  about 
returning  it,  I  have  let  it  stand  over  till  this  paper  is 
off  my  hands. 

Lankester  seems  to  have  doubled  up  Slade  in  fine 
style.  I  suppose  the  latter  has  always  trusted  to  his 
customers  not  liking  to  resort  to  violent  methods. 
His  defence  in  the  'Times'  about  the  locked  slates 
was  unusually  weak.  '  Once  a  thief  always  a  thief  ' 
applies,  I  suppose,  to  his  case  ;  but  it  is  hard  to  under- 
stand how  Wallace  could  not  have  seen  him  inverting 


48  GEOEGE  JOHN  ROMANES  m5- 

the  table  on  his  head.  In  this  we  have  another  of 
those  perplexing  contradictions  with  which  the  whole 
subject  appears  to  be  teeming.  I  do  hope  next  winter 
to  settle  for  myself  the  simple  issue  between  Ghost 
versus  Goose. 

Yery  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 


To  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace. 

Professor  Hackel's  paper  on  the  Medusa  is  called 
'  Beitrag  zur  Naturgeschichte  der  Hydromedusen  ' 
(Leipzig,  1865).  Professor  Huxley  has  lent  me  his 
copy,  but  says  he  wants  it  returned  in  a  week  or 
two.  I  ought  certainly  to  have  the  work  by  me  next 
summer,  so  I  thought  that  if  you  happen  to  have  it 
and  can  spare  it  till  next  autumn,  I  need  not  send 
to  Germany  for  it,  remembering  what  you  said  when 
I  last  saw  you.  I  should  also  much  like  to  see  the 
other  paper  of  Hackel's  about  cutting  up  the  ova  of 
Medusae. 

I  have  an  idea  that  you  are  afraid  I  am  neglecting 
Pangenesis  for  Medusae.  If  so,  I  should  like  to 
assure  you  that  such  is  not  the  case.  Last  year  I 
gave  more  time  to  the  former  than  to  the  latter 
inquiry ;  and  although  the  results  proved  very  dispro- 
portionate, this  was  only  due  to  the  fact  that  the  one 
line  of  work  was  more  difficult  than  the  other.  How- 
ever, I  always  expected  that  the  first  year  would 
require  to  be  spent  in  breaking  up  the  ground,  and  I 
am  quite  satisfied  with  the  experience  which  this 


1876  PANGENESIS  V.   MEDUSA  49 

work  has  brought  me.  I  confess,  however,  that  but 
for  personal  reasons  I  should  have  postponed  Pan- 
genesis  and  worked  the  Medusae  right  through  in  one 
year.  There  is  a  glitter  about  immediate  results 
which  is  very  alluring. 

From  C.  Darwin  to  Gr.  J.  Romanes. 

I  will  send  the  books  off  by  railway  on  Monday  or 
Tuesday.  You  may  keep  that  on  Medusaa  until  I  ask 
for  it,  which  will  probably  be  never.  That  on  Siphono- 
phora  I  should  like  to  have  back  at  some  future  time. 

So  far  from  thinking  that  you  have  neglected 
Pangenesis,  I  have  been  astonished  and  pleased  that 
your  splendid  work  on  the  jelly-fishes  did  not  make 
you  throw  every  other  subject  to  the  dogs.  Even  if 
your  experiments  turn  out  a  failure,  I  believe  that 
there  will  be  some  compensation  in  the  skill  you  will 
have  acquired. 

P.S. — I  have  been  having  more  correspondence 
with  Galton  about  Pangenesis,  and  my  confusion  is 
more  confounded  with  respect  to  the  points  in  which 
he  differs  from  me. 

About  this  time  Mr.  Romanes  made  the  acquaint- 
ance of  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  and  also  that  of  Mr. 
G.  H.  Lewes,  and  of  the  wonderful  woman  known  to 
the  outer  world  as  George  Eliot,  and  to  a  small  circle 
of  friends  as  Mrs.  Lewes. 

Mr.  Komanes  was  one  of  the  favoured  few  who  were 
allowed  to  join  the  charmed  circle  at  the  Priory  on 
Sunday  afternoons.  He  enjoyed  the  few  talks  he  had 
with  George  Eliot,  and,  amongst  other  reminiscences, 

E 


50  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1875- 

he  told  a  characteristic  story  of  Lewes.  One  after- 
noon, when  there  were  very  few  people  at  the  Priory, 
the  conversation  drifted  on  to  the  Bible,  and  George 
Eliot  and  Mr.  Eomanes  began  a  discussion  on  the 
merits  of  the  two  translations  of  the  Psalms  best 
known  to  English  people — the  Bible  and  the  Prayer 
Book  version.  They  '  quoted '  at  each  other  for  a 
short  time,  and  then  Lewes,  who  had  not  his  Bible  at 
his  finger  ends  to  the  extent  the  other  two  had,  ex- 
claimed impatiently,  '  Come,  we've  had  enough  of 
this  ;  we  might  as  well  be  in  a  Sunday  school.'  Both 
George  Eliot  and  Mr.  Eomanes,  by  the  way,  preferred 
the  Bible  version. 

In  one  of  the  letters  to  Mr.  Darwin,  Mr.  Eomanes 
alludes  to  the  question  of  spiritualism,  and  his  own 
determination  to  investigate  the  question  so  far  as  in 
him  lay  for  himself. 

He  worked  a  good  deal  at  spiritualism  for  a  year 
or  two,  and  he  never  could  assure  himself  that  there 
was  absolutely  nothing  in  spiritualism,  no  unknown 
phenomena  underlying  the  mass  of  fraud,  and  trickery, 
and  vulgarity  which  has  surrounded  the  so-called 
manifestations. 

He  was  always  willing  to  investigate  such  subjects 
as  hypnotism,  thought  reading,  &c.,  and  in  1880  he 
wrote  an  article  for  the  September  number  of  the 
1  Nineteenth  Century,'  in  which  he  pleads  for  a  candid 
and  unprejudiced  investigation  of  the  facts.  The 
article  was  a  review  of  Heidenhain's  '  Der  sogenannte 
thierische  Magnetismus.' 

The  work  on  Pangenesis  and  on  Medusae  went  on 
through  1876,  and  some  letters  to  and  from  Mr. 
Darwin  are  here  inserted. 


1876  PANGENESIS  51 

From  C.  Darwin,  Esq.,  to  G.  J.  Romanes. 

Dear  Romanes, — As  you  are  interested  in  Pan- 
genesis,  and  will  some  day,  I  hope,  convert  an  '  airy 
nothing '  into  a  substantial  theory,  therefore  I  send 
by  this  post  an  essay  by  Hackel,  attacking  'Pan.,' 
and  substituting  a  molecular  hypothesis.  If  I  under- 
stand his  views  rightly,  he  would  say  that  with  a  bird 
which  strengthened  its  wings  by  use,  the  formative 
protoplasm  of  the  strengthened  parts  becomes  changed, 
and  its  molecular  vibrations  consequently  changed, 
and  that  their  vibrations  are  transmitted  throughout 
the  whole  frame  of  the  bird.  How  he  explains  rever- 
sion to  a  remote  ancestor  I  know  not.  Perhaps  I  have 
misunderstood  him,  though  I  have  skimmed  the  whole 
with  some  care.  He  lays  much  stress  on  inheritance 
being  a  form  of  unconscious  memory,  but  how  far  this 
is  part  of  his  molecular  vibration  I  do  not  understand. 
His  views  make  nothing  clearer  to  me,  but  this  may 
be  my  fault.  No  one,  I  presume,  would  doubt  about 
molecular  movements  of  some  kind.  His  essay  is 
clever  and  striking.  If  you  read  it  (but  you  must  not 
on  my  account),  I  should  much  like  to  hear  your 
judgment,  and  you  can  return  it  at  any  time. 

We  have  come  here  for  rest  for  me,  which  I  much 
needed,  and  shall  remain  here  for  about  ten  days  more, 
and  then  home  to  work,  which  is  my  sole  pleasure  in 
life.  I  hope  your  splendid  Medusae  work  and  your 
experiments  on  Pan.  are  going  on  well.  I  heard 
from  my  son  Frank  yesterday  that  he  was  feverish 
with  a  cold,  and  could  not  dine  with  the  Physiologists, 

E2 


52  GEORGE  JOHN  BOMANES  1876- 

which  I  am  very  sorry  for,  as  I  should  have  heard 
what  they  think  about  the  new  Bill.1  I  see  that  you 
are  one  of  the  secretaries  to  this  young  society.  I 
was  very  much  gratified  by  the  wholly  unexpected 
honour  of  being  elected  one  of  the  hon.  members. 
This  mark  of  sympathy  has  pleased  me  to  a  very  high 
degree. 

Believe  me,  yours  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DARWIN. 

Hackel  gives  reference  to  a  paper  on  Pan.  of  which 
I  have  never  heard. 

I  fear  that  you  will  have  difficulty  in  reading  my 
scrawl. 

Do  you  know  who  are  the  other  hon.  members 
of  your  Society  ? 

From  G.  J.  Romanes  to  C.  Darwin. 

Dunskaith,  Nigg,  Koss-shire,  N.B. :  June  1,  1876. 

Many  thanks  for  your  long  and  kind  letter. 
Also  for  the  accompanying  essay.  It  seems  to  me, 
from  your  epitome  of  the  latter,  that  if  Pangene- 
sis  is  '  airy,'  Perigenesis  must  be  almost  vacuous. 
However,  I  anticipate  much  pleasure  in  reading  the 
work,  for  anything  by  Hackel  on  such  a  subject 
cannot  fail  to  be  interesting. 

I  am  sorry  to  hear  that  you  '  much  needed  rest,' 
and  also  about  Frank.  I  had  hoped,  too,  that  you 
would  have  mentioned  Mrs.  Litchfield. 

Having  been  away  from  London  for  several  weeks, 

1  For  tho  Suppression  of  Vivisection. 


1877  THE   PHYSIOLOGICAL   SOCIETY  53 

I  cannofc  say  anything  about  the  feeling  with  regard 
to  the  Bill.  Sanderson  and  Foster  think  it l  stringent,' 
and  so  I  suppose  will  all  the  Physiologists.  The 
former  wants  me  to  write  articles  in  the  '  Fortnightly/ 
*  to  make  people  take  more  sensible  views  on  vivisec- 
tion :  '  but  I  cannot  see  that  it  would  be  of  any  use. 
The  heat  of  battle  is  not  the  time  for  us  to  expect 
fanatics  to  listen  to  '  sense.'  Do  you  not  think  so  ? 

I  am  sure  the  Physiological  Society  will  be  very 
pleased  that  you  like  being  an  hon.  member,  for  it 
was  on  your  account  that  honorary  membership  was 
instituted.  At  the  committee  meeting  which  was 
called  to  frame  the  constitution  of  the  Society,  the 
chairman  (Dr.  Foster)  ejaculated  with  reference  to  you 
— '  Let  us  pile  on  him  all  the  honour  we  possibly  can,' 
a  sentiment  which  was  heartily  enough  responded  to 
by  all  present ;  but  when  it  came  to  considering  what 
form  the  expression  of  it  was  to  take,  it  was  found 
that  a  nascent  society  could  do  nothing  further  than 
make  honorary  members.  Accordingly  you  were 
made  an  hon.  member  all  by  yourself ;  but  later  on 
it  was  thought,  on  the  one  hand,  that  you  might  feel 
lonely,  and  on  the  other  that  in  a  Physiological 
Society  the  most  suitable  companion  for  you  was  Dr. 
Sharpey. 

Perhaps  a  '  secretary  '  ought  not  to  be  giving  all 
the  details  about  committee  meetings,  but  if  not,  1 
know  you  will  take  it  in  confidence.  It  seems  to  me 
that  you  never  fully  realise  the  height  of  your 
pedestal,  so  that  I  am  glad  of  any  little  opportunity 
of  this  kind  to  show  you  the  angle  at  which  the 
upturned  faces  are  inclined.  I  am  glad,  too,  to  see 


54  GEOBGE  JOHN   BOMANES  1876- 

from  the  inscription  in  Hackel's  essay,  that  he  is  still 
doing  his  best  to  show  that  in  Germany  this  angle  is 
fast  being  lost  in  horizontality. 

As  the  spring  was  so  backward,  the  plants  at  Kew 
were  too  small  to  graft  before  I  had  to  leave  for  the 
Medusae.  But  this  does  not  much  matter,  as  I  had 
a  lot  of  vegetables  planted  down  here  also,  which  are 
doing  well.  Pangenesis  I  always  expected  would 
require  a  good  deal  of  patience,  and  one  year's  work 
on  such  a  subject  only  counts  for  apprenticeship.  If, 
by  the  time  I  am  a  skilled  workman,  I  am  not  able 
to  send  anything  to  the  international  exhibitions,  I 
shall  not  envy  any  one  else  who  may  resolve  to  enter 
the  same  trade. 

I  am  working  hard  at  the  jelly-fish  just  now,  and 
have  succeeded  in  extracting  several  new  confessions. 
The  nerve-plexus  theory,  in  particular,  is  coming  out 
with  greater  clearness.  The  new  poisons,  too,  are 
giving  very  interesting  results.  I  suppose  you  do 
not  happen  to  know  where  I  could  get  any  snake 
poison.  The  '  Phil.  Trans.'  seem  very  long  in  coming 
out.  I  have  not  yet  got  the  proofs  of  my  paper. 


June  6,  1877. 

I  am  very  glad  you  sent  me  the  extract  from 
Lamarck,  for  I  had  just  been  to  the  E.S.,  hunting 
up  several  of  the  older  authors  to  see  whether  any 
mention  had  been  made  of  the  theory  before  Spencer 
wrote. 

While  at  Down  I  forgot  my  speculations  about 
inter-crossing,  and,  therefore,  although  I  do  not 


1877  GUINEA-PIGS   AND   NETTLES  55 

think  they  are  much  worth,  I  send  you  a  copy  of  my 
notes.  The  ideas  are  not  clearly  put — having  been 
jotted  down  a  few  years  ago  merely  to  preserve  them 
—but  no  doubt  you  will  be  able  to  understand  them. 
Do  not  trouble  to  return  the  MS. 

I  had  intended  to  ask  you  while  at  Down  if  you 
happen  to  know  whether  stinging  nettles  are  endemic 
plants  in  South  America.  The  reason  I  should  like 
to  know  is,  that  last  year  it  occurred  to  me  that  the 
stinging  property  probably  has  reference  to  some 
widely  distributed  class  of  animals,  and  being  told— 
rightly  or  wrongly,  I  do  not  know — that  ruminants 
do  not  object  to  them,  I  tried  whether  my  tame 
rabbits  would  eat  freshly  plucked  nettles.  I  found  they 
would  not  do  so  even  when  very  hungry,  but  in  the 
same  out-house  with  the  rabbits  there  were  confined 
a  number  of  guinea-pigs,  and  these  always  set  upon 
the  nettles  with  great  avidity.  Their  noses  wrere 
tremendously  stung,  however,  so  that  between  every 
few  nibbles  they  had  to  stop  and  scratch  vigorously. 
After  this  process  had  been  gone  through  several 
times,  the  guinea-pig  would  generally  become  furious, 
and  thinking  apparently  that  its  pain  must  have  had 
some  more  obvious  cause  than  the  nettles,  would 
fall  upon  its  nearest  neighbour  at  the  feast,  when  a 
guinea-pig  fight  would  ensue.  I  have  seldom  seen 
a  more  amusing  spectacle  than  twenty  or  thirty  of 
these  animals  closely  packed  round  a  bunch  of 
nettles,  a  third  part  or  so  eating  with  apparent  relish, 
another  third  scratching  their  noses,  and  the  re- 
maining third  fighting  with  one  another.  But  what 
I  want  to  ask  you  is  this.  Does  it  not  seem  that 


56  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1876- 

the  marked  difference  in  the  behaviour  of  the 
rabbits  and  the  guinea-pigs  points  to  inherited  experi- 
ence on  the  part  of  the  former  which  is  absent  in  the 
case  of  the  latter  ?  If  nettles  are  not  endemic  in 
South  America,  this  inference  would  seem  almost 
irresistible.  Dr.  Hooker  tells  me  nettles  grow  there 
now,  but  he  does  not  know  whether  they  did  so  before 
America  was  visited  by  Europeans.  Possibly  there 
might  be  some  way  of  ascertaining. 

I  have  now  made  a  number  of  grafts  at  Kew.  In 
about  a  month,  I  should  think,  one  could  see  which 
are  coming  up  as  single  and  which  as  double  sprouts. 
If,  therefore,  Frank  is  going  to  work  in  the  laboratory 
in  July,  he  might  perhaps  look  over  the  bed  (which 
is  just  outside  the  door),  and  reject  the  double-stalked 
specimens.  I  could  trust  him  to  do  this  better  than 
any  one  at  Kew,  and  if  the  useless  specimens  were 
rejected,  there  would  afterwards  be  much  less  trouble 
in  protecting  the  valuable  ones.  But  do  not  suggest 
it  unless  you  think  it  would  be  quite  agreeable  to 
him.  If  he  is  in  town  within  the  next  fortnight,  I 
wish  he  would  look  me  up. 

June  16. 

I  have  deferred  answering  your  letter  until  having 
had  a  talk  with  Mr.  Gait  on  about  rudimentary  organs. 
He  thinks  with  me  that  if  the  normal  size  of  a  useful 
organ  is  maintained  in  a  species,  when  natural 
selection  is  removed,  the  average  size  will  tend  to 
become  progressively  reduced  by  inter-crossing,  and 
this  down  to  whatever  extent  economy  of  growth 
remains  operative  in  placing  a  premium  on  variations 


,877  KUDIMENTABY   OKGANS  57 

below  the  average  at  any  given  stage  in  the  history 
of  reduction. 

I  think  I  thoroughly  well  know  your  views  about 
natural  selection.  In  writing  the  manuscript  note, 
so  far  as  I  remember,  I  had  in  view  the  possibility 
which  Huxley  somewhere  advocates,  that  nature  may 
sometimes  make  a  considerable  leap  by  selecting 
from  single  variations.  But  it  was  not  because  of 
this  point  that  I  sent  you  the  note;  it  was  with 
reference  to  the  possibility  of  natural  selection  acting 
on  organic  types  as  distinguished  from  individuals — a 
possibility  which  you  once  told  me  did  not  seem  at 
all  clear,  although  Wallace  maintained  it  in  conver- 
sation. 

I  do  not  myself  think  that  Allen 1  made  out  his 
points,  although  I  do  think  that  he  has  made  an 
effort  in  the  right  direction.  It  seems  to  me  that 
his  fundamental  principle  has  probably  much  truth 
in  it,  viz.  that  aesthetic  pleasure  in  its  last  analysis  is 
an  effect  of  normal  or  not  excessive  stimulation. 

Very  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

From  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

Down,  Beckenhain,  Kent :  August  9. 

My  dear  Romanes, — I  have  read  your  two  articles 
in  *  Nature,'  and  nothing  can  be  clearer  or  more  inte- 
resting, though  I  had  gathered  your  conclusions 
clearly  from  your  other  papers.  It  seems  to  me  that 
unless  you  can  show  that  your  muslin  (in  your 

1  Mr.  Grant  AJlen. 


58  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1876- 

simile)  is  rather  coarse,  the  transmission  may  be  con- 
sidered as  passing  in  any  direction  from  cell  or  unit 
of  structure  to  cell  or  unit ;  and  in  this  case  the 
transmission  would  be  as  in  Diona3a,  but  more 
easily  effected  in  certain  lines  or  directions  than  in 
others.  It  is  splendid  work,  and  I  hope  you  are 
getting  on  well  in  all  respects.  The  Mr.  Lawless  to 
whom  you  refer  is  the  Hon.  Miss  Lawless,  as  I  know, 
for  she  sent  me  a  very  good  manuscript  about  the 
fertilisation  of  plants,  which  I  have  recommended 
her  to  send  to  l  Nature.' 

As  for  myself,  Frank  and  I  have  been  working 
like  slaves  on  the  bloom  on  plants,  with  very  poor 
success ;  as  usual,  almost  everything  goes  differently 
from  what  I  had  anticipated.  But  I  have  been  abso- 
lutely delighted  at  two  things :  Cohn,  of  Breslau,  has 
seen  all  the  phenomena  described  by  Frank  in 
Dipsacus,  and  thinks  it  a  very  remarkable  discovery, 
and  is  going  to  work  with  all  reagents  on  the  fila- 
ments as  Frank  did,  but  no  doubt  he  will  know  much 
better  how  to  do  it.  He  will  not  pronounce  whether 
the  filaments  are  some  colloid  substance  or  living 
protoplasm ;  I  think  he  rather  leans  to  latter,  and  he 
quite  sees  that  Frank  does  not  pronounce  dogmati- 
cally on  the  question. 

The  second  point  which  delighted  me,  seeing  that 
half  of  the  botanists  throughout  Europe  have  pub- 
lished that  the  digestion  of  meat  by  plants  is  of  no 
use  to  them — (a  mere  pathological  phenomenon  as 
one  man  says !) — is  that  Frank  has  been  feeding 
under  exactly  similar  conditions  a  large  number  of 
plants  of  Drosera,  and  the  effect  is  wonderful.  On 


1877  MR.   F.  DARWIN   ON   DROSERA  59 

the  fed  side  the  leaves  are  much  larger,  differently 
coloured,  and  more  numerous — flower  stalks  taller 
and  more  numerous,  and,  I  believe,  far  more  seed- 
capsules,  but  these  not  yet  counted.  It  is  particu- 
larly interesting  that  the  leaves  fed  on  meat  contain 
very  many  more  starch  granules  (no  doubt  owing  to 
more  protoplasm  being  first  formed),  so  that  sections 
stained  with  iodine  of  fed  and  unfed  leaves  are  to 
the  naked  eye  of  very  different  colour. 

There,  I  have  boasted  to  my  heart's  content ;  and 
do  you  do  the  same,  and  tell  me  what  you  have  been 
doing. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DABWIN. 

From  G.  J.  Romanes. 

Dunskaith,  Ross-shire  :  August  11,  1877. 

I  was  very  pleased  to  get  your  long  and  genial 
letter,  which  I  will  answer  seriatim. 

The  '  muslin  '  in  the  hypothetical  plexus  seems  to 
be  very  coarse  in  some  specimens  and  finer  in  others 
—the  young  and  active  individuals  enduring  severer 
forms  of  section  than  the  old.  And  in  exploring  by 
graduated  stimuli,  areas  of  different  degrees  of  excita- 
bility may  be  mapped  out,  and  these  areas  are  pretty 
large,  averaging  about  the  size  of  one's  finger-nails. 
I  am  rather  inclined  to  think  that  these  areas  are 
determined  by  the  course  of  well-differentiated  nerve- 
tracts,  while  the  less-differentiated  ones  are  probably 
more  like  muslin  in  their  mesh.  But  the  only  reason 
why  I  resort  to  the  supposition  of  nerve-tracts  at  all 
is  because  of  the  sudden  blocking  of  contractile  waves 


60  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1876- 

by  section,  and  the  fact  that  stimulus  (tentacular) 
waves  very  often  continue  to  pass  after  the  contractile 
ones  have  been  thus  blocked. 

I  am  sorry  I  made  the  ungallant  mistake  about 
Miss  Lawless,  but  I  ha.d  no  means  of  knowing.  If  I 
had  known  I  should  not  have  written  the  letter,  be- 
cause I  am  almost  sure  the  movements  of  the  Medusa 
were  accidental,  and  my  pointing  out  this  source  of 
error  may  be  discouraging  to  a  lady  observer. 

I  remember  thinking  you  were  too  diffident  about 
the  bloom,  but  I  suppose  that  is  the  advantage  of 
experience ;  it  keeps  one  from  forming  too  high  hopes 
at  the  first. 

The  rest  of  your  letter  contains  glorious  news. 
Cohn,  I  suppose,  is  about  the  best  man  in  Europe  to 
take  up  the  subject,  and  although  I  cannot  conceive 
what  else  he  can  do  than  Frank  has  done  already,  it 
is  no  doubt  most  desirable  that  his  opinion  should  be 
formed  by  working  at  the  problems  himself. 

The  other  item  about  the  effects  of  feeding  Drosera 
is  really  most  important,  and  in  particular  about  the 
starch.  I  have  heard  the  doubts  you  allude  to 
expressed  in  several  quarters,  but  this  will  set  them 
all  at  rest.  It  was  just  the  one  thing  required  to  cap 
the  work  on  insectivorous  plants.  What  capital  work 
Frank  is  doing  ! 

I  have  nothing  in  the  way  of  'boasting '  to  set 
off  against  it.  The  year  has  been  a  very  bad  one  for 
jelly-fish,  so  that  sometimes  I  have  not  been  able 
to  work  at  them  for  several  days  at  a  time.  The  most 
important  new  observation  is  perhaps  the  following. 

Suppose  a  portion  of  Aurelia  to  be  cut  into  the 


1877  WOEK  ON   MEDUSA  61 

form  of  a  pair  of  trousers,  in  such  a  way  that  a 
ganglion,  a,  occupies  the  bottom  of  one  of  the  legs. 
Usually,  of  course,  contractile  waves  starting  from 
a  course  along  to  6,  and  thence  round  to  c  and 
backwards  to  d.  But  in  one  specimen  I  observed 
that  every  now  and  then  the  exact  converse  took 
place — viz.  the  contractile  wave  starting  at  d  to 
course  to  c,  b,  and  a.  On  now  excising  the 
ganglion  at  a  both  sets  of  contractile  waves  ceased 
— thus  showing  that  even  in  the  case  where  they 
started  from  d  it  was  the  ganglion  at  a  which 
started  them.  This  power  on  the  part  of  Medusoid 


a  k 

/////////////f//////////////////r///f////r/f ////////////) 

FIG.  3. 

ganglia  to  discharge  their  influence  at  a  distance 
from  their  own  seat  I  have  also  observed  in  other 
forms  of  section,  and  it  affords  the  best  kind  of 
evidence  in  favour  of  nerves. 

On  the  days  when  I  could  get  no  jelly-fish  I  took 
to  starfish.  I  want,  if  possible,  to  make  out  the 
functions  of  the  sand-canal  and  the  aviculae ;  but  as 
yet  I  have  only  discovered  the  difficulties  to  be  over- 
come. I  had  intended  to  make  a  cell  to  cover  the 
calcareous  plate  at  the  end  of  the  sand-canal,  and  to 
1ill  the  cell  with  dye,  in  order  to  test  Siebold's  hypo- 
thesis that  the  whole  apparatus  is  a  filter  for  the 


62  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1876- 

ambulacral  system ;  but  Providence  seems  to  have 
specially  designed  that  no  substance  in  creation 
should  be  adapted  for  sticking  to  the  back  of  a  starfish. 

The  aviculse  are  very  puzzling  things.  I  am  sure 
Allen  is  wrong  in  his  hypothesis  of  their  function 
being  to  remove  parasitical  growths ;  for,  on  the  one 
hand,  parasites  are  swarming  around  them  unheeded, 
and  on  the  other,  they  go  snapping  away  apparently 
at  nothing.  It  is  more  easy,  however,  to  say  what 
they  are  not  than  what  they  are. 

I  went  a  few  days  ago  to  see  the  vine.  It  is  now 
five  feet  high  and  vigorous,  but  I  believe  spring  is 
the  proper  time  for  grafting. 

With  best  thanks  for  your  '  boasting '  and  good 
wishes,  I  remain  very  sincerely  and  most  respect- 
fully yours, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES.' 


From  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

Down :  June  4. 

Sir  Joseph  Fayrer  supplied  me  with  cobra  poison. 
It  is  very  precious,  but  I  have  no  doubt  that  by 
explaining  your  motive  he  would  give  you  a  little, 
and  your  best  plan  of  applying  would  be  through 
Lauder  Bruiiton. 

Your  letter  has  made  me  as  proud  and  conceited 
as  ten  peacocks.  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  writing 
against  the  bigots  about  vivisection  is  as  hopeless  as 
stemming  a  torrent  with  a  reed.  Frank,  who  has 
just  come  here,  and  who  speaks  with  indignation  on 
the  subject,  takes  an  opposite  line,  and  perhaps  he  is 


1877  VIVISECTION  63 

right ;  anyhow  he  had  the  best  of  an  argument  with 
me  on  the  subject.  By  the  way,  I  think  Frank  has 
made  a  fine  discovery,  but  I  won't  say  what,  for  fear  it 
should  break  down.  It  seems  to  me  the  Physiologists 
are  now  in  the  position  of  a  persecuted  religious  sect, 
and  they  must  grin  and  bear  the  persecution,  however 
cruel  and  unjust,  as  well  as  they  can. 

I  shall  be  very  glad  to  hear  what  you  think  about 
Hackel ;  perhaps  I  have  shamefully  misrepresented 
him.  About  the  other  subject  (never  mentioned  to  a 
human  being)  I  shall  be  glad  to  hear,  but  I  fear  that 
I  am  a  wretched  bigot  on  the  subject.1 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CHAELES  DARWIN. 

The  rest  has  done  me  much  good.  We  return  on 
the  10th.  My  daughter  is  certainly  better  a  good 
deal,  but  not  up  to  her  former  poor  standard. 

From  G.  J.  Romanes  to  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

Dunskaith,  Nigg,  Koss-shire :  June  11. 

We  had  a  good  laugh  over  some  parts  of  your 
letter.  I  have  not,  as  yet,  had  time  to  read  any  of 
Hackel' s  book. 

I  am  delighted  to  hear  about  the  discovery,  and 
hope,  if  it  turns  out  well,  to  have  my  stimulated 
curiosity  satisfied  with  regard  to  it.  If  it  is  as 
interesting  as  the  observations  about  the  seeds,  people 
will  think  Frank  a  very  lucky  fellow  to  hook  so  many 
good  fish  in  such  a  short  time. 

1  Spiritualism. 


64  GEORGE   JOHN   ROMANES  1876- 

Not  having  heard  his  arguments  about  the  article- 
writing,  I  am  still  strongly  of  your  opinion,  and,  being 
besides  ill  able  to  afford  any  time  just  now,  I  shall 
not  bother  with  it.  When  I  think  that  in  this  one 
county  (Boss,  and  still  more  in  Cromarty)  there  are 
more  rabbits  expressly  bred  every  year  for  trapping 
than  could  be  vivisected  in  all  the  physiological 
laboratories  in  Europe  during  the  next  thousand 
years,  it  seems  hopeless  to  reason  with  people  who, 
knowing  such  facts,  expend  all  their  energies  in 
straining  at  a  wonderfully  small  gnat,  while  swallow- 
ing, as  an  article  of  daily  food,  such  an  enormously 
large  camel. 

From  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

Down :  August  10. 

Dear  Eomanes, — When  I  wrote  yesterday,  I  had 
not  received  to-day's  '  Nature,'  and  I  thought  that 
your  lecture  was  finished.  This  final  part  is  one  of 
the  grandest  essays  which  I  ever  read. 

It  was  very  foolish  of  me  to  demur  to  your  lines 
of  conveyance  like  the  threads  in  muslin,  knowing  how 
you  have  considered  the  subject,  but  still  I  must  confess 
I  cannot  feel  quite  easy.  Every  one,  I  suppose,  thinks 
on  what  he  has  himself  seen,  and  with  Drosera,  a  bit 
of  meat  put  on  any  one  gland  on  the  disc  causes  all 
the  surrounding  tentacles  to  bend  to  this  point ;  and 
here  there  can  hardly  be  differentiated  lines  of  convey- 
ance. It  seems  to  me  that  the  tentacles  probably 
bend  to  that  point  whence  a  molecular  wave  strikes 
them,  which  passes  through  the  cellular  tissue  with 


1877  NEKVES  OF  AURELIA  65 

equal  ease  in  all  directions  in  this  particular  case. 
But  what  a  fine  case  that  of  the  Aurelia  is  ! 

Forgive  me  for  bothering  you  with  another  note. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

C.  DAKWIN. 

From  Gr.  J.  'Romanes  to  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

Dunskaith,  Ross-shire,  N.B. :  August  13,  1877. 

I  thought  you  had  given  me  quite  enough  praise 
in  your  first  letter,  but  am  not  on  that  account  the 
less  pleased  at  the  high  compliment  you  pay  me 
in  the  second  one.  The  ending  up  was  what  the 
people  at  the  Institution *  seemed  to  like  best. 

Pray  do  not  think  that  I  have  yet  made  up  my 
mind  about  the  '  muslin.'  On  the  contrary,  the  more 
I  work  at  the  tissues  of  Aurelia  the  more  puzzled  I 
become,  so  that  I  am  thankful  for  all  criticisms.  If 
Aurelia  stood  alone,  I  should  be  inclined  to  take  your 
view,  and  attribute  blocking  of  contractile  waves  in 
spiral  strips,  &c.,  to  some  accidental  strain  previously 
suffered  by  the  tissue  at  the  area  of  blocking.  But 
the  fact  that  in  Tiaropsis  the  polypite  is  so  quick  and 
precise  in  localising  a  needle  prick,  seems  to  show 
that  here  there  must  be  something  more  definite 
in  the  way  of  conducting  tissue  than  in  Drosera, 
although  I  confess  it  is  most  astonishing  how  precise 
the  localising  function,  as  described  by  you,  is  in  the 
latter.  In  *  Nature  '  I  did  not  express  my  doubts, 
but  it  was  because  I  feared  there  may  yet  turn  out  to 
be  a  skeleton  in  the  cupboard  that  I  kept  all  these 

1  He  had  just  lectured  at  the  Royal  Institution. 


66  GEOEGE  JOHN  ROMANES  me- 

more  or  less  fishy  deductions  out  of  the  B.S.  papers. 
Further  work  may  perhaps  make  the  matter  more 
certain  one  way  or  another.  Possibly  the  microscope 
may  show  something,  and  so  I  have  asked  Schafer  to 
come  down,  who,  as  I  know  from  experience,  is  what 
spiritualists  call  '  a  sensitive  ' — I  mean  he  can  see 
ghosts  of  things  where  other  people  can't.  But  still, 
if  he  can  make  out  anything  in  the  jelly  of  Aurelia,  I 
shall  confess  it  to  be  the  best  case  of  clairvoyance  I 
ever  knew. 

I  am  very  glad  you  have  drawn  my  attention 
prominently  to  the  localising  function  in  Drosera,  as 
it  is  very  likely  I  have  been  too  keen  in  my  scent 
after  nerves  ;  and  I  believe  it  is  chiefly  by  comparing 
lines  of  work  that  in  such  novel  phenomena  truth  is 
to  be  got  at.  And  this  reminds  me  of  an  observation 
which  I  think  ought  to  be  made  on  some  of  the 
excitable  plants.  It  is  a  fact  not  generally  known, 
even  to  professed  physiologists,  that  if  you  pass  a 
constant  current  through  an  excised  muscle  two  or 
three  times  successively  in  the  same  direction,  the 
responses  to  make  and  break  become  much  more 
feeble  than  at  first,  so  that  unless  you  began  with  a 
strong  current  for  the  first  of  the  series,  you  have  to 
strengthen  it  for  the  third  or  fourth  of  the  series  in 
order  to  procure  a  contraction.  But  on  now  reversing 
the  direction  of  the  current,  the  muscle  is  tremen- 
dously excitable  for  the  first  stimulation,  less  so  for 
the  second,  and  so  on.  Now  this  rapidly  exhausting 
effect  of  passing  the  current  successively  in  the  same 
direction,  and  the  wonderful  effect  of  reversing  it, 
point,  I  believe,  to  something  very  fundamental  in 


1877  BEITISH  ASSOCIATION   IN   GLASGOW  07 

the  constitution  of  muscular  tissue.  The  comple- 
mentary effects  in  question  are  quite  as  decided  in 
the  jelly-fish  as  in  frog's  muscle ;  so  I  think  it  would 
be  very  interesting  to  try  the  experiment  on  the 
contractile  tissues  of  plants.  But  there  are  so  many 
things  to  write  about  that  I  am  afraid  of  '  bothering 
you,'  and  this  with  much  more  reason  that  you  can 
have  to  be  afraid  of  l  bothering  '  me. 

Aurelia  is,  as  you  say,  £  a  fine  case,'  and  I  often 
wish  you  could  see  the  experiments. 

Very  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

The  leading  Physiologists  felt  the  importance  of 
co-operation  and  of  alliance,  and  a  society  entitled 
the  Physiological  Society  was  formed  of  which  Mr. 
Romanes  and  Professor  Gerald  Yeo  were  the  first 
honorary  secretaries. 

In  1876  Mr.  Romanes  made  his  first  appearance 
at  the  British  Association  ;  he  recounts  his  experiences 
in  the  following  letter. 


To  Miss  G.  E.  Bomanes. 

British  Association,  Glasgow  :  Monday,  1876. 

My  dearest  Puffin, — I  have  received  all  your 
letters,  and  had  a  good  laugh  over  them  ;  it  is  evident 
that  I  must  get  back  soon  to  pilot  the  way.  We 
shall  indeed  have  a  jolly  time. 

I  have  just  got  out  from  the  section  room,  and  my 
work  is  over.  I  had  a  splendid  audience  both  as  to 
number  and  quality. 

F   2 


68  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1876- 

When  I  had  finished,  all  the  great  guns  had  their 
say,  Professor  Hackel  leading  off  with  a  tremendous 
eulogium  on  the  work,  laying  special  stress  on  the 
great  difficulty  of  conducting  an  inquiry  of  the  kind, 
and  complimenting  me  highly  on  the  success  obtained. 
Sanderson  then  made  a  long  speech,  and  then 
Stirling  and  Balfour,  &c. 

The  latter  stated  it  as  his  opinion  that  my 
investigation  is  the  most  important  that  has  as  yet 
been  conducted  in  any  department  of  invertebrate 
physiology.  The  discussion  was  then  cut  short  by  the 
president  to  leave  time  for  the  other  papers,  my  own 
exposition  having  taken  so  long.  I  replied  briefly. 

Shortly  after  this,  Mr.  Romanes  delivered  a  lecture 
on  the  Evidences  of  Organic  Evolution,  which  he  re- 
printed in  the  '  Fortnightly,'  and  afterwards  worked  up 
into  a  little  book  called  '  The  Scientific  Evidences 
of  Organic  Evolution.'  About  this  lecture  Mr.  Darwin 
wrote  : — 

Down. 

My  dear  Romanes, — I  have  just  finished  your 
lecture.  It  is  an  admirable  scientific  argument  and 
most  powerful.  I  wish  that  it  could  be  sown  broad- 
cast throughout  the  land.  Your  courage  is  marvellous, 
and  I  wonder  that  you  were  not  stoned  on  the  spot. 
And  in  Scotland !  Do  please  tell  me  how  it  was 
received  in  the  Lecture  Hall.  About  man  being 
made  like  a  monkey  (p.  37)  is  quite  new  to  me  ;  and 
the  argument  in  an  earlier  place  on  the  law  of 
parsimony  admirably  put.  Yes,  p.  21  is  new  to  me. 
All  strikes  me  as  very  clear,  and  considering  small 


1877         EVIDENCES   OF  OEGANIC  EVOLUTION  69 

space   you    have   chosen    your    lines    of    reasoning 
excellently. 

But  I  am  tired,  so  good  night ! 

C.  DAE  WIN. 

The  few  last  pages  are  awfully  powerful  in  my 
opinion. 

Sunday  Morning. — The  above  was  written  last 
night  in  an  enthusiasm  of  the  moment,  and  now  this 
dark,  dismal  Sunday  morning  I  fully  agree  with 
what  I  said. 

I  am  very  sorry  to  hear  about  the  failure  in  the 
graft  experiments,  and  not  from  your  own  fault  or 
ill-luck.  Trollope,  in  one  of  his  novels,  gives  us  a 
maxim  of  constant  use  by  a  brick-maker, '  It  is  dogged 
as  does  it ! '  and  I  have  often  and  often  thought 
this  is  the  motto  for  every  scientific  worker.  I  am 
sure  it  is  yours  if  you  do  not  give  up  Pangenesis  with 
wicked  imprecations.  By  the  way,  Gr.  Jager  has  just 
brought  out  in  '  Kosmos '  a  chemical  sort  of  Pange- 
riesis,  bearing  chiefly  on  inheritance. 

I  cannot  conceive  why  I  have  not  offered  my 
garden  for  your  experiments.  I  would  attend  to  the 
plants,  as  far  as  mere  care  goes,  with  pleasure,  but 
Down  is  an  awkward  place  to  reach. 

C.  D. 

(Would  it  be  worth  while  to  try  if  the  <  Fortnightly  ' 
would  publish  it  ?) 

To  this  Mr.  Komanes  replied : 


70  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1877- 

18  Cornwall  Terrace  :  Dec.  2,  1877. 

It  was  most  kind  of  you  to  write  me  such  a  long 
and  glowing  letter.  In  one  way  it  is  a  good  thing 
that  all  the  world  are  not  so  big-hearted  as  yourself 
—it  would  make  young  men  awfully  conceited.  Yet 
I  value  your  opinion  more  than  the  opinion  of  any- 
body, because  in  other  things  I  have  always  found 
your  judgment  more  deep  and  sound  than  anybody's. 
However,  I  will  go  to  Huxley  next  Saturday  for  an 
antidote,  as  it  is  .quite  true  what  he  said  about 
himself  at  Cambridge,  that  he  is  not  given  to  making 
panegyrics. 

On  the  whole,  as  I  have  said,  I  was  surprised  how 
well  it  was  taken.  And  still  more  so  in  Yorkshire 
last  week — where  I  was  lecturing  at  Leeds  and 
Halifax  on  Medusae,  and  took  occasion  to  wind  up 
about  you  and  your  degree.  I  was  perfectly  as- 
tonished at  the  reception  you  got  among  such  popular 
audiences.  What  a  change  you  have  lived  to  see  ! 
If  ever  human  being  had  a  right  to  cry  '  Vici ' — but 
you  know  it  all  better  than  I  do. 

About  the  grafts,  I  thought  it  most  natural  that 
you  should  not  like  the  bother  of  having  them  done 
at  Down,  when  there  are  such  a  multitude  of  other 
gardens  belonging  to  do-nothing  people.  But  as  you 
have  mentioned  it,  I  may  suggest  that  in  the  case  of 
onions  there  is  a  difficulty  in  all  the  gardens  I  know 
—viz.,  that  they  are  more  or  less  infested  with  onion, 
worms.  If,  therefore,  you  should  know  any  part  of 
your  garden  where  onions  have  not  grown  for  some 
years,  I  might  do  the  grafts  here  in  pots,  and  bring 


1878  DEATH  OF  HIS   SISTER  71 

the  promising  ones  to  plant  out  at  Down  in  May. 
Seed  could  then  be  saved  in  the  following  autumn. 
All  the  other  plants  could  he  grown  in  the  other  gar- 
dens, and  well  attended  to. 

That  is  a  very  interesting  letter  in.  i  Nature.' 
What  do  you  think  of  Dr.  Sanderson's  paper  in  the 
same  number,  as  to  its  philosophy  and  expression  ?  I 
have  sent  a  letter  about  animal  psychology  which  I 
think  will  interest  you. 

With  kind  regards  to  all,  I  remain,  very  sincerely 
and  most  respectfully  (this  is  a  bow  which  I  specially 
reserve  for  you,  and  would  make  it  lower,  but  for  the 
fear  of  making  myself  ridiculous), 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

P.S. — I  fear  Mr.  Morley  would  think  my  lecture  too 
long,  and  not  original  enough  for  the  '  Fortnightly.' L 

Early  in  the  year  1878,  a  great  sorrow  fell  on  the 
Komanes  family.  The  elder  of  the  two  sisters, 
Georgina,  died  in  April,  and  to  her  brother,  her  junior 
by  two  or  three  years,  her  loss  was  very  great.  She 
was  a  brilliant  musician,  and  had  done  much  to  pre- 
vent her  young  brother  from  becoming  too  entirely 
absorbed  in  science,  and  in  keeping  alive  in  him  the 
passionate  love  for  music  which  was  always  one  of  his 
characteristics. 

They  went  much  together  to  concerts,  and  the 
house  was  the  centre  of  a  good  deal  of  musical  society. 
Among  the  many  musicians  who  came  and  went  may 
be  mentioned  Gounod.  He  had  a  great  admiration 
and  liking  for  Miss  Romanes,  and  used  to  make  her 

1  It  was  subsequently  published  in  the  Fortniyhtly. 


72  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1878 

sing  to  him.  And  also  there  was  Dr.  Joachim,  who 
with  characteristic  kindness  came  in  the  last  days  of 
Georgina's  life  and  played,  as  only  he  can  play,  to  her. 

From  G.  J.  Romanes  to  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace  :  April  10,  1878. 

Many  thanks  for  your  kind  expressions  of  sym- 
pathy. When  the  sad  event  occurred  I  had  some 
thoughts  of  sending  you  an  announcement ;  but  as 
you  had  scarcely  ever  seen  my  sister,  I  afterwards  felt 
that  you  might  think  it  superfluous  in  me  to  let  you 
know. 

The  blow  is  indeed  felt  by  us  to  be  one  of  dire 
severity,  the  more  so  because  we  only  had  about  a 
fortnight's  warning  of  its  advent.  My  sister  did  not 
pass  through  much  suffering,  but  there  was  something 
painfully  pathetic  about  her  death,not  only  because  she 
was  so  young  and  had  always  been  so  strong,  but  also 
because  the  ties  of  affection  by  which  she  was  bound 
to  us,  and  we  to  her,  were  more  than  ordinarily 
tender.  And  when  in  her  delirium  she  reverted  to 
the  time  when  our  positions  were  reversed,  and  when 
by  weeks  and  months  of  arduous  heroism  she  saved 
my  life  by  constant  nursing — upon  my  word  it  was 
unbearable.1  The  blank  which  her  death  has  created 
in  our  small  family  is  very  distressing.  She  always 
used  to  be  so  proud  of  my  work  that  I  feel  that  half 
the  pleasure  of  working  will  now  be  gone — but  I  do 
not  know  why  I  am  running  on  like  this.  Of  course 
it  will  give  me  every  pleasure  to  go  to  Down  before 

1  He  refers  to  the  attack  of  typhoid  fever  in  1873. 


1878        LECTUBE   ON   ANIMAL  INTELLIGENCE  73 

leaving  for  Scotland.  If  you  have  no  preference 
about  time,  I  suppose  it  would  be  best  to  go  when 
you  return  home  in  May,  as  the  onions  might  possibly 
be  then  ready  for  grafting.  Unless,  therefore,  I  hear 
from  you  to  the  contrary,  I  shall  write  again  some 
time  between  the  middle  and  end  of  May. 

Then  came  a  second  appearance  at  the  British 
Association.  Mr.  Eomanes  was  asked  to  deliver  one 
of  the  evening  lectures  at  the  meeting  of  1878,  which 
took  place  at  Dublin. 

The  subject  was  animal  intelligence,  and  seems 
to  have  excited  a  good  deal  of  attention.  The  follow- 
ing letters  relate  to  the  lecture  and  to  his  book  on 
Animal  Intelligence : 

To  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  N.W. :  June  18. 

Very  many  thanks  for  your  permission  to  use  your 
observations,  as  well  as  for  the  additional  information 
which  you  have  supplied.  If  all  the  manuscript  chapter 
on  instinct  is  of  the  same  quality  as  the  enclosed  por- 
tion, it  must  be  very  valuable.  Time  will  prevent  me 
from  treating  very  fully  of  instinct  in  my  lecture,  but 
when  I  come  to  write  the  book  for  the  International 
Science  Series  on  Comparative  Psychology,  I  shall 
try  to  say  all  that  I  can  on  instinct.  Your  letter, 
therefore,  induces  me  to  say  that  I  hope  your  notes  will 
be  published  somewhere  before  my  book  comes  out 
(i.e.  within  a  year  or  so),  or,  if  you  have  no  intention 
of  publishing  the  notes,  that  you  would,  as  you  say,  let 
me  read  the  manuscript,  as  the  references,  &c.,  would 


74  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1878 

be  much  more  important  for  the  purposes  of  the  book 
than  for  those  of  the  lecture.  But,  of  course,  I  should 
not  ask  to  publish  your  work  in  my  book,  unless  you 
have  no  intention  of  publishing  it  yourself.  I  do  not 
know  why  you  have  kept  it  so  long  unpublished,  and 
your  having  offered  me  the  manuscript  for  preparing 
my  lecture  makes  me  think  that  you  might  not 
object  to  lending  it  me  for  preparing  my  book.  But 
please  understand  that  I  only  think  this  on  the  sup- 
position that,  from  its  unsuitable  length,  isolated 
character,  or  other  reason,  you  do  not  see  your  way 
to  publishing  the  chapter  yourself. 


From  C.  Darwin ,  Esq. 

Down :  June  19. 

My  dear  Romanes, — You  are  quite  welcome  to 
have  my  longer  chapter  on  instinct.  It  was  abstracted 
for  the  Origin.  I  have  never  had  time  to  work  it  up 
in  a  state  fit  for  publication,  and  it  is  so  much  more 
interesting  to  observe  than  to  write.  It  is  very  un- 
likely that  I  should  ever  find  time  to  prepare  my 
several  long  chapters  for  publication,  as  the  material 
collected  since  the  publication  of  the  Origin  has  been 
so  enormous.  But  I  have  sometimes  thought  that 
when  incapacitated  for  observing,  I  would  look  over 
my  manuscripts,  and  see  whether  any  deserved  publi- 
cation. You  are,  therefore,  heartily  welcome  to  use 
it,  and  should  you  desire  to  do  so  at  any  time,  inform 
me  and  it  shall  be  sent. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CHARLES  DARWIN. 


1878          MR.   DABWIN'S   NOTES   ON   INSTINCT  75 


From  G.  J.  Romanes  to  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace  :  June  21,  1878. 

I  am  of  course  very  glad  to  hear  that  you  have  no 
objection  to  letting  me  have  the  benefit  of  consulting 
your  notes. 

Most  observers  are  in  a  frantic  hurry  to  publish 
their  work,  but  what  you  say  about  your  own  feelings 
seems  to  me  very  characteristic.  Like  the  bees,  you 
ought  to  have  some  one  to  take  the  honey,  when  you 
make  it  to  give  to  the  world — not,  however,  that  I 
want  to  play  the  part  of  a  thieving  wasp.  I  will  send 
you  my  manuscript  about  instinct  (or  the  proofs 
when  out),  and  you  can  strike  out  anything  that  you 
would  rather  publish  yourself. 

I  shall  not  be  able  to  begin  my  book  till  after  the 
jelly-fish  season  is  over.  This  will  be  in  September 
or  October  ;  but  I  will  let  you  know  when  I  want  to 
read  up  about  instinct. 

With  very  many  thanks,  I  remain,  yours  very 
sincerely  and  most  respectfully, 

GEO.  J.  KOMANES. 


The  Palace,  Dublin  :  August  17,  1878. 

Your  letter  and  enclosure  about  the  geese  arrived 
the  day  after  I  left  Dunskaith,  but  have  been  forwarded 
here,  which  accounts  for  my  delay  in  answering,  for 
I  only  arrived  in  Dublin  a  few  days  ago. 

I  am  sorry  to  hear  about  the  onions,  and  can  only 
quote  the  beatitude  which  is  particularly  applicable 


76  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1878 

to  a  worker  in  science,  Blessed  is  he  that  expecteth 
nothing,  for  he  shall  not  be  disappointed. 

But  I  am  still  more  sorry  to  hear  of  your  feeling 
knocked  up.  I  meet  your  son  here,  who  tells  me 
about  you. 

Yesterday  was  the  evening  of  my  big  lecture,  and 
I  send  you  a  copy  as  well  as  a  newspaper  account. 
(The  latter  was  in  type  before  delivery,  and  so  no 
4  applauses,'  &c.  are  put  in.)  The  thing  was  a  most 
enormous  success,  far  surpassing  my  utmost  expecta- 
tions. I  had  a  number  of  jokes  which  do  not  appear 
in  the  printed  lecture,  and  I  never  saw  an  audience 
laugh  so  much.  The  applause  also  was  really  extra- 
ordinary, especially  at  some  places,  and  most  of  all 
at  the  mention  of  your  name  at  the  grand  finale. 
In  fact,  it  was  here  tremendous,  and  a  most  impres- 
sive sight  to  see  such  a  multitude  of  people  so  enthu- 
siastic. I  expected  an  outburst,  but  the  loud  and 
long-continued  cheering  beat  anything  that  ever  I 
heard  before.  I  do  not  know  whether  your  son  was 
there,  but  if  so  he  will  tell  you. 

Hooker,  Huxley,  Allen,  and  Sir  W.  Thomson, 
Flower,  D.  Galton,  and  a  lot  of  other  good  men  were 
present,  and  had  nothing  but  praise  to  give,  Captain 
Galton  going  so  far  as  to  say  that  it  was  the  most 
successful  lecture  he  had  ever  heard.  So  I  am  quite 
conceited. 

Ever  your  devoted  worshipper, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 


1878        LECTUEE   ON   ANIMAL  INTELLIGENCE  77 


From  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

August  20,  1878. 

My  dear  Komanes, — I  am  most  heartily  glad  that 
your  lecture  (just  received  and   read)    has   been   so 
eminently   successful.     You  have   indeed  passed    a 
most  magnificent  eulogium  on   me,  and   I   wonder 
that  you  were  not  afraid  of  hearing  '  Oh !  oh  ! '   or 
some  other  sign  of   disapprobation.     Many   persons 
think  that  what  I  have  done  in  science   has  been 
much  overrated,  and  I  very  often  think  so  myself ; 
but  my  comfort  is  that  I  have  never  consciously  done 
anything  to  gain  applause.     Enough  and  too  much 
about  my  dear  self.     The  sole  fault  that  I  find  with 
your  lecture  is  that  it  is  too  short,  and  this  is  a  rare 
fault.     It  strikes  me  as  admirably  clear  and  interest- 
ing.    I  meant  to  have  remonstrated  that   you   had 
not  discussed  sufficiently  the  necessity  of  signs  for 
the  formation  of  abstract  ideas  of  any   complexity, 
and  then  I  came  on  to  the  discussion  on  deaf  mutes. 
This  latter  seems  to  me  one  of  the  richest  of  all  the 
mines,  and  is  worth  working  carefully  for  years  and 
very  deeply.     I  should  like  to  read  whole  chapters 
on  this  one  head,  and  others  on   the  minds  of  the 
higher  idiots.     Nothing  can  be  better,  as  it  seems  to 
me,  than  your  several  lines  or  sources  of  evidence, 
and  the  manner  in  which   you   have   arranged   the 
whole  subject.     Your  book  will   assuredly  be  worth 
years  of  hard  labour,  and  stick  to  your  subject.     By 
the  way,  I  was  pleased  at  your  discussing  the  selec- 
tion of  varying  instincts  or  mental  tendencies,  for  I 


78  GEOKGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1878 

have  often  been  disappointed  by  no  one  ever  having 
noticed  this  notion. 

I  have  just  finished  La  Psychologic,  son  present 
et  son  avenir,  1876,  by  Delbceuf  (a  mathematician 
and  physicist  of  Belgium),  in  about  one  hundred 
pages ;  it  has  interested  me  a  good  deal,  but  why  I 
hardly  know ;  it  is  rather  like  Herbert  Spencer  ;  if 
you  do  not  know  it,  and  would  care  to  see  it,  send 
me  a  post-card. 

Thank  Heaven  we  return  home  on  Thursday,  and 
I  shall  be  able  to  go  on  with  my  humdrum  wrork, 
and  that  makes  me  forget  my  daily  discomfort. 

Have  you  ever  thought  of  keeping  a  young 
monkey,1  so  as  to  observe  its  mind  ?  At  a  house 
where  we  have  been  staying  there  were  Sir  A.  and 
Lady  Hobhouse,  not  long  ago  returned  from  India, 
and  she  and  he  kept  three  young  monkeys,  and  told 
me  some  curious  particulars.  One  was  that  the 
monkey  was  very  fond  of  looking  through  her  eye- 
glass at  objects,  and  moved  the  glass  nearer  and 
further  so  as  to  vary  the  focus.  This  struck  me,  as 
Frank's  son,  nearly  two  years  old  (and  we  think 
much  of  his  intellect !),  is  very  fond  of  looking 
through  my  pocket  lens,  and  I  have  quite  in  vain 
endeavoured  to  teach  him  not  to  put  the  glass  close 
down  on  the  object,  but  he  will  always  do  so.  There- 
fore I  conclude  that  a  child  just  under  two  years  is 
inferior  in  intellect  to  a  monkey. 

Once  again  I  heartily  congratulate  you  on  your 

1  Mr.  Romanes  carried  out  this  suggestion,  or  rather  his  sister,  Miss 
C.  E.  Romanes,  did ;  she  kept  a  monkey  for  observation  for  several  months, 
as  is  recorded  at  p.  484  of  '  Animal  Intelligence.' 


1878  THE   LECTUKE   AT   DUBLIN  79 

well-earned  present  and  I  feel  assured  grand  future 
success. 

Yours  very  truly, 

CH.  DAKWIN. 

P.S.  28th. — Can  you  spare  time  to  come  down 
here  any  day  this  week,  except  Saturday,  to  dine  and 
sleep  here  ?  We  should  be  very  glad  indeed  if  you 
can  come.  If  so,  I  would  suggest  your  leaving 
Charing  Cross  by  the  4.12  train,  and  we  would  send 
a  carriage  to  Orpington  to  meet  you,  and  send  you 
back  next  morning.  In  this  case  let  us  have  a  line 
fixing  your  day.  It  will  be  dull  for  you,  for  none  of 
my  sons  except  Frank  are  at  home. 

The  extraordinary  modesty,  the  absolute  sim- 
plicity, the  fatherly  kindness,  which  breathe  in  this 
letter,  cannot  but  give  some  idea  of  what  Mr.  Darwin 
was  and  why  he  was  so  much  loved. 


Dunskaith,  Eoss- shire  :  August  29,  1878. 

My  dear  Mr.  Darwin, — I  only  returned  here  yes- 
terday and  found  your  letter  awaiting  me. 

Your  letter  has  made  me  as  proud  as  Punch,  and 
as  you  have  such  a  good  opinion  of  the  line  of  work, 
I  think  I  shall  adopt  your  plan  of  working  up  the 
subject  well  before  I  publish  the  book.  The  greatest 
difficulty  I  had  in  writing  the  lecture  was  to  make  it 
short  enough,  but  it  will  be  splendid  to  be  able  to 
spread  oneself  over  the  whole  subject  in  a  book.  I 
was  at  one  time  in  doubt  whether  it  would  be  better 
to  spend  time  over  this  subject  or  over  something 


80  GEOKGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1878 

more  purely  physiological,  but  of  late  I  had  begun  to 
incline  towards  the  former,  and  your  opinion  has  now 
settled  mine. 

I  have  not  previously  heard  of  the  book  by  the 
Belgian  physicist,  and  should  much  like  to  read  it.  I 
have  already  such  a  number  of  your  books  that  I  fear 
you  must  sometimes  miss  them  ;  but  I  can  return  any 
of  them  at  a  minute's  notice. 

I  had  thought  of  keeping  a  monkey  and  teaching 
its  young  ideas  how  to  shoot,  and  wrote  to  Frank 
Buckland  for  his  advice  as  to  the  best  kind  to  get, 
but  he  has  never  answered  my  letter.  The  case 
about  the  lens  is  a  capital  one. 

I  have  such  a  host  of  letters  to  answer,  which 
have  accumulated  during  my  absence,  that  I  must 
make  this  a  short  one.  Your  '  congratulations  '  are 
of  more  value  to  me  than  any  of  the  others,  and  I 
thank  you  for  them  much. 

Ever  your  devoted  disciple, 

GEO.  J.  KOMANES. 

P.S. — Science  is  not  a  world  where  a  man  need 
trouble  himself  about  getting  more  credit  than  is  due. 


From  C.  Darwin. 

Down  :  Sept.  2,  1878. 

My  dear  Eomanes,— Many  thanks  for  your  letter. 
I  am  delighted  to  hear  that  you  mean  to  work  the 
comparative  psychology  well.  I  thought  your  letter 
to  the  '  Times  '  very  good  indeed.  Bartlett,  at  the 
Zoological  Gardens,  I  feel  sure,  would  advise  you 


1878  THE   ECLIPSE   OF  FAITH  81 

infinitely  better  about  hardiness,  intellect,  price,  &c., 
of  monkeys  than  F.  Buckland,  but  with  him  it 
must  be  viva  voce. 

Frank  says  you  ought  to  keep  an  idiot,  a  deaf 
mute,  a  monkey,  and  a  baby  in  your  house  ! 

Ever  yours  sincerely, 

CH.  DAKWIN. 

Dunskaith,  Eoss-shire,  N.B. :  Sept.  10,  1878. 

My  dear  Mr.  D.arwin, — Having  been  away  for  a 
week's  deer-stalking  in  the  hills,  I  have  only  to-day 
received  your  letter  together  with  the  book.  Thank 
you  very  much  for  both,  and  also  for  the  hints  about 
Espinas  and  Bartlett.  I  am  glad  you  thought  well 
of  the  letter  to  the  '  Times.'  In  a  book  I  shall  be  able 
to  make  more  evident  what  I  mean. 

Frank's  idea  of  '  a  happy  family '  is  a  very  good 
one;  but  I  think  my  mother  would  begin  to  wish 
that  my  scientific  inquiries  had  taken  some  other 
direction. 

The  baby  too,  I  fear,  would  stand  a  poor  chance 
of  showing  itself  the  fittest  in  the  struggle  for  exist- 
ence. 

I  am  now  going  to  write  my  concluding  paper  on 
Medusae,  also  to  try  some  experiments  on  luminosity 
of  marine  animals. 

Ever  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  KOMANES. 

In  addition  to  other  scientific  and  purely  philo- 
sophical work,  Mr.  Romanes  had,  even  while  writing 
his  Burney  Prize,  entered  on  that  period  of  conflict 

G 


82  GEOEGE   JOHN   ROMANES  1878 

between  faith  and  scepticism  which  grew  more  and 
more  strenuous,  more  painful,  as  the  years  went  on, 
which  never  really  ceased  until  within  a  few  weeks 
of  his  death,  and  which  was  destined  to  end  in  a 
chastened,  a  purified,  and  a  victorious  faith.  His 
was  a  religious  nature,  keenly  alive  to  religious 
emotion,  profoundly  influenced  by  Christian  ideals, 
by  Christian  modes  of  thought.  As  time  went  on  he 
felt,  like  all  philosophically  minded  men,  the  impossi- 
bility of  a  purely  materialistic  position,  and  as  he 
pondered  on  the  final,  ultimate  mysteries,  on *  c  God, 
Immortality,  Duty,'  he  arrived  very  slowly,  very 
painfully,  but  very  surely,  at  the  Christian  position. 

But  these  years  were,  to  him  and  to  many,  years 
of  peculiar  and  of  extraordinary  difficulty.  Roughly 
speaking,  the  time  between  1860  and  1880  was  a  time 
of  great  perplexity  to  those  who  wished  to  adhere  to 
the  faith  of  Christendom. 

It  is  impossible  to  exaggerate  the  influence  which 
Mr.  Darwin's  great  work  has  had  on  every  depart- 
ment of  science,  of  literature,  and  also  of  art. 
Thirty-six  years  have  passed  away  since  the  publica- 
tion of  the  '  Origin  of  Species,'  and  we  have  lived  to 
see  that  again  tempora  mutantur,  nos  et  mutamur  In 
illis.  Now  we  see  that  a  man  can  fully  accept  the 
doctrine  of  evolution,  and  yet  can  also  believe  in  a 
personal  God  and  in  the  doctrines  which  logically 
follow  on  such  a  belief.  But  it  was  not  so  at  first. 
To  many  on  both  sides  the  new  teaching  seemed  to 
threaten  destruction  to  Theism,  at  least  to  Theism  as 
understood  either  by  Newman  or  by  Martineau. 

Again,  in  philosophy  Herbert  Spencer  seemed  to 
many  to  have  constructed  a  lasting  system  of  philo- 

1  Cf.  F.  Myers's  '  Essay  on  George  Eliot,'  Modern  Essays,  p.  269. 


1878  THE  ECLIPSE  OF  FAITH  83 

sophy,  a  system  sufficient  to  account  for  all  things  in 
heaven,  in  earth,  and  under  the  earth.  And  German 
criticism  seemed  to  many  to  be  rapidly  destroying 
the  credibility  of  the  early  documents  of  Christianity. 

Many  a  noble  soul  made  shipwreck  of  its  faith, 
nor  is  this  disaster  wonderful.  For  popular  theology 
had  made  many  unwise,  many  untenable  claims,  and 
the  ground  had  to  be  cleared  before  the  battle  could 
be  fought  out  on  its  real  issues.  There  were  some 
who,  amidst  all  the  strife  of  tongues,  kept  their  heads, 
remembered  bygone  storms,  and  did  not  lose  their 
courage,  their  whole-heartedness,  but  they  were  few, 
and  were  not  over  much  heard  or  heeded.1  For  the 
most  part,  those  on  the  Christian  side  adopted  the 
line  taken  by  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  in  his  review  of 
Mr.  Darwin's  '  Origin  of  Species  '  in  the  '  Quarterly 
Eeview,'  and  in  his  famous  speech  at  Oxford  during 
the  British  Association  of  1860. 

Certainly  the  outlook  now  is  more  encouraging 
than  it  was  twenty  years  ago. 

It  has  been  well  and  eloquently  said  by  one  than 
whom  none  is  more  qualified  to  speak  on  this  subject : 2 
1  It  is  quite  certain  that  this  scientific  obstacle  has 
been,  in  the  main,  removed.  In  part,  it  has  been 
through  the  theologians  abandoning  false  claims,  and 
learning,  if  somewhat  unwillingly,  that  they  have  no 
"  Bible  revelation  "  in  matters  of  science  ;  in  part,  it 
has  been  through  its  becoming  continually  more 
apparent,  that  the  limits  of  scientific  "explanation  "  of 
nature  are  soon  reached ;  that  the  ultimate  causes, 
forces,  conditions  of  nature  are  as  unexplained  as 


1  Cf.  *  Life  and  Letters  of  Dean  Church,'  p.  154. 

'Buying   up   the    Opportunity,'    a   sermon   by   the    Rev.    C.    Gore, 
preached  before  the  University  of  Oxford,  and  published  by  the  S.P.C.K, 

Q'2 


84  GEORGE  JOH^   ROMANES  1878 

ever,  or  rather  postulate  as  ever  for  their  explanation 
a  Divine  mind.  Thus,  if  one  "  argument  from  design  " 
was  destroyed,  another  was  only  brought  into  pro- 
minence. No  account  which  science  can  give,  by 
discovery  or  conjecture,  of  the  method  of  creation, 
can  ever  weaken  the  argument  which  lies  from  the 
universality  of  law,  order,  and  beauty  in  the  universe 
to  the  universality  of  mind.  The  mind  of  man  looks 
forth  into  nature,  and  finds  nowhere  unintelligible 
chance,  but  everywhere  an  order,  a  system,  a  law,  a 
beauty,  which  corresponds,  as  greater  to  less,  to  his 
own  rational  and  spiritual  intuitions,  methods,  and 
expectations.  Universal  order,  intelligibility,  beauty, 
mean  that  something  akin  to  the  human  spirit, 
something  of  which  the  human  spirit  is  an  offshoot 
and  a  reflection,  is  in  the  universe  before  it  is  in 
man. 

4  Or,  again,  a  prolonged  period  of  controversy  and 
reflection  has  resulted  in  making  it  fairly  apparent 
that  no  scientific  doctrine  or  conjecture  about  the 
dim  origins  of  the  spiritual  life  of  man  can  affect 
the  argument  from  its  development  and  persistence. 
It  has  developed  and  persisted,  as  one  of  the  most 
prominent  features  of  human  life,  solely  on  the 
postulate  of  God.  And  is  it  not  out  of  analogy  with 
all  that  science  teaches  us  to  imagine  that  so  impor- 
tant, continuous,  and  universal  a  development  of 
human  faculty  could  have  arisen  and  persisted  unless 
it  were  in  correspondence  with  reality  ? 

i  In  fact  we  may  almost  say  that  the  obstacles  to 
belief  on  the  side  of  science  were  gone  when  once  it 
was  admitted  that  God  Who  has  revealed  to  us  His 
nature  and  ours,  and  made  this  revelation  in  part 
through  an  historical  process  and  in  the  literature  of 
a  nation,  has  yet,  and  for  obvious  reasons,  given  us 


1878  THE   ECLIPSE   OF  FAITH  85 

no  revelation  at  all  on  matters  which  fall  within  the 
domain  of  scientific  research. 

'  A  similar  removal  of  obstacles  must  be  claimed 
in  the  region  of  historical  criticism.  There,  again, 
it  has  become  apparent  that,  whatever  turns  out  true 
about  this  or  that  Old  Testament  narrative,  no 
question  really  vital  to  the  Christian  religion  can  be 
said  to  be  at  stake  in  this  field ;  while  in  the  region 
of  the  New  Testament  the  most  sifting  criticism  has 
had  a  result  emphatically  reassuring.  The  critical 
evidence  justifies,  or  more  than  justifies,  the  belief  of 
the  Church  which  is  expressed  in  her  Creeds/ 

But  this  has  been  a  hard- won  fight  for  most — 

'  Friends,  companions,  and  train 
The  avalanche  swept  from  our  side,' l 

and  no  one  felt  the  strain,  the  positive  agony  of  soul, 
in  greater  degree  than  did  George  Eomanes.  Step 
by  step  he  abandoned  the  position  he  had  maintained 
in  his  Burney  Prize,  with  no  great  pauses,  rather,  as 
it  seems,  with  startling  rapidity,  and  with  sad  and  with 
reluctant  backward  glances  he  took  up  a  position  of 
agnosticism,  for  a  time  almost  of  materialism.  He 
wrote  a  book,  published  in  1876,  which  was  entitled 
'  A  Candid  Examination  of  Theism.'  It  is  almost 
needless  to  discuss  the  work,  as  it  has  been  dealt 
with  by  its  author  in  his  posthumous  i  Thoughts  on 
Eeligion.'  It  is  an  able  piece  of  work,  and  is 
marked  throughout  by  a  lofty  spirit,  a  profound  sad- 
ness, and  a  belief  (which  years  after  he  criticised 
sharply)  in  the  exclusive  light  of  the  scientific  method 
in  the  Court  of  Eeason. 

His    education   had  been    on    strictly   scientific 

1  '  Bugby  Chapel,'  M.  Arnold. 


86  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1878 

lines,  and  the  limitations  of  thought  produced  by 
such  education  are  clearly  seen  in  that  essay; 
1  limitations '  which  the  philosophical  and  the 
metaphysical  tendencies  of  his  mind  soon  led  him 
to  overstep. 

The  reaction  against  the  conclusions  of  the  essay 
set  in  far  sooner  than  has  been  at  all  suspected. 
Perhaps  the  first  published  mark  of  reaction  is  the 
Eede  Lecture  1  of  1885. 

Yet  anyone  who  reads  carefully  the  conclusion  ol 
the  '  Candid  Examination'  will  see  the  note  of  '  long- 
ing and  thirsting  for  God.' 

And  forasmuch  as  I  am  far  from  being  able  to 
agree  with  those  who  affirm  that  the  twilight  doctriue 
of  the  '  new  faith '  is  a  desirable  substitute  for  the 
waning  splendour  of  l  the  old/  I  am  not  ashamed  to 
confess  that  with  this  virtual  negation  of  God  the 
universe  to  me  has  lost  its  soul  of  loveliness ;  and 
although  from  henceforth  the  precept  to  '  work  while 
it  is  day  '  will  doubtless  but  gain  an  intensified  force 
from  the  terribly  intensified  meaning  of  the  words 
that  i  the  night  cometh  when  no  man  can  work,' 
yet  when  at  times  I  think,  as  think  at  times  I  must, 
of  the  appalling  contrast  beween  the  hallowed  glory 
of  that  creed  which  once  was  mine,  and  the  lonely 
mystery  of  existence  as  now  I  find  it,  at  such  times 
I  shall  ever  feel  it  impossible  to  avoid  the  sharpest 
pang  of  which  my  nature  is  susceptible.  For  whether 
it  be  due  to  my  intelligence  not  being  sufficiently 
advanced  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  age,  or 
whether  it  be  due  to  the  memory  of  those  sacred  asso- 
ciations which  to  me  at  least  were  the  sweetest  that 
life  has  given,  I  cannot  but  feel  that  for  me,  and  for 

1  Now  republished  in  a  book  called  '  Mind  and  Motion.' 


1878  THE   ECLIPSE   OF  FAITH  87 

others  who  think  as  I  do,  there  is  a  dreadful  truth  in 
those  words  of  Hamilton,  philosophy  having  become 
a  meditation  not  merely  of  death  but  of  annihilation, 
the  precept  know  thyself  has  become  transformed  into 
the  terrific  oracle  to  (Edipus — 

'  Mayest  thou  ne'er  know  the  truth  of  what  thou  art.' 

There  are  many  who  abandon  belief  for  various 
reasons,  and  who  in  various  methods  stifle  regret  and 
call  in  stoicism  to  their  aid.  There  are  those  who 
really  care  very  little  about  the  '  ultimate  problems,' 
and  who  find  the  world  of  sense  quite  enough  to 
occupy  them.  And  there  are  souls  who  seem  to  be  con- 
stantly crying  out  in  their  darkness  for  light,  the  bur- 
den of  whose  cry  seems  to  be : '  Fecisti  nos  ad  te,  Domine, 
et  inquietum  est  cor  nostrum  donee  requiescat  in  te.J 
These  last  have  within  them  the  capacity  for  holiness, 
the  capacity  for  a  real  and  tremendous  power  to  witness 
for  the  truth,  to  do  and  to  suffer  pro  causa  Dei.  To 
this  class  George  Romanes  belonged.  By  nature  he  was 
deeply  and  truly  religious,  and  interested  and  absorbed 
as  he  was  in  science,  it  is  no  exaggeration  to  say  he  was 
just  as  keenly  interested  in  theology,  that  is  to  say, 
in  the  deepest  and  ultimate  problems  of  theology. 
By  the  questions  which  divide  Christians  he  was  not 
greatly  attracted,  and  he  never  could  see  any  reason 
for  the  bitterness  which  exists  between  e.g.  Roman 
and  Anglican. 

This  is  anticipating.  In  1878  he  had  touched  the 
very  depths  of  scepticism,  and  he  would  have  rejected 
the  idea  of  a  possibility  of  return,  and  would  have 
rejected  it  in  terms  of  unmeasured  regret. 

A  letter  from  Mr.  Darwin  is  interesting. 


88  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  ws- 

Down  :  December  5,  1878. 

My  dear  Romanes, — I  am  much  pleased  to  send 
my  photograph  to  the  future  Mrs.  Romanes. 

I  have  read  your  anonymous  book — some  parts 
twice  over — with  very  great  interest ;  it  seems  admir- 
ably, and  here  and  there  very  eloquently  written,  but 
from  not  understanding  metaphysical  terms  I  could 
not  always  follow  you.  For  the  sake  of  outsiders,  if 
there  is  another  edition,  could  you  make  it  clear  what 
is  the  difference  between  treating  a  subject  under 
a  'scientific,'  'logical,'  'symbolical,'  and  'formal' 
point  of  views  or  manner  ?  With  regard  to  your 
great  leading  idea,  I  should  like  sometimes  to  hear 
from  you  verbally  (for  to  answer  would  be  too  long 
for  letters)  what  you  would  say  if  a  theologian 
addressed  you  as  follows  : 

'  I  grant  you  the  attraction  of  gravity,  persistence 
of  force  (or  conservation  of  energy),  and  one  kind  of 
matter,  though  the  latter  is  an  immense  admission ; 
but  I  maintain  that  God  must  have  given  such 
attributes  to  this  force,  independently  of  its  persist- 
ence, that  under  certain  conditions  it  develops  or 
changes  into  light,  heat,  electricity,  galvanism,  per- 
haps even  life. 

'  You  cannot  prove  that  force  (which  physicists 
define  as  that  which  causes  motion)  would  inevitably 
thus  change  its  character  under  the  above  conditions. 
Again  I  maintain  that  matter,  though  it  may  in  the 
future  be  eternal,  was  created  by  God  with  the  most 
marvellous  affinities,  leading  to  complex  definite 
compounds  and  with  polarities  leading  to  beautiful 


1879  THE   ECLIPSE   OF  FAITH  89 

crystals,  &c.  &c.  You  cannot  prove  that  matter  would 
necessarily  possess  these  attributes.  Therefore  you 
have  no  right  to  say  that  you  have  "  demonstrated  " 
that  all  natural  laws  necessarily  follow  from  gravity, 
the  persistence  of  force,  and  existence  of  matter.  If 
you  say  that  nebulous  matter  existed  aboriginally 
and  from  eternity  with  all  its  present  complex  powers 
in  a  potential  state,  you  seem  to  me  to  beg  the  whole 
question.' 

Please  observe  it  is  not  I,  but  a  theologian  who 
has  thus  addressed  you,  but  I  could  not  answer  him. 
In  your  present  c  idiotic  '  state  of  mind,  you  will  wish 
me  at  the  devil  for  bothering  you.1 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DAKWIN. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park  :  Sunday,  Dec.  1878. 

My  dear  Mr.  Darwin, — Many  thanks  for  your 
portrait — not  only  from  myself  but  also  from  the 
'future  Mrs.  Romanes.' 

I  am  glad  that  you  think  well  of  the  literary  style 
of  the  book  on  Theism.  As  regards  the  remarks 
of  the  supposed  theologian,  I  have  no  doubt  that  he 
is  entitled  to  them.  The  only  question  is  whether  I 
have  been  successful  in  making  out  that  all  natural 
cases  must  reasonably  be  supposed  to  follow  from  the 
conservation  of  energy.  If  so,  as  the  transmutations 
of  energy  from  heat  to  electricity  &c.  all  take  place 
in  accordance  with  law,  and  as  the  phenomena  of 
polarity  in  crystals  &c.  do  the  same,  it  follows  that 

1  He  was  engaged  to  be  married 


90  GEOEGE  JOHN  ROMANES  ms- 

neither  these  nor  any  other  class  of  phenomena 
afford  any  better  evidence  of  Deity  than  do  any  other 
class  of  phenomena.  Therefore,  if  all  laws  follow 
from  the  persistence  of  force,  the  question  of  Deity 
or  no  Deity  would  simply  become  the  question  as  to 
whether  force  requires  to  be  created  or  is  self -existent. 
And  if  we  say  it  is  created,  the  fact  of  self-existence 
still  requires  to  be  met  in  the  Creator. 

Of  course  it  may  be  denied  that  all  laws  do  follow 
from  the  persistence  of  force.  And  this  is  what  I 
mean  by  the  distinction  between  a  scientific  and  a 
logical  proof.  For  in  the  last  resort  all  scientific 
proof  goes  upon  the  assumption  that  energy  is  per- 
manent, so  that  if  from  this  assumption  all  natural 
laws  and  processes  admit  of  being  deduced,  it  follows 
that  for  a  scientific  cosmology  no  further  assumption 
is  required ;  all  the  phenomena  of  Nature  receive  their 
last  or  ultimate  scientific  explanation  in  this  the  most 
ultimate  of  scientific  hypotheses.  But  now  logic 
may  come  in  and  say,  '  This  hypothesis  of  the  persist- 
ence of  force  is  no  doubt  verified  and  found  constantly 
true  within  the  range  of  science  (i.e.  experience),  so 
that  thus  far  it  is  not  only  an  hypothesis  but  a  fact. 
But  before  logic  can  consent  to  allow  this  ultimate 
fact  of  science  to  be  made  the  ultimate  basis  of  all 
cosmology,  I  must  be  shown  that  it  is  ultimate,  not 
merely  in  relation  to  human  modes  of  research,  but 
also  in  a  sense  absolute  to  all  else.' 

But  the  more  I  think  about  the  whole  thing  the 
more  am  I  convinced  that  you  put  it  into  a  nutshell 
when  you  were  here,  and  that  there  is  about  as  much 
use  in  trying  to  illuminate  the  subject  with  the  light 


1879  THE   ECLIPSE   OF  FAITH  91 

of  intellect  as  there  would  be  in  trying  to  illuminate 
the  midnight  sky  with  a  candle.  I  intend,  therefore, 
to  drop  it,  and  to  take  the  advice  of  the  poet,  '  Be- 
lieve it  not,  regret  it  not,  but  wait  it  out,  O  Man.' 

G.  J.  E. 

I  return  the  papers,  having  taken  down  the  re- 
ferences. The  books  I  shall  return  when  read,  but 
honey-mooning  may  prolong  the  time. 


92  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1879- 


CHAPTEE  II 

LONDON,     1879-1890 

ME.  EOMANES  married,  on  February  11,  1879,  Ethel, 
only  daughter  of  Andrew  Duncan,  Esq.,  of  Liverpool, 
whom  he  had  met  at  the  house  of  her  cousin  and 
guardian,  Sir  James  Malcolm,  of  Balbedie  and  Grange, 
Fifeshire.  In  the  same  year  he  was  elected  a  Fellow 
of  the  Royal  Society. 

From  1879  to  1890  Mr.  Romanes  resided  in  18 
Cornwall  Terrace,  which  his  mother  gave  up  to  him, 
and  these  eleven  years  were  perhaps  the  brightest  and 
most  fruitful  of  his  life. 

It  is  difficult  to  give  any  just  idea  of  the  extreme 
happiness  and  pleasantness  of  the  home  life  and  of 
outward  circumstances  ;  happiness  which  only  seemed 
to  increase  as  years  went  on.  He  grew  more  boyish, 
more  playful,  and  seemed  to  have  an  endless  capacity 
for  enjoyment,  for  friendship,  for  happiness  of  the 
best  and  purest  kind. 

He  greatly  enjoyed  society,  and  had  full  oppor- 
tunities for  seeing  the  kind  he  liked  best,  the  cream 
of  the  intellectual  world  of  London,  and  perhaps  one 
may  be  allowed  to  say  that  no  one  was  ever  more 
unspoilt  by  success,  by  popularity.  He  seemed  to 
grow  more  simple,  more  single-hearted  each  year. 


1880  SCIENTIFIC  CONTROVERSY  93 

The  amount  of  work  he  did  was  very  considerable. 
His  books,  '  Animal  Intelligence/  '  Mental  Evolution 
in  Animals/  '  Mental  Evolution  in  Man/  '  Jelly-Fish 
and  Star-Fish/  i  Darwin  and  after  Darwin/  '  An  Exa- 
mination of  Weismannism/  represent  an  enormous 
amount  of  reading  and  thought ;  and  besides  all  these, 
there  was  experimental  work  in  University  College 
and  in  his  own  laboratory  in  Scotland,  and  a  succes- 
sion of  important  articles  in  reviews,  chiefly  the 
1  Nineteenth  Century/  '  Fortnightly  '  and '  Contempo- 
rary '  Eeviews,  and  '  Nature.'  He  was  elected  to  the 
Fellowship  of  the  Eoyal  Society  in  1879. 

It  would  be  quite  absurd  to  deny  that  Mr. 
Romanes  liked  a  fair  and  free  fight,  and  there  was  a 
good  deal  of  scientific  controversy,  but  he  was  abso- 
lutely incapable  of  anything  but  fairness,  and  never 
imported  into  private  life  any  quarrel  in  print.  He 
had  plenty  of  stiff  fights,  chiefly  with  Mr.  Thiselton- 
Dyer,  Professor  Lankester,  and  Mr.  Wallace,  but  the 
first  two  were  always  his  friends,  and  with  the  latter 
he  had  a  very  slight  acquaintance.  The  following 
letter,  though  it  belongs  to  a  later  date,  will  show  his 
feelings  on  the  subject  of  controversy : 

Christ  Church,  Oxford. 

Dear  Professor  Meldola, — I  trust  that  our  differ- 
ences— and  disagreements — as  presented  in  '  Nature/ 
will  not  disturb  our  relations  in  private.  Anyhow,  I 
send  the  inclosed  circular,  which  I  am  addressing  to 
English  biologists,  and  hope  you  will  testify  to  your 
desire  for  '  facts  '  by  signing  the  memorial. 

Yours  truly, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 


94  GEOBGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1879- 

He  lectured  a  good  deal  in  provincial  towns,  and 
gave  several  Friday  evening  discourses  at  the  Royal 
Institution.  Lecturing,  even  in  days  of  failing  health, 
was  always  a  pleasure,  never  a  burden  to  him.  In 
one  of  the  following  letters  is  a  mock  triumphant 
description  of  a  lecture  in  Glasgow,  written  purely  to 
amuse  his  wife,  and  provoke  some  mock  depreciatory 
remarks. 

To  Mrs.  Bomanes. 

Edinburgh :  November  1880. 

In  the  evening  I  went  to  Professor 's  dinner, 

which  was  a  most  gorgeous  affair.  The  feed  was 
sumptuous,  and  the  guests  the  best  that  Edinburgh 
had  to  afford.  There  were  twelve  of  us,  all  except 
myself  and  Hullah  (the  musician),  professors  of  the 
University.  I  sat  next  to  one  of  the  latter- 
Turner,  who,  as  his  handsome  namesake  might  say, 
has  done  original  work.  The  advantage  of  meeting 
celebrated  men  when  oneself  is  also  a  celebrated  man 
(how  sweet  is  se]f-contentment ! )  is  that  the  two 
know  all  about  each  other  before  they  meet,  and 
so  meet  as  friends  already.  Turner  is  a  man  of  great 
general  intelligence,  and  as  it  is  needless  to  tell 
you  that  Komanes  is  the  same,  of  course  they  got  on 
delightfully.  In  proof  of  which  he  asked  me  to  go 
with  him  next  day  to  see  the  new  hospital  and 
medical  schools,  which,  when  finished,  are  to  be  the 
largest  in  the  world  and  cost  nearly  half  a  million 
of  money.  We  agreed  that  he  should  call  for  me  at 
ten,  which  he  did  to-day.  We  two  then  drove  to  the 
buildings,  and,  between  exploring  them  and  the  old 


isso  LECTUKE   IN   GLASGOW  95 

University,  he  spent  more  than  two  hours  of  his, 
at  this  time  of  year,  very  valuable  time.  From 
which  you  may  gather  that  he  is  a  particularly 
pleasant  man. 

Glasgow:  1880. 

Now  for  my  news.  Everything  was  splendid, 
much  the  best  thing  in  the  way  of  lecturing  that  I 
have  done  since  Dublin,1  and  I  was  so  sorry  that  you 
were  not  there. 

First  of  all  we  had  a  dinner  given  by  my  host  in 
my  honour,  the  guests  being  all  the  chief  men  in  the 
University,  including  Professor  Caird 2  and  the  biggest 
of  all  big  swells,  Sir  W.  Thomson.3 

The  dinner  was  to  me  highly  interesting,  as  I 
talked  nearly  all  the  time  to  Sir  William,  who  is  a 
wonderful  psychological  study. 

We  then  went  to  the  lecture,  where  Sir  William 
took  the  chair,  and  introduced  me  to  the  audience 
with  such  a  glowing  oration  that  it  would  have 
startled  you.  (It  quite  astonished  me.)  The  au- 
dience being  thus  led  to  suppose  that  I  was  one  of 
the  brightest  of  all  bright  lights,  received  me  very 
warmly ;  I  got  enthusiastic,  discarded  my  notes,  and 
swam  along  in  the  most  magnificent  style  even  for 
me,  which,  you  know,  is  the  highest  praise  I  can 
bestow  upon  myself.  I  spoke  for  an  hour  and  a  half ; 
at  the  end  the  people  applauded  so,  I  felt  really 
awfully  sorry  you  were  not  there.  There  seems  to  be 
a  cruel  fate  preventing  you  from  witnessing  my  per- 
formances. 

1  The  Brit.  Assoc.  Lecture,  1878. 
2  The  present  Master  of  Balliol.  3  Now  Lord  Kelvin. 


96  GEOEGE  JOHN  ROMANES  isso- 

The  vote  of  thanks  was  proposed  by  Professor 
McKendrick.  I  was  met  by  another  storm  of  ap- 
plause ;  I  began  to  feel  quite  overcome.  But  I  said 
a  few  words  with  all  becoming  humility,  and  then 
Sir  William  summed  up. 

Gateshead :  November  1880. 

My  news  since  yesterday  is  interesting.  Mr. 
Newall  is  Newall  the  astronomer,  who  has  the  tele- 
scope of  world-wide  renown — in  fact,  the  largest 
telescope  in  the  world.  It  is  mounted  just  outside 
the  house  in  a  large  dome-like  building,  and  looks 
like  a  small  tower  set  horizontally  on  no  end  of 
wheels  and  machinery.  Yesterday  night  was,  un- 
fortunately, smoky.  ...  I  do  hope  and  pray  there 
may  be  some  stars  visible  to-night,  as  I  should  dearly 
like  to  see  something  through  the  monster.  It  is 
such  an  irony  of  fate  that  the  largest  telescope  in  the 
world  should  be  mounted  in  the  smokiest  place  in 
the  world.  Mr.  Newall  himself  is  very  nice,  with 
something  about  his  appearance  and  manner  which 
faintly  reminds  me  of  Darwin.  .  .  . 

My  lectures  went  off  very  well  of  course  \  The 
dinner  at  the  Logans  was  delightful.  Bob 1  was  there, 
and  kept  the  table  in  roars.  He  certainly  is  a  genius 
at  telling  a  story.  Carrie  2  was  there  also.  She  is 
charming,  and  sings  and  plays  delightfully.  There 
is  a  peculiar  sweetness  about  her  singing,  or,  as  Bob 
calls  it,  warbling,  which  gives  one  the  same  kind  of 
pleasure  as  listening  to  a  skylark  does. 

1  His  cousin,  Major  Eoinanes,  King's  Own  Borderers. 

2  Another  cousin,  Mrs.  T.  M.  Murray. 


WORK  ON   MARINE   ZOOLOGY  97 

Here  is  an  affectionate  outburst  to  his  mother, 
written  about  this  time  : 

'  When  thou  art  feeble,  old,  and  grey, 
My  healthy  arm  shall  be  thy  stay, 

My  mother.' 

When.  But  you  are  not  yet  either  so  feeble,  old, 
or  grey  as  to  make  me  imagine  that  you  have  lost  a 
needful  prop  in  the  absence  of  your  i  peerless  son  !  ' 
And  I  am  sure  you  are  not  more  proud  of  him  than 
he  is  of  you.  With  your  eyes  as  bright  as  the  bright 
starlight,  and  your  face  as  ruddy  as  the  morning,  I 
am  glad  you  are  my  mother. 

In  1881  Mr.  Romanes  was  at  Garvock,  Perth- 
shire. And  he  was  for  a  short  time  also  at  Oban, 
working  with  his  friend  Professor  Ewart  on  EcJiino- 
dermata,  and  their  joint  paper  was  made  the  <  Croonian 
Lecture.' 1 

This  was  the  last  bit  of  work  on  marine  zoology, 
excepting  a  trifling  research  on  the  smelling  power 
of  anemones,  at  which  he  worked  with  Mr.  Walter 
Herries  Pollock,  who  had  been  tempted  to  make  a 
temporary  excursion  from  the  paths  of  literature  into 
the  walks  of  science.  They  contributed  a  joint  paper 
to  the  Linnean  Society  on  indications  of  smell  in 
Actinia,  and  it  is  greatly  to  be  feared,  such  is  the 
frivolity  of  literary  men,  that  Mr.  Pollock  regarded 
the  whole  affair  as  a  very  good  joke. 

The  following  letters  describe  the  work  of  the 
years  1880  and  1881.  The  summer  of  1879  and 
1880  had  been  spent  at  Westfield. 

1  His  book  entitled  '  Jelly-Fish,  Star-Fish,  and  Sea  Urchins,'  gives  a 
full  account  of  Mr.  Romanes'  researches  on  these  primitive  nervous  systems. 

H 


98  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  isso- 


From  6r.  J.  Eomanes  to  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

By  this  post  I  return  you  Hackel's  essay  on 
Perigenesis.  Although  I  have  kept  it  so  long,  I  have 
only  just  read  it,  as  you  said  there  was  no  need  to 
return  it  at  any  particular  time. 

To   me   it    seems   that  whatever  merit  Hackel's 
views  may  have  in  this  matter,  they  certainly  have 
no  claim  to  be  regarded  as  original ;  for  I  cannot  see 
that  his  '  Plastidules  '  differ  in  anything  but  in  name 
from  Spencer's  '  Physiological  Units.'     Why  he  does 
not   acknowledge  this,  it  is  difficult  to   understand. 
Anyhow,   the    theories   being   the    same,   the   same 
objections  apply ;  and  to  me  it  has  always  seemed 
that  this  theory  is  unsatisfactory  because  so  general. 
As  you  observe  in  your  letter,  everyone  believes  in 
molecular  movements  of  some  kind ;  but  to  offer  this 
as  a  full  explanation  of   heredity  seems  to  me  like 
saying  that  the  cause,  say,  of  an  obscure  disease  like 
diabetes,  is  the  persistence  of  force.    No  doubt  this  is 
the  ultimate  cause,  but  the  pathologist  requires  some 
more  proximate  causes  if  his  science  is  to  be  of  any 
value.     Similarly,  I  do  not  see  that   biology  gains 
anything  by  a  theory  which  is  really  but  little  better 
than   a  restatement   of   the  mystery  of   heredity  in 
terms   of   the   highest   abstraction.      Pangenesis    at 
least  has  the  merit  of  supplying  us  with  some  con- 
ceivable  carriers,  so  to  speak,  of  the  modified  pro- 
toplasm from  the  various  organs  or  parts  of  the  parent 
to  the  corresponding  organs  or  parts  of  the  offspring, 
and  the  multiplication  of  gemmules  seems  to  me  to 


1881  PANGENESIS  AND  PEEIGENESIS  99 

avoid  a  difficulty  with  which  Perigenesis  (as  stated  by 
Hackel)  is  beset,  viz.  that  atavism  sometimes  occurs 
over  too  large  a  gap  to  be  reasonably  attributed  to 
what  remains  of  the  original  i  stem-vibrations '  after 
their  characters  have  been  successively  modified  at 
each  '  bifurcation.'  But  it  would  be  tedious  to  enter 
into  details.  Perigenesis,  in  my  opinion,  is  l  more 
simple  '  than  Pangenesis,  only  because  its  terms  are 
so  much  more  general. 

P.S. — I  forgot  to  tell  you,  when  we  were  at  lunch, 
that  the  seed  of  the  grafted  beets  is  ready  for  sowing ; 
also  that  the  vine  is  now  four  feet  high,  and  so,  I 
should  think,  might  be  grafted  next  spring. 

From  C.  Darwin,  Esq.,  to  G.  J.  Romanes. 

Down :  February  3,  1880. 

I  will  keep  your  diagram  1  for  a  few  days,  but  I 
find  it  very  difficult  now  to  think  over  new  subjects, 
so  that  it  is  not  likely  that  I  shall  be  able  to  send 
any  criticisms  ;  but  you  may  rely  on  it  that  I  will  do 
my  best. 

I  am  glad  you  like  Guthrie's  book.  If  you  care 
to  read  a  little  book  on  pure  instinct,  get  Fabre, 
'  Souvenirs  Entomologiques,'  1879.  It  is  really  admir- 
able, and  very  good  on  the  sense  of  direction  in  insects. 
I  have  sent  him  some  suggestions  such  as  rotating 
the  insects,  but  I  do  not  know  whether  he  will  try 
them. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CHARLES  DARWIN. 

1  Diagram  for  a  lecture  on  '  Mental  Evolution.' 

H  2 


100  GEOKGE  JOHN   EOMANES  isso- 


From  Gr.  J.  Romanes  to  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

February  6,  1880. 

I   have   to   thank   you  very  much  for  your  two 

letters,  and  also  for  the  enclosures  from ,  which 

I  now  return.  The  latter  convey  exactly  the  criti- 
cism that  I  should  have  expected  from ,  for  while 

writing  my  essay  on  Theism  I  had  several  con- 
versations with  him  upon  the  subject  of  Spencer's 
writings,  and  so  know  exactly  what  he  thinks  of 
them.  But  in  none  of  these  conversations  could  I 
get  at  anything  more  definite  than  is  conveyed  by  the 
returned  letters.  In  no  point  of  any  importance  did 
he  make  it  clear  to  me  that  Spencer  was  wrong,  and 
the  only  result  of  our  conversation  was  to  show  me 

that  in opinion   it  was    only  my   ignorance  of 

mathematics  that  prevented  me  from  seeing  that  Mr. 
Spencer  is  merely  a  '  word  philosopher.'  Upon  which 
opinion  I  reflected,  and  still  reflect,  that  the  mathema- 
ticians must  be  a  singularly  happy  race,  seeing  that 
they  alone  of  men  are  competent  to  think  about  the 
facts  of  the  cosmos.  And  this  reflection  becomes 
still  more  startling  when  supplemented  by  another, 
viz.  that  although  one  may  not  know  any  mathema- 
tics, everybody  knows  what  mathematics  are  :  they 
are  the  sciences  of  number  and  measurement,  and  as 
such,  one  is  at  a  loss  to  perceive  why  they  should  be 
so  essentially  necessary  to  enable  a  man  to  think 
fairly  and  well  upon  other  subjects.  But  it  is,  as  you 
once  said,  that  when  a  man  is  to  be  killed  by  the 
sword  mathematical,  he  must  not  have  the  satisfac- 


1881  ON   MENTAL  EVOLUTION  101 

tion  of  even  knowing  how  he  is  killed.  Of  course,  in 
a  general  way  I  quite  understand  and  agree  with 

-  that  Spencer  has  done  but  little  service  to 
science.  But  I  believe  that  he  has  done  grea.t 
service  to  thinking,  and  all  the  mathematicians  in  the 
world  would  not  convince  me  to  the  contrary,  even 
though  they  should  all  deliver  their  judgment  with 
the  magnificent  authority  of  a  — — -. 

Coming  now  to  the  diagram,  I  am  much  obliged 
to  you  for  your  suggestions.  The  '  Descent  of  Man/ 
with  all  its  references  upon  the  subject,  and  also 
your  paper  on  the  '  Baby,'  were  read,  and  the  results 
embodied  in  the  diagram,  so  I  am  very  glad  you  did 
not  take  the  needless  trouble  of  consulting  these 
works.  By  '  Love  '  I  intend  to  denote  the  complex 
emotion  (dependent  on  the  representative  faculties) 
which,  having  been  so  lately  smitten  myself,  I  am 
perhaps  inclined  to  place  in  too  exalted  a  position. 
But  you  did  not  observe  that  I  placed  '  Parental  Affec- 
tion '  and  '  Social  Feeling '  very  much  lower  down. 

In  my  essay  I  carefully  explain  the  two  cases 
of  Drosera  and  Dionaea  as  being  the  best  hitherto 
observed  for  my  purpose  in  establishing  the  prin- 
ciple of  discrimination  among  stimuli,  as  a  principle 
displayed  by  non-nervous  tissues. 

April  22,  1880. 

As  soon  as  I  received  your  first  intimation  about 
Schneider's  book  I  wrote  over  for  it,  and  received  a 
copy  some  weeks  ago.  I  then  lent  it  to  Sully,  who 
wanted  to  read  it,  so  do  not  yet  know  what  it  is 
worth.  I,  together  with  my  wife — who  reads  French 


102  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  isso- 

much  more  quickly  than  I  can — am  now  engaged 
upon  all  the  French  books  on  animal  intelligence 
which  you  kindly  lent  me.  I  am  also  preparing  for 
my  Royal  Institution  lecture  on  the  7th  of  May.  I 
will  afterwards  publish  it  in  some  of  the  magazines, 
and,  last  of  all,  in  an  expanded  and  more  detailed 
form,  it  will  go  into  my  book  on  Animal  Intelligence. 

I  went  to  see the  other  day  on  Spiritualism. 

He  answered  privately  a  letter  that  I  wrote  to 
'  Nature,'  signed  '  F.R.S.,'  which  was  a  feeler  for 
some  material  to  investigate.  I  had  never  spoken 

to before,  but  although  I  passed  a  very 

pleasant  afternoon  with  him,  I  did  not  learn  any- 
thing new  about  Spiritualism.  He  seemed  to  me  to 
have  the  faculty  of  deglutition  too  well  developed. 
Thus,  for  instance,  he  seemed  rather  queer  on  the 
subject  of  astrology  !  and  when  I  asked  whether  he 
thought  it  worthy  of  common  sense  to  imagine  that, 
spirits  or  no  spirits,  the  conjunctions  of  'planets  could 
exercise  any  causative  influence  on  the  destinies  of 
children  born  under  them,  he  answered  that  having 
already  '  swallowed  so  much,'  he  did  not  know  where 
to  stop !  ! 

My  wife  and  baby  are  both  flourishing.  I  noticed 
that  the  latter,  at  four  days  old,  could  always  tell 
which  hand  I  touched,  inclining  its  head  towards 
that  hand. 

From  C.  Darwin  to  G.  J.  Romanes. 

September  14,  1880. 

We  send  you  our  best  thanks  for  your  magnificent 
present  of  game,  I  have  not  tasted  black-game  for 


1881  SHOOTING   IN   SCOTLAND  103 

nearly  half  a  century,   when  I  killed  some  on  my 
father-in-law's  land  in  Staffordshire. 

I  hope  that  you  are  well  and  strong  and  do  not 
give  up  all  your  time  to  shooting.  Pray  tell  Mrs. 
Romanes,  if  you  turn  idle,  I  shall  say  it  is  her  fault, 
and  being  an  old  man,  shall  scold  her.  But  you 
have  done  too  splendid  work  to  turn  idle,  so  I  need 
not  fear,  and  shall  never  have  audaciously  to  scold 
Mrs.  Romanes.  But  I  am  writing  great  rubbish. 
You  refer  to  some  Zoological  station  on  your  coast, 
and  I  now  remember  seeing  something  about  it,  and 
that  more  money  was  wanted  for  apparatus,  there- 
fore I  send  a  cheque  of  51.  5s.  just  to  show  my 
goodwill. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DAKWIN. 

We  went  to  the  Lakes  for  three  weeks  to  Conis- 
ton,  and  the  scenery  gave  me  more  pleasure  than  I 
thought  my  soul,  or  whatever  remains  of  it,  was 
capable  of  feeling.  We  saw  Buskin  several  times, 
and  he  was  uncommonly  pleasant. 

To  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

November  5,  1880. 

I  was  sorry  to  hear  on  my  return  from  Scotland 
that  I  had  missed  the  pleasure  of  a  call  from  you, 
and  also  to  hear  from  Mr.  Teesdale  to-day  that  you 
had  returned  to  Down,  owing,  he  fears,  to  the  alarm- 
ing condition  of  Miss  Wedgwood.  I  trust,  however, 
that  her  state  of  health  may  not  be  so  serious  as  he 
apprehends. 


104  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  isso- 

On  my  way  South  I  stayed  for  a  couple  of  days 
at  Newcastle,  to  give  two  lectures  on  Mental  Evolu- 
tion, and  hence  my  absence  when  you  called.  I 
stayed  with  Mr.  Newall,  who  has  the  monster  tele- 
scope, and  '  as  good  luck  would  have  it,  Providence 
was  on  my  side,'  in  the  matter  of  giving  us  a  clear 
sky  for  observing,  rather  a  rare  thing  at  Newcastle. 

You  will  be  glad  to  hear  that  our  season's  work 
at  the  '  Zoological  station  '  has  been  very  successful. 
A  really  interesting  research  has  been  conducted  by 
Ewart  and  myself  jointly  on  the  locomotor  system  of 
Echinoderms,  he  taking  the  morphological  and  I  the 
physiological  part.  When  next  I  see  you  I  shall  tell 
you  the  principal  points,  but  to  do  so  in  a  letter 
would  be  tedious. 

I  think  it  is  probable  that  Mivart  and  I  shall 
have  a  magazine  battle  some  day  on  Mental  Evolu- 
tion, as  I  think  it  is  better  to  draw  him  in  this  way 
before  finally  discussing  the  whole  subject  in  my 
book. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace  :  November  13,  1880. 

I  am  grieved  to  hear  from  Mr.  Teesdale  that  his 
fears  were  only  too  well  founded.  Although  I  had 
not  myself  the  privilege  of  Miss  Wedgwood's  ac- 
quaintance, I  know,  from  what  I  have  been  told  by 
those  who  had,  how  greatly  your  household  must  feel 
her  loss. 

I  should  not,  however,  have  written  only  to  trouble 
you  with  expressions  of  sympathy.  I  desire  to  ask 
you  one  or  two  questions  with  reference  to  an  article 
on  Hybridism  which  I  have  written  for  the  '  Ency- 
clopaedia Britannica,'  and  the  corrected  proof  of  which 


1881  AUTHORITIES   ON   HYBRIDISM  105 

I  send.  It  is  in  chief  part  an  epitome  of  your  own 
chapters  upon  the  subject,  and  therefore  you  need  not 
trouble  to  read  the  whole,  unless  you  care  to  see 
whether  I  have  been  sufficiently  clear  and  accurate. 
But  there  are  two  points  on  which  I  should  like  to 
have  your  opinion,  both  for  my  own  benefit  and  for 
that  of  my  readers.  First,  I  think  it  is  desirable  to 
append  a  list  of  the  more  important  works  bearing 
upon  the  subject,  and  if  I  make  such  a  list  I  should 
not  like  to  trust  to  my  own  information,  lest  I  should 
do  unwitting  injustice  to  some  observing  writers.  If, 
therefore,  you  could,  without  taking  any  special  trouble, 
jot  down  from  memory  the  works  you  think  most 
deserving  of  mention,  I  think  it  would  be  of  benefit 
to  the  reading  public. 

From  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

Down :  November  14,  1880. 

My  dear  Eomanes, — Many  thanks  for  your  kind 
sympathy.  My  wife's  sister  was,  I  fully  believe,  as 
good  and  generous  a  woman  as  ever  walked  this 
earth. 

The  proof-sheets  have  not  arrived,  but  probably 
will  to-morrow.  I  shall  like  to  read  them,  though 
I  may  not  be  able  to  do  so  very  quickly,  as  I  am 
bothered  with  a  heap  of  little  jobs  which  must  be  done. 
I  will  send  by  to-day's  post  a  large  book  by  Focke, 
received  a  week  or  two  ago,  on  Hybrids,  and  which  I 
have  not  had  time  to  look  at,  but  which  I  see  in 
Table  of  Contents  includes  full  history  of  subject  and 
much  else  besides.  It  will  aid  you  far  better  than  I 


106  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  isso- 

can ;  for  I  have  now  been  so  long  attending  to  other 
subjects,  and  with  old  age,  I  fear  I  could  make  no 
suggestions  worth  anything.  Formerly  I  knew  the 
subject  well. 

Kolreuter,  Gartner,  and  Herbert  are  certainly  far 
the  most  trustworthy  authorities.  There  was  also  a 
German,  whose  name  I  mention  in  '  Origin,'  who 
wrote  on  Hybrid  Willows.  Naudin,  who  is  often 
quoted,  I  have  much  less  confidence  in.  By  the  way, 
Nageli  (whom  many  think  the  greatest  botanist  in 
Germany)  wrote  a  few  years  ago  on  Hybridism;  I 
cannot  remember  title,  but  I  will  hunt  for  it  if  you 
wish.  The  title  will  be  sure  to  be  in  Focke. 

I  quite  agree  with  what  you  say  about  Passiflora. 
Herbert  observed  an  analogous  case  in  Crinum. 

November  15,  1880. 

I  have  just  read  your  article.  As  far  as  my  judg- 
ment goes  it  is  excellent  and  could  not  be  improved. 
You  have  skimmed  the  cream  off  the  whole  subject. 
It  is  also  very  clear.  One  or  two  sentences  near  the 
beginning  seem  rather  too  strong,  as  I  have  marked 
with  pencil,  without  attending  to  style.  I  have  made 
one  or  two  small  suggestions.  If  you  can  find  my 
account  in  <  Nature '  (last  summer  I  think) ]  about 
the  hybrid  Chinese  geese  [being  fertile]  inter  se,  it 
would  be  worth  adding,  and  would  require  only  two 
or  three  lines.  I  do  not  suppose  you  wish  to  add, 
but  in  my  paper  on  Lythrum,  and  I  think  requoted 
in  cVar.  under  Dom.'  vol.  ii.  2nd  edit,  bottom  of 

1  See  Nature,  vol.  xxi.  p.  207. 


1881  KESEAKCH   ON   ECHINODEKMS  107 

page  167,  I  have  a  good  sentence  about  a  man 
finding  two  vars.  of  Lythrum,  and  testing  them  by 
fertility,  and  coming  to  egregiously  wrong  conclu- 
sion. 

I  think  your  idea  of  reference  to  best  books  and 
short  history  of  subject  good.  By  the  way,  you  have 
made  me  quite  proud  of  my  chapter  on  Hybridism,  I 
had  utterly  forgotten  how  good  it  appears  when  dressed 
up  in  your  article.  Yours  very  sincerely, 

CHAKLES  DAKWIN. 

I  have  had  a  hunt  and  found  my  little  article  on 
Geese,  which  please  hereafter  return. 

• 

To  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace  :  November  18,  1880. 

Yery  many  thanks  for  your  kind  assistance  and 
expressions  of  approval.  It  was  stupid  of  me  to  for- 
get your  article  in  l  Nature  '  about  the  geese.  I  now 
quite  well  remember  reading  it  when  it  came  out. 

Focke's  book  is  just  the  very  thing  I  wanted,  as 
it  supplies  such  a  complete  history  of  the  subject.  If 
I  do  not  hear  from  you  again,  I  shall  keep  it  for  a 
few  days  to  refer  to  when  the  proof  which  I  have 
sent  to  press  shall  be  returned  with  my  historical 
sketch  added. 

I  have  now  nearly  finished  my  paper  on  the 
physiology  of  the  locomotor  system  in  Echinoderms. 
The  most  important  result  in  it  is  the  proof,  both 
morphological  and  physiological,  of  a  nervous  plexus, 
external  to  everything,  which  in  Echinus  serves 


108  GEOEGE   JOHN   ROMANES  isso- 

to  co-ordinate  spines,  feet,  and  pedicellariae  in  a 
wonderful  manner.  By  the  way,  I  remember  once 
talking  with  you  about  the  function  of  the  latter, 
and  thinking  it  mysterious.  There  is  no  doubt  now 
that  this  function  is  to  seize  bits  of  seaweed,  and 
hold  them  steady  till  the  sucking  feet  have  time  to 
establish  their  adhesions,  so  assisting  locomotion  of 
animal  when  crawling  about  seaweed-covered  rocks. 

From  G.  J.  Eomanes  to  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Regent's  Park,  N.W. :  December  10,  1880. 

I  return  by  this  post  the  book  on  Hybridism, 
with  many  thanks.  It  itas  been  of  great  use  to  me 
in  giving  an  abstract  of  the  history. 

I  have  read  your  own  book  with  an  amount  of 
pleasure  that  I  cannot  express. 

One  idea  occurred  to  me  with  reference  to  lumi- 
nous stimulation,  which,  if  it  has  not  already  occurred 
to  you,  would  be  well  worth  trying.  The  suggestion 
suggests  itself.  How  about  the  period  of  latent  stimu- 
lation in  these  non-nervous  and  yet  irritable  tissues  ? 
And  especially  with  reference  to  luminous  stimulation 
it  would  be  most  interesting  to  ascertain  whether  the 
tissues  are  affected  by  brief  flashes  of  light.  If  you 
had  an  apparatus  to  give  bright  electrical  sparks  in  a 
dark  room,  and  were  to  expose  one  of  your  plants  to 
flashes  of  timed  intervals  between  each  other,  you 
might  ascertain,  first,  whether  any  number  of  sparks 
in  any  length  of  time  would  affect  the  plants  at  all ; 
and  second,  if  so,  what  number  in  a  given  time.  I 
should  not  wonder  (from  some  of  my  experiments  on 


1881        FLASHING   LIGHT   ON   PLANT   TISSUES          109 

Medusae,  see  '  Phil.  Trans.'  vol.  clxvii.  pt.  ii.  pp.  683-4) 
if  it  would  turn  out  that  a  continuous  uninterrupted 
series  of  sparks,  however  bright,  would  produce  no 
effect  at  all,  owing  to  the  plant  tissues  being  too  slug- 
gish to  admit  of  being  affected  by  a  succession  of 
stimuli  each  of  such  brief  duration.  But  if  any  effect 
were  produced,  it  would  still  be  interesting  to  make 
out  whether  this  interrupted  source  of  flashing  light 
were  considerably  less  effective  than  a  continuous 
source  of  the  same  intensity. 

Very  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  KOMANES. 

Linnean  Society,  Burlington  House,  Piccadilly,  London,  W. : 

December  14,  1880. 

My  dear  Mr.  Darwin, — I  am  glad  that  you  think 
the  experiment  worth  trying.  As  you  say  you  have 
not  got  the  requisite  apparatus  for  trying  it,  I  have 
written  to  Professor  Tyndall  to  see  if  he  would  allow 
it  to  be  carried  through  at  the  Eoyal  Institution. 

If  I  had  known  you  were  in  town  I  should  have 
called  to  tell  you  about  the  Echinoderms.  My  paper 
on  them  is  now  written  (70  pages),  so  I  have  begun 
to  come  here  (Burlington  House)  to  read  up  syste- 
matically all  the  literature  I  can  find  on  animal 
intelligence.  Hence  it  is  that,  having  left  your  letter 
at  home,  and  not  remembering  the  address  upon  it,  I 
have  to  send  this  answer  to  Down. 

is    a    lunatic    beneath    all    contempt — an 
object  of  pity  were  it  not  for  his  vein  of  malice. 
Very  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  KOMANES. 


110  GEOBGE  JOHN   KOMANES  isso- 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  N.W. :  December  17,  1880. 

My  dear  Mr.  Darwin, — Just  a  line  to  let  you 
know  that  Professor  Tyndall  has  kindly  placed  at  my 
disposal  the  apparatus  required  to  conduct  the  ex- 
periment with  flashing  light. 

Frank's  papers  at  the  Linnean  were,  as  you  will 
probably  have  heard  from  other  sources,  a  most 
brilliant  success,  as  not  only  was  the  attendance 
enormously  large  and  the  interest  great,  but  his  ex- 
position was-  a  masterpiece  of  scientific  reasoning, 
rendered  with  a  choice  and  fluency  of  language  that 
were  really  charming.  I  knew,  of  course,  that  he  is 
a  very  clever  fellow,  but  I  did  not  know  that  he  could 
do  that  sort  of  thing  so  well. 

I  have  now  got  a  monkey.  Sclater  let  me 
choose  one  from  the  Zoo,  and  it  is  a  very  intelligent, 
affectionate  little  animal.  I  wanted  to  keep  it  in  the 
nursery  for  purposes  of  comparison,  but  the  proposal 
met  with  so  much  opposition  that  I  had  to  give  way. 
I  am  afraid  to  suggest  the  idiot,  lest  I  should  be  told 
to  occupy  the  nursery  myself. 

Very  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

Down,  Beckenham,  Kent :  January  24. 

My  dear  Romanes, — I  have  been  thinking  about 
Pompilius  and  its  allies.  Please  take  the  trouble  to 
read  on  <  Perforation  of  the  Corolla  by  Bees,'  p.  425  of 
my  Cross  Fertilisation  to  end  of  chapter.  Bees  show 
so  much  intelligence  in  their  acts,  that  it  seems  not 
improbable  to  me  that  the  progenitors  of  Pompilius 


1881  ON   TRANSMITTED   MEMORY  111 

originally  stung  caterpillars  and  spiders,  &c.,  in  any 
part  of  their  bodies,  and  then  observed  by  their  in- 
telligence that  if  they  stung  them  in  one  particular 
place,  as  between  certain  segments  on  the  lower  side, 
their  prey  was  at  once  paralysed.  It  does  not  seem 
to  me  at  all  incredible  that  this  action  should  thus 
become  instinctive,  i.e.  memory  transmitted  from  one 
generation  to  another.  It  does  not  seem  necessary 
to  suppose  that  when  Pompilius  stung  its  prey  in  the 
ganglion  that  it  intended  or  knew  that  the  prey  would 
long  keep  alive.  The  development  of  the  larra  may 
have  been  subsequently  modified  in  relation  to  their 
half-dead  instead  of  wholly  dead  prey,  supposing 
that  the  prey  was  at  first  quite  killed,  which  would 
have  required  much  stinging.  Turn  this  notion 
over  in  your  mind,  but  do  not  trouble  yourself  by 
answering. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DAKWIN. 

N.B.  Once  on  a  time  a  fool  said  to  himself 
that  at  an  ancient  period  small  soft  crabs  or  other 
creatures  stuck  to  certain  fishes  ;  these  struggled 
violently,  and  in  doing  so,  discharged  electricity, 
which  annoyed  the  parasites,  so  that  they  often 
wriggled  away.  The  fish  was  very  glad,  and  some 
of  its  children  gradually  profited  in  a  higher  degree 
and  in  various  ways  by  discharging  more  electricity 
and  by  not  struggling.  The  fool  who  thought  thus 
persuaded  another  fool  to  try  an  eel  in  Scotland,  and 
lo  and  behold  electricity  was  discharged  when  it 
struggled  violently.  He  then  placed  in  contact  with 


112  GEOKGE  JOHN   EOMANES 

the  fish,  or  near  it,  a  small  medusa  or  other  animal 
which  he  cleverly  knew  was  sensitive  to  electricity, 
and  when  the  eel  struggled  violently,  the  little  animals 
in  contact  showed  by  their  movements  that  they  felt 
a  slight  shock.  Ever  afterwards  men  said  that  the 
two  fools  were  not  such  big  fools  as  they  seemed 

to  be'  STULTUS. 

From  Gr.  J.  Romanes  to  C.  Darwin. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  N.W. :  Sunday,  March  1881. 

I  have  got  a  lot  of  cats  waiting  for  me  at  different 
houses  round  Wimbledon  Common,  and  some  day 
next  week  shall  surprise  our  coachman  by  making  a 
round  of  calls  upon  the  cats,  drive  them  several  miles 
into  the  country,  and  then  let  them  out  of  their  re- 
spective bags.  If  any  return,  I  shall  try  them  again 
in  other  directions  before  finally  trying  the  rotation 
experiment. 

I  am  also  getting  the  experiment  on  flashing  light 
agoing.  The  first  apparatus  did  not  answer,  so  now 
I  have  invested  in  a  large  eight-day  clock,  the  pen- 
dulum of  which  I  intend  to  make  do  the  flashing. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  N.W. :  March  24,  1881. 

I  write  to  ask  you  what  you  think  of  the  following 
idea  as  to  a  possible  method  of  attacking  Pangenesis. 
Why  not,  I  mean,  inarch,  at  an  early  period  of  their 
growth,  the  seed-vessels  or  ovaries  of  plants  belong- 
ing to  different  varieties  ?  If  adhesion  takes  place, 
the  ovary  might  then  be  severed  from  its  parent 
plant,  and  left  to  develop  upon  the  foreign  one. 


PANGENESIS  113 

If  you  think  this  a  possible  experiment,  now 
would  be  the  time  of  year  to  try  it.  Therefore  I  write 
to  ask  whether  you  do  think  it  possible,  and  if  so,  what 
plants  you  may  think  it  would  be  best  to  try  it  with. 
All  the  cats 1  I  have  hitherto  let  out  of  their 
respective  bags  have  shown  themselves  exceedingly 
stupid,  not  one  having  found  her  way  back. 

Very  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

From  C.  Darwin,  Esq.,  to  G.  J.  Romanes. 

Down,  Beckenham,  Kent :  March  26,  1881. 

You  are  very  plucky  about  Pangenesis,  and  I 
much  wish  that  you  could  have  any  success.  I  do 
not  understand  your  scheme.  Do  you  intend  to 
operate  on  an  ovarium  with  a  single  ovule,  and  to 
bisect  it  after  being  fertilised?  I  should  fear  that 
this  was  quite  hopeless.  If  you  intend  to  operate  on 
ovaria  with  many  seeds,  whether  before  or  after 
fertilisation,  I  do  not  see  how  you  could  possibly 
distinguish  any  effect  from  the  union  of  the  two 
ovaria.  Any  operation  before  fertilisation  would,  I 
presume,  quite  prevent  the  act ;  for  very  few  flowers 
can  be  fertilised  if  the  stem  is  cut  and  placed  in 
water.  Gartner,  however,  says,  that  some  Liliacea? 
can  be  fertilised  under  these  circumstances. 

If  Hooker  is  correct,  he  found  that  cutting  off  or 

1  Mr.  Romanes  used  to  describe  with  much  amusement  the  ludicrous 
nature  of  the  experiment  as  seen  by  passers-by.  He  drove  in  a  cab  well 
into  the  country,  released  the  cats,  and  mounted  the  roof  of  the  cab  in 
order  to  get  a  good  view  of  the  cats  speeding  away  in  different  directions. 

I 


114  GEORGE   JOHN   ROMANES  issi 

making  a  hole  into  the  summit  of  the  ovarium  and 
then  inserting  pollen  caused  the  fertilisation  of  the 
ovules.  This  has  always  stretched  my  belief  to  the 
cracking  point.  I  think  he  has  published  a  notice 
on  this  experiment,  but  forget  where,  and  I  think  it 
was  on  'Papaver.'  Dyer  could  probably  tell  you 
about  it.  Perhaps  your  plan  is  to  remove  one  half  of 
the  ovarium  of  a  one-seeded  plant  and  join  it  on  to 
the  ovary  of  another  of  a  distinct  var.,  with  its  ovule 
removed;  but  this  would  be  a  frightfully  difficult 
operation. 

I  am  very  sorry  to  hear  about  your  ill  success 
with  cats,  and  I  wish  you  could  get  some  detailed 
account  of  the  Belgium  trials. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

C.  DAE  WIN. 

April  16,  1881. 

My  manuscript  on  Worms  has  been  sent  to 
printers,  so  I  am  going  to  amuse  myself  by  scribbling 
to  you  on  a  few  points ;  but  you  must  not  waste 
your  time  in  answering  at  any  length  this  scribble. 
Firstly,  your  letter  on  intelligence  was  very  useful 
to  me,  and  I  tore  up  and  rewrote  what  I  sent  you. 
I  have  not  attempted  to  define  intelligence,  but  have 
quoted  your  remarks  on  experience,  and  have  shown 
how  far  they  apply  to  worms.  It  seems  to  me,  that 
they  must  be  said  to  work  with  some  intelligence, 
anyhow,  they  are  not  guided  by  a  blind  instinct. 

Secondly,  I  was  greatly  interested  by  the  abstract 
in  '  Nature  '  of  your  work  on  Echiiioderms  ;  the  com- 
plexity, with  simplicity,  and  with  such  curious  co- 


1881  DB.  EOUX'S  BOOK  115 

ordination  of  the  nervous  system,  is  marvellous  ;  and 
you  showed  me  before  what  splendid  gymnastic  feats 
they  can  perform. 

Thirdly,  Dr.  Eoux  has  sent  me  a  book  just 
published  by  him,  '  Der  Kampf  der  Theile,'  &c., 
1881  (240  pages  in  length).  He  is  manifestly  a  well- 
read  physiologist  and  pathologist,  and  from  his 
position  a  good  anatomist.  It  is  full  of  reasoning, 
and  this  in  German  is  very  difficult  to  me,  so  that 
I  have  only  skimmed  through  each  page,  here  and 
there  reading  with  a  little  more  care.  As  far  as  I 
can  imperfectly  judge,  it  is  the  most  important  book 
on  evolution  which  has  appeared  for  some  time.  I 
believe  that  Gr.  H.  Lewes  hinted  at  the  same  funda- 
mental idea,  viz.  that  there  is  a  struggle  going  on 
within  every  organism  between  the  organic  molecules, 
the  cells,  and  the  organs.  I  think  that  his  basis  is 
that  every  cell  which  best  performs  its  function  is  as 
a  consequence  at  the  same  time  best  nourished  and 
best  propagates  its  kind.  The  book  does  not  touch  on 
mental  phenomena,  but  there  is  much  discussion  on 
rudimentary  or  atrophied  parts,  to  which  subject  you 
formerly  attended.  Now  if  you  would  like  to  read  this 
book,  I  will  send  it  after  Frank  has  glanced  at  it,  for 
I  do  not  think  he  will  have  time  to  read  it  with  care. 
If  you  read  it  and  are  struck  with  it  (but  I  may  be 
wholly  mistaken  about  its  value),  you  would  do  a 
public  service  by  analysing  and  criticising  it  in 
'  Nature.'  Dr.  Eoux  makes,  I  think,  a  gigantic  over- 
sight in  never  considering  plants ;  these  would 
simplify  the  problem  for  him. 

Fourthly,  I  do  not  know  whether  you  will  discuss 

i  -2 


116        GEOUGE  JOHN  ROMANES 

in  your  book  on  the  '  Mind  of  Animals  '  any  of  the 
more  complex  and  wonderful  instincts.  It  is  un- 
satisfactory work,  as  there  can  be  no  fossilised  in- 
stincts, and  the  sole  guide  is  their  state  in  other 
members  of  the  same  order  and  mere  probability.  But 
if  you  do  discuss  any  (and  it  will  perhaps  be  expected 
of  you)  I  should  think  that  you  could  not  select  a  better 
case  than  that  of  the  sand- wasps,  which  paralyse  their 
prey,  as  formerly  described  by  Fabre  in  his  wonderful 
paper  in  <  Annales  des  Sciences,'  and  since  amplified 
in  his  admirable  '  Souvenirs.'  Whilst  reading  this 
latter  book,  I  speculated  a  little  on  the  subject. 
Astonishing  nonsense  is  often  spoken  of  the  sand- 
wasp's  knowledge  of  anatomy.  Now  will  anyone  say 
that  the  Gauchos  on  the  plains  of  La  Plata  have 
such  knowledge,  yet  I  have  often  seen  them  prick  a 
struggling  and  lassoed  cow  on  the  ground  with  un- 
erring skill,  which  no  mere  anatomist  could  imitate. 
The  pointed  knife  was  infallibly  driven  in  between 
the  vertebra  by  a  single  slight  thrust.  I  presume 
that  the  art  was  first  discovered  by  chance,  and  that 
each  young  Gaucho  sees  exactly  how  the  others  do 
it,  and  then  with  a  very  little  practice  learning 
the  art.  Now  I  suppose  that  the  sand-wasps 
originally  merely  killed  their  prey  by  stinging  them 
in  many  places  (see  p.  129  of  Fabre,  '  Souvenirs,'  and 
page  241),  on  the  lower  and  softer  side  of  the  body, 
and  that  to  sting  a  certain  segment  was  found  by  far 
the  most  successful  method,  and  was  inherited,  like 
the  tendency  of  a  bull-dog  to  pin  the  nose  of  a  bull, 
or  of  a  ferret  to  bite  the  cerebellum.  It  would  not  be 
a  very  great  step  in  advance  to  prick  the  ganglion  of 


1881  WOEK  ON   ECHINODEEMS  117 

its  prey  only  slightly,  and  thus  to  give  its  larvae  fresh 
meat  instead  of  old  dry  meat.  Though  Fabre  insists 
so  strongly  on  the  unvarying  character  of  instinct, 
yet  it  shows  that  there  is  some  variability,  as  on 
pp.  176,  177. 

I  fear  that  I  shall  have  utterly  wearied  you  with 
my  scribbling  and  bad  handwriting. 
My  dear  Eomanes, 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DAKWIN. 


From  G.  J.  Eomanes  to  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  N.W. :  April  17,  1881. 

Your  long  letter  has  been  most  refreshing  to  me 
in  every  way. 

I  am  looking  forward  with  keen  interest  to  the 
appearance  of  your  book  on  Worms,  and  am  unex- 
pectedly glad  to  hear  that  my  letter  was  of  any  use. 

I  should  very  much  like  to  see  the  book  you 
mention,  and  from  what  you  say  about  sending 
it  I  shall  not  order  it.  But  there  is  no  need  to  send 
it  soon,  as  I  have  already  an  accumulation  of  books 
to  review  for  '  Nature.' 

I  am  very  glad  that  you  think  well  of  the  Echino- 
derm  work.  Several  other  experiments  have  occurred 
to  me  to  try,  and  I  hope  to  be  able  to  do  so  next 
autumn,  as  also  the  interesting  experiment  suggested 
by  Frank  of  rotating  by  clockwork  (as  you  did  the 
plants)  an  Echinus  inverted  upon  its  aboral  pole,  to 
see  whether  it  would  right  itself  when  the  influence 
of  gravity  is  removed. 


118  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES 

No  doubt  I  must  in  my  second  book  deal  with 
instincts  of  all  kinds,  complex  or  otherwise.  Your 
'  speculations  '  on  the  sand- wasp  seem  to  me  very 
pithy — excuse  the  pun  suggested  by  the  analogy  of 
the  cattle — and  I  think  there  can  be  little  doubt  that 
such  is  the  direction  in  which  the  explanation  is  to 
be  sought.  I  also  think  that  the  difficulty  is  mitigated 
by  the  consideration  that  both  the  ganglion  of  the 
spider  and  the  sting  of  the  wasp  are  organs  situated 
on  the  median  line  of  their  respective  possessors,  and 
therefore  that  the  origin  of  the  instinct  may  have  been 
determined  or  assisted  by  the  mere  anatomical  form 
of  the  animals — the  wasp  not  stinging  till  securely 
mounted  on  the  spider's  back,  and  when  so  mounted 
the  sting  might  naturally  strike  the  ganglion.  But 
I  have  not  yet  read  Fabre's  own  account,  so  this 
view  may  not  hold.  Anyhow,  and  whatever  de- 
termining conditions  as  to  origin  may  have  been,  it 
seems  to  me  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  natural 
selection  would  have  developed  it  in  the  way  you 
suggest. 

I  have  now  grown  a  number  of  seeds  exposed  to 
the  flashing  light,  but  am  not  yet  quite  sure  as  to  the 
result.  About  one  seedling  out  of  ten  bends  towards 
the  flashing  source  very  decidedly,  while  all  the  rest, 
although  exposed  to  just  the  same  conditions,  grow 
perfectly  straight.  But  I  shall,  no  doubt,  find  out 
the  reason  of  this  by  further  trials.  It  is  strange 
that  the  same  thing  happens  when  I  expose  other 
seedlings  to  constant  light  of  exceedingly  dim  in- 
tensity. It  looks  as  if  some  individuals  were  more 


1881  FLASHING   LIGHT   ON   PLANTS  119 

sensitive  to  light  than  others.  I  do  not  know 
whether  yon  found  any  evidence  of  this. 

I  have  just  found  that  this  year  again  I  have 
heen  too  late  in  asking  them  to  send  me  cuttings  of 
the  vine  for  grafting.  I  did  not  know  that  the  sap 
in  vines  began  to  run  so  early. 

I  remain  ever  yours,  very  sincerely  and  most 
respectfully,  GEQ  j  EOMANES 


From  G.  Darwin,  Esq.,  to  G.  J.  Romanes. 

Down  :  April  18,  1881. 

I  am  extremely  glad  of  your  success  with  the 
flashing  light.  If  plants  are  acted  on  by  light,  like 
some  of  the  lower  animals,  there  is  an  additional 
point  of  interest,  as  it  seems  to  me,  in  your  results. 
Most  botanists  believe  that  light  causes  a  plant  to 
bend  to  it  in  as  direct  a  manner  as  light  affects 
nitrate  of  silver. 

I  believe  that  it  merely  tells  the  plant  to  which 
side  to  bend,  and  I  see  indications  of  this  belief 
prevailing  even  with  Sachs.  Now  it  might  be 
expected  that  light  would  act  on  a  plant  in  some- 
thing the  same  manner  as  on  the  lower  animals.  As 
you  are  at  work  on  this  subject,  I  will  call  your 
attention  to  another  point.  Wiesner,  of  Vienna  (who 
has  lately  published  a  good  book  on  Heliotropism) 
finds  that  an  intermittent  light  during  20  m.  produces 
same  effect  as  a  continuous  light  of  same  brilliancy 
during  GO  m.  So  that  Van  Tieghem,  in  the  first  part 
of  his  book,  which  has  just  appeared,  remarks,  the 
light  during  40  m.  out  of  the  GO  m.  produced  no  effect. 


120  GEORGE  JOHN   KOMANES  issi- 

I  observed  an  analogous  case  described  in  my  book. 
Wiesner  and  Tieghem  seem  to  think  that  this  is 
explained  by  calling  the  whole  process  i  induction,' 
borrowing  a  term  used  by  some  physico-chemists  (of 
whom  I  believe  Koscoe  is  one),  and  implying  an 
agency  which  does  not  produce  any  effect  for  some 
time,  and  continues  its  effect  for  some  time  after  the 
cause  has  ceased.  I  believe  (?)  that  photographic 
paper  is  an  instance.  I  must  ask  Leonard  whether 
an  interrupted  light  acts  on  it  in  the  same  manner 
as  on  a  plant.  At  present  I  must  still  believe  in  my 
explanation  that  it  is  the  contrast  between  light  and 
darkness  which  excites  a  plant. 

I  have  forgotten  my  main  object  in  writing,  viz. 
to  say  that  I  believe  (and  have  so  stated)  that  seedlings 
vary  much  in  their  sensitiveness  to  light ;  but  I  did 
not  prove  this,  for  there  are  many  difficulties,  whether 
time  of  incipient  curvature  or  amount  of  curvature 
is  taken  as  the  criterion.  Moreover,  they  vary 
according  to  age  and  perhaps  from  vigour  of  growth ; 
and  there  seems  inherent  variability,  as  Strasburger 
(whom  I  quote)  found  with  spores.  If  the  curious 
anomaly  observed  by  you  is  due  to  varying  sensitive- 
ness, ought  not  all  the  seedlings  to  bend  if  the  flashes 
were  at  longer  intervals  of  time  ?  According  to  my 
notion  of  contrast  between  light  and  darkness  being 
the  stimulus,  I  should  expect  that  if  flashes  were 
made  sufficiently  slow  it  would  be  a  powerful  stimulus, 
and  that  you  would  suddenly  arrive  at  a  period  when 
the  result  would  suddenly  become  great.  On  the 
other  hand,  as  far  as  my  experience  goes,  what  one 
expects  rarely  happens. 


1882  FLASHING  LIGHT   ON   PLANTS  121 

I  heartily  wish  you  success,  and  remain,  yours 
ever  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DAEWIN. 

Do  you  read  the  '  Times  '  ?  As  I  had  a  fair 
opportunity,  I  sent  a  letter  to  the  '  Times  '  on  Vivi- 
section, which  is  printed  to-day.  I  thought  it  fair  to 
bear  my  share  of  the  abuse  poured  in  so  atrocious  a 
manner  on  all  physiologists. 


From  Gr.  J.  Romanes  to  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace  :  April  22. 

I  have  left  your  last  letter  so  long  unanswered  in 
order  that  I  might  be  able  to  let  you  know  the  result 
of  the  next  experiment  I  was  trying  on  the  seeds  with 
flashing  light.  I  think  in  the  end  the  conclusion 
will  be  that  short  flashes,  such  as  I  am  now  using, 
influence  the  seedlings,  but  only  to  a  comparatively 
small  degree,  so  that  it  is  only  the  more  sensitive 
seedlings  that  perceive  them. 

Your  letter  in  the  '  Times '  was  in  every  way 
admirable,  and  coming  from  you  will  produce  more 
effect  than  it  could  from  anybody  else.  The  answer 
to-day  to is  also  first-rate — just  enough  with- 
out being  too  much.  It  would  have  been  a  great 
mistake  to  have  descended  into  a  controversy.  I 

thought  had  more  wit  than  to  adopt  such  a 

tack  and  tone,  and  am  sure  that  all  physiologists  will 
be  for  ever  grateful  to  you  for  such  a  trenchant 
expression  of  opinion. 

I  have  a  little  piece  of  gossip  to  tell.     Yesterday 


122         GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES 

the  Council  of  the  Linnean  nominated  me  Zoological 
Secretary,  and  some  of  the  members  having  pressed 
me  to  accept,  I  have  accepted.  I  also  hear  that  your 
son  is  to  be  on  the  same  Council,  and  that  Sir 
John  Lubbock  is  to  be  the  new  President. 

I  have  at  length  decided  on  the  arrangement  of 
my  material  for  the  books  on  Animal  Intelligence 
and  Mental  Evolution.  I  shall  reserve  all  the  heavier 
parts  of  theoretical  discussion  for  the  second  book- 
making  the  first  the  chief  repository  of  facts,  with 
only  a  slender  network  of  theory  to  bind  them  into 
mutual  relation,  and  save  the  book  as  much  as 
possible  from  the  danger  that  you  suggested  of  being 
too  much  matter-of-fact.  It  will  be  an  advantage  to 
have  the  facts  in  a  form  to  admit  of  brief  reference 
when  discussing  the  heavier  philosophy  in  the  second 
book,  which  will  be  the  more  important,  though  the 
less  popular,  of  the  two. 

Just  then  some  correspondence  had  been  going 
on  in  the  '  Times  '  on  the  subject  of  Vivisection,  and 
Mr.  Darwin  wrote  to  Mr.  Romanes  as  follows  : — 

Down,  Beckenham,  Kent :  April  25,  1881. 

My  dear  Romanes, — I  was  very  glad  to  read  your 
last  notes  with  much  news  interesting  to  me.  But  I 
write  now'  to  say  how  I,  and  indeed  all  of  us  in  the 
house,  have  admired  your  letter  in  the  '  Times.' l  It 
was  so  simple  and  direct.  I  was  particularly  glad 
about  Burdoii  Sanderson,  of  whom  I  have  been  for 
several  years  a  great  admirer.  I  was,  also,  especi- 

1  A  letter  written  at  the  end  of  April  1881. 


1882  MR.   DARWIN'S   PORTRAIT  123 

jilly  glad  to  read  the  last  sentences.  I  have  been 
bothered  with  several  letters,  but  none  abusive. 
Under  a  selfish  point  of  view  I  am  very  glad  of  the 
publication  of  your  letter,  as  I  was  at  first  inclined  to 
think  that  I  had  done  mischief  by  stirring  up  the 
mud,  now  I  feel  sure  that  I  have  done  good 

The  following  letters  relate  to  the  portrait  of 
Mr.  Darwin  which  was  painted  by  the  Hon.  John 
Collier  for  the  Linnean  Society. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Eegent's  Park,  N.W. :  May  25. 

My  dear  Mr.  Darwin, — When  at  the  Linnean  this 
afternoon,  I  was  told  by  Dr.  M —  that  he  had 
obtained  your  consent  to  sit  for  a  portrait  for  the 
Society.  Now,  as  it  appears  to  me  a  great  favour  to 
ask  of  you  to  sit  for  yet  another  portrait,  the  least  we 
can  do,  if  you  consent,  is  to  employ  a  thoroughly 
good  man  to  paint  it.  Therefore,  if  you  have  not 
already  entered  into  any  definite  agreement,  I  write 
to  suggest  a  little  delay  (say  of  a  month),  when,  as 
Secretary,  I  might  ascertain  the  amount  of  the  sub- 
scription on  which  we  might  rely,  and  arrange  matters 
accordingly.  John  Collier  (Huxley's  son-in-law)  told 
me  some  time  ago  that  he  would  dearly  like  to  have 
you  to  paint,  and  I  doubt  not  that  he  would  do  it 
at  less  than  his  ordinary  charges  if  necessary.  He 
would  be  sure  to  do  the  work  well,  and  so  I  write  to 
ascertain  whether  you  would  not  prefer  him,  or  some 
other  artist  of  known  ability,  to  do  the  work,  if  I 
were  to  undertake  to  provide  the  needful. 

Please  give  to  Mrs.  Darwin,  and  take  to  yourself, 


124  GEORGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

our  best  thanks  for  your  kind  congratulations  on  the 
opportune  arrival  of  another  baby — just  in  time  to  be 
worked  into  the  book  on  Mental  Evolution.  Every- 
thing is  going  well. 

Very  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

To  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  N.W. :  July  1. 

I  have  told  Collier  that  he  had  now  better  write 
to  you  direct  at  whatever  time  he  intends  to  make  his 
final  arrangements  with  you  as  to  place  and  time  of 
sitting.  He  has  just  finished  a  portrait  of  me,  which 
my  mother  had  painted  as  a  present  to  my  wife.  It 
is  exceedingly  good,  and  as  all  his  recent  portraits  are 
the  same — notably  one  of  Huxley — I  am  very  glad 
that  he  is  to  paint  you.  Besides,  he  is  such  a 
pleasant  man  to  talk  to,  that  the  sittings  are  not  so 
tedious  as  they  would  be  with  a  less  intelligent 
man. 

I  shall  certainly  read  the  '  Creed  of  Science '  as 
soon  as  I  can.  The  German  book  on  Evolution  I 
have  not  yet  looked  at,  as  I  have  been  giving  all  my 
time  to  my  own  book.  This  is  now  finished.  But 
talking  of  my  time,  I  do  not  see  how  the  two  or  three 
hours  which  I  have  spent  in  arranging  to  have  a 
portrait,  which  will  be  of  so  much  historical  im- 
portance, taken  by  a  competent  artist,  could  well  have 
been  better  employed. 

You  will  see  that  I  have  got  into  a  row  with 
Carpenter  over  the  thought-reading.  Everybody 


i«82  BOOKS  ON   MENTAL  EVOLUTION  125 

thinks  he  made  a  mistake  in  lending  himself  to 
Bishop's  design  of  posing  as  a  scientific  wonder. 
Bishop  is  a  very  sly  dog,  and  has  played  his  cards 
passing  well.  In  an  article  which  he  published  two 
years  ago  in  an  American  newspaper,  he  explains  the 
philosophy  of  advertising,  and  says  the  first  thing  to 
attend  to  is  to  catch  good  names.  He  has  now  suc- 
ceeded well. 

Very  sincerely  and  most  respectfully  yours, 

GEO.  J.  KOMANES. 

Down :  August  7. 

My  dear  Komanes, — I  received  yesterday  the  en- 
closed notice,  and  I  send  it  to  you,  as  I  have  thought 
that  if  you  notice  Dr.  Eoux's  book  in  'Nature'  or 
elsewhere  the  review  might  possibly  be  of  use  to  you. 
As  far  as  I  can  judge  the  book  ought  to  be  brought 
before  English  naturalists.  You  will  have  heard  from 
Collier  that  he  has  finished  my  picture.  All  my 
family  who  have  seen  it  think  it  the  best  likeness 
which  has  been  taken  of  me,  and,  as  far  as  I  can  judge, 
this  seems  true.  Collier  was  the  most  considerate, 
kind,  and  pleasant  painter  a  sitter  could  desire. 
My  dear  Komanes, 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

CH.  DAB  WIN. 

To  C.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  N.W. :  August  8,  1881. 

Many  thanks  for  the  notice  of  Koux's  book.     I 
have  not  yet  looked  at  the  latter,  but  Preyer,  of  Jena 


126  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

(who  has  been  our  guest  during  the  Congress  meeting,1 
and  who  knows  the  author),  does  not  think  much  of  it. 

I  am  delighted  that  the  portrait  has  pleased  those 
who  are  the  best  judges.  I  saw  it  the  day  it  came 
up,  and  feel  no  doubt  at  all  that  it  is  far  and  away  the 
best  of  the  three.  But  I  did  not  like  to  write  and 
venture  this  opinion  till  I  knew  what  you  all  thought 
of  it. 

I  have  been  very  busy  this  past  week  with  the 
affairs  of  the  Congress  in  relation  to  Vivisection.  It 
has  been  resolved  by  the  Physiological  Section  to  get 
a  vote  of  the  whole  Congress  upon  the  subject,  and  I 
had  to  prepare  the  resolution  and  get  the  signatures 
of  all  the  vice-presidents  of  the  Congress,  presidents 
and  vice-presidents  of  sections,  and  to  arrange  for  its 
being  put  to  the  vote  of  the  whole  Congress  at  its 
last  general  meeting  to-morrow.  The  only  refusal 
to  sign  came  appropriately  enough  from  the  president 
of  the  section  '  Mental  Diseases.' 

We  leave  for  Scotland  to-morrow,  when  I  shall 
hope  to  get  time  to  read  Eoux's  book,  though  I  shall 
first  review  '  The  Student's  Darwin.' 

I   remain,  very  sincerely   and   most   respectfully 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

The  following  letters  relate  to  the  burning  question 
of  Vivisection : — 

Garvock,  Perthshire  :  August  31,  1881. 

My  dear  Mr.  Darwin, — It  is  not  often  that  I  write 
to  dun  you,  and  I  am  sorry  that  duty  should  now 

1  International  Medical  Congress. 


1882  VIVISECTION  127 

impose  on  me  the  task  of  doing  so,  but  I  have  no 
alternative,  as  you  shall  immediately  see. 

The  Physiological  Society  was  formed,  as  you  may 
remember,  for   the  purpose   of   obtaining   combined 
action  among  physiologists  on  the  subject  of  Vivi- 
section.    The   result   in   the   first   instance   was   to 
resolve  on  a  tentative  policy  of  silence,  with  the  view 
of  seeing  whether  the  agitation  would  not  bum  itself 
out.     It  is  now  thought  that  this  policy  has  been 
tried  sufficiently  long,  and  that  we  are  losing  ground 
by  continuing   it.     After  much    deliberation,  there- 
fore, the  society  has  resolved  to  speak  out  upon  the 
subject,  and  the  '  Nineteenth  Century  '  has  been  in- 
volved as  the  medium  of  publication.     Arrangements 
have  been  made  with  Knowles  for  a  symposium-like 
series  of  short  essays  by  all  the  leaders  of  biology  and 
medicine  in  this  country — each  to  write  on  a  branch 
of  the  subject  chosen  by  himself  or  allotted  to  him  by 
the  society.     In  this  matter  of  organising  the  con- 
tributions, the  society  is  to  be  represented  by  Dr.  Pye 
Smith,  who  combines  science,  medicine,  and  literary 
culture  better  than  any  other  member  of  our  body. 

As  secretary  I  am  directed  to  write  to  all  the  men 
whose  names  are  mentioned  in  a  resolution  passed  by 
the  society  in  accordance  with  the  report  of  a  com- 
mittee appointed  by  the  society  to  consider  the  sub- 
ject. Hence  these  tears. 

Of  course,  your  name  in  this  matter  is  one  of  the 
most  important,  and  as  the  idea  is  to  get  a  body  of 
great  names,  it  would  be  a  disappointment  of  no  small 
magnitude  if  yours  should  fail.  It  does  not  matter 
so  much  that  you  should  write  a  long  dissertation,  so 


128  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  issi- 

long  as  you  allow  yourself  to  stand  among  this  noble 
army  of  martyrs.  Two  or  three  pages  of  the  '  Nine- 
teenth Century  '  on  one,  say,  of  the  following  topics 
would  be  all  that  we  should  want : — 

4  The  limits  and  safeguards  desirable  in  carrying 
on  scientific  experiments  on  animals.' 

<  Mistaken  humanity  of  the  agitation :  real 
humanity  of  vivisection/ 

'  The  Royal  Commission  and  its  report.' 

Or  any  other  topic  connected  with  Vivisection  on 
which  you  may  feel  the  spirit  most  to  move  you  to 
write. 

Any  further  information  that  you  may  desire  I 
shall  be  happy  to  give ;  but  please  remember  how 
much  your  assistance  is  desired. 

This  is  a  very  delightful  place,  though  not  very 
conducive  to  work.  If  any  of  your  sons  are  in  Scot- 
land and  should  care  for  a  few  days'  sport  with  other 
scientific  men  on  the  spree,  please  tell  them  that  they 
will  find  open  house  and  welcome  here. 

The  proofs  of  my  book  on  Animal  Intelligence 
are  coming  in.  I  hope  your  work  on  Worms  will 
be  out  in  time  for  me  to  mention  it  and  its  main 
results. 

Ewart  has  pitched  his  zoological  laboratory  at 
Oban,  so  as  to  be  as  near  this  as  possible.  I  shall  go 
down  when  I  can  to  keep  his  pot  of  sea-eggs  upon 
the  boil. 

I  remain,  very  sincerely  and  most  respectfully 
yours, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 


• 


1882  ME.   DAKWIN   ON   VIVISECTION  129 

Down,  Beckenham,  Kent :  September  2,  1881. 

My  dear  Eomanes, — Your  letter  has  perplexed  me 
beyond  all  measure.  I  fully  recognise  the  duty  of 
everyone,  whose  opinion  is  worth  anything,  expressing 
his  opinion  publicly  on  vivisection,  and  this  made  me 
send  my  letter  to  the  '  Times.'  I  have  been  thinking 
at  intervals  all  morning  what  I  could  say,  and  it  is  the 
simple  truth  that  I  have  nothing  worth  saying.  You, 
and  men  like  you,  whose  ideas  flow  freely,  and  who  can 
express  them  easily,  cannot  understand  the  state  of 
mental  paralysis  in  which  I  find  myself.  What  is  most 
wanted  is  a  careful  and  accurate  attempt  to  show  what 
physiology  has  already  done  for  man,  and  even  still 
more  strongly  what  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  it 
will  hereafter  do.  Now  I  am  absolutely  incapable  of 
doing  this,  or  of  discussing  the  other  points  suggested 
by  you. 

If  you  wish  for  my  name  (and  I  should  be  glad 
that  it  should  appear  with  that  of  others  in  the  same 
cause),  could  you  not  quote  some  sentence  from  my 
letter  in  the  '  Times,'  which  I  inclose,  but  please  return 
it  ?  If  you  thought  fit  you  might  say  that  you  quoted 
it  with  my  approval,  and  that,  after  still  further  re- 
flection, I  still  abide  most  strongly  in  my  expressed 
conviction.  For  Heaven's  saJce,  do  think  of  this ;  I 
do  not  grudge  the  labour  and  thought,  but  I  could 
write  nothing  worth  anyone's  reading. 

Allow  me  to  demur  to  your  calling  your  conjoint 
article  a  '  symposium,'  strictly  a  '  drinking-party  ;  ' 
this  seems  to  me  very  bad  taste,  and  I  do  hope  every- 
one of  you  will  avoid  any  semblance  of  a  joke  on  the 

K 


130  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

subject.  I  know  that  words  like  a  joke  on  this  sub- 
ject have  quite  disgusted  some  persons  not  at  all 
inimical  to  physiology.  One  person  lamented  to  me 
that  Mr.  Simon,  in  his  truly  admirable  address  at  the 
Medical  Congress  (by  far  the  best  thing  which  I  have 
read),  spoke  of  the  i  fantastic  sensuality' 1  (or  some  such 
term)  of  the  many  mistaken,  but  honest  men  and 
women  who  are  half  mad  on  the  subject. 

Do  pray  try  and  let  me  escape,  and  quote  my  letter, 
which  in  some  respects  is  more  valuable,  as  giving  my 
independent  judgment  before  the  Medical  Congress. 
I  really  cannot  imagine  what  I  could  say. 

I  will"  now  turn  to  another  subject :  my  little  book 
on  Worms  has  been  long  finished,  but  Murray  was  so 
strongly  opposed  to  publishing  it  at  the  dead  season, 
that  I  yielded.  I  have  told  the  printers  to  send  you 
a  set  of  clean  sheets,  which  you  can  afterwards  have 
stitched  together.  There  is  hardly  anything  in  it 
which  can  interest  you. 

Two  or  three  papers  by  Hermann  Miiller  have  just 
appeared  in  '  Kosmos,'  which  seem  to  me  interesting,  as 
showing  how  soon,  i.e.  after  how  many  attempts,  bees 
learn  how  best  to  suck  a  new  flower ;  there  is  also  a 
good  and  laudatory  review  of  Dr.  Eoux.  I  could  lend 
you  '  Kosmos  '  if  you  think  fit. 

You  will  perhaps  have  seen  that  my  poor  dear 
brother  Erasmus  has  just  died,  and  he  was  buried 
yesterday  here  at  Down. 

Garvock,  Bridge  of  Earn,  Perthshire  :  September  4. 

My  dear  Mr.  Darwin, — I  hasten  to  relieve  your 
mind  about  writing  on  vivisection,  as  I  am  sure  that 

1  See  '  Life  &c.  of  C.  Darwin,'  vol.  iii.  p.  210. 


p 


1882  ON   BEES  131 

none  of  the  physiologists  would  desire  you  to  do  so  if 
you  feel  it  a  bother.  After  all,  there  are  plenty  of  other 
men  to  do  the  writing,  and  if  some  of  them  quote  the 
marked  sentences  in  your  letter  (which  I  return),  with 
the  statement  that  you  still  adhere  to  them,  the  chief 
thing  will  be  done — viz.  showing  again  and  emphati- 
cally on  which  side  you  are. 

It  is  not  intended  to  call  the  article  a  '  Symposium.' 
I  only  used  this  word  to  show  that  they  are  to 
be  of  the  same  composite  kind  as  those  which  the 
1  Nineteenth  Century'  previously  published  under 
this  designation. 

Your  letter  gives  me  the  first  news  of  your  brother's 
death.  I  remember  very  well  seeing  him  one  day  when 
I  called  on  you  at  his  house.  It  must  make  you  very 
sad,  and  I  am  sorry  to  have  written  you  at  such  a  time. 

I  have  already  sent  in  a  short  review  of  Roux's 
book,  but  should  like  to  see  about  the  bees  in i  Kosmos.' 
I  am  trying  some  experiments  with  bees  here  on  way- 
finding  ;  but,  contrary  to  my  expectations,  I  find  that 
most  bees,  when  marked  and  liberated  at  one  hundred 
yards  from  their  hive,  do  not  get  back  for  a  long  time. 
This  fact  makes  it  more  difficult  to  test  their  mode  of 
way-finding,  as  the  faculty  (whatever  it  is)  does  not 
seem  to  be  certain. 

Many  thanks  for  sending  me  the  book  on  Worms 
so  early.  As  yet  I  have  only  had  time  to  look  at 
the  table  of  contents,  which  seems  most  interesting. 

Lockyer  is  staying  here  just  now,  and  has  given 
me  the  proofs  of  his  book.  It  seems  to  me  that  he 
has  quite  carried  the  position  as  to  the  elements  being 
roducts  of  development. 

K  2 


132  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

Down :  October  14. 

My  dear  Romanes, — I  have  just  read  the  splendid 
review  of  the  Worm  book  in  '  Nature.'  I  have  been 
much  pleased  by  it,  but  at  the  same  time  you  so 
over-estimate  the  value  of  what  I  do,  that  you  make 
me  feel  ashamed  of  myself,  and  wish  to  be  worthy  of 
such  praise.  I  cannot  think  how  you  can  endure  to 
spend  so  much  time  over  another's  work,  when  you 
have  yourself  so  much  in  hand ;  I  feel  so  worn  out, 
that  I  do  not  suppose  I  shall  ever  again  give  re- 
viewers trouble. 

I  hope  that  your  opus  magnum  is  progressing  well, 
and  when  we  meet  later  in  the  autumn  I  shall  be 
anxious  to  hear  about  it. 

In  a  few  days'  time  we  are  going  to  visit  Horace 
in  Cambridge  for  a  week,  to  see  if  that  will  refresh  me. 

Pray  give  my  kind  remembrances  to  Mrs.  Romanes, 
and  I  hope  you  are  all  well. 

Garvock,  Bridge  of  Earn,  Perthshire  :  October  16,  1881. 

My  dear  Mr.  Darwin, — If  I  did  not  know  you  so 
well,  I  should  think  that  you  are  guilty  of  what  our 
nurse  calls  '  mock  modesty.'  At  least  I  know  that  if 
I,  or  anybody  else,  had  written  the  book  which  I  re- 
viewed, your  judgment  would  have  been  the  first  to 
endorse  all  I  have  said.  I  never  allow  personal  friend- 
ship to  influence  what  I  say  in  reviews ;  and  if  I  am 
so  uniformly  stupid  as  to  *  over-estimate  the  value  of 
all  you  do,'  it  is  at  any  rate  some  consolation  to  know 
that  my  stupidity  is  so  universally  shared  by  all  the 


1887  ECHINODEKMS  AND   ANEMONES  133 

men  of  my  generation.  But  your  letters  are  to  me 
always  psychological  studies,  and  especially  so  when, 
as  in  this  one,  you  seem  without  irony  intentionally 
grim  to  refer  to  my  work  in  juxtaposition  with  your 
own. 

The  proof-sheets  are  coming  in,  and  I  suppose  the 
book  will  be  out  in  a  month  or  two.  I  do  not  know 
why  they  are  so  slow  in  setting  up  the  type.  But,  as 
I  said  once  before,  this  book  will  not  be  so  good  (or 
so  little  bad)  as  the  one  that  is  to  follow. 

Ewart  and  I  have  been  working  at  the  Echino- 
derms  again,  and  at  last  have  iound  the  internal 
nervous  plexus.  Also  tried  poisons,  and  proved  still 
further  the  locomotor  function  of  the  pedicellariae. 

I  observed  a  curious  thing  about  anemones.  If 
a  piece  of  food  is  placed  in  a  pool  or  tank  where  a 
number  are  closed,  in  a  few  minutes  they  all  expand  : 
clearly  they  smell  the  food. 

I  am  deeply  sorry  to  hear  that  you  feel '  worn  out,' 
but  cannot  imagine  that  the  reviewers  have  done  with 
you  yet. 

The  vivisection  fight  does  not  promise  well.  Like 
yourself,  most  of  the  champions  do  not  like  the  idea. 

G.  J.  ROMANES. 

There  are  many  other  letters,  but  care  has  been 
taken  only  to  select  the  most  interesting.  In  1881 
came  the  last  visit  to  Down,  full  of  brightness. 
Mr.  Darwin  was  most  particularly  kind,  and  gave 
Mr.  Romanes  some  of  his  own  MSS.,  including  a  paper 
on  '  Instinct,'  which  is  bound  up  with  Mr.  Romanes' 
own  book,  '  Mental  Evolution  in  Animals.'  It  trans- 
pired that  Mr.  Darwin  was  extremely  fond  of  novels, 


134  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

and  had  the  most  delightful  way  of  offering  his  guests 
books  to  take  to  bed  with  them.  In  fact,  Down  was 
one  of  the  few  houses  in  which  readable  books  adorned 
the  guest-chambers. 

It  came  out  on  this  occasion  that  Mr.  Darwin  had 
an  especial  love  for  the  books  written  by  the  author 
of  '  Mademoiselle  Mori.'  He  offered  one  of  his  guests 
4  Denise,'  saying  it  was  his  favourite  tale,  or  words  to 
that  effect. 

Down  was  indeed  one  of  the  most  delightful  of 
houses  in  which  to  stay,  and  that  snowy  January 
Sunday  of  1881  was  a  very  real  red  letter  day. 

To  Miss  C.  E.   'Romanes. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Eegent's  Park,  N.W. :  July  24,  1881. 

My  dearest  Charlotte, — There  have  been  no  letters 
from  you  for  two  days,  so  I  have  nothing  to  answer. 

I  did  not  write  yesterday  because  we  were  spend- 
ing the  day  with  Mr.  Teesdale,  in  his  house  at  Down, 
and  did  not  get  back  again  till  past  the  post  hour. 
We  went  over  to  pay  a  call  upon  Darwin.  He  and 
his  wife  were  at  home,  and  as  kind  and  glad  to  see  us 
as  possible.  The  servant  gave  our  names  wrongly  to 
them,  and  they  thought  we  were  a  very  old  couple 
whom  they  know,  called  Norman.  So  old  Darwin  came 
in  with  a  huge  canister  of  snuff  under  his  arm — old 
Norman  being  very  partial  to  this  luxury — and  looked 
very  much  astonished  at  finding  us.  He  was  as 
grand  and  good  and  bright  as  ever. 

In  to-day's  '  Times '  you  will  see  a  letter  by '  F.E.S.' 
which  is  worth  reading,  as  are  all  the  productions  of 
his  able  pen. 


1887  DEATH  OF  MB.   DARWIN  135 

I  have  been  applied  to  by  the  Editor  of  the 
'  Encyclopaedia  Britannica '  to  supply  an  article  on 
'  Instinct.'  This  I  am  writing. 

We  are  all  quite  well,  except  that  I  have  had  a 
cold,  which  is  now  going  away. 

With  united  love  to  all,  yours  ever  the  same. 

GEORGE. 

One  evening  Mr.  Komanes  personally  <  conducted  ' 
Mr.  Darwin  to  the  Royal  Institution  to  hear  a  lec- 
ture by  Dr.  Sanderson  on  'Dionaea.'  A  burst  of 
applause  greeted  Mr.  Darwin's  entrance,  much  to  that 
great  man's  surprise.  Earlier  in  the  day  he  had  half 
timidly  asked  Mr.  Komanes  if  there  would  be  room 
at  the  Eoyal  Institution  for  him. 

In  1882  came  the  great  sorrow  of  Mr.  Darwin's 
death.  The  following  letters  show  something  of 
what  the  loss  was  to  the  ardent  disciple,  the  loyal- 
hearted  friend. 

To  Francis  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Regent's  Park,  N.W. :  April  22,  1882. 

My  dear  Darwin, — I  did  not  write  because  I 
thought  it  might  trouble  you,  but  I  sent  some  flowers 
yesterday  which  did  not  require  acknowledgment. 

Even  you,  I  do  not  think,  can  know  all  that  this 
death  means  to  me.  I  have  long  dreaded  the  time, 
and  now  that  it  has  come  it  is  worse  than  I  could 
anticipate.  Even  the  death  of  my  own  father- 
though  I  loved  him  deeply,  and  though  it  was  more 
sudden,  did  not  leave  a  desolation  so  terrible.  Half 
the  interest  of  my  life  seems  to  have  gone  when  I 


136  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

cannot  look  forward  any  more  to  his  dear  voice  of 
welcome,  or  to  the  letters  that  were  my  greatest  hap- 
piness. For  now  there  is  no  one  to  venerate,  no  one 
to  work  for,  or  to  think  about  while  working.  I 
always  knew  that  I  was  loaning  on  these  feelings  too 
much,  but  I  could  not  try  to  prevent  them,  and  so  at 
last  I  am  left  with  a  loneliness  that  never  can  be 
filled.  And  when  I  think  how  grand  and  generous 
his  kindness  was  to  me,  grief  is  no  word  for  my  loss. 

But  I  know  that  your  grief  is  greater  than  mine, 
and  that,  like  him,  I  should  try  to  think  of  others 
before  myself.  And  I  do  feel  for  you  all  very  much 
indeed.  But  although  I  cannot  endure  to  picture 
your  house  or  your  household  as  the  scene  of  such  a 
death,  I  can  derive  some  consolation  from  the  thought 
that  he  died  as  few  men  in  the  history  of  the  world 
have  died — knowing  that  he  had  finished  a  gigantic 
work,  seeing  how  that  work  has  transformed  the 
thoughts  of  mankind,  and  foreseeing  that  his  name 
must  endure  to  the  end  of  time  among  the  very 
greatest  of  the  human  race.  Very,  very  rare  is  such 
consolation  as  this  in  a  house  of  mourning. 

I  look  forward  to  hearing  more  about  the  end 
when  we  meet.  I  feel  it  is  very  kind  of  you  to  have 
written  to  me  so  soon,  and  I  hope  you  will  convey 
our  very  sincere  sympathy  to  Mrs.  Darwin  and  the 
other  members  of  your  family. 

Yours  ever  sincerely, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

After  l  Mr.  Darwin's  Life  '  appeared,  Mr.  Romanes 
writes  : — 


1887  THE   LIFE   OF  ME.   DARWIN  137 

To  Francis  Darwin,  Esq. 

Geanies,  Ross-shire,  N.B. :  November  21,  1887. 

Dear  Darwin, — In  this  far-away  place  I  have  only 
to-day  seen  the  '  Times  '  review,  and  sent  for  the 
book.  But  from  what  the  review  says  I  can  see  that 
all  the  world  has  to  thank  you.  Therefore  I  write  at 
once  to  say  how  more  than  glad  I  feel  that  you  have 
carried  so  great  a  work  to  so  successful  a  termination. 
How  glad  you  must  be  that  the  immense  labour  and 
anxiety  of  it  all  is  over.  Do  not  trouble  to  answer, 
but  believe  in  the  genuine  congratulations  of 
Yours  very  truly, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

November  26,  1887. 

I  write  again  to  thank  you — this  time  for  the  pre- 
sentation copy  of  the  Life  and  Letters.  I  had  pre- 
viously got  one,  but  am  very  glad  to  have  the  work 
in  duplicate.  It  is  indeed  splendidly  done. 

I  send  you  the  enclosed  to  post  or  not,  as  you  think 

best.     On  reading 's  letter  yesterday  it  occurred 

to  me  that  if  any  answer  were  required,  it  might  be 
better  for  somebody  other  than  yourself  to  supply  it. 
But  I  do  not  know  how  you  may  think  it  best  to 
treat  this  man,  therefore  post  the  letter  or  not,  ac- 
cording to  your  judgment. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

GEO.    J.    EOiMANES. 
Geanies  :  December  1,  1887. 

I  have  now  nearly  finished  the  '  Life  and  Letters,' 
and  cannot  express  my  admiration  of  your  work. 


138  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  i«8i- 

What  a  mercy  it  is  that  you  were  so  wonderfully 
qualified  to  do  it. 

Yours  ever  indebtedly, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

Mr.  Komanes  wrote  one  of  the  memorial  notices 
in  the  little  volume  '  Charles  Darwin,'  published  by 
Messrs.  Macmillan. 

Thus  closed  a  very  significant  and  important 
chapter  in  his  life. 

The  relationship  of  disciple  to  master  ceased  for 
him,  no  one  else  exactly  held  the  place  Mr.  Darwin 
had  held,  to  no  one  else  did  he  so  constantly  refer  ; 
and  dear  as  were  other  friends,  notably  Dr.  Burdon 
Sanderson,  no  one  stood  in  the  position  to  Romanes 
of  '  The  Master.' 

There  was  no  exaggeration  in  his  expressions 
of  grief,  or  in  the  verses  in  which  he  poured  out  his 
soul : — 

1 1  loved  him  with  a  strength  of  love  l 

Which  man  to  man  can  only  bear 
When  one  in  station  far  above 

The  rest  of  men,  yet  deigns  to  share 
A  friendship  true  with  those  far  down 

The  ranks  :  as  though  a  mighty  king, 
Girt  with  his  armies  of  renown, 

Should  call  within  his  narrow  ring 
Of  counsellors  and  chosen  friends 

Some  youth  who  scarce  can  understand 
How  it  began  or  how  it  ends 

That  he  should  grasp  the  monarch's  hand.' 

To  all  those  to  whom  a  great  friendship  has  been 
given,  a  friendship,  not  on  equal  terms,  but  one  in 
which  the  chief  elements  on  one  side  have  been 
reverence  and  gratitude,  on  the  other  affectionate 

1  Charles  Darwin  :  a  memorial  poem. 


1887  POEM   ON   ME.   DAEWIN  139 

approval  and  esteem,  to  all  such  fortunate  souls 
these  letters  and  verses  will  appeal.  For  it  is  no 
small  matter  in  a  man's  life  that  he  should  have  had 
a  passionate  friendship  for  a  great  man,  a  real  leader ; 
and  it  is  a  still  greater  matter  that  the  younger  man 
should  have  found  his  confidence,  his  devotion,  his 
reverence  worthily  bestowed. 


To  Francis  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  N.W. :  January  13,  1885. 

Dear  Darwin, — I  will  think  over  the  conversations 
and  write  you  again  whether  there  is  anything  that 
would  do  for  publishing. 

Meanwhile  I  send  for  your  perusal  some  verses 
which  I  have  written  at  odds  and  ends  of  time  since 
he  died.  This  was  only  done  for  my  own  gratifica- 
tion, and  without  any  view  to  publishing.  But  having 
recently  had  them  put  together  and  copied  out,  I 
have  sent  them  to  two  or  three  of  the  best  poetical 
critics  for  their  opinion  upon  the  literary  merits  of  the 
poem  as  a  whole.  The  result  of  this  has  been  more 
satisfactory  than  I  anticipated ;  and  as  one  of  them 
suggests  that  I  should  offer  the  verses  as  an 
addendum  to  the  biography,  I  act  upon  the  coinci- 
dence of  receiving  your  letter  and  his  at  about  the 
same  time. 

It  seems  to  me  there  are  two  things  for  you  to 
consider :  first,  whether  anything  in  the  way  of 
poetry,  however  good,  is  desirable ;  and  next,  if  so, 
whether  this  poetry  is  good  enough  for  the  occasion. 
The  first  question  would  be  answered  by  your  own 


140  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

feelings,  and  the  second,  I  suppose,  by  submitting 
the  verses  to  some  good  authority  for  an  opinion- 
say  one  to  whom  I  have  not  sent  them.  Only,  if  the 
matter  were  to  go  as  far  as  this,  I  should  like  you  to 
explain  to  the  critic  that  as  it  stands  the  poem  is  only 
in  the  rough.  If  it  were  to  be  revised  for  publication 
I  should  spend  a  good  deal  of  trouble  over  the  process 
of  polishing,  and  some  of  the  lines  expressive  of  pas- 
sionate grief  would  be  altogether  changed. 

In  sending  you  the  MS.  I  rely  upon  you  not  to 
let  the  authorship  be  known  to  anyone  without  first 
asking  me,  because,  although  I  have  published  poetry 
already,1  it  has  been  anonymous,  and  I  do  not  want 
it  to  be  known  that  I  have  this  propensity.  And  on 
this  account,  if  these  verses  were  to  appear  in  the 
biography,  it  would  require  to  be  without  my  name, 
or  headed  in  some  such  way  as  <  Memorial  verses  by 
a  friend.'  In  this  case  I  should  modify  any  of  the 
lines  which  might  lead  to  the  author  being  spotted. 

Should  you  decide  against  admitting  them,  I  do 
not  think  that  I  should  publish  them  anywhere  else, 
because  where  such  a  personality  is  concerned,  inde- 
pendent publication  (without  the  occasion  furnished 
by  the  appearance  of  a  biography)  might  seem  pre- 
sumptuous even  on  the  part  of  an  anonymous  writer. 

Yesterday  I  received  a  letter  from  the  Frenchman 
who  translated  my  book  on  '  Mental  Evolution,'  ask- 
ing me  to  let  him  know  whether  he  might  apply  for 
the  translation  of  the  biography.  His  name  is  De 
Varigny,  and  he  does  some  original  work  in  verte- 

1  A  few  stray  poems  in  magazines. 


1887  REDE   LECTUEE  141 

brate  physiology.     I  think  he  has  done  my  book  very 
well. 

Yours  ever  sincerely, 

Gr.    J.    EOMANES. 

Can  you   suggest    a   subject  for  a  Rede  lecture 
which  I  have  to  give  in  May  ? 


142  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES 


CHAPTEK  III 

LONDON — GEANIES 

1881-1890 

ONE  may  now  for  a  short  space  turn  away  from  the 
scientific  side  of  Mr.  Romanes'  life  and  speak  a  little 
of  other  aspects. 

No  one  was  ever  a  more  incessant  worker  and 
thinker.  If  he  went  away  for  a  short  visit,  his 
writing  went  too ;  and  if  in  Scotland  wet  weather 
interfered  with  shooting,  he  would  sit  down  and  write 
something,  perhaps  a  poem,  perhaps  (as  he  once  said 
playfully  when  condoled  with  on  account  of  heavy 
rain  and  absence  of  books,  '  I  don't  care,  I'll  write  an 
essay  on  the  freedom  of  the  will ' )  an  article  for  a 


magazine. 


A  great  deal  of  reviewing,  chiefly  in  '  Nature,' 
filled  up  some  of  his  time,  and  he  also  turned  his 
attention  more  and  more  to  poetry. 

In  the  postscript  of  a  letter  written  in  1878  to 
Mr.  Darwin  he  says :  '  I  am  beginning  to  write 
poetry ! '  and  poetry  interested  him  more  and  more 
as  years  went  on.  Of  this,  more  later. 

He  much  enjoyed  society ;  he  ceased  to  mingle 
exclusively  with  scientific  and  philosophical  people, 
and  as  time  went  on  he  became  acquainted  with 
many  of  the  notabilities  of  the  day.  And,  as  has  been 


1890  HIS   CHILDEEN  143 

said,  it  is  impossible  perhaps  to  exaggerate  the  out- 
ward pleasantness  of  those  years. 

He  was  able  to  devote  himself  to  his  work ;  he 
had  an  ever-increasing  number  of  devoted  friends 
both  of  men  and  women,  and  he  was  intensely  happy 
in  his  home  life. 

His  children  were  a  great  and  increasing  interest 
to  him,  and  he  was  an  ideal  father,  tender,  sym- 
pathetic, especially  as  infancy  grew  into  childhood. 
He  shared  in  all  his  children's  interests,  and  lived 
with  them  on  terms  of  absolute  friendship,  chaffing 
and  being  chaffed,  enjoying  an  interchange  of  pet 
names  and  jokes,  and  yet  exacting  obedience  and 
gentle  manners,  and  never  permitting  them  as  small 
children  to  make  themselves  troublesome  to  visitors 
in  any  way,  or  to  chatter  freely  at  meals  when  guests 
were  present. 

He  had  very  strong  feelings  about  the  importance 
of  making  children  familiar  with  the  Bible.  He  used 
to  say  that  as  a  mere  matter  of  literary  education 
everyone  ought  to  be  familiar  with  the  Bible  from 
beginning  to  end.  He  himself  was  exceedingly  well 
versed  in  Holy  Scripture. 

He  also  thought  a  good  classical  training  very 
desirable  for  boys  (and  girls  also),  and  had  no 
very  great  belief  in  science  being  taught  to  any  great 
extent  during  a  boy's  school  career.  Memory,  he 
considered,  ought  to  be  cultivated  in  childhood,  and 
he  did  not  think  that  the  reasoning  powers  ought  to 
be  much  taxed  in  early  years.  He  used  to  say  that 
Euclid  could  be  learnt  much  more  easily  if  it  were 
begun  later  in  boyhood.  He  also  much  wished  that 
foreign  languages  should  be  taught  very  early  in  life, 
and  with  little  or  no  attention  to  grammar. 


144  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES 

„     Perhaps  a  few  words  of  reminiscence  from  one  of 
his  children  may  not  be  unwelcome. 

MEMOEIES.— G.   J.  E. 

I  remember  that  when  my  father  was  particularly 
amused  at  anything,  he  used  a  certain  gesture,  which, 
according  to  the  '  Life  of  Darwin,' 1  must  have  been 
precisely  similar  to  that  of  Darwin,  and  was  probably 
unconsciously  copied  by  my  father.  He  never  used 
the  gesture  except  when  very  much  tickled  at  hearing 
some  amusing  story  ;  when  the  climax  of  the  story 
was  reached  he  would  burst  into  a  peal  of  hearty 
laughter,  at  the  same  time  bringing  his  hand  heavily 
but  noiselessly  down  upon  his  knee  or  on  the  table 
near  him. 

When  we  were  at  Geanies,  our  greatest  delight 
was  '  to  go  out  shooting  with  father.'  We  used  to 
tramp  for  hours  together  over  turnip  and  grass  fields 
behind  my  father  and  the  gamekeeper.  We  used  to 
enjoy  the  expeditions  so  much  better  if  our  father 
was  the  only  sportsman,  for  then  we  had  him  all  to 
ourselves.  We  were  very  small  then  ;  our  ages  were 
ten,  nine,  and  six  respectively,  but  we  were  good 
walkers  and  we  never  became  tired.  What  little 
sunburnt,  healthy,  grubby  children  we  were  to  be 
sure  !  When  Bango,  the  setter,  pointed  at  a  covey, 
we  all  had  to  stand  quite  still  while  our  father  walked 
forward  towards  the  dog.  Directly  the  covey  rose 
we  all  '  ducked  '  for  safety.  I  shall  never  forget  the 
joy  and  pride  we  felt  when  a  bird  fell,  and  we  ran 

1  Life  and  Letters  of  Charles  Darwin,  by  Francis  Darwin,  vol.  i.  p.  iii. 


1890  A   SONNET   ON   CHILDEEN  145 

with  shouts  of  triumph  to  pick  it  up.  Then  the 
delight  of  eating  lunch  under  a  hedge  or  in  a  wood ! 
That  was  a  time  of  jokes  and  fun,  and  we  talked  as 
freely  and  unrestrainedly  as  we  liked  about  all  kinds 
of  subjects.  Then  came  some  more  tramping  in  the 
turnips,  and  we  would  journey  homewards,  a  weary 
but  very  happy  little  party.  The  counting  of  the 
game  would  follow,  and  our  pride  was  very  great 
when  the  number  of  brace  was  high,  for  we  felt  that 
we  had  been  helping  our  father  to  slay  the  partridges. 
In  fact,  we  thought  that  Sandy,  the  gamekeeper,  was 
a  very  useless  personage  when  we  went  out,  for  did 
we  not  mark  as  well  as,  or  better  than,  he  did  ?  And 
surely  we  could  carry  the  game  bags  ;  they  were  not 
very  heavy  even  when  they  were  full  to  bursting ! 

There  was  something  very  beautiful  in  the  respect 
and  reverence  which  George  Komanes  felt  for  children 
and  for  child-life,  and  a  sonnet  '  To  my  Children  ' 
expresses  these  feelings  : — 

'  Of  all  the  little  ones  whom  I  have  known 

Ye  are  so  much  the  fairest  in  my  view — 

So  much  the  sweetest  and  the  dearest  few — 
That  not  because  ye  are  my  very  own 
Do  I  behold  a  wonder  that  is  shown 

Of  loveliness  diversified  in  you  : 

It  is  because  each  nature  as  it  grew 
Surpassed  a  world  of  joy  already  grown. 


If  months  bestow  such  purpose  on  the  years, 
May  not  the  years  work  out  a  greater  plan  '? 

Vast  are  the  heights  which  form  this  '  vale  of  tears,' 
And  though  what  lies  beyond  we  may  not  scan, 

Thence  came  nay  little  flock — strayed  from  their  spheres, 
As  lambs  of  God  turned  children  into  man.' 


146  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

As  has  been  said,  for  music  Mr.  Eomanes  had  an 
absolute  passion.  A  good  concert  of  chamber  or  of 
orchestral  music  was  absolute  happiness  to  him,  and 
he  heard  a  great  deal  in  these  years.  One  or  two  of 
his  friends  were  excellent  musicians.  To  one  of  these 
he  once  wrote  a  sonnet,  '  To  a  Member  of  the  Bach 
Choir,' 1  and  sent  it  to  her  in  the  form  of  a  Christmas 
card,  producing  much  pleasant  mystification  and 
laughter  when  it  was  discovered  from  whom  the 
sonnet  came. 

To  Miss  Paget. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Eegent's  Park  :  December  27,  1887. 

Dear  Miss  Paget, — If  my  sonnet  gave  half  as  much 
pleasure  as  your  note,  I  am  sure  we  have  both  the 
best  reasons  to  be  glad.  The  letter  was  as  much  a 
surprise  to  me  as  the  former  was  to  you,  because,  far 
from  seeing  the  '  ungraciousness  '  of  yesterday,  even 
then  I  thought  that  my  reward  was  much  in  excess 
of  my  deserving.  But  your  further  response  of  to- 
day has  given  me  a  greater  happiness  than  I  can  tell ; 
let  it,  therefore,  be  told  in  some  of  the  greatest  words 
of  the  greatest  man  I  ever  knew.  These  you  will 
find  in  the  first  nine  lines  of  a  letter  on  page  323, 
vol.  ii.,  of  the  '  Life  of  Darwin,'  and  in  one  respect 
you  have  conferred  an  additional  benefit,  for,  unlike 
him,  I  did  not  previously  know  that  my  own  feelings 
of  friendship  were  so  fully  reciprocated.  If  you  think 
that  this  amounts  to  a  confession  of  dulness  on  my 
part,  my  only  excuse  is  that  I  formed  too  just  an 
estimate  of  my  own  merits  as  compared  with  those  of 

1  Miss  M.  M.  Paget. 


1890  LOVE   FOE  MUSIC  147 

a  friend.  All  that  the  latter  were,  or  in  this  estimate 
must  ever  continue  to  be,  I  shall  not  now  venture  to 
say;  for,  if  I  did,  the  peculiar  ethics  of  the  Paget 
family  (which  you  have  been  good  enough  to  explain) 
would  certainly  pound  this  letter  into  a  pulp.  But 
there  are  two  remarks  which  I  may  hazard.  The 
first  is,  that  I  make  it  a  point  of  what  may  be  called 
aesthetic  conscience  never  to  write  anything  in  verse 
which  is  not  perfectly  sincere.  The  next  is,  that  my 
dulness  is  not  so  bad  as  to  have  prevented  me  from 
observing  the  Sebastian  attachment. 

Last  Christmas  I  lost  my  greatest  and  my  dearest 
friend.1  This  Christmas  I  have  found  that  I  had  a 
better  friend  than  I  was  aware  of.  For  the  season- 
able kindness,  therefore,  of  your  truly  Yule-tide 
consolation,  gratias  tibi  ago. 

Ever  yours,  most  sincerely, 

G.  J.  KOMANES. 

For  some  years  a  delightful  society  existed  in 
London,  known  as  the  '  Home  Quartet  Union,'  the 
members  of  which  met  at  different  houses  and  listened 
to  perfect  music  performed  by  first-rate  artists  under 
perfect  conditions. 

There  were  few  happier  evenings  in  his  life  than 
those  spent  in  such  a  way. 

Of  all  composers,  Beethoven  represented  to  him 
everything  that  was  highest  in  art  or  poetry ;  for 
Beethoven,  Mr.  Romanes  had  much  the  same  reve- 
rence and  admiration  which  he  felt  for  Darwin,  and 
perhaps  Beethoven,  in  other  and  very  different  ways, 
taught  him  and  influenced  him  much. 

1  The  friend  referred  to  on  p.  186. 

L  2 


148  GEOBGE  JOHN  ROMANES 

He  was  very  catholic  in  his  musical  tastes,  except 
perhaps  that  Italian  opera  never  greatly  fascinated 
him.  Wagner's  operas,  on  the  other  hand,  became  a 
great  delight,  particularly  after  a  visit  to  Baireuth  in 
1889,  where  he  saw  '  Parsifal '  and  '  Meistersinger.' 

Politics  interested  Mr.  Romanes  moderately.  He 
was  by  nature  and  by  family  tradition  a  Conservative, 
but  he  cared  very  little  for  parties,  and  admired  great 
men  on  whichever  side  of  the  House  they  sat. 

Perhaps  of  all  living  politicians,  the  one  for  whom 
he  had  the  greatest  enthusiasm  and  respect  was 
Mr.  Arthur  Balfour.  For  him,  both  as  a  politician 
and  as  a  thinker,  Mr.  Romanes  had  an  unbounded 
admiration.  In  1880  came  the  first  of  many  visits 
to  Oxford.  This  time  Mr.  Romanes  and  his  wife 
were  Mr.  Francis  Paget's  guests,  and  met  in  his 
rooms  at  Christ  Church  Dr.  Liddon  and  Mr.  Scott 
Holland. 

EXTKACTS   FROM  JOURNAL  ' 

Feb.  1881. — Went  to  Mr.  Norman  Lockyer.  Seve- 
ral people,  including  William  Black,  the  novelist, 
were  there.  After  Mr.  Lockyer  had  shown  us  several 
experiments  in  spectrum  analysis,  a  lady  asked  him 
i  What  is  the  use  of  the  spectroscope  ?  '  Called  on 
Mr.  Cotter  Morison  and  saw  some  beautiful  books. 
He  is  a  wonderfully  good  talker. 

June  1881. — Dinner  at  the  Spottiswoodes'.  Mr. 
Browning  was  there  and  talked  much  about  Victor 
Hugo.  He  mentioned  that  when  Wordsworth  was 
told  that  Miss  Barrett  had  married  Mr.  Browning, 

1  It  should  be  explained  that  the  writer  of  this  memoir  is  responsible 
for  the  Journal,  but  as  it  was  kept  for  the  benefit  of  both  husband  and 
wife  a  few  extracts  are  given. 


1890  LETTEE  TO   MISS   EOMANES  149 

he  replied,  ( It's  a  good  thing  these  two  understand 
each  other,  for  no  one  else  understands  them.' 

Garvock,  Perthshire  :  November  5,  1881. 

My  dearest  Charlotte,—  I  thought  you  would  like 
the  photos,  and  your  letter  to-day  more  than  justifies 
my  anticipation.  Corning  events  cast  their  shadows 
before,  and  it  will  not  now  be  long  before  you  see  the 
former.  These  are  both  exceedingly  well.  I  wish 
you  could  see  little  Ethel  dancing.  It  is  now  her 
greatest  amusement,  and  she  does  it  with  all  the  state 
and  gravity  of  an  eighteenth  century  grande  dame. 

Many  thanks  for  your  prompt  action  about  the 
proofs.  You  did  everything  in  the  best  possible  wTay, 
as  I  knew  you  would.  It  is  a  great  blessing  you  were 
in  London  at  the  time,  as  the  caretaker  would  be  sure 
to  have  made  some  mistake,  and  time  is  pressing. 

The  duke  has  answered  me  in  this  week's  i  Nature/ 
and  likewise  has  Carpenter.  I  have  written  a  re- 
joinder for  next  week's  issue  in  a  tone  which  I  have 
tried  to  make  at  once  dignified  and  blunt. 

I  send  you  a  riddle  which  I  have  just  made.  See 
if  you  can  answer  it  in  your  next. 

'  My  first  is  found  in  Scripture, 

My  second  hangs  in  air, 
My  third  a  thing  to  all  unknown, 
Yet  maps  can  tell  you  where. 

My  whole  is  neither  fact  nor  thing, 

A  word,  yet  not  a  word, 
And  if  you  stand  me  on  my  head, 

I'm  bigger  by  a  third.' l 

Much  love  from  both  to  both. 

Yours  ever  the  same, 
GEOEGE. 

1  The  answer  is  the  word  six. 


150  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  isei- 

In  this  Journal  constant  mention  occurs  of  con- 
certs and  of  the  pleasure  given  by  amateur  musical 
friends.  The  late  Professor  Eowe's  name  often  occurs  ; 
he  succeeded  Professor  Clifford  at  University  College, 
and  besides  his  great  mathematical  attainments  he 
was  also  a  most  accomplished  musician.  .  He  played 
Schumann  especially  in  the  most  poetic  way. 

Journal,  Feb.  1882. — Lecture  by  Professor  Tyndall 
on  the  action  of  molecular  heat.  Triumphant  vindi- 
cation of  his  own  work  against  Magnus  and  Tait. 

April  2. — Sunday,  the  25th,  we  spent  at  Oxford, 
met  the  Warden  of  Keble  in  Mr.  F.  Paget's  rooms, 
as  a  year  ago  we  had  met  Dr.  Liddon.  Met  Mr. 
Vernon  Harcourt  at  Christ  Church. 

May. — Met  Shorthouse,  author  of  '  John  Ingle- 
sant,'  at  the  F.  Pollocks'.  He  spoke  of  Mr.  Scott- 
Holland's  review  of  his  book.  Sir  F.  Bramwell 
lectured  the  other  day  at  the  Koyal  Institution  on 
the  making  of  the  Channel  tunnel,  and  was  as 
amusing  as  usual.  Tea  with  Dr.  and  Mrs.  Huggins 
in  their  pretty  house,  which  is  full  of  beautiful  things. 
Much  talk  about  spiritualism. 

June. — Interesting  talk  with  Mr.  J.  E.  Green. 
Both  J.  E.  G.  and  G.  J.  E.  agreed  that  Herbert 
Spencer,  Professor  Huxley,  and  Leslie  Stephen  only 
represented  one  side  of  the  question,  i.e.  that  conduct 
can  only  be  called  moral  when  it  is  beneficial  to  the 
race,  and  that  the  ethical  quality  of  an  action  is 
determined  solely  by  its  effects  as  beneficial  or 
injurious.  This  purely  mechanical  view  of  morality 
deprives  morality  of  what  both  speakers  considered 
the  essential  elements  of  morality  as  such,  i.e.  the 


1890  FEESH-WATEE  MEDUSAE  151 

feeling  of  right  and  wrong,  so  that,  e.g.,  ants  and 
bees,  according  to  this  canon,  have  a  right  to  be  con- 
sidered more  truly  moral  than  men. 

The  view  taken  by  J.  K.  G.  and  G.  J.  E.  was  that 
the  essential  element  of  morality  resided  in  feeling 
and  inclination. 


To  Miss  G.  E.  Romanes. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace  :  June  9. 

My  dearest  Charlotte, — We  are  all  well  and  lively. 
Ascot  and  an  '  at  home '  yesterday  ;  to-day  artists' 
studios,  dinner  at  the  Pagets',  and  Sanderson's 
lecture  ;  to-morrow,  College  of  Surgeons'  reception 
and  dinner  party  of  our  own ;  and  next  week,  one, 
two,  or  three  engagements  for  every  day.  '  Babylon  ' 
is  in  full  swing,  and  I  heard  yesterday,  from  the  head 
of  the  Census  department,  that  for  the  last  ten  years 
it  has  been  growing  at  the  rate  of  1,000  per  week. 

I  have  only  time  to  write  a  few  lines  to  thank  you 
and  the  mother  for  the  very  jolly  letters  received  this 
morning,  and  to  let  you  know  that  we  are  all  well. 

The  reason  of  my  haste  now  is  this  extraordinary 
discovery  that  has  been  made  in  the  Botanical 
Gardens,  and  which  you  have  probably  read  about  in 
the  '  Times.'  Medusa  have  been  found  in  swarms 
in  the  fresh-water  tank  of  the  Victoria  Eegina  Lily. 
Such  a  thing  as  a  fresh-water  Medusa  has  never  been 
heard  of  before,  and  I  want  to  lose  no  time  in  getting 
to  work  upon  his  physiology.  You  see,  when  I  don't 
go  to  the  jelly-fish  the  jelly-fish  come  to  me,  and  I  am 
bound  to  have  jelly-fish  wherever  I  go. 


152         GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES 

It  would  have  been  very  odd  if  I  had  been  the  dis- 
coverer, as  I  should  have  been  had  I  known  that  there 
was  a  living  Victoria  Eegis,  for  then  I  should  have 
gone  to  see  the  plant,  and  would  not  have  failed  to 
see  the  Medusae.  Only  in  that  case  I  might  have 
begun  to  grow  superstitious,  and  to  think  that  in 
some  way  my  fate  was  bound  up  in  jelly-fish. 

I  must  get  to  work  soon  because  all  the  naturalists 
are  in  a  high  state  of  excitement,  and  there  has  been 
a  regular  scramble  for  priority. 

The  worst  about  this  jelly-fish  is  that  it  will  only 
live  in  a  temperature  of  90°,  so  I  shall  have  to  work 
at  it  in  the  Victoria  House,  which  is  kept  at  a  tempera- 
ture of  100°,  and  makes  one  '  sweat.'  But  I  shall  not 
work  long  at  a  time. 

From  1882  to  1890  Mr.  Romanes  rented  Geanies, 
a  beautiful  place  overlooking  the  Moray  Firth.  It 
belongs  to  a  cousin  of  the  Romanes  family,  Captain 
Murray,  of  the  81st  Regiment.  Captain  Murray's 
mother  and  sisters  lived  not  far  away,  and  the 
Murrays  and  Romanes  formed  a  little  coterie  in  that 
not  very  populous  neighbourhood. 

He  continued  to  be  an  ardent  sportsman,  and 
probably  his  happiest  days  were  those  he  spent 
tramping  over  moors  or  plodding  through  turnips  in 
those  October  days  of  perfect  beauty,  which  seem 
especially  peculiar  to  Scotland. 

The  surroundings  of  Geanies,  without  being 
romantically  beautiful,  have  a  charm  of  their  own. 
There  is  a  certain  melancholy  and  loneliness  about 
the  inland  landscape  round  Geanies  which  appealed 
strongly  to  him.  It  is  a  place  abounding  in  every 


1890  GEANIES  153 

kind  of  sea-bird,  and  it  is  almost  impossible  to  de- 
scribe the  weird,  uncanny  effect  which  the  long 
endless  twilight  of  the  summer,  the  silence  broken 
by  hootings  of  owls,  by  the  scream  of  a  sea-gull,  pro- 
duce on  one. 

It  is  an  old  rambling  house  with  long  passages 
and  mysterious  staircases,  and,  as  the  children  found, 
endless  conveniences  for  playing  at  hide-and-seek. 
The  library  is  a  most  lovely  room,  lined  with  book- 
cases, and  leading  into  an  old-fashioned  garden,  full 
of  sweet-smelling  flowers. 

It  is  impossible  to  imagine  a  more  ideal  abode  for 
a  poet,  a  naturalist,  a  botanist,  a  sportsman,  than 
this,  his  summer  home  ;  and  as  Mr.  Romanes  was, 
to  some  extent,  all  four,  Geanies  was  a  place  of 
exceeding  happiness  to  him. 

Two  of  his  sonnets  are  dedicated  to  his  dogs,  '  To 
my  Setters,'  and  '  To  Countess,'  and  the  following 
letter  will  show  him  as  a  sportsman. 


To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

Achalibster,1  Caithness :  August  14,  1883. 

To-day  turned  out  not  at  all  bad  after  all ;  and 
although  there  was  a  good  deal  too  much  rain  I 
had  a  glorious  time.  Bag  twenty  brace  of  grouse, 
one  brace  plover,  one  hare,  one  duck;  I  could 
easily  have  got  more,  only  Bango  got  so  tired  in  the 
afternoon  that  we  knocked  off  at  five  o'clock,  more- 
over I  did  not  begin  till  eleven,  as  I  did  not  wake  till 
ten  !  80  the  twenty  brace  was  shot  in  about  five 
hours.  The  new  setter  '  Flora  '  is  a  beauty.  She  is 

1  A  moor  taken  in  addition  to  the  low  ground  shooting  of  Geanies, 


154  GEOKGE   JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

extraordinarily  like  Bango,  but  with  a  prettier  face. 
She  is  a  splendid  worker. 

Even  at  Geanies  he  always  l  worked '  for  some 
part  of  the  day,  and  sport,  tennis,  boating,  filled  up 
the  rest  of  his  time. 

Yery  often  there  was  a  house  party,  and  the 
evenings  were  particularly  bright — merry  talk,  games, 
very  amateurish  theatricals,  learned  discussions. 
Nothing  came  amiss  to  the  master  of  the  house.  He 
was  always  a  little  apt  to  be  absent-minded  and 
dreamy,  and  his  pet  name,  bestowed  on  him  by  the 
dearest  and  merriest  of  all  the  merry  *  Geanies  brother- 
hood '  was  '  Philosopher.'  It  stuck,  and  many  people 
only  knew  him  by  that  name. 

No  one  ever  appreciated  a  good  story  more  than 
he,  and,  as  a  friend  has  said,  '  his  laugh  was  so  merry 
and  so  often  heard.' 

His  own  jokes  were  invariably  free  from  any  un- 
kindness,  and  he  did  not  in  the  least  appreciate 
repartee  or  epigram,  the  point  of  which  lay  chiefly,  if 
not  wholly,  in  unkindness.  Many  friends  enlivened 
his  summer  home,  and  all  those  who  paid  a  second 
visit  were  known  as  the  '  Geanies  brotherhood.' 

Journal,  Geanies,  July  26. — Yesterday  came  the 
terrible  news  of  Mr.  Frank  Balfour's  sudden  death.1 
His  loss  is  irreparable.  It  is  only  a  month  since  we 
met  him  at  Cambridge,  looking  so  well,  quite  recovered 
from  his  recent  illness ;  we  were  looking  forward  to 
his  promised  visit. 

Sept. — Mr.  Lockyer,  the  Bruntons,  and  the  Burdon 

1  Mr.  F.  Balfour  was  killed  on  the  Aiguille  Blanche  de  Peuteret,  July 
1882. 


1890  NOVEL-EEADING  155 

Sandersons  have  been  here.  Memorial  Poem  to 
Darwin  begun. 

Nov.  14,  Edinburgh. — Met  for  the  first  time  Mr. 
and  Mrs.  Butcher,  who  were  just  taking  possession 
of  the  Greek  Chair ;  also  Professor  Blackie,  who  was 
himself,  and  talked  much  of  the  insolence  of  John 
Bull. 

Jan.  1883. — Dr.  Sanderson  is  elected  Professor  of 
Physiology  at  Oxford. 

To  this  election  was  due  the  ultimate  change 
in  Mr.  Romanes'  life  in  1890,  when  he  followed 
Dr.  Sanderson  to  Oxford,  attracted  mainly  by  the 
facilities  for  physiological  research. 

On  Jan.  2  of  this  year  (1883)  his  mother  died. 

Mr.  Romanes  lectured  at  the  Royal  Institution  in 
January,  and  immediately  afterwards  went  abroad  on 
one  of  the  only  two  Continental  tours  he  took  simply 
for  pleasure.  He  much  enjoyed  this  Italian  journey, 
and  the  rhyming  instinct  woke  up  in  him  greatly. 
He  wrote  a  good  deal  about  this  time,  and  one  of  his 
sonnets  has  reference  to  this  journey — 'Florence.' 
He  also  made  acquaintance  for  the  first  time  with  a 
good  many  well-known  novels,  read  to  him  during  a 
temporary  illness  at  Florence — the  precursor,  alas,  of 
many  such  times  of  novel-reading.  He  shared  Mr. 
Darwin's  tastes  for  simple,  pure,  love  stories,  and 
one  of  the  party  at  Florence  well  remembers  how 
'  The  Heir  of  Redclyffe '  brought  tears  to  his  eyes. 
For  this  and  <  The  Chaplet  of  Pearls,'  read  to  him 
some  years  later,  he  had  a  great  admiration. 

Journal,  March  28, 1883. — Mr.  F.  Paget's  wedding 
in  St.  Paul's,  a  special  anthem  by  Stainer.  The 


156         GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES 

Warden  of  Keble  and  Dr.  Liddon  married  them,  and 
the  whole  service  was  very  impressive. 

June. — Mr.  Spottiswoode's  death  has  been  a  ter- 
rible blow.  Service  at  the  Abbey.  We  put  off  our 
party  on  June  27th ;  it  seemed  improper  to  have  a 
party,  mainly  composed  of  scientific  people,  the  very 
day  after  the  death  of  the  President  of  the  Eoyal 
Society. 

l%th. — Dinner  at  the  Pagets'.  Met  Browning,1 
who  is  entirely  on  Carlyle's  side  apropos  of  Froude's 
recent  revelations. 

13th. — Went  to  Cambridge  to  stay  with  the 
Humphrys.  Sir  John  Lubbock,  Mr.  Watts,  Mr.  M. 
Arnold  get  their  degrees. 

15th. — Went  to  Professor  and  Mrs.  Allman,  at 
Parkston.  He  is  a  most  fascinating  naturalist  of  the 
old  type,  caring  for  birds,  and  beasts,  and  flowers. 

Met  Mr.  E.  Clodd  the  other  night,  who  alluded  to 
<  Physicus  ' 2  and  the  tone  of  depression  in  the  book 
('  Candid  Examination  of  Theism  '),  which  depression 
he  does  not  understand  and  rather  despises. 

This  year  Mr.  Komanes  and  Professor  Ewart  set 
up  a  small  laboratory  on  the  Geanies  coast,  and  the 
Journal  notes  : 

Professor  Ewart  could  not  get  the  farmhouse  he 
hoped,  and  this  was  unfortunate,  as  he  had  written 
to  the  British  Association  and  invited  one  or  two 

1  Mr.  Browning  told  the  same  story  of  the  Carlyles  at  this  party  which 
Mrs.  Ritchie  narrates  in  Tennyson,  Buskin,  and  Browning,  pp.  198,  199. 

2  The  nom   de  plume  adopted  in  writing  Candid  Examination  of 
Theism, 


1890  GEANIES— LONDON  157 

foreigners  fco  come  and  work  and  live  in  this  farm- 
house. In  vain  were  the  foreigners  warned  not  to 
come,  for  one  evening  in  walked  a  young  Dane,  who 
preceded  a  postcard  he  had  sent  announcing  his 
arrival.  Very  nice,  and  extremely  embarrassed  at 
finding  himself  in  a  country  house  where  people 
dressed  for  dinner. 

However,  he  got  accommodation  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood and  worked  at  Ascidians,  but  the  expe- 
riment of  inviting  stray  foreign  scientists  was 
abandoned. 

Sept. — The  Allmans,  Turners,  and  Mr.  Lockyer 
have  been  here,  and  we  have  been  getting  up  some 
private  theatricals. 

Jan.  1884. — Lecture  at  the  Koyal  Institution  on 
'  the  Darwinian  Theory  of  Instinct.' 


To  Miss  C.  E.  Eomanes. 

January  5,  1884. 

I  am  preparing  a  beautiful  surprise  for  Ethel 
after  she  comes  down  again.  The  library  is  to  have 
its  end  wall  papered  and  panelled,  the  conservatory 
is  to  be  painted  green,  and  filled  with  stands  of 
flowers,  and  the  little  room  is  to  have  the  window 
filled  with  stained  glass,  the  walls,  ceiling,  and  doors, 
beautifully  papered  and  decorated.  I  expect  my 
book  to  pay  the  bills.  Is  not  this  a  nice  idea  ? 

Little  Ethel's  ideas  about  writing,  by  the  way,  are 
original.  A  few  days  ago  she  wanted  me  to  play  at 
gee-gee.  I  said,  *  No,  Ethel,  father  is  writing.'  She 
asked,  '  Writing  letters  or  writing  book  ?  '  I  said, 


158  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  i88i- 

i  Writing  book.'  Whereupon  she  made  the  shrewd 
remark — i  Father  not  writing  to  anybody,  father  can 
play  gee-gee.'  So  much  for  her  estimate  of  my 
popularity  as  an  author. 

Journal,  April. — Lecture  at  Manchester ;  stayed 
with  Professor  Boyd  Dawkins. 

This  year  Mr.  Komanes  attended  Canon  Curteis' 
4  Boyle  Lectures  '  at  Whitehall. 

Journal,  March  1883. — '  G.  Lectured  at  -  — . 
One  of  the  hearers  asked  whether  in  the  lecturer's 
opinion  man  or  animals  had  first  appeared  011  the 
earth  !  G.  spent  a  pleasant  day  at  Bromsgrove  with 
the  F.  Pagets.' 

To  James  Romanes,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Eegent's  Park,  N.W. :  June  1,  1884. 

My  dearest  James, — Little  Ethel  has  just  brought 
me  the  enclosed  letter  to  send  to  you.  She  had 
written  it  as  far  as  the  up  and  down  lines  go,  and 
said  it  was  to  tell  you  how  much  she  loved  you,  and 
how  sorry  she  was  that  she  should  not  see  you  when 
she  goes  to  Geanies.  She  then  asked  me  to  tell  her 
how  to  write  kiss.  I  told  her  that  in  letters  they 
write  kiss  by  a  cross,  and  then  she  made  the  crosses. 
-  She  also  made  me  promise  to  send  you  the  letter  at 
once,  without  any  delay ;  and  as  the  idea  of  writing 
you  a  letter  was  entirely  her  own,  I  do  as  I  was  told. 
You  may  take  it  as  a  definite  expression  of  the 
emotions,  even  though  it  be  not  a  very  intelligible 
expression  of  ideas. 


1890  ILL-HEALTH  159 

She  wants  to  know  why  you  are  going  away,  and 
whether  you  will  write  to  her  when  you  are  away,  and 
a  heap  of  other  questions  of  the  same  kind. 

We  are  all  well  now,  and  I  am  just  going  with 
the  two  Ethels  to  a  children's  service,  which  they 
both  enjoy.  It  is  very  pretty  to  hear  the  little  one 
singing  with  the  other  children,  which  she  does  per- 
fectly in  tune. 

They  are  waiting  for  me  now,  so  with  best  love 

from  all,  v 

Yours  ever  the  same, 

GEOKGE. 
To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

There  is  nothing  to  tell  you  to-day  except  that 
I  dined  with  the  — — ,  and  one  thing  after  another 
was  more  comical  than  the  last.  The  boys  both 
spontaneously  expressed  their  desire  to  write  to  you. 
The  enclosed  is  the  result.  It  does  not  seem  much 
as  to  quantity,  but  if  you  knew  the  time  and  labour  it 
required  you  would  value  it  highly.  I  am  going  to  the 
theatre  with  the  Pollocks  after  lunch,  and  then  to 
read  my  paper. 

In  1885  came  the  first  warnings  of  ill-health.  Mr. 
Eomanes  had  a  short  but  very  sharp  illness,  and  after 
that  year  he  suffered  frequently  from  gout,  which 
necessitated  visits  to  various  foreign  '  cures.'  He  was  a 
perfect  travelling  companion,  he  liked  to  have  arrange- 
ments made  for  him,  and  was  never  discomposed  if 
anything  went  wrong,  never  put  out  by  any  of  the 
ordinary  mischances  of  travel.  Although  he  always 
professed  indifference  to  architecture  and  art,  he  would 
grow  quite  boyishly  enthusiastic  over  some  cathedral, 


160  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

as  his  sonnets  to  Amiens,  and  Christ  Church,  Oxford,1 
testify,  and  for  sculpture  he  had  a  real  love. 

In  May  1885  came  the  first  marked  public  utter- 
ance which  showed  that  Mr.  Eomanes  was  now  in  a 
very  different  mental  attitude  to  that  in  which  he 
wrote  his  '  Candid  Examination  of  Theism.' 

He  delivered  the  Eede  Lecture  at  Cambridge,  and 
in  it  he  criticises  the  materialistic  position.  (It  must 
be  remembered  that  his  anti-Theistic  book  was  pub- 
lished anonymously,  and  at  that  time  he  had  no 
intention  of  ever  referring  to  it.) 

The  reaction  set  in  very  soon  after  the  i  Candid 
Examination '  was  published. 

He  was  severe,  as  it  seemed  often  to  those  who 
knew  him  best,  unduly  severe  with  himself,  and  often 
described  himself  as  utterly  agnostic  when  possibly 
'  bewildered  '  would  have  better  described  him. 

Through  these  years,  underneath  all  the  outward 
happiness,  the  intense  love  for  scientific  work,  there 
was  the  same  longing  and  craving  for  the  old  belief, 
and  before  his  eyes  was  always  the  question,  *  Is 
Christian  faith  possible  or  intellectually  justifiable  in 
the  face  of  scientific  discovery  ?  ' 

These  years  between  1879  and  1890  were  years  of 
frequent  despondency,  of  almost  despair,  but  also  of 
incessant  seeking  after  truth,  and  year  after  year  he 
grew  gradually  nearer  Christian  belief. 

The  letters  which  follow  will  be  interesting  in 
this  place.  They  arose  out  of  a  correspondence  in 
1  Nature.'2 

1  See  sonnets,  The  Bible  of  Amiens,  and  Christ  Church,  Oxford. 

2  See  Nature,  January  25,  1883. 


1890      COEEESPONDENCE   WITH  DE.  ASA  GEAY      161 
To  Professor  Asa  Gray. 

May  16,  1883. 

Dear  Professor  Gray, — The  receipt  of  your  kind 
letter  of  the  1st  instant  has  given  me  in  full  measure 
the  sincerest  kind  of  pleasure  ;  for  in  the  light  sup- 
plied by  your  second  letter  communicated  to 
i  Nature  '  I  came  deeply  to  regret  my  misunderstand- 
ing of  the  spirit  in  which  you  wrote  the  first  one,  and 
now  you  enable  me  to  feel  that  we  have  shaken 
hands  over  the  matter. 

For  my  own  part  I  am  always  glad  when  differ- 
ences in  matter  of  opinion  admit  of  being  honestly 
expressed  without  enmity,  and  still  more  so  when,  as 
in  the  present  case,  this  discussion  leads  to  a  basis  of 
friendship.  I  therefore  thank  you  most  heartily  for 
your  letter,  and  remain  yours  very  truly, 

G.  J.  ROMANES. 

P.S. — If  you  have  not  already  happened  to  read  a 
book  called l  A  Candid  Examination  of  Theism, '  I  should 
like  to  send  you  a  copy.  I  wrote  it  six  or  seven  years 
ago  and  published  it  anonymously  in  1878.  I  do  not 
now  hold  to  all  the  arguments,  nor  should  I  express 
myself  so  strongly  on  the  argumentative  force  of  the 
remainder,  but  I  should  like  you  to  read  the  book,  in 
order  to  show  you  how  gladly  I  would  enter  your 
camp  if  I  could  only  see  that  it  is  on  the  side  of 
Truth. 

December  30,  1883. 

Dear  Professor  Gray, — I  sent  you  my  papers  as  a 
return  for  those  which  you  so  kindly  sent  to  me,  and 

M 


162  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

for  which  I  have  written  to  thank  you  before.  I 
quite  agree  with  your  view,  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
human  mind  having  been  proximately  evolved  from 
lower  minds  is  not  incompatible  with  the  doctrine  of 
its  having  been  due  to  a  higher  and  supreme  mind. 
Indeed,  I  do  not  think  the  theory  of  evolution,  even 
if  fully  proved,  would  seriously  affect  the  previous 
standing  of  this  more  important  question. 

The  sorrow  is,  that  this  question  is  so  far  removed 
from  the  reach  of  any  trustworthy  answer.  Or,  at 
least,  such  is  the  sorrow  if  that  answer  when  it  comes 
is  to  prove  an  affirmative.  If  it  is  to  be  an  eternal 
sleep,  no  doubt  it  is  better  to  live  as  we  are  than  in 
the  certainty  of  a  Godless  universe.  But  although 
we  cannot  find  any  sure  answer  to  this  momentous 
question,  I  cannot  help  feeling  that  it  is  reasonable  (al- 
though it  may  not  be  orthodox)  to  cherish  this  much 
faith,  that  if  there  is  a  God,  whom,  when  we  see,  we 
can  truly  worship  as  well  as  dread,  He  cannot  ex 
hypotliesi  be  a  God  who  will  thwart  the  strong  desire 
which  He  has  implanted  in  us  to  worship  Him, 
merely  because  we  cannot  find  evidence  enough  to 
believe  this  or  that  doctrine  of  dogmatic  Theology. 

But  I  do  not  know  why  I  should  thus  trouble  you 
with  my  troubles,  unless  it  is  that  the  kindness  of 
your  letters  has  broken  through  the  bars  by  which 
we  usually  imprison  such  feelings  from  the  world. 
Anyhow,  I  thank  you  for  that  kindness,  and  hope 
you  will  forgive  this  somewhat  odd  requital. 

Very  sincerely  yours, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 


1890  EELIGIOUS   BELIEF  163 


'  The  desire  to  worship  Him.' 

These  words  are  the  key-note  of  the  religious 
history  of  the  pure  and  noble  character  which  I  am 
trying  to  describe. 

The  letters,  so  touching  in  the  momentary  breaking 
down  of  reserve,  give,  as  it  were,  a  glimpse  of  the 
inner  life,  give  an  indication  of  the  struggle,  the  per- 
plexity, the  sorrow  which  eleven  years  later  ended  in 
'Eternal  Peace.' 

Eeaders  of  the  lately  published  '  Thoughts  on 
Eeligion  '  will  see  how  gradually  he  grew  to  perceive 
the  reasonableness  of  the  Christian  Faith  ;  he  had 
never  doubted  the  beauty,  the  moral  worth,  the 
attraction  of  that  faith.  And  with  him  it  was  what 
Dante  in  his  '  Paradiso '  puts  into  S.  Bernard's 
mouth : 

'  A  quella  luce  cotal  si  diventa, 

Che  volgersi  da  lei  per  altro  aspetto 
E  impossibil  che  mai  si  consenta.' 

And  through  all  these  years  there  was  a  constant 
willingness  to  try  to  aid  other  people  in  their  diffi- 
culties, to  remove  stumbling-blocks  which  hindered 
others.  He  was  always  willing  to  discuss  problems  of 
belief,  always  perfectly  fair  and  candid,  and  there  were 
not  a  few  who,  since  his  death,  have  spoken  of  the 
real  help  which  he  gave  them.  He  did  not  drop  re- 
ligious observances ;  on  Sunday  in  London  he  usually 
went  to  Christ  Church,  Albany  Street,  of  which  the 
present  Bishop  of  St.  Albans  was  then  vicar,  and  for 
some  years  at  Geanies  he  had  a  short  Evening  Service 
for  guests  and  servants  who  could  not  drive  ten  miles 
to  church. 

M  2 


164  GEOEGE   JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

This  service,  unless  a  clergyman  happened  to  be 
staying  at  Geanies,  he  conducted  himself,  and  ended 
it  by  reading  a  sermon.  He  had  all  his  Presbyterian 
ancestors'  love  for  a  good  discourse,  and  serious  efforts 
had  to  be  made  to  prevent  him  from  reading  too  long 
a  sermon. 

Mozley's  '  University  Sermons '  he  liked  parti- 
cularly, and  when  these  were  divided,  they  were 
tolerated  by  his  audience,  who  at  first  considered  them 
much  too  long.  He  also  read  many  of  Dean  Church's 
sermons. 

He  first  knew  the  Dean  in  1883,  and  although  he 
only  went  very  occasionally  to  the  Deanery,  he  was 
greatly  impressed  by  the  striking  personality  of  the 
great  divine  and  scholar,  whom  to  know  was  to  love. 
The  Dean's  beautiful  style,  his  great  learning,  his  intel- 
lectual sympathy  with  perplexities  and  troubles  of  heart 
and  mind,  and  the  indefinable  air  of  distinction  which  a 
great  writer  stamps  on  every  bit  of  work  he  undertakes, 
all  appealed  to  Mr.  Romanes ;  and  above  and  beyond 
all  these,  the  almost  austere  loftiness  of  thought,  the 
moral  heights  implied  in  Dean  Church's  writings, 
seized  on  the  mind  of  one  who,  beyond  all  else, 
reverenced  personal  character  and  personal  good- 
ness. 

He  really  enjoyed  reading  Dean  Church's  sermons, 
and  they  exercised  much  influence  on  him.  For 
Newman,  on  the  other  hand,  he  had  little  liking,  and 
indeed  he  never  did  Newman  adequate  justice.  He 
had  promised  a  friend  just  before  his  death  to  read 
more  of  Newman,  and  discover  for  himself  the  great 
gifts  of  that  wonderful  man,  but  there  was  not  time. 
Only  one  bit  of  Newman's  writing  was  dear  to  him, 
'  Lead,  kindly  Light.' 

The  following   letter  rose  out  of  a  conversation 


1890  COEEESPONDENCE  WITH  THE  EEV.  F.  PAGET  165 

Mr.  Eomaiies  had  with  Dr.  Paget,  during  one  of  the 
Oxford  visits  : 

The  Palace,  Ely  :  June  15,  1886. 

My  dear  Romanes , — I  have  often  and  anxiously 
thought  over  the  question  which  you  asked  me  when 
you  were  at  Oxford  about  your  boy's  education,  and 
the  part  which  you  should  take  in  his  religious  train- 
ing :  and  I  would  venture,  with  most  true  and 
affectionate  gratitude  for  your  trust,  to  write  a  few 
lines  in  partial  qualification  of  what  I  then  said. 

I  start  on  the  ground  of  your  own  wish  (for  which 
indeed  I  am  with  all  my  heart  thankful)  that  your  boy's 
character  should  be  fashioned  after  the  Christian  type 
and  under  the  influence  of  Christ.  And  I  am  as  anxious 
as  ever  that,  even  if  your  own  estimate  of  the  evidences 
of  Christianity  should  for  a  long  while  remain  as  it  is, 
your  children  may  never,  in  their  later  years,  feel  that 
you  ever  taught  them  anything  which  you  did  not 
believe  :  on  every  ground  I  long  to  avoid  all  danger  of 
such  a  thought  crossing  their  minds.  But  at  the 
same  time  I  do  long  that  they  may  be  spared  to  the 
very  last  possible  moment  the  knowledge  that  in  the 
judgment  of  the  mind  which  they,  I  hope,  will  most 
reverence  and  love,  the  bases  of  their  religious  trust 
and  hope  are  uncertain.  It  is  only  far  on  in  life,  I 
think,  that  a  man  comes  to  realise  either  the  vast  im- 
portance of  things  which  are  not  held  with  absolute 
certainty,  or  the  mysterious  and  complex  nature  of  the 
act  of  faith,  and  the  discipline  of  obscurity,  and  the 
way  in  which  real  spiritual  progress  may  be  going  on 
where  the  mind  seems  only  to  be  holding  on,  as  it 
were,  with  fear  and  trembling. 


166  GEOBGE  JOHN   EOMANES 

To  a  boy  of  sixteen  the  mere  knowledge  of  uncer- 
tainty in  his  father's  mind  may  drain  all  the  moral 
cogency  out  of  the  whole  conception  of  religion  : — the 
very  suspicion  of  the  uncertainty  may  unnerve  him 
more  than  the  full  realisation  of  the  doubt  would 
change  his  father's  aim  and  hope  in  doing  his  duty. 

And  so,  at  the  risk  of  paining  you — believe  me,  I 
would  rather  have  the  pain  than  give  it  you — and  pre- 
suming very  thankfully  on  the  wish  of  which  you 
spoke,  I  would  plead  that  your  children  might  remain 
as  long  as  possible  in  ignorance  of  your  uncertainty 
and  anxiety ;  that  they  should  only  know  in  a  general 
way  that  the  religious  influences,  the  principles  of 
their  Godward  life  which  they  receive,  are  given  to 
them  by  your  wish — that  you  would  have  them  grow 
up  after  that  type,  with  that  hope  and  aspiration ; 
and  I  would  plead  that  for  their  sakes  you  should 
suffer  the  pain,  great  as  it  may  be,  of  being  reticent 
where  you  long  to  be  ever  communicative,  ever  unre- 
served. You  may  be  unspeakably  thankful  some  day 
that  you  did  so  suffer  : — and,  whatever  comes,  you  will 
be  sure  of  your  children's  deepest  love  and  gratitude, 
if  ever  they  should  know  that  this  was  one  of  your 
acts  of  self-sacrifice  for  them. 

Please  forgive  me,  dear  Eomanes,  where  I  have 
written  blunderingly,  or  given  you  unnecessary  pain. 
I  pray  God  to  guide  and  teach  and  gladden  both  you 
and  yours,  and  I  am 

Your  affectionate  friend, 

FKANCIS  PAGET. 


1890  COEEESPONDENCE  WITH  THE  EEV.  F.  PAGET  167 

Geanies,  Koss-shire,  N.B. :  June  24,  1886. 

My  dear  Paget, — I  should  indeed  require  to  be 
made  of  unduly  sensitive  material,  if  either  the 
extreme  kindness  of  your  thought  or  the  most  con- 
siderate delicacy  of  your  expression  could  give  me  pain. 
Pain  I  have,  but  it  is  of  a  kind  that  is  beyond  the 
power  of  friends  either  to  mitigate  or  to  increase. 

The  advice  which  you  give  accords  precisely  with 
my  own  view  of  the  matter,  and  it  is  needless  to  say 
that  in  such  an  agreement  I  find  no  small  degree  of 
satisfaction.  Moreover,  the  principles  which  it  thus 
appears  to  be  my  duty  to  adopt  are  made  easy  for  me. 
...  So  that  on  the  whole  it  does  not  now  appear  to  me 
that  in  its  practical  aspects  the  problem  is  likely  to 
prove  difficult  of  solution ;  although  theoretically, 
or  as  a  matter  of  ethics;  I  do  think  it  is  a  complex 
question  whether  (or  how  far)  parents  should  teach 
dogmas  as  facts,  or  matters  of  faith  as  matters  of 
knowledge.  Happily,  however,  ethics  are  to  morals 
very  much  what  shadow  is  to  sunshine  ;  and  in  seek- 
ing to  follow  the  right  or  the  good,  instinct  is  often  a 
better  guide  than  syllogism. 

And  now,  in  conclusion,  let  me  endeavour — inade- 
quately as  it  must  be — to  express  my  deep  sense  of 
gratitude  to  you  for  having  so  earnestly  taken  my 
troubles  into  your  consideration.  I  assure  you  that 
your  letter  has  touched  me  truly,  and  that  on  its 
account  I  am  more  than  ever  happy  to  subscribe  my- 
self 

Your  affectionate  friend, 

GEO.  J.  BOMANES, 


168  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issl- 

Joumal  says  : — 

April  12,  1885.— Went  with  the  Church  family  to 
St.  Paul's  and  heard  a  fine  sermon  from  Dr.  Liddon. 
He  spoke  very  touchingly  of  Lady  Selborne's  death, 
and  also  alluded  to  Max  Miiller's  new  book. 

Have  been  to  Pfleiderer 's  Hibbert  Lectures.1  We 
met  Pfleiderer  the  other  day,  and  he  described  a 
Sunday  in  which  he  had  tried  to  study  English 
religious  life.  Spurgeon,  Parker,  and,  I  think,  Stop- 
ford  Brooke  or  Haweis,  I  forget  which,  he  took  as 
samples !  Pfleiderer  also  went  to  St.  Paul's  on  the ' 
day  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln 2  was  consecrated,  and  as 
he  got  within  earshot  he  heard  Dr.  Liddon' s  silvery 
voice  pronouncing  his  own  name  not  with  approval. 

Geanies,  August. — Mr.  Cotter  Morison  is  here,  and 
is  most  amusing.  Mr.  Horsburgh  asked  two  comic 
riddles :  '  Why  are  men  like  telescopes  and  women 
like  telegrams  ?  ' 

Men  are  like  telescopes,  because  they  are  made  to 
be  drawn  out  and  shut  up  ;  and  women  are  like  tele- 
grams because  they  far  exceed  the  males  (mails)  in 
intelligence. 

G.  fiddled  at  an  amateur  concert  at  Tain. 

Mr.  F.  Galton  is  here.  He  told  us  an  amusing 
child's  question  :  4  How  did  sausages  get  along  when 
they  were  alive  ?  ' 

1  Mr.  Romanes  remarked  d  propos  of  Pfleiderer's  lecture  that  St.  Paul 
seemed  to  be  a  very  hard  nut  for  the  lecturer  to  crack. 

2  Dr.  King. 


1390  GEANIES  169 


To  Miss  C.  E.  Romanes. 

Geanies,  lloss-shire  :  November  7,  1885. 

The  two  Ethels  left  this  afternoon  minus  their  lug- 
gage and  luncheon,  which  arrived  at  the  station  with 
the  dog-cart  just  as  the  train  was  leaving.  Pathetic 
it  was  to  see  their  hungry  eyes  looking  at  the  neat 
luncheon  basket  from  the  train  windows  !  We  are  all 

well  here.     L is  here.     He  has  now  fired  his  first 

hundred  cartridges,  and  has  nothing  to  show  but  a 
brace  of  cats  which  he  took  a  pot  shot  at  in  the  trees. 

November  12. 

I  am  now  playing  at  the  last  day  in  the  old  house, 

and  doing  so  in  the  library  all  by  myself.  L left 

this  morning,  and  we  all  leave  to-morrow.  Gerald 
now  leads  me  from  one  room  to  another,  and  after  open- 
ing the  door  and  looking  round  each  says,  'All  gone! ' 

I  have  somewhat  relieved  the  monotony  of  my 
solitary  life  by  buying  a  horse.  This  you  will  no 
doubt  think  is  a  purchase  well  timed  and  thus  worthy 
of  a  philosopher.  For  six  months  at  least  I  shall 
have  to  pay  for  his  keep,  and  never  have  a  chance  of 
a  single  bit  of  use  for  him  all  that  time.  Yet,  strange 
to  say,  I  think  I  have  made  a  good  bargain. 

Nov.,  Edinburgh. — Dined  at  Dalmeny.  We  met 
Mr.  and  Mrs.  Gladstone,  and  also  Lieutenant  Greely, 
of  Arctic  fame. 

Nov.,  London. — Dinner  with  the  F.  Galtons,  and 
met  the  Leckys  and  other  nice  people.  Mr.  Galton 


170  GEOKGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

says  the  study  of  statistics  fascinates  him  just   as 
skating  on  thin  ice  does  some  people— it's  so  perilous. 

To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

Your  letter  and  postcard  most  welcome.  Yester- 
day I  dined  with  the  George  Turners,  and  played 
chess  from  eight  to  one  A.M.,  winning  two  out  of 
three  games.  I  told  them  that  for  to-night  I  hesi- 
tated whether  to  go  and  see  some  dancing  or  go  to 
the  '  Messiah.'  Isabel  said  she  would  throw  into  the 
latter  scale  the  inducement  of  her  own  company, 
so  we  are  going  together.  Mr.  Diggle  signified  his 
desire  to  see  my  school,1  so  I  went  with  him. 

Returning  for  a  little  while  to  the  scientific  work 
of  these  years,  one  may  say  that  they  were  chiefly 
devoted  to  the  more  philosophical  side  of  his  work  as 
a  naturalist. 

1  Animal  Intelligence,'  '  Mental  Evolution  in 
Animals,'  appeared  respectively  in  1881  and  1883, 
and  are  works  designed  to  prove  that  the  law  of 
evolution  is  universal,  and  applies  to  the  mind  of  man 
as  well  as  to  his  bodily  organisation. 

Mr.  Romanes  read  widely  and  observed  much,  and 
no  one  less  deserved  the  charge  of  writing  without 
observing,  or  of  being  a  '  paper  philosopher.'  Both 
these  books  abound  in  stories  of  animals,  and  are  full 
of  interest  for  anyone  caring  at  all  for  '  beasts,'  quite 
apart  from  the  special  object  of  the  books. 

Lecturing  and  reviewing  were,  so  to  speak,  pas- 
times to  him,  and  gave  him  little  trouble.  One 
lecture  given  at  the  Royal  Institution  on  '  The  Mental 

1  See  p.  236. 


1890  PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  171 

Differences  between  Men  and  Women  '  drew  upon  the 
head  of  the  unlucky  lecturer  a  great  storm  of  indig- 
nation— why,  the  writer  of  this  memoir  has  never  been 
able  to  discover. 

In  May  1886,  Mr.  Romanes  read  a  paper  before 
the  Linnean  Society  on  '  Physiological  Selection,  an 
additional  suggestion  on  the  origin  of  species.'  This 
paper  was  the  outcome  of  many  years'  study  of  the 
philosophy  of  evolution,  during  which  time  he  had 
gradually  been  coming  to  the  conclusion  that  natural 
selection  cannot  be  regarded  as  the  sole  guiding  factor 
in  the  production  of  species,  but  that  there  must  be 
some  other  cause  at  work  in  directing  the  course  of 
evolution. 

The  theory  of  natural  selection  rests  on  two 
classes  of  observable  facts :  first,  that  all  plants  and 
animals  are  engaged  in  a  perpetual  struggle  for  ex- 
istence, there  being  in  every  generation  of  every 
species  a  great  many  more  individuals  born  than  can 
possibly  survive ;  and  secondly,  that  the  offsprings,  al- 
though closely  resembling  the  parent  form,  do  present 
individual  variations.  It  follows,  therefore,  that  those 
individuals  presenting  variation  in  any  way  beneficial 
to  them  in  the  struggle  for  existence  will  survive  as 
being  the  fittest  to  do  so,  Nature,  so  to  speak,  selecting 
certain  individuals  of  each  generation,  enabling  them 
not  only  to  live  themselves,  but  also  to  transmit  their 
favourable  qualities  to  their  offspring.  If  a  special 
line  of  variation  is  in  some  way  preserved,  there  may 
result  a  variety  so  fixed  and  so  distinct  from  the 
parent  and  collateral  related  forms  as  to  constitute  a 
separate  species. 

Further,  since  the  environment  (i.e.  the  sum  total 
of  the  external  conditions  of  life)  is  continually 
changing,  it  follows  that  natural  selection  may  slowly 


in  GEOEGB  JOHN   KOMANES 

alter  a  type  in  adaptation  to  the  slowly  changing 
environment,  and  if  in  any  case  the  alterations 
effected  are  sufficient  in  amount  to  lead  naturalists  to 
name  the  result  a  distinct  species,  then  natural  selec- 
tion has  transmuted  one  specific  type  into  another. 

Mr.  Komaiies  pointed  out  that  the  theory  of 
natural  selection  only  accounts  for  such  organic 
changes  as  are  of  use  to  the  species — by  use  signify- 
ing life-preserving — that  it  is,  in  fact,  a  theory  of  the 
origin  and  cumulative  development  of  adaptations, 
whether  these  be  distinctive  of  species,  or  of  genera, 
families,  classes,  &c. 

The  question  then  arises,  do  species  differ  from 
species  solely  in  points  of  a  useful  character,  as  they 
undoubtedly  should  do  if  natural  selection  has  been 
the  sole  factor  in  their  formation  ?  Investigation 
shows  that  systematists  recognise  a  species  by  a 
collection  of  characters,  the  value  of  a  character 
depending  not  on  its  utility,  but  upon  its  stability ; 
in  fact,  a  large  proportional  number  of  specific  cha- 
racters, such  as  minute  details  of  structure,  form,  and 
colour,  are  wholly  without  meaning  from  a  utilitarian 
point  of  view.  Investigation  further  shows  that  the 
most  general  of  all  the  '  notes '  of  a  true  species  is 
cross-infertility,  that  is,  the  infertility  of  the  offspring 
of  two  individuals  belonging  to  separate  species : 
this,  it  was  urged,  could  not  be  due  to  the  action  of 
natural  selection.  Lastly,  apart  from  the  primary 
distinction  of  cross-infertility,  and  the  inutility  of  so 
many  of  the  secondary  specific  distinctions,  neither 
of  which  can  be  explained  by  the  action  of  natural 
selection,  Mr.  Komanes  was  strongly  of  the  opinion  that 
even  if  a  beneficial  variation  did  arise,  the  swamping 
effects  of  free  intercrossing  would  reabsorb  it,  and  so 
render  evolution  of  species  in  divergent  lines,  as 


1890  PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  173 

distinguished  from  linear  transmutation,  impossible. 
This  last  difficulty  can  only  be  met  by  assuming  that 
the  same  beneficial  variation  arises  in  a  number  of 
individuals  simultaneously,  for  which  assumption 
our  present  knowledge  furnishes  no  warrant.  If 
natural  selection  is  brought  forward  as  the  sole  factor 
in  the  guidance  of  organic  evolution,  then  he  con- 
sidered that  these  difficulties  remain  insurmount- 
able ;  if,  however,  it  is  regarded  as  a  factor,  even  the 
chief  factor,  then  these  difficulties  vanish,  it  being 
consistent,  in  the  latter  case,  to  hold  the  other 
factor,  or  factors,  responsible  for  an  explanation  of 
the  difficulties  in  question.  It  was  the  object  of 
this  paper  to  suggest  another  factor  in  the  formation 
of  species,  which,  although  independent  of  natural 
selection,  was  in  no  way  opposed  to  it,  and  might  be 
called  supplementary  to  it,  and  was  at  the  same  time 
capable  of  explaining  the  facts,  of  the  inutility  of 
many  specific  characters,  the  cross-infertility  of  allied 
species,  and  the  non-occurrence  of  free  intercrossing. 
Very  briefly  indicated,  Mr.  Romanes'  line  of  argument 
is  as  follows  : — Every  generation  of  every  species 
presents  an  enormous  number  of  variations,  of  which 
only  the  ones  that  happen  to  be  useful  are  preserved 
by  natural  selection.  The  useless  variations  are 
allowed  to  die  out  immediately  by  intercrossing. 

Consequently,  if  intercrossing  be  prevented,  there 
is  no  reason  why  unuseful  variations  should  not  be 
perpetuated  by  heredity  quite  as  much  as  useful  ones 
when  under  the  nursing  influence  of  natural  selection. 
Thus,  if  from  any  cause,   a  section  of  a  species  is 
prevented   from   intercrossing  with   the   rest   of   its 
parent  form,  it  is  to  be  expected  that  new  varieties— 
for  the  most  part  of  a  trivial  and  unuseful  kind- 
should  arise  within  that  section,  and  in  time  pass 


174  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

into  new  species.  This  supposition  is  borne  out  by 
the  nature  of  the  flora  and  fauna  of  oceanic  islands, 
which  are  particularly  rich  in  peculiar  species,  and 
where  intercrossing  was,  of  course,  prevented  with 
the  original  parent  forms  by  the  action  of  the  geo- 
graphical boundaries. 

However,  closely  allied  species  are  not  always,  or 
even  generally,  separated  by  geographical  boundaries, 
and  the  cross-infertility  remains  to  be  explained. 
The  cardinal  feature  of  Mr.  Romanes'  theory  is  that 
the  initial  step  in  the  origin  of  species  is  the  arising 
of  this  infertility  as  an  independent  variation,  by 
which  free  intercrossing  with  the  parent  form  on  a 
common  area  is  prevented,  and  specific  differentiation 
rendered  possible.  Innumerable  varieties  are  known 
to  occur  which  do  not  pass  into  distinct  species, 
the  reason  being  that  this  initial  variation,  that  is, 
incipient  infertility  whereby  the  swamping  effects  of 
intercrossing  might  be  obviated,  was  lacking,  and  the 
variations  became  re-absorbed.  That  is,  given  any 
degree  of  sterility  towards  the  parental  form  which 
does  not  extend  to  the  varietal  form,  then  a  new 
species  must  take  its  origin.  Without  the  bar  of 
sterility,  in  Mr.  Romanes'  opinion,  free  intercrossing 
must  render  the  formation  of  species  impossible. 
Mutual  sterility  is  thus  the  cause,  not  the  result,  of 
specific  differentiation.  As  regards  the  occurrence  of 
this  initial  variation,  the  reproductive  system  is  known 
to  be  highly  variable,  its  variability  taking  the  form 
either  of  increased  fertility,  or  of  sterility  in  all  degrees, 
and  depending  on  either  extrinsic  causes  (changes  of 
food,  climate,  &c.),  or  on  an  intrinsic  cause  arising  in 
the  system  itself. 

From  the  nature  of  this  additional  factor  at  work 


1890  PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  175 

in  the  formation  of  species,  Mr.  Komanes  called  his 
theory  <  physiological  selection.' 

Physiological  selection  is  conceived  of  as  co- 
operating with  natural  selection,  the  former  allowing 
the  latter  to  act  by  interposing  its  law  of  sterility, 
with  the  result  that  the  secondary  specific  characters 
may  be  either  adaptive  or  non-adaptive  in  character. 


To  Miss  C.  E.  Romanes. 

Aix-les-Bains:  May  1886. 

The  Linnean  Society  paper  went  off  admirably. 
There  was  a  larger  attendance  than  ever  I  saw  there 
before.  But  this  may  have  been  partly  due  to  the 
president  (Lubbock)  having  had  a  paper  down  for  the 
same  evening.  He  was  considerate  enough  to  with- 
draw it  at  the  last  moment  so  as  to  leave  all  the 
evening  for  mine.  I  spoke  for  an  hour  and  a  half,  and 
the  discussion  lasted  another  hour.  The  paper  itself 
I  have  brought  with  me  here,  and  am  now  putting  the 
last  touches  upon  it. 

Probably  I  shall  have  to  try  the  rat  experiment 
again,  if  the  young  ones  show  no  signs  of  piebalding. 
But  look  at  them  occasionally  to  see. 

There  would  be  no  use  in  getting  the  parrot  to 
make  a  gesture  sign  at  the  same  time  as  he  makes  a 
verbal  one  ;  for,  as  you  say,  he  would  only  show  that 
he  can  establish  an  association  between  a  phrase  and 
a  thing  (whether  object,  quality,  or  action),  and  about 
this  there  is  no  question.  The  question  is  whether 
he  can  use  verbal  signs,  not  only  as  stereotyped  in 
phrases  (when  they  are  really  equivalent  to  only  one 


176  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES 

word),  but  as  movable  types,  which  he  can  transpose 
for  the  purpose  of  expressing  different  ideas  with  the 
same  words. 

He  writes  concerning  a  Junior  Scientific  Society 
which  had  a  meeting  to  discuss  his  theory  : 

'  The  meeting  was  the  best  fun  imaginable,  the 
paper  was  merely  a  statement  of  my  theory  by  a 

young  man  who  made  it  very  clear. got  up  and 

expressed  disapproval  of  the  theory,  but  expressly 
declined  to  argue,  so  I  had  merely  to  give  him  some 
chaff.  The  young  men  highly  enjoyed  it.  Afterwards 
they  were  enthusiastic  in  their  applause. 

4 1  have  no  doubt,  if  I  had  not  been  present,  the  class 
would  have  had  a  very  different  impression  both  of  me 
and  my  theory.' 

To  Professor  Meldola. 

Geanies  :  September  16,  1886. 

Dear  Professor  Meldola, — Physiological  selection 
seems  to  have  brought  a  regular  nest  of  hornets  about 
my  head.  If  I  had  known  there  was  to  have  been 
so  much  talk  about  it  at  the  British  Association  I 
should  have  gone  up  to  defend  the  new-born.  If  you 
were  there,  can  you  let  me  know  the  main  objections 
that  were  urged?  It  seems  to  me  there  is  a  good 
deal  of  misunderstanding  abroad,  due,  no  doubt,  to 
the  insufficiency  with  which  my  theory  has  been 
stated.  In  '  studying '  the  paper,  therefore,  please 
keep  steadily  in  view  that  the  backbone  of  the  whole 
consists  in  regarding  mutual  sterility  as  the  cause  (or 


1890  PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  177 

at  least,  the  chief  condition)  instead  of  the  result  of 
specific  differentiation.  This  is  just  the  opposite  view 
to  that  now  held  by  all  evolutionists,  and,  I  believe, 
by  Darwin  himself.  (See  '  Origin,'  pp.  245-246 ; 
1  Variation,'  ii.  pp.  171-175.)  Now,  if  this  view  be 
sound,  my  theory  is  obviously  not  restricted  to  any 
one  class  of  causes  that  may  induce  mutual  sterility. 
Such  cases  may  be  either  extrinsic  or  intrinsic  as 
regards  the  reproductive  system ;  they  may  be  either 
direct  in  their  action  on  that  system  or  indirect  (e.g. 
natural  selection,  or  use  and  disuse,  &c.,  producing 
morphological  changes  elsewhere,  which  in  turn  react 
on  that  system)  ;  therefore  these  causes  may  act 
either  on  a  few  or  on  many  individuals.  Yet  Wallace 
does  not  seem  to  see  this,  but  argues  in  the  '  Fort- 
nightly '  that  they  can  only  act  on  an  individual  here 
and  there. 

I  sincerely  hope  you  will  give  your  attention  to 
the  subject,  because  the  great  danger  I  now  fear  is 
prejudice  against  the  theory  on  account  of  people  not 

taking  the  trouble  to  understand  it.  How  absurd , 

for  example,  giving  that  quotation  from  '  Origin '  in 
1  Nature,'  as  evidence  of  Mr.  Darwin's  having  con- 
sidered the  theory!  Bead  with  its  context,  the  pas- 
sage is  arguing  (much  against  the  writer's  desire)  that 
variations  in  the  way  of  sterility  with  parent  forms 
cannot  be  seized  upon  (or  perpetuated  as  specific  dis- 
tinctions) by  natural  selection.  But  physiological 
selection  says  that  such  variations  do  not  require  to  be 
seized  upon  by  natural  selection.  Therefore,  so  far  as 
the  passage  in  question  proves  anything,  it  tends  to 
show  that  nothing  could  have  been  further  from  the 

N 


178  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

mind  of  the  writer  than  a  theory  which  would  have 
rendered  his  whole  argument  superfluous,  and  I  can 
scarcely  believe  that  if  the  theory  of  physiological 
selection  had  ever  occurred  to  him,  he  would  not  have 
mentioned  it,  if  only  to  state  his  objections  to  it,  as 
he  has  done  with  regard  to  so  many  ideas  of  a  much 
less  feasible  character. 

I  write  at  length  because  I  value  your  judgment 
more  than  that  of  almost  anybody  else  upon  a  subject 
of  this  kind,  and  therefore  I  should  like  it  to  be  given 
with  your  eyes  open.  Prejudice  at  first  there  must 
be,  but  there  need  not  be  misunderstanding ;  and 
private  correspondence  shows  me  that  the  theory  has 
already  struck  root  in  some  of  the  best  minds  who 
do  understand  it.  Any  explanation,  therefore,  will  be 
gladly  given  you  by 

Yours  very  truly, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

To  F.  Darwin,  Esq. 

Geanies  :  November  5,  1886. 

Dear  Darwin, — I  am  much  interested  by  the  en- 
closed, and  therefore  much  obliged  to  you  for  letting 
me  see  it.  But  it  would  have  been  made  a  better 
1  answer  '  if  it  had  gone  on  to  say  something  about 
the  relation  of  such  an  experiment  (supposing  it  suc- 
cessful) to  the  question  of  originating  a  species. 
Some  weeks  ago  I  was  planning  with  a  friend  a 
closely  analogous  experiment,  but  designed  to  pro- 
duce a  '  family  '  which  would  be  sterile  towards  the 
majority  of  the  parent  form,  or  not  only  towards  one 
other  'family.'  And  it  seemed  to  me  that  if  this 
could  be  done  it  would  amount  to  the  artificial 


1890  PHYSIOLOGICAL  SELECTION  179 

creation  of  a  new  species  by  conscious  selection  of  a 
physiological  kind. 

But,  as  far  as  I  can  gather  from  the  enclosed,  the 
idea  seems  to  be  that  of  experimenting  on  the  con- 
ditions leading  to  sterility ;  not  that  of  regarding 
sterility,  however  conditional,  as  itself  the  condition 
of  specific  divergence.  In  other  words,  the  passage 
seems  to  go  upon  the  supposition  that  sterility  is  the 
result  and  not  the  cause  of  specific  divergence.  But 
if  so,  I  do  not  see  that  it  affects  the  question  whether 
he  ever  contemplated  the  latter  possibility. 

I  have  just  received  Seebohm's  British  Association 
paper,  which,  except  when  it  repeats  Wallace's  objec- 
tion about  the  doctrine  of  chances,  elsewhere  curiously 
contradicts  all  the  points  in  his  criticism. 

The  editor  of  the  '  Fortnightly  '  tells  me  that  a 
further  delay  has  arisen  in  bringing  out  my  reply,  on 
account  of  Wallace  desiring  to  answer  it.  For  my 
own  part  I  think  that  all  this  fire  of  criticism  at  the 
present  juncture  is  a  mistake.  As  yet  the  theory  is 
only  a  '  suggestion,'  and,  until  tested,  there  can  be  no 
adequate  data  for  forming  a  definite  opinion. 

Therefore  I  regret  the  published  opposition — those 
who  are  in  favour  do  not  publish  only  because  it  may 
tend  to  choke  off  co-operation  in  carrying  out  the  ex- 
periments ;  and  it  was  for  the  sake  of  securing  assist- 
ance in  so  laborious  a  research  that  I  published  the 
suggestion  in  outline. 

I  wonder  who  Catchpole  is  ?  His  answer  in 
*  Nature  '  to  Wallace  won't  do. 

Yours  very  truly, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 


186  GEOkGE  JOHN  BOMANES 


18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Regent's  Park,  N.W.  :  January  7,  1887. 

Dear  Darwin,  —  Some  time  ago  you  write  that  I 
ought  to  read  a  book  or  paper  by  Jordan  about  varieties 
in  relation  to  sterility.  I  cannot  find  any  book  or 
paper  of  his  at  the  L.S.  library  which  treats  of  this 
subject  ;  could  you  give  me  the  name  of  his  essay  ? 

I  am  making  arrangements  for  trying  whether 
there  are  any  degrees  of  sterility  to  be  found  between 
well-marked  and  constant  varieties  of  plants.  But 
as  I  have  never  done  anything  in  the  way  of  hybrid- 
ising, perhaps  you  would  be  good  enough  to  let  me 
know  whether  the  enclosed  plan  of  experimenting 
represents  the  full  and  proper  way  of  going  to  work. 
I  know  that  you  do  not  believe  in  the  object  of  it, 
but,  even  supposing  it  to  be  a  wild-goose  chase,  there 
would  be  no  harm  in  your  telling  rne  the  best  way  to 
run.  Then,  whether  the  results  prove  positive  or 
negative,  it  will  not  be  open  for  any  one  to  doubt 
them  on  the  ground  of  any  fault  in  the  method. 

Do  any  objections  occur  to  you  re  my  answer  to 
critics  in  the  '  Nineteenth  Century  '  ?  Of  course  I 
might  have  said  more  about  the  swamping  effects  of 
free  intercrossing  (which  appears  to  me  the  only 
point  in  which  I  deviate  at  all  from  the  *  Origin  of 
Species  '),  but  it  is  much  too  large  a  subject  to  be 
dealt  with  in  a  review.  My  greatest  difficulty  here 
is  to  conceive  the  possibility  of  differentiation  (as 
distinguished  from  transmutation  in  linear  series) 
without  the  assistance  of  isolation  in  some  form  or 
another. 

Yours  very  truly, 

GEO.  J.   ROMANES. 


1890  PHYSIOLOGICAL  SELECTION  181 

Dear  Darwin, — Criticism  of  an  intelligent  kind  is 
what  I  feel  most  in  need  of,  and  therefore  it  is  no 
merit  on  my  part  to  like  it  when  it  comes. 

The  point  about  the  combined  action  of  natural 
and  physiological  selection  is,  after  all,  a  very  sub- 
ordinate one,  and,  as  I  said  in  '  Nature '  some  weeks 
ago,  is  the  most  highly  speculative  and  least  trust- 
worthy part  of  the  theory.  Moreover,  it  is  the  only 
part  that  is  directly  opposed  to  an  expressed  conclusion 
in  the  (  Origin,'  though,  even  here,  the  opposition 
is  not  real.  If  natural  selection  can  do  anything 
at  all  in  the  way  of  bringing  about  sterility  with 
parent  forms,  it  can  only  do  so  by  acting  on  the  type 
or  whole  community  (for  I  quite  agree  with  the 
reasoning  in  the  '  Origin,'  that  it  cannot  do  so  by 
acting  on  individuals) ;  and  whether  natural  selection 
could  in  any  case  act  on  a  type  is  a  question  which 
your  father  has  told  me  he  could  never  quite  niako 
up  his  mind  about,  except  in  the  case  of  social 
ii\  menoptera  and  moral  sense  of  man. 

You  will  see  what  I  mean  by  '  secondary  varia- 
tions '  by  looking  at  page  366  of  my  paper.  It  is 
merely  a  short-hand  expression  for  all  other  specific 
differences  save  the  sexual  difference  of  sterility.  My 
view  is  that  these  secondary  differences  are  always 
sure  to  arise  sooner  or  later  in  some  direction  or  another 
wherever  a  portion  of  a  species  is  separated  from  the 
rest,  whether  by  geographical  or  physiological  isolation, 
which,  indeed,  as  regards  the  former, is  no  more  than 
you  (following  Weismann,  &c.)  acknowledge.  Now,  to 
me  it  seems  obvious  that  Weismann's  '  variations  ' 
(i.e.  slight  changes  in  the  form  of  shells)  cannot 


182  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

possibly  be  themselves  my  l  physiological  sports,' 
although  they  may  very  well  be  the  consequences  of 
such  a  sport  leading  to  physiological  isolation,  and  so 
to  independent  variation  in  two  or  three  directions 
simultaneously,  till  afterwards  blended  by  inter- 
crossing. And  my  reason  for  thinking  this  is  that 
'  Weismann's  variations  '  always  arose  in  crops  at 
enormously  long  intervals  of  time.  On  the  mere 
doctrine  of  chances  it  therefore  becomes  impossible 
to  suppose  that  each  of  these  variations  was  due  to 
a  separate  physiological  sport,  although  it  is  easy  to 
see  how  each  crop  of  them  might  have  been  so.  For, 
if  not,  why  should  they  always  have  arisen  in  crops, 
each  member  of  which  was  demonstrably  fertile  with 
the  other  members  of  that  crop,  while  no  less 
demonstrably  sterile  with  the  original  parent  form  ? 
Therefore,  what  I  see  in  these  facts  is  precisely  what, 
upon  my  theory,  I  should  expect  to  see,  viz.  first,  a 
'  primary  variation,'  or  '  physiological  sport,'  arising 
at  long  intervals ;  secondly,  closely  following  upon 
this,  a  crop  of  (  secondary  variations  '  in  the  way  of 
slight  morphological  changes  affecting  two  or  three 
different  i  strains  '  simultaneously ;  and  thirdly,  an 
eventual  blending  of  these  strains  by  intercrossing 
with  one  another  without  being  able  to  intercross 
with  the  surrounding  and  (at  first)  very  much  more 
numerous  parent  form. 

But  I  can  now  quite  understand  why  you  thought 
these  facts  were  *  dead  against '  me ;  you  thought 
that  every  single  slight  change  of  morphology  must 
(on  my  theory)  have  had  a  separate  '  physiological 
sport '  to  account  for  it.  This,  however,  most  em- 


1890  PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  183 

phatically  is  not  my  theory.  Physiological  isola- 
tion I  regard  as  having  morphological  consequences 
precisely  analogous  to  those  of  geographical  isolation ; 
and  you  would  not  think  of  arguing  that  there  must 
be  a  separate  geographical  isolation  for  every  slight 
change  of  structure — for  example,  that  a  peculiar 
species  of  plant  growing  on  a  mountain  top  must 
have  had  one  isolation  to  explain  its  change  of 
form,  and  another  isolation  to  explain  its  change  of 
colour. 

Lastly,  if  you  will  look  up  Hilgendorf's  paper 
about  these  snails  of  Steinheim,  I  think  you  will  find 
it  impossible  to  suppose  that  all  these  little  changes 
(thus  arising  at  long  intervals  in  crops)  can  have 
been  useful.  Or,  if  you  can  still  doubt,  look  up  the 
closely  analogous  but  much  larger  case  of  the  ammo- 
nites investigated  by  Neumayr  and  Wurtenberger. 

What  I  meant  about  the  sexual  system  being 
specially  liable  to  variation  is,  that  it  is  specially 
liable  to  variation  in  the  way  of  sterility.  In  other 
words,  changed  conditions  of  life  more  readily  effect 
variations  in  the  primary  functions  of  the  sexual 
system  than  they  do  in  general  morphology.  But  at 
the  same  time,  I  quite  agree  with  your  view  that  in 
the  last  resort  all  changes  of  structure  may  be 
regarded  as  due  to  variations  of  this  system.  And, 
as  you  will  see  by  turning  to  pp.  371-72  of  my  paper, 
important  capital  is  made  out  of  this  doctrine. 

Now  about  making  too  much  of  the  inutility  of 
specific  characters  ;  if  I  do  so,  it  is  erring  on  the 
side  of  natural  selection ;  for  it  clearly  follows  from 
this  theory  that,  if  there  are  any  useless  struc- 


184  GEOBGE   JOHN   EOMANES 

tures  at  all,  they  ought  to  occur  with  (greater  ?) 
frequency  among  species,  where  (as  ?)  yet  natural 
selection  has  not  had  time  to  remove  them.  But  I 
cannot  think  I  have  here  unduly  favoured  natural 
selection.  For  although  there  are  not  a  few  instances 
of  apparently  useless  structures  running  through  even 
an  entire  class  (as  the  '  Origin  '  remarks),  these  are 
not  only  infinitely  less  numerous  than  apparently 
useless  structures  in  species,  but  are  also  very  much 
more  rarely  trivial. 

Now  the  latter  fact,  coupled  with  that  of  the 
greatly  wider  range  of  their  occurrence,  appears  to 
me  intensely  to  strengthen  '  the  argument  from 
ignorance,'  i.e.  to  give  us  much  more  justification  for 
believing  that  they  are  now,  or  once  were,  of  use. 
For  in  the  case  of  species,  the  l  once  were  '  possibility 
is  virtually  excluded. 

A  propos  to  this  point,  I  do  not  believe  that  any- 
one yet  has  half  done  justice  to  natural  selection  in 
respect  of  its  action  subsequent  to  the  formation  of 
species — at  least,  not  expressly.  But  I  must  shut 
up. 

I  should  greatly  like  to  see  Jordan's  paper.  Sir 
J.  Hooker  and  Professor  Oliver  have  sent  me  refe- 
rences to  literature,  but  neither  of  them  mentions 
this. 

Why  my  answer  to  Wallace  has  not  appeared  in 
this  month's  c  Fortnightly  '  I  am  at  a  loss  to  under- 
stand. The  editor  bullied  me  with  letters  and 
telegrams  to  have  it  ready  in  time,  till  I  laid  every- 
thing else  aside,  and  sent  him  back  the  proof  on 
the  15th. 


1890  LECTUEESHIP  AT  EDINBUKGH  185 

This  new  theory  roused  the  public  interest  (so  far 
as  the  scientific  public  were  concerned)  and  produced 
much  criticism. 

There  is  a  scientific  orthodoxy  as  well  as  a  theo- 
logical orthodoxy  '  plus  loyal  que  le  roi,'  and  by  the 
ultra-Darwinians  Mr.  Romanes  was  regarded  as 
being  strongly  tainted  with  heresy. 

The  '  Times  '  devoted  a  leader  in  August  1886  to 
the  theory,  and  the  president  of  Section  D  at  the 
British  Association  at  Bath  in  the  same  month  also 
criticised  it. 

A  sharp  discussion  took  place  in  the  columns  of 
1  Nature,'  and  it  is  characteristic  of  those  who  took  the 
chief  part  in  this  controversy  that  their  friendly 
relations  remained  undisturbed.  Mr.  Wallace  criti- 
cised the  theory  in  the  '  Fortnightly,'  and  Mr. 
Romanes  wrote  an  article  in  the  '  Nineteenth  Century  ' 
describing  his  beliefs  on  the  subject.  This  theory  was 
very  close  to  his  heart,  and  perhaps  no  part  of  his  work 
was  left  unfinished  with  more  keen  regret. 

He  planned  a  course  of  experiments  on  plants  in 
an  alpine  garden  which,  through  the  kindness  of  M. 
Correvon,  Professor  of  Botany  at  Geneva,  he  was  able 
to  begin  on  a  plot  of  ground  near  Bourg  St.  Pierre,  on 
the  great  St.  Bernard. 

Other  work  diverted  him  a  good  deal  from  this, 
but  Mr.  Romanes  had  always  large  plans  of  work, 
looking  forward  through  a  course  of  years. 

There  were  some  experiments  on  the  power  dogs 
possess  of  tracking  by  scent,  in  the  autumn  of  1886. 

With  this  year  came  the  appointment  to  a  Lec- 
tureship in  the  University  of  Edinburgh  on  '  The 
Philosophy  of  Natural  History.'1  This  lectureship 

1  Through  the  kindness  of  Lord  Eosebery. 


186  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  issi- 

Mr.  Eomanes  held  for  five  years,  and  he  enjoyed  the 
fortnight's  residence  in  Edinburgh  it  involved,  and 
the  meetings  with  Edinburgh  people.  He  gave  to  his 
class  a  course  on  the  History  of  Biology,  and  then 
proceeded  to  take  them  through  a  course  of  lectures 
on  the  Evidences  of  Organic  Evolution,  on  the  theo- 
ries of  Lamarck,  of  Mr.  Darwin  himself,  and  on  post- 
Darwinian  theories.  These  lectures  he  worked  up 
into  the  three  years'  course  he  gave  as  Eulleriari  Pro- 
fessor at  the  Eoyal  Institution,  with  many  additions 
and  alterations.  The  substance  of  them  now  appears 
in  l  Darwin  and  after  Darwin,'  parts  i.  and  ii.  A  third 
volume  was  to  have  been  devoted  to  Physiological 
Selection,  and  enough  was  prepared  in  the  form  of 
notes  to  justify  publication. 

At  the  end  of  1886  there  fell  on  the  Komanes 
family  a  bitter  sorrow.  Of  the  Geanies  '  brother- 
hood,' the  brightest  and  merriest,  a  remarkably  hand- 
some, joyous  girl,  absolutely  unselfish  and  sweet, 
most  dearly  loved  and  loving,  was  the  first  to  die. 
Her  death  was  a  terrible  sorrow  not  only  to  her  own 
immediate  circle  of  relations,  but  to  the  friends  to 
whom  she  had  been  as  a  very  dear  sister.  On  Mr. 
Romanes  this  death,  so  sudden  and  so  startling, 
made  a  deep  and  lasting  impression.  Erom  this 
time  more  and  more  he  turned  in  the  direction  of 
faith,  and  his  feelings  found  an  outlet  in  poetry  more 
frequently  and  more  effectually  than  before. 


To  Miss  C.  E.  Eomanes. 

Edinburgh :  Christmas  Day,  1886. 

My  dearest  Charlotte,-^ The  time  has  come  when 
it  is  some  relief  to  write,  but  how  shall  I  begin  to  tell 


1890  A  GEEAT   SOEKOW  187 

the  sadness  of  the  saddest  tragedy  that  has  ever  been 
put  together  ?  First  the  hours  of  fluctuating  hope, 
and  then  the  growing  darkness  of  despair.  She  had 
previously  asked  whether  Ethel  and  G.  J.1  had  come 
down  from  London,  and  on  being  told  that  we  were 
in  the  house  was  so  glad.  We  were  admitted  at  night, 
and  only  had  to  watch  for  three  hours  the  peaceful 
breathing,  slower,  slower,  slower,  until  the  last.  Oh, 
the  unearthly  beauty  of  that  face  !  Nothing  I  have  ever 
seen  in  flesh  or  in  marble — nothing  I  could  have  ever 
conceived  could  approach  it.  But  try  to  picture  it 
as  you  knew  it  in  life  changed  into  something  so  yet 
more  beautiful  that  it  seemed  no  longer  human,  but 
the  face  of  the  angel  that  she  was.  Then  in  one  room 
her  little  child,  in  another  her  mother,  utterly  broken 
by  illness.  For  my  own  part  I  have  never  had  a 
grief  so  great  as  this.  Even  in  our  sister's  case  there 
were  elements  of  mitigation  ;  but  here  absolutely  none. 
Oh,  it  is  bitter,  bitter ;  so  much  of  life's  happiness 
emptied  out  and  Edith,  our  own  Edith,  no  longer 
here  ! 

In  memory  of  this  friend  Mr.  Eomanes  wrote  a 
little  poem  called  '  To  a  Bust,'  and  from  this  a  few 
lines  are  given. 

There  is  one  point  to  which  the  writer  of  this 
memoir  would  like  to  call  attention. 

Mr.  Romanes  was  incapable  of  exaggeration,  of 
writing  for  effect,  of  insincerity.  What  he  wrote  he 
felt,  and  his  very  simplicity  and  sweetness  of  character, 
his  childlike  trust  in  the  sympathy  of  others,  made 

1  One  of  Mr,  Eomanes'  numerous  pet  names, 


188  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

him  unreserved   to   his   friends,  to   those  whom  he 
loved. 

'  Upon  that  Christmas  Eve 
We  saw  thee  pass  away, 

We  heard  the  music  of  thy  parting  breath  ; 

We  saw  a  light  of  angels  in  thy  face — 
A  beauty  so  ineffable,  that  Death 

Was  changed  into  a  minister  of  Grace  : 

The  mountains  in  their  autumn  hues, 
Of  mountain  reds  and  mountain  blues, 
With  heather  and  with  highland  bells, 
Await  thy  step  on  hills  and  fells  ; 
The  spongy  peat  and  dewy  moss 
Eemember  where  we  used  to  cross — 
Remember  how  they  loved  thy  tread, 
Make  for  thy  steps  their  softest  bed : 
The  murmuring  streams  are  calling  thee, 
The  woodlands  sigh  in  every  tree ; 
Yet  when  I  walk  upon  the  shore, 
The  waves  are  whispering— nevermore  ! 

Mournfully,  mournfully  whispering,  they, 
Whispering,  whispering  every  day, 
Thy  soul  in  their  waters,  thy  breath  in  their  spray, 
Thy  spirit  still  speaking  in  all  that  they  say. 
They  knew  thee  well,  those  weedy  rocks, 
And  now  they  rear  their  rugged  blocks 
When  I  pass  by, 
To  ask  me  why 

They  never  feel  thy  tender  hands  ; 
And  all  the  yellow  of  the  sands 
Is  spread  to  greet 
Thy  tireless  feet, 
Which  loved  to  walk  them  when  the  tide  was  low. 

Now  when  I  walk  alone, 
To  hear  the  ocean  moan, 
The  sea-birds  circling  round 
Sweep  almost  to  the  ground, 
And  peep  and  pry  above  my  head  to  know 


1890  SOCIAL  LIFE  189 

Why  thou  dost  never  come, 
To  watch  them  flying  home, 
Upon  the  purple  breast, 
Where  daylight  sinks  to  rest.' 

The  Journal  1887,  1888,  and  1889  is  full  of  men- 
tion of  pleasant  dinners  and  meetings  with  interesting 
people.  Young  as  Mr.  Komanes  was,  he  attained  long 
before  he  died  'that  which  should  accompany  old  age- 
honour,  love,  obedience,  troops  of  friends,'  and  as  one 
turns  over  the  brief  records  of  the  Journal  one  is  struck 
with  the  brightness  of  his  outward  life.  He  enjoyed  con- 
stant pleasant  intercourse  with  men  and  women  differ- 
ing widely  in  pursuits,  in  opinions,  in  social  position  ; 
he  was  full  of  plans  for  work,  work  which  led  him  into 
many  different  phases  of  intellectual  life,  and  he  had 
every  year  an  admixture  of  country  life  and  country 
pursuits,  and  the  love  for  music  and  for  poetry,  which 
increased  each  year,  kept  him  from  growing  too 
absorbed  in  science,  from  being  at  all  one-sided.  He 
used  sometimes  to  say  he  had  too  many  interests,  but 
be  that  as  it  may,  these  interests  gave  him  much 
enjoyment  and  made  him  the  most  delightful  of 
companions. 

A  dear  friend  wrote  of  him  after  his  death  that 
1  In  the  home  few  men  have  been  more  surrounded  by 
love,  or  have  better  deserved  it,'  and  few  men  have 
been  more  loved  by  those  outside  his  home.  He  had  an 
unlimited  capacity  for  loyal,  true-hearted  friendship. 
As  one  most  truly  said,  '  Romanes  was  the  most  loyal 
of  friends.' 

There  was  something  womanly  in  the  tenderness 
which  he  felt  for  anyone  in  trouble  of  mind  or  body, 
and  he  was — what  perhaps  is  even  more  rare — always 
ready  to  put  aside  his  own  work  to  help  other  people. 
He  never  grudged  time  or  trouble  to  write  letters  or 


190  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES  issi- 

testimonials  ;  he  was  always  ready  to  go  and  see 
people  who  were  sad  or  lonely ;  he  was  never  too 
busy  to  be  kind.  He  was  intensely  loved  by  those 
who  served  him,  and  few  have  been  better  served. 
There  were  very  few  changes  in  his  household,  and 
no  one  was  ever  more  unwilling  to  give  needless 
trouble,  to  find  fault  without  cause,  than  he,  or  more 
ready  to  be  really  grateful  for  the  ungrudging  and 
loving  and  devoted  service  he  received.  '  You  were 
the  nicest  master  I  ever  served,'  wrote  a  gamekeeper. 
<  To  think  I  have  lived  for  fifteen  years  with  him 
and  never  heard  a  cross  word,'  was  said  the  day  he 
was  taken  from  his  home.  In  money  matters  he  was 
generous  and  almost  lavish  in  readiness  to  give  and 
also  to  lend. 

In  Mr.  Romanes  there  was  a  certain  chivalrous 
temper  which  could  be  roused  to  strong  indignation 
where  it  was  encountered  by  injustice  and  oppression, 
and  the  following  letter  to  the  '  Times  '  is  one  of 
many  such  : 

To  the  Editor  of  the  l  Times.' 

Sir, — On  several  previous  occasions  I  have  been 
instrumental  in  obtaining  remission  of  grievous  sen- 
tences at  the  police-courts  by  simply  drawing  atten- 
tion in  your  correspondence  columns  to  the  cases  as 
they  appear  in  your  police  reports.  Adopting  this 
course,  I  think  that  the  following,  which  appeared  in 
your  issue  of  the  29th  ult.,  requires  some  explana- 
tion : 

4  At  Wandsworth, ,  aged  17,  a  weakly-looking 

lad,  residing  at ,  was  charged  with  stealing  two  tur- 
nips, value  3d.,  growing  in  a  field  belonging  to  Mr.  H. 


1890  LETTEE  TO  THE   'TIMES'  191 

Bunce,  at  Merton.  The  prosecutor  having  lost  a  quan- 
tity of  produce,  Police  Constable  Whitty  was  set  to 
watch  the  property,  and  saw  the  prisoner  pull  the 
turnips  and  put  them  in  his  pocket.  The  accused 
said  he  had  had  nothing  to  eat  all  day,  and  being  very 
hungry,  he  took  the  turnips  !  A  previous  conviction 
was  proved  against  him  for  felony,  and  he  was  now 
committed  by  Mr.  Denman  for  six  weeks'  hard 
labour.' 

One  would  like  to  possess  a  good  large  field  of 
turnips,  where  each  turnip  can  be  fairly  valued  at 
\\d.  But,  taking  this  as  the  true  value  of  the  par- 
ticular turnips  in  question,  it  appears  that  a  starving 
man  is  now  serving  a  week's  hard  labour  for  every 
half-penny's  worth  of  the  cheapest  possible  kind  of 
food  that  he  could  steal.  It  is,  of  course,  very  right 
that  he  should  have  received  some  measure  of  punish- 
ment, if  only  as  a  warning  to  others  in  the  neighbour- 
hood ;  but  the  measure  of  punishment  which  he  did 
receive  seems,  in  the  face  of  the  matter,  monstrous. 
We  are  not  told  what  was  the  '  felony  '  for  which  this 
'  weakly-looking  lad  '  was  previously  convicted  ;  but, 
at  any  rate,  we  do  know  that  on  the  present  occasion 
his  theft  was  not  for  any  purpose  of  gain.  It  must 
have  been,  as  he  said,  merely  to  alleviate  the  pains  of 
hunger,  for  otherwise  he  would  have  carried  some 
more  capacious  receptacle  than  either  his  pockets  or 
his  stomach.  On  the  whole,  therefore,  I  say — and 
say  emphatically — this  case  demands  some  explana- 
tion. 

I  am,  Sir,  yours,  &c., 

LL.D. 


192  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  issi- 

He  was  always  ready  to  listen  to  what  younger 
men  (and  women)  had  to  say,  to  talk  to  them  about 
his  own  subjects,  his  own  work,  to  draw  out  their 
abilities,  to  discuss  their  difficulties.  What  Mr. 
Lionel  Tollemache  has  written  of  Professor  Owen  is 
not  less  applicable  to  him : 

1  His  innate  modesty  enabled  him,  when  speaking 
upon  his  own  subject,  so  to  let  himself  down  to  the 
level  of  the  ordinary  listeners  that  they  not  only  felt 
quite  at  their  ease  with  him,  but  fancied  for  the 
moment  that  they  were  experts  like  himself.' 

Journal,  Jan.  1888. — Met  Mr.  Burne-Jones  at 
the  Humphry  Wards',  and  had  much  interesting 
talk  anent  Eossetti.  Burne-Jones  said  Kossetti  was 
like  an  emperor ;  his  voice  was  that  of  a  king  who 
could  quell  his  subjects.  Also  that  he  had  a  won- 
derful memory  for  metre,  but  that  Swinburne's  is 
better  still,  inasmuch  as  he  can  remember  prose. 
On  one  occasion  Swinburne  recited  to  Burne-Jones 
several  pages  of  Milton's  prose  which  he  had  read 
once  twenty  years  previously.  Burne-Jones  went  on 
to  say  that  Eossetti  worked  a  great  deal  at  his  poetry, 
and  added,  '  That's  what  you  can  do  with  words, 
worry  them  as  much  as  you  like,  but  you  can't  tease 
a  picture.' 

March  9. — Mr.  Leslie  Stephen  lectured  on  Cole- 
ridge most  admirably. 

To  Miss  C.  E.  Eomanes. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace  :  March  1,  1888. 

My  dearest  Charlotte, — I  find  that  neither  of  us 
wrote  yesterday,  so  I  have  two  of  your  letters  to 
answer  to-day. 


1890  LIFE   IN   LONDON  193 

You  certainly  seem  to  be  having  much  the  best 
time  of  it  as  regards  weather.  Every  week  and  every 
day  here  is  worse  than  the  last — the  month  which 
has  just  ended  having  been  the  most  savage  February 
in  the  memory  of  living  Londoners.  You  will  have 
seen  that  poor  Cotter  Morison  has  not  survived  it. 
He  died  last  Sunday,  just  too  soon  to  see  his  son,  who 
had  been  telegraphed  home  from  India.  He  had  a 
great  desire  to  live  long  enough  to  have  had  this 
meeting,  and  it  seems  hard  that  when  he  struggled 
on  so  long  and  painfully  at  the  end,  that  he  should 
just  have  missed  it. 

For  Mr.  Morison  Mr.  Romanes  had  a  great  regard, 
and  his  death  was  a  real  sorrow. 

Journal. — Sir  F.  Bramwell  lectured  on  the  '  Faults 
of  the  Decimal  System,'  calling  it  a  lecture  without 
a  point.  He  was  killingly  amusing.  Dinner  at  Sir 
H.  Thompson's,  met  Mr.  J.  Froude,  Hannen,  and 
others. 

We  met  the  author  of  '  The  New  Antigone  '  the 
other  night  at  the  Lillys'.  He  reviewed  '  Mental 
Evolution  in  Man '  in  a  E.G.  paper  the  other  day ; 
according  to  him  it's  the  Gospel  of  Dirt !  Last 
Sunday  we  went  to  hear  Spurgeon  ;  of  his  personal 
goodness  there  is  no  doubt. 

May  14. — Stayed  in  Christ  Church  with  the 
Pagets.  G.  had  a  most  interesting  talk  with  Aubrey 
Moore.  [Mr.  Romanes  had  already,  at  the  Aristote- 
lian Society,  met  Mr.  Aubrey  Moore.]  Lunched 
on  Sunday  with  the  Max  Mullers.  He  showed  us  a 

o 


194  GEOEGE   JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

letter  from  Mr.  Darwin  most  characteristic  in  its 
humility  and  sweetness. 

May  20. — Very  fine  sermon  from  Mr.  Scott- 
Holland  on  the  Evidence  of  the  Gospels.  Tea  at  the 
Deanery,  and  G.  had  a  little  talk  with  the  Dean. 

There  are  frequent  mentions  now  of  Mr.  Scott- 
Holland,  whom  Mr.  Romanes  often  went  to  hear. 

In  1888  appeared  '  Mental  Evolution  in  Man.' 
To  Miss  C.  E.  Romanes. 

Cornwall  Terrace  :  May  18,  1888. 

My  own  book  is  certain  to  make  a  '  commotion,' 
if  not  among  l  the  angels  '  in  heaven,1  at  least  among 
'  the  saints  '  upon  earth.  One  of  these  same  saints 
has  been  behaving  outrageously  in  print,  and  every- 
body is  full  either  of  jubilation  or  indignation  at 
what  he  has  been  writing  about  Darwin  and 
Darwinism.  F.  Darwin  asked  me  to  do  the  replying, 
and  to-day  I  am  returning  proof  of  an  article  for  the 
<  Contemporary  Review.' 

I  am  ashamed  to  have  been  so  long  in  writing, 
but  the  truth  is  that,  notwithstanding  having  put 
down  Finis  to  my  MS.,  other  things  occurred  to  me 
to  add,  which  required  recasting  some  of  the  chapters, 
and  so  I  have  been  fighting  against  time,  and  am 
still. 

It  will  not  be  long  now  before  you  have  the 
children. 

1  This  is  in  allusion  to  a  minister  of  a  small  country  parish  in  Scotland, 
who  prayed  that  there  might  be  at  this  time,  on  account  of  this  parish,  '  a 
very  great  commotion  among  the  angels.' 


1890  ROYAL   INSTITUTION   LECTUEE  195 

They  are  looking  forward  with  great  glee  to  Dun- 
skaith  ;  but  you  must  take  care  that  they  do  not 
make  it  too  lively.  I  never  saw  such  nice  children 
myself,  but  James  may  find  them  over-noisy  when 
they  are  particularly  high-spirited.  His  godson  is 
the  most  comical  chap  that  ever  was  born.  He  has 
a  passion  for  what  he  calls  'loaded  matches/  i.e. 
matches  unused,  and  so  ready  to  '  go  off.'  Yesterday 
his  fingers  were  found  to  be  burnt.  Asked  as  to  the 
cause,  he  said  he  had  lighted  some  loaded  matches 
and  held  his  fingers  in  the  flames  so  as  to  see  if  he 
could  'keep  back  crying.'  This  he  seems  to  have 
done  to  his  own  satisfaction,  and  now  wants  to  prove 
his  prowess  in  public.  Little  Ethel  was  found  bathed 
in  tears  a  few  days  ago  in  a  room  by  herself,  and  the 
grief  turned  out  to  have  been  on  account  of  the  death 
of  the  Emperor.1 

You  ask  how  the  lectures  are  'going  on.'  They 
are  '  going  on  '  rather  too  well.  Owing  to  Schafer 
having  been  taken  ill  with  bronchitis,  I  agreed  to 
relieve  him  of  some  engagements  he  had  entered  into 
for  giving  lectures  to  a  Highgate  Institution.  Con- 
sequently I  had  to  give  two  lectures  on  Tuesday  (in 
the  afternoon  at  the  Institution,  and  in  the  evening 
at  Highgate),  and  another  yesterday,  besides  attend- 
ing Council  meetings,  &c.  The  Institution  lectures 
give  much  more  satisfaction  than  I  anticipated,  as  I 
thought  the  historical  character  of  this  year's  course 
would  appeal  but  to  a  small  number  of  people.  But 
the  audience  keeps  up  to  between  one  hundred  and 


1  Of  Germany. 

o2 


196  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

two  hundred  very  steadily  (usually  one  hundred  and 
fifty),  and  is  in  part  made  up  of  outsiders.  But  I 
shall  not  be  sorry  when  they  are  over,  as  it  will  leave 
me  more  time  for  better  work. 

I  am  sorry  that  there  still  continue  to  be  so  many 
ups  and  downs  in  your  daily  reports.1  The  case  is, 
indeed,  dreadfully  tedious.  How  would  you  like  me 
to  run  down  to  see  you  after  my  lectures  are  over  ? 

I  enclose  a  photo  which  has  just  come  from  a  man 
who  is  photographing  the  Royal  Society. 

We  are  all  well  and  flying  about  in  all  directions. 
Such  a  time  for  dinners  and  concerts  and  all  manner 
of  things ;  it  is  a  wonder  that  we  are  living  at  all,  as 
old  Jean 2  used  to  say. 


To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

Ernest  is  as  right  as  ever  he  was.  I  had  all 
three  boys,  and  Gerald  was  more  comical  than  can 
be  described.  Jack  made  me  take  him  all  over 
the  house  looking  for  mother.  Then  I  went  out  to 
get  my  dinner,  when  I  made  a  great  discovery. 
After  close  upon  thirty  years'  residence  in  London,  I 
have  at  last  found  the  perfect  thing  in  the  way  of 
a  restaurant.  For  Is.  6d.  one  can  get  the  most  ideal 
of  conceivable  dinners  (which  has  also  the  advantage 
of  being  decidedly  material).  There  was  only  one 
deficiency,  and  that  was  yourself.  This  you  must 
supply.  Indeed,  I  should  like  to  repeat  the  whole 
of  this  evening's  experience  with  you.  For  after  the 

1  His  brother  was  ill.  ~  An  old  nurse. 


1890  DINING  197 

dinner  I  went  to  St.  James's  Theatre,  and  there  saw 
one  of  the  best  pieces  of  acting  I  have  ever  seen. 
Yours  in  Zeit  and  Ewigkeit.  Waggett 1  came  in  for 
an  hour,  and  I  gave  him  my  book. 

I  went  to  see  Father  Clarke.2  I  had  to  go  to  a 
vegetarian  dinner,  but  secured  a  good  luncheon  at 
the  club  first ! 

To  J.  Romanes,  Esq. 

March  15,  1889. 

I  am  glad  you  think  so  well  of  what  I  write,  for  it 
often  seems  to  me  that,  amid  so  many  distractions 
and  in  so  many  directions,  I  work  to  very  little  pur- 
pose. The  '  Guardian  '  reviewer  3  has  written  to  me 
a  private  letter,  from  which  it  appears  that  he  is  a 
man  I  know  very  well.  He  is  Aubrey  Moore,  of 
Oxford,  and  is  considered  one  of  the  ablest  men  there. 
I  enclose  his  letter,  which  I  failed  to  send  before. 

It  is  indeed  a  change  for  you  to  like  being  nursed, 
and  perhaps  not  altogether  a  bad  one  from  the 
character  point  of  view.  The  only  l  explanation '  I 
can  give  is  that  of  the  '  adaptation  of  the  organism  to 
changed  conditions  of  life.' 

Journal,  May  1889. — Our  dear  Mr.  Henry  Pollock 
is  dead.  Wisest,  kindest  of  friends.  Geanies  will  be 
so  sad  now.  So  many  who  had  helped  to  make  it 
bright  are  gone. 

1  The  Kev.  Philip  Napier  Waggett,  now  of  Cowley  St.  John,  who  WMS 
one  of  Mr.  Romanes'  most  intimate  friends.  Mr.  Waggett's  scientific 
attainments  made  him  a  valuable  as  well  as  a  much-loved  friend. 

~  The  Eev.  E.  Clarke,  S.J. 

3  Mr.  Aubrey  Moore  reviewed  Mental  Evolution  in  Man  in  the 
Guardian. 


198  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

About  this  time  Mr.  Komanes  drew  up  a  paper, 
which  is  given  here,  as  it  may  interest  some  readers. 


18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  London,  N.'W. 

Dear  Sir  or  Madam, — While  engaged  in  collecting 
materials  for  a  work  on  Human  Psychology,  I  have 
been  surprised  to  find  the  greatness  of  the  differences 
which  obtain  between  different  races,  and  even 
between  different  individuals  of  the  same  race,  con- 
cerning sentiments  which  attach  to  the  thoughts  of 
death.  With  the  view,  if  possible,  of  ascertaining 
the  causes  of  such  differences,  I  am  addressing  a 
copy  of  the  appended  questions  to  a  large  number  of 
representative  and  average  individuals  of  both  sexes, 
various  nationalities,  creeds,  occupations,  &c.  It 
would  oblige  me  if  you  would  be  kind  enough  to 
further  the  object  of  my  inquiry  by  answering  some 
or  all  of  these  questions,  and  adding  any  remarks 
that  may  occur  to  you  as  bearing  upon  the  sub- 
ject. 

In  order  to  save  unnecessary  trouble,  I  may  explain 
that,  in  the  event  of  your  not  caring  to  answer  any  of 
the  questions,  I  shall  not  expect  you  to  acknowledge 
this  letter ;  and  that,  if  you  should  reply,  answers  to 
many  of  the  questions  may  be  most  briefly  furnished 
by  underlining  the  portion  of  each,  which  by  its  repe- 
tition would  serve  to  convey  your  answer. 

It  is  needless  to  add  that  the  names  of  my  corre- 
spondents will  not  be  published. 

I  am  yours  very  faithfully, 

GEOEGE  J.  KOMANES. 


1890  QUESTIONS  ON  DEATH  199 

(1)  Do  you  regard  the  prospect  of  your  own  death 

(A)  with  indifference,  (B)  with  dislike,  (c)  with  dread, 
or  (D)  with  inexpressible  horror  ? 

(2)  If  you  entertain  any  fear  of  death  at  all,  is  the 
cause  of  it  (A)  prospect  of  bodily  suffering  only,  (B) 
dread  of   the  unknown,  (c)    idea  of   loneliness    and 
separation  from  friends,  or  (D)  in  addition  to  all  or 
any  of  these,  a  peculiar  horror  of   an  indescribable 
kind? 

(3)  Is  the  state  of  your  belief  with  regard  to  a 
future  life  that  of  (A)  virtual  conviction  that  there  is 
a  future  life,  (B)  suspended  judgment  inclining  to- 
wards such  belief,  (c)  suspended  judgment  inclining 
against  such   belief,  or  (D)    virtual   conviction   that 
there  is  no  such  life  ? 

(4)  Is  your  religious  belief,  if  any,  (A)  of  a  vivid 
order,  or    (B)   without   much  practical   influence   on 
your  life  and  conduct  ? 

(5)  Is    your    temperament    naturally    of    (A)    a 
courageous   or  (B)  of   a  timid   order  as   regards  the 
prospect  of  bodily  pain  or  mental  distress  ? 

(6)  More  generally,  do  you  regard  your  own  dis- 
position as  (A)   strong,  determined,  and  self-reliant ; 

(B)  nervous,  shrinking,  and  despondent ;  or  (c)  medium 
in  this  respect  ? 

(7)  Should  you  say  that  in  your  character  the 
intellectual  or  the  emotional  predominates  ?     Does 
your  intellect  incline  to  abstract  or  concrete  ways  of 
thought  ?     Is  it  theoretical,  practical,  or  both  ?     Are 
your  emotions  of  the  tender  or  heroic  order,  or  both  ? 
Are  your  tastes  in  any  way  artistic,  and,  if  so,  in  what 
way,  and  with  what  strength  ? 

(8)  What  is  your  age  or  occupation  ?     Can  you 
trace  any  change  in  your  feelings  with  regard  to  death 


200  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  issl- 

as  having  taken   place    during  the   course   of   your 
life? 

(9)  If  ever  you  have  been  in  danger  of  death,  what 
were  the  circumstances,  and  what  your  feelings  ? 

(10)  Remarks. 

(Signature.) l 

This  communication  well  exemplifies  the  spirit  in 
which  Mr.  Romanes  approached  the  problems  of 
animal  faculty.  He  spent,  indeed,  much  time  and 
labour  in  collecting  and  classifying  the  observations 
and  anecdotes  which  he  published  in  '  Animal  Intelli- 
gence ' ;  but  he  lost  no  opportunities  of  observing  and 
experimenting  for  himself.  In  this,  as  in  other 
departments  of  inquiry,  his  constant  effort  was  to  be 
in  direct  and  immediate  touch  with  facts.  His 
observations  on  his  own  dogs,  especially  those  which 
he  published  in  his  article2  on  '  Fetichism  in  Animals,' 
wiiereiri  he  describes  the  effects  on  a  terrier  of  the 
apparent  coming  to  life  of  a  dry  bone  which  the  dog 
had  been  playing  with,  and  to  which  a  fine  thread 
had  been  attached,  and  those  which  dealt  with  the 
power  of  tracking  their  master  by  scent,3  further 
exemplify  his  careful  methods  and  his  resort,  wher- 
ever possible,  to  experimental  conditions.  His  obser- 
vations, too,  on  the  '  homing '  of  bees,4  by  which  he 
showed  that  the  insects  find  their  way  back  to  the 
hive  through  their  experience  of  the  topography  and 
by  knowledge  of  landmarks,  rather  than  through  any 
mysterious  innate  faculty  or  sense  of  direction,  are 

1  I  have  not  been  able  to  discover  any  answer  to  these,  except  those 
given  by  the  Hon.  L.  Tollemache  in  his  Stones  of  Stumbling. 
*  Nature,  vol.  xvii.  p.  168.  3  Ibid.  vol.  xxxvi.  p.  273. 

4  Ibid.  vol.  xxxii.  p.  030. 


1890  PYSCHOLOGICAL  WOEK  201 

the  work  of  a  scientific  observer,  and  very  different 
from  the  chance  tales  of  a  mere  anecdotist. 

The  whole  subject  of  comparative  psychology  had 
a  special  and  peculiar  fascination  for  Mr.  Romanes, 
partly  on  account  of  its  intimate  connection  with  the 
theory  of  evolution,  and  partly  from  its  bearing  on 
those  deeper  philosophic  problems  which  were  never 
long  absent  from  his  thoughts.  His  treatment  of 
the  phenomena  of  instinct  in  '  Mental  Evolution  in 
Animals,'  and  elsewhere,  was  both  comprehensive 
and  exact,  and  still  forms,  in  the  opinion  of  com- 
petent authorities,  the  best  general  account  of  the 
subject  that  we  have ;  though,  had  he  lived  to  review 
and  consolidate  his  work,  some  changes  would  probably 
have  been  introduced  in  view  of  later  discussions 
on  the  nature  and  method  of  hereditary  transmission. 
His  arguments  in  '  Mental  Evolution  in  Man,'  in 
support  of  the  essential  similarity  of  the  reasoning 
processes  in  the  higher  animals  and  in  man,  created 
a  stir,  at  the  time  of  their  publication,  which  was  in 
itself  evidence  that  his  critics  felt  that  they  had  a 
writer  and  thinker  that  must  be  seriously  and 
sharply  met.  He  hoped  by  this  work  to  win  over 
the  psychologists  to  the  evolution  camp;  and  he 
himself  felt  strongly  that  in  some  cases,  when  he 
failed  fully  to  convince  them  of  the  adequacy  of  his 
method  of  treatment  and  of  the  arguments  he 
adduced,  it  was  rather  in  matters  of  definition  than 
in  matters  of  fact  that  the  source  of  their  differences 
lay.  He  was  somewhat  disappointed  that  his  terms 
1  recept '  and  (  receptual '  for  mental  products  inter- 
mediate between  the  i  percept '  and  the  '  concept  ' 
were  not  more  generally  accepted  by  psychologists, 
since,  in  his  matured  opinion,  they  and  the  conception 
they  represent  were  eminently  helpful  in  bridging 


202  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

the  debatable  space  between  the  intellectual  powers 
of  man  and  the  faculties  of  the  lower  animals. 

It  was  Mr.  Romanes'  intention  to  continue  the 
mental  evolution  series  and  to  deal,  in  further  instal- 
ments of  his  work,  with  the  intellectual  emotions, 
volition,  morals,  and  religion.  This  intention,  how- 
ever, he  did  not  live  to  fulfil.  His  further  develop- 
ment of  mental  evolution  in  the  light  of  his  later 
conclusions  in  the  region  of  philosophical  and  religious 
thought  would  have  been  profoundly  interesting. 
But  one's  regret  that  this  part  of  his  life  work 
remained  incomplete  is  tempered  by  the  recollection 
that  what  he  did  complete  was  so  worthily  done. 
For,  in  the  words  of  Mr.  Lloyd  Morgan,  which  were 
quoted  with  approval  by  Dr.  Burdon  Sanderson  in 
his  Royal  Society  obituary  notice  :  i  by  his  patient 
collection  of  data ;  by  his  careful  discussion  of  these 
data  in  the  light  of  principles  clearly  and  definitely 
formulated ;  by  his  wide  and  forcible  advocacy  of  his 
views ;  and,  above  all,  by  his  own  observations  and 
experiments,  Mr.  Romanes  left  a  mark  in  this  field  of 
investigation  and  interpretation  which  is  not  likely 
to  be  effaced.' 

In  1889  Mr.  Romanes  attended  the  British  Asso- 
ciation which  met  that  year  at  Newcastle.  Here,  he 
and  Professor  Poultori  had  a  long  discussion  on  the 
'  Inheritance  of  Acquired  Characters  ' ;  he  spoke  so 
much,  and  was  so  much  en  evidence,  at  this  Association 
that  the  Newcastle  papers  described  him  as  a  most 
belligerent  person. 

He  wrote  afterwards  from  Edinburgh  : 

Things  progress  as  usual.  After  my  lecture  I 
played  chess  with  Mrs.  Butcher  and  dined  with  the 


1890  LETTEE  TO   PEOFESSOE  POULTON  203 

Logans.  Margaret,  in  telling  me  the  pretty  things 
she  had  heard,  drew  from  her  husband  the  rebuke 
that  she  was  not  judicious.  So  I  told  them  your 
estimate  of  my  merits,  and  Charles 1  was  quite  satisfied 
that  I  was  in  good  keeping. 

You  have  made  a '  philosophical '  mistake  about  the 
dinner  party  to  the  E.'s  which,  of  course,  I  imitated. 
Butcher  has  given  me  a  MS.  of  his  to  read  on  the 
'  Psychology  of  the  Ludicrous.'  Seems  very  good. 


To  Professor  Poulton. 

Newcastle  :  Monday,  September  ]  889. 

My  dear  Poulton, — I  am  very  glad  to  receive  your 
long  and  friendly  letter  ;  because,  although  I  have  the 
Ishmael-like  reputation  of  finding  my  hand  against 
every  man,  and  every  man's  against  mine,  my  blasto- 
genetic  endowments  are  really  of  the  peaceful  order. 
Moreover,  in  the  present  instance  the  '  row '  was  not 
one  that  affected  me  with  any  feelings  of  real  opposi- 
tion, although  it  seemed  expedient  to  point  out  that 
a  somewhat  hasty  inference  had  not  been  judiciously 
stated.  Therefore,  I  take  it,  we  may  now  cordially, 
as  well  as  formally,  shake  hands,  and  probably  be 
better  friends  than  ever.  In  token  of  which  I  may 
begin  by  furnishing  the  explanation  of  what  was 
meant  by  the  passage  in  the  '  Contemporary  Keview  ' 
to  which  you  alluded. 

I  quite  agree  that  Weismann's  suggestion  about 
causes  of  variability  is  an  admirable  one.  But  it  has 

1  C.  Logan,  Esq.,  W.S.,  who  had  married  Mr.  Romanes'  cousin. 


204  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES  issi- 

always  seemed  to  me  that  it  is  comprised  under 
Darwin's  general  category  of  causes  internal  to  the 
organism  (or,  in  his  terminology,  causes  due  to  *  the 
nature  of  the  organism  ').  But  besides  this,  he  recog- 
nised the  category  of  causes  external  to  the  organism 
(or  the  so-called  Lamarckian  principles  of  direct 
action  of  environment,  plus  inherited  efforts  of  use 
and  disuse).  Now,  anyone  who  accepts  this  latter 
category  as  comprising  verce  causce,  obviously  has  a 
larger  area  of  causality  on  which  to  draw  for  his 
theoretical  explanations  of  variability,  than  has  a 
man  who  expressly  limits  the  possibility  of  such 
causes  to  the  former  category.  This  is  all  that  I 
had  in  my  mind  w7hen  writing  the  line  in  the  '  Con- 
temporary Eeview '  which  led  you  to  suppose  that  I 
was  expounding  W.  without  having  read  him ;  and 
although  I  freely  allow  that  the  meaning  was  one 
that  required  explanation  to  bring  out,  you  may 
remember  that  this  meaning  had  nothing  whatever 
to  do  with  the  subject  which,!  was  expounding, 
and  therefore  it  was  that  I  neglected  to  draw  it  out. 
You  will  observe  that,  so  far  as  the  present  matter 
is  concerned,  it  does  not  signify  what  views  we 
severally  take  touching  the  validity  of  Lamarckian 
hypotheses.  The  point  is,  that  anyone  who  sees 
his  way  to  entertaining  them  thereby  furnishes 
himself  with  a  larger  field  of  causality  for  explaining 
variations  than  does  a  man  who  limits  that  field 
to  causes  internal  to  organisms — even  though,  like 
W.,  he  suggests  an  extension  of  the  latter. 

And  now  about  the  '  Athena3um.'     I  fear  you  think 
I  have  been  taking  an  unfair  opportunity  of  giving 


1890  LETTER   TO   PROFESSOR  POULTON  205 

you  a  back-hander.  In  point  of  fact,  however,  I  never 
do  such  things ;  and  the  more  reason  I  have  for  any- 
thing like  hitting  back  (which,  however,  is  entirely 
absent  on  the  present  occasion),  the  more  careful 
should  I  be  to  avoid  any  appearance  of  doing  so  in  an 
unsigned  review.  I  neither  wrote,  nor  have  I  read 
the  particular  review  in  question. 

Regarding  articulation,  read  in  my  c  Mental 
Evolution  in  Man,'  Mr.  Hales'  admirable  remarks  on 
children  having  probably  been  the  constructors  of  all 
languages,  I  believe  this  theory  will  prove  to  be  the 
true  solution  of  the  origin  of  languages,  as  distin- 
guished from  the  faculty  of  language.  What  you  say 
about  the  latter  being  blastogenetic,  requires  you  to 
unsay  what  is  said  by  W. 

Please  let  me  know  whether  there  is  anything 
that  you  see  in  my  '  cessation  of  selection  '  different 
from  W.'s  '  Panmixia.'  The  debate  to-day  failed  to 
furnish  any  opposition. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

G.  J.  ROMANES. 


Geanies,  Ross- shire,  N.B. :  October  21,  1889. 

My  dear  Poulton, — Many  thanks  for  your  interest- 
ing letter.  From  it  I  quite  understand  your  views 
about  the  relation  between  reproduction  and  repair  ; 
are  they  those  of  Weismann  or  altogether  your  own  ? 
And  have  they,  as  yet,  been  published  anywhere  ?  If 
not,  I  suppose  it  is  undesirable  to  allude  to  them  in 
public  ?  The  theory  is  ingenious,  but  seems  to  sail 
rather  near  Pangenesis  (as  do  many  of  the  latter 


206  GEOEGE   JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

amendments  of  germplasm  by  W.) ;  and  I  should 
have  thought  that  the  limbs  of  salamanders,  &c.,  are 
too  late  products,  both  phylogenetically  and  ontogene- 
tically,  to  fall  within  its  terms. 

I  also  see  better  what  you  mean  about  Sphex. 
But  Darwin's  letter  in  c  Mental  Evolution  in  Animals  ' 
seems  to  me  to  meet  (or  rather  to  anticipate)  the 
1  difficulty.'  Of  course,  he  did  not  suppose  that  the 
insects'  knowledge  of  '  success  '  goes  further  than 
finding  out  and  observing  the  best  place  to  sting  in 
order  to  produce  the  maximum  effect.  The  analogy 
of  Cymphs  is  apposite  ;  but  is  it  the  fact  that  there 
is  any  species  whose  localisation  is  really  compara- 
ble with  that  of  Sphex  ?  Contrasting  Weismann's 
account  with  Fabre's,  I  should  say  not. 

As  for  neuter  insects  (which  you  mentioned  at 
Newcastle),  Darwin  allows  that  they  constitute  one 
of  the  most  difficult  cases  to  bring  under  natural  selec- 
tion, seeing  that  this  has  here  to  act  at  the  end  of  a 
long  lever  of  the  wrong  kind,  so  to  speak.  Bead 
Perrier's  preface  to  French  translation  of  i  Mental 
Evolution  in  Animals,'  and  observe  how  good  his 
suggestion  is,  on  the  supposition  that  Lamarckian 
principles  have  any  applicability  at  all. 

Lastly,  at  Newcastle  you  said  something  that 
seemed  to  imply  a  doubt  upon  such  facts  as  Lord 
Morton's  mare.  Do  you  really  doubt  such  facts  ?  I 
cannot  suppose  it. 

There  are  plenty  of  white  stoats  hereabouts,  I 
believe,  though  I  have  never  actually  seen  them, 
because  I  do  not  stay  late  enough  in  the  year.  I 
have  told  my  keeper  to  try  to  catch  some  without 


1890  LETTEE  TO   PEOFESSOK  POULTON  207 

injuring  them,  and,  if  he  succeeds,  to  send  them 
straight  to  the  Zoo.  The  experiment  would  be  a  very 
interesting  one.  But  the  keeper  says  that  even  here 
the  whiteness  depends  as  to  its  intensity  upon  the 
amount  of  snow  in  different  seasons.  He  is  most 
positive  about  this  ;  he  says  it  depends  upon  snow, 
and  not  on  cold.  However,  I  do  not  quote  him  as  an 
authority  in  science,  although  he  certainly  is  an  in- 
telligent and  observing  man. 

Regarding  the  Royal  Institution,  an  after  Easter 
course  by  you  would  be  doubly  interesting,  because 
before  Easter  I  have  to  give  one  on  the  '  Post- 
Darwinian  Period,'  which  will  be  mainly  concerned 
with  Weismann.  Your  lectures  might  then  serve  as 
a  counter-irritant,  therefore  I  will  do  anything  I 
can  to  bring  them  about,  only,  not  being  on  the 
managing  body,  I  can  help  merely  by  backing  any 
application  you  may  make.  And,  of  course,  there 
ought  to  be  no  difficulty  about  it.  Only  let  me  know 
if  you  should  want  backing. 

Would  it  not  be  worth  while  to  get  also  some 
mountain  hares  for  observation  at  the  Zoo  ?  These,  I 
think,  I  could  get. 

Yours  very  truly, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

Geanies,  Ross-shire,  N.B. :  October  15. 

Would  you  mind  sending  me  the  part  of  your  MS. 
dealing  with  Sphex  ?  I  do  not  know  that  I  quite 
caught  your  objection  to  my  difficulty,  and  want  to 
allude  to  it  in  lectures  which  I  am  now  preparing  for 
my  Edinburgh  class. 


GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

Also,  did  I  correctly  understand  you  to  say  that 
you  refused  to  acknowledge  any  fundamental  identity 
between  processes  of  reproduction  and  those  of  repair  ? 
For  this  identity  is  to  my  mind  the  most  important 
of  all  objections  to  W.'s  theory. 

G.  J.  KOMANES. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Eegent's  Park,  N.W. :  December  3, 1889. 

My  dear  Poulton, — I  returned  here  a  day  or  two 
ago,  and  now  send  you  my  copy  of  Perrier's  remarks 
about  the  neuters  of  hymenopterpus  insects.  But 
he  said  a  good  deal  more  in  subsequent  and  private 
correspondence.  His  preface,  however,  will  serve  to 
show  you  the  general  tone  of  argument. 

With  regard  to  Panmixia,  it  occurs  to  me  that 
very  likely  you  have  not  seen  all  that  I  wrote  upon  it, 
as  the  three  papers  were  scattered  over  several  months 
in  '  Nature.'  The  following  are  the  references  :  Yol. 
ix.  pp.  361,  440 ;  vol.  x.  p.  164. 

You  will  see  that  I  took  up  a  decided  stand  upon 
the  principle  of  Panmixia  not  being  able  altogether 
to  supersede  that  of  disuse.  This  was  for  the  reasons 
stated  in  my  last  letter ;  and  I  still  see  no  further 
reason  for  changing  the  opinion  that  was  then  formed 
under  the  influence  of  Darwin's  judgment. 

With  reference  to  the  difference  that  you  alluded 
to — and  which,  as  far  as  I  can  see,  is  the  only  differ- 
ence between  Weismann's  presentation  of  the  prin- 
ciple and  my  own — I  enclose  an  extract  from  the 
lecture  which  I  have  just  been  giving  in  Edinburgh. 
From  this  extract  I  think  you  will  see  that  the  one 
point  of  difference  does  not  redound  to  the  credit  of 


1890  WEISSMANN'S  THEORY  209 

Weismann's  logic.  After  reading  the  extract  in 
conjunction  with  the  papers  in  '  Nature,'  perhaps  you 
will  let  me  know  whether  you  now  understand  my 
view  any  better,  or  still  believe  that  the  cessation  of 
selection  alone  can  reduce  the  average  of  a  useless 
organ  below  fifty  per  cent,  of  its  original  size — so 
long,  that  is,  as  the  force  of  heredity  continues  unim- 
paired. 

G.  J.  ROMANES. 

Some  further  letters  to  Mr.  Thiselton  Dyer  and 
to  Mr.  F.  Darwin  follow. 


To  Professor  Thiselton  Dyer. 

December  20,  1888. 

Dear  Dyer, — Would  you  mind  sending  me  on  a 
postcard  the  name  of  the  genus  of  plants  the  con- 
stituent species  of  which  you  alluded  to  in  the  train 
as  being  mutually  fertile,  and  also  separated  from 
one  another  topographically  ?  I  want  to  get  as  many 
of  such  cases  as  I  possibly  can,  so,  if  any  others  occur 
to  you,  please  mention  them  likewise. 

By  reading  pages  401  and  404  of  my  paper,  you 
will  see  why  such  cases  are  of  quite  as  much  impor- 
tance to  me  as  the  converse,  viz.  where  closely  allied 
species  inhabiting  continuous  areas  are  more  or  less 
mutually  sterile  (see  p.  392). 

If  you  have  hitherto  failed  to  apply  these  converse 
tests  to  my  theory,  I  cannot  conceive  by  what  other 
principle  you  have  sought  to  test  it.  Pray  read  the 
passages  referred  to,  which  present  the  shortest 

p 


210  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES  mi- 

summary  of  what  I  regard  as  the  very  backbone  of 
my  evidence. 

If  your  large  knowledge  of  geographical  distribu- 
tion should  enable  you  to  supply  me  with  specific 
cases  of  the  general  principle  mentioned  by  Darwin  in 
the  quotation  given  on  page  392  ('  Origin  of  Species,' 
6th  ed.,  pp.  134-5),  I  should  much  like  to  try  experi- 
ments on  the  sterility  which  I  should  expect  to  find 
between  these  interlocking  species. 

It  seems  comical  to  ask  a  scientific  opponent  for 
assistance,  but  the  fact  of  being  able  to  do  so 
proves  the  superiority  of  science  to  politics. 


18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Regent's  Park,  N.W. :  December  27,  1888. 

I  am  most  glad  that  in  your  last  letter  you  deal 

with  what  I  consider  the  real  '  question ' — viz.  not 

whether   degrees  of   sterility  obtain   among  a  large 

proportional  number  of  species,  but  whether  there  is 

any  such  correlation  between  them  and  absence  of 

isolation  of  other  kinds  as  my  theory  would  expect. 

And   in   dealing   with   this    question   you   hit    upon 

precisely  the  two  greatest  difficulties  which  I  have 

myself  concluded  lie  against  the  theory.     The  first 

is  about  areas  now  discontinuous  having  been  once 

continuous,    and  our  being  so   often  unable   to    say 

whether   or  not  such  has  been  the  case.     But  this 

difficulty  is  one  that  lies  against  verification  of  the 

theory,  not  against  the  theory  itself.      It  was  in  view 

of  this  difficulty  that  I  mentioned  oceanic  islands  as 

furnishing  the  best  flora  for  trying  experiments  upon  ; 

but  since  I  published  the  paper,  I  have  not  been  able  to 


1890        OBJECTIONS  TO  THEOEY  CONSIDEEED        211 

hear  of  any  botanists  visiting  islands.  Should  you 
ever  hear  of  any  you  might  let  me  know. 

The  second  difficulty  is  one  that  lies  against  the 
theory  itself,  and  has  always  seemed  to  me  most 
formidable.  But  as  nobody  else  has  ever  mentioned 
it,  I  have  not  hitherto  done  so,  as  I  want  to  work  it 
out  quietly.  I  allude  to  your  remark  about  the  ex- 
traordinary differences  that  obtain  among  different 
genera  with  regard  to  the  capability  of  intercrossing 
exhibited  by  their  constituent  species.  This,  I 
confess,  has  from  the  first  appeared  a  tremendous 
objection  to  my  theory.  On  the  other  hand,  I  have 
taken  comfort  from  the  consideration  that  besides 
being  a  tremendous  objection,  it  is  also  a  tremendous 
mystery.  For,  as  it  must  admit  of  some  explanation, 
and  as  this  explanation  must  almost  certainly  have 
to  do  with  the  sexual  system,  it  becomes  not 
improbable  that  when  found  the  explanation  may 
square  with  p.s.  That  the  difference  in  question  is 
functional  and  not  structural  (or  physiological  as 
distinguished  from  morphological)  seems  to  be  proved 
by  the  fact  that  in  some  cases  it  obtains  as  between 
the  most  closely  allied  genera,  being,  e.g.,  most 
strongly  pronounced  of  all  between  Geranium  and 
Pelargonium.  Even  quite  apart  from  my  own  theory, 
it  seems  to  me  that  this  is  a  subject  of  the  highest 
importance  to  investigate. 

As  regards  sexual  selection  I  allow,  of  course,  that 
the  i  law  of  battle '  is  a  form  of  natural  selection. 
But  where  the  matter  is  merely  a  pleasing  of  aesthetic 
taste,  and  the  resulting  structures  therefore  only 
ornamental,  I  can  see  nothing  '  advantageous  '  in  the 

P2 


GEOBGE  JOHN  KOMANES  issi- 

sense  of  life-preserving.  On  the  contrary,  in  most 
cases  such  structures  entail  considerable  expenditure 
of  physiological  energy  in  their  production.  On  this 
account  Darwin  says  that  nat.  sel.  must  impose  a 
check  on  sexual  selection  running  beyond  a  certain 
point  of  injuriousness  (' D.  of  M.,'  p.  227).  Now, 
physiological  selection  is  never  thus  injurious ;  and 
although  it  is  a  'form  of  isolation,'  the  isolation  is 
neither  so  extreme  nor  of  such  long  continuance  as 
the  ones  you  compare  it  with.  Moreover,  the  environ- 
ment (therefore  all  other  or  external  conditions  of  life) 
remains  the  same,  which  is  not  the  case  under  the 
other  forms  of  isolation.  Provided  that  the  physio- 
logical change  is  not  in  itself  injurious,  I  do  not  see 
why  physiologically  isolated  forms  should  be  less  fit 
than  those  from  which  they  have  been  separated, 
though  I  can  very  well  see  why  this  should  be  the 
case  with  such  geographically  isolated  forms  as  you 
mention,  for  there  the  schooling  is  different.  Lastly, 
physiological  selection,  if  not  in  itself  injurious,  does 
not  require  that  its  children  should  be  '  protected 
against  the  struggle  for  existence.'  On  the  contrary, 
as  I  say  in  my  paper,  it  is  calculated  to  give  this 
struggle  a  better  chance  than  ever  to  develope  adap- 
tive character  in  the  sexually  isolated  forms,  because 
the  swamping  effects  of  intercrossing  are  diminished. 
But  I  really  did  not  intend  to  afflict  you  with 
another  jaw  of  this  kind.  I  am,  however,  very  glad 
that  we  now  understand  each  other  better  than  we 
did.  At  all  events  on  my  side  I  think  I  now  know 
exactly  the  points  which  I  have  to  make  good  if 
Nature  is  so  constituted  as  to  admit  of  my  theory. 


1890  EXPERIMENTS  IN   GEAFTING  213 

One  thing  only  I  have  forgotten  to  say,  viz.  that 
nothing  can  be  argued  against  the  theory  from  the 
fact  of  hybridisation  occurring  in  cases  where, 
according  to  the  theory,  it  ought  not  to  occur.  This 
argument  only  becomes  valid  where  it  is  found  that 
the  resulting  hybrids  are  fertile.  In  relation  to  the 
theory,  a  sterile  hybrid  is  all  the  same  as  a  failure  to 
cross.  Yours  very  sincerely, 

G.  J.  KOMANES. 

P.S. — I  forgot  to  ask  you  if  there  would  be  any 
facilities  in  spring  at  Kew  for  repeating  Adam's  graft 
of  purple  on  yellow  laburnum.  I  want  to  try  this 
experiment  in  budding  on  a  large  scale  because  of  its 
importance  on  Weismannism,  should  the  result  of 
any  of  the  grafts  go  to  corroborate  Adam's  account 
of  the  way  in  which  he  produced  the  hybrid.  If  you 
agree  to  the  experiments  being  tried  at  Kew,  perhaps 
you  might  let  me  know  whether  there  are  any  purple 
laburnums  already  in  the  gardens,  or  whether  I 
should  get  the  material  over  from  France.  But  in 
that  case  you  might  also  let  me  know  to  whom  in 
France  or  elsewhere  I  had  best  apply.  However, 
do  not  bother  to  answer  any  other  parts  of  this 
tremendous  letter,  these  we  can  discuss  in  conversa- 
tion hereafter.  A  postcard  to  answer  this  postscript, 
however,  is  desirable,  as  then  it  might  be  possible  to 
get  matters  in  train  for  next  budding  season. 

G.  J.  E. 

I  should  much  like  to  meet  Churchill.  Will  you 
remember  to  tell  me  when  he  comes  ? 


214  GEOEGE  JOHN   KOMANES 


To  F.  Darwin,  Esq. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Regent's  Park,  N.W.  :  January  20,  1889. 

Dear  Darwin, — Many  thanks  for  your  long  letter. 
I  thought  you  might  have  had  some  notes  or  memo- 
ries of  conversations,  to  show  in  a  general  way  what 
the  '  line  '  would  have  been.1  If  so,  of  course  I  should 
not  have  said  that  my  sayings  were  inspired,  but 
should  myself  have  known  that  I  was  not  going 
astray. 

The  line  I  am  going  to  take  is : 

1st.  Even  assuming,  for  sake  of  argument,  that 
heightened  colour  is  correlated  with  increased  vigour, 
Wallace  everywhere  fails  to  distinguish  between  bril- 
liancy and  ornament ;  yet  it  is  the  disposition  of  colours 
in  patterns,  &c.,  that  is  the  chief  thing  to  be  explained. 

2nd.  In  many  cases  (e.g.  peacock's  tail)  the  pattern 
is  only  revealed  when  unfolded  during  courtship. 
Besides  natural  selection  could  not  be  such  a  fool  as  to 
develope  large  (physiologically  expensive)  and  weighty 
(impeding  flight)  structures  like  this — stags'  antlers, 
&c.,  merely  as  correlates  of  vigour. 

3rd.  There  is  not  much  in  Wallace's  merely 
negative  difficulty  about  our  not  knowing  what  goes 
on.  in  the  mind  of  a  hen,  when  we  set  against  that 
difficulty  the  positive  fact  that  we  can  see  what  does 
go  on  in  the  mind  of  a  cock — display,  antics,  song,  &c. 

4th.  To  say  that  '  each  bird  finds  a  mate  under  any 
circumstances  '  is  merely  to  beg  the  whole  question. 

1  Of  Mr.  Darwin. 


1890       OBJECTIONS   TO   THEOEY   CONSIDEEED         215 

5th.  There  remains  Wallace's  jealousy  of  natural 
selection.  He  will  not  have  any  other  '  factor,'  and 
therefore  says  natural  selection  must  eat  up  sexual 
selection  like  the  lean  kine  have  the  fat  kine.  But 
natural  selection  alone  does  not  explain  all  the 
phenomena  of  sexual  colouring,  courtship,  &c.,  and 
sexual  selection  is  exactly  the  theory  that  does. 
Wallace's  jealousy,  therefore,  is  foolish  and  inimical 
to  natural  selection  theory  itself,  by  forcing  it  into 
explanations  which  are  plainly  false. 

My  own  belief  is,  that  what  Lankester  calls  the 
c  pure  Darwinians  '  are  doing  the  same  thing  in 
another  direction.  By  endeavouring,  with  Wallace 
and  Weismann,  to  make  natural  selection  all  in  all  as 
the  sole  cause  of  adaptive  structure,  and  expressly 
discarding  the  Darwinian  recognition  of  use  and  dis- 
use, I  think  they  are  doing  harm  to  natural  selection 
theory  itself.  Moreover,  because  I  do  not  see  any 
sufficient  reason  as  yet  to  budge  from  the  real 
Darwinian  standpoint  (Weismann  has  added  nothing 
to  the  facts  which  were  known  to  Charles  Darwin), 
the  post-Darwinians  accuse  me  of  moving  away  from 
Darwinian  principles.  But  it  is  they  who  are  mov- 
ing, and,  because  they  see  a  change  in  our  relative 
positions,  affirm  that  it  is  I.  In  point  of  fact,  my 
position  has  never  varied  in  the  least,  and  my  con- 
fession of  faith  would  still  follow,  in  every  detail,  that 
given  011  p.  421  of  i  Origin,'  6th  ed.,  which,  it  seems 
to  me,  might  also  be  regarded  as  prophetic  no  less 
than  retrospective. 

If  I  did  not  say  all  this  in  my  paper  in  physio- 
logical selection,  it  is  only  because  I  never  conceived 


216  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

the  possibility  of  my  being  accused  of  trying  to  under- 
mine natural  selection  ;  and,  therefore,  I  only  stated 
as  briefly  as  possible  what  my  relations  were  to  it. 
Yet  it  seems  to  me  that  this  statement  was  clear 
enough  if  Wallace  had  not  come  down  with  his  pre- 
posterous '  Romanes  versus  Darwin.'  At  all  events, 
it  is  not  in  my  power — or,  I  believe,  in  that  of  any- 
body else — to  express  more  strongly  than  I  now  have 
in  c  Nature,'  in  answer  to  Dyer,  what  I  do  hold  about 
natural  selection  in  its  relation  to  physiological  selec- 
tion, sexual  selection,  and  other  subordinate  principles. 
Of  course,  if  there  were  a  debate  on  these  lines  at  the 
B.A.,  I  should  get  my  part  of  it  published  somewhere. 
As  far  as  I  can  honestly  see,  my  '  position  '  is  abso- 
lutely identical  with  that  in  last  editions  of  '  Origin  ' 
and  <  Descent,'  with,  perhaps,  a  '  tendency '  to  lay 
more  stress  on  levelling  influence  of  Panmixia. 

Re  physiological  selection.  I  have  sent  Correvon, 
of  Geneva,  £50  to  help  in  founding  a  garden  in  the 
Alps,  which  will  have  the  proud  distinction  of  being 
the  highest  garden  in  the  world.  He  is  a  splendid 
man  for  his  knowledge  of  Alpine  flora,  and  besides,  is 
strongly  bitten  with  a  desire  to  test  physiological  selec- 
tion. Of  course  I  shall  do  the  hybridising  experiments 
myself,  but  he  will  collect  the  material  from  the 
different  mountains — i.e.  nearly  allied  species,  topo- 
graphically separated,  and  therefore,  I  hope,  mutually 
fertile.  The  converse  experiments  of  nearly  allied 
species  on  common  areas  may  be  tried  in  England. 

I  am  making  arrangements  for  repeating  on  an 
extensive  scale  experiments  on  budding  purple  labur- 
num on  yellow,  to  see  if  it  is  possible  to  reproduce 


1890  PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  217 

f  Adam's  eye  '  hybrid.  If  so,  it  would  now  be  of  more 
importance  than  ever  in  relation  to  Weismann.  By 
the  way,  he  is  sorely  put  to  it  in  the  case  of  plants 
which  reproduce  themselves  not  only  by  cuttings,  but 
even  by  leaves.  Here  he  is  bound  to  confess  that  his 
germ-plasma  occupies  all  the  cellular  tissue  of  the 
entire  plant.  But  if  so,  how  in  the  world  does  his 
germ-plasma  differ  from  gemmules  ? 

There  !  I  did  not  intend  to  write  you  anything 
of  a  letter  when  I  began,  but  have  gone  on  and  on 
till  it  is  well  for  you  that  the  second  sheet  is  coming 
to  an  end. 

Yours  ever, 

G.  J.  KOMANES. 

P.S. — Any  contributions  to  Correvon's  garden 
(however  small)  would  be  thankfully  received  by  him. 
Possibly  his  garden  may  be  of  some  use  to  English 
botanists  ;  if  so,  you  might  send  the  hat  round,  and 
collect  any  coppers  that  fall. 


To  Professor  Thiselton  Dyer. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Eegent's  Park,  N.W. :  January  7,  1889. 

My  dear  Dyer, — Knowing  what  a  busy  man 
you  are,  I  never  expected  you  to  answer  my  last 
letter,  and  therefore  it  has  come  as  an  agreeable  sur- 
prise. For  no  doubt  you  will  believe  me  when  I  say 
that  I  value  much  more  communications  which  are 
opposed  to  physiological  selection  than  those  in  its 
favour  ;  the  former  show  me  better  what  has  to  be 
done  in  the  way  of  verification,  as  well  as  the  general 


218  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

views  which  may  be  taken  on  the  subject  by  other 
minds.  And  most  of  all  is  this  the  case  when  anyone 
like  yourself  gives  me  the  benefit  of  opinions  which  are 
formed  by  a  trained  experience  in  botany,  seeing  that 
here  I  am  myself  such  a  sorry  ignoramus.  And  I 
willingly  confess  that  your  strongly  expressed  opinion 
has  seriously  shaken  my  hopes  for  physiological  selec- 
tion, notwithstanding  that  some  German  botanists 
think  otherwise.  Nevertheless,  I  still  think  that  it 
is  worth  while  to  devote  some  years  to  experimental 
testing,  and  then,  if  the  results  are  against  me — well, 
I  shall  be  sorry  to  have  spent  so  much  time  over  a 
wild  flower  chase,  and  to  have  kicked  up  so  much 
scientific  dust  in  the  process ;  but  I  will  not  be 
ashamed  to  acknowledge  that  Nature  has  said 
No. 

And  now  for  your  last  letter.  Eead  in  the  light 
of  subsequent  experience,  I  have  no  doubt  that  I 
ought  to  have  expressed  myself  with  more  care  while 
writing  my  paper.  But,  to  tell  the  honest  truth,  it 
never  once  occurred  to  me  that  I  of  all  men  could  be 
suspected  of  trying  to  undermine  the  theories  of 
Darwin.  I  was  entirely  filled  with  the  one  idea  of 
presenting  what  seemed  to  me  '  a  supplementary 
hypothesis,'  which,  while  '  in  no  way  opposed  to 
natural  selection,'  w^ould  i  release  the  latter  from  the 
only  difficulties  '  which  to  my  mind  it  had  ever  pre- 
sented. Therefore  I  took  it  for  granted  that  every- 
body would  go  with  me  in  recognising  natural  selec- 
tion as  the  '  boss  '  round  which  every  '  other  theory  ' 
must  revolve,  without  my  having  to  say  so  on  every 
page.  So,  of  course,  by  'other  theory'  I  did  not  mean 


1890  PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  219 

that  physiological  selection  was  in  my  opinion  the 
only  theory  of  the  origin  of  species.  Everywhere 
throughout  the  paper,  from  the  title-page  to  the  con- 
clusion, I  represented  it  as  an  'additional  suggestion,' 
a  '  supplementary  hypothesis,'  &c.,  &c.  Sexual  selec- 
tion is  in  my  view  (as  it  is  also  in  Darwin's,  Wallace's, 
and  doubtless  that  of  all  evolutionists)  one  of  the 
*  other  theories  that  have  been  propounded  on  the 
origin  of  species.'  So  is  Lamarck's  theory,  which 
was  considered  by  Darwin  as  more  or  less  i  supplemen- 
tary '  to  natural  selection ;  and  this  is  all  that  I  meant 
— or,  I  should  say,  could  possibly  be  understood  to 
mean  in  view  of  the  title-page,  &c. — by  speaking  of 
physiological  selection  as  another  theory  of  the  origin 
of  species.  It  certainly  is  not  the  same  thing  as  natural 
selection  or  either  of  the  c  other  theories '  just  men- 
tioned ;  but  no  less  certainly  it  is  not  exclusive  of  any 
of  the  three.  Unquestionably  it  is  as  you  say,  and  as 
I  myself  said,  an  independent  theory — i.e.  not  iden- 
tical with,  but  additional  to,  that  of  natural  selection. 
But  this  is  a  widely  different  thing  from  saying  that 
it  is  in  itself  an  exhaustive  theory,  which  must  there- 
fore swallow  up  all  or  any  '  others.'  In  short,  I  abide 
by  the  closing  statement  of  my  introductory  para- 
graph— viz.  that  the  theory  is  an  '  attempt  at  sug- 
gesting another  factor  in  the  formation  of  species, 
which,  although  quite  independent  of  natural  selection, 
is  in  110  way  opposed  to  natural  selection,  and  may 
therefore  be  regarded  as  a  factor  supplementary  to 
natural  selection.'  Statements  to  the  same  effect 
are  indeed  scattered  through  the  entire  paper ;  but, 
of  course,  could  I  have  foreseen  the  interpretations 


220         GEOEGE  JOHN  BOMANES 

which  afterwards  arose,  I  should  have  reiterated  such 
statements  ad  nauseam. 

Sorry  you  cannot  come  to  the  B.A.,  or  to  dine, 
but  certainly  do  not  wonder. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

G.  J.  ROMANES. 

Lastly,  about  species  not  being  able  to  exist  as 
species  without  the  physiological  isolation  of  physio- 
logical selection  (p.  403),  the  statement  of  course  only 
applies  to  nearly  allied  species  occupying  common 
areas  (see  p.  404).  If  this  statement  is  wrong,  no 
one  has  yet  shown  me  wherein  it  is  so.  I  fancy  you 
do  not  quite  appreciate  that  by  l  sterility '  I  always 
mean  (unless  otherwise  expressly  stated)  sterility  in 
some  degree,  and  this  not  only  with  regard  to  the 
fertile  hybrids.  It  is  by  no  means  enough  to  point  to 
natural  and  fertile  hybrids  as  cases  opposed  to  phy- 
siological selection  unless  it  has  been  shown  by 
experiment  through  a  generation  or  two  that  these 
hybrids  are  fully  fertile — i.e.  as  fertile  as  their  parent 
species.  Now,  experiments  of  this  kind  have  rarely 
been  carried  through.  If  you  assume  that  the  result 
of  carrying  them  through  would  be  destructive  of 
physiological  selection  by  proving  that  fertile  hybrids 
are,  as  a  rule,  fully  fertile,  and  also  (which  is  very 
important)  that  in  any  cases  where  experiment  may 
show  them  to  be  so,  further  experiment  would 
fail  to  show  that  isolation  has  not  been  effected  in 
any  other  way  (as  by  pre-potency,  differences  of 
insect  fertilisation,  &c.) — in  short,  if  you  assume 
that  fertility  is  as  complete  between  the  two  asso- 


1890  PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  221 

ciated  species  as  it  is  within  each  species,  how  is  it 
conceivable  that  they  should  continue  to  be  distinct  ? 
In  this  connection  it  is  well  to  consult  Gulick's  paper 
already  referred  to  (especially  p.  259,  paragraph  1st) 
on  the  theoretical  side,  and  Jordan's  papers  and 
books  on  the  practical  side.  I  have  repeated  the 
latter's  observations  on  poppies,  and  find  that  where 
any  considerable  number  of  individuals  are  concerned, 
natural  selection  is  not  nearly  so  great  a  power  in 
this  respect.  (Even  in  cases  where  it  happens  that 
in-breeding  is  necessarily  confined  to  single  herma- 
phrodite individuals  for  numberless  generations,  the 
handicapping  is  not  fatal :  witness  flowers  which 
habitually  fertilise  themselves  before  opening — es- 
pecially some  species  of  orchids,  which  never  seem 
to  do  otherwise,  notwithstanding  the  elaborate  pro- 
visions for  cross-fertilisation  in  other  species.)  Now, 
I  believe  most  of  all  in  what  I  have  called  l  collective 
variation '  of  the  reproductive  system  in  the  way 
of  physiological  selection,  whereby,  owing  to  some 
common  influence  acting  on  a  large  number  of  indi- 
viduals similarly  and  simultaneously,  they  all  become 
sexually  co-adapted  inter  se  while  physiologically 
isolated  from  the  rest.  This  essential  feature  of  the 
theory  seems  to  me  entirely  to  remove  the  difficulty 
about  in-breeding,  as  well  as  that  which  Wallace 
urged  about  the  chances  against  a  suitable  meeting 
of  'physiological  complements.' 

As  for  my  having  attributed  too  much  to  the 
swamping  effects  of  intercrossing  (Panmixia),  this,  I 
am  convinced,  is  the  one  and  only  particular  wherein 
I  have  at  all  departed  from  the  judgments  of  Darwin  ; 


222  GEOBGE  JOHN  BOMANES  issi- 

though,  curiously  enough,  it  is  the  particular  on 
which  my  critics  have  laid  least  stress  when  accusing 
me  of  Darwinian  heresy.  But  it  is  too  big  a  question 
to  treat  in  correspondence.  Gulick's  recently  pub- 
lished paper  at  the  Linnean  Society  seems  to  me  a 
most  important  one  in  this  connection,  and  I  have 
a  large  body  of  other  evidence. 


To  F.  Darwin,  Esq.1 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Eegent's  Park,  N.W. :  January  8,  1889. 

Dear  Darwin, — Hate  you,  indeed  !  Why,  I  can- 
not imagine  any  better  service  than  that  of  stopping 
a  fellow  from  making  a  fool  of  himself,  and  I  most 
cordially  thank  you  for  having  done  so  in  this  case. 
The  business  was  so  completely  out  of  my  line,  that 
I  did  not  know  what  was  required.  It  seemed  to 
me  that  if  I  got  any  evidence  of  bending  towards  the 
sparks,  the  only  question  I  wanted  to  answer  would 
be  answered,  and,  therefore,  that  it  did  not  matter 
a  straw  about  temperature,  moisture,  and  the  rest. 
Moreover,  the  results  did  not  seem  to  me  to  be  of  any 
importance,  as  they  were  just  what  might  have  been 
expected,  and,  therefore,  I  doubted  whether  it  was 
worth  while  publishing  a  paper  about  them.  Had 
they  gone  the  other  way,  and  proved  that  the  plants 
would  not  bend  to  flashing  light,  I  should  have  thought 
it  much  more  interesting.  Lastly,  the  research  was 
so  expensive,  costing  £1  per  day  at  the  only  place 

1  Mr.  F.  Darwin  had  pointed  out  some  erroneous  conclusions  in  a  pro- 
jected scientific  paper. 


1890  FLASHING   LIGHT  ON   PLANTS  223 

where  I  could  get  the  requisite  apparatus,  and  there 
they  shut  up  at  night. 

Of  course,  I  will  withdraw  this  paper,  and,  if  you 
think  the  thing  is  worth  working  out  in  all  the  details 
you  suggest,  will  do  so.  In  that  case,  it  would  be 
worth  while  to  ascertain  whether  there  would  be  any 
electrical  apparatus  at  Cambridge  which  I  could  get 
the  use  of  at  a  lower  rate  of  profit  to  the  owners.  A 
good-sized  induction  coil  is  really  all  that  is  required, 
and  they  probably  have  this  in  the  Cavendish.  But 
there  is  not  one  available  in  any  of  the  London  work- 
shops, and  so  I  had  to  go  to  Appes,  in  the  Strand.  It 
is  suggested  that  the  debate  in  Section  _D  at  the 
British  Association  this  year  should  be  opened  by  me 
on  the  question  of  utility  as  universal.  Before  I  agree, 
I  should  like  to  know  what  you  think  about  the 
i  Nature '  controversy  which  I  have  recently  had  with 
Dyer,  and  out  of  which  the  present  suggestion  has 
emanated.  Perhaps  we  might  arrange  to  meet  some- 
where soon  to  have  a  talk  over  the  expediency  of 
such  a  debate  at  all,  and  the  lines  on  which,  if  held,  it 
should  run.  Of  course,  physiological  selection  would 
be  carefully  kept  out.  My  object  would  be  to  show 
the  prime  importance  of  natural  selection  as  a  theory 
which  everywhere  accounts  for  adaptations. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

G.  J.  KOMANES. 

May  27, 1889. 

Herewith  I  return,  with  many  thanks,  a  pamphlet 
by  Kerner,  numbered  738. 

In  my  experiments  with  electric  spark  illumina- 


224  GEOBGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

tion  on  plants,  I  notice  that  the  seedlings,  although  so 
wonderfully  heliotropic,  never  form  chlorophyll,  even 
if  exposed  to  a  continuous  stream  of  sparks  for  30 
hours  on  end,  while  they  will  bend  through  90° 
in  seven  hours  to  single  sparks  following  one  another 
at  one  per  second.  This  proves  that  there  is  no  con- 
nection at  all  between  heliotropism  and  formation  of 
chlorophyll,  or  vice  versa — a  point  which  I  cannot 
find  to  have  been  hitherto  stated.  Do  you  happen  to 
know  if  it  has  been  ?  If  you  do  not  happen  to  re- 
member anything  bearing  on  this  subject,  do  not 
trouble  to  search  or  to  answer. 

Wallace's  book1  strikes  me  as  very  able  in  many 
parts,  though  singularly  feeble  in  others — especially 
the  last  chapter.  He  has  done  but  scant  justice  to 
Gulick's  paper.  Had  he  read  it  with  any  care,  he 
might  have  seen  that  it  fully  anticipates  his  criticism 
on  mine.  But  I  think  he  deserves  great  credit  for 
nowhere  chuckling.  From  the  first  he  has  been  con- 
sistent in  holding  natural  selection  the  sole  factor  of 
organic  evolution — leaving  no  room  for  sexual  selec- 
tion, inheritance  of  acquired  characters,  &c.,  &c. 
And  now  that  he  had  lived  to  see  an  important 
body  of  evolutionists  adopting  this  view,  there  must 
have  been  a  strong  temptation  to  '  I  always  told  you 
so.'  Yet  there  is  nowhere  any  note  of  this,  or  even 
so  much  as  an  allusion  to  his  previous  utterances  on 
the  subject. 

1  Darwinism,  by  Alfred  Kussel  Wallace. 


1890  ON   WEISMANN'S  THEOEY  225 

To  E.  B.  Poulton,  Esq. 

Geanies,  Boss- shire  :  November  2,  1889. 

My  dear  Poulton, — Continuing  our  antipodal  cor- 
respondence, and  taking  the  points  in  your  last  letter 
seriatim,  I  quite  saw  that  your  theory  of  repair  was 
'  the  logical  outcome  of  Weismann's  '  (being,  in  fact,  a 
direct  application  of  his  views  on  phytogeny  to  the 
case  of  repair) ;  but  I  did  not  know  whether  the  out- 
come had  been  traced  by  him  or  by  yourself.  Now,  I 
understand,  I  may  allude  to  it  as  yours.  Again,  what 
I  meant  about  regeneration  of  entire  limbs,  &c.,  was 
that,  to  meet  such  cases,  your  diagram  would  require 
modification  in  the  way  that  you  now  suggest.  Has 
it  occurred  to  you  as  an  argument  in  favour  of  this 
suggestion  (i.e.  that  the  '  potentiality '  of  somatic 
germ-plasm  may  in  such  cases  be  arrested  in  its  pro- 
cess of  ontogeiietic  diffusion),  that  Darwin  has  shown, 
or  at  least  alleged,  that  all  such  cases  may  be  traced 
to  special  adaptation  to  special  needs,  dangers,  &c. — 
so  that  the  arrest  may  have  been  brought  about  in 
these  cases  by  natural  selection  ? 

If  you  deem  the  '  chief  difference  '  between  Dar- 
win's and  Weismann's  theory  of  heredity  to  be  '  that 
the  one  implies  material  particles  and  the  other  only 
physical  and  chemical  constitution,'  then,  it  seems  to 
me,  Weismann's  theory  will  become  identical  with 
Herbert  Spencer's — seeing  that  this  is  virtually  the 
only  respect  in  which  Spencer's  differs  from  Darwin's. 
But  I  think  there  is  another  and  a  much  more 
important  respect  in  which  W.'s  theory  differs  from 


26  GEOBGE  JOHN  EOMANES  issi- 

both  these  predecessors.  However,  to  proceed  to  the 
next  point,  I  agree  with  you,  that  the  sole  object  of 
the  Sphex  stinging  the  larvae  is  now  to  cause  them 
to  c  keep,'  and  that  natural  selection  must  have 
worked  upon  this  for  perfecting  the  instinct.  But 
the  point  is,  what  was  the  origin  of  the  selective 
stinging  ?  If  merely  chance  congenital  variations, 
would  unity  to  billions  express  the  chances  against 
their  ever  arising  ?  Get  some  mathematician  to  cal- 
culate— giving  as  data  superficial  area  of  caterpillar 
on  the  one  hand  and  that  of  nine  ganglia  on  the  other. 
Even  neglecting  the  consideration  that  the  variation 
must  occur  many  times  to  give  unaided  natural 
selection  a  chance  to  fix  it  as  an  instinct,  the  chances 
against  its  occurring  only  once  would  be  represented 
by  the  following  series,  where  x  is  the  superficial  area 
of  the  caterpillar  minus  that  of  eight  ganglia,  and 
unity  is  superficial  area  of  one  ganglia  : 


'x'xVxVx'xV 
xxxxxxxxx 


If,  as  I  suppose,  x  may  here  be  taken  as  — 100,000, 
the  chances  against  the  variation  occurring  once 
would  be  written  in  figures  expressing  unity  to  one 
thousand  million  billion  trillions.  Of  course  I  do  not 
rely  on  calculations  of  this  kind  for  giving  anything 
like  accurate  results  (mathematics  in  biology  always 
seems  to  me  like  a  scalpel  in  a  carpenter's  shop),  but 
it  makes  no  difference  how  far  one  cuts  down  such 
figures  as  these.  Therefore,  if  Lamarck  won't  satisfy 
such  facts,  neither  do  I  think  that  Darwin  minus 
Lamarck  can  do  so.  We  must  wait  for  the  next  man. 


1890  ON  WEISMANN'S   THEORY  227 

I  will  send  you '  Perrier  '  on  my  return  to  town  next 
month. 

Lord  Morton's  experience  is  so  universally  that  of 
all  breeders  of  live  stock,  that  I  never  knew  anybody 
ever  doubted  it.  But,  if  they  do,  there  is  no  reason 
why  they  should  not  satisfy  themselves  on  the  point. 
For  my  part  I  do  not  feel  that  the  fact  requires  any 
corroboration  as  regards  mammals,  though  I  have 
some  experiments  going  on  with  birds.  Lastly,  the 
apparently  analogous  cases  in  plants  are  still  worse 
for  Weismann's  theory,  and  they  stand  on  the  best 
authorities. 

I  enclose  a  letter  received  by  same  post  that 
brought  yours.  It  is  from  a  former  keeper  of  mine 
who  is  now  more  in  the  moorlands.  Other  applications 
are  out,  so  I  hope  some  of  them  will  be  successful. 
Yery  little  doubt  it  will  prove  to  be  temperature.  I 
found  a  dead  stoat  here  to-day ;  it  had  not  turned 
white  at  all,  but  then  the  season  is  very  mild. 

The  Secretary  of  the  K.I.  is  Sir  F.  Bramwell, 
Bart.,  F.K.S.  You  had  better  write  to  him.  Also  to 
his  son-in-law,  Victor  Horsley,  who  is  more  of  a 
biologist.  Tell  Bramwell,  if  you  like,  that  I  think  he 
ought  to  jump  at  you. 

Yours  very  truly, 

Gr.  J.  EOMANES. 
Geanies,  Boss-shire,  N.B.  :  November  6,  1889. 

My  dear  Poulton, — Many  thanks  for  your  paper, 
which  is  the  clearest  exposition  I  have  yet  seen  of 
Weismann's  views.  But  how  about  your  allusion  to 
experiments  in  grafting  ?  As  regards  plants,  there  is  a 


228  GEOEGE  JOHN   KOMANES  issi- 

good  deal  of  evidence  as  to  the  possibility  of  a  graft- 
hybrid.  As  regards  animals,  fifteen  years  ago  I  spent 
an  immensity  of  time  in  experimenting,  and  could  not 
then  find  that  there  was  any  literature  on  the  subject. 
Nobody  who  had  grafted  animal  tissues  had  done  so 
with  any  reference  to  the  heredity  question,  nor 
do  I  know  of  any  publications  on  the  subject  since 
then. 

Yours  very  truly, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 

Geanies,  Boss-shire,  N.B.  :  November  11,  1889. 

My  dear  Poulton, — Although  I  spent  more  time 
and  trouble  than  I  like  to  acknowledge  (even  to  my- 
self) in  trying  to  prove  Pangenesis  between  '73  and 
'80,  I  never  obtained  any  positive  results,  and  did 
not  care  to  publish  negative.  Therefore  there  are  no 
papers  of  mine  on  the  subject,  although  I  may  fairly 
believe  that  no  other  human  being  has  tried  so  many 
experiments  upon  it.  No  doubt  you  will  think  that 
I  ought  to  regard  this  fact  as  so  much  negative  evi- 
dence in  favour  of  the  new  theory ;  and,  up  to  a 
certain  point,  I  do,  only  the  issue  between  Pangenesis 
and  Germ-plasm  is  not  really  or  nearly  so  well  defined 
as  Weismann  represents,  where  the  matter  of  experi- 
ments is  concerned ;  e.g.  it  is  not  the  case  that  any 
crucial  test  is  furnished  by  the  iion-transmissibility  of 
mutilations  ;  Darwin  did  not  set  much  store  by  them, 
though  Eimer  and  others  have  done  so  since.  In 
fact  all  the  Germans  on  both  sides,  and  all  the 
Englishmen  on  Weismann's  side,  seem  to  me  unjust 
to  Darwin  in  this  respect. 


1890  ON   WEISMANN'S   THEOKY  229 

Regarding  the  cessation  of  selection,  the  motive 
that  prompted  my  question  to  you  was  not  the  paltry 
one  of  claiming  priority  in  the  enunciation  of  an  ex- 
ceedingly obvious  idea.  My  motive  was  to  assure  my- 
self that  this  idea  is  exactly  the  same  as  Weismann's 
Panmixia  ;  for,  although  I  could  see  no  difference,  I 
thought  perhaps  he  and  you  did  (from  absence  of 
allusion  to  my  paper,  while  priority  is  acknowledged 
as  regards  a  later  one) ;  and,  if  this  were  so,  I  wanted 
to  know  where  the  difference  lay.  And  the  reason  I 
wanted  to  know  this  was  because  when  my  paper 
was  published,  and  Darwin  accepted  the  idea  with 
enthusiasm,  I  put  it  to  him  in  conversation  whether 
this  idea  might  not  supersede  Lamarckian  principles 
altogether.  (By  carefully  reading  between  the  lines 
of  the  paper  itself,  you  will  see  howr  much  this 
question  was  occupying  my  mind  at  the  time,  though 
I  did  not  dare  to  challenge  Lamarck's  principles  in  toto 
without  much  more  full  inquiry.)  Then  it  was  that 
Darwin  dissuaded  me  from  going  on  to  this  point,  on 
the  ground  that  there  was  abundant  evidence  of 
Lamarck's  principles  apart  from  use  and  disuse  of 
structures — e.g.  instincts — and  also  on  the  ground  of 
his  theory  of  Pangenesis.  Therefore  I  abandoned  the 
matter,  and  still  retain  what  may  thus  be  now  a  pre- 
judice against  exactly  the  same  line  of  thought  as 
Darwin  talked  me  out  of  in  1873.  Weismann,  of 
course,  has  greatly  elaborated  this  line  of  thought ;  but 
what  may  be  called  the  scientific  axis  of  it  (viz. 
possible  non-inheritance  of  acquired  characters)  is 
identical,  and  all  the  more  metaphysical  part  of  it 
about  the  immortality,  immutability,  &c.,  of  a  hypo- 


P30        GEOBGE  JOHN  BOMANES        mi- 

thetical  germ-plasm  is  the  weakest  part  in  my  esti- 
mation. 

Now,  the  point  I  am  working  up  to  is  this.  If  there 
be  no  difference  between  Panmixia  and  Cessation  of 
Selection,  from  what  I  have  briefly  sketched  about  it, 
it  follows  that,  had  Darwin  lived  till  now,  he  would 
almost  certainly  have  been  opposed  to  Weismann. 
This  is  not  a  thing  I  should  like  to  say  in  public,  but 
one  that  I  should  like  to  feel  practically  assured  about 
in  my  own  mind. 

Regarding  the  numerical  calculations,  I  have  not 
got  a  copy  of  the  '  Nature  '  paper  here,  but,  so  far  as  I 
remember  (and  I  think  I  am  right),  the  idea  was  that 
'  Economy  of  Growth  '  would  go  on  assisting  Cessa- 
tion of  Selection  till  the  degenerating  organ  became 
'  rudimentary.'  In  other  words,  reversal  of  selection 
would  co-operate  with  cessation  of  it. 

This,  as  I  understand  it,  is  now  exactly  Weismann's 
view;  only  he  thinks  that  thus  the  rudimentary  organ 
would  finally  become  extinguished.  Here,  however, 
it  seems  to  me  evident  he  must  be  wrong.  The 
reasons  are  obvious,  as  I  am  going  to  show  this  week 
to  my  Edinburgh  class.  Six  lectures  are  to  be  devoted 
entirely  to  Weismann,  and  when  they  are  published 
(as  they  will  be  this  time  next  year),  I  think  it  will  be 
seen  that  Weismannism  is  not  such  very  plain  sailing 
as  Weismann  himself  seems  to  think.  Vines  has  anti- 
cipated some  of  my  points  in  his  paper  in  '  Nature ' ; 
but  I  hope  this  may  have  the  effect  of  letting  me  see 
what  answers  can  be  given  before  I  shall  have  to 
publish.  Yours  very  truly, 

Cr.  J.  ROMANES. 


1890  THE   ADDEESS  AT  TOYNBEE   HALL  231 

In  the  midst  of  these  scientific  labours  and  scien- 
tific controversies,  Mr.  Komanes  found  time  for  other 
thoughts  and  for  other  work. 

At  the  beginning  of  1889  he  delivered  an  address 
at  Toynbee  Hall  on  the  Ethical  Teaching  of  Christ, 
of  which  the  following  is  an  extract : 

'  The  services  rendered  by  Christ  to  the  cause  of 
morality  have  been  in  two  distinct  directions.  The 
first  is  in  an  unparalleled  change  of  moral  concep- 
tion, and  the  other  in  an  unparalleled  moral  example, 
joined  with  peculiar  powers  of  moral  exposition  and 
enthusiasm  of  moral  feeling  which  have  never  before 
been  approached.  The  originality  of  Christ's  teach- 
ing might  in  some  quarters  be  over-rated,  but  the 
achievement  it  was  impossible  to  overrate.  It  is 
only  before  the  presence  of  Christ  that  the  dry  bones 
of  ethical  abstraction  have  sprung  into  life.  The 
very  essence  of  the  new  religion  consists  in  re- 
establishing more  closely  than  ever  the  bonds  be- 
tween morality  and  religion.  One  important  effect  of 
Christ's  teaching  and  influence  has  been  the  carrying 
into  effect  of  the  doctrine  of  universalism,  for  pre- 
viously the  idea  of  human  brotherhood  can  not  be 
said  to  have  existed.  Again,  in  the  exaltation  of 
the  benevolent  virtues  at  the  expense  of  the  heroic, 
the  change  effected  is  fundamental  and  abrupt. 
Christ  may  be  said  to  have  created  the  virtues  of 
self-abnegation,  universal  beneficence,  unflinching 
humility — indeed,  the  divine  supremacy  of  com- 
passion. Whether  Christ  be  regarded  as  human  or 
divine,  all  must  agree  in  regarding  the  work  of  His 
life  as  by  far  the  greatest  work  ever  achieved  in  the 


232  GEOBGE  JOHN  ROMANES  issi- 

history  of  the  human  race.  A  topic  of  great  impor- 
tance is  the  influence  of  Christ's  personality  in  secur- 
ing the  acceptance  of  His  teaching.  The  personal 
character  of  Christ  is  of  an  order  sui  generis,  and  even 
the  most  advanced  of  sceptics  have  done  homage  to  it. 
The  more  keen  the  intellectual  criticism,  the  greater 
is  the  appreciation  of  the  uniqueness  of  the  person- 
ality. Men  may  cease  to  wonder  at  the  effect  of 
Christ's  teaching ;  for,  given  the  wonderful  person- 
ality, all  the  rest  must  follow.  Whatever  answers 
different  persons  may  give  to  the  questions,  "  What 
think  ye  of  Christ  ?  Whose  son  is  He  ?  "  everyone 
must  agree  that  "  His  name  shall  be  called  Wonder- 
ful!'" 

This  brought  on  him  two  characteristic  letters, 
one  from  an  Agnostic  lady,  blaming  him  for  attach- 
ing so  much  importance  to  Him  whom  she  was 
pleased  to  call  '  The  Peasant  of  Nazareth,'  the  other 
from  Dr.  Paget : 

Christ  Church,  Oxford :  January  14,  1889. 

My  dear  Romanes, — I  hope  you  will  not  think 
me  impertinent  if  I  write  a  few  words  of  gratitude 
for  the  happiness  which  I  enjoyed  in  reading  to-day 
even  such  an  account  of  your  address  at  Toynbee  Hall 
as  the  '  Times  '  gave  me.  There  is  always  a  risk  of 
impertinence  in  thanking  a  man  for  what  he  has  said ; 
for  of  course  he  has  said  it  because  he  saw  it,  and 
thought  he  ought  to  say  it,  quite  simply.  But  I  may 
just  thank  you  for  the  generous  willingness  with  which 
you  accepted  such  a  task  : — and  for  the  light  in  which 
you  looked  at  it : — as  an  opportunity  for  saying  so 


1890  THE   POEMS  233 

ungrudgingly,  so  open-heartedly,  that  which  is  clear 
to  you  about  our  Lord.  This  must  be,  please  God,  a 
real  bit  of  help  to  others  ;  and  I  trust  and  pray  that 
it  may  return  in  help  to  you. 

But  how  dark  you  were  about  it !  I  should  have 
been  furious  if  I  had  been  in  London,  and  not  there. 

Please  forgive  me  this  letter ;  and  do  not  think  it 
needs  any  answer. 

Affectionately  yours, 

FBANCIS  PAGET. 


At  the  beginning  of  this  year  Mr.  Romanes  col- 
lected his  various  poems  and  had  them  privately 
printed.  He  writes  to  his  sister  : 

February  1889. 

Three  weeks  before  the  llth  I  was  wondering 
what  I  should  get  as  a  wedding-day  present  to  mark 
the  tenth  anniversary.  Ethel  then  chanced  to  say  that 
she  wished  my  poems  were  published,  so  that  she 
could  have  them  in  type.  This  suggested  to  me  the 
idea  of  putting  them  into  type  for  private  circulation, 
when  they  might  serve  at  once  as  the  required 
wedding-present,  and  as  a  preliminary  to  publication 
at  any  future  time  either  by  myself  or,  more  probably, 
by  her  or  someone  else.  So  I  got  an  estimate  from 
the  printer,  and  with  an  awful  rush  he  set  up  the 
whole  in  a  week.  Proof  corrections  occupied  another 
week,  and  the  binding  of  a  grand  presentation  copy 
the  third  week.  Thus  I  only  had  my  present  ready 
a  few  hours  before  it  had  to  be  presented.  Binding 
the  other  copies  occupied  the  time  till  I  sent  you 


234  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

yours.     In  Ethel's  copy   (which  is  awfully  swell)  I 
have  written  a  special  sonnet,  as  I  did  in  yours. 

These  poems,  or  rather  a  selection  from  them, 
will  be  published,  in  accordance  with  the  author's 
wish. 

Of  his  poetry,  his  sonnets  (which  were  privately 
printed)  seem  the  most  successful.  Various  friends 
saw  the  privately  printed  book,  and  the  then  Pro- 
fessor of  Poetry1  at  Oxford  gratified  Mr.  Romanes 
very  much  by  his  own  kind  words  respecting  them, 
and  also  by  submitting  them  to  Lord  Tennyson,  who 
spoke  of  them  in  kindly  terms,  as  did  also  Dean 
Church,  Mr.  Edmund  Gosse,  Mr.  George  Meredith, 
and  others.  Two  letters  he  received  about  his  poems 
are  here  given  : 

From  the  Dean  of  St.  Paul's. 

Ettenheim,  Torquay  :  February  26,  1889. 

My  dear  Mr.  Romanes, — Thank  you  very  much 
for  your  kindness  in  thinking  me  worthy  of  your  gift. 
I  am  always  glad  to  see  science  and  poetry  go  together. 
It  was  the  way  with  the  earliest  efforts  of  natural 
science,  as  Empedocles  and  Lucretius  ;  and  when  the 
strictest  thinking  of  science  is  done,  there  is  still 
something  more  of  expression  and  meaning,  of 
which  poetry  is  the  natural  and  only  adequate 
interpreter. 

My  acquaintance  with  your  volume  is  as  yet  only 
superficial.  But  I  have  been  very  much  impressed  by 
'  Charles  Darwin,'  and  by  the  '  Dream  of  Poetry.'  It  is 
a  very  pleasant  volume  to  open,  and  does  not  send 

1  F.  T.  Palgrave,  Esq. 


1890  LETTEB  FBOM  MB.  GLADSTONE  235 

one  away  empty  and  cold ;  which  means  that  it  is 
genuine  poetry.  We  do  not  get  on  very  fast;  but 
we  are  better  here  than  in  London,  and  the  place  is 
pleasant. 

Please  remember  us  all  to  Mrs.  Komanes.  Mary 
sends  a  very  special  remembrance. 

Yours  faithfully, 

E.  W.  CHUECH. 

From  the  Rt.  Hon.  W.  E.  Gladstone. 

Hawarden. 

Dear  Mr.  Eomanes, — You  have  sent  me  an 
acceptable  gift,  and  a  most  considerate  note ;  con- 
siderate as  regards  me,  but  not,  I  fear,  as  respects 
yourself ;  for  you  have  made  your  appeal  to  an  incom- 
petent judge.  I  do  not  think  I  possess,  though  I 
have  always  coveted,  the  gift  of  song,  and  I  am  not  a 
qualified  judge  of  those  who  have  it. 

But  in  your  case  there  can  surely  be  neither 
difficulty  nor  doubt.  I  came  home  on  Saturday 
evening  and  found  a  book  awaiting  me  with  prior 
personal  claims,  which  has  taken  up  most  of  the 
short  time  since  my  arrival.  It  does  not,  however, 
I  think,  require  much  time  to  learn  from  your  book 
whether  you  have  or  have  not  the  poetic  gift.  Before 
many  minutes  had  passed  the  affirmation,  I  will  not 
say  dawned,  but  glared,  upon  me. 

I  am  very  glad  that  you  have  proceeded  to  its 
further  exercise.  I  can  see  no  good  reason  why  a 
man  of  science  should  not  be  a  poet.  Lord  Bacon 
surely  shows  in  his  Essays  that  he  had  the  poet  in 
him.  It  all  depends  upon  the  way  of  going  about  it, 


236  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  issi- 

and  on  the  man's  keeping  himself,  as  man,  above  his 
pursuit,  as  Emerson  well  said  long  ago. 

I  do  not  quite  apprehend  your  estimate  of  Darwin, 
nor  of  Darwin's  works,  in  p.  119.  This  is  no  doubt  due 
to  my  ignorance.  I  knew  him  little,  but  my  slight 
intercourse  with  him  impressed  me  deeply  as  well  as 
pleasurably. 

With  sincere  thanks,  I  remain,  dear  Mr.  Komanes, 
faithfully  yours,  W.  E.  GLADSTONE. 

Mr.  Romanes  was  an  omnivorous  reader  of  poetry, 
and  this  taste  grew  by  what  it  fed  on.  On  a  holiday 
he  read  poetry  in  preference  to  anything  else,  and  he 
was  very  fond  of  good  anthologies,  beginning  first  and 
foremost  with  the  t  Golden  Treasury.'  Shakespeare, 
Milton,  and,  above  all,  Tennyson  were  the  poets  he 
most  loved.  For  Byron  he  had  had  an  early  boyish 
enthusiasm,  but  this  he  seemed  to  outgrow  ;  at  least 
Byron  was  not  an  author  to  whom  in  later  years  he 
turned.  He  grew  more  and  more  addicted  to  versi- 
fying in  the  later  years  of  his  life,  and  girl  friends  who 
grew  into  intimate  acquaintances  were  sure  to  have 
sooner  or  later  a  sonnet  sent  to  them  on  some  special 
occasion. 

As  the  years  went  on  he  became  more  interested 
in  work  amongst  the  poor,  and  longed  to  take  up 
some  special  line.  For  a  while  he  set  up  a  small 
school  in  a  slum  near  the  Euston  Eoad,  in  which  he 
tried  to  attract  the  very  poorest  boys  who  had 
managed  to  elude  the  vigilance  of  the  School  Board. 
His  plan  was  to  have  only  morning  school,  and  to 
give  the  children  their  dinner.  The  School  Board 
officer  came  to  his  aid,  and  the  school  was  maintained 
for  one  or  two  winters. 


1890  PEOFESSOK   LE   CONTE  237 

He  visited  the  school  regularly,  and  on  one  occasion, 
finding  that  a  boy  had  been  grossly  rude  to  the  mis- 
tress, he  gave  the  young  scamp  a  sound  whipping. 

For  other  people's  interests  in  the  way  of  work  he 
had  much  sympathy ;  he  several  times  went  down  to 
the  Christ  Church  mission  at  Poplar  when  the  Rev. 
H.  L.  Paget  was  in  charge,  and  he  lectured  at  Toynbee 
Hall  and  at  the  Oxford  House. 

Of  the  work  of  the  clergy  as  a  whole  Romanes 
always  spoke  most  warmly ;  of  the  peculiar  dislike  of 
and  suspicion  of  i  black  coats,'  so  often  attributed  to 
laymen  in  general  and  to  scientific  men  in  particular, 
he  had  no  trace,  and  as  years  went  on  he  used  to  be 
gently  chafed  for  his  clerical  tendencies  and  the  way 
in  which  he  was  consulted  as  to  the  bearings  of 
Science  on  Religion. 

Two  new  correspondents  were  now  added  to  Mr. 
Romanes'  list,  Professor  Joseph  Le  Conte,  of  the 
University  of  California,  and  the  Rev.  J.  Gulick,  who 
was,  and  is  still,  an  American  missionary  in  Japan. 
Of  Mr.  Gulick' s  scientific  attainments,  Mr.  Romanes 
entertained  a  very  high  opinion.  Unfortunately,  none 
of  the  letters  to  Mr.  Gulick  have  come  to  hand. 

Of  Mr.  Le  Conte's  book,  i  Evolution  and  Religious 
Thought,'  Mr.  Romanes  thought  very  highly,  and 
introduced  it  to  the  notice  of  various  people,  especially 
to  Mr.  Aubrey  Moore. 

He  writes  to  Mr.  Le  Conte : 

To  Professor  Le  Conte. 

Geanies,  Koss-shire,  N.B. :  October  11,  1887. 

Dear  Sir, — I  am  much  obliged  to  you  for  sending 
me  a  copy  of  your  most  interesting  paper  on  Flora  of 
the  Coast  Islands,  &c. 


238  GEOKGE  JOHN   EOMANES  issi- 

If  you  are  acquainted  with  my  new  theory  of 
'  Physiological  Selection  '  (published  in  '  Journ.  Lin. 
Soc.'  1886)  you  will  understand  why  I  regard  your 
facts  as  furnishing  first-rate  material  for  testing 
that  theory.  If  you  cannot  get  access  to  my  paper,  I 
will  send  you  a  copy  on  my  return  to  London  in 
December. 

My  object  in  now  writing — over  and  above  that  of 
thanking  you  for  your  paper — is  to  ask  whether  you 
yourself,  or  any  other  American  naturalist  whom  you 
may  know,  would  not  feel  it  well  worth  while  to  try 
some  experiments  on  the  hybridisation  of  the  peculiar 
species.  Although  I  agree  with  you  in  thinking  it 
probable  that  many  of  these  species  may  be  '  rem- 
nants,' I  also  think  it  abundantly  possible  that  some 
of  them  may  be  merely  evolved  forms.  A  botanist 
on  the  spot  might  be  able  to  determine,  by  intelligent 
comparison,  which  of  the  peculiar  species  are  most 
probably  of  the  last-mentioned  character.  These  he 
might  choose  for  his  experiments  on  hybridisation. 
And  I  should  expect  him  to  find  marked  evidence  of 
mutual  sterility  between  closely  allied  unique  species 
growing  on  the  same  island,  with  possibly  unimpaired 
fertility  between  allied  species  growing  on  different 
islands.  If  this  anticipation  should  be  realised  by 
experiment,  the  fact  would  go  far  to  prove  my 
theory. 

Even  if  you  do  not  happen  to  know  of  any  botanist 
who  would  care  to  undertake  this  experimental  re- 
search, you  might  possibly  know  of  some  one  who 
would  gather  and  transmit  seeds  for  me  to  grow  in 
hothouses  here. 


1890    LETTEES  TO  PROFESSOR  LE  CONTE     239 

I  shall  be  much  interested  to  hear  what  you  think 
of  these  proposals,  and  meanwhile  remain 

Yours  truly, 

G.  J.  KOMANES. 

Geanies. 

My  dear  Sir, — Your  book  I  will  look  forward  to 
with  much  interest,  and  certainly  not  least  so  to 
your  treatment  of  that  very  comprehensive  question 
-<  What  then  ?  ' 

I  will  send  you  a  copy  of  my  paper  on  Physiological 
Selection  as  soon  as  I  return  to  London,  which  will 
be  about  Christmas. 

With  many  thanks  for  your  kindness,  I  remain, 
yours  truly,  G.  J.  ROMANES. 

May  7,  1888. 

My  dear  Sir, — Many  thanks  for  sending  me  a  copy 
of  your  book,1  which  seems  to  me  everywhere  admi- 
rable. Of  course,  I  am  particularly  glad  that  you 
think  with  me  so  much  on  physiological  selection,  but 
even  apart  from  this,  the  work  is,  to  my  mind,  one  of 
the  most  clearly  thought  out  that  I  have  met  with  in 
Darwinian  literature.  I  have  sent  it  on  to  i  Nature  ' 
for  review,  understanding  from  the  office  that  a  copy 
had  not  then  been  received.  But  for  your  kind 
mention  of  myself,  I  should  have  reviewed  it. 

A  most  remarkable  paper  has  been  sent  to  the 
Linnean  Society  by  a  Mr.  Gulick  on  '  Divergent 
Evolution/  for  the  publication  of  which  in  the 
'  Journal '  you  might  look  out. 

G.  J.  ROMANES. 

1  Evolution  and  Religious  Thought. 


240  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1886- 

January  21,  1889. 

My  dear  Sir, — I  should  like  you  to  set  your  lucid 
wits  to  work  upon  the  following  questions,  and  let  me 
know  whether  you  can  devise  any  answers. 

On  pp.  220  226  of  your  book,  you  state  with  ex- 
treme felicity,  and  much  better  than  he  does,  Weis- 
mann's  theory  of  the  causes  of  variation.  But  it  does 
not  occur  to  him,  and  does  not  seem  to  have  occurred 
to  you,  that  there  is  a  curious  and  unaccountable 
interruption  in  the  ascending  grades  of  sexual  diffe- 
rentiation, for  in  the  vegetable  kingdom  these  do  not 
follow  the  grades  of  taxonomic  ascent ;  but,  on  the 
contrary,  and  as  a  general  rule,  the  lower  the  order  of 
evolution,  the  greater  is  the  tendency  to  bi-sexualism. 
Dioecious  species  (i.e.  male  and  female  organs  on  dif- 
ferent plants)  occur  in  largest  proportion  among  the 
lower  Cryptogams,  less  frequently  among  the  higher, 
and  more  rarely  still  among  Phanerogams.  Monoe- 
cious species  (i.e.  male  and  female  organs  on  the  same 
plant,  but  locally  distinct)  occur  chiefly  among  the 
higher  Cryptogams  and  lower  Phanerogams  ;  Herma- 
phrodite species  (i.e.  male  and  female  organs  in  the 
same  flower)  occur  much  more  frequently  among 
higher  Phanerogams. 

There  is,  besides,  another  difficulty.  According 
to  Weismann  and  yourself,  it  is  natural  selection  that 
has  brought  about  sexuality  '  for  the  sake  of  better 
results  in  the  offspring,'  by  making  them  more 
variable  or  plastic.  But  how  can  natural  selection 
act  prophetically  ?  Unless  the  variability  is  of  use  to 
the  individuals  at  each  stage  of  its  advance,  it  cannot 


1890  LETTERS   TO   PEOFESSOR   LE  CONTE  241 

come  under  the  sway  of  natural  selection,  however 
advantageous  it  may  eventually  prove  to  the  type. 
But,  if  one  thinks  about  it,  how  can  such  variability 
be  of  any  use  to  the  individual  ?  Observe,  beneficial 
variability  is  quite  different  from  beneficial  variation. 
It  is  the  tendency  to  vary  that  is  in  question,  not  the 
occurrence  of  this,  that,  and  the  other  display  of  it. 
Now,  I  do  not  see  how  sexuality  can  have  been  evolved 
by  natural  selection  for  the  purpose  of  securing  their 
tendency  in  the  future,  when  it  can  never  be  of  any 
use  to  individuals  of  the  present.  Each  individual  of 
the  present  is  an  accomplished  fact ;  the  tendency  to 
produce  variable  offspring  is,  therefore,  of  no  use  to  it 
individually,  and  so  natural  selection  would  have  no 
reason  to  pick  it  out  for  living  and  propagating. 
Such  is  my  difficulty  touching  this  point.  Another 
is,  why  do  we  meet  with  such  great  differences  be- 
tween (sometimes)  allied  natural  genera,  and  even 
whole  natural  orders,  as  to  the  facility  with  which 
their  constituent  species  hybridise  ?  For  example, 
species  of  genus  Geranium  will  hybridise  almost  better 
than  any  other,  those  of  the  Pelargonium  scarcely 
at  all. 

I  hope  that  at  some  time  you  will  be  able  to  get 
sent  to  me  seeds  of  species  peculiar  to  oceanic  islands, 
should  you  hear  of  any  botanists  who  are  visiting 
such  islands. 

G.    J.    EOMANES. 

I  note  that  you  have  been  good  enough  to  pass 
my  questions  on  to  Mr.  Greene,  whose  great  kindness 
(already  experienced  by  me)  will,  I  trust,  prevent 


242  GEOEGE  JOHN   KOMANES  isss- 

him  from  thinking  that  the  failure  of  the  seeds  to 
flower  here  was  due  to  any  negligence  on  my  part. 

Yes,  it  is  the  same  Eev.  Mr.  Gulick  whom  you 
describe  that  wrote  the  paper  on  'Divergent  Evolution ' 
to  which  I  alluded,  and  which  is  a  most  remarkable 
paper  in  every  way,  though  not  at  all  easy  to  master. 
Wallace  completely  misunderstood  it  in  his  letter  to 
1  Nature.'  It  was  his  work  in  shells  that  first  led  Mr. 
Gulick  to  study  Isolation,  and  he  has  been  at  work 
upon  the  subject  ever  since.  To  the  best  of  my 
judgment,  he  has  demonstrated  the  necessity  of  what 
he  calls  '  segregate  breeding '  for  '  polytypic  evolu- 
tion,' and  in  this  connection  has  worked  out  the  idea 
of  physiological  selection  (which  he  calls  segregate 
fecundity)  much  more  fully  than  I  have. 

It  is  most  astonishing  to  me  with  what  a  storm 
of  opposition  this  idea  has  been  met  in  England,  and 
how  persistent  is  the  misunderstanding.  In  Ger- 
many and  America  it  is  being  much  more  fairly 
treated,  but  meanwhile  I  intend  to  keep  it  as  quiet  as 
possible,  till  I  shall  be  in  a  position  to  publish  a  large 
body  of  experimental  observations.  As  far  as  time 
has  hitherto  allowed,  the  results  are  strongly  corrobo- 
rative of  the  theory. 

I  have  now  read  your  admirable  book,  and  my 
only  objection  to  it  is  that  it  seems  in  such  large 
measure  to  anticipate  the  publication  of  my  own 
course  of  lectures  on  the  theory  of  Evolution  which 
I  am  now  giving  at  the  Eoyal  Institution.  But,  on 
the  other  hand,  this  will  relieve  me  of  the  necessity 
of  printing  a  good  deal  of  my  matter,  as  it  will  be 
sufficient  to  refer  to  your  book  in  mine  when  the  two 


1890  PROFESSOR  WEISMANN'S  THEORY  243 

cover  common  ground.  It  is  needless  to  add  that  I 
am  very  glad  to  note  you  think  so  well  of  physiolo- 
gical selection. 

Yours  very  truly, 

Gr.    J.    ROMANES. 

The  theory  of  the  Non-Inheritance  of  Acquired 
Characters,  with  which  Professor  Weismann's  name 
is  inseparably  connected,  was  now  coming  to  the  front. 

Mr.  Eomanes  was,  of  course,  intensely  interested, 
and  set  himself  not  to  dispute  so  much  as  to  examine 
and  to  test  it. 

He  devoted  a  large  part  of  his  last  year  at  the 
Eoyal  Institution  to  lecturing  on  Prof.  Weismann's 
theory,  which  lectures  he  worked  up  into  his  book, 
'An  Examination  of  Weismannism,'  published  in 
1892. 

He  devised  many  experiments  to  test  that  theory, 
experiments  which  have  a  pathetic  interest  for  those 
who  love  him,  for  they  occupied  his  mind  up  to  the 
very  day  of  his  death. 

Of  this  theory  it  may  safely  be  said  that  since  the 
promulgation  of  Mr.  Darwin's  great  doctrine,  no  pro- 
blem has  interested  the  world  of  science  so  profoundly. 

For  the  most  part  the  younger  English  naturalists 
have  accepted  Professor  Weismann's  theory,  which, 
by  the  way,  had  long  ago  been  anticipated  by  Mr. 
Francis  Galton,  and  Mr.  Romanes  was  not  much 
supported  in  his  opposition,  or,  rather,  his  non- 
adherence  to  Weismannism. 

Linnean  Society,  Burlington  House,  London,  W. :  March  21,  1890. 

My  dear  Dyer, — I  have  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  anything  published  in  4  Nature '  might  as  well 

R  2 


244  GEOKGE  JOHN  ROMANES  isss- 

never  have  been  published  at  all;  and  therefore  have 
come  here  to-day  in  order  to  look  through  the  back 
numbers  of  '  Nature,'  with  a  view  to  republishing  as  a 
small  book  the  various  things  that  I  have  contributed 
during  the  past  twenty  years.  Thus  it  is  I  find  that 
the  explanation  which  I  gave  to  Herbert  Spencer  re 
Panmixia  and  his  articles  on  the  '  Factors  of  Organic 
Evolution,'  appeared  in  August  25,  1887,  and  showed 
that  his  whole  argument  was  in  the  air. 

I  have  also  read  my  own  article  on  Panmixia, 
written  about  two  months  ago,  and  published  last 
week.  The  result  is  to  satisfy  me  that  your  '  intelli- 
gent '  friends  must  have  had  minds  which  do  not 
belong  to  the  a  priori  order — i.e.  are  incapable  of 
perceiving  other  than  the  most  familiar  relations. 
Such  minds  may  do  admirable  work  in  other  direc- 
tions, but  not  in  that  of  estimating  the  value  of 
Darwinian  speculations.  A  few  years  ago  they 
would  have  thought  the  cessation  of  selection  a  very 
unimportant  principle,  and  one  which  could  not 
possibly  sustain  any  such  large  question  as  that  of 
the  transmissibility  of  acquired  character.  And  a 
few  years  hence  they  will  wonder  why  they  raised 
such  an  ado  over  the  no  less  obvious  principle  of 
physiological  selection. 

Yours  very  truly, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 

He  writes  to  his  brother  : 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Regent's  Park,  N.W. :  Sunday. 

My  dearest  James, — This  theory,  of  the  Non- 
Inheritance  of  Acquired  Characters,  is  that  nothing 


1890  PEOFESSOE  WEISMANN'S  THEOEY  245 

that  can  happen  in  the  lifetime  of  the  individual 
exercises  any  influence  on  its  progeny;  effects  of  use 
or  disuse,  for  example,  cannot  be  inherited,  nor,  there- 
fore, can  any  adaptation  to  external  conditions  which 
are  brought  about  in  individual  organisms.  Natural 
selection  thus  can  only  operate  in  spontaneous  varia- 
tions of  germ-plasm,  choosing  those  variations  which, 
when  l  writ  large'  in  the  resulting  organisms,  are  best 
suited  to  survive  and  transmit. 

This  is  the  most  important  question  that  has 
been  raised  in  biology  since  I  can  remember,  and  one 
proof  of  an  inherited  mutilation  would  settle  the 
matter  against  Weismann's  theory.  I  am  therefore 
also  trying  the  mutilation  of  caterpillars  at  the  Zoo, 
in  the  hope  that  a  mutilation  during  what  is  virtually 
an  embryonic  period  of  life  will  be  most  likely  to  be 
transmitted,  seeing  that  congenital  variations  are  so 
readily  transmissible,  and  that  these  are  changes  of 
a  pre-embryonic  kind. 

All  well  and  with  much  love,  yours  ever, 

GEORGE. 

Have  you  got  the  l  Contemporary  Keview '  for 
June  with  my  article  on  Darwinism  ?  If  not,  I  will 
send  it. 

In  a  letter  of  which  only  a  part  has  been  kept, 
Mr.  Waggett  tried  to  show  how  mutual  sterility  (i.e. 
the  production  of  sterile  offspring)  might  be  produced 
between  two  parts  of  a  species  (so  as  to  constitute 
them  two  species),  'by  way  of  natural  selection,' 
if  only  the  small  variations  in  every  direction  weie 
supposed  which  natural  selection  requires  in  respect 


246  GEORGE   JOHN   ROMANES  isss- 

of  any  other  specific  peculiarity ;  and  also  if  '  survival ' 
were  recognised  to  be  a  matter  of  degree,  consisting 
in  the  greater  or  less  representation  of  an  individual 
in  following  generations.  This,  of  course,  would 
be  a  different  explanation  from  that  of  physiological 
selection,  in  which  mutual  sterility  is  regarded  as  the 
original  cause  of  the  differentiation  of  parts  of  a 
species,  and  also  from  sexual  selection,  in  which 
something  different  from  automatic  survival  is  indi- 
cated by  the  word  '  selection.' 

From  the  Rev.  P.  N.  Waggett. 

The  Charterhouse  Mission,  Tabard  Street,  S.E. 

This  is  how  I  should  put  it  systematically. 

The  number  of  ova  produced  in  any  female  is 
regulated  by  natural  selection.  It  is  no  more  than 
the  number  which  is  required  to  obtain  a  sufficient 
percentage  of  fertilised  ova. 

The  number  fertilised  on  the  average  is  no  more 
than  is  necessary  to  provide  (against  death  of  off- 
spring, failure  of  birth,  &c.)  for  the  representation 
of  the  female  in  the  species. 

The  average  of  meetings  with  the  male  is  in  the 
same  way  not  more  than  enough  to  provide  (against 
accidents,  &c.)  for  the  maternity  of  the  female. 

All  this  is  pared  down  as  close  as  it  will  go  by 
natural  selection.  The  enormous  production  of  eggs 
is  not  one  more  than  enough  on  average  to  provide 
against  all  the  eliminations. 


1890  ON   PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  247 

The  force  of  the  female  and  length  of  fertile 
period,  &c.,  is  enough  and  no  more  to  bear  enough 
offspring  under  all  these  conditions  to  maintain  her 
representation  in  the  species.  (We  use  '  provide,' 
'  maintain '  poetically.) 

She  has  no  time  to  spare.  She  lives  long  enough 
to  replace  herself  in  species  and  no  longer. 

[In  what  follows]  I  say  '  mare '  for  short.  At 
present  mares  are  not  under  natural  conditions.  And 
no  doubt  in  high  feeding,  &c.,  and  protection  pro- 
duce many  more  ova  than  enough,  and  so  on  through 
the  series.  In  nature  the  ground  is  full  stocked. 
1  Enough  and  no  more '  is  the  badge  of  all  our 
tribe. 

Take  then  a  species  of  animals,  a  number  of  indi- 
viduals, closely  related,  all  alike,  and  freely  interbreed- 
ing and  producing  fertile  and  nearly  similar  offspring. 

Now  suppose  two  varieties  to  arise  by  any  means 
known.  Is  there  any  things  which  will  produce  in- 
sterility  between  these  varieties  without  a  new  addi- 
tional factor  of  segregation  ? 

A  mare  of  variety  A  might  bear  say  twenty  off- 
spring of  variety  A.  If  she  spends  force  in  bearing 
ten  of  variety  A  B,  on  average  she  will  bear  ten  only 
of  A. 


The  intermediate  form  is  at  a  disadvantage :  see 
Wallace. 

The  mare  then  has  only  half  her  representation 
in  the  extreme  variety  A.  (And  the  others  are  no 
good  to  her  for  prolonging  her  seed,  in  the  long  run). 


248  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1888- 

Now  if  one  mare  among  many  has  the  slightest 
degree  of  insterility  with  the  second  variety,  she  will 
have  a  larger  representation  in  A,  and  a  less  represen- 
tation in  that  intermediate  portion  of  species  which 
is  ready  to  vanish  away. 

Her  unsuccessful  attempts  with  B  come  into  the 
ordinary  number  of  failures  to  fertilise  which  the 
supply  of  ova  provides  for.  Her  nourishing  and 
bearing  powers  are  spent  on  producing  A. 

And  this  is  so  in  whatever  smallest  degree  she  is 
infertile  with  B,  that  is  in  whatever  smallest  degree 
she  tends  not  to  bear  intermediates.  We  want  no 
special  segregating  variation,  only  all  possible  varia- 
tion in  this  respect  as  in  others — and  the  smallest 
will  be  accumulated  by  '  new  natural  selection  '  pre- 
cisely as  the  smallest  variations  in  hoof  or  hair  are, 
i.e.  by  less  or  more  representation  within  the  group. 

The  mares  who  bear  no  intermediate  or  centrally 
typed  forms  will  be  in  each  generation  more  and 
more  preponderatingly  represented.  Those  which 
are  equally  fertile  in  all  directions  will  become  rarer 
and  rarer  till  at  last  they  are  counted  abnormal. 

That  explains  sterility  of  two  adjacent  species 
inter  se. 

But  not  the  infertility  of  hybrids. 

I  think  that  acts  in  a  similar  way.  Two  mares 
bear  first  crosses,  which  are  fertile  either  wiuh  original 
species  on  either  side  or  with  other  first  crosses. 

If  one  of  these  mares  bears  first  crosses  which 
are  less  fertile,  she  is  less  represented,  i.e.  succeeded 
in  the  central  portion  of  the  stock,  and  more  in  her 
own  part  of  it,  by  her  other  children,  and  so  in  the 


1890  ON   PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  249 

next  generation.  And  since  the  ova  are  among  the 
earliest  formed  tissues,  the  first-cross  creature  is 
born  more  or  less  infertile — its  sexual  condition  comes 
straight  from  its  mother — and  acts  back  on  its  mother 
by  natural  selection,  as  a  man's  books  act  back  on 
him  when  he  is  considered  as  a  factor  in  the  making 
of  English  style. 

It  is  an  advantage  then  (from  the  point  of  view 
of  life  and  death  in  the  long  run)  for  a  mother  to  bear 
fertile  extreme  forms,  and  infertile  central  forms — and 
this  in  any  degree. 

There  might  be  five  mares.  The  first  indifferently 
bearing  to  all  alike,  and  so  on  an  average  bearing 
equal  numbers  [the  rest  bearing  increasingly  less 
freely  with  B],  ten  A  and  ten  AB,  eleven  A  and  nine 
AB,  twelve  A  and  eight  AB  [and  so  on]  ...  nine- 
teen A  and  one  AB,  twenty  A  and  no  AB. 

All  the  AB's  are  at  a  disadvantage,  and  must  in 
long  run  be  unrepresented  in  the  final  balance  of 
species. 

And  if  there  are  two  which  bear  equally  AB's, 
the  one  which  bears  them  most  infertile  will  in  the 
long  run  be  best  represented  in  the  aggregate  of 
descendants  from  herself  and  her  relations. 


Geanies,  Rosshire,  N.B. :  July  28,  1890. 

My  dear  Waggett, — It  seems  to  me  most  desirable 
to  retain  the  term  '  natural  selection  '  as  defined  and 
everywhere  used  by  Darwin.  I  know  that  it  is 
often  (and  not  rarely,  unconsciously  as  by  Wallace) 


250  GEORGE   JOHN   ROMANES  1888- 

extended  so  as  to  include  failure  to  propagate  from 
any  cause,  besides  that  of  death,  through  comparative 
mal-adaptation  in  the  struggle  for  existence.  In  this 
extended  sense,  of  course,  it  includes,  as  you  say, 
sexual  selection,  and  also  a  variety  of  other  prin- 
ciples, which  would  thus  fail  to  be  distinguished 
as  distinct  principles.  Moreover,  by  thus  identifying 
them,  the  most  distinguishing  feature  of  natural 
selection  becomes  obscured  ;  for,  I  take  it,  this  most 
distinguishing  feature  is  not  that  of  homogamy  (or 
breeding  of  like  with  like  to  the  exclusion  of  breeding 
with  unlike),  but  homogamy  where  likeness  is  deter- 
mined by  adaptation.  All  the  other  forms  of  dis- 
criminate breeding  (such  as  sexual  selection)  agree 
among  themselves  and  with  natural  selection  in 
being  exclusive,  or  in  allowing  propagation  only 
to  some  individuals  of  the  species  (i.e.  those  which 
resemble  one  another  in  respect  to  the  characters 
which  determine  permission  to  propagate).  But  the 
enormous  difference  between  them  all  and  natural 
selection  consists  in  the  latter  alone  making  for 
improvement  of  type  in  respect  of  adaptation.  Here 
alone  homogamy  is  due  to  a  struggle  for  existence,  is 
brought  about  by  death  of  the  non-propagating,  and 
has  reference  to  fitness  in  a  life-preserving  sense. 
Surely  this  is  the  great  distinguishing  mark  of 
natural  selection,  considered  as  a  principle  in  organic 
evolution :  not  the  merely  exclusive  breeding,  which 
is  presented  also  by  all  the  other  principles  which 
your  extension  of  the  term  would  embrace,  but  which 
in  their  case  can  have  no  effect  in  the  way  of 


1890  ON   PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  251 

evolving  any  of  the  adaptive  mechanisms  in  organic 
nature. 

It  is  for  these  reasons  that  in  my  forthcoming 
lectures  I  carefully  and  expressly  follow  Darwin  in 
holding  '  that  there  must  be  a  life  and  death 
question  to  make  natural  selection.'  No  doubt  your 
principle,  if  it  works,  l  accumulates  variation  by 
mere  elimination  of  competitors '  ;  but  in  so  doing 
it  does  not  i  make  for  righteousness '  in  the  sense 
of  improvement. 

Therefore  I  say,  it  is  not,  properly  speaking,  <  a 
form  of  natural  selection.'  On  the  other  hand,  I 
think  it  is  a  form  of  physiological  selection.  For, 
as  you  observe,  physiological  selection  depends  for  its 
action  on  i  some  change  in  the  organs  concerned.' 
But  is  it  not  precisely  to  explain  such  a  change  that 
your  principle  is  suggested  ?  As  I  understand  it, 
your  principle  is  put  forward  as  one  possible  (or  more 
or  less  probable)  cause  of  increasing  sterility  of  first 
crosses  between  two  sexually  segregating  sections  of 
a  hitherto  (or  previously)  uniform  species.  Now,  if 
this  be  so,  is  not  your  suggestion  a  suggestion  to 
explain  the  causation  of  the  particular  physiological 
variation  on  the  occurrence  of  which  my  theory 
depends  ?  Unless  you  can  show  any  reason  for 
answering  this  question  in  the  negative,  I  can  only 
continue  to  regard  your  principle  (which  I  think  a 
most  interesting  one)  as  belonging  to  the  category  of 
physiological  selection.  For,  if  you  turn  to  p.  354  of 
my  paper,  you  will  see  that  immediately  after  stating 
tltc  theory,  I  say  : — 

'First,  let  it  be  observed  that  if  this  particular 


252  GEOEGE   JOHN   KOMANES  1888- 

kind  of  variation  ever  takes  place  at  all,  we  are  not 
concerned  either  with  its  causes  or  with  its  degrees. 
Not  with  its  causes,  because  in  this  respect  the 
theory  of  physiological  selection  is  in  just  the  same 
position  as  that  of  natural  selection ;  it  is  enough  for 
both  that  the  needful  variations  are  provided,  without 
its  being  incumbent  on  either  to  explain  the  causes 
which  underlie  the  variations.' 

Nevertheless,  just  as  it  is  of  importance  to  any 
one  believing  in  natural  selection  to  ascertain  these 
underlying  causes  of  the  variations  on  which  it 
depends,  so  &c.  &c.  Therefore  I  suggested  some  as 
more  or  less  probable — e.g.  in  plants  slight  differences 
in  the  season  of  flowering.  Now,  your  principle 
seems  to  me  a  further  suggestion  on  the  same  lines  : 
it  seeks  to  explain  the  raison  d'etre  of  cumulative 
inter-sterility  between  two  sections  of  a  species. 

Lastly,  I  do  not  follow  what  you  say  about  your 
not  requiring  a  '  segregation,'  but  only  '  variations  in 
every  possible  direction,  with  no  special  factor  brought 
in  besides  to  effect  the  beginning  and  progress  of 
separation.'  It  seems  to  me,  on  the  contrary,  1st, 
that  you  must  assume  the  sexual  variation  to  have 
already  been  begun  by  some  other  cause,  or  causes 
(else  there  could  be  no  hybrids  in  the  question) ;  and 
2nd,  that  when  infertility— or  other  inferiority — of 
the  hybrids  begins  to  tell  on  the  parent  forms  in 
the  way  supposed,  that  the  only  variation  which 
it  is  concerned  in  continuing  and  intensifying  is 
the  variation  on  which  physiological  selection  de- 
pends— viz.  infertility  between  A  and  B,  with  unim- 
paired fertility  between  both  A  x  A  and  B  x  B — where 


1890  SALLY  253 

A  and  B  are  two  sections  of  a  sexually  segregating 
species. 

I  have  written  thus  at  length,  because  I  am 
anxious  to  prevent  loggerheads  in  print  from  absence 
of  clear  understanding  of  each  other's  views.  If, 
after  considering  the  matter  in  the  light  I  have 
endeavoured  to  present,  you  still  fail  to  agree,  please 
say  why  ;  and  in  any  case  believe  me  to  remain, 

Always  your 

PHILOSOPHER. 

Please  return  this  letter,  as  it  may  be  of  use 
in  answering  your  next — you  marking  it  to  avoid 
quoting. 

Another  bit  of  work  was  an  investigation  into 
the  intelligence  of  the  chimpanzee  '  Sally '  at  the 
Zoological  Gardens,  which  the  following  letter  de- 
scribes : 

SAVAGE  VERSUS  BEUTE. 

To  the  Editor  of  the  l  Times '  (Sept.  19,  1888). 

Sir, — In  connection  with  the  correspondence  on 
the  powers  of  counting  displayed  by  savages,  it 
may  be  of  interest  to  narrate  the  following  facts 
with  regard  to  similar  powers  as  displayed  by 
brutes. 

One  often  hears  a  story  told  which  seems  to  show 
that  rooks  are  able  to  count  as  far  as  five.  The 
source  of  this  story,  however,  is  generally  found  to 
have  been  forgotten,  and  therefore  the  story  itself  is 
discredited.  Now,  the  facts  stand  on  the  authority 


254  GEOKGE   JOHN   EOMANES 

of  a  very  accurate  observer,  and  as  he  adds  that  they 
are  '  always  to  be  repeated  when  the  attempt  is 
made,'  so  that  they  are  regarded  by  him  as  '  among 
the  very  commonest  instances  of  animal  sagacity,' 
we  cannot  lightly  set  them  aside.  The  observer  in 
question  is  Leroy,  and  the  facts  for  which  he 
personally  vouches  in  his  work  on  animal  intelligence 
are  briefly  as  follows  : 

<  The  rooks  will  not  return  to  their  nests  during 
daylight  should  they  see  that  anyone  is  waiting  to 
shoot  them.  If  to  lull  suspicion  a  hut  is  made  below 
the  rookery  and  a  man  conceal  himself  therein,  he 
will  have  to  wait  in  vain,  should  the  birds  have  ever 
been  shot  at  from  the  hut  on  a  previous  occasion. 
Leroy  then  goes  on  to  say :  '  To  deceive  this  suspicious 
bird,  the  plan  was  hit  upon  of  sending  two  men  into 
the  watch-house,  one  of  whom  passed  out  while  the 
other  remained ;  but  the  rook  counted  and  kept  her 
distance.  The  next  day  three  went,  and  again  she 
perceived  that  only  two  returned.  In  fine,  it  was 
found  necessary  to  send  five  or  six  men  to  the  watch- 
house  in  order  to  throw  out  her  calculation.' 

Finding  it  on  this  testimony  not  incredible  that  a 
bird  could  count  as  far  as  five,  I  thought  it  worth 
while  to  try  what  might  be  done  with  a  more 
intelligent  animal  in  this  connection.  Accordingly, 
about  a  year  ago,  I  began,  with  the  assistance  of  the 
keeper,  to  instruct  the  chimpanzee  at  the  Zoological 
Gardens  in  the  art  of  computation.  The  method 
adopted  was  to  ask  her  for  one,  two,  three,  four,  or 
five  straws,  which  she  was  to  pick  up  and  hand  out 
from  among  the  litter  in  her  cage.  Of  course,  no 


1890  SALLY  255 

constant  order  was  observed  in  making  these  requests, 
but  whenever  she  handed  a  number  not  asked  for  her 
offer  was  refused.  In  this  way  the  animal  learnt  to 
associate  the  numbers  with  their  names.  Lastly,  if 
more  than  one  straw  were  asked  for  she  was  taught 
to  hold  the  others  in  her  mouth  until  the  required 
number  was  complete,  and  then  to  deliver  the  whole 
at  once.  This  method  prevented  any  possible  error 
arising  from  her  interpretation  of  vocal  tones,  an 
error  which  might  well  have  arisen  if  each  straw  had 
been  asked  for  separately. 

After  a  few  weeks'  continuous  instruction  the  ape 
perfectly  well  understood  what  was  required  of  her, 
and  up  to  the  time  when  I  left  town,  several  months 
ago,  she  rarely  made  a  mistake  in  handing  me  the 
exact  number  of  straws  that  I  named.  Doubtless 
she  still  continues  to  do  so  for  her  keeper.  For 
instance,  if  she  is  asked  for  four  straws  she  succes- 
sively picks  up  three  and  puts  them  in  her  mouth, 
then  she  picks  up  a  fourth  and  hands  over  all  the 
four  together.  Thus,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
animal  is  clearly  able  to  distinguish  between  the 
numbers  1,  2,  3,  4,  and  5,  and  that  she  understands 
the  name  for  each.  But  as  this  chimpanzee  is  some- 
what capricious  in  her  moods,  even  private  visitors 
must  not  be  disappointed  if  they  fail  to  be  entertained 
by  an  exhibition  of  her  learning,  a  caution  which  it 
seems  desirable  to  add,  as  this  is  the  first  time  that 
the  attainments  of  my  pupil  have  been  made  known 
to  the  public,  although  they  have  been  witnessed 
by  officers  of  the  Society  and  other  biological 
friends. 


256  GEOEGE  JOHN  ROMANES  isss- 

I  have  sent  these  facts  to  you,  Sir,  because  I  think 
that  they  bear  out  the  psychological  distinction  which 
is  drawn  in  your  leading  article  of  the  17th  inst. 
Briefly  put,  this  distinction  amounts  to  that  between 
sensuous  estimation  and  intellectual  notation.  Any 
child,  a  year  after  emerging  from  infancy,  and  not  yet 
knowing  its  numerals,  could  immediately  see  the 
difference  between  five  pigs  and  six  pigs,  and  there- 
fore, as  your  writer  indicates,  it  would  be  an  extra- 
ordinary fact  if  a  savage  were  unable  to  do  so.  The 
case,  of  course,  is  different  where  any  process  of 
calculation  is  concerned  :  e.g.  '  each  sheep  must  be 
paid  for  separately;  thus,  suppose  two  sticks  of 
tobacco  to  be  the  rate  of  exchange  for  one  sheep,  it 
would  sorely  puzzle  a  Damara  to  take  two  sheep  and 
give  him  four  sticks.'  (F.  Galton,  i  Tropical  South 
Africa,'  p.  213.)  But  if  the  savage  had  to  deal  with 
a  larger  number  of  pigs  the  insufficiency  of  his  sensu- 
ous estimation  would  increase  with  the  increase  of 
numbers,  until  a  point  would  be  reached  at  which,  if 
he  were  to  keep  count  at  all,  he  would  be  obliged  to 
resort  to  some  system  of  notation,  i.e.  to  mark  off 
each  separate  unit  with  a  separate  nota,  whether  by 
fingers,  notches,  or  words.  Similarly  with  the  sense 
of  hearing  and  the  so-called  muscular  sense.  We 
can  tell  whether  a  clock  strikes  1,  2,  3,  4,  or  5  without 
naming  each  stroke,  and  whether  we  have  walked  1, 
2,  3,  4,  or  5  paces  without  naming  each  pace,  but  we 
cannot  in  this  way  be  sure  whether  a  clock  has  struck 
11  or  12,  or  we  ourselves  have  walked  as  many  yards. 

Thus  there  is  counting  and  counting,  distinguish- 
ing between  low  numbers  by  directly  appreciating 


1890  SALLY  257 

the  difference  between  two  quantities  of  sensuous 
perceptions,  and  distinguishing  between  numbers  of 
any  amount  by  marking  each  sensuous  perception 
with  a  separate  sign.  Of  course,  in  the  above  in- 
stance of  animals  counting  it  must  be  the  former 
method  alone  that  is  employed,  and,  therefore,  I  have 
not  sought  to  carry  the  ape  beyond  the  number  5 
lest  I  should  spoil  the  results  already  gained.  But  a 
careful  research  has  been  made  to  find  how  far  this 
method  can  be  carried  in  the  case  of  man.  The 
experiments  consisted  in  ascertaining  the  number  of 
objects  (such  as  dots  on  a  piece  of  paper)  which  admit 
of  being  simultaneously  estimated  with  accuracy.  It 
was  found  that  the  number  admits  of  being  largely 
increased  by  practice,  until,  with  an  exposure  to  view 
of  one  second's  duration,  the  estimate  admits  of 
being  correctly  made  up  to  between  20  and  30  objects. 
(Preyer, '  Sitzungsber.  d.  Gesell.  f.  Med.  u.  Naturwiss.,' 
1881.)  In  the  case  of  the  ape  it  is  astonishing  over 
how  long  a  time  the  estimate  endures.  Supposing, 
for  instance,  that  she  is  requested  to  find  five  coloured 
straws.  She  perfectly  well  understands  what  is 
wanted,  but  as  coloured  straws  are  rare  in  the  litter, 
she  has  to  seek  about  for  them,  and  thus  it  takes  her 
a  long  time  to  complete  the  number ;  .yet  she  remem- 
bers how  many  she  has  successively  found  and  put 
into  her  mouth,  so  that  when  the  number  is  com- 
pleted she  delivers  it  at  once.  After  having  consigned 
them  to  her  mouth  she  never  looks  at  the  straws,  and 
therefore  her  estimate  of  their  number  must  be  formed 
either  by  the  feeling  of  her  mouth,  or  by  retaining  a 
mental  impression  of  the  successive  movements  of  her 

s 


258  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES  1888- 

arm  in  picking  up  the  straws  and  placing  them  in  her 
mouth.  Without  being  able  to  decide  positively  in 
which  of  these  ways  she  estimates  the  number,  I  am 
inclined  to  think  it  is  in  the  latter.  But,  if  so,  it  is 
surprising,  as  already  remarked,  over  how  long  a  time 
this  estimate  by  muscular  sense  endures.  Should 
we  trust  Houzeau's  statement,  however  (and  he  is 
generally  trustworthy),  it  appears  that  computation 
by  muscular  sense  may  extend  in  some  animals  over 
a  very  long  period.  For  he  says  that  mules  used  in 
the  tramways  at  New  Orleans  have  to  make  five 
journeys  from  one  end  of  the  route  to  the  other  before 
they  are  released,  and  that  they  make  four  of  these 
journeys  without  showing  any  expectation  of  being 
released,  but  begin  to  bray  towards  the  end  of  the 
fifth.1 

From  this  letter  it  will,  I  hope,  be  apparent  that 
so  far  as  *  counting '  by  merely  sensuous  computation 
is  concerned,  the  savage  cannot  be  said  to  show  much 
advance  upon  the  brute.  i  Once,  while  I  watched  a 
Damara  floundering  hopelessly  in  a  calculation  on  one 
side  of  me,  I  observed  Dinah,  my  spaniel,  equally  em- 
barrassed on  the  other.  She  was  overlooking  half  a 
dozen  of  her  new-born  puppies,  which  had  been  re- 
moved two  or  three  times  from  her,  and  her  anxiety 
was  expressive  as  she  tried  to  find  out  if  they  were 
all  present,  or  if  any  were  still  missing.  She  kept 
puzzling  and  running  her  eyes  over  them,  backwards 
and  forwards,  but  could  not  satisfy  herself.  She  evi- 
dently had  a  vague  notion  of  counting,  but  the  figure 
was  too  large  for  her  brain.  Taking  the  two  as  they 

1  Fac.  Ment.  des  Anim.  torn.  ii.  p.  207. 


1890  SALLY  259 

stood,  dog  and  Damara,  the  comparison  reflected  no 
great  honour  on  the  man.'  (Galton,  loc.  cit.)  But 
the  case,  of  course,  is  quite  otherwise  when,  in  virtue 
of  the  greatly  superior  development  of  the  sign-mak- 
ing faculty  in  man,  the  savage  is  enabled  to  employ 
the  intellectual  artifice  of  separate  notation,  whereby 
he  attains  the  conception  of  number  in  the  abstract, 
and  so  lays  the  foundation  of  mathematical  science. 
Now,  so  far  as  I  am  aware,  there  is  no  trustworthy 
evidence  of  any  race  of  savages  who  are  without  any 
idea  of  separate  notation.  Whether  the  system  of 
notation  be  digital  only,  or  likewise  verbal,  is,  psycho- 
logically speaking,  of  comparatively  little  moment. 
For  it  is  historically  certain  that  notation  begins  by 
using  the  fingers,  and  how  far  any  particular  tribe 
may  have  advanced  in  the  direction  of  naming  their 
numbers  is  a  question  which  ought  never  to  be  con- 
fused with  that  as  to  whether  the  tribe  can  '  count,' 
i.e.  notate. 

GEORGE  J.  KOMANES. 

Geanies,  Ross-shire. 


a   2 


260  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  1889- 


CHAPTEK  IV 

OXFORD 

LIFE  had  run  very  smoothly  during  these  years  from 
1879  to  1890,  only  now  and  then  fits  of  gout  had 
shaken  the  belief  Mr.  Komanes  had  hitherto  felt  in 
his  own  strength,  in  his  possession  of  perfect  health. 

But  about  the  end  of  1889  other  signs  of  ill-health 
appeared  in  the  shape  of  severe  headaches ;  he  began 
to  weary  of  London  and  the  distractions  of  London  life. 

By  degrees  his  thoughts  and  inclinations  turned 
strongly  in  the  direction  of  Oxford.  Oxford  seemed 
to  satisfy  every  wish.  The  beautiful  city  gratified  his 
poetic  sense ;  there  were  old  friends  already  there  to 
welcome  him,  and  there  seemed  abundance  of  appli- 
ances and  of  facilities  for  scientific  work. 

Also  the  ease  with  which  he  could  get  into  the 
country,  the  opportunities  for  constant  exercise,  the 
freedom  he  would  obtain  from  councils  and  com- 
mittees, were  tempting.  A  beautiful  old  house  oppo- 
site Christ  Church  was  to  be  had,  and  this  finally  deter- 
mined him.  He  fell  absolutely  in  love  with  Oxford, 
and  brief  as  his  connection  with  her  was  to  be,  the 
University  has  had  few  more  loyal  sons,  nor  has  she 
ever  exercised  more  complete  influence  over  any  who 
have  fallen  under  her  sway. 

It  is  surprising,  as  one  looks  back  on  the  Oxford 
years,  to  realise  how  short  a  time  Mr.  Komanes  spent 


1890  ME.   AUBEEY   MOOBE-'LUX  MUNDI'  261 

there,  and  yet  it  is  impossible  not  to  realise  also  for 
how  much  that  time  counted  in  his  life. 

Many  influences  were  working  in  him  :  a  ripening 
judgment,  a  growth  of  character,  a  deepening  sense 
of  the  inadequacy  of  scientific  research,  philosophical 
speculation,  and  artistic  pleasures  to  fill  '  the  vacuum 
in  the  soul  of  man  which  nothing  can  fill  save  faith  in 
God.' l  And  now  Oxford,  with  all  the  beauty  still  left 
to  her,  with  all  the  associations  which  haunt  her,  with 
all  the  extraordinary  witching  spell  which  she  knows 
so  well  how  to  exercise — Oxford,  the  home  of  '  lost 
causes  '  and  also  of  forward  movements,  Oxford  came 
to  be  for  four  brief  years  his  home. 

1890  opened  with  the  death  of  Mr.  Aubrey  Moore. 
Only  a  very  few  weeks  before  his  too  early  death,  Mr. 
Moore  had  been  present  at  the  Aristotelian  Society,2 
and  had  heard  the  joint  papers  contributed  by  Pro- 
fessor Alexander,  the  Rev.  S.  Gildea,  and  Mr.  Romanes 
on  the  '  Evidences  of  Design  in  Nature.' 

Here,  again,  Mr.  Romanes  showed  how  far  he  had 
receded  from  the  materialistic  point  of  view.  In  his 
paper  he  quoted  passages  from  Aubrey  Moore's  essay 
in  i  Lux  Mundi '  (just  published),  and  says  : 

Yet  once  more,  it  may  be  argued,  as  it  has  been 
argued  by  a  member  of  this  Society  in  a  recently  pub- 
lished essay — and  this  an  essay  of  such  high  ability 
that  in  my  opinion  it  must  be  ranked  among  the  very 

1  See  Thoughts  on  Religion,  p.  92. 

2  Mr.   Komanes   had  belonged  for  many  years  to  the  Aristotelian 
Society,  and  had  contributed  papers  to  the  Journal  of  the  Society.     He 
also  once  belonged  to  the  Psychological  Club,  which  used  to  meet  at  Pro- 
fessor Groom  Robertson's  house.     The  other  members  of  the  club  were  Mr. 
Francis  Galton,  Mr.  Sully,  Mr.  Shadworth  Hodgson,  Professor  Edgeworth, 
Professor  Dunstan,  Mr.  Edmund  Gurney,  Mrs.  Bryant,  and  one  or  two  others. 


262  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1889- 

few  of  the  very  greatest  achievements  in  the  depart- 
ment of  literature  to  which  it  belongs— it  may,  I  say, 
be  argued,  as  it  recently  has  been  argued  by  the  Eev. 
Aubrey  Moore,  that  '  the  counterpart  of  the  theological 
belief  in  the  unity  and  omnipresence  of  God  is  the 
scientific  belief  in  the  unity  of  nature  and  the  reign  of 
law ' ;  that '  the  evolution  which  was  at  first  supposed  to 
have  destroyed  teleology  is  found  to  be  more  saturated 
with  teleology  than  the  view  which  it  superseded  ' ; 
that  '  it  is  a  great  gain  to  have  eliminated  chance,  to 
find  science  declaring  that  there  must  be  a  reason  for 
everything,  even  when  we  cannot  hazard  a  conjecture 
as  to  what  the  reason  is  ' ;  that  '  it  seems  as  if  in  the 
providence  of  God  the  mission  of  modern  science  was 
to  bring  home  to  our  unmetaphysical  ways  of  thinking 
the  great  truth  of  the  Divine  immanence  in  creation, 
which  is  not  less  essential  to  the  Christian  idea  of 
God  than  to  the  philosophical  view  of  Nature.'  But 
on  the  opposite  side  it  may  be  represented — as, 
indeed,  Mr.  Aubrey  Moore  himself  expressly  allows— 
that  all  these  deductions  are  valid  only  on  the  pre- 
formed supposition,  or  belief,  '  that  God  is,  and  that 
He  is  the  rewarder  of  such  as  diligently  seek  Him.' 
Granting,  as  Mr.  Aubrey  Moore  insists,  that  a  pre- 
cisely analogous  supposition,  or  belief,  is  required  for 
the  successful  study  of  Nature — viz.  '  that  it  is,  and 
that  it  is  a  rational  (?  orderly)  whole  which  reason 
can  interpret,'  still,  where  the  question  is  as  to 
the  existence  of  God,  or  the  fact  of  design,  it 
constitutes  no  final  answer  to  show  that  all  these 
deductions  would  logically  follow  if  such  an  answer 
were  yielded  in  the  affirmative.  All  that  these 


1890       SYMPOSIUM  ON   'DESIGN   IN   NATUEE  *         263 

deductions  amount  to  is  an  argument  that  there  is 
nothing  in  the  constitution  of  nature  inimical  to  the 
hypothesis  of  design  :  beyond  this  they  do  not  yield 
any  independent  verification  of  that  hypothesis.  In- 
numerable, indeed,  are  the  evidences  of  design  in 
nature  if  once  a  designer  be  supposed ;  but,  apart 
from  any  such  antecedent  supposition,  we  are  without 
any  means  of  gauging  the  validity  of  such  evidence 
as  is  presented.  And  the  reason  of  this  is,  that  we 
are  without  any  means  of  ascertaining  what  it  is  that 
lies  behind,  and  is  itself  the  cause  of,  the  uniformity 
of  nature.  In  other  words,  we  do  not  know,  and  can- 
not discover,  what  is  the  nature  of  natural  causation. 
Nevertheless,  I  think  it  is  a  distinct  gain,  both  to 
the  philosophy  and  the  theology  of  our  age,  that 
science  has  reduced  the  great  and  old-standing 
question  of  Design  in  Nature  to  this  comparatively 
narrow  issue.  Therefore,  I  have  directed  the  purpose 
of  this  paper  to  showing  that,  in  view  of  the  issue  to 
which  science  has  reduced  this  question,  it  cannot  be 
answered  on  the  lower  plane  of  argument  which  Mr. 
Alexander  has  chosen.  All  that  has  been  effected 
by  our  recent  discovery  of  a  particular  case  of  caus- 
ality in  the  selection  principle  is  to  throw  back  the 
question  of  design,  in  all  the  still  outstanding  pro- 
vinces of  Nature,  to  the  question — What  is  the 
nature  of  natural  causation  ?  Or,  again,  to  quote 
Mr.  Aubrey  Moore,  '  Darwinism  has  conferred  upon 
philosophy  and  religion  an  inestimable  benefit  by 
showing  us  that  we  must  choose  between  two  alter- 
natives :  either  God  is  everywhere  present  in  Nature, 
or  He  is  nowhere.'  This,  I  apprehend,  puts  the  issue 


264  GEOKGE  JOHN  ROMANES  1889- 

into  as  small  a  number  of  words  as  it  well  can  be  put. 
And  whether  God  is  everywhere  or  nowhere  depends 
on  what  is  the  nature  of  natural  causation.  Is  this 
intelligent  or  unintelligent  ?  Is  it  the  mode  in  which 
a  Divine  Being  is  everywhere  simultaneously  and 
eternally  operating;  or  is  it  but  the  practical  expres- 
sion of  what  we  understand  by  a  mechanical  necessity  ? 
In  short,  is  it  original  or  derived — final,  and  therefore 
inexplicable,  because  self-existing  ;  or  is  it  the  effect 
of  a  higher  cause  in  the  existence  of  a  disposing 
Mind? 

Although  I  cannot  wait  to  argue  this,  the  ulti- 
mate question  which  we  have  met  to  consider,  I  may 
briefly  state  my  own  view  with  regard  to  it.  This  is 
the  same  view  that  the  originator  of  the  doctrine  of 
natural  selection  himself  used  habitually  to  express 
to  me  in  conversation — viz.,  to  use  his  own  words,  i  I 
have  long  ago  come  to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  a 
question  far  beyond  the  reach  of  the  human  mind.' 
Such,  of  course,  is  the  position  of  pure  agnosticism. 

At  the  end  of  this  paper,  Mr.  Aubrey  Moore  re- 
marked that  he  agreed  with  all  Mr.  Alexander's  argu- 
ments, but  disagreed  with  all  his  conclusions,  and 
that  he  disagreed  with  all  Mr.  Gildea's  arguments, 
but  agreed  with  his  conclusions ;  and  as  for  Mr. 
Romanes,  he  could  only  leave  him  out,  after  the  kind 
and  flattering  terms  in  which  he  had  spoken  of  the 
essay  in  *  Lux  Mundi.'  At  the  end  of  his  little 
speech  he  said  aside  to  a  friend,  '  What  a  fellow 
Romanes  is  !  "  Lux  Mundi  "  has  been  out  about  three 
weeks,  and  he  knows  all  about  it.' 

The  friends  are  lying  almost  side  by  side  in  Holy- 


1890  DEATH  OF  AUBBEY  MOOEE  265 

well,1  and  it  is  impossible  not  to  feel  that  their  deaths 
have  left  places  hard  to  fill.  About  Aubrey  Moore,  Mr. 
Eomanes  wrote  some  touching  words  in  the  i  Guar- 
dian '  (he  was  never  afraid  to  express  his  admiration,  to 
wear  his  heart  upon  his  sleeve).  The  little  notice  has 
now  been  reprinted  with  two  others  as  a  Preface  to 
the  volume  of  Mr.  Moore's  Essays  '  Scientific  and 
Philosophical.' 

To  Mr.  Eomanes. 

Ch.  Ch.,  January  17, 1890. 

My  dear  Eomanes, — You  will  have  heard,  I  think, 
the  great  sorrow  and  loss  which  to-day  has  brought, 
in  that  dear  Aubrey  Moore  was  taken  away  from  us 
this  morning.  He  had  been  very  ill  since  Monday 
with  congestion  of  the  lungs  following  influenza. 

Dear  friend,  I  know  how  you  and  Mrs.  Romanes 
will  miss  him ;  it  is  a  loss  we  can  very  slowly  realise 
and  fathom. 

I  have  never  known  anyone  who  combined  such 
gifts  for  the  help  of  others ;  such  strength  and  brilli- 
ancy and  loveableness  and  generosity.  May  God 
help  us  to  learn  the  lesson  of  such  lives,  and  to  grow 
in  love,  and  to  know  and  do  His  will. 

I  am,  affectionately  yours, 

FRANCIS  PAGET. 
To  Mr.  Paget. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  N.W. :  January  18,  1890. 

My  dear  Paget, — Like  most  men  of  my  age,  I 
have  had  many  sudden  shocks  of  this  kind,  but  never 
one  in  a  more  terrible  degree  than  is  delivered  by 

1  The  beautiful  cemetery  adjoining  Holy  well  Church,  Oxford. 


266  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1889- 

your  letter  this  morning.  It  is  so  very  short  a  time 
since  he  was  our  guest,  and  my  wife  has  a  letter 
from  him  dated  only  a  few  days  ago.  Yet  this  is 
not  the  reason  why  your  intelligence  is  so  over- 
whelming— excepting  in  so  far  as  his  visit  enabled 
me  more  than  ever  to  appreciate  the  extraordinary 
combination  of  learning,  intellect,  kindness,  and 
religion,  where  each  was  present  in  the  highest 
degree.  For  who  was  more  learned  ?  Who  more 
intellectual  ?  more  full  of  heart,  or  more  charged 
with  the  power  of  Christianity  ?  It  appeared  to  me 
that  a  nature  thus  endowed  in  greatest  measure  with 
all  the  greatest  attributes  of  humanity  was  really,  in 
respect  of  their  combination,  the  most  remarkable 
man  I  ever  met.  And  I  am  perfectly  persuaded 
that,  had  he  lived  for  another  twenty  years,  his 
would  have  become  the  strongest  voice  in  England 
against  the  infidelity  of  our  generation. 

Personally  the  loss  is  to  me  more  than  I  can 
compute.  For  not  only  have  I  lost  a  newly  gained 
friend,  but  one  whose  rich  stores  of  knowledge  and 
of  thought  had  just  begun  to  open  such  large  possi- 
bilities in  the  way  of  adding  to  my  own.  But  well 
I  know  that  this  loss  must  be  but  small  compared 
with  yours,  whose  longer  and  deeper  friendship  must 
have  brought  into  so  much  greater  prominence  the 
void  that  has  been  left  by  a  '  loveliness  and  gene- 
rosity '  which  are  now  no  more.  Therefore,  I  not 
only  grieve  with  you,  but  for  you — and  this  with  all 
the  sincerity  of 

Your  sincerely  affectionate  friend, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 


1890  LETTER  ON   WEISMANN'S  THEOEY  267 

P.S. — If  possible,  I  should  much  like  to  attend 
the  funeral.     Can  you  let  me  hear  as  to  this  ? 


To  Professor  Poulton. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Eegent's  Park,  N.W. :  January  27,  1890. 

My  dear  Poulton, — Many  thanks  for  your  letter, 
with  its  very  clear  and  cogent  reasoning.  But  I  am 
not  sure  that  the  latter  does  not  hit  Weismann 
harder  than  it  hits  me.  For  the  cases  you  have  in 
view  are  those  where  very  recently  acquired  charac- 
ters are  concerned;  and  where,  therefore,  according 
to  my  views,  <  the  force  of  heredity '  is  weak  and  thus 
quickly  'worn  out.'  In  such  cases  (as  I  say  in  the 
last  passages  of  enclosed,  which  I  return  for  you  to 
hand  me  on  Friday)  '  cessation  will  (quickly)  ensure 
the  reduction  of  an  unused  organ  below  fifty  per  cent, 
of  its  original  size,  and  so  on  down  to  zero  ;  but  this 
it  does  because  it  is  now  assisted  by  another  and 
co-operating  principle — viz.  the  eventual  failure  of 
heredity.' 

Now,  it  is  just  this  co-operating  principle  that 
Weismann  is  debarred  from  recognising  by  his  dogma 
about  '  stability  of  germ-plasm.'  And  it  is  a  principle 
that  must  act  the  more  energetically  (i.e.  l  quickly ') 
the  shorter  the  time  since  the  now  degenerating  organ 
was  originally  acquired.  In  the  *  Nature'  articles  I 
was  speaking  of  '  rudimentary  organs '  which  in 
Darwin's  sense  are  very  old  heirlooms.  All  this  to 
make  you  reconsider  whether  there  is  any  disagree- 
ment between  us  upon  this  point. 


268  GEOBGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1890 

It  is,  indeed,  a  terrible  thing  about  Aubrey  Moore, 
and  also  a  loss  to  Darwinism  on  its  popular  side. 

G.  J.  E. 

February  16,  1890. 

After  receiving  your  letter  this  day  a  month  ago, 
it  occurred  to  me  that  I  had  better  write  an  article  in 
1  Nature  '  on  Panmixia,  pointing  out  the  resemblances 
and  the  differences  between  Weismann's  statement 
of  the  principle  and  mine.  Shortly  after  sending  it 
in,  Weismann's  answer  to  Vines  appeared,  and  from 
this  it  seems  that  he  has  modified  his  views  upon  the 
subject.  For  while  in  his  essays  he  says  that  '  the 
complete  disappearance  of  a  rudimentary  organ  can 
only  take  place  by  the  operation  of  natural  selection  ' 
(i.e.  reversal  of  selection  through  economy,  &c.),  in 
'  Nature  '  he  says,  '  Organs  no  longer  in  use  become 
rudimentary,  and  must  finally  disappear,  solely  by 
Panmixia.'  Thus,  the  same  facts  are  attributed  at 
one  time  '  only  '  to  the  presence  of  selection,  and  at 
another  time  '  solely  '  to  its  absence. 

Now,  the  latter  view  seems  exactly  the  same  as 
mine,  if  it  means  (as  I  suppose  it  must)  that  the 
cessation  of  selection  ultimately  leads  to  a  failure  of 
heredity.  (How  about  stability  of  germ-plasm  here  ?) 
The  time  during  which  the  force  of  heredity  will  per- 
sist, when  thus  merely  left  to  itself,  will  vary  with  the 
original  strength  of  this  force,  which,  in  turn,  will 
presumably  vary  with  the  length  of  time  that  the 
organ  has  previously  been  inherited.  Thus,  differences 
of  merely  specific  value  (to  which  you  allude  in  your 
letter)  will  quickly  disappear  under  cessation  of 


1890  ON   WEISMANNISM  269 

selection,  while  '  vestiges '  of  class  value  are  long- 
enduring.  The  point  to  be  clear  about  is  that  the 
cessation  of  selection  (in  my  view)  entails  two  conse- 
quences, which  are  quite  distinct.  First,  a  compara- 
tively small  amount  of  reduction  due  to  promiscuous 
variability  round  an  average  which,  however,  will  be 
a  continuously  sinking  average  if  the  cessation  is 
assisted  by  a  reversal  of  selection ;  and  second,  later 
on,  a  failure  of  the  form  of  heredity  itself. 

Touching  the  first  of  the  two  consequences,  you 
say  that  '  variations  below  or  away  from  the  standard 
would  not  be  balanced  by  those  above,  because  the 
standard  was  reached  by  the  selection  of  such  an 
extremely  minute  fraction  of  all  variations  which 
occurred.'  But  can  variations  in  the  matter  of 
increase  or  decrease  take  place  in  more  than  two 
directions,  up  or  down,  smaller  or  larger,  better  or 
worse  ?  (Read  Wallace,  '  Darwinism,'  pp.  143  4.) 

I  write  this  in  view  of  the  lecture  you  say  you  are 
going  to  give,  because  I  do  not  know  when  <  Nature  ' 
will  bring  out  my  article. 

March  20,  1890. 

It  might  perhaps  be  well  for  you  to  read  the  type- 
written reply  which  I  have  prepared  to  Wallace's 
criticism  on  '  physiological  selection.'  But  this  is 
for  you  to  consider.  He  has  fallen  into  some  errors 
of  great  carelessness,  not  only  with  regard  to  my 
paper,  but  also  to  that  of  Mr.  Gulick,  whose  theory  of 
<  segregate  fecundity  '  is  the  same  as  mine.  On  this 
account  I  am  able  to  upset  the  whole  criticism,  and, 
bottom  upwards,  to  show  that  it  really  supports  the 
theory. 


270  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  1890 

I  see  '  Nature '  of  this  week  contains  my  letter  on 
Panmixia,  and  hope  it  will  define  in  your  and  other 
minds  the  outs  and  ins  of  the  matter. 

Please  return  the  enclosed,  which  I  send  as  a  fact 
that  may  interest  you. 

To  Professor  J.  C.  Ewart. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace,  Kegent's  Park,  N.W. :  April  27,  1890. 

As  Ethel  has  already  told  you,  I  believe,  we  have 
taken  a  three  years'  lease  of  a  charming  old  house, 
and  let  this  one  for  a  corresponding  period.  It  is  a 
very  old  house  in  Oxford,  having  been  built  by 
Cardinal  Wolsey.  It  is  immediately  opposite  Tom 
Tower  of  Christ  Church,  and  full  of  old  oak — walls, 
floors,  and  ceilings  of  the  principal  rooms  being 
nothing  else. 

I  do  wish  you  could  come  up  before  we  begin 
operations,  to  give  us  the  benefit  of  your  advice  how 
so  splendid  an  opportunity  in  the  way  of  decoration 
should  be  utilised.  We  have  to  get  out  of  this  house, 
with  all  our  furniture,  on  or  before  May  20.  The 
children  and  servants  will  then  go  to  Geanies,  while  my 
wife  and  I  will  go  to  Oxford  to  begin  the  decorations. 

I  am  preparing  my  lectures  on  Darwinism  for  the 
press,  so  that  they  may  be  ready  for  publication  on 
the  last  day  of  my  course  at  Edinburgh  in  November. 
I  suppose  I  have  your  permission  to  reproduce  your 
E.S.  pictures  of  electric  organs  ?  Also,  could  you 
send  me  for  a  day  or  two  Haddon's  book  on  Em- 
bryology ? 

I  have  just  heard  that  Charles  Lister  (whom  I 


1890  OXFOBD  271 

think    you  met   at  Geanies)   has   died  of  fever  in 
Brazil,  where  he  was  zoologising. 

Yours  ever  sincerely, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

April  1889. 

Marian  Pollock  wants  to  make  me  dance  at  a 
ball,  but  I  say  it  is  a  case  of  bringing  a  horse  to  the 
water  (or  an  ass  if  you  like).  A  philosopher  cannot 
expect  to  be  pushed  through  his  paces  by  the  kind- 
ness of  strangers  as  he  has  been  by  that  of  his  guests. 
Give  my  love  to  my  other  sister l  and  my  only  wife. 

April  12,  1889. 

Another  letter  from  some  one  named  Kose  who 
'  as  '  been  made  '  appy  '  by  you,  i  hand  '  would  have 
been  to  church  but  for  her  mistress,  '  hand  '  so  would 
you  please  write,  and  then  Eose  might  meet  you  and 
pour  out  her  sorrows. 

A  Hungarian  youth  called  to-day  wanting  me  to 
tell  him  which  bankers  would  allow  him  to  inspect 
their  bank  books  in  order  that  he  might  study  their 
methods  for  his  political  economy !  I  told  him  he 
had  better  go  and  try. 

Yesterday  I  took  Mytsie2  to  the  theatre,  and  to- 
day have  been  to  the  Pollocks  and  the  Gosses. 

The  move  was  made  from  London  to  Oxford  in 
May  1890.  Mr.  Eomanes  incorporated  with  the  Uni- 
versity and  became  a  member  of  Christ  Church.  This 

1  Mrs.  Ingham,  a  very  dear  and  intimate  friend. 

2  A  favourite  cousin  who  died  a  few  months  after  Mr.  Romanes. 


272  GEOEGE  JOHN   BOMANES  1890 

connection  with  '  the  House  '  was  a  great  pleasure  to 
him. 

For  a  little  while  during  the  early  summer  of  1890 
Mr.  Romanes  was  alone  in  Oxford,  and  he  writes  : 

To  Mrs.  Eomanes. 

I  called  to-day  on  Mr.  Dodgson,  to  sign  my  name 
in  the  Common  Room,  and  signed  my  name  in  the 
book  where  the  signatures  go  back  to  the  foundation 
of  the  House.  It  is  certainly  the  best  thing  I  could 
have  done  to  join  Christ  Church,  and  I  am  enjoying 
this  return  to  my  undergraduate  days  as  something 
quite  novel.  Yesterday  Liddon 1  graced  the  high  table 
with  his  company.  He  was  particularly  gracious  to 
me,  remembering  all  about  our  meeting  years  ago, 
and  hoping  to  be  allowed  to  have  the  pleasure  of  call- 
ing upon  us  when  we  were  settled  in  the  '  almshouse.' 2 
After  dinner  in  the  Common  Room,  seeing  that  the 
party  was  both  elderly  and  reverend,  all  the  other  six 
being  parsons,  I  started  what  seemed  to  me  a  suit- 
able game,  viz.  who  could  best  '  card  wool '  in  oppo- 
site directions,  or  turn  the  right  hand  round  and 
round  one  way,  while  at  the  same  time  turning  the 
left  hand  round  and  round  the  other  way.  This  inno- 
cent occupation  at  once  became  very  popular — the 
Canon  in  particular  being  greatly  interested  in  the 
peculiar  difficulty  which  it  presents.  For  my  own 
part,  I  much  enjoyed  the  spectacle  of  all  these  dons 
winding  their  hands  about,  and  this  enjoyment 

1  Dr.  Liddon  died  in  September  1890. 

2  The  house  which  Mr.  Komanes  had  taken  was  originally  an  alms- 
house. 


1890  OXFOED  273 

reached  its  climax  when  Dr.  Liddon  ended  by  tilting 
his  glass  of  claret  off  the  table  into  his  lap. 

But  there  is  a  good  deal  of  fun  behind  his  serious 
exterior,  and  he  enjoyed  this  little  catastrophe  as 
much  as  the  rest  of  us.  So  you  see  that  the  snares 
and  temptations  of  University  life  do  not  dangerously 
assail  your  husband  at  the  high  table  of  Christ  Church. 

Yesterday  we  had  our  physiological  picnic,  start- 
ing in  five  boats,  and  taking  tea  on  the  river-bank 
near  the  old  farmhouse.  I  took  supper  with  the 
Sandersons,  who  had  a  party.  The  Victor  Horsleys 
were  at  the  picnic,  and  I  have  arranged  that  they 
will  pay  us  a  visit  in  October. 

It  is  very  jolly  living  in  this  house,  but  it  is  well 
we  are  both  good  sleepers,  the  noise  of  traffic  is  so 
great ;  even  the  foot-passengers  sound  like  burglars. 

But  this  will  not  affect  the  children  in  the  other 
wing,  and  as  for  me,  I  could  sleep  if  the  carriages  were 
driving  through  the  rooms,  with  the  burglars  to  boot. 

I  have  only  time  to  write  a  very  few  lines,  as  I 
am  now  momentarily  expecting  to  be  called  to  give 
my  exposition  before  the  Physiological  Society,1 
which  has  mustered  in  considerable  force,  and  is  now 
being  regaled  by  Horsley 2  and  Gotch 3  while  I  am 
watching  my  plants,  which  are  coming  on  next. 

The  dinner  at  Ch.  Ch.  yesterday  was  most  enjoy- 
able, though  there  were  only  four  others  besides 
myself  at  the  high  table.  We  had  turtle  soup  and 
very  good  wine ;  is  that  good  for  gout  ? 

1  The  Physiological  Society  has  a  yearly  meeting  at  Oxford. 

2  Professor  Victor  Horsley,  F.K.S.,  Univ.  Coll.,  London. 

3  Professor  of  Physiology  at  Oxford. 

T 


274  GEOEGE  JOHN  ROMANES  1890 

John  has  gone  and  I  am  well.  The  connection 
sounds  like  one  of  Gerald's  letters. 

Yours  ever  the  same. 

I  have  been  signing  my  name  in  Latin  so  much 
of  late  that  I  stumble  over  it.  Besides,  I  am  not 
really  the  same,  being  a  M.A.  M.  A. 

St.  Aldate's :  July  1,  1890. 

I  have  just  come  back  from  dinner.  My  next 
neighbour  to-night  was  Liddon,  and  we  had  a  long 
talk  on  the  ethics  of  suicide  regarded  from  the  pre- 
Christian  or  purely  '  secular '  point  of  view. 

I  also  improved  the  occasion  in  the  interests  of 
P.  N.  W.  It  was  clearly  a  new  light  to  Liddon  that 
Philip  should  be  so  highly  thought  of  by  a  man  of 
science,  and  he  appeared  to  have  determined  there 
and  then  to  exert  himself  in  getting  a  more  suitable 
berth  for  '  a  man  now  so  greatly  needed  in  the  Church.' 

Oxford. 

Two  bits  of  news.  Dunstan l  has  a  son  and 
Liddon  is  seriously  ill.  Dr.  John  Ogle  came  yester- 
day afternoon  from  town  to  see  him,  and  dined  with 
us.  There  is  great  pain  in  the  neck. 

I  lunched  with  the  Sandersons,  or  rather  with  Mrs. 
Sanderson,  as  the  Professor  did  not  leave  his  room, 
but  he  is  getting  on  very  well. 

Last  night  after  dinner  I  looked  in  at  the  Poul- 
tons,  and  found  them  entertaining  two  Natural 
Science  young  ladies  from  Somerville  Hall.  A  very 

1  Professor  W,  Dunstan,  F.K.S. 


1890  OXFOED  275 

agreeable  party.  Huxley  is  expected  here  this 
week.  His  article  on  <  Lux  Mundi '  is  very  charac- 
teristic.1 

It  would  be  very  enjoyable  to  go  with  you  to  Ober 
Ammergau,  but  I  am  sure  I  ought  not.  First,  I  should 
not  enjoy  it  half  so  much  as  you ;  second,  it 
would  double  the  expense  ;  third,  it  would  run  away 
with  all  the  time  I  want  to  give  to  the  book.  So  in 
this  case  what  is  sauce  for  the  goose  is  not  sauce  for 
the  gander. 

I  wish  I  had  some  jokes  to  treasure  up,  but 
Oxford  is  not  a  joke-yielding  place  at  present; 
Geanies  must  be  jubilation  itself  compared  with 
Oxford  now. 

I  am  the  sole  occupant  of  the  laboratory  as  of  the 
house.  But  I  rather  enjoy  the  exclusive  privilege  of 
my  own  company,  save  so  far  as  it  is  relieved  by 
guinea-pigs.  I  have  written  a  letter  to  '  Nature  ' 
which  will  furnish  a  little  joke  for  you  on  Friday  next. 

I  am  sorry  to  hear  poor  old  Parker2  is  dead. 
You  did  not  know  him,  but  he  was  a  real  good  fellow,, 
and  hearty  friend  to  me. 

I  enjoyed  my  three  days  in  London  very  much. 
Went  twice  to  the  theatre,  and  one  of  the  plays 
was  '  Judah.'  Mr.  H.  A.  Jones  gave  me  a  box.  Saw  a 
great  deal  of  the  Pollocks ;  met  Scott,3  who  asked  me 
to  let  him  put  me  up  for  Koyal  Society  Club ;  played 
chess  with  Gr.  R.  Turner. 

I  have  now  got  to  work  on  my  plants  and  guinea- 
pigs. 

1  '  Lights  of  the  Church  and  of  Science.' 
2  Professor  Kitchen  Parker,  F.E.S.  3  Mr.  II.  Scott,  F.B.S. 

T  2 


276  GEOKGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1890 


July  7. 

I  have  just  returned  from  dining  in  Ch.  Ch.  The 
table  is  now  reduced  to  three — myself,  Prout,  and 
Strong.  The  latter  is  very  young.  He  succeeded 
Scott  Holland,  and  is  a  very  good  sort.  I  spent  a 
couple  of  hours  in  his  rooms  after  dinner.  Liddon 
remains  about  the  same. 

I  cannot  find  anyone  who  knows  what  translation 
of  Horace  to  recommend.  The  few  classical  men 
who  are  up  appear  to  be  too  well  acquainted  with 
the  original  to  have  paid  any  attention  to  other 
versions. 

18  Cornwall  Terrace  :  July  9. 

I  am  writing  in  the  library  of  No.  18,  all  the 
walls  of  which  are  gazing  at  me  with  reproach.  My 
tenant  host  is  extremely  kind. 

Last  night  I  dined  with  the  George  Turners,  and 
afterwards  took  Marion  Pollock  to  the  botanical  fete. 
All  went  well  until  eleven,  when  there  suddenly  came 
on  the  most  violent  shower,  almost  a  waterspout. 
We  made  for  the  nearest  trees,  and  crowded  together 
under  the  same  umbrella.  We  both  enjoyed  the 
extraordinary  spectacle  ;  hundreds  of  people  in  even- 
ing dress,  with  all  conventionality  suddenly  thrown 
to  the  winds,  scrambling  in  all  directions,  the  men 
shining  like  blackbeetles,  and  the  ladies  with  their 
skirts  over  their  heads. 

Tell  Fritz  1  that  this  being  Thursday,  the  organ- 

1  A  pet  name  for  his  daughter. 


1890  THE   COLOURS  OF  ANIMALS  277 

grinder   is   now   grinding   away  in   his   hebdomadal 
manner. 

Yours  ever  as  twelve  years  ago  at  the  botanical 
f6te,  which  always  makes  romantic 

THE  PHILOSOPHER. 

To  Professor  Poulton. 

Geanies,  Ross-shire,  N.B. :  July  16,  1890. 

My  dear  Poulton, — I  went  to  the  tennis  ground 
yesterday  week,  but,  as  I  expected,  on  account  of  the 
rain,  found  nobody  there. 

I  now  write  to  ask  you  if  you  would  have  any 
objection  to  my  borrowing  with  acknowledgment 
figures  from  your  book  for  mine,  supposing  the  pub- 
lishers also  consent.  In  particular  figs.  1,  2,  6,  10, 
40,  and  41. 

Having  now  read  the  book,1  I  may  say  how 
greatly  it  has  delighted  me.  The  whole  is  a  wonder- 
ful story,  and  I  congratulate  you  on  the  large  share 
which  you  have  had  in  adding  to  this  chapter  of 
Darwinism. 

There  is  only  one  point  I  am  not  quite  clear  about, 
viz.  pp.  213-215.  It  is  doubtless  an  advantage  to 
the  parasites  that  the  caterpillars  should  warn  them 
off  as  having  been  already  *  occupied.'  But  would 
not  this  be  rather  a  disadvantage  to  the  caterpillars 
— i.e.  to  their  species  ?  For  in  this  way,  it  seems  to 
me,  a  greater  number  of  caterpillars  would  become 
infested  than  would  be  the  case  in  the  absence  of 

1   The    Colours   of  Animals,  by  E.  B.  Poulton,  M.A.,  F.R.S.,  Inter, 
national  Scientific  Series,  vol.  Ixviii. 


278  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1890 

such  warning.     Or  is  there  any  point  about  it  which 
I  do  not  understand  ? 

When  is  your  next  book  coming  out  ?  I  should 
like  you  to  read  my  reply  to  Wallace  before  it  does. 
Also  my  re-statement  of  physiological  selection,  with 
discussion  on  the  principles  of  Segregation  and 
Divergence.  I  hope  the  whole  will  be  in  type  before 
November.  Can  you  wait  till  then,  or  shall  I  send 
type-written  MSS.? 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

GEORGE  J.  EOMANES. 

P.S. — Talking  about  hon.  degrees  the  last  time  I 
saw  you  reminded  me — but  something  again  put  it 
out  of  my  head — that  I  had  been  wondering  why 
Oxford  or  Cambridge  does  not  offer  one  to  F.  Galton. 
Could  you  start  a  movement  in  that  direction  ?  .  .  . 

I  am  getting  so  convinced  about  physiological 
selection,  that  I  do  not  care  what  is  said  at  random, 
or  without  understanding  the  theory. 

Later  in  the  autumn  he  writes  : 

To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

I  hope  to  find  letters  from  Ober  Ammergau  when 
I  return  to  Geanies,  with  a  dozen  bottles  of  sulphur 
water  and  several  pounds  of  heather  honey.  Went 
yesterday  to  see  a  waterfall,  which  was  wonderfully 
beautiful ;  on  the  way  back  met  a  pony  with  half  a 
trap,  and  afterwards  came  on  the  other  half  with  its 

previous  occupants,  Lord  and  Lady ,  cut  about 

the  face,  but  not  seriously  hurt,     There  is  an  awful 


1890  LAST  DAYS  AT  GEANIES  279 

row  going  on  here  in  the  Free  Kirk,  which  bids  fair  to 
end  in  bloodshed  locally,  if  not  disruption  generally. 

I  am  so  glad  you  do  not  repent  going,  and  am 
longing  to  hear  what  you  think  of  the  play.  I  took 
Ethel  and  Ernest  partridge-shooting,  and  had  tea  out- 
side. The  new  hound,  '  Dart,'  has  arrived.  He  is 
beautiful,  and  as  gentle  as  a  lamb  with  the  children. 
This  threw  us  off  our  guard,  and  at  tea  there  was  a 
horrible  scene,  ending  in  the  murder  of  Sharpe.1 
The  latter  barked  at  him,  and  five  minutes  afterwards 
was  a  mangled  misery.  Have  returned  Dart  with  a 
civil  note,  for  the  sake  of  Norah  and  Jack,2  the  latter 
having  only  been  saved  by  heroic  measures  on  the 
part  of  Mytsie. 

Later  in  the  autumn  he  wrote  : 

To  Mrs.  Henry  Pollock. 

Geanies  :  October  9,  1890. 

My  dear  Mentor, — The  lyric  is  certainty  very 
pretty,  but  I  am  still — and  much — more  touched 
by  the  unrhymed,  and  perhaps  unconscious,  poetry 
that  accompanies  it.  We  have,  indeed,  many  associ- 
ations with  Geanies  in  common  ; 3  and  as  neither  the 
joys  nor  the  sorrows  of  them  can  ever  return  into  our 
lives  as  they  were  when  they  arose,  it  is  perhaps 
better  that  they  should  be  kept  in  our  memories  as 
they  now  are,  without  being  overlaid  by  future 
experiences  in  the  same  moods  and  the  same  cliffs  by 
the  same  sea.  '  The  water  that  has  passed  '  has  been 

1  A  beautiful  terrier.  2  Two  more  dogs. 

3  This  was  the  last  summer  at  Geanies, 


280  GEOEGE  JOHN   BOMANES  1890 

beautiful,  even  in  its  sadness ;  and  however  long  the 
wheel  of  life  may  still  have  to  go,  I  do  not  think  it 
could  have  done  better  work  for  any  of  us  than 
during  the  years  that  it  has  gone  at  Geanies. 

With  my  philosophic  love  to  both  of  you,  ever 
the  same, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

My  very  dear  Mentor, — You  are  quite  too  kind  to 
me.  The  touching  little  present  has  just  arrived, 
and  I  am  smoking  it  now.  It  is  just  the  kind  that  I 
like  best.  I  wonder  whether  the  vendor  thought  it 
was  for  yourself  ?  Very  many  thanks. 

Ethel  sends  her  love,  and  tells  me  to  ask  you 
whether  you  want  a  copy  of  the  photo  group,  where 
you  do  not  look  like  a  Mentor. 

I  enclose  payment  for  the  pipe  in  the  form  of  son- 
nets— although  I  am  sure  they  are  not  so  sweet — and 
remain,  with  love  to  Marion, 

Ever  yours  most  sincerely, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

This  autumn  Mr.  Eomanes  delivered  the  last  of 
his  Edinburgh  course  of  lectures.  Giving  the  lectures 
had  been  a  real  pleasure,  and  he  liked  his  Scotch 
students,  who  on  their  side  were  keenly  appreciative 
and  intelligent. 

He  was  alone  at  Geanies  for  a  few  days  before 
leaving  for  Edinburgh,  and  a  letter  written  at  this 
time  shows  for  the  first  time  a  foreboding  of  failing 
health ;  but  when  the  headaches  left  him  the  fore- 
boding vanished,  and  there  was  no  real  idea  of  serious 
mischief. 


1890  LAST   DAYS  AT  GEANIES  281 

To  his  Wife. 

As  it  is  only  a  few  hours  since  you  left,  there  is 
not  much  in  the  way  of  news,  only  that  the  house 
seems  very  lonely.  I  am  inclined  to  agree  with 
Sandy,  who  said  while  we  were  out  that  '  Please  he 
had  never  felt  so  full  of  sorrow  since  he  was  at 
Geanies  as  he  did  when  he  saw  the  mistress  driving 
away ;  it  was  all  he  could  do  to  keep  from  bursting 
out  crying.'  Give  my  love  to  the  '  Fair  One.' l 

I  ordered  breakfast  at  8.30,  and  heard  Fritz  and 
Ernest  their  Latin,  very  much  impressed  by  the 
result.  I  had  no  idea  they  knew  so  much.  Dinner 
tranf erred  to  7.30  so  as  to  admit  of  Fritz  keeping  me 
company. 

I  have  been  shooting  with  Pat  Sellar.  I  can 
shoot  better  but  not  so  well  as  I  used.  Partridges 
very  wild,  so  we  only  bagged  six  brace. 

Geanies :  November  1890. 

I  really  have  three  of  your  dear  letters  to  answer. 
I  did  not  write  yesterday.  I  have  had  one  continu- 
ous headache  ;  it  is  now  nearly  away,  but  the  matter 
is  getting  serious,  and  I  have  written  to  Edward,2 
to  send  the  '  home  trainer  '  to  Oxford,  so  that  I 
may  lose  no  time  in  giving  his  cure  (exercise)  a 
trial. 

Don't  get  low  about  me  ;  I  begin  to  doubt  if  these 
headaches  are  due  to  gout  at  all,  and  somehow  or 
other  I  shall  find  a  means  of  preventing  them. 

1  A  pet  name  for  Mrs.  Ingham.  Mr.  E.  £.  Turner,  F.R.C.S, 


282  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1890 

I  am  sorry  for  myself,  my  work,  and  most  of  all 
for  you  ;  but  we  must  take  illness  as  it  comes,  and  be 
glad  it  is  110  worse. 

Geanies :  October  31. 

I  will  not  disappoint  you  about  the  sonnet,  which 
you  expect  to  be  in  the  vein  of  '  Weltschmerz,'  and 
therefore  send  you  the  first  of  the  series  which  I  wrote 
in  the  small  hours,  after  reading  your  favourite  Psalm.1 
There  was  only  one  verse  that  remained  appropriate 
to  me,  so  I  took  it  as  a  text. 

The  principal  thing  that  has  happened  to-day  is 
my  having  seen  on  the  shore  a  sea  otter.  It  was 
lying  on  a  rock,  and  I  came  upon  it  at  such  close 
quarters  I  could  have  hit  it  with  a  stone.  But  it 
was  so  quick  that  I  had  not  even  time  to  fire  my 
gun. 

I  may  return  the  compliment  as  to  letters.  I 
did  not  intend  to  send  the  sonnet  even  to  you  when 
I  wrote  it,  but  afterwards  thought  I  ought  to  have 
no  secrets. 

Fritz  and  Ernest  came  out  shooting.  I  am  all 
right  as  to  hitting ; 2  and  my  head  is  perfectly  well. 
Jack3  has  been  very  Jacldsh.  I  told  him  we 
were  all  going  to  leave  Geanies.  He  said,  '  Geanies 
belongs  to  us.'  I  answered,  '  No,  it  belongs  to  the 
Hurrays.'  <  Part  of  it  belongs  to  me,'  he  continued. 
'  How  is  that  ?  '  said  I.  i  Because  I  was  born  here.' 
What  would  Victor  Horsley  say  to  this  for  early 
appreciation  of  rights  conferred  by  birth  ? 

1  Psalm  xxvii. 

2  He  hadjslipped  on  the  rocks  and  hurt  his  arm, 

3  His  third  son. 


1890  LIFE  AT   OXFOBD  283 

Ernest  and  Gerald  are  very  happy.  I  allow  them 
to  play  with  the  fire  when  they  are  with  me,  and 
this  I  find  to  be  very  popular. 

To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

Edinburgh  :  November  23,  1890. 

My  lectures  are  now  concluded,  and  1  took  an 
affectionate  farewell  of  the  class  amid  much  en- 
thusiasm on  their  side. 

There  is  no  news  to  give.  I  play  chess  with  Mrs. 
Butcher  and  read  MSS.  which  Professor  Butcher 
lends  me  of  his  own ;  pay  many  calls,  have  sundry 
talks  with  professors  that  come  to  dine  with  Ewart, 
and  so  on. 

Yesterday  we  had  here  what  at  Cambridge  used 
to  be  called  a  i  Perpendicular,'  twenty  students  to 
supper.  Mrs.  Butcher  and  Miss  Trench  came  in  to 
help  to  entertain  them ;  the  latter  sang  Irish  songs. 

I  am  going  to  give  an  additional  lecture  to  the 
class  on  the  controversy  in  <  Nature.' x 

I  send  you  a  report  of  my  lecture,  that  you  may 
see  how  orthodox  I  was.  Sellar *  was  at  the  lecture, 
and  told  me  that  I  reminded  him  of  some  professor 
at  St.  Andrews,  who  had  told  him  as  a  fact  that  he 
(the  St.  Andrews  professor)  always  made  a  point  of 
alluding  to  Providence  in  an  introductory  lecture,  and 
afterwards  '  threw  him  aside  !  ' 

The  sonnet  alluded  to  in  one  of  the  letters  (p.  282) 
is  so  beautiful  that  it  is  inserted  here.  It  shows  better 

1  On  'Physiological  Selection.'     See  Nature,  vol.  xlii.  pp.  5,  7,  and 
vol.  xliii.  pp.  79  and  127. 

2  The  late  Professor  Sellar. 


284  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1891 

than  any  words  could  do  the  attitude  of  George 
Romanes'  mind.  Profoundly  sincere,  anxious,  almost 
unduly  anxious,  to  give  no  indulgence  to  his  own 
longings,  to  state  to  himself  and  to  others  unsparingly, 
unflinchingly,  what  appeared  to  him  the  as  yet  irre- 
futable arguments  against  the  Faith,  when  he  was 
alone  he  relaxed  and  poured  out  his  inmost  heart. 

'  I  ask  not  for  Thy  love,  0  Lord  :  the  days 

Can  never  come  when  anguish  shall  atone. 

Enough  for  me  were  but  Thy  pity  shown, 
To  me  as  to  the  stricken  sheep  that  strays, 
With  ceaseless  cry  for  unforgotten  ways — 

O  lead  me  back  to  pastures  I  have  known, 

Or  find  me  in  the  wilderness  alone, 
And  slay  me,  as  the  hand  of  mercy  slays. 

I  ask  not  for  Thy  love ;  nor  e'en  so  much 
As  for  a  hope  on  Thy  dear  breast  to  lie ; 

But  be  Thou  still  my  shepherd — still  with  such 
Compassion  as  may  melt  to  such  a  cry ; 

That  so  I  hear  Thy  feet,  and  feel  Thy  touch, 
And  dimly  see  Thy  face  ere  yet  I  die.' 

In  November  Mr.  Romanes  came  formally  into  resi- 
dence, and  at  first  nothing  could  have  been  happier 
than  his  Oxford  life. 

He  simply  revelled  in  the  facilities  for  work  which 
the  splendidly  equipped  laboratories  afforded,  and  he 
once  said,  '  that  the  laboratory  alone  had  made  the 
move  from  London  to  Oxford  worth  while  ! ' 

He  set  to  work  on  his  book,  '  Darwin,  and  after 
Darwin,'  and  on  many  experiments  bearing  on  Pro- 
fessor Weismann's  theories  and  on  some  other  points. 

About  this  time  Mr.  Romanes  was  much  interested 
in  a  scheme  for  promoting  the  establishment  of  a  gar- 
den or  farm  for  the  purpose  of  studying  questions  of 
hereditary  transmission,  or  heredity.  His  object  was 


1691      IDEA  OF  AN   INSTITUT  TRANSFOBMISTE      285 

to  afford  facilities  which  at  present  do  not  exist  for 
observing  the  modifications  produced  in  animals  and 
plants  by  subjecting  them  during  long  periods  and  in 
successive  generations  to  suitable  external  conditions, 
and  for  testing  the  transmissibility  of  the  modifications 
so  produced.  He  was  anxious  that  such  an  Institution 
should  be  founded  in  connection  with  one  of  the  Uni- 
versities, and  with  this  view,  circulated  the  following 
memorandum.  As  yet  the  idea  has  come  to  nothing, 
but  possibly  the  project  may  one  day  be  revived. 

1  AN    INSTITUT    TEANSFOKMISTE.' 

In  an  English  translation  of  a  lecture  which  was 
recently  delivered  by  M.  Giard,  as  Professor  of  Evo- 
lutionary Biology  in  France,  there  occurs  the  following 
passage : 

1  If  evolutionists  must  content  themselves  in  most 
cases  with  experiments  carried  on  in  nature,  or  those 
of  breeders,  instead  of  applying  themselves  to  verifica- 
tions made  with  all  the  rigour  of  modern  scientific 
precision,  is  it  not  because  of  the  deplorable  insuf- 
ficiency of  our  laboratories  ?  It  is  astonishing  that 
in  no  country,  not  even  where  science  is  held  in 
greatest  honour,  does  there  yet  exist  an  Listitut 
transformiste  devoted  to  the  long  and  costly  experi- 
ments now  indispensable  for  the  progress  of  evolu- 
tionary biology.' 

That  an  institution  of  the  kind  in  question  would 
tend  to  promote  the  solution  of  problems  in  '  evolu- 
tionary biology,'  it  seems  needless  to  argue.  Many 
of  the  most  desirable  experiments  in  heredity  and 
variation,  for  example,  require  such  prolonged  time 


286  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES 

and  such  constant  attention,  that  it  is  practically  im- 
possible for  individual  workers  to  undertake  them  ; 
and,  therefore,  as  M.  Giard  observes,  they  have  never 
been  undertaken.  But  if  there  were  an  Institut 
transformiste  to  which  material  might  be  sent  from 
any  part  of  the  world,  with  directions  as  to  its  treat- 
ment, biologists  of  all  countries  would  be  furnished 
with  an  opportunity  of  experimentally  testing  any 
ideas  which  might  occur  to  them  in  regard  to  these 
or  kindred  matters. 

Again,  it  seems  needless  to  remark  that  England 
ought  to  be  regarded  as  the  natural  territory  of  an 
establishment  of  this  character ;  that  the  establish- 
ment itself  should  be  situated  in  the  vicinity  of  others 
which  are  already  devoted  to  the  study  of  morphology 
and  physiology ;  and  that  sufficient  land  should  belong 
to  the  Institut  to  admit  of  plots  of  ground  being  set 
apart  for  researches  on  plants,  as  well  as  buildings 
for  the  accommodation  of  animals. 

In  order  to  satisfy  all  these  conditions,  the  Institut 
ought  to  be  established  either  in  Oxford  or  Cambridge  ; 
and  at  least,  one  skilled  naturalist,  one  competent 
gardener,  and  one  trustworthy  keeper  ought  to  be 
resident.  This  would  involve  an  annual  expenditure 
of  between  3001.  and  4001.  But  the  capital  sum 
which  would  have  to  be  sunk  in  the  purchase  of  land 
and  the  erection  of  buildings  would  not  be  consider- 
able ;  because,  in  the  first  instance,  at  all  events,  two 
or  three  acres  of  ground  would  probably  be  sufficient ; 
while  the  animal  houses  would  be  chiefly — if  not  ex- 
clusively— required  for  the  accommodation  of  small 
mammalia,  birds,  insects,  and  aquatic  organisms. 


1891  OXFOBD   LIFE  287 

Nevertheless,  seeing  that  an  initial  expenditure 
of  at  least  1,OOOZ.  would  be  needed  for  the  purposes 
just  mentioned,  as  well  as  an  annual  income  of  at 
least  400Z.,  and  seeing  that  even  this  much  money  is 
not  likely  to  be  forthcoming  for  objects  of  a  purely 
scientific  nature,  the  scheme  on  behalf  of  which  we 
solicit  your  opinion  is  the  following. 

From  inquiries  which  we  have  made  here,  we 
think  it  is  probable  that  the  University  would  take 
up  the  matter,  or,  at  any  rate,  render  important 
assistance  thereto,  if  the  Hebdomadal  Council  were 
satisfied  as  to  the  desirability  of  the  project  from  a 
scientific  point  of  view.  It  is  on  this  account  that  we 
have  ventured  to  address  you  upon  the  subject.  The 
appended  memorial  is  being  sent,  together  with  this 
circular  letter,  to  all  the  other  leading  biologists  in 
this  country  ;  and  if  you  could  see  your  way  to  signing 
the  former,  you  would  render  additional  weight  to  the 
body  of  authoritative  opinion  which  it  will  eventually 
convey  to  the  University. 

January  22,  1891. 

My  dear  Poulton, — I  am  very  sorry  that,  being 
already  engaged  for  to-morrow,  I  cannot  attend  the 
meeting.  But  I  should  like  to  join  the  Society.1 
Only,  please,  postpone  any  suggestion  about  lecturing, 
as  this  term  I  shall  be  dreadfully  busy,  between  the 
book  and  the  experiments.  H.  has  certainly  been 
very  successful  over  a  very  difficult  experiment.  I 
tried  it  in  an  elaborate  way.  But  I  lacked  assistance 
for  the  mechanical  performance,  and  so  intended  to 
do  it  here  this  term.  Now  I  am  saved  the  trouble, 

1  The  Oxford  Natural  History  Society. 


288  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1891 

but  have  gained  experience.  This  prevents  me  from 
regarding  H.'s  result  as  final,  although,  as  you  say, 
valuable.  My  scepticism  is  founded  on  a  queer  freak 
of  heredity,  which  my  own  work  showed  me  ;  but  as 
I  think  I  spoke  too  much  about  the  experiments  I 
was  trying,  in  future  I  shall  adopt  Weismann's  method 
of  silence  before  publication. 

Yours  ever, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

One  of  the  experiments  Mr.  Romanes  tried  in  the 
summers  of  1891-93  was  as  to  whether  animals 
completely  isolated  would  reproduce  the  real  sounds 
natural  to  their  kind.  In  other  words,  whether  these 
vocal  sounds  were  due  to  imitation.  Through  the 
kindness  of  Mr.  Arthur  Balfour,  Mr.  Romanes  got  the 
permission  of  the  Trinity  Brethren  to  try  these  experi- 
ments on  lighthouses  situated  on  lonely  islands  or 
rocks ;  he  selected  puppies,  chickens,  &c.,  but  the 
results  were  not  decisive.  The  puppies  barked  and 
the  young  cocks  crowed,  but  Mr.  Romanes  was  not  able 
entirely  to  establish  to  his  own  satisfaction  that  the 
isolation  had  been  complete. 

Experiments  were  also  carried  on  bearing  on 
Heliotropism  and  on  Seed  Germination.  Of  these 
mention  will  be  made  later. 

In  the  spring  of  1891,  he  paid  a  visit  to  Paris  and 
saw  M.  Pasteur  and  his  laboratory,  and  also  M.  Brown- 
Sequard,  in  whose  work  he  was  specially  interested. 

And,  apart  from  his  work,  Oxford  and  Oxford  life 
were  great  sources  of  enjoyment.  He  made  many 
new  friends,  and  keenly  enjoyed  the  institution,  so 
characteristic  of  Oxford,  of  '  walks.' 

Intimacies  seemed  to   grow  up  quickly,  and  he 


1891  OXFORD  289 

often  spoke  of  the  extreme  kindliness,  the  '  pleasant- 
ness '  which  marked  Oxford  society. 

Of  all  the  friends  made  in  these  four  years, 
Mr.  Eomanes  undoubtedly  was  most  drawn  to  the 
Kev.  Charles  Gore,  who  became  in  a  very  short  time 
a  true  and  valued  and  much-loved  friend. 

It  is  very  difficult,  very  often  misleading  and  even 
impertinent  to  speak  of  what  one  man  owes  to  another 
in  the  way  of  direct  or  indirect  intellectual  or  spiritual 
help.  But  those  few  persons  who  really  watched  and 
could  see  the  workings  of  George  Komanes'  mind,  saw 
that  these  Oxford  years  were,  even  before  the  first 
beginnings  of  fatal  illness,  years  of  rapid  growth  in 
what  perhaps  may  be  termed  spiritual  perception. 

In  1891  Mr.  Gore's  famous  Bampton  Lectures  were 
preached.  Mr.  Eomanes  heard  them  all,  and  was 
intensely  interested  by  them  ;  he  wrote  many  notes 
on  them  for  his  own  private  use,  notes  by  no  means 
always  in  agreement  with  them,  and  in  his  '  Thoughts 
on  Eeligion  '  he  refers  to  them. 

Many  of  his  older  friends  were  clergymen,  and 
he  was  once  much  amused  by  hearing  that  a 
scientific  friend  in  London  had  said,  '  How  on  earth 
will  Eomanes  stand  the  clerical  atmosphere  of 
Oxford  ?  '  Another  time,  a  very  eminent  scientific  man 
asked  him  his  opinion  of  Liberal  High  Churchmen, 
'  Do  you  really  think  these  people  believe  what  they 
say  ?  '  to  which  Mr.  Eomanes  replied  that  he  knew 
several  pretty  intimately,  and  he  was  sure  they  would 
all  go  to  the  stake  on  behalf  of  their  Faith. 

In  the  spring  of  1891  Mr.  Eomanes  was  elected 
by  the  committee  a  member  of  the  Athenaeum  Club. 
The  Journal  notes  : 

'Pleasant  dinners  at  Merton,  Keble,  &c.     Visit 

u 


290  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES 

from  the  Gills,1  which  we  much  enjoyed.  Lord 
and  Lady  Compton,  from  the  6th  to  the  8th  of  June. 
He  delighted  us  with  his  magnificent  singing.' 

This  summer,  for  the  first  time,  Scotland  and 
shooting  were  given  up,  and  Mr.  Romanes,  accom- 
panied by  his  wife  and  daughter,  tried  what  the 
Engadine  would  do  for  his  incessant  headaches. 

He  enjoyed  this  tour,  especially  three  weeks  at 
Tarasp,  in  the  lower  Engadine,  where  he  met  his  old 
friend  Professor  Joachim  and  also  Professor  Victor 
Carus.  On  the  way  back  the  Romanes  stayed  with 
Mr.  H.  Graham,  M.P.,  at  his  lovely  country  home 
near  Heidelberg,  enjoying  themselves  much,  but 
failing  to  see  the  famous  ghost  which  is  said  to 
haunt  the  place.  In  the  autumn,  in  spite  of  often- 
recurring  headaches,  he  struggled  on  with  his  work 
and  lectured  in  one  or  two  provincial  towns. 

He  says  in  one  of  his  letters  at  this  time  :  i  There 
is  much  excitement  in  Oxford  to-day  over  the 
announcement  that  Paget  is  to  be  the  new  Dean  of 
Christ  Church.  Of  course  we  are  greatly  delighted. 
As  he  said  to  me  to-day,  "  We  may  now  look  forward  to 
being  close  neighbours  for  not  a  few  years  to  come." 

Journal,  Nov.,  Birmingham  Festival. — The  '  Mes- 
siah '  and  Dvorak's  '  Requiem,'  Parry's  '  Blest  Pair  of 
Sirens,'  which  one  never  hears  too  often.  Went  to 
Compton  Wynyates,  a  splendid  old  house  of  temp. 
Henry  VII.  Only  Lady  Compton  at  home,  but  we 
much  enjoyed  our  little  visit.  Went  up  to  town  and 
saw  the  Edmund  Gosses  and  various  other  old  friends. 
Saw  Miss  Rehan  and  her  company  in  their  last  per- 
formance, 'A  Last  Word.'  Poor  play,  but  well  acted. 

1  The  Astronomer  Royal  at  the  Cape  and  his  wife. 


1891  THE   KOMANES  LECTURE  291 

To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

Athenaeum  Club  :  November  30,  1891. 

I  have  had  a  jolly  time.  Driving  straight  here, 
I  met  Huxley,  Foster,  Lockyer,  and  at  the  Koyal 
Society  everybody  of  scientific  persuasion. 

December  23. 

The  fog  is  so  frightful  it  seems  probable  I  shall 
not  get  to  Cambridge,  so  I  dined  with  the  Pollocks 
and  slept  at  H.  Paget's.  It  is  jolly  about  Mr. 
Gladstone.1 

It  was  during  this  autumn  that  Mr.  Eomanes  re- 
solved to  found  a  lectureship  at  Oxford  on  the  lines  of 
the  Eede  Lectures  at  Cambridge,  and  after  consulting 
various  friends,  chiefly  the  present  Master  of  Pem- 
broke,2 the  idea  was  submitted  to  the  University  and 
the  offer  was  accepted.  The  preface,  which  is  to  be 
prefixed  to  the  first  volume  of  Lectures,  gives  the 
Founder's  ideas. 

Founder's  Preface. 

The  primary  object  of  this  Lectureship  is  to 
secure  a  perpetual  series  of  discourses  in  the  University 
of  Oxford  under  the  conditions  laid  down  in  the  fore- 
going Statute.  But  seeing  that  these  conditions  are 
necessarily  of  a  general  character,  I  add  the  following 
suggestions  with  regard  to  certain  matters  of  detail, 
in  order  that,  as  far  as  from  time  to  time  may  seem 
expedient,  the  proceedings  may  be  conducted  in 
accordance  with  my  wishes. 

1  Mr.  Gladstone's  consent  to  be  the  first  Romanes  lecturer  is  here 
referred  to.  '  The  Rev.  Bartholomew  Price,  D.D.,  F.B.S. 


292  GEOEGE  JOHN   KOMANES  1891- 

(1)  I   desire   that  the   selection   of  lecturers   be 
irrespective  of  nationality,  and  determined  with  refer- 
ence either  (a)  to  general  eminence  in  art,  literature, 
or  science,  or  (b)  to  special  claims  for  discussing  any 
particular  subject  of  high  interest  at  the  time. 

(2)  I  deem  it  desirable  that  foreigners,  otherwise 
eligible,  should  not  be  disqualified  from  receiving  invi- 
tations to  lecture  merely  because  they  may  not  be 
able  to  do  so  in  English.     And,  in  order  to  meet  such 
cases,  I  suggest  that  the  translated  addresses  should 
be  delivered  before  the  University  by  some  competent 
reader  (to  be  selected  by  the  Vice-Chancellor)  in  the 
presence  of  their  authors. 

(3)  I   further   suggest  that  the  same  method  of 
delivery   should  be   adopted  in  cases  where   age   or 
infirmity    would   render    the   voice   of   the   lecturer 
inaudible,  or  indistinct,  to  any  portion  of  his  audience. 
And  I  hope  that  neither  age  nor  infirmity,  any  more 
than  inability  to  speak  the  English  language,  will  be 
deemed  a  hindrance  to  the  issuing  of  invitations  to 
the  men  of  high  distinction  in  their  several  depart- 
ments.    For,   on   the   one  hand,   in   order   to   have 
attained  such  distinction,  it  must  often  happen  that 
such  men  will  have  attained  old  age,  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  it  is  of  more  importance  that  they  should 
be  represented  in  these  decennial  volumes  than  that 
men  of  less  eminence  should  be  chosen  in  view  of  their 
superiority  as  lecturers. 

G.  J.  KOMANES. 

To  the  great  satisfaction  of  the  whole  University, 
Mr.  Gladstone  most  generously  consented  to  give  the 


1892       MB.   GLADSTONE   THE   FIEST   LECTUEEE       293 

first  lecture,  which  consent  he  signified  in  the  follow- 
ing letter : 

Grand  Hotel,  Biarritz  :  December  18,  1891. 

Dear  Mr.  Romanes, — Until  I  received  your  kind 
letter  I  reposed  undoubtingly  in  the  belief  that  the 
Vice-Chancellor  had  accepted  my  answer  as  the 
answer  which  best  met  the  case.1  I  thought  and 
think  it  right,  for  no  one  knows  my  poverty  except 
myself.  But  Oxford  is  Oxford,  and  I  think  that  if  she 
desired  me  to  climb  up  the  spire  of  Salisbury,  I  should 
attempt  it,  or  play  the  G-rcecidus  esuriens  in  any 
manner  she  desired.  Your  letter  opens  to  me  unex- 
pectedly the  fact  that  there  is  a  desire,  and  that  the 
proposal  was  not  simply  a  courtesy. 

I  therefore  thankfully  and  respectfully  accept ; 
secretly  relying  a  good  deal,  as  I  own,  on  the  fact  that 
there  is  (if  I  recollect  the  Y.C.'s  letter  rightly)  a  good 
deal  of  time  before  me,  and  that  the  chances  of  in- 
termediate reflection  may  bring  up  something  to 
the  surface  which  is  not  now  there,  for  I  own  my 
perplexity  continues  as  to  the  chance  of  making  any 
presentation  not  wholly  worthless.  But  enough  of 
this  :  and  let  me  thank  you  very  much  for  the  interest 
you,  who  have  so  high  a  title,  have  personally  taken 
in  bringing  me  to  the  front. 

We  are  much  delighted  with  this  place  ;  more 
eminently,  I  think,  a  sea  place  than  any  other  I  happen 
to  know. 

I  am  sure,  let  me  add,  that  you  will   make   my 

1  Mr.  Gladstone  had  declined  at  first,  but  yielded  to  a  second  urgent 
request  from  the  Founder. 


294  GEOEGE  JOHN  BQMANES  1892 

apologies  to  the  Yice-Chancellor ;  for  I  am  sensible 
that  the  altered  reply  may  seem  less  than  respectful 
to  the  resident  Head  of  the  University. 

Believe  me,  most  faithfully  yours, 

W.  E.  GLADSTONE. 

It  had  been  arranged  that  the  lectures  (which  the 
University,  rather  against  the  Founder's  wish,  decided 
should  be  called  the  '  Romanes  Lectures  ')  were  to  be 
given  in  the  Trinity  Term,  but  owing  to  the  General 
Election  of  1891,  Mr.  Gladstone  postponed  the  de- 
livery of  his  inaugural  lecture  until  October  1892. 

Journal,  March  1892. — The  Comptons  have  been 
here  for  Norman's  baptism,  which  was  a  strikingly 
pretty  ceremony  in  cathedral  at  evening  service  with 
the  choir.  Our  Dean  and  the  President  of  Magdalen, 
as  well  as  Lady  Compton,  stood  sponsors,  so  the  boy 
is  well  provided.  The  students  at  St.  Hugh's  Hall 
decorated  the  font,  and  as  the  boy's  second  name  is 
Hugh,  he  is  a  special  protege  of  the  little  Hall. 

April  1. — We  spent  a  week  at  Malvern,  in  com- 
pany with  the  Walter  Hobhouses,  and  then  went  on 
to  Denton  Manor,1  where  a  company  of  the  wise,  inclu- 
ding Ray Lankester,  Professors  Poultonaiid  Shadworth 
Hodgson,  and  Mr.  Sully,  were.  Also  others,  including 
Lady  Cecil  Scott  Montagu,  who  walked  abroad  with 
a  divining  rod,  a  real  act  of  courage  considering  who 
were  among  the  party. 

At  Malvern  Mr.  Romanes  wrote  a  sonnet  which, 
in  the  light  of  after  years,  was  a  sad  prophecy. 

1  The  home  of  Sir  William  and  the  Hon.  Lady  Welby- Gregory. 


1892  A  SONNET  295 


MALVEEN   1892 

'  To  doze  upon  a  sunny  hill  in  June, 

And  hear  the  lullaby  that  Nature  lends  ; 

To  drink  the  cup  that  sweet  contentment  blends 
With  sweetlier  love  of  those  whose  hearts  shall  soon 
Reverberate  with  joy,  as  they  attune 

Their  praise  to  praises  that  achievement  sends  : 

This  is  to  feel  that  bounteous  Nature  bends 
A  mother's  smile  on  manhood  in  its  noon. 

But  when  the  shadows  of  the  twilight  come, 
And  high  Ambition  needs  must  fold  his  wings, 

While  voices  both  of  hearts  and  hills  grow  dumb, 
Can  she  still  bring  the  smile  that  now  she  brings  ? 
Yea,  by  the  memory  of  brighter  things, 

I'll  trust  her  in  the  night  that  calls  me  home.' 

Journal,  May  and  June  1892. — Had  a  delightful 
visit  from  the  Butchers  and  Mr.  H.  Graham,  later  on 
the  Comptons,  and  Mr.  Edmund  Gosse,  full  of  witty 
and  wise  sayings.  Lord  Comptoii  sang  more  divinely 
than  ever,  and  the  Principal  of  Brasenose  played  the 
piano.  It  was  a  real  musical  feast. 

Professor  Le  Conte  came  to  stay  here  ;  we  had 
Mr.  Gore  and  one  or  two  others  to  meet  him. 


To  Miss  C.  E.  Romanes. 

94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford :  June  10,  1892. 

My  dearest  Charlotte, — I  received  your  letter  of 
the  6th  inst.,  together  with  the  pair  of  slippers  ;  the 
latter  are  the  very  things  which  are  required  when 
occasion  again  arises. 

Ever  since  you  left  we  have  been  having  Italian 


296  GEOBGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1892 

weather,  the  only  objection  to  which  being,  that  for 
my  taste  the  sunshine  is  too  continuous. 

We  have  had  staying  with  us  Professor  Palgrave 
and  his  daughter.  I  am  going  to  take  her  to  the 
Conversazione  of  the  Eoyal  Society  on  Wednesday 
next,  as  Ethel  is  going  to  stay  behind  for  her  political 
work.  We  have  also  had  Lord  Justice  Fry,  with 
his  wife  and  daughter,  staying  with  us  for  two  or 
three  days. 

I  have  got  a  promise  from  Professor  Huxley  to  give 
the  second  Eomanes  Lecture,  provided  he  is  able  to 
do  so  next  year.  It  will  be  an  interesting  occasion  if 
he  can  ;  because  he  has  not  lectured  for  the  last  five 
or  six  years. 

I  am  glad  you  like  my  book,  which  is  selling  off 
very  well ;  but,  as  you  know,  the  second  volume  will 
be  much  more  interesting. 

We  are  all  well,  and,  with  united  love  to  both,  I 
remain  yours  ever  the  same, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

To  Mr.  Huxleij. 

94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford  :  June  18,  1892. 

Dear  Mr.  Huxley, — I  write  to  thank  you  for  the 
large  and  latest  instalment  of  your  wisdom  which 
has  just  been  sent  me  by  your  publishers.  As  far  as 
I  am  personally  concerned,  its  publication  at  the 
present  time  is  opportune  ;  for  having  recently  lost 
the  sight  of  one  eye  by  effusion  of  serum  on  the 
retina,  I  arn  not  allowed  to  read  or  write.  So  I  am 
dependent  upon  others  for  my  reading,  and  under 


1892  TERMINAL  PHALANGES  OF  THE  PBIMATES   297 

such  circumstances  it  is  a  great  matter  to  have  your 
interesting  work  to  set  upon. 

My  eye  trouble  entirely  prevents  me  from  carry- 
ing on  my  experiments  in  heredity,  except  by  deputy ; 
this  to  me  is  most  provoking,  as  they  have  been 
yielding  very  interesting  results  ;  and  having  now 
trained  my  hands  for  the  performance  of  the  more 
delicate  among  them,  I  am  doubtful  where  I  can 
find  the  deputy  which  I  need.  I  mention  this  in  case 
you  should  happen  to  know  of  any  young  physiologist 
who,  possessing  some  operative  skill,  would  care  to 
join  in  the  research.  I  am  ordered  six  months'  rest 
from  any  kind  of  intellectual  work,  and  as  in  any 
case  I  could  not  finish  the  second  instalment  of  my 
work  upon  '  Darwin  and  After  Darwin  '  by  means  of 
dictation,  this  will  have  to  stand  over  until  next 
year. 

A  new  investigation  is  here  described* 

94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford :  March  27,  1892. 

My  dear  Schafer, — I  think  I  have  found  a  new 
ordinal  character  peculiar  to  the  Primates — viz.  a  nude 
condition  of  the  terminal  phalanges.  This  does  not 
occur  in  any  other  order  of  mammals  that  I  have 
looked  at,  but  in  all  species  of  primates  from  Lemurs 
to  Man,  as  far,  at  all  events,  as  I  have  been  able  to 
examine.  Now  I  want  to  see  whether  hair-follicles, 
or  vestiges  thereof,  can  be  found  in  the  terminal  pha- 
langes of  any  species  of  the  order.  So  I  am  making 
a  number  of  sections  of  the  skin  of  the  backs  of 
the  terminal  phalanges  of  fingers  and  toes,  of  man 


298  GEOKGE  JOHN  BOMANES  1892 

(adult  and  foetal),  apes,  monkeys,  baboons,  and  lemurs. 
Hitherto  I  cannot  detect  (nor  can  Kent)  any  signs 
or  vestiges  of  follicles.  But  I  should  much  like  you 
to  look  over  some  of  the  specimens  (a  few  would  be 
enough),  in  order  to  see  whether  your  trained  eyes 
would  be  also  unable  to  trace  any  rudiments  of  follicles. 
If  you  would  care  to  do  this,  of  course  I  should  acknow- 
ledge my  obligations  in  a  paper  which  I  am  prepar- 
ing on  the  subject. 

Yours  very  truly, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 

'  Darwin,  and  after  Darwin  '  appeared  in  the  spring 
of  1892. 

It  was  a  book  which  was  written,  so  to  speak,  with 
the  writer's  life-blood,  it  was  a  great  burden  on  him 
from  the  moment  he  commenced  it,  and  one  of  his 
greatest  sorrows  was  his  inability  to  finish  it. 

It  is  curious  to  those  who  know  Mr.  Eomanes'  mind 
intimately  to  note  the  exceeding  severity,  the  almost 
harsh  manner  in  which  he  treated  the  theological 
questions  involved  in  the  doctrines  called,  for  conve- 
nience sake,  '  Darwinism.'  As  more  and  more  he 
found  himself  yielding  on  the  side  of  emotion,  of 
moral  convictions,  inclination,  of  spiritual  need  to 
the  relinquished  faith,  so  much  the  more  did  he  re- 
solve to  be  utterly  true,  to  face  every  difficulty,  to 
push  no  objection  aside,  to  leave  nothing  unsaid — to 
be,  in  fact,  absolutely  and  entirely  honest.  As  a  friend 
after  his  death,  speaking  of  this  very  book,  said,  '  It 
was  his  righteousness  which  made  him  seem  so  hard.' 

Yet  there  is  a  ring  of  hope  of  something  which 
will  one  day  turn  to  faith  in  the  words  which  end  the 
book : 


1892  ON   'DAKWINISM'  299 

c  Upon  the  whole,  then,  it  seems  to  me  that  such 
evidence  as  we  have  is  against  rather  than  in  favour 
of  the  inference,  that  if  design  be  operative  in 
animate  nature  it  has  reference  to  animal  enjoyment 
or  well-being,  as  distinguished  from  animal  improve- 
ment or  evolution.  And  if  this  result  should  be 
found  distasteful  to  the  religious  mind — if  it  be  felt 
that  there  is  no  desire  to  save  the  evidences  of  design 
unless  they  serve  at  the  same  time  to  testify  to  the 
nature  of  that  design  as  beneficent — I  must  once 
more  observe  that  the  difficulty  thus  presented  to 
theism  is  not  a  difficulty  of  modern  creation.  On 
the  contrary,  it  has  always  constituted  the  funda- 
mental difficulty  with  which  natural  theologians 
have  had  to  contend.  The  external  world  appears, 
in  this  respect,  to  be  at  variance  with  our  moral 
sense  ;  and  when  the  antagonism  is  brought  home  to 
the  religious  mind,  it  must  ever  be  with  a  shock  of 
terrified  surprise.  It  has  been  newly  brought  home 
to  us  by  the  generalisations  of  Darwin,  and  there- 
fore, as  I  said  at  the  beginning,  the  religious  thought 
of  our  generation  has  been  more  than  ever  staggered 
by  the  question — Where  is  now  thy  God  ?  But  I 
have  endeavoured  to  show  that  the  logical  standing 
of  the  case  has  not  been  materially  changed;  and  when 
this  cry  of  reason  pierces  the  heart  of  Faith  it  re- 
mains for  Faith  to  answer  now,  as  she  always  answered 
before — and  answered  with  that  trust  which  is  at 
once  her  beauty  and  her  life — Verily  thou  art  a  God 
that  hidest  Thyself.' 

In  the  spring  of  this  year  Mr.  Romanes  wrote  for 


300  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1892 

the  wedding-day  of  a  dearly  loved  friend,  Mrs. 
W.  Ingham,  his  last  '  made-to-order  '  sonnet.  He 
wrote  it  in  the  train  as  he  was  going  North  to  this 
peculiarly  bright  and  happy  wedding,  and  he  was 
much  struck  with  the  sunniness  and  joyousness  of 
the  country  bathed  in  June  sunshine.  Yet  in  this 
sonnet  there  is  a  touch  of  sadness,  a  hint  of  shadows 
soon  to  close  in. 

To  Annie. 

(June  1,  1892.) 

Through  all  the  gladness  of  the  marriage  bells 
Methinks  I  hear  a  distant  echo  chime, 
Wherewith  their  rhythm,  wedded  to  a  rhyme, 
Is  wafted  by  this  breeze  of  June,  and  telJs 
Of  brooding  Death  in  sound  of  funeral  knells. 
*  The  new  supplants  the  old,'  it  rings,  and  Time 
That  'gins  to  steal  our  beauty  in  its  prime 
Shah1  ever  change  the  heart  where  Heaven  dwells. 
My  heart  for  thee  can  never  cease  to  beat ; 
But  if  to  thine  it  so  should  seem  to-day 
That  England  never  smiled  a  smile  so  sweet 
Among  her  meadows  decked  with  bridal  May, 
Remember  still  the  moorland  far  away, 
Whose  heather  blushed  with  joy  around  thy  feet. 

June  1892  brought  the  first  warnings  of  serious 
illness.  One  day  Mr.  Romanes  announced  at  lunch 
that  he  noticed  a  blind  spot  in  one  eye.  He  con- 
sulted his  friend  Mr.  Doyne,  the  well-known  oculist, 
who  from  the  first  thought  seriously  of  the  case. 

He  went  up  to  town,  and  saw  various  doctors, 
and  had  some  thoughts  of  taking  a  voyage.  He 
was,  however,  well  enough  to  attend  the  Conversa- 
zione at  the  Royal  Society,  and  showed  some  ex- 
periments on  rabbits  and  rats  which  bore  on  questions 
of  acquired  characters.  He  writes  : 


1892  ILLNESS  301 

To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

I  have  been  thinking  of  you  a  great  deal,  and, 
with  a  somewhat  literal  application  of  a  certain  ex- 
pletive addressed  by  a  fast  man  to  his  eyes,  am 
driven  to  address  you  through  my  goggles. 

Nettleship  has  appointed  to-morrow  morning  to 
see  me,  so  I  shall  not  be  able  to  get  home  sooner  than 
six  o'clock  train.  Don't  trouble  to  meet  me,  as  I  must 
take  a  cab  for  the  rabbits  and  rats.  The  latter  are 
now  at  the  Royal  Society,  where  ample  space  has 
been  provided  for  their  exhibition.  The  Zoological 
paper 1  went  off  very  well,  and  Flower  made  a  very 
good  remark  on  it,  the  substance  of  which  I  will  tell 
you  when  we  meet,  it  had  not  previously  occurred 
to  me.  Your  letter  to  the  Pollocks  never  reached 
them,  so  they  had  given  me  up.  They  were  as 
enthusiastically  kind  as  usual,  and  very  sympathetic 
about  my  eyes. 

He  returned  to  Oxford,  and  was  persuaded  to  rest, 
and  not  to  go  to  London  again  to  pay  a  promised 
visit  to  Professor  Palgrave. 

To  Miss  C.  E.  Romanes. 

• 

94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford  :  June  18,  1892. 

My  dearest  Charlotte, — Your  little  differences  of 
opinion  with  regard  to  the  rats  are  very  amusing  to 
me,  and  I  quite  see  how  the  matter  stands. 

1  On  the  work  alluded  to  in  a  letter  to  Professor  Schafer. 


302  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1892 

I  am  very  glad  to  hear  of  your  improvement  in 
general  health,  and  also  of  James'  continued  vigour. 
As  regards  myself  I  have  no  very  satisfactory  ac- 
count to  give.     The  headaches  indeed  are  not  worse 
—if  anything  they  are  better ;   but  the  gout  is  at 
work  on  other  parts  of  this  vile  body,  and  the  latest 
assault  is  a  very  serious  one  for  a  man  of  my  pursuits. 
About  ten  days  ago  I  found  myself  partially  blind  in 
the  right  eye — the  upper  half  of  the  field  of  vision 
being   totally   obliterated.     I   have  seen  an    Oxford 
and  also  a  London  oculist,  who  have  both  examined 
the  eye  and  pronounce  the  sudden  seizure  to  be  one  of 
serous  effusion  upon  the  retina.     It  seems  probable 
that  the  impairment  of  vision  will  be  permanent,  and 
so  prevent  all  operative  work  where  any  delicacy  is 
required.     The   blindness  is  so   complete,  that  if   I 
look  about  an  inch  below  the  electric  light  placed  at  a 
distance  of  a  very  few  yards,  I  am  not  able  to  per- 
ceive any   luminosity.     Meanwhile,  I  have  to  wear 
the  darkest  of  possible  goggles,  and  generally  to  live 
the  life  of  a  blind  man.     Per  contra,  this  may  prove 
a  blessing  in  disguise,  as  it  compels  me  to  abstain 
from  work  for  some  considerable  time  to  come,  and 
I  had  been  advised  to  this  course  on  account  of  the 
headaches.     How   I   am  to    spend   the  six  months' 
rest  which  is  prescribed  I  have  not  yet  determined. 
Shooting  will  be  probably  out  of  the  question,  as  I 
cannot   use   the  left  eye  in  any  form  of  recreation. 
My  idea  is  rather  to  go  to  Egypt  and  Palestine,  to 
take  a  voyage  to  the  Cape,  or  in  some  other  such 
way  to   break  my   usual   habits  without   altogether 
wasting  time. 


1892  ILLNESS  303 

All  the  rest  of  the  household  are  flourishing,  and 
with  love  to  both, 

I  remain  yours  ever  the  same, 

GEOKGE. 

In  a  day  or  two  a  second  blind  spot  appeared,  and 
now  the  doctors  took  a  very  serious  view  of  his  case. 
Life  and  sight  alike  were  threatened,  and  instant 
rest  and  quiet  were  ordered.  For  about  three  weeks 
he  remained  in  bed,  until  the  extreme  pulse  tension 
was  reduced,  and  then  it  seemed  as  if  hope  might 
be  entertained  of  years  of  life,  if  only  care  were 
taken  about  diet,  and  work,  and  thought. 

Now  began  the  two  years  of  quiet,  steadfast,  en- 
durance ;  no  one  could  realise  from  his  quiet  manner 
and  cheerful  talk  how  great  was  the  inconvenience 
caused  by  the  affection  of  his  eyes,  no  one  ever  found 
him  anything  but  unselfish  and  gentle.  The  one 
difficulty  was  to  persuade  him  not  to  work,  and  this 
was  almost  impossible.  He  was  almost  feverishly 
anxious  to  finish  his  book,  to  work  out  experiments 
he  had  been  planning  ;  and  as  time  went  on,  and  he 
thought  and  pondered  as  he  had  ever  done  on  the 
ultimate  mysteries  of  life  and  being,  other  books 
were  planned,  other  courses  of  reading  mapped  out. 

Just  then  a  letter  came  from  Canon  Scott- 
Holland  which  much  touched  the  recipient. 

Mr.  Holland  writes : 

'  I  hear  sad  news  of  you  through  Philip  Waggett. 
You  have  passed  under  the  sorest  trial  perhaps  that 
could  have  been  laid  on  your  courage,  your  hopeful- 
ness, your  peace. 

I  trust,   indeed,  that  there  is   much  to  look  for 


304  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1892 

yet  of  recovered  power  and  renewed  work,  but,  for 
the  moment,  there  must  be  anxiety,  and  the  bitter 
strain  of  disappointment,  and  the  rough  curb  of  pain. 
You  are  assured  of  the  deep  sympathy  of  many  warm- 
hearted friends  to  whom  you  have  always  shown 
most  generous  kindness,  and  I  venture  to  rank  my- 
self among  them.  We  shall  remember  you  often  and 
anxiously. 

It  is  a  tremendous  moment  when  first  one  is 
called  upon  to  join  the  great  army  of  those  who  suffer. 

That  vast  world  of  love  and  pain  opens  suddenly 
to  admit  us  one  by  one  within  its  fortress. 

We  are  afraid  to  enter  into  the  land,  yet  you 
will,  I  know,  feel  how  high  is  the  call.  It  is  as  a 
trumpet  speaking  to  us,  that  cries  aloud — '  It  is  your 
turn — endure.'  Play  your  part.  As  they  endured 
before  you,  so  now,  close  up  the  ranks — be  patient 
and  strong  as  they  were.  Since  Christ,  this  world  of 
pain  is  no  accident  untoward  or  sinister,  but  a  lawful 
department  of  life,  with  experiences,  interests,  adven- 
tures, hopes,  delights,  secrets  of  its  own.  These  are  all 
thrown  open  to  us  as  we  pass  within  the  gates- 
things  that  we  could  never  learn  or  know  or  see,  so 
long  as  we  were  well. 

God  help  you  to  walk  through  this  world  now 
opened  to  you  as  through  a  kingdom,  regal,  royal,  and 
wide  and  glorious.  My  warmest  sympathies  to  your 
wife.' 

The  first  weeks  of  illness  passed  away,  the  phy- 
sicians seemed  more  satisfied  with  his  condition, 
and  he  was  sent  to  Carlsbad,  and  after  five  weeks 


1892  ILLNESS  305 

there,  came  the  last  bit  of  pleasant  foreign  travel. 
He  and  his  wife  travelled  in  the  Tyrol  and  in  the 
Bavarian  Highlands,  and  Mr.  Eomanes  was  able  to 
enjoy  the  glorious  scenery  with  what  seemed  keener 
appreciation  than  ever  ;  he  especially  took  a  fancy  to 
Parten  Kirchen,  in  Bavaria,  and  planned  a  return  to  it 
another  year  with  his  children. 

He  got  as  far  as  Meran,  and  much  enjoyed  meet- 
ing Mr.  and  Mrs.  Lecky  (Mr.  Lecky's  works  were 
among  the  very  few  historical  books  he  read  with  any 
real  pleasure).  And  on  his  return,  Sir  Andrew  Clark 
was  encouraging,  holding  out  hopes  of  a  return  to 
health  :  i  You've  made  a  bid  for  recovery,'  he  said  in 
his  genial  way.  It  was  thought  best  that  Mr.  Eomanes 
should  spend  the  winter  in  a  warm  climate,  and  Ma- 
deira was  chosen. 

To  Mr.  Huxley. 

Athenaeum  Club,  Pall  Mall,  S.W. :  October  12,  1892. 

My  dear  Mr.  Huxley, — My  wife  tells  me  that  she 
saw  you  in  the  street  on  the  day  of  our  arrival  here. 
Since  then  I  have  been  ordered  by  Sir  A.  Clark  and 
Dr.  Bruntoii  to  spend  the  winter  in  Madeira.  There- 
fore it  occurs  to  me  to  ask  whether  during  your 
residence  in  those  parts  you  came  across  any  matters 
of  natural  history  which  you  might  think  worth 
following  up.  Also,  whether  there  is  any  literature 
that  it  might  be  wise  for  me  to  consult  before 
starting. 

Above  all  things,  according  to  Sir  A.  C.,  I  am  to 
'  cultivate  tranquillity,'  so  any  observations  I  may 
hope  to  make  must  be  of  the  pottering  kind.  But 
the  oculists  tell  me  I  may  now  use  my  eyes — or 

x 


306  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1392 

rather  as  much  of  them  as  are  left  to  use.  Victor 
Horsley  has  undertaken  to  continue  the  hereditary 
experiments. 

My  general  condition  is  still  said  to  be  '  critical,' 
and  I  do  not  myself  think  that  Carlsbad  has  proved 
to  be  of  any  benefit.  Indeed,  after  a  somewhat 
extensive  acquaintance  with  mineral  spas  in  general, 
I  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  their  popularity 
as  '  cures  '  is  chiefly  due  to  the  survival  of  a  pre- 
scientific  faith  in  the  virtue  of  drugs  supplied  by 
Providence.  On  pressing  my  Carlsbad  doctor  as  to 
why  one  might  not  drink  the  waters  anywhere  else 
(seeing  that  they  contain  nothing  but  soluble  salts), 
he  answered  that  perhaps  they  might  hold  '  some 
electricity  or  magnetism '  that  would  escape  if  the 
waters  were  not  '  fresh  ' ! 

Many  thanks  for  your  kind  letter  to  Carlsbad. 
The  G.  0.  M.,  I  hear,  is  hard  at  work  on  the 
approaching  lecture. 

G.  J.  ROMANES. 

Then  came  the  first  Romanes  lecture,  which  was 
a  great  success  in  every  way.  Mr.  Gladstone  called 
it  '  An  Academic  Sketch,'  and  nothing  could  have 
been  a  happier  inauguration  of  the  series.  It  was  a 
memorable  scene.  The  Prime  Minister  in  his  doctor's 
robes,  the  crowded  Sheldonian  theatre,  the  eloquent 
lecture,  the  inspiring  words  of  which  came  like  a 
trumpet  call  to  Oxford's  sons,  ending  with  her  motto, 
1  Dominus  illuminatio  mea.' 

The  few  days  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Gladstone's  visit  to 
Oxford  were  days  of  real  enjoyment  to  Mr.  Romanes. 
The  Journal  notes  :  'We  had  a  pleasant  luncheon  party 


1892  THE  FIEST    BOMANES  LECTIlEE  307 

for  the  Gladstones  and  Lord  Acton,  who  was  also  in 
Oxford;  also  a  breakfast  party  on  the  morning  after  the 
lecture,  to  which,  among  others,  came  the  Principal 
of  St.  Edmund's  Hall.1  I  put  him  next  Mr.  Gladstone, 
and  the  consequence  was  a  Dante  talk,  to  Lady 
Compton's  great  satisfaction.  Mr.  Gladstone's  talk 
was  wonderful,  and  no  one  would  have  suspected  that 
he  had  any  political  cares  whatsoever,  or  that  the 
Election  of  1892  was  only  just  over.' 

On  the  day  of  the  lecture  we  had  a  delightful  time 
before  lunch.  Mary  Paget  and  Lord  Compton  sang 
for  an  hour,  and  put  us  in  good  humour. 

It  was  with  real  regret  that  good-bye  was  said  to 
the  illustrious  guests,  with  hopes  of  future  meetings 
never  to  be  realised. 

Mr.  Huxley  accepted  the  invitation  which  the 
Yice-Chancellor  permitted  Mr.  Romanes  to  give  him 
privately.  The  following  delightful  letter  gives  his 
final  decision : 2 

Hodeslea,  Staveley  Koad,  Eastbourne  :  November  1,  1892. 

My  dear  Mrs.  Romanes, — I  have  just  written  to 
the  Yice-Chancellor  to  say  that  I  hope  to  meet  his 
disposition  any  time  next  May. 

My  wife  is  '  larking ' — I  am  sorry  to  use  such  a 
word,  but  what  she  is  pleased  to  tell  me  of  her 
doings  leaves  me  no  alternative — in  London,  whither 
I  go  on  Monday  to  fetch  her  back — in  chains,  if 
necessary.  But  I  know,  in  the  matter  of  being  '  taken 
in  and  done  for  '  by  your  hospitable  selves,  I  may,  for 
once,  speak  for  her  as  much  as  myself. 

1  The  Rev.  E.  Moore,  D.D. 

2  Since  this  letter  has  been  in  type  the  world  has  had  to  lament  Mr, 
Huxley's  death. 


308  GEOBGE  JOHN  EOMANES  1892 

Don't  ask  anybody  above  the  rank  of  the  younger 
son  of  a  peer,  because  I  shall  not  be  able  to  go  into 
dinner  before  him  or  her,  and  that  part  of  my  dignity 
is  naturally  what  I  prize  most. 

Would  you  not  like  me  to  come  in  my  P.O.1  suit  ? 
All  ablaze  with  gold,  and  costing  a  sum  with  which 
I  could  buy,  oh  !  so  many  books. 

Only  if  your  late  experiences  should  prompt  you  to 
instruct  your  other  guests  not  to  contradict  me — don't 
— I  rather  like  it. 

Ever  yours  very  truly, 

T.  H.  HUXLEY. 

Bon  voyage  !  You  can  tell  Mr.  Jones 2  that  I  will 
have  him  brought  before  the  Privy  Council,  and  fined 
as  in  the  good  old  days,  if  he  does  not  treat  you 
properly. 

To  Mr.  Huxley. 

St.  Aldate's,  Oxford  :  October  25,  1892. 

My  dear  Mr.  Huxley, — I  am  much  obliged  to  you 
for  your  information,  general  and  particular,  about 
Madeira. 

You  will  have  seen  from  the  newspapers  that  the 
G.O.M.  function  has  duly  come  off  here  with  all 
possible  pomp  and  enthusiasm.  Bay  Lankester 
called  it  '  George's  Show,'  and  certainly  as  a  show 
it  was  well  worth  seeing.  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  the 
last  telegraphic  account  I  have  received  of  his  con- 
dition from  his  sister  to  Sir  H.  Aclaiid  is  rather 
alarming.  It  will  be  a  sad  blow  to  English  biology 
if  he  should  die. 

1  Privy  Councillor.  3  The  proprietor  of  an  hotel  in  Madeira. 


1892  MADEIEA  309 

I  will  now  see  that  you  receive  an  official  invita- 
tion from  the  V.C.  to  deliver  your  lecture  next  May 
Term.  And  I  am  glad  to  think  that  there  will  be  no 
possibility  of  the  lecturer  following  the  Premier  in 
almost  totally  ignoring  the  existence  of  science, 
Bacon  and  Newton  being  the  only  names  that  he 
mentioned  in  this  connection.  Please  remember  (in 
case  I  should  forget  to  to  tell  you  later  on)  that  when 
your  lecture  comes  off  you  had  better  follow  the 
precedent  set  by  Mr.  G.,  and  wear  your  red  D.C.L. 
gown. 

With  united  kind  regards  to  Mrs.  Huxley  and 
yourself, 

I  remain,  yours  very  sincerely, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 

Then  came  the  departure  for  Madeira,  which  was 
a  real  trial,  for  never  before  had  Christmas  been  spent 
away  from  home.  But  the  change  seemed  to  do  him 
much  good.  Save  for  occasional  days  of  headache  he 
was  very  bright  and  well,  and  worked  at  his  book  and 
wrote  several  articles  for  the  i  Contemporary  Keview ' 
on  Professor  Weismann's  theory.  But  poetry  he 
could  not  manage. 

To  Mrs.  Henry  Pollock. 

Madeira  :  December  18,  1892. 

My  dear  Mentor, — I  fear  you  must  have  been 
thinking  that  I  am  either  very  ill  or  very  heartless  not 
to  have  written  ere  this.  Yet  neither  is  the  case. 
Ill  I  assuredly  am,  but  not  so  much  as  to  have  pre- 
vented me  from  sending  you  a  letter  for  the  marriage 


310  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1892 

day.  The  fact  is  I  have  been  trying  to  write  a  sonnet 
for  that  occasion  ever  since  I  came  out  here,  and  can- 
not. Since  my  breakdown  in  June  I  have  entirely 
lost  the  power  of  poetising  ;  I  suppose  it  will  come 
back  if  my  general  health  should  ever  return,  but  still 
I  did  think  that  such  an  occasion  ought  to  have  in- 
spired me.  Nothing  further  than  rhymes,  however, 
would  come,  so  the  day  passed  over  without  my  in- 
tended contribution  to  its  memorials. 

So,  dear  Mentor,  do  not  think  hardly  of  me.  For 
indeed  both  you  and  Marion  have  been  much  in  my 
thoughts;  and  for  you  especially  I  know  this  time 
must  be  one  of  many  and  varied  feelings  of  the  kind 
that  sink  deepest  into  the  heart.1  So  not  only  my 
old  affection,  but  a  new  sympathy,  is  with  you — a 
sympathy  in  the  joy  as  in  the  grief  of  it. 

Ethel  will  have  told  you  what  little  has  to  be  told 
about  our  uneventful  life  here.  As  I  have  said  to  all 
my  correspondents,  it  is  the  island  that  Tennyson 
must  have  had  in  view  when  he  wrote  his  '  Lotus- 
eaters.'  The  description  is  so  exact,  that  I  need  not 
write  anything  in  the  way  of  description,  if  you  will 
only  read  it. 

My  headaches  are  growing  less  intense,  although 
they  still  keep  wonderfully  persistent.  I  cannot  fore- 
see what  is  likely  to  happen  in  the  end,  as  no  one 
seems  to  know  exactly  what  is  the  matter  with  me. 

The  last  mail  brought  me  a  letter  from  the  Master 
of  my  College  at  Cambridge,  telling  me  that  I  had 
been  unanimously  elected  to  fill  a  vacancy  in  the  list 

1  Miss  Pollock's  marriage  to  Mr.  Vernon  Boys,  F.R.S.,  is  here  re- 
ferred to. 


1892  FELLOWSHIP   AT   CAIUS   COLLEGE  311 

of  Honorary  Fellows.  This  seems  to  me  very  generous, 
seeing  how  I  have  played  the  prodigal  and  squandered 
my  living  on  endowing  the  enemy. 

Please  give  my  very  heartiest  love  and  good  wishes 
to  the  bride.  Take  also  my  Christmas  greetings  for 
all  three  of  you,  coupled  with  the  congratulations  that 
are  so  meet,  and  believe  me  to  remain, 

Yours  ever  affectionately, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

To  James  Romanes,  Esq. 

Madeira:  1892. 

I  suppose  you  will  have  seen  in  the  newspapers,  or 
have  been  told  by  Char.,1  that  Caius  College  has  made 
me  an  Honorary  Fellow.2  This  is  a  great  pleasure  to 
me,  because  I  have  always  retained  my  first  love  for 
Cambridge,  and  yet  of  late  years  I  have  so  severed 
my  connection  with  it.  These  coals  of  fire  have 
therefore  a  heat  about  them  which  is  all  the  more 
gratifying. 

To  Professor  Ewart. 

This  would  be  a  wonderful  place  for  natural  history 
if  I  were  well  enough  to  knock  about. 

I  get  fishermen,  however,  to  bring  any  marine 
animals  which  they  know  to  be  rare.  There  is  one 
fish  which  I  never  heard  of  before,  and  which  seems 
to  me  remarkable  on  account  of  its  curious  combi- 
nations of  character,  for  in  all  respects  it  seems  to  be 
a  large  dog-fish,  excepting  its  teeth,  which  are  those 
of  a  shark. 

1  A  pet  name  for  his  sister. 
A  window  to  his  memory  is  to  be  placed  in  Gains  College  Chapel. 


312  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1392 

To  Professor  Poulton. 

New  Hotel,  Madeira  :  December  2,  1892. 

My  dear  Poulton, — I  have  now  read  the  corre- 
spondence in  '  Nature.'  It  seems  to  me  that is 

quite  absurdly  '  aggressive,'  even  supposing  that  he 
proves  to  be  right.  But  I  send  this  to  ask  you  about 
the  grasshopper  letter  in  last  week's  <  Nature,'  just 
received  here.  I  have  noticed  the  same  thing  in 
grasshoppers,  but  do  not  remember  to  have  seen  any 
account  of  the  changes  of  colour,  or  mechanism 
thereof,  in  them.  Do  you  know  if  it  has  ever  been 
worked  at  ?  If  not,  I  might  do  so  here. 

The  same  question  applies  to  lizards.  It  seems  to 
me  that  those  here  vary  their  colours  to  suit  those  of 
habitual  stations.  I  remember  Eimer  read  a  paper 
about  the  lizards  in  Capri,  but  forget  details.  He 
often  alludes  to  it  in  his  book  translated  by  Cunning- 
ham. What  are  his  main  results  ? 

G.  J.  E. 

The  Cambridge  Fellowship  was  a  great  pleasure 
to  Mr.  Komanes.  In  the  last  months  of  his  life  he 
longed  eagerly  to  visit  his  first  University  and  his 
own  college,  and  planned  visits  to  Cambridge  which, 
alas,  were  never  paid. 

Canon  Isaac  Taylor  was  in  the  same  hotel  at 
Madeira,  and  this  considerably  relieved  the  weariness  of 
exile.  Mr.  Romanes  was  still  full  of  fun  and  merriment ; 
the  headaches  diminished  ;  he  played  chess  intermin- 
ably, and  even  took  part  in  a  little  play  given  one 
afternoon  by  a  few  people  who  formed  themselves 


1893  MADEIRA  313 

into  an  '  Oxford  Brotherhood,'  most  of  the  members 
having  some  connection  with  the  University  of 
Oxford. 

The  members  of  the  brotherhood  were  supposed 
to  deliver  lectures  in  turn,  but  the  burden  chiefly 
fell  on  Mr.  Komanes.  The  lecturing,  which  in  this 
particular  case  was  simply  talking,  was  never  any 
trouble  to  him,  and  he  used  to  deliver  little  im- 
promptu discourses  which  apparently  pleased  his 
friendly  audience. 

Mr.  Eomanes'  letters  showed  nearly  always  great 
brightness  and  increased  feelings  of  health,  although 
now  and  then  he  had  '  bad  days.' 


To  James  Romanes,  Esq. 

Madeira  :  January  1,  1893. 

This  is  the  first  letter  which  I  write  in  1893,  and 
am  writing  it  early  in  the  morning  before  breakfast. 
New  Year's  Day  is  as  glorious  in  sunshine  and  azure 
as  all — or  nearly  all — the  others  have  been  since  we 
came.  I  wish  you  many  returns  of  them  and  happy, 
whether  in  cloud  or  sunshine. 

January  31,  1893. 

Your  letter  on  the  15th  has  been  a  great  treat  to 
me ;  it  rings  true  and  deep,  and  the  next  best  thing 
to  having  dear  ones  near  is  to  receive  expressions  of 
their  dearness. 

Besides,  I  am  all  alone  here,  for  but  a  few  days, 
it  is  true,  still  the  place  seems  dreary  under  present 
circumstances,  therefore  all  you  say  is  opportunely 
said. 


314  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1893 

For  my  own  part  I  have  always  felt  that  the  two 
most  precious  things  in  life  are  faith  and  love,  and 
more  and  more  the  older  that  I  grow.  Ambition 
and  achievement  are  a  long  way  behind  in  my  ex- 
perience, in  fact  out  of  the  running  altogether.  The 
disappointments  are  many  and  the  prizes  few,  and  by 
the  time  they  are  attained  seem  small. 

The  whole  thing  is  vanity  and  vexation  of  spirit 
without  faith  and  love. 

Perhaps  it  is  by  way  of  compensation  for  having 
lost  the  former  that  the  latter  has  been  dealt  to  me 
in  such  full  measure.  I  never  knew  anyone  so  well 
off  in  this  respect.  .  .  . 

Although  I  have  been  very  much  in  the  world  I 
have  not  a  single  enemy,  unless  it  be  the  -  — ,  who 
have  entirely  dropped  out  of  my  life. 

On  the  other  hand,  I  do  not  know  anyone  who 
has  so  many  friends,  not  merely  acquaintances,  but 
men  and  women  who  are  devoted  with  an  ardent 
affection.  .  .  . 

Now,  all  this  might  sound  very  conceited  to  any- 
one who  would  not  understand  me  as  I  know  you 
will  do.  But  I  have  been  thinking  the  matter  over 
in  my  solitude,  and  candidly  I  am  wholly  unable  to 
account  for  it.  Still,  to  be  further  candid,  even  love 
is  not  capable  of  becoming  to  me  any  compensation 
for  the  loss  of  faith.  .  .  . 

But  it  is  time  for  me  to  go  to  bed  and  shut  up 
this  egotistic  screed  to  post  by  to-morrow's  mail. 

I  received  a  telegram  yesterday  announcing  the 
arrival  in  England  of  my  brace  of  Ethels,  and  to- 


1893  MADEIKA  315 

morrow  I  expect  the  arrival  here  of  Charlotte  and 
Mytsie.1  .  .  . 

I  forgot  about  the  mesmerism  article.  You  will 
have  seen  that  the  writer  rather  caved  in  at  the  end, 
so  that  one  cannot  well  understand  how  much  he  him- 
self supposes  was  genuine  and  how  much  imposture. 

But  quite  apart  from  (this),  there  is  no  question 
in  my  mind  that  the  facts,  even  as  far  as  hitherto 
established,  are  very  perplexing.  But  on  this  account 
there  is  all  the  more  need  for  caution.  I  myself 
went  over  the  Paris  Salpetriere  two  years  ago,  and 
saw  the  doctors'  experiments  on  a  number  of  girls, 
who  were  trotted  out  for  my  benefit. 

But  there  was  such  a  lot  of  hocus  pocus  with 
magnets  that  I  was  much  disappointed.  Even  if 
none  of  the  girls  were  humbugging,  I  saw  nothing 
that  could  not  be  explained  by  suggestion. 

For  the  doctors  made  suggestions  while  perform- 
ing the  very  experiments  which  were  designed  to 
exclude  suggestion. 

To  Mrs.  Vernon  Boys. 

New  Hotel,  Madeira :  February  1,  1893. 

My  dear  Marion, — If  I  have  your  husband's 
permission  still  to  call  you  so — your  kind  letter  has 
been  a  great  solace  to  me,  after  my  ineffectual  efforts 
to  supply  a  sonnet  for  the  great  occasion.  For  it 
shows  me  that  your  Laureate  is  forgiven,  and  my 
friend,  what  that  friend  has  always  been.  Besides,  I 
am  now  lonely — as  my  brace  of  Ethels  has  flown 

1  A  favourite  cousin,  who  died  a  few  months  after  Mr,  Romanes. 


316  GEOKGE  JOHN   EOMANES  189* 

away — and  therefore  your  affectionate  words  are  all 
the  more  welcome. 

This,  however,  is  the  last  day  of  my  solitude,  as 
Charlotte  and  Mytsie  ought  to  arrive  in  a  few  hours. 

And  now,  having  given  you  all  my  little  news, 
let  me  pile  up  my  congratulations  as  high  as  words 
can  pile  them.  I  heard  all  about  the  wedding  from 
many  different  sources,  and  there  was  but  one  opinion 
as  to  the  bride.  I  will  not  say  what  it  was,  but  oh, 
had  I  been  there  to  see.  It  is  so  so  good  of  you  to 
miss  us  in  the  middle  of  it  all.  But  it  may  have 
been  telepathy,  because  I  was  hard  at  work  on  my 
abortive  sonnet  all  that  day. 

It  is  like  northern  breezes  to  read  your  account 
of  all  the  happy  doings  you  have  had  on  your  wedding 
trip,  and  it  makes  me  happy  to  feel  that  you  have 
made  so  wise  a  choice  in  the  greatest  event  of  your 
life.  Long  may  you  live  together  in  the  cultivation 
of  domestic  bliss,  although  of  course  only  in  the 
moments  snatched  from  the  cultivation  of  science  ! 

February  2. 

Charlotte  and  Mytsie  arrived  last  night  at  ten 
o'clock — twelve  hours  late.  They  had  the  roughest 
voyage  which  the  boat  has  ever  experienced.  Poor 
Char.1  is  literally  more  dead  than  alive.  But  the 
weather  here  is  beautiful,  and  I  hope  she  may  soon 
get  to  rights  again. 

With  affectionate  regards  to  my  mentor,  and  to 
yours,  I  remain,  ever  the  same, 

PHILOSOPHER. 

1   See  p.  811,  above, 


1893  MADEIKA  317 

To  James  Romanes,  Esq. 

Madeira :  March  8. 

Charlotte  enjoys  this  place  amazingly,  she  is 
always  saying,  '  Just  a  very  Paradise  for  James.'  I 
quite  agree  with  her.  You  liked  Nice  very  much, 
but  Nice  is  far  from  being  up  to  this  either  in  regard 
to  sun,  flowers,  rocks,  or  mountains.  It  has  certainly 
done  me  a  lot  of  good.  My  headaches  are  virtually 
gone,  and  I  can  work  a  little  again,  which  makes  all 
the  difference  between  Heaven  and  its  antipodes. 

March  13. 

I  am  glad  you  are  pleased  about  the  lectureship 
foundation.  The  principal  feature  of  the  scheme  is 
the  perpetual  publication  of  the  lectures  in  volumes 
of  ten  each  through  all  time,  or  at  least  as  long  as 
Oxford  lasts. 

I  am  better  even  since  I  last  wrote  to  you.  Even 
my  powers  of  work  have,  to  a  considerable  extent, 
returned.  So  I  am  answering  H.  Spencer's  articles 
on  '  Weismannism.' 

With  warmest  love,  yours  ever  the  same, 

GEOEGE. 
To  Mrs.  G.  J.  Romanes. 

Madeira. 

I  got  your  dear  note  soon  after  we  went  down 
to  the  pier  to  see  you  start.  Through  the  club 
telescope  I  thought  I  saw  you  and  Fritz.  When  you 
got  far  out  I  came  home.  The  Taylors  joined  our 
table,  which  is  very  agreeable.  The  Canon  told  me 


318  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  189:3 

a  good  joke  which  came  off  to-day.  Sir  '  Gorgias  ' 
told  the  Canon  he  had  bought  a  second-hand  book 
which  he  thought  Dr.  Taylor  might  find  interesting. 

The  Canon  asked  what  the  book  was,  and  the 
Knight  replied  it  was  by  a  man  called  Locke,  and 
was  all  about  the  Human  Understanding. 

February  2. 

Char.,  Mytsie,  and  maid  arrived  ;  they  had  a  per- 
fectly frightful  passage.  All  passengers  shut  down 
for  two  days,  crockery  broken,  &c. 

S presented  a  large  wedding  cake  for  the 

Sunday  tea  of  the  Inner  Brotherhood. 

February  5. 

Poor  little  Mytsie  !  It  is  a  cruel  pity  to  see  what 
a  wreck  she  is.  ...  A  sense  of  duty  is  her  ruling 
passion. 

This  morning,  for  instance,  she  made  me  promise 
not  to  work  for  more  than  two  hours  while  she  went 
down  to  the  garden.  When  the  time  was  up  I  went 
to  join  her,  but  half  way  down  I  met  her  slowly 
creeping  up  lest  I  should  have  failed  to  notice  the 
time.  Now  that  means  more  to  her  than  miles  of 
walking  to  you  or  me.  I  wonder  how  the  Dean  is 
getting  on.1 

February  11. 

This  is  the  joyful  day.2  Your  telegram  was 
handed  to  me  at  lunch,  so  all  the  Inner  Brotherhood 
had  the  benefit.  The  Canon  said  you  ought  to  have 
used  the  comparative  degree,  so  as  to  leave  me  an 
opportunity  of  returning  the  superlative. 

1  Dr.  Paget  had  been  very  ill.  3  His  wedding-day. 


1893  MADEIRA  319 

What  a  journey  you  had,  poor  dears !  It  does 
not  seem  so  certain  after  all  that  we  should  be  safe 
for  comfort  on  a  long  voyage.  Mytsie  and  Char,  had 
a  worse  passage  than  you,  the  wind  was  dead  against 
them  all  the  way. 

It  is  indeed  shocking  about  the  Dean.  I  heard 
it  before  you  did.  I  will  write  to  him  by  this  mail. 

So  glad  you  had  such  a  good  concert.  If  you  only 
knew  how  I  was  longing  to  enjoy  it  with  you.  .  .  . 

An  adagio  movement  has  now  followed  the 
allegro,  and  I  am  looking  forward  to  a  presto  home 
as  a  finale. 

My  news  is  not  much.  My  cold  was  very  bad 
from  Saturday  to  Monday,  but  I  slept  most  of  the 
time  straight  on.  If  it  were  not  for  my  eyes  I  should 
be  almost  as  wrell  as  ever  I  was. 

I  read  Walter  Hobhouse's  child  story,  and  Mrs. 

capped  it  with  another.     A  little  girl  she  knew 

asked  whether,  when  she  got  to  heaven,  she  might 
*  have  a  little  devil  up  to  play  with.'  Mytsie's 
nephew,  when  three  years  old,  had  a  much  prettier 
idea.  On  M.  telling  him  that  something  had  hap- 
pened before  he  was  born,  he  said,  '  Then  that  was 
when  I  was  still  in  heaven.'  <  Yes,'  answered  M., 
'  but  what  was  heaven  like  ?  '  i  Oh,  there  I  played 
with  angels,  and  there  was  nothing  but  Christmas 
trees.' 

Are  not  the  debates  first-rate  ?  It  seems  to  me 
I  never  read  so  many  good  speeches  as  those  of 
Balfour,  Bryce,  and  Chamberlain.  But  the  measure 
itself  is  absurd. 

had  a  party  on  board  the  '  Koyal  Sovereign  ' 


320  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1893 

on  Tuesday  last.  It  was  a  dance  on  deck,  and  was 
very  pretty.  Enormous  profusion  of  flags  and  flowers 
all  over  the  ship.  I  asked  one  of  the  midshipmen 
to  dine  with  us  at  the  '  round  table ;  '  he  had  shown 
us  over  one  of  the  ships  on  a  previous  day,  as  I  told 
you,  and  proved  an  awfully  nice  little  fellow,  curi- 
ously like  P.  N.  W.1  Suffers  always  horribly  from 
sea-sickness,  and  gave  a  dismal  account  of  his  life  at 
sea.  He  was  only  about  eighteen,  with  that  perfect 
bearing  which  I  think  Lankester  is  right  in  pre- 
ferring to  University  manners.  Even  the  bluejackets 
have  it. 

By  the  way,  apropos  of  the  B.A.  I  suppose  you 
have  heard  that  Lord  Salisbury  is  to  be  President 
next  year  at  Oxford.  You  had  better  be  thinking 
whom  to  invite  as  guests,  leaving  a  margin  in  case 

should  redeem  his  promise.  I  shall  meet 

him  between  this  and  then  somewhere  and  ascer- 
tain. 

I  gave  my  lecture  on  Sea  Urchins  to  the  Inner 
Brotherhood.  Mr.  Keen 2  wants  me  to  give  a  public 
lecture  on  hydrophobia.  He  will  take  the  chair.  I 
am  certainly  on  the  up  grade.  Mytsie  reads  the 
German  pamphlet,  and  I  work  two  and  a  half  hours, 
so  my  book  is  getting  on. 

March  12. 

There  has  been  a  most  extraordinary  change  in 
the  weather.  Up  to  yesterday  we  had  three  of  the 
calmest  days  that  have  been  since  I  came.  The  sea 
was  without  a  ripple,  and  Char,  and  I  were  last  night 

1  Mr.  Waggett.  2  The  English  Consul. 


1893  MADEIKA  321 

hoping  it  would  be  like  that  when  we  start,  as  it 
would  be  sure  to  last  till  we  got  home.  When,  lo 
and  behold,  this  morning  there  is  by  far  the  highest 
wind  and  sea  I  have  yet  seen.  The  spray  is  flying 
right  over  the  rocks,  once  up  to  where  Fritz  got  over 
the  wall  by  the  bathing-place.  Rain  in  sheets.  The 
<  Drummond  Castle  '  will  have  an  awful  time  of  it. 
No  hope  of  a  letter  to-day. 

Here's  a  good  story.  A  rector  was  asked  to  take 
the  chair  at  a  prayer  meeting.  One  of  his  parish- 
ioners prayed  as  follows  :  '  0  Lord,  we  had  a  sermon 
from  our  vicar  yesterday,  and  we  thank  Thee  for  it 
because  it  was  an  able  discourse,  but  we  pray  Thee 
to  give  him  some  idea  of  what  the  Gospel  is  ! ' 

March  16. 

Letters,  such  jolly  good  gossip  that  I  feel  disposed 
to  follow  the  example  of  the  '  distinguished  man ' 
who  lived  apart  from  his  wife  because  he  so  much 
enjoyed  her  letters.  And  yet  I  am  like  a  hound 
straining  at  his  leash  to  get  away. 

I  cannot  read  what  it  is  that  York  Powell  is  going 
to  have  designed  for  us,  it  looks  like  i  booky  flash.' l 

....  By  the  time  you  get  this,  it  will  only  be 
another  fortnight  before  you  get  me,  and  I  believe 
you  will  get  me  in  a  wonderfully  restored  state  of 
health. 

March  17. 

The  weather  is  still  the  same.  Tremendous  wind 
and  perpetual  squalls  of  rain,  '  the  sea  and  the  waves 

1  It  was  'book-plate.' 


322  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES  1893 

roaring,'  also  '  men's  hearts  failing  them  for  fear,'  for 
the  occupants  of  the  rooms  we  used  to  have  never 
went  to  bed  last  night. 

This  morning  an  English  man-of-war  ran  in  for 
refuge,  but  had  to  run  out  again  before  the  return 
salutes  had  been  fired,  as  her  anchors  could  not  hold, 
and  an  odd  accident  happened.  At  the  18-miiiute 
gun  from  the  fort,  one  of  the  gunners  somehow  got 
in  front  of  the  cannon  and  was  blown  to  atoms.  I 
suppose  they  were  all  confused  with  the  wind  and  the 
spray. 

The  waterproof  coat  you  sent  me  is  in  great 
requisition.  Moreover  it  is  a  source  of  great  amuse- 
ment to  the  Inner  Brotherhood,  as  Miss  Taylor  has 
discovered  in  it  a  close  resemblance  to  a  hassock- 
no,  I  mean  a  cassock.  She  wants  me  to  get  a  round 
hat  wherewith  to  '  cap  '  it  when  I  return  to  Oxford. 
All  the  same,  it  is  the  best  thing  in  the  way  of  a 
waterproof  that  I  have  met  as  yet. 

The  Aryan  lecture  from  Canon  Taylor  has  come 
off,  and  it  was  really  splendid.  Everybody  came, 
and  the  Canon  delivered  a  mass  of  most  interesting 
matter.  He  began  by  saying  that  my  lectures  had 
been  illustrated  by  specimens,  but  that  the  only 
specimens  he  would  show  were  the  members  of  his 
audience  themselves,  who  were  all  Aryans.  The 
title  of  the  lecture  was  '  The  Origin  of  the  Aryans,' 
and  one  of  the  audience  had  understood  this  to  be 
1  Origin,  of  the  Arians,'  and  had  come  expecting  a 
theological  discussion  on  the  rise  of  the  Arian  heresy. 
She  was  beyond  measure  astonished  and  indignant 
at  his  assumption  that  we  were  all  heretics  ! 


1893  AETICLES   ON   WEISMANNISM  323 


March  19. 

I  have  got  Weismann's  new  book,  '  The  Germ- 
Plasm.'  It  is  a  much  more  finished  performance 
than  the  'Essays.'  In  fact,  he  has  evidently  been 
consulting  botanists,  reading  up  English  literature 
on  the  subject,  so  he  has  anticipated  nearly  all  the 
points  of  my  long  criticisms.  This  is  a  nuisance. 

Per  contra,  since  coming  here  I  have  heard  of  no 
less  than  three  additional  cases  of  cats  which  have 
lost  their  tails  afterwards  having  tailless  kittens.  I 
wish  to  goodness  I  had  been  more  energetic  in  get- 
ting on  with  my  experiments  about  this,  so  I  have 
written  to  John  to  get  me  twelve  kittens  to  meet  me 
on  my  return.  It  would  be  a  grand  thing  to  knock 
down  W.'s  whole  edifice  with  a  cat's  tail. 

The  monotony  of  life  here  is  becoming  intolerable. 
There  is  nothing  to  write  about. 

You  will  have  seen  that  Taine  is  dead.  I  was 
just  about  to  write  to  him,  to  ask  if  he  would  be  the 
Romanes  lecturer. 

March  21. 

Here  is  an  odd  thing.  I  find  that  Weismann  in 
his  new  book  has  discussed  all  the  points  raised  by 
Spencer.  So  Spencer  and  I  have  been  hammering 
away  at  things  which  W.  has  already  written  upon. 
Luckily,  he  says  about  what  I  anticipated  he  would 
say  (see  my  article),  but  how  absurd  a  fiasco  !  I 
have  written  a  postscript  to  go  by  the  mail,  hoping 
it  may  arrive  in  time  to  be  bound  up  as  a  separate 
slip  before  the  issue  of  April  number,  explaining  that 

T  2 


324  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1893 

absence  from  England  prevented  me  from  getting 
W.'s  new  book  until  now.  But  S.  ought  to  have 
known. 

March  22. 

I  have  written  to  Weismann  telling  him  that 
Bunting  will  send  him  a  copy  of  the  '  Cont.  Eeview.' l 

I  have  asked  W.  if  he  will  give  the  Eomanes 
Lecture  some  year.  Love  to  you  and  the  chicks. 
You  will  have  to  tell  me  which  is  which  of  the  boys. 

Unless  he  has  already  procured  ordinary  kittens, 
tell  John2  to  get  them  either  Angora  or  Persian. 
They  will  cost  more,  but  will  be  much  better. 

I  had  a  long  innings  with  the  doctor  to-day ;  he 
says  I  am  perfectly  sound ;  believes  my  headaches 
are  all  gastric. 

Your  last  letter  just  received  is  such  a  relief  to 
me.  I  was  just  Ernest's  age  when  I  nearly  died  of 
whooping  cough. 

This  is  the  last  letter  of  mine  that  you  will  be 
able  to  answer  I  hope  for  years  to  come.  Does  this 
not  look  like  getting  home  ?  I  am  now  a  coming 
event.  I  have  been  busy  with  my  answer  to  H. 
Spencer.  H.  S.  is  singularly  behindhand  with  his 
information.  In  fact,  it  is  melancholy  to  see  how 
he  fails  to  appreciate  the  strength  of  Weismann' s 
position.  He  does  not  even  understand  it,  and  the 
weakness  of  his  criticism  is  such  that  he  makes 
matters  worse  for  his  own  position  with  regard  to  the 
inheritance  of  acquired  characters — i.e.  the  foundation 
of  his  entire  system  of  synthetic  philosophy. 

1   Contemporary,  April  1892. 

a  His  butler,  an  old  and  valued  servant. 


1893  AT  THE  EOYAL   SOCIETY  325 

The  home  coming  was  very  bright,  and  again 
Mr.  Eomanes  set  to  work  with  renewed  and,  alas,  too 
great  vigour.  Beyond  absolutely  refusing  invitations 
to  dine  out  at  Oxford,  and  living  as  quietly  as  possible 
at  home,  there  was  no  keeping  him  in  order.  The 
following  letters  show  how  irrepressible  his  spirits  were 
whenever  a  day's  health  made  him  hopeful  again. 


To  Mrs.  G.  J.  Romanes. 

Athenaeum  Club  :  May  10,  1893. 

I  was  very  sorry  that  I  could  not  get  home  to- 
day, and  hope  you  will  have  received  my  telegram. 
Everybody  was  at  the  Royal  Society  except  Balfour, 
and  I  became  wearied  with  congratulations  on  my 
improved  appearance.  I  met  Moulton,1  who  was 
awfully  nice,  and  wanted  me  to  dine  and  sleep  at 
his  house  some  day  if  I  can,  in  order  to  talk  over 
*  physiological  selection.' 

So  I  asked  him  to  come  and  hear  Huxley.  He 
said  he  would  try.  .  .  .  Galton  asked  me  to  join  in 
an  investigation  of  the  French  calculating  boy  at 
his  house  to-day,  so  I  did.  Oliver  Lodge  was  there. 
The  boy  was  most  marvellous. 

I  am  going  to  the  Globe  to-night  and  am  very 
well.  After  the  E.S.  last  night  I  went  to  a  party  at 
Lady  Tenterden's.  Very  smart. 

Yours  ever  lovingly, 

GEORGE. 

1  F.  J.  Moulton,  Esq.,  M.P.,  F.R.S. 


326  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  1893 

To  Professor  Huxley. 

St.  Aldate's,  Oxford :  April  19,  1893. 

My  dear  Mr.  Huxley,— Very  many  thanks  for 
your  kind  inquiries  about  my  health.  I  am  certainly 
much  better,  although  still  far  from  well.  My  eyes 
continue  in  exactly  the  same  state,  so  I  am  afraid 
there  is  no  hope  of  recovery  in  that  direction.  How- 
ever, if  they  get  no  worse  I  shall  still  be  able  .... 
to  '  toddle  along.' 

I  am  very  sorry  to  hear  that  you  have  caught 
influenza  microbes  from  the  doctors,  but  trust  from 
what  you  say  that  they  will  have  left  you  before  the 
date  of  your  lecture.  But  of  course  we  will  remember 
not  to  lionise  you  unduly  while  you  are  our  guest. 

As  regards  the  audience,  you  may  expect  the 
Sheldonian  Theatre  to  be  as  full  as  it  can  be,  and 
that  means  close  upon  two  thousand. 

You  ask  whether  I  can  tell  you  i  what  such  audi- 
ences are  used  to,'  in  the  way  of  time.  But  as  there 
has  only  been  one  such  before,  there  is  nothing  much 
to  go  by  in  the  way  of  precedent.  On  that  occasion, 
however,  the  lecture  extended  to  an  hour  and  a  half, 
and  there  were  no  signs  of  impatience — in  fact,  quite 
the  contrary.  I  feel  quite  sure  that  an  hour  and  a 
half  will  not  be  too  long. 

I  do  not  quite  understand  whether  the  discourse 
has  already  been  -set  up  in  type.  The  scheme  for 
publishing  these  lectures  is  that  prior  to  delivery  a 
thousand  copies  are  printed  by  the  Clarendon  Press 
for  sale  at  Is.  per  copy ;  half  the  profits  of  this  sale 
go  to  the  lecturer,  the  other  half  being  retained  by  the 


1893  THE  ROMANES  LECTURE  327 

Clarendon  Press  to  defray  expenses  of  republication 
in  the  ten  yearly  volumes.  I  understood  from  the 
V.  C.  that  he  would  explain  this  to  you  by  sending 
you  a  printed  copy  of  the  statute.  But  if  he  has  not 
done  so,  and  if  you  have  made  any  other  arrange- 
ments, I  should  like  to  know  what  they  are.  In  any 
case,  please  let  me  know  soon  how  we  stand  as  to  this, 
as  I  shall  not  be  able  to  see  the  Y.  C.  till  next  week. 
Looking  forward  with  much  pleasure  to  meeting 
you  and  yours, 

I  remain,  yours  very  sincerely, 

GL  J.  KOMANES. 


St.  Aldate's,  Oxford :  April  27,  1893. 

My  dear  Mr.  Huxley, — It  is  very  kind  of  you  to 
send  me  the  enclosed,  which,  it  is  needless  to  say,  I 
have  read  with  no  ordinary  interest. 

In  my  censorial  capacity,  with  which  you  have 
been  so  considerate  as  to  invest  me,  I  am  certainly 
unable  to  find  the  smallest  ground  for  any  conceiv- 
able objection  ;  and  my  wife,  who  has  a  fine  nose  for 
heresy,  is  likewise  unable  to  perceive  any  obnoxious 
flavour.  Therefore  please  forgive  my  timidity,  and 
remember  that  the  '  scare '  was  aroused  only  by  the 
ominous  sound  of  your  remark  about  expecting  the 
audience  to  apply  your  remarks  to  the  case  of  modern 
religions. 

In  so  much  that  is  good,  it  seems  to  me  a  pity 
that  Note  19  was  not  embodied  in  the  text  of  page 
33 ;  for  in  its  absence  the  audience  will  suppose  that 
you  regard  the  moral  sense  as  opposed  to  that  which 


328  GEOEGE   JOHN   ROMANES  1893 

leads  to  success  in  the  struggle  for  existence — not 
perceiving  that  the  appearance  of  opposition  is  due 
to  natural  selection  having  been  transferred  from  the 
individual  to  the  community. 

With  the  permitted  exception  of  my  wife,  no  one 
else  has  seen  the  proof. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

G.  J.  KOMANES. 


Journal :  May. — Sir  A.  Clark  is  fairly  encouraging. 
Dinner  at  Mrs.  Pollock's ;  met  the  E.  Palgraves  and 
W.  Flowers,  who  have  blossomed  out  into  K.C.B.'s 
since  we  left. 

%0th. — The  Huxleys'  visit  has  been  most  delight- 
ful. He  was  most  genial  and  'mellow,'  and  his  lecture 
has,  of  course,  aroused  great  interest.  Various  people 
to  meet  them.  Mr.  Gore  and  Professor  Froude  one 
day  to  lunch.  Somewhat  heterogeneous  elements. 
When  the  former  had  gone,  Mr.  Huxley  suddenly 
awakened  to  the  fact  that  it  was  the  Principal  of  the 
Pusey  House  whom  he  had  met. 

Count  and  Countess  Balzani  have  been  here,  and 
we  had  an  '  historical '  dinner  for  them. 


This  was  the  last  bit  of  the  old  pleasant  life  which 
Mr.  Komanes  had  so  much  enjoyed.  He  was  busy 
arranging  experiments  on  heliotropism  and  on  the 
power  of  germination  in  dry  seeds  after  precautions 
had  been  taken  to  prevent  any  ordinary  processes 
of  respiration,  which  were  worked  up  into  a  Eoyal 
Society  paper.  He  writes : 


1893  GEBMINATION   IN   DM   SEEDS  329 

To  F.  Darwin,  Esq. 

St.  Aldate's,  Oxford :  June  14. 

My  dear  Darwin, — There  has  been  no  hurry 
about  answering  my  letter  because  I  cannot  publish 
until  I  shall  have  ascertained  what  has  already  been 
done  upon  the  subject,  and  for  this  purpose  I  have 
had  to  write  to  Germany.  I  am  greatly  obliged  to 
you  for  the  substantial  assistance  which  your  letter 
has  given  me. 

My  modus  operandi  was  to  give  nine  different 
kinds  of  seeds  to  Crookes,1  to  place  them  in  one  of  his 
TO"O  iW ou  atmosphere  vacuums  for  three  months  last 
year  (viz.  February,  March,  and  April).  He  then 
left  one  set  undisturbed,  whilst  the  other  eight  sets 
were  transferred  to  their  respective  gases  (nine  in 
number),  where  they  remained  sealed  up  for  a  year. 
On  being  planted  last  month  they  have  all  germinated 
even  better  than  those  from  the  control  packets  of 
seeds,  which  have  been  in  air  all  the  time. 

I  should  have  thought  beforehand  that  at  any  rate 
the  seeds  which  have  been  in  so  high  a  vacuum  for 
fifteen  months  would  have  had  any  residual  air  ex- 
tracted. But  I  will  now  try  for  next  year,  peeling 
peas,  beans,  &c.,  as  you  suggest.  Do  you  think  it 
would  be  well  also  to  soak  the  seeds  for  a  few  hours 
before  sealing  in  Crookes'  tubes  ? 

Do  not  trouble  to  answer  by  letter,  as  I  am  going 
to  Cambridge  on  the  21st  inst.  for  the  day,  and  will 
then  see  you  if  I  can  find  you  at  home. 

1  Professor  W.  Crookes,  F.R.S. 


330  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1893 

I  am  not  exactly  '  at  work,'  as  I  am  not  as  yet 
well  enough  to  attempt  it  at  anything  like  ordinary 
pressure,  but  I  am  certainly  better,  and  much  obliged 
to  you  for  your  kind  inquiries  upon  the  subject. 

With  our  united  kind  regards  to  Mrs.  Darwin  and 
yourself, 

I  remain,  yours  sincerely, 

G.  J.  KOMANES. 

P.S.  My  illness  has  left  me  half  blind,  so  I  write 
as  much  as  possible  by  dictation.  (What  a  bull !) 

94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford :  June  1-5. 

My  dear  Dyer, — Many  thanks  for  your  letter  with 

enclosures.  The  letter  shows  that 's  opinion  has 

not  altered  since  I  last  saw  him.  As  I  think  I  told 
you  at  the  Athenaeum,  he  undertook  some  two  or  three 
years  ago  on  my  behalf  to  raise  discussions  in  the 
papers,  to  which  he  alludes.  Since  that  time  he  has 
sent  me,  I  believe,  copies  of  all  the  numberless  letters 
which  have  been  published  in  consequence.  The 
result  of  our  inquiry  has  been  to  confirm  the  opinion 
which  he  gave  me  at  the  first,  and  also  to  form  my 
own  in  the  same  direction.  (See  my  article  in 
answer  to  Herbert  Spencer  in  the  '  Contemporary 
Eeview '  for  April.1) 

As  regards  the  isolation  of  species  I  do  not 
understand  why  you  should  suppose  that  the  facts  of 
hybridisation  to  which  you  allude  should  in  any  way 
modify  my  i  belief.'  As  fully  set  forth  in  '  Physio- 

1  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  on  '  Natural  Selection,'  Contemporary  Eeview, 
April  1893. 


1893  EVIDENCE  FOE  PHYSIOLOGICAL  SELECTION  331 

logical  Selection/  what  I  maintain  is  that  the  origin 
of  species  is  in  all  cases  due  to  isolation  of  some  kind, 
but  that  only  in  the  case  of  differential  fertility  can 
physo.  sel.  have  been  the  kind  of  isolation  at  work. 
Therefore,  it  would  be  fatal  to  my  views  if  all  species 
were  cross-sterile,  because  this  would  prove  vastly 
too  much.  What  the  theory  of  phy.  sel.  requires 
is  exactly  what  occurs,  viz.  cross-sterility  between 
allied  species  in  nearly  all  cases  where  species  have 
been  differentiated  on  common  areas  or  identical 
stations,  and  more  or  less  complete  cross-fertility 
where  they  have  been  differentiated  on  different  (dis- 
continuous) areas,  or  else  prevented  from  intercrossing 
by  yet  some  other  means  of  isolation. 

I  have  collected  a  quantity  of  evidence  in  favour 
of  both  these  otherwise  inexplicable  correlations. 
But  I  should  like  to  know  the  species  of  wild  fowl 
which  you  have  found  to  be  hybridisable  or  cross- 
fertile,  so  that  I  may  ascertain  whether  their  natural 
breeding  areas  are,  or  are  not,  identical.  Of  course  I 
should  expect  them  not  to  be. 

I  have  been  told  to  save  rny  eyes  as  much  as 
possible,  and  therefore  conduct  most  of  my  corre- 
spondence by  dictation.  But  not  being  used  to  this 
process,  I  find  it  even  more  difficult  than  before  to 
express  my  meaning  with  clearness,  so  I  will  tackle 
with  my  own  hand  what  you  say  about  Aquilegias. 

I  have  looked  up  the  group,  and  find  that,  with 
the  exception  of  vulgaris  (common  columbine),  all 
the  European  species  seem  to  occupy  restricted  areas, 
or  else  well-isolated  stations.  Also,  that  the  same 
seems  to  apply  as  a  very  general  rule  to  other  species 


332  GBOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1893 

all  over  the  world,  for,  wherever  mountains  are  con- 
cerned, stations  are  apt  to  be  isolated  by  difference 
of  altitude,  &c. 

Now  if  such  be  the  case  with  the  group  in  ques- 
tion, the  fact  of  its  constituent  species  being  freely 
hybridisable  when  artificially  brought  together  is 
exactly  what  my  theory  requires.  For  the  specific 
differentiation  has  presumably  been  effected  by 
geographical  (or  topographical)  isolation,  without 
physiological  having  had  anything  to  do  with  it. 
In  fact,  as  stated  over  and  over  again  in  my  original 
paper,  this  correlation  between  geographical  isolation 
and  cross-fertility  is  one  of  my  lines  of  verification, 
the  other  line  being  the  correlation  between  identical 
stations  and  cross-sterility. 

Now,  as  above  stated,  I  have  found  both  these 
correlations  to  obtain  in  a  surprisingly  general 
manner. 

I  wish  that,  instead  of  perpetually  misunderstand- 
ing the  theory,  you  English  botanists  would  help  me 
by  pointing  out  exceptions  to  these  two  rules,  so  that 
I  might  specially  investigate  them.  It  seems  to  me 
that  the  group  you  name  goes  to  corroborate  the 
first  of  them,  while  all  Jordan's  work,  for  instance, 
uniformly  bears  out  the  second.  And  whatever  may 
be  thought  about  him  in  other  respects,  I  am  not 
aware  that  anyone  has  ever  refuted  his  observations 
and  experiments  so  far  as  I  am  concerned  with  them. 
Yours  ever  sincerely, 

G-.  J.  ROMANES. 


1893  EVIDENCE  FOE  PHYSIOLOGICAL  SELECTION  333 

94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford  :  June  22. 

Dear  Dyer, — I  received  a  letter  from  -  -  by  the 
same  post  that  brought  yours  of  the  19th  inst.  From 
it  I  gather  that  his  opinion  on  the  subject  of  telegony 
has  not  changed  in  any  material  respect  since  our 
inquiry  began.  His  opinion  has  always  been  such  as 
you  now  quote  ('  atavism  '  on  the  one  hand,  with  a 
small  minority  of  '  dormant  fertilisation  '  cases  on  the 
other).  His  has  likewise  always  been  my  own  view 
(with  the  addition  of  coincidence),  and  has  been  cor- 
roborated by  the  result  of  these  inquiries.  So  I  think 
we  are  all  three  pretty  well  in  agreement,  because  both 

-  and  myself  share  in  your  doubts  as  to  the 
minority  of  the  cases  being  really  due  to  dormant 
fertilisation — i.e.  not  to  be  ascribed  to  coincidence  or 
mal-observation.  Also,  as  I  said  before,  I  quite  agree 
with  you  that  '  neither  view  is  any  help  to  Herbert 
Spencer.'  In  fact,  I  have  somewhat  elaborately 
sought  to  prove  this  in  my  '  Contemporary  Eeview ' 
article  for  April,  and  have  been  in  private  correspon- 
dence with  him  ever  since,  but  without  getting  any 
1  forerder.' 

But  in  this  connection  I  should  like  to  know 
whether  you  have  any  opinion  upon  the  apparently 
analogous  class  of  phenomena  in  plants  which  Darwin 
gives  in  the  eleventh  chapter  of  his  '  Variation,'  &c. 
Here,  it  seems  to  me,  the  evidence  is  much  more 
cogent  and  of  far  more  importance  to  the  issue, 
Weismann  v.  Lamarck.  Focke  and  Dr.  Yris,  however, 
seem  to  doubt  the  facts  or  their  interpretation, 
although,  as  it  seems  to  me,  without  presenting  any 


334  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES  1893 

adequate  reasons  for  doing  so.  You  need  not  bother 
with  Dr.  Vris,  as  he  merely  follows  Focke,  but  I  wish 
you  would  read  Focke  ('Die  Pflanzen-Mischlinge,' 
p.  510,  et  sq.),  and  compare  what  he  says  with  the 
evidence  which  Darwin  presents. 

As  I  do  not  know  in  what  respects  you  have 
found  one  part  of  my  previous  letter  not  to  '  tally ' 
with  another,  I  cannot  fully  explain  it ;  but  I  fancy 
that  you  will  find  they  do,  if,  in  reading  the  letter, 
you  carry  in  your  mind  the  simple  proposition  that, 
from  the  nature  of  the  case,  there  can  be  no  physio- 
logical selection  except  where  differentiating  varieties 
(l  incipient  species  ' )  occur  upon  common  areas  and 
identical  stations.  I  do  not  see  any  difficulty 
about  willows,  roses,  brambles,  &c.,  since  Naudin's 
researches  on  Datura  have  shown  how  much  vari- 
ability, due  to  the  hybridisation  of  any  two  species, 
may  give  rise  to  the  appearance  of  there  being  many 
species.  This,  you  will  remember,  is  the  view  that 
Naudin  himself  takes  with  regard  to  willows  &c. — - 
although,  of  course,  without  any  reference  to  phy.  sel. 
If  you  will  refer  to  p.  405  of  the  paper  on  phy.  sel.  you 
will  find  that  from  the  first  I  have  been  aware  of  the 
difficulty  about  discontinuous  areas  to  which  you 
allude.  But  I  think  the  converse  line  of  evidence 
(viz.  that  of  cross-sterility  between  incipient  species 
on  identical  stations)  will  alone  prove  sufficient  to 
verify  the  theory.  At  the  same  time  I  look  for  more 
corroboration  from  the  cross-fertility  of  well-dif- 
ferentiated species  upon  discontinuous  areas  where 
these  are,  as  you  say,  oceanic  islands,  or,  still  better, 
mountainous  districts  where  the  allied  species  are 


1893  EVIDENCE  FOR  PHYSIOLOGICAL  SELECTION   335 

severally  peculiar  to  mountain  tops  and  isolated 
valleys.  For  in  these  cases  there  must  be  much 
doubt,  as  a  general  rule,  touching  the  species  having 
been  differentiated  by  topographical  isolation  upon 
the  particular  areas  where  they  are  now  found. 
Moreover,  and  this  I  think  quite  as  important, 
the  consideration  which  Darwin  adduces  in  another 
connection  is  obviated,  viz.  i  that  if  a  species  was 
rendered  sterile  with  some  one  compatriot,  sterility 
with  other  species  would  follow  as  a  necessary  con- 
tingency.' 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 

P.S. — From  your  first  letter  it  would  almost  seem 
that  you  had  supposed  me  to  doubt  the  fact  (or,  at 
any  rate,  the  frequency)  of  cross-fertility  in  general. 
And  this  after  I  had  written  the  article  on  '  Hybridi- 
sation '  in  the  l  Ency.  Brit.'  ! 

In  June  Mr.  Komanes  took  a  small  house  for  the 
summer  months  outside  Oxford  at  Boar's  Hill,  a 
district  well  known  to  Oxford  people,  and  it  was  hoped 
country  air  and  quiet  might  do  him  much  good. 

He  was  rather  headachy,  and  liked  to  lie  on  the 
grass  in  the  garden  and  have  novels  read  to  him,  but 
he  wras  able  to  go  up  to  London  one  day,  and  even 
planned  to  take  a  journey  to  Wiesbaden  in  order  to 
consult  an  eminent  oculist. 

But  on  July  11  he  was  stricken  down  by  hemi- 
plegia.  And  now  began  the  last  year  of  patient 
endurance,  for  from  that  time  the  Shadow  of  Death 
was  ever  on  him,  and  he  knew  it ;  from  that  July 
day  he  regarded  himself  as  doomed.  Sometimes  the 


336  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1893 

thought  of  leaving  those  whom  he  loved  with  such 
intense  devotion,  such  wonderful  tenderness,  over- 
whelmed him ;  sometimes  the  longing  to  finish  his 
work  was  too  great  to  be  borne,  but  generally  he  was 
calm,  and  always,  even  when  he  was  most  sad,  he 
was  gentle  and  patient,  and  willing  to  be  amused. 

On  July  13  Dr.  Paget  gave  him  the  Holy  Com- 
munion. 

It  was  a  lovely  morning.  Outside  the  sunshine 
and  the  summer  sights  and  sounds.  Inside  that 
quiet  room  there  was  a  sense  of  peace,  even  of  joy. 
Death  seemed  very  near  that  day,  and  yet  there  was 
no  fear,  no  dread.  A  little  while  before  the  celebra- 
tion he  had  listened  to  Dr.  Bright's  hymn,  '  And  now, 
0  Father,'  and  had  said,  '  It  is  wonderful ;  it  is  a 
poem,  and  yet  it  conveys  the  deepest  teaching,'  or 
words  to  that  effect. 

One  who  was  much  with  him  at  that  time  read 
aloud  on  the  following  Sunday  the  Psalms  for  the 
sixteenth  evening,  and  as  they  came  to  the  eighty- 
fourth  he  said,  '  I  can  hardly  bear  that  psalm;  I  have 
longed  so  much.' 

He  slowly  recovered  from  this  attack,  and  there 
were  hopes — not  of  perfect  health,  but  of  life,  and 
of  power  to  work.  Now,  more  resolutely  than  ever, 
he  set  himself  to  face  the  ultimate  problems  of  Life 
and  Being,  to  face  the  question  of  the  possibility  of  a 
return  to  Faith. 

It  is  impossible  here  to  tell  of  the  inner  workings 
of  that  pure  and  unselfish  soul,  of  those  longings  and 
searchings  after  God,  of  the  gradual  growth  in  stead- 
fast endurance,  in  faith. 

To  one  or  two  these  are  known,  and  the  example 
of  lofty  patience  and  of  single-heartedness  is  not  one 
they  are  likely  to  forget.  Of  this  more  later. 


1893  EETUEN   TO   OXFOKD  337 

It  was  almost  pathetic  to  see  how  keen  and 
vigorous  his  intellect  was.  In  fact,  the  great 
difficulty  was  to  keep  the  busy  brain  from  thinking. 
Novels  helped  to  some  degree,  and  occasional  visits 
from  friends  as  he  grew  better.  Dr.  and  Mrs. 
Burdon  Sanderson,  the  President  of  Trinity  and 
Mrs.  Woods,  the  Dean,  Mr.  Gore,  the  President  of 
Magdalen  and  Mrs.  Warren,  and  Mr.  Waggett,  all 
helped,  coming  and  paying  brief  visits,  which  did 
him  good,  for  if  he  was  not  listening  to  reading  or 
conversation,  he  would  be  planning  experiments  or 
pondering  problems  of  theology,  and  ask  by-and-by 
that  his  thoughts  should  be  taken  down  from  dictation, 
or  that  paper  and  pencil  should  be  given  him,  or, 
worse  than  all,  devising  arrangements  for  finishing 
*  Darwin,  and  after  Darwin.'  He  dictated  some 
'  Thoughts  011  Things  '  in  the  very  first  days  of  his 
illness,  and  sent  for  Professor  Lloyd  Morgan,  who  came 
and  received  instructions  about  the  unfinished  books, 
instructions  which  he  has  carried  out  with  unflagging 
diligence  and  never-failing  kindness. 

But  still  he  grew  better,  and  early  in  August  he 
went  back  to  Oxford,  and  by  the  first  of  September 
he  was  able  to  be  present  in  the  cathedral  at  the 
baptism  by  Dr.  Talbot  of  his  youngest  son. 

The  fact  that  the  Yicar  of  Leeds1  and  Mrs. 
Talbot  were  in  Oxford  during  that  August  was  a 
great  pleasure  to  him,  and  he  much  enjoyed  occa- 
sional talks  with  Dr.  Talbot. 

To  Professor  Eivati. 

I  do  not  know  what  account  E.  gave  you  of  my 
illness,  but  it  is  much  too  serious  an  affair  to  admit 

1  Now  Bishop  of  Rochester. 


338-  GEOEGE  JOHN   KOMANES  1893 

of  our  going  to  the  British  Association.  Indeed,  I 
hardly  anticipate  being  able  to  make  any  engage- 
ments or  do  much  work  during  the  rest  of  my  life, 
which  is  not  likely  to  be  a  long  one.  It  is  just 
such  an  attack  as  I  expected  when  walking  with 
you  over  Magdalen  Bridge.1 

Yours  ever, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 

By  September  he  was  able  to  listen  to,  and  dis- 
cuss, Dr.  Sanderson's  Presidential  Address,  which  was 
delivered  in  Nottingham  at  the  British  Association 
of  1893. 

It  was  one  of  the  great  disappointments  of  that 
illness  that  he  could  not  go  to  Nottingham.  To  be 
at  the  Association  when  his  dear  friend  and  master 
was  president  was  a  great  wish  of  his,  and  early  in 
the  summer  a  kind  invitation  from  Lady  Laura 
Bidding,  to  stay  with  the  Bishop  of  Southwell  and 
herself  for  it,  had  been  accepted. 

Nottingham  and  a  visit  to  Denton,  to  which 
Mr.  Romanes  had  been  looking  forward,  had  to  be 
given  up. 

These  things  were  real  trials.  It  was  not  the 
giving  up  particular  bits  of  pleasure,  but  the  realisa- 
tion that  he  was  too  much  of  an  invalid  to  do  any- 
thing of  the  sort,  which  he  found  so  hard  to  bear,  and 
which  he  did  bear  with  ever-increasing  patience. 

His  letters  sometimes  show  how  hard  he  felt  his 
trial. 

1  About  eighteen  months  before,  when  a  very  temporary  attack  of 
aphasia  had  come  on. 


1893       KNOWLEDGE   OF  INCEEASING  ILLNESS       339 
To  James  Romanes,  Esq. 

Oxford :  September  4. 

My  dearest  James, — I  have  had  two  reasons  for 
not  writing  to  Dunskaith  since  my  letter  about  the 
birth  of  Edmund. 

I  agree  with  all  you  say  about  Fritz  and  her 
numerous  brothers,  the  last  two  of  whom  you  have 
never  seen.  But,  although  I  have  been  so  signally 
blest  in  my  family  ...  I  am  not  disposed  to  fall  in  with 
your  optimism  in  other  respects.  Rather  am  I  dis- 
posed to  agree  with  the  Scotch  minister,  that  '  Man 
is  a  mi-ser-able  worrm,  craaling  upon  the  airth ;  ' 
for,  both  as  regards  the  misery  and  the  craaling  I 
am  now  a  type. 

And  this  brings  me  to  my  two  reasons  for  not 
writing  before.  The  first  is,  that  I  am  almost  unable 
to  write ;  and  the  second  is,  that  I  did  not  want  to 
let  you  and  Charlotte  know  all  the  facts  sooner  than 
I  could  help. 

The  long  and  the  short  of  it  is  that  I  believe  I 
am  dying.  I  have  been  gradually  getting  worse  and 
worse,  .  .  .  nor  shall  I  be  sorry  wrhen  it  comes. 
Such  being  the  case,  I  should  like  to  consult  you 
about  setting  my  house  in  order 

The  photos  which  the  children  brought  with  them 
of  Dunskaith  make  me  realise  what  splendid  work 
the  buildings  are,  and  even  although  it  is  now  im- 
probable that  I  shall  ever  see  them,  I  am  glad  to 
think  that  they  will  be  in  the  family.1 

1  His  brother  was  making  additions  to  the  house  at  Dunskaith. 


340  GEOBGE  JOHN  BOMANES  1893 

I  cannot  write  more  now.  In  fact  I  have  not 
written  so  much  since  my  attack.  But  I  send  you 
the  best  love  of  a  life-time's  growth  and  that  of  your 
only  brother, 

GEOKGE. 

To  W.  T.  Thiselton-Dyer,  Esq. 

94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford :  September  15,  1893. 

Dear  Dyer, — Many  thanks  for  your  letter  with 
enclosures.  As  you  say,  there  does  not  seern  to  be 
anything  remarkable  about  the  hybrid ;  but  I  am 
glad  to  see  that  both  its  parent  species  are  well 
marked  and  presumably  both  of  mountain  origin. 
The  case  thus  well  accords  with  my  views,  as  ex- 
plained in  my  previous  letters.  I  met  with  many 
such  (i.e.  hybrids  between  originally  isolated  species) 
in  Madeira  and  the  Canaries. 

There  are  none  so  blind  as  those  who  will  not  see. 
Where  can  your  powers  of  '  observation  '  have  been 
when  you  can  still  remark  that  I  ignore  the  facts  of 
hybridisation  ?  I  can  only  repeat  that  from  the 
first  I  have  regarded  them  as  evidence  of  the  utmost 
importance  as  establishing  a  highly  general  correla- 
tion between  separate  origin  of  allied  species  and 
absence  of  cross-sterility.  In  fact,  for  the  last  five 
years  I  have  had  experiments  going  on  in  my  Alpine 
garden,  which  I  helped  in  founding  for  the  very  pur- 
pose of  inquiring  into  this  matter.  And  Focke,  with 
whom  I  have  been  in  correspondence  from  the  first, 
and  who  does  understand  the  theory,  writes  that  in 
his  opinion  it  will  'solve  the  whole  mystery'  of 
natural  hybridisation  in  relation  to  artificial. 


1893  LETTERS   ON   HIS  ILLNESS  341 

Since  my  last  letter  to  you  I  have  been  at  death's 
door.  On  July  11,  I  was  struck  down  by  paralysis 
of  the  left  side,  and  am  now  a  wreck.  Not  the  least 
of  my  sorrow  is  that  I  fear  I  shall  have  to  leave  the 
verification  of  phys.  sel.  to  other  hands  in  larger  mea- 
sure than  I  had  hoped.  I  have  little  doubt  that  it  will 
eventually  prevail;  but  more  time  will  probably  be 
needed  before  it  does. 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

GT.  J.  ROMANES. 

Oxford  :  September  18,  1893. 

Dear  Dyer,— I  am  not  a  little  touched  by  the 
kind  sympathy  expressed  in  your  letter  of  the  16th. 
When  one  is  descending  into  the  dark  valley,  scien- 
tific squabbles  seem  to  fade  away  in  those  elementary 
principles  of  good  will  which  bind  mankind  together. 
And  I  am  glad  to  think  that  in  all  the  large  circle  of 
my  friends  and  correspondents  there  is  no  vestige  of 
ill  will  in  any  quarter,  unless  it  be  with and 

— ,  who  both  seem  to  me  half-crazy  in  their 
enmity,  and  therefore  not  of  much  count. 

As  for  '  fortitude,'  sooner  or  later  the  night  must 
come  for  all  of  us  ;  and  if  my  daylight  is  being  sud- 
denly eclipsed,  there  is  only  the  more  need  to  work 
while  it  lasts.  But,  to  tell  the  truth,  I  do  not  on  this 
account  feel  less  keenly  the  pity  of  it.  With  five 
boys — the  eldest  not  yet  in  his  teens  and  the  youngest 
still  in  his  weeks  ;  with  piles  of  note-books  which 
nobody  else  can  utilise,  and  heaps  of  experimental 
researches  in  project  which  nobody  else  is  likely  to 
undertake,  I  do  bitterly  feel  that  my  lot  is  a  h-; 


342  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1893 

Looking  all  the  facts  in  the  face,  I  do  not  expect 
ever  to  see  another  birthday,1  and  therefore,  like  Job, 
am  disposed  to  curse  my  first  one.  For  I  know  that 
all  my  best  work  was  to  have  been  published  in  the 
next  ten  or  fifteen  years  ;  and  it  is  wretched  to  think 
of  how  much  labour  in  the  past  will  thus"  be  wasted. 

However,  I  do  not  write  to  constitute  you  my 
confessor,  but  to  thank  you  for  your  letter,  and 
also  to  say  that  I  am  sending  you  a  copy  of  my 
1  Examination  of  Weismannism,'  just  published  by 
Longmans. 

With  our  united  kind  regards  to  Mrs.  Dyer  and 
yourself,  I  remain,  yours  very  sincerely, 

GEO.  J.  EOMANES. 

To  Professor  Huxley. 

94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford  :  September  26,  1893. 

My  dear  Mr.  Huxley, — Although  grieved  to  hear 
that  Mrs.  Huxley  has  been  so  poorly,  we  sincerely 
hope  that  your  project  of  i  gathering  up  the  threads  ' 
of  the  Weismann  question  betokens  a  marked  im- 
provement in  your  own  health,  since  the  kind  letter 
was  written  which  she  sent  us  on  your  going  abroad 
in  July. 

I  am  sorry  to  say  that  your  corresponding  infer- 
ence with  regard  to  myself  is  very  wide  of  the  truth. 
My  <  Examination  of  Weismannism '  was  written 
before  my  last  attack — which,  in  fact,  occurred  on 
the  very  day  when  the  concluding  proofs  had  been 
returned  to  the  Clarendon  Press.  And  this  attack  has 
been  of  far  too  serious  a  nature  to  admit  of  my  doing 

1  He  did  see  one  more. 


1893  'EXAMINATION   OF   WEISMANNISM  '  343 

any  more  work  at  present — or,  I  fear,  in  the  future. 
It  was  a  stroke  of  paralysis  of  the  ordinary  hemiplegic 
kind ;  and  although  I  have  now  recovered  to  the 
extent  of  being  able  to  crawl  about  a  little,  I  am  but 
a  wreck  of  my  former  self.  Moreover  the  doctors 
prohibit  work  of  every  kind,  so  that  my  misery  is 
absolute,  all  my  experiments  have  come  to  an  un- 
timely end,  and  it  is  improbable  that  any  of  my  half- 
written  books  can  ever  be  published. 

I  am  most  of  all  disappointed  about  my  theory  of 
'  Physiological  Selection,'  for  which  I  have  accumu- 
lated a  large  mass  of  evidence  during  the  last  seven 
years,  and  which  I  had  hoped  would  satisfy  most 
people  as  an  explanation  of  the  contrast  between 
natural  species  and  artificial  varieties  in  respect  of 
cross-sterility. 

As  regards  Weismannism,  you  will  see  that  I  have 
not  dealt  with  the  question  of  acquired  characters  in 
my 'Examination.'  For,  as  this  question  has  been 
vividly  before  me  during  half  my  life,  I  cannot  allow 
that  it  belongs  to  '  Weismannism.'  In  his  writings 
it  is  a  sort  of  Lip  van  Winkel.  But  my  own  treat- 
ment of  this  long-standing  question  is  almost  ready 
for  press,  and  I  hope  it  may  be  published  before  your 
gathering  up  process  begins.  My  condition,  however, 
is  now  so  precarious  that  I  scarcely  expect  to  live 
long  enough  even  for  this. 

With  our  united  kind  regards  to  Mrs.  Huxley  and 
yourself, 

I  remain,  yours  very  sincerely, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 


344  GEOEGE  JOHN  'ROMANES  1893 

Weismann  ought  not  to  wonder  at  the  l  bitterness ' 
of  Spencer's  attack,  looking  to  the  effects  of  denying 
use-inheritance  upon  the  whole  system  of  Synthetic 
Phil. 

94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford :  September  26,  1893. 

My  dear  Dyer, — This  is  one  of  my  bad  days,  and 
I  have  just  exhausted  my  little  store  of  energy  by 
answering  a  kind  letter  from  Huxley.  So  please 
excuse  brevity,  as  I  cannot  leave  your  highly  appre- 
ciated benevolence  without  an  immediate  response. 

I  am  much  concerned  to  hear  what  you  say  about 
yourself,  and  it  makes  me  doubly  desirous  of  seeing 
you.  On  Monday  next  I  am  to  try  to  go  to  town  for 
the  purpose  of  consulting  doctors.  But  any  day 
before  that  we  should  be  truly  glad  if  you  could  come 
as  you  so  kindly  propose.  Possibly  I  might  be  able 
to  drive  out  to  Kew  on  Tuesday  or  Wednesday  of 
next  week,  should  you  find  it  impracticable  to  run 
down  here  before  then.  But  I  fluctuate  so  much 
from  day  to  day  that  I  cannot  make  any  engagements. 

Most  fully  do  I  agree  with  all  that  you  say  re- 
garding criticism.  And,  especially  from  yourself,  I 
have  never  met  with  any  but  the  fairest.  Even  the 
spice  of  it  was  never  bitter,  or  such  as  could  injure 
the  gustatory  nerves  of  the  most  thin-skinned  of 
men.  I  have,  indeed,  often  wondered  how  you  and 
and  -  -  can  have  so  persistently  misunder- 
stood my  ideas,  seeing  that  neither  on  the  Continent 
nor  in  America  has  there  been  any  difficulty  in 
making  myself  intelligible.  But  this,  of  course,  is 
quite  another  matter. 


1893  LETTERS   ON   HIS   ILLNESS  345 

As  regards  Weismannism,  I  do  not  include  under 
this  term  the  question  of  the  inheritance  of  acquired 
characters.  That  has  been  a  question  for  me  since 
the  publication  of  Galton's  '  theory  of  heredity  '  in 
1875.  Indeed,  even  before  that,  everybody  knew  the 
contrast  between  congenital  and  acquired  characters 
in  respect  of  hereditability  ;  and  you  may  remember, 
the  first  time  we  met  you  gave  me  a  lot  of  good 
advice  regarding  my  experiments  on  this  subject. 

Please  remember  both  of  us  very  kindly  to  your 
wife  when  you  write  to  her,  and  with  our  united  best 
wishes  to  yourself, 

Believe  me,  ever  yours  sincerely, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 

To  Francis  Darwin,  Esq. 

St.  Aldate's,  Oxford :  October  8,  1893. 

My  dear  Darv\;in, — Your  very  kind  letter  has  been 
one  ray  of  light  to  me  in  my  gloom.  Yet  you  must 
not  think  it  is  the  only  one. 

It  is  comparatively  easy  to  set  our  teeth  and  face 
the  inevitable  with  '  a  grin ;  '  but  the  '  highest 
bravery  '  is  to  hide  our  anguish  with  a  smile.  I  do 
think  I  make  a  decently  good  Stoic,  but  confess  that 
in  times  like  this  Christians  have  the  pull.  Never- 
theless,! have  often  thought  of  the  words,  '  I  am  not  in 
the  least  afraid  to  die,' l  and  wondered  whether,  when 
my  time  should  come,  I  would  be  able  to  say  them. 
But  now  I  know  that  I  can,  and  this  even  in  the 
bitterness  of  feeling  that  one's  work  is  prematurely 

1  See  Life  and  Letters  of  C.  Darwin,  vol.  iii.  p.  358. 


346  GEOEGE   JOHN   EOMANES  i898 

cut  short.  .  .  .  '  Somewhat  too  much  of  this,'  how- 
ever. What  I  want  to  tell  you  is  that  I  managed  to 
get  to  London  on  Friday  for  the  purpose  of  consult- 
ing my  doctors  as  to  my  prospects.  They  take  a 
more  hopeful  view  than  I  expected,  i.e.  notwith- 
standing that  I  have  had  three  attacks  in  one  year 
(in  both  eyes  and  now  in  the  brain),  it  is  not  inevit- 
able that  I  should  have  another  for  years  to  come, 
provided  that  I  become  a  strict  teetotaller,  vege- 
tarian, hermit,  and  abstainer  from  work.  In  short, 
'  that  my  rule  of  life,'  '  the  exemplar  '  for  my  '  imita- 
tion,' is  to  be  that  of  a  tortoise.  Hence  it  does  not 
appear  that  there  is  any  immediate  necessity  for 
saying  farewell  to  my  friends,  and  hence  also  I  will 
not  bother  you  by  falling  in  with  your  kind  proposal 
to  come  over  from  Cambridge  to  see  me,  much  as  I 
should  like  to  see  you  in  any  case.  But  if  you  would 
care  to  pay  a  visit  to  Oxford  any  time  between  this 
and  to-morrow  week  (16th),  when  I  shall  start  for  the 
vicinity  of  Nice,  we  should  both  be  awfully  glad  to 
put  you  up.  I  think  Dyer  will  probably  be  with  us 
from  Saturday  to  Monday  (14  to  16). 

With  our  united  very  kind  regards  to  all, 
Yours  ever  sincerely, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 

To  Professor  Huxley. 

94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford  :  October  9,  1893. 

My  dear  Mr.  Huxley, — We  are  so  very  sorry  to 
have  missed  seeing  you.  Indeed  it  seems  a  curious 
irony  of  fate  that,  after  having  been  caged  in  my 
house  for  the  last  three  months,  I  should  have  been 


1893  LETTEES   ON   HIS  ILLNESS  347 

ordered  to  town  by  the  doctors  on  the  very  day  that 
you  were  in  Oxford.  And  they  must  have  been 
melancholy  days  for  both  Mrs.  Huxley  and  yourself.1 

I  saw  Andrew  Clark,  Lauder  Brunton,  and  Hugh- 
lings  Jackson.  They  all  agreed  that  I  still  have  a 
decent  chance  of  living  for  an  indefinite  number  of 
years,  provided  that  in  all  things  I  lead  the  life  of  a 
tortoise.  To  tell  the  truth,  I  should  not  deem  the 
game  worth  the  candle  were  it  not  for  my  wife  and 
five  sons.  But  in  view  of  them  I  must  obey  orders. 

As  for  <  General  Death,'  I  think  it  must  be  easier 
to  withstand  his  boast  of  Veni,  vidi,  vici,  if  in  reply 
one  can  say,  Vixi.  With  such  a  record  as  yours,  and 
with  all  your  family  doing  so  well,  the  '  order  to 
march  '  need  not  be  quite  so  bitter. 

But  I  have  derived  one  benefit  from  my  full-dress 
rehearsal  of  the  final  act  (literally  l  full  dress,'  by  the 
way,  as  it  was  after  dinner  that  I  was  struck  down  .  .  .) ; 
and  this  is  the  certain  knowledge  of  being  at  any 
time  able  to  repeat  the  last  words  of  Darwin  :  '  I  am 
not  in  the  least  afraid  to  die.'  I  remember  many 
years  ago,  in  your  house  at  St.  John's  Wood,  cordially 
agreeing  with  the  feelings  you  then  expressed,  viz., 
that  the  prospect  of  death  filled  you  with  a  horror 
unspeakable.  '  Whether  or  not  nature  abhors  a  va- 
cuum,' you  added, '  I  know  that  the  soul  of  man  does/ 
But  illness  seems  to  make  a  vast  difference  in  this 
respect. 

Another  benefit  I  have  gained  is  an  increase  of 
admiration  for to  a  limitless  extent.  I  will 

1  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Huxley  had  come  to  Oxford  in  order  to  attend  the 
funeral  of  the  Master  of  Balliol, 


348  GEOEGE   JOHN   EOMANES  1893 

not  try  to  express  it,  lest  you  should  think  that  my 
judgment  must  have  been  impaired.  But  the  upshot 
is  that,  if  I  am  to  die  soon,  I  shall  be  certain  that 
there  is  no  one  in  the  wide  world  who,  for  bravery, 
devotion,  and  sound  sense,  is  better  capable  of  doing 
all  that  can  be  done  for  the  children. 

With  many  and  sincerest  thanks  to  Mrs.  Huxley 
and  yourself  for  your  truly  kind  sympathy, 

I  remain,  yours  ever  the  same, 

GEORGE  J.  EOMANES. 

Then  came  the  journey  to  Costebelle,  which  he 

describes  as  follows  : 

* 

To  James  Romanes,  Esq. 

Hotel  1'Ermitage,  Costebelle  :  November  4,  1893. 

My  dearest  James, — I  ought  to  have  answered 
long  ago  the  kind  letter  which  I  received  from  you 
just  as  I  was  driving  to  the  Oxford  station,  and  read 
m  the  train.  But  I  am  still  such  a  wretched  invalid 
that  I  shrink  from  the  smallest  exertion,  whether  of 
body  or  mind.  I  caught  a  violent  cold  in  crossing 
the  Channel,  which  kept  me  in  bed  for  three  days  at 
Amiens,  and  left  me  so  weak  that  I  had  to  further 
break  the  journey  at  Paris,  Lyons,  and  Marseilles— 
finally  arriving  here  with  a  still  feverish  temperature. 
But  this  has  now  subsided. 

We  found  not  only  Paris  but  quite  as  much  Lyons 
and  Marseilles  in  a  state  of  delirium  over  the  Eussian 
fleet  officers,  with  whom  we  were  muddled  up  all  the 
way,  greatly  to  our  inconvenience.  This  was  espe- 


COSTEBELLE  349 

cially  the  case  on  leaving  Lyons,  where  the  railway 
officials,  after  having  put  our  luggage  (containing  our 
circular  notes)  in  the  railway  station,  locked  the 
doors  of  the  latter  in  our  faces,  when  the  police  and 
military  officials  hurried  us  down  the  hill  again  in  the 
town  (in  the  rudest  of  ways)  till  the  arrival  of  the 
Kussians  nearly  an  hour  after  our  train  was  timed  to 
depart.  We  had  no  doubt  that  our  hand  baggage  had 
all  been  carried  off  in  our  railway  carriage  without  us 
and  without  labels  ;  but  on  at  last  getting  into  the 
station  found  that  our  train  had  not  started. 

This  is  one  of  the  most  charming  places  I  have 
ever  seen.  The  hotel  is  situated  on  the  top  of  a  hill 
which  slopes  for  a  mile  to  the  sea,  and  which  is  thickly 
clothed  with  pine  and  olive  woods  in  all  directions. 
The  climate  admits  of  our  sitting  out  of  doors  without 
overcoats  or  shawls  till  sunset,  amid  the  most  won- 
derful profusion  of  aromas  I  have  ever  met  with. 

To  the  Dean  of  Christ  Church. 

Costebelle  :  November  28,  1893. 

My  dear  Dean, — In  the  firmament  of  my  friend- 
ships there  is  no  such  star  as  yourself,  and  I  find  it 
belongs  to  them  all  that  the  darker  and  the  colder 
the  night  becomes,  the  more  brightly  do  they  shine. 

It  is  quite  certain  that  '  the  South  has  not  yet 
.rendered  its  full  service,'  inasmuch  as  it  has  not 
rendered  me  any  service  at  all.  If  anything  I  am 
worse  than  when  I  left  Oxford.  My  muscular  power, 
indeed,  has  somewhat  improved,  but  my  nervous 
exhaustion  seems  to  be  growing  upon  me,  week  by 


350  GEOBGE  JOHN  BOMANES  1S93 

week;    so   that   I  am   now  able  to  walk   but   very 
little — to  hope,  not  much,  to  think,  not  at  all. 

The  truth  is  that  my  ailment,  whatever  it  is,  is 
not  to  be  reached  by  climatic  influences :  it  belongs 
to  those  mysterious  internal  changes,  which  Darwin 
ascribes  to  what  he  calls  '  the  nature  of  the  organism  ' 
— '  variations  which  to  our  ignorance  appear  to  arise 
spontaneously.'     Hence,  I  am  out  of  harmony  with 
my  environment,  whatever  the  environment  may  be. 
And,  as  this  Spencerianism  applies  to  my  spiritual, 
no  less  than  to  my  bodily  organisation,  it  would  seem 
that  somehow  or  other  I  have  been  born  into  a  wrong 
world — like   those  poor   Porto    Santo  rabbits,  which 
I  took  home  with  me  last  year,  and  the  history  of 
which  I  think  I  told  you.     However,  I  do  not  intend 
to  grumble  at  the  visible  universe  until  I  shall  have 
had  an  opportunity  of  looking  round  the  edge  and 
seeing  what  is  behind. 

Most  of  our  time  is  spent  in  sheer  idleness,  or 
rather,  I  should  say,  all  of  my  time,  and  that  propor- 
tion of  my  wife's  which  is  spent  in  reading  to  me— 
chiefly  novels,  poetry,  and  history.  Yesterday,  we 
had  Coppee's  play  '  Le  Pater,'  which  I  know  you 
have  read.  For  the  length  of  it,  I  think  it  is  as  power- 
ful a  piece  of  dramatic  writing  as  I  have  ever  read. 

Very  few  worries  find  their  way  to  L'Ermitage. 
The  worst  at  present  is  the  choice  of  the  next 
'  Komanes  Lecturer.'  Owing  to  his  accident,  Helm- 
holtz  has  blocked  the  way  for  the  last  two  months, 
but  now  promises  a  final  reply  in  the  course  of  a  few 
days.  If  he  does  come,  I  hope  the  University  will 
give  him  the  D.C.L. 


1893  COSTEBELLE  351 

With  our  united  kindest  regards  to  Mrs.  Paget, 
whose  messages  to  me  are  of  more  benefit  than  all 
my  doctor's  drugs  (now  that   is  a  thing   I    '  would 
rather  have  expressed  otherwise  ' !)  and  yourself, 
I  remain,  ever  your  affectionate  friend, 

G.  J.  KOMANES. 

For  a  while  all  went  well,  he  liked  the  place,  and 
was  able  to  work  a  little,  and  to  have  many  books  read 
to  him.  He  had  taken  out  Dr.  Martineau's  <  Study 
of  Keligion,'  and  other  philosophical  books,  and  he 
also  plunged  into  poetry,  reading  Wordsworth  chiefly. 

In  December  came  what  seemed  to  be  a  severe 
gastric  attack,  with  other  alarming  symptoms,  and  for 
a  few  hours  he  seemed  to  be  dying.  But  this  passed 
off,  and  although  he  was  kept  in  bed  for  three  weeks 
he  grew  better,  and  in  some  ways  there  seemed 
grounds  for  fresh  hope. 

For  a  few  days  in  January  he  was  under  the  care 
of  a  cousin  with  two  trained  nurses,  and  his  letters 
home  were  surprisingly  bright. 

His  wife's  maid,  of  whom  he  was  very  fond,  was 
terribly  ill  in  January,  and  he  writes  : 

Give  Jane  my  love,  and  tell  her  I  never  forget 
how  good  she  was  to  me  when  I  thought  I  was  dying 
in  her  arms  at  Boar's  Hill. 

And  again  he  wrote  : 

So  glad  to  hear  the  operation  has  been  successful. 
Congratulate  her  from  me.  Tell  her  I  heartily  wish 
I  were  in  her  place  as  to  this,  but  that  neverthe- 
less I  have  not  *  lost  heart.'  I  am  now  certainly 


352  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1393 

stronger,  and  if  I  could  only  submit  my  cranial  cavity 
to  Tom's  l  hands  for  removal  of  anything  disagree- 
able, I  should  be  comparatively  joyful. 

The  weather  is  glorious.  Marian  is  at  mass, 
having  read  me  one  of  Church's  sermons. 

Please  tell  John  to  send  me  a  couple  of  hundred 
cigarettes  (to  prevent  influenza  ! ). 

When  you  come  out  you  will  not  find  me  a  kill- 
joy ;  the  danger  will  rather  be  that  of  my  scandalising 
you  all  by  riotous  conduct  on  Sunday. 

And  certainly  he  was  astonishingly  bright  when 
his  wife  returned  to  him.  It  was  on  a  Sunday  after- 
noon, and  his  first  proposition  was,  '  The  church  bell  is 
tinkling,  let's  go  to  church.'  It  was  the  twenty-eighth 
of  January,  and  the  brightness  and  gladness  of  two  of 
the  Evening  Psalms  were  singularly  appropriate,  and 
chimed  in  with  feelings  of  a  greater  gladness  dawning 
on  him,  for  he  was  leaving  the  strange  land  in  which 
for  years  he  had  not  been  able  to  sing  '  The  Lord's 
Song.' 

And  then  began  a  time,  often  saddened  by  hours 
of  intense  physical  exhaustion  and  physical  depres- 
sion, but  also  of  what  can  only  be  called  growth  in 
holiness,  in  all  that  comes  from  nearness  to  God. 

In  the  early  autumn  and  winter  there  had  been 
sad  moments  when  still  the  clouds  of  darkness,  of 
inability  to  grasp  the  Hand  of  God  stretched  out  to 
meet  him,  hung  over  him,  but  in  these  months  there 
had  been  the  same  growth. 

One  to  whom  he  often  spoke  of  the  deepest  things 

1  Mr.  E.  B.  Turner,  F.K.C.S.,  one  of  Mr.  Eomanes's  dearest  friends ;  as 
was  also  his  brother,  Mr.  G.  E.  Turner,  F.B.C.S, 


1893  PAPEBS  BEAD  AT  ROYAL  SOCIETY  353 

of  life  and  of  death  will  never  forget  his  saying  one 
day  just  after  the  attack  of  illness  in  December :  i  I 
have  come  to  see  that  cleverness,  success,  attainment, 
count  for  little ;  that  goodness,  or,  as  F.  (naming  a 
dear  friend)  would  say,  "character,"  is  the  important 
factor  in  life.' 

For  in  early  days  Mr.  Romanes  had  attached,  so  it 
seemed  to  some  of  those  who  knew  him  best,  an  undue 
importance  to  intellect,  to  cleverness,  to  intelligence, 
and  the  same  person  to  whom  he  said  the  few  words 
just  quoted  had  often  discussed  with  him  the  relative 
value  of  goodness  and  of  intellect. 

By  goodness  is  meant  perfect  and  complete  good- 
ness, not  such  as  that  of  which  it  has  been  said,  4  It 
is  the  business  of  the  wise  to  rectify  the  mistakes  of 
the  good.' 

And  as  weeks  passed  on  he  would  often  plan  a 
country  house  and  a  life  in  which  '  good  works  '  were 
to  have  a  share. 

He  had  always  had  a  high  ideal  of  what  Love  and 
Faith  should  bring  about,  and  in  the  last  months  of  his 
life  he  said  to  one  whom  he  dearly  loved,  '  Darling, 
if  you  believe  what  you  say  you  believe,  why  should 
you  mind  so  much  ?  '^J  With  absolute  resignation 
he  gave  up  all  his  ambitions,  the  old  longing  for 
distinction,  for  greater  fame,  and  yet  he  did  not 
lose  for  one  moment  the  old  interest  in  his  scientific 
work. 

Two  papers  of  his  were  read  at  the  Royal  Society 
in  October  1893.  The  first  described  experiments 
undertaken  by  Mr.  Romanes,  the  primary  object  of 
which  was  to  ascertain  whether  seeds  which  had  been 
kept  out  of  contact  with  air  for  a  lengthy  period  of  time 
still  possessed  the  power  of  germination.  The  method 
adopted  was  as  follows  :  a  certain  number  of  seeds 

A  A 


354  GEOEGE  JOHN  KOMANES  1393 

were  taken  from  each  packet,  mustard,  cress,  beans, 
peas,  &c.,  being  the  kinds  employed,  and,  having  been 
weighed  in  a  chemical  balance,  were  sealed  up  in 
tubes  which  had  previously  been  exhausted  of  air, 
and  kept  exposed  to  the  vacuum  for  a  period  of 
fifteen  months.  At  the  end  of  that  time  they  were 
removed  from  the  tubes  and  sown  in  flower-pots 
buried  in  moist  soil.  In  some  cases,  after  the  seeds 
had  been  in  the  vacuum  tubes  for  three  months, 
they  were  transferred  to  other  tubes  charged  with 
pure  gases,  such  as  oxygen,  nitrogen,  hydrogen,  car- 
bon monoxide,  or  with  aqueous  or  chloroform  vapour, 
and  there  kept  for  a  further  period  of  twelve  months, 
when  they  were  sown  as  before. 

In  all  cases  the  same  number  of  seeds,  of  simi- 
lar weights  to  those  sealed  up  in  the  tubes,  were 
taken  from  each  packet,  kept  in  ordinary  air  for 
the  fifteen  months,  and  then  sown  as  control  experi- 
ments. 

The  results  clearly  showed  that  the  germinating 
power  of  the  seeds  was  hardly,  if  at  all,  affected  either 
by  being  exposed  to  the  vacuum  or  to  the  atmo- 
spheres of  the  various  gases  and  vapours.  Further,  in 
110  single  case,  in  the  hundreds  of  seeds  so  treated, 
did  the  plants  produced  from  them  differ  from  the 
standard  types  grown  from  the  control  seeds  even  in 
the  smallest  degree. 

The  second  paper  described  experiments  in  helio- 
tropism,  which  had  been  undertaken  by  Mr.  Eomanes 
with  the  object  of  ascertaining  whether  plants  would 
bend  towards  a  light  that  is  not  continuous,  but 
intermittent. 

Mustard  seedlings,  grown  in  the  dark  until  they 
were  about  one  or  two  inches  high,  were  used  in  all 
the  experiments  ;  they  were  either  placed  in  a  dark 


1893  EXPEEIMENTS   ON   HELIOTROPISM  355 

room  and  exposed  to  flashes  of  light  in  the  form  of 
electric  sparks  passed  at  regular  intervals,  or  they 
were  put  in  a  camera  obscura,  before  which  was 
placed  a  Swan  burner  or  arc  lamp,  the  light  from 
which  was  rendered  intermittent  by  the  regular 
opening  and  shutting  of  the  photographic  shutter. 
The  heliotropic  effect  on  the  seedlings  was  found  in 
all  cases  to  be  very  marked,  the  most  vigorous  ones 
beginning  to  bend  towards  the  light  ten  minutes  after 
the  flashing  began,  bending  through  45°  in  as  many 
minutes,  and  often  through  another  45°  in  as  many 
minutes  more.  By  protecting  half  of  the  seedlings 
from  the  interrupted  light,  by  means  of  a  cardboard 
cap,  then  after  the  experiment  uncovering  them  and 
exposing  that  half  for  the  same  duration  of  time  to 
constant  sunlight,  Mr.  Romanes  found  that  the  bend- 
ing was  less  in  this  latter  case  ;  that  is,  when  the  light 
was  continuous.  This  result  was  confirmed  by 
placing  two  sets  of  plants  under  exactly  similar  con- 
ditions before  a  Swan  burner,  the  light  from  which 
was  constant  for  one  set  of  seedlings,  and  rendered 
intermittent  for  the  other  set  by  working  the  flash 
shutter  ;  in  all  cases  the  interrupted  light  caused  the 
plants  to  start  bending  more  quickly,  and  through  a 
greater  angle  in  a  given  time. 

As  regards  the  rate  the  flashes  must  succeed 
one  another  to  produce  this  heliotropic  effect,  Mr. 
Romanes  found  that  sparks  passed  at  the  rate  of  fifty 
in  an  hour  would  cause  considerable  bending  in  half 
an  hour.  It  is  of  interest  to  note  that  in  no  single 
case  was  there  any  green  colouring  matter  produced, 
the  seedlings  remaining  colourless  even  when  the 
sparks  were  passed  at  the  rate  of  100  per  second 
continuously  during  forty-  eight  hours. 


A  A 


356  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1893 

Dr.  Sanderson  writes  : 

Friday,  November  17. 

My  dear  Romanes, — There  was  a  rather  interest- 
ing discussion  at  the  R.  S.  on  your  paper  about  the 
fresh  experiments  with  seedlings.  It  was  objected 
that  there  was  no  evidence  that  the  effects  were 
not  due  to  one-sided  drying  of  the  stems  of  the 
seedlings,  and  -  -  wanted  to  know  whether  suffi- 
cient precautions  were  taken  to. guard  against  this. 
I  suppose  that  he  meant  heat  effects.  I  said  that, 
under  the  conditions  of  this  experiment,  I  could 
not  see  how  any  c  drying  effect '  could  possibly  take 
place. 

My  suggestion  is  that  it  wrould  be  worth  while 
to  add  a  note,  if  you  think  of  the  impossibility  of 
any  effect,  excepting  a  light  effect,  being  concerned. 
I  asked  Foster  just  now,  and  he  agreed  with  me 
that  it  would  be  useful.  I  ought  to  add  that  it 
was  admitted  that  the  observation  was  a  new  one 
which  promised  to  have  very  important  bearings. 

I  am  writing  this  in  great  haste.  I  trust  that 
you  are  enjoying  Costebelle. 

Yery  truly  yours, 

T.  BUKDON  SANDERSON, 

At  this  time  Mr.  Romanes  had  a  very  interesting 
correspondence  with  the  Rev.  G.  Henslow,  on  the 
subject  of  the  direct  action  of  the  environment  on 
plant  structures. 

Ealing :  October  19,  1893. 

Dear  Mr.  Romanes, — If  you  are  in  town  on 
November  16,  I  should  be  very  glad  indeed  if  you 


1893      ENVIRONMENT   ON   PLANT   STRUCTURES       357 

could  come  to  the  Linnean  Society,  and  criticise  my 
paper  which  I  am  going  to  read :  '  On  the  origin  of 
plant  structures  by  self-adaptation  to  the  environ- 
ment, exemplified  by  desert  and  xerophilous  plants.' 

In  this  and  in  subsequent  letters  Mr.  Henslow 
explained  the  subject-matter  of  his  paper,  and  as 
it  formed  the  basis  of  the  corresponidence,  a  brief 
analysis,  furnished  by  Mr.  Henslow  in  a  later  letter, 
is  here  inserted. 

The  object  of  the  paper  is  to  show  that  the  origin 
of  varieties  and  species — as  far  as  the  vegetative 
organs  are  concerned — is  solely  due  to  climatic 
causes.  For  the  acquired  (somatic)  characters  be- 
come more  or  less  hereditary  if  the  same  environ- 
ment be  maintained.  But  plants  possess  every  de- 
gree in  their  capacities  either  of  reverting,  changing, 
or  of  stability. 

The  result  is  that  I  do  not  see  any  necessity  for 
natural  selection  at  all  in  Nature,  for  the  following 
reasons. 

Variations  are  often  indefinite  in  cultivation, 
especially  after  several  years.  Therefore  to  secure 
a  useful  race  artificial  selection  is  necessar}^.  On 
the  other  hand,  variation  is  definite  in  Nature,  all 
the  seedlings  varying  in  one  and  the  same  direc- 
tion, i.e.  towards  equilibrium  with  the  environmental 
forces.  Darwin  knew  of  this  fact,  and  you  have 
abundantly  described  it.  But  Darwin  failed  to  see 
tliat  this  definite  variation  in  Nature  is  the  rule, 
not  the  exception.  Hence,  as  he  admits,  natural 


358  GEORGE  JOHN     ROMANES  1393 

selection  is  not  wanted  at  all  [i.e.  if  all  variations 
are  definite  in  Nature]. 

Moreover,  it  is  contended  that  climatic  variations 
are  of  no  great,  even  of  any  useful,  importance. 
This  may  be  so,  for  all  I  know,  with  animals ;  but  it 
is  precisely  the  reverse  with  plants.  I  took  my  illus- 
trations from  desert  plants,  and  showed  that  their 
remarkable  characteristics,  which  give  the  fades  to 
desert  plants,  are  on  the  one  hand  the  direct  results 
of  the  excessive  drought,  heat,  light,  &c.  On  the 
other,  they  are  just  those  features  which  enable  the 
plants  to  live  under  their  extremely  inhospitable 
environment.  These  characters  are  the  minute 
leaves,  hardening  of  woody  tissues,  thick  cuticle, 
dense  clothing  of  hair,  wax,  storage  of  water  tissues, 
&c.  ;  so  that  the  whole  economy  of  the  plant,  in- 
cluding its  specific  characters,  is  all  climatically 
acquired.  Although  some  may  vary  when  the  plants 
are  grown  in  ordinary  gardens,  such  is  no  more  than 
one  would  expect  on  a  priori  grounds  to  be  the  case. 

I  would  limit  natural  selection,  as  far  as  plants 
are  concerned,  to  three  things  : 

1.  Mortality  among  seedlings  with  the  survival  of 
the  strongest. 

I  do  not  say  '  fittest,'  because  it  is  ordinarily 
understood  to  mean  that  the  survivors  have  some 
morphological  features,  by  which  they  are  benefited, 
which  lead  on  finally  to  specific  characters. 

I  do  not  find  this  to  be  the  case.  Take  an 
instance  of  great  contrast.  Sow  100  seeds  of  the 
water  (submerged)  Ranunculus  fluitans  in  a  garden. 
They  all  grow  up  as  aerial  plants,  i.e.  they  vary  as 


1893  ON   SELF-ADAPTATION  359 

they  grow  precisely  in  the  same  way.  It  is  only 
the  weakest  (from  badly  nourished  seeds)  which  get 
crowded  out  of  existence.  Here,  then,  is  definite 
variation  without  the  aid  of  natural  selection.  Ex  uno 
disce  omnes. 

2.  Delimitation  of  varieties   and  species  by  the 
non-reproduction  of  intermediate  forms. 

It  is  generally  said  that  if  '  good  species '  are 
isolated,  the  intermediate  forms  have  been  killed  off 
by  natural  selection.  I  maintain  that  they  were 
never  reproduced.  Thus  if  A  has  passed  by  succes- 
sive generations,  A',  A",  A"',  &c.,  to  A"  ;  A  and  An  being 
now  only  in  existence,  then  A',  A",  &c.,  represented  a 
single  generation  apiece,  each  offspring  being  one 
degree  nearer  to  A",  but  could  never  be  reproduced, 
as  the  environment  was  continually  acting  upon  the 
whole  series,  urging  each  generation  forwards  till  it 
became  stable  in  A". 

This  is  precisely  what  takes  place  in  cultivating  a 
wild  plant  like  the  parsnip.  Each  year  the  grower 
selects  a  slightly  improved  form,  till  the  required 
type  is  fixed.  The  '  Student '  is  now  AU,  a  more  or 
less  permanently  fixed  form,  each  of  the  intermediate 
forms,  lasting  one  year,  having  ceased  to  be  reproduced. 

3.  The  geographical  distribution  of  varieties  and 
species  by  self-adaptation. 

That  is,  if  a  number  of  plants  migrate  to  a  new 
locality  with  new  environmental  conditions,  half  of 
them  may  die ;  because  they  cannot  adapt  them- 
selves ;  the  other  half  may  live — change,  and  become 
fixed  forms,  by  their  power  of  adaptation.  The  final 
conclusion  of  the  whole  is  that  plants  require  nothing 


360  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1893 

more  than  climatic  influences,  to  which  their  proto- 
plasm may  respond.  The  result  is  new  varietal  or 
specific  characters.  Then,  if  the  same  environment 
lasts,  these  become  gradually  more  and  more  fixed 
and  hereditary,  but  one  can  never  tell  beforehand  but 
that  the  oldest  plant  in  creation  may  not  change 
again  as  soon  as  it  finds  a  new  environment.  .  .  . 
This  is  what  a  long  study  of  plants  and  experiments 
has  led  me  to ;  and  it  is  not  a  conclusion  arrived  at 
solely  by  '  thinking  out '  or  evolving  from  my  own 
consciousness — like  the  German  camel ! 
Hoping  you  are  progressing, 

Believe  me,  yours  sincerely, 

GEOEGE  HEN  SLOW. 

Hotel  I'Ermitage,  Costebelle,  Hyeres,  France  :  October  29,  1893. 

Dear  Mr.  Henslow, — You  will  correctly  infer  from 
this  address  that  I  shall  not  be  able  to  attend  the 
Linnean  Society  meeting  on  the  16th  prox.  For  two 
or  three  years  past  my  health  has  been  breaking  up, 
and  several  months  ago  I  had  a  stroke  of  paralysis. 
So  I  have  had  to  knock  off  all  work,  and  have  just 
arrived  here  to  spend  the  winter — finding  your  letter, 
forwarded  from  Oxford,  awaiting  me. 

It  has  interested  me  very  much,  and  some  time 
I  should  like  to  see  the  paper  to  which  it  refers, 
whether  in  MS.  or  print.  As  far  as  I  can  gather, 
you  are  spontaneously  following  in  the  footsteps  of 
Asa  Gray,  Nageli,  and  some  other  botanists.  But,  it 
seems  to  me,  this  self-adaptation  doctrine  is  equi- 
valent to  an  a  priori  abandoning  of  all  hope  to  obtain 
any  naturalistic  explanation  of  the  phenomena  in 


1893  ON   SELF-ADAPTATION  361 

question.  It  simply  refers  the  facts  of  adaptation 
immediately  to  some  theory  of  design,  and  so  brings 
us  back  again  to  Paley,  Bell,  and  Chalmers.  As 
when  a  child  asks  why  a  flower  closes  at  night, 
and  we  answer  him :  Because  God  has  made  it 
so,  my  dear.  C'est  magnifique,  mais  ce  n'est  pas  la 
science. 

But  do  not  mistake  me.  My  quarrel  is  with  the 
term  self-adaptation,  which  seems  to  imply  causes  of 
a  non-naturalistic  kind.  Which,  of  course,  is  quite  a 
different  thing  from  doubting  whether  the  natural- 
istic explanation  given  by  Darwin  is  adequate  to 
meet  all  the  facts.  I  am  myself  more  and  more 
given  to  question  '  the  all-sufficiency  of  natural 
selection,'  and  this,  whether  or  not  use-inheritance 
is  one  of  the  supplementary  factors.  But  that 
there  are  some  hitherto  undiscovered  factors  of 
this  kind  where  many  of  the  phenomena  of  adap- 
tation are  concerned,  I  am  more  and  more  disposed 
to  suspect.  Nevertheless  I  believe,  in  the  light  of 
analogy,  that  they  will  all  prove  to  be  natural 
causes,  and  therefore  not  correctly  definable  as 
due  to  '  self-adaptation.' 

My  hemiplegia  has  given  me  a  terrible  shake,  so 
I  cannot  write  much.  Indeed,  this  is  the  longest  of 
the  few  letters  which  I  have  written  since  my  attack. 
So  please  excuse  seeming  bluntness,  and  believe  me 
to  remain, 

Ever  yours,  very  truly  and  most  interestedly, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

P.S, — Of  course  you  would  not  in  any  case  expect 


362  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1893 

to  find  so  much  variability  of  the  conspicuously  in- 
definite kind  in  nature  as  in  cultivation.  For,  by 
hypothesis,  natural  selection  is  present  in  the  one 
case  (to  destroy  useless  variations)  while  absent  in 
the  other.  But  I  allow  this  does  not  apply  to  the 
examples  you  give  me.  Only  remember  the  point  in 
publishing  your  paper. 

Hotel  Costebelle,  Hyeres :  February  10,  1894. 

Dear  Mr.  Henslow, — I  am  much  indebted  to  you 
for  all  your  most  interesting  letters,  and  also  for 
prospect  of  receiving  your  books.  Although  for- 
bidden to  write  letters  myself,  or  to  think  about 
anything  as  yet,  I  must  send  a  few  lines,  pending 
arrival  of  the  books  and  papers,  giving  my  general 
impression  of  your  views  as  set  out  in  your  corre- 
spondence. 

Briefly,  it  seems  to  me  that  your  argument  is  per- 
fectly clear  up  to  a  certain  point,  but  then  suddenly 
becomes  a  petitio  principii.  In  other  words,  so  far  as 
your  view  is  critical  of  natural  selection  considered 
as  a  hypothetical  cause  of  adaptive  evolution,  I  can 
well  believe  you  have  adduced  a  formidable  array  of 
facts.  But  I  fail  to  follow,  when  you  pass  on  to  the 
constructive  part  of  your  case — or  your  suggested 
substitute  for  natural  selection  in  self-adaptation. 
For  self-adaptation,  I  understand,  consists  in  results 
of  immediate  response  to  stimuli  supplied  by  environ- 
ment. But,  if  so,  surely  the  statement  that  all  the 
adaptive  machinery  of  plant-organisation  is  due  to 
self-adaptation  is  a  mere  begging  of  the  question 
against  natural  selection  unless  it  can  be  shoivji  how 


1894    NATUEAL  SELECTION  r.  SELF-ADAPTATION     363 

self-adaptation  works  in  each  case.  Now  I  do  not  find 
any  suggestion  as  to  this.  And  yet  this  is  obviously 
the  essential  point ;  since,  unless  it  can  be  shown  how 
self-adaptation  works— -i.e.  that  it  is  a  vera  causa, 
and  not  a  mere  word  serving  to  re-state  the  facts  of 
adaptive  evolution — we  have  got  no  further  in  the 
way  of  explanation  than  the  physician  who  said, 
that  the  reason  why  morphia  produces  sleep  is  be- 
cause it  possesses  a  soporific  quality. 

Observe,  I  purposely  abstain  from  considering 
your  criticism  of  natural  selection,  which,  although 
perfectly  lucid  and  possibly  justifiable,  yet  certainly 
does  admit  of  the  answer  that  incipient  variations  of 
a  fortuitous  kind  under  nature  may  often  be  incon- 
spicuous (while  Wallace  shows  that  in  animals  they 
are,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  usually  considerable).  But 
we  need  not  go  into  this.  The  interesting  point  to 
all  of  us  must  be  the  constructive  part  of  your  work ; 
and  I  have  tried  to  explain  my  difficulty  with  regard 
to  it.  Why  should  protoplasm  be  able  to  adapt  itself 
into  the  millions  of  diverse  mechanisms  of  nature  by 
converse  with  environment  ?  The  theory  of  natural 
selection  gives  a  logically  possible,  even  if  it  be  a 
biologically  inadequate,  answer.  But  I  cannot  see 
that  the  theory  of  self-adaptation  does,  unless  it  can 
be  shown  that  there  is  some  sufficient  reason  why,  say, 
a  desert-environment  should  produce  self-addptdtion 
in  the  direction  of  hairs,  a  marine  one  in  that  of 
fleshiness,  &c.  &c. 

I  have  been  very  frank,  because  I  know  you,  and 
therefore  that  this  is  what  you  would  prefer.  But  I 
am  too  ill  to  make  myself  clear  in  a  letter.  I  wish 


364  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1894 

you  could  stop  here  for  a  day  on  your  way  home,  by 
which  time  I  shall  probably  have  read  your  books, 
and  we  might  discuss  the  whole  business  before  I 
publish  mine  on  the  Post-Darwinian  Theories. 
With  very  many  thanks, 

I  remain  yours  very  truly, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 

Hotel  Costebelle,  Hyeres :  February  24,  1894. 

Dear  Mr.  Henslow, — Nothing  can  be  more  clear 
than  are  all  your  letters,  and  the  last  one,  I  take  it, 
sets  at  rest  the  only  question  which  I  had  to  ask.  For 
it  expressly  answers  that,  in  your  own  view,  the  hypo- 
thesis of  i  self-adaptation  '  is  a  statement  rather  than 
an  explanation  of  the  facts.  Nevertheless,  it  is  also  to 
some  certain  extent  advanced  as  an  explanation  on 
Lamarckian  lines,  for  in  your  books  (for  which  I 
much  thank  you)  you  attribute  adaptive  mechanism 
in  flowers  to  thrusts,  strains,  &c.  caused  by  insects. 
But  here,  if  I  may  say  so,  it  does  not  seem  to  me 
that  you  sufficiently  deal  with  an  obvious  criticism, 
viz.  How  is  it  so  much  as  conceivable  that  proto- 
plasm should  always  respond  to  insect  irritation 
adaptively,  when  we  look  to  the  endless  variety  and 
often  great  elaboration  of  the  mechanism  ?  Similarly 
as  regards  the  inorganic  environment,  Lamarck's 
hypothesis  of  ws^-inheritance  (i.e.  mere  increase  and 
decrease  of  parts  as  due  to  inherited  efforts  of  greater 
or  less  development  by  altered  flow  of  nutrition)  was 
at  least  theoretically  valid.  But  how  can  you  extend 
this  to  structures  which,  though  useful,  are  never 
active,  so  as  to  modify  flow  of  nutrition,  e.g.  hard 


1894  ON   SELF-ADAPTATION  365 

shells  of  nuts,  soft  pulp  of  fruits,  &c.  ?  Here  it  is 
that  natural  selection  theory  has  the  pull.  And  so 
of  adaptive  colours,  odours,  and  secretions  ?  I  con- 
fess that,  even  accepting  inheritance  of  acquired 
characters,  I  could  conceive  of  l  self-adaptation ' 
alone  producing  all  such  innumerable  and  diversified 
adjustments  only  by  seeing  with  Newman  (in  his 
'  Apologia  ')  an  angel  in  every  flower. 

Besides,  I  do  not  see  why  you  are  shut  up  to 
this,  even  on  your  own  principles.  For  surely,  be 
there  as  much  self-adaptation  in  Nature  as  ever  you 
please,  it  would  still  be  those  individuals  (or  incipient 
types)  which  best  respond  to  stimulation  (i.e.  most 
adaptively  do  so)  that,  other  things  equal,  would 
survive  in  the  struggle  for  existence,  and  so  be 
naturally  selected.  In  other  words,  I  do  not  see 
why  you  should  accept  natural  selection  as  regards 
•  vigour  '  of  seedlings,  and  nowhere  else. 

I  quite  accept  the  validity  of  your  criticism  of  my 
physiological  selection  in  your  book,  supposing  your 
'  self-adaptation '  true  to  the  extent  you  suppose. 
But  otherwise  what  you  say  tells  in  favour  of  physio- 
logical selection,  at  least,  excepting  the  statement  as 
to  new  allied  species  originating  as  a  rule  on  distant 
areas  from  parent  types.  This,  however,  is  certainly 
an  erroneous  statement,  though  I  should  like  to 
know  how  you  came  to  make  it. 

I  much  wish  I  could  write  more  or  meet  you. 
For,  notwithstanding  apparent  bluntness  (for  brevity's 
sake),  I  see  you  are  one  of  the  few  evolutionists  who 
think  for  yourself. 

With  many  thanks,  yours  very  truly, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 


366  GEOEGE  JOHN   KOMANES  1894 

I  am  not  against  your  criticism  of  natural 
selection,  for  I  have  always  thought  there  must 
be  some  other  additional  principle  of  adaptation  at 
work. 

Grand  Hotel,  Costebelle,  Hyeres  (Var) :  March  12. 

Dear  Mr.  Henslow, — My  husband  has  .much 
enjoyed  your  long  and  clear  letter  which  I  have 
just  read  to  him.  He  is  too  ill  to  reply  himself, 
but  he  will  dictate  a  few  notes  to  me  to  send  to 
you. 

Yours  very  truly, 

ETHEL  KOMANES. 


(A)  I  cry  '  Peccavi '  as  regards  natural  selection 
co-operating  with   self-adaptation.     Since  you  show 
that,  even   if   it  does,  you  are  not  concerned  with 
this  fact — i.e.  of  the  development  of  the  adaptation, 
but  only  with  its  origin. 

(B)  All  the  same,  however,  we   must   remember 
that  where  high  elaboration  of  mechanism  is  con- 
cerned, the  question  as  to  the  causes  of  its  develop- 
ment become  of  more  importance  than  those  of  its 
origin;    e.g.    even    if    self-adaptation   be    conceived 
capable  of  making  a  first   step   towards    producing 
the   exquisite    mechanism   of    a    bivalve    shell,   by 
discriminate  variation,  how  is  it  conceivable  that  it 
should  go  on  through  the  odd  millions  of  successive 
steps  of  improvement  needed  to  produce  the  perfect 
mechanism  in  which  the  great  wonder  of  adaptation 
really  occurs  ? 

I  can  conceive  of  no  natural  process  to  accomplish 


1894     THE  FACTORS  OF  ADAPTIVE  EVOLUTION     367 

this  development  even  in  one  such  case  of  mechanism 
oilier  than  natural  selection.  Let  alone  the  l  endless 
variety '  of  elaborate  mechanism  elsewhere. 

(c)  Of  course,  if  you  could  prove  that  indiscrimi- 
nate variations  have  not  occurred  in  wild  plants,  but 
only  under  cultivation,  you  would  destroy  Darwinism 
—intoto.  But  is  the  proposition  credible  a  priori ; 
or  sustainable  a  posteriori,  &c.  ? 

I  suppose  you  have  read  Wallace  on  the  subject 
as  regards  wild  animals,  and  if  you  were  to  make 
similar  measurements  with  regard  to  wild  plants,  you 
would  obtain  analogous  results. 

I  remember  as  a  boy  having  a  game  of  who  could 
find  most  specimens  of  four-leaved  clover  in  a  given 
time,  or  even  two  leaves  of  clover  which  would  be 
exactly  alike  in  all  respects.  But  I  have  already 
discussed  the  matter  of  definite  and  indefinite 
variability  in  '  Darwin  and  after  Darwin.' 

(D)  I  will  let  the  question  of  Use-Inheritance  in 
relation  to  seemingly  Passive  Organs  go  by  default 
against  me,  as  it  is  rather  a  side  issue  and  would 
need  much  writing  to  discuss.     The  same  applies  to 
your  remarks  on  Teleology.     As  regards  both  points 
I  agree  with  your  observations. 

(E)  Touching  varieties  as  found  in  different  areas 
from  parent  types,  I  suppose  you  heard  how  carefully 
Nageli  has  gone  into  the  subject,    with   the  result 
that,  after  making  allowances  for  defects  of  isolation, 
change  of  environment,  &c.,  only  about  five  per  cent, 
of  species  of  plants  seem  to  have  originated  on  distant 
areas,  while  Wallace  has  shown  that  some  such  pro- 
portion applies  to  animals. 


368  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1894 

(F)  As  regards  plants  having  been  brought  under 
cultivation,  and  yielding  variations  that  prove 
hereditary,  I  knew  there  were  innumerable  cases 
where  artificial  selection  had  been  brought  into  play. 
But  of  course  they  are  all  out  of  court  until  the 
question  on  which  you  are  engaged  has  been  de- 
cided in  your  favour,  i.e.  until  you  have  succeeded 
in  disproving  natural  selection  as  analogous  or 
parallel  to  artificial.  It  was  for  this  reason  I  men- 
tioned the  case  of  parsnips,  where  the  hereditary 
variations  seem  to  have  taken  place  in  the  first 
generation  after  transplanting,  and  therefore  without 
leaving  time  for  selection  of  any  kind  to  have  come 
into  play. 

Hotel  Costebelle,  Hyeres  :  March  29. 

Dear  Mr.  Henslow, — I  am  still  terribly  ill  and 
cannot  write  much.  We  must  have  a  talk.  Could 
you  come  to  Oxford  any  day  you  like  and  be  our 
guest  ?  I  think  we  might  derive  mutual  benefit.  I 
shall  be  there  from  the  middle  of  April  till  I  do  not 
know  when.  Why  not  come  on  May  2,  to  hear 
Weismann  give  his  lecture  in  the  afternoon  ? 

I  much  wish  you  would  save  seed  of  any  fixed 
local  varieties  of  plants  you  may  find  to  be  in  seed, 
while  you  are  in  Malta  (or  bulbs),  in  order  to  see 
whether  plants  grown  from  them  in  England  will  or 
will  not  prove  fully  fertile.  This  is  in  relation  to  my 
own  theory  of  physiological  selection,  according  to 
wilich  isolation  produces  segregation  of  type ;  in  the 
same  way  as  it  does  that  of  a  language — viz.  by 
prevention  of  intercourse  with  the  parent  type  and 
consequently  with  an  independent  history  of  varia- 


1894  ON    PHYSIOLOGICAL   SELECTION  369 

tion.  Where  the  isolation  is  due  to  physical  barriers 
(as  at  Malta)  there  is  no  need  for  any  sexual  differen- 
tiation to  originate  a  species.  But  on  common  areas, 
sexual  differentiation  is  the  only  means  of  securing 
the  isolation.  Therefore  (I  say)  we  can  see  why 
Jordan's  French  varieties  all  prove  sterile  with  their 
parent  forms,  and  I  should  expect  your  Malta  varie- 
ties to  prove  fertile  with  theirs  elsewhere. 

G.  J.  E. 

Costebelle :  April  15,  1894. 

Dear  Mr.  Henslow, — Yes,  please  write  when  you 
get  back,  suggesting  any  time  you  may  find  con- 
venient for  spending  a  day  or  two  with  us  at 
94  St.  Aldate's,  Oxford  (immediately  opposite  Christ 
Church).  I  cannot  talk  long  at  a  time,  but  I  think 
the  meeting  will  be  of  use  to  both. 

Of  course  '  Isolation  produces  segregation  of  type,' 
is  only  a  short-hand  expression,  meaning — indis- 
criminate variation  being  supposed — isolation  supplies 
a  necessary  condition  to  segregation  of  type  by  up- 
setting the  previous  stability  that  was  due  to  free 
inter-crossing. 

I  quite  agree  that  Darwin  very  greatly  over- 
estimated the  benefit  of  inter-crossing,  as  I  am 
showing  in  my  forthcoming  book  on  '  Physiological 
Selection.'  But  this  is  quite  a  different  thing  from 
his  having  made  too  much  of  inter-crossing  as  a  con- 
dition to  stability  of  type ;  I  do  not  think  that  this 
can  be  made  too  much  of.  Indeed,  how  is  it  con- 
ceivable that  there  ever  can  be  divergence  of  type 
without  isolation  of  some  kind  having  first  occurred 

B  B 


370  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1894 

at  the  origin,  and  throughout  the  growth  of  every 
branch?  Moreover,  I  agree  with  you  about  self- 
fertilisation,  but  see  in  it  a  form  of  physiological 
selection ;  it  is  one  kind  of  sexual  isolation,  or 
prevention  of  inter-crossing  with  neighbouring  in- 
dividuals. So  that  the  more  perfectly  it  obtains  in 
any  given  type,  the  better  chance  there  is  for  that 
type  to  become  a  new  species  by  independent  varia- 
bility— and  this  whether  or  not  the  independent 
variability  is  likewise  indiscriminate  (or  in  your 
terminology  '  indefinite  '). 

In  my  last  letter  I  referred  to  the  works  of  Jordan 
and  Nageli  for  any  number  of  'facts  in  Nature  of 
varieties  arising  among  the  type-forms.'  I  will  show 
you  the  passages  when  we  meet.  But  even  in  cases 
of  '  local  varieties,'  where  a  variety  has  a  habitat 
of  its  own  surrounded  by  the  type-form,  I  should 
expect  experiment  would  often  (though  by  no  means 
always)  show  some  degree  of  cross-infertility  between 
the  two,  pointing  to  prepotency  (i.e.  early  stages  of 
physiological  selection)  being  the  origin  of  the  diver- 
gence. 

Before  we  meet  I  wish  you  would  try  to  think  of 
any  plants  which  can  be  propagated  by  cuttings  (or 
otherwise  asexually)  which  are  known  to  be  modifi- 
able by  changed  conditions  of  life  in  the  first  genera- 
tion. I  understand  you  that  in  some  cases  the  seed 
of  such  a  plant  will  not  revert — when  sown  in  its 
natural  environment,  though,  of  course,  the  rule  is 
that  it  does.  Well,  in  either  case,  I  should  much 
like  to  try  whether  a  cutting  &c.  from  the  trans- 
planted (and  therefore  modified)  tubers  &c.  would 


1894  EXPEEIMENTS   ON   HEEEDITY  371 

revert  to  its  ancestral  character.  When  retrans- 
planted  to  its  natural  environment,  much  would 
follow  from  result  of  such  an  experiment  as  regards 
Weismannism. 

Yours  very  and  always  truly, 

G.  J.  EOMANES. 

P.S. — Of  course  in  saying  i  on  common  areas, 
sexual  differentiation  is  the  only  means  of  securing 
the  isolation,'  I  did  not  include  self-fertilising  plants 
—any  more,  e.g.  than  insect-fertilising  where  changes 
in  the  instincts  of  insects  may  cause  sexual  isola- 
tion. 

I  leave  for  Oxford  to-morrow. 

These  months  were  made  very  happy  to  him  by 
the  fact  that  three  friends,  Mrs.  and  Miss  Church 
and  the  Eev.  E.  C.  Moberly,1  were  staying  in  the 
same  hotel.  He  often  alludes  in  his  letters  to  the 
intense  pleasure  these  friends  gave  him,  and  speaks  of 
how  much  he  owed  to  their  tenderness  and  sympathy, 
and  to  their  perception  when  to  come  and  when  to 
stay  away. 

Many  books  were  heard  and  read  by  him.  Mr. 
Gore's  Bampton  Lectures  were  read  aloud  to  him, 
and  he  liked  them  even  better  than  when  he  heard 
them  preached.  Several  other  theological  books  were 
read,  and  of  all  these  the  one  which  bears  marks  of 
most  careful  study  is  Pascal's  '  Pensees.'  He  used 
Mr.  C.  Kegan  Paul's  translation.  The  copy  he  had 
at  Costebelle,  which  used  to  lie  by  his  bedside,  is 
marked  and  annotated.  It  is  the  last  book  he 

1  Regius  Professor  of  Pastoral  Theology  at  Oxford. 

B  B  2 


372  GEOEGE  JOHN  EOMANES  1894 

read  to  himself  in  his  own  careful  and  student- 
like  fashion.  He  also  wrote  some  notes  of  advice 
to  his  boys. 

At  this  time  he  began  to  make  notes  for  a  work 
which  he  intended  to  be  a  supplement  or  an  answer 
to  the  4  Candid  Examination  of  Theism.'  As  he  went 
on,  his  notes  grew — so  it  seemed  to  one  who  read 
them — increasingly  nearer  Faith,  but  of  them  the 
world  can  now  judge. 

He  said  one  day,  while  scribbling  down  notes,  'If 
anything  happens  to  me  before  I  can  work  them  up 
into  a  book,  give  them  to  Gore.  He  will  understand.' 

Nothing  can  be  more  erroneous  than  to  suppose 
that  the  change  in  point  of  view  was  sudden,  or  due 
to  any  fear  of  death,  or  that  it  caused  mental  suffer- 
ing to  the  author  of  '  Thoughts  on  Keligion,'  or  that 
he  was  influenced  by  anyone,  priest  or  layman. 

There  will  always  be  unconscious  influence,  and  it 
probably  was  not  altogether  in  vain  that  two  or  three 
of  Mr.  Komanes'  greatest  and  most  intimate  friends 
were  Christian  as  well  as  intellectual  men.  But  of 
influence  and  argument  and  persuasion,  as  ni3st 
people  imagine  them,  there  was  nothing.  Disous- 
sions  many,  during  the  past  years,  but  to  these  he 
owed  little. 

A  dear  friend  once  wrote  of  him  :  '  I  think  of  him 
as  one  of  the  cross-bearers  of  the  world,  and  perhaps 
among  those  who  are  chosen  to  bear  the  heaviest  .... 
one  of  those  through  whose  suffering  the  real  progress 
of  humanity  is  worked  out.  And  perhaps  there  is 
no  greater,  stranger,  suffering  than  the  suffering  of 
doubt.  No  cross  is  harder  to  bear  than  that  which 
he  is  bearing,  nor,  I  think,  is  he  bearing  it  blindly  or 
in  the  dark.  I  venture  to  think  that  he  has  really 
much  more  of  true  faith  than  he  at  all  suspects,  and 


1894  LIFE  AT  COSTEBELLE  373 

that  he  and  some  others  with  him  who  think  they 
are  more  and  more  losing  hold  on  God  because  the 
burden  and  the  bulk  of  doubt  is  growing  more  and 
more,  may  really  be,  underground,  as  it  were,  main- 
taining and  strengthening  their  hold  by  their  loving 
stubbornness  in  graces  which  are  indeed  their  acts  of 
faith,  and  by  the  secret  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
their  hearts,  even  through  the  darkness  and  the 
sorrow.' 

This  was  written  many  years  before,  and  is  quoted 
now  because  it  shows  the  kind  of  impression  George 
Komanes  made  on  those  few  who  really  knew  him,  to 
whom  he  showed  his  inmost  self. 

It  is  written  that  those  who  seek  find,  and  to 
no  one  do  these  words  more  fitly  apply. 

During  these  months  Mr.  Eomanes  read  many 
books  of  a  religious  nature ;  particularly  and  pre- 
eminently he  liked  to  have  Dean  Church  read  aloud, 
and  he  also  liked  Mr.  Holland's  '  City  of  God '  and 
Mr.  Illingworth's  sermons,  particularly  one  on  '  In- 
nocence,' which  he  asked  for  more  than  once.  He 
also  read  much  poetry,  Miss  Kossetti  and  Archbishop 
Trench  being  especial  favourites  at  this  time. 

To  himself  he  read  or  had  read  to  him  the  Bible 
and  Thomas  a  Kempis,  and  he  liked  Dr.  Bright's 
Ancient  Collects,  and  in  part  Bishop  Andrewes' 
Devotions.  He  never  would  read  or  have  anything 
read  to  him  which  did  not  ring  true  to  him  and  which 
he  could  not  appreciate ;  for  instance,  the  Pleadings 
of  Our  Lord's  Physical  Sufferings  in  Andrewes'  Devo- 
tions for  Friday  were  very  distasteful  to  him. 

He  often  went  to  the  English  Church  for  short 
services,  and  on  Easter  Monday  Dr.  Moberly  gave 
him  Holy  Communion,  for  which  he  had  asked  and 
for  which  he  wished. 


374  GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES  1894 

In  the  week  before  Easter  he  felt  very  ill,  and 
said,  '  I  wish  Moberly  (who  had  gone  away  for  a  few 
days)  were  here,  and  we  could  have  that  Celebration  ; 
I  don't  think  I  shall  live  till  Easter.'  But  this 
passed  away,  and  on  Easter  Day  he  was  peculiarly 
bright,  and  in  the  evening  said,  '  I  have  written  this 
poem  to-day.' 

It  is  impossible  to  resist  the  wish  to  insert  it 
here : 

HEBREWS  xi.  10  (or  ii.  10). 

'  Amen,  now  lettest  Thou  Thy  servant,  Lord, 

Depart  in  peace,  according  to  Thy  Word : 

Although  mine  eyes  may  not  have  fully  seen 

Thy  great  salvation,  surely  there  have  been 

Enough  of  sorrow  and  enough  of  sight 

To  show  the  way  from  darkness  into  light ; 
And  Thou  hast  brought  me,  through  a  wilderness  of  pain, 
To  love  the  sorest  paths  if  soonest  they  attain. 

'  Enough  of  sorrow  for  the  heart  to  cry — 

"  Not  for  myself,  nor  for  my  kind,  am  I :  " 

Enough  of  sight  for  Keason  to  disclose, 

"  The  more  I  learn  the  less  my  knowledge  grows." 

Ah  !  not  as  citizens  of  this  our  sphere, 

But  aliens  militant  we  sojourn  here, 
Invested  by  the  hosts  of  Evil  and  of  Wrong, 
TiU  Thou  shalt  come  again  with  all  Thine  angel  throng. 

'  As  Thou  hast  found  me  ready  to  Thy  call, 
Which  stationed  me  to  watch  the  outer  wall, 
And,  quitting  joys  and  hopes  thai?  once  were  mine, 
To  pace  with  patient  steps  this  narrow  line, 
Oh  !  may  it  be  that,  coming  soon  or  late, 
Thou  still  shalt  find  Thy  soldier  at  the  gate, 
Who  then  may  follow  Thee  till  sight  needs  not  to  prove, 
And  faith  will  be  dissolved  in  knowledge  of  Thy  love.' 

From  the  manuscript  it  is  difficult  to  determine 
what  was  the  motto  of  the  poem,  Hebrews  xi.  or 


1894  DAYS  AT  COSTEBELLE  375 

Hebrews  ii. ;  the  latter  is  more  probable,  at  least  so  it 
seems  to  the  present  writer. 

On  the  28th  Mr.  Eomanes  wrote  a  letter  to  the 
Dean  of  Christ  Church,  which,  besides  some  items  of 
personal  interest,  and  of  expressions  of  affection  too 
intimate  to  be  given,  contains  the  following : 

Costebelle  :  March  28,  1894. 

My  dear  Paget, — I  have  had  to  abandon  letter 
writing  for  several  weeks  past,  as  the  least  effort, 
even  in  the  way  of  conversation,  produces  exhaustion 
in  a  painful  degree.  So,  as  usual,  I  had  to  ask  my 
wife  to  answer  your  kind  letter  yesterday.  But  this 
morning  I  feel  a  little  bit  better,  so  I  should  like  to 
have  a  try.  She  has  gone  to  church,  and  therefore, 
as  I  could  not  even  hear  her  read  the  letter  which 
she  posted  to  you  yesterday,  there  is  likely  to  be 
some  repetition. 

Oddly  enough  for  my  time  of  life,  I  have  begun  to 
discover  the  truth  of  what  you  once  wrote  about 
logical  processes  not  being  the  only  means  of  research 
in  regions  transcendental.  It  is  too  large  a  matter 
to  deal  with  in  a  letter,  but  I  hope  to  have  a  con- 
versation with  you  some  day,  and  ascertain  how  far 
you  will  agree  with  a  certain  'new  and  short  way 
with  the  Agnostics.' 

Yours  ever  sincerely  and  affectionately, 

GEO.  J.  ROMANES. 

He  had  all  his  old  interest  in  psychical  research, 


376  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1894 

and  a  friend,  Mrs.  Crawfurd,  of  Auchinames,  who 
shared  this  interest,  used  to  beguile  many  weary 
hours  with  ghost  stories,  and  he  and  she  used  to 
4  cap  '  each  other's  narratives. 

There  were  pleasant  people  in  the  hotels  around, 
and  the  bright  sunshine  and  balmy  air  were 
great  sources  of  enjoyment  to  him.  Dr.  Bidon,  of 
Hyeres,  was  unfailing  in  constant  kindness,  and  it 
would  be  ungrateful  not  to  say  how  much  was  owed 
to  the  kind  landlord,  M.  Peyron,  and  to  Madame 
Peyron. 

The  journey  to  England  was  apparently  borne 
without  undue  fatigue,  and  the  home-coming  was 
very  bright,  with  joyous  meeting  with  his  children 
and  with  various  friends.  The  only  difficulty  was  to 
keep  him  quiet  enough.  It  was  said  one  day, '  When 
you  go  home  you  must  not  see  too  many  people.' 
'  Oh,  no,'  he  replied,  '  I  only  want  to  see  Paget,  and 
Dr.  Sanderson,  and  Gore,  and  Philip  (Waggett),  and 
Mrs.  Woods,  and  Ray  Lankester,  and—  '  but  he 
stopped,  laughing,  the  list  was  already  so  long  and 
would  soon  have  been  doubled.  For  a  few  days  his 
wife  was  away,  and  during  this  brief  absence  a  very 
dear  friend,  Miss  Eose  Price,  the  daughter  of  the 
Master  of  Pembroke,  died. 

He  writes : 

To  Mrs.  Romanes. 

How  glad  I  am  you  are  still  mine !  I  have 
just  returned  from  Eose's  funeral,  which  was  all  but 
too  much  for  me.  As  you  know,  I  have  seen  other 
such  things  on  a  grander  scale,  but  never  any 
approach  to  this  one  in  point  of  beauty  and  pathos. 
The  College  Chapel  was  completely  filled  with 


1894  OXFOED  377 

members  of  the  University,  with  wives  and  daughters, 
yet  all  personal  friends  of  hers,  including  all  members 
of  the  family,  the  poor  Master  separated  from  the 
rest  in  his  official  seat.  All  the  undergraduates  of 
Pembroke  were  present,  each  provided  with  a  lovely 
wreath,  carried  in  procession  to  the  grave.  The  whole 
of  the  east  end  was  one  mass  of  white  flowers,  the 
coffin  with  its  own  flowers  being  placed  in  the  middle 
of  the  aisle.  The  procession  walked  first  all  round 
the  quad,  and  then  through  Christ  Church  Meadows, 
being  met  at  Holywell  by  the  choir.1 

This  is  the  last  letter  I  shall  write.  All  well  here, 
and  the  Interlopers 2  know  me  now.  Weismann 
accepts  invitation  to  lecture,  and  is  on  his  way  on 
purpose.  I  have  obtained  an  invitation  from  the 
Koyal  Society  for  him  to  the  '  soiree.' 

Four  weeks  more,  and  the  writer  of  this  letter 
was  also  borne  through  Christ  Church  Meadow,  and 
laid  to  rest  near  the  young  girl  whom  he  had  made 
his  friend,  and  whose  death  he  deeply  mourned. 

It  was  thought  at  this  time  that  a  country  home 
would  be  possibly  better  for  him.  Many  drives  were 
taken  in  search  of  houses  or  of  possible  sites  for 
building,  and  he  was  often  positively  boyish  and 
merry  during  these  expeditions. 

On  one  of  the  last  days  of  his  life  he  drove  up  to 
Boar's  Hill,  and  it  is  impossible  to  forget  his  delight 
in  the  beauty  of  the  woods  in  their  fresh  spring 
dress,  the  ground  one  mass  of  bluebell,  the  hedges 
white  with  'May.' 

He  began  to  devise  experiments  again,  and  also 

1  Of  St.  Giles's  Parish  Church.        2  A  pet  name  for  the  two  babies. 


378  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1894 

set  to  work  to  arrange  his  papers  and  manuscripts 
in  the  most  methodical  way.  As  has  been  said,  he 
had  already  arranged  that  if  he  died  before  completing 
'  Darwin,  and  after  Darwin,'  Professor  Lloyd  Morgan 
should  finish  it  and  publish  it,  and  any  other  scientific 
papers,  an  arrangement  to  which  Mr.  Lloyd  Morgan 
most  kindly  consented.  To  Mr.  Gore  were  be- 
queathed the  fragmentary  notes  nowT  published  under 
the  title  l  Thoughts  on  Religion.' 

On  May  3  came  the  third  Romanes  Lecture.  It 
wras  given  by  Professor  Weismann,  and  was  a  worthy 
successor  to  the  two  which  had  preceded  it. 

Mr.  Romanes  was  glad  to  meet  Professor 
Weismann,  and  enjoyed  the  pleasant  talk  he  and 
his  distinguished  opponent  had  in  his  house  after 
the  lecture. 

On  the  seventh  of  May  he  went  to  London  to 
consult  doctors,  and  for  the  last  time  he  stayed  with 
his  two  dear  friends,  Sir  James  and  Lady  Paget. 

He  saw  one  or  two  people  and  was,  as  one  friend 
said,  '  just  his  dear  merry  old  self,  chaffing  and  being 
chaffed.' 

He  enjoyed  music  as  much  as  ever,  and  on  the 
nineteenth  of  May  he  went  to  a  concert  given  by  the 
Ladies'  Orchestral  Society. 

He  was  often  at  the  Museum,  and  he  wrote  fre- 
quently of  the  experiments  he  was  devising,  all  bear- 
ing on  Professor  Weismann's  theory ;  in  these  he  was 
assisted  by  Dr.  Leonard  Hill. 

He  wrote  several  times  to  Professor  Schafer,  and 
on  May  19,  four  days  before  his  death,  in  the  midst  of 
a  long  letter  too  technical  to  be  given,  he  says,  '  All  I 
can  do  now  for  science  is  to  pay.' 

He  still  took  much  interest  in  Oxford  life,  and  one 
of  the  last  things  he  did  was  to  vote  against  the 


1894  THE   LAST  BAYS  379 

introduction  of  the  English  Language  and  Literature 
School. 

Cathedral  was  more  than  ever  a  pleasure  to  him, 
and  he  used  often  to  slip  in  for  bits  of  the  service, 
particularly  if  some  particular  service  or  anthem 
was  going  to  be  given.  Especially  he  loved  a  few 
special  anthems ;  Brahms'  '  How  lovely  are  Thy 
dwellings  fair '  being  a  great  favourite. 

He  used  to  go  down  to  the  '  Eights '  when  they 
began,  and  on  almost  the  very  last  day  of  his  life  he 
was  with  difficulty  dissuaded  from  writing  a  letter  to 
the  '  Times,'  strongly  supporting  the  Christ  Church 
authorities,  whose  proceedings  in  some  disturbances 
in  the  College  had  been  criticised.  On  Whit  Sunday, 
for  the  last  time,  he  went  to  the  University  Sermon, 
which  happened  to  be  preached  by  the  Bishop  of 
Lincoln,  and  which  greatly  impressed  Mr.  Romanes, 
brought  as  he  was  for  the  first  time  under  the  spell  of 
one  who  has  influenced  more  than  one  generation  of 
Oxford  men. 

And  as  the  days  went  on,  there  was  a  curious 
feeling  of  preparation  for  some  change.  He  made  all 
his  arrangements  and  was  quite  calm,  quite  gentle, 
even  merry  at  times ;  now  and  then  the  weary  fits 
of  physical  lassitude  or  of  headache  would  prostrate 
him,  but  when  these  were  past  he  would  placidly 
begin  some  bit  of  work. 

On  Thursday  in  Whit  week  he  went  to  the  eight 
o'clock  Celebration  of  Holy  Communion  in  the  Latin 
Chapel  of  Christ  Church,  and  in  the  course  of  that 
day  he  said,  '  I  have  now  come  to  see  that  faith  is 
intellectually  justifiable.'  By-and-by  he  added,  'It 
is  Christianity  or  nothing.' 

Presently  he  added,  '  I  as  yet  have  not  that  real 
inward  assurance ;  it  is  with  me  as  that  text  says,  "  I 


380  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1894 

am  not  able  to  look  up,"  but  I  feel  the  service  of  this 
morning  is  a  means  of  grace.7 

This  was  almost  the  last  time  he  ever  spoke  on 
religious  subjects. 

With  Mr.  Philip  Waggett  there  had  been  in  these 
last  days  some  talks,  and  the  two  friends,  united  as 
they  had  been  in  earlier  years  by  their  common 
interest  in  science,  and  in  those  problems  which 
all  who  think  at  all  must  sooner  or  later  face, 
now  found  themselves  in  closer  and  fuller  agree- 
ment than  either  could  at  one  time  have  believed 
possible. 

Sunday,  the  twentieth  of  May,  was  his  birthday  and 
that  of  his  eldest  son,  and  had  always  been  a  family 
festa.  He  was  bright  and  merry,  went  to  Magdalen  to 
see  Mrs.  Warren,  saw  for  the  last  time  Dr.  Paget,  and 
had  a  little  talk  about  his  '  Thoughts  on  Keligion ' 
with  Mr.  Gore,  whom  he  went  to  hear  preach  in  one  of 
the  Oxford  churches.  And  on  Monday  he  keenly  en- 
joyed a  small  luncheon  party,  consisting  of  the  Master 
of  Balliol,  Mr.  Gore,  and  Miss  Wordsworth,  saying  that 
Poetry,  Science,  Theology,  Philosophy  were  all  repre- 
sented, and  that  he  would  have  such-like  little  parties 
every  now  and  then,  they  were  so  refreshing  and  did 
not  tire  him. 

One  or  two  special  friends  came  in  to  see  him  on 
these  last  days,  and  he  had  planned  to  go  and  stay  at 
a  country  house  belonging  to  the  President  of  Trinity, 
which  had  been  with  characteristic  kindness  put  at 
his  disposal. 

On  Wednesday,  May  23,  he  seemed  particularly 
well ;  he  wrote  a  letter  to  the  Editor  of  the  '  Contem- 
porary Eeview '  and  did  some  bits  of  work.  It  was 
Sir  James  and  Lady  Paget 's  Golden  Wedding  day, 
and  he  despatched  a  telegram  of  congratulation  to 


1894  THE   MOUNT  OF  PURIFICATION  381 

them.  (The  very  last  bit  of  shopping  he  ever  did  was 
to  buy  a  present  for  that  Golden  Wedding,  which 
reached  those  for  whom  it  was  intended  after  he  was 
dead.) 

He  came  into  his  study  about  twelve,  and  asked 
that  the  book  in  which  he  was  then  interested, '  Some 
Aspects  of  Theism,'  1  might  be  read  aloud;  but  before 
the  reading  began  he  changed  his  mind,  and  said  he 
would  lie  down  in  his  bedroom  and  be  read  to  there. 
On  lying  down  he  complained  of  feeling  very  ill,  said 
a  few  loving  words  to  one  who  was  with  him,  and 
became  unconscious.  His  children  and  the  Dean 
came  to  him,  but  he  did  not  recover  enough  to  know 
them,  and  passed  away  in  less  than  an  hour : 

Ex  umbris  et  imaginibus  in  veritatem. 

Five  days  later  he  was  laid  to  rest  in  Holywell 
Cemetery,  after  an  early  Celebration  in  Christ  Church, 
the  first  part  of  the  service  being  said  in  the  cathe- 
dral which  he  had  loved  so  much,  and  which  had 
brought  him  so  much  comfort  in  the  last  weeks  of 
life,  and  in  which  it  is  hoped  a  memorial  of  him  may 
be  placed. 

His  favourite  hymn,  '  Lead,  kindly  Light,',  was 
sung,  and  the  service  was  said  in  part  by  the  friend 
who  had  been  with  him  on  his  wedding  day,  given 
him  his  first  Communion  after  the  illness  began,  and 
who  had  been  bound  up  with  many  joys  and  sorrows  ; 2 
and  in  part  by  Mr.  Philip  Waggett,  who  had  been 
to  him  as  a  young  brother,  more  and  more  loved, 
during  the  seven  years  in  which  they  had  walked  and 
talked  as  friends,  the  friend  known  as  'Carissime.' 
(One  other  special  friend,  Mr.  Gore,  was  prevented  by 
illness  from  coming.) 

1  By  Professor  Knight  of  St.  Andrews.          -  The  Dean  of  Christ  Church. 


382  GEOEGE  JOHN   KOMANES  1894 

Looking  back  over  these  two  years  of  illness,  it  is 
impossible  not  to  be  struck  by  the  calmness  and  forti- 
tude with  which  that  illness  was  met.  There  were, 
as  has  been  said,  moments  of  terrible  depression  and 
of  disappointment  and  of  grief.  It  was  not  easy  for 
him  to  give  up  ambition,  to  leave  so  many  projects 
unfulfilled,  so  much  work  undone. 

But  to  him  this  illness  grew  to  be  a  mount  of 
purification, 

Ove  T  umano  spirito  si  purga, 
E  di  salire  al  ciel  diventa  degno.1 

More  and  more  there  grew  on  him  a  deepening 
sense  of  the  goodness  of  God.  No  one  had  ever  suf- 
fered more  from  the  Eclipse  of  Faith,  no  one  had 
ever  been  more  honest  in  dealing  with  himself  and 
with  his  difficulties. 

The  change  that  came  over  his  mental  attitude 
may  seem  almost  incredible  to  those  who  knew  him 
only  as  a  scientific  man ;  it  does  not  seem  so  to  the 
few  who  knew  anything  of  his  inner  life.  To  them 
the  impression  given  is,  not  of  an  enemy  changed 
into  a  friend,  of  antagonism  altered  into  submission ; 
rather  is  it  of  one  who  for  long  has  been  bear- 
ing a  heavy  burden  on  his  shoulders  bravely  and 
patiently,  and  who  at  last  has  had  it  lifted  from 
him,  and  lifted  so  gradually  that  he  could  not  tell 
the  exact  moment  when  he  found  it  gone,  and 
himself  standing,  like  the  Pilgrim  of  never  to  be 
forgotten  story,  at  the  foot  of  the  Cross,  with  Three 
Shining  Ones  coming  to  greet  him. 

It  was  recovery,  to  some  extent  discovery,  which 
befell  him,  but  there  was  no  change  of  purpose,  no 
sudden  intellectual  or  moral  conversion. 

1  Dante's  Purgatorio,  I. 


1894  HIS   LOYALTY  TO   TRUTH  383 

He  had  always  cared  more  for  Truth,  for  the 
knowledge  of  God,  than  for  anything  else  in  the 
world.  In  the  years  most  outwardly  happy  he  was 
crying  out  in  the  darkness  for  light,  with  a  soul 
athirst  for  God,  and,  as  was  said  before,  he  did  most 
truly  re-echo  St.  Augustine's  words,  '  Fecisti  nos  ad 
Te,  et  inquietum  est  cor  nostrum,  donee  requiescat 
in  Te: 

It  is  difficult  for  anyone  wrho  has  lived  in  closest 
intimacy  with  him  to  speak  of  him  in  words  which 
will  not  to  those  who  did  not  know  him  seem  ex- 
aggerated, nay,  extravagant ;  to  those  who  knew 
and  loved  him,  cold,  inadequate,  lifeless  ;  for  he  bore 
<  the  white  flower  of  a  blameless  life '  from  boyhood 
onwards,  and  in  heart  and  life  he  was  unstained,  pure, 
unselfish,  unworldly  in  the  truest  sense. 

When  the  Shadow  of  Death  lay  on  him,  and  the 
dread  messenger  was  drawing  near,  and  he  looked 
back  on  his  short  life,  he  could  reproach  himself 
only  for  what  he  called  sins  of  the  intellect,  mental 
arrogance,  undue  regard  for  intellectual  supremacy. 

No  one  better  understood  him  than  the  friend1 
who  wrote : 

When  a  man  has  lived  with  broad  and  strong 
interest  in  life,  neither  discarding  nor  slighting  any 
true  part  of  it  in  home,  or  society,  or  work,  the 
various  aspects  of  his  character  and  career  are  likely 
to  be  many  and  suggestive.  And  so  there  may  be 
some  warrant  for  an  attempt  to  disengage  one  line  of 
advance  in  the  life,  one  trait  in  the  example,  and  to 
concentrate  attention  upon  that,  while  the  other  and 
perhaps  more  widely  recognised  elements  are  for  the 

1  The  Dean  of  Christ  Church. 


384  GEORGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1894 

moment  left  unnoticed.  There  was  one  such  line  of 
advance  in  the  life  of  George  Romanes,  of  which  it 
may  be  hard  to  speak,  but  wrong,  perhaps,  to  be 
wholly  silent.  Few  men  have  shown  more  finely 
the  simplicity  and  patience  in  sustained  endeavour 
which  are  the  conditions  of  attainment  in  the  quest 
of  truth.  It  is  easy  to  see  how  the  training  and 
habits  of  a  mind  devoted  to  natural  science  may 
render  faith  more  difficult,  and  cross  or  check  the 
venture  of  the  soul  towards  the  things  eternal  and 
unseen.  But  there  is  one  quality  proper  to  such  a 
mind  which  should  have  a  different  effect,  and  act  as 
a  safeguard  against  a  fault  that  often  checks  or  mars 
the  growth  of  faith.  That  quality  is  tenacity  of  un- 
correlated  fragments  ;  the  endurance  of  incomplete- 
ness ;  the  patient  refusal  to  attenuate  or  discard  a 
fact  because  it  will  not  fit  into  a  system  ;  the  deter- 
mined hope  that  whatsoever  things  are  true  have 
further  truth  to  teach,  if  only  they  are  held  fast 
and  fairly  dealt  with.  The  sincerely  scientific  mind 
shows  such  tenacity  as  that  under  every  trial  of  its 
faith  and  patience,  howsoever  long  and  unpromising 
and  unrelieved  ;  for  it  knows  itself  responsible  not  for 
attainment,  but  for  perseverance ;  not  for  conquest, 
but  for  loyalty.  It  resists  even  the  temptation  to  dis- 
like the  untidy  scraps  of  observation  or  experience 
which  will  match  nothing  and  go  nowhere ;  for  it 
suspects  and  reveres  in  all  the  possibility  of  new  light. 
And  surely  there  is  a  like  excellence  of  thought, 
rare,  and  high,  and  exemplary,  in  regard  to  the  things 
unseen,  the  things  that  are  spiritually  discerned. 
Scattered  up  and  down  the  world,  coming  one  way  or 


1894  HIS   LOYALTY   TO   TRUTH  385 

another  within  the  ken  of  all  men,  there  are  facts  of 
plain  experience  which  will  not  really  fit,  unmuti- 
lated,  undisfigured,  into  any  scheme  or  view  of  life 
that  leaves  God  out  of  sight.  They  are  facts,  it  may 
be,  of  which  a  full  account  can  hardly,  if  at  all,  be 
given.  They  are  fragmentary,  isolated,  imponder- 
able ;  clearer  at  one  time  than  at  another ;  largely 
dependent,  for  anything  like  due  recognition,  upon 
the  individual  mind,  and  heart,  and  will.  Yet  there 
they  are,  flashing  out  at  times  with  an  intensity 
which  makes  all  else  seem  pale  and  cold  ;  disclosing, 
or  ready  to  disclose,  to  any  quietness  of  thought, 
great  hints  of  worlds  unrealised  and  possibilities  of 
overwhelming  glory. 

And  it  is  on  loyalty,  on  justice  to  such  fragments 
of  truth,  unaccounted  for  and  unarranged,  that  for 
many  men  the  trial  of  faith  may  turn.  All  is  not 
lost,  and  everything  is  possible,  so  long  as  the  mind 
refuses  to  doubt  the  reality  of  the  light  that  has 
come,  perhaps,  as  yet  only  in  broken  rays.  Of  such 
justice  and  loyalty  George  Romanes  set  a  very  high 
example.  The  strength  and  simplicity  and  patience 
of  his  character  appeared  in  nothing  else  more  re- 
markably, more  happily,  than  in  his  undiscouraged 
grasp  of  those  unseen  realities  which  invade  this  world 
in  the  name  and  power  of  the  world  to  come.  The 
love  of  precision  and  completeness  never  dulled  his  care 
for  the  things  that  he  could  neither  define,  nor  label, 
nor  arrange ;  in  their  fragmentariness  he  treasured 
them,  in  their  reserve  he  trusted  them,  waiting  faith- 
fully to  see  what  they  might  have  to  show  him.  And 
they  did  not  fail  him.  This  is  not  the  place  in  which 

c  c 


386  GEORGE  JOHN  ROMANES  1894 

to  try  to  speak  of  the  graces  and  the  gladness  which 
from  such  loyal  sincerity  passed  into  his  life,  nor  of 
the  clearer  light  that  grew  and  spread  before  his  wist- 
ful, hopeful  gaze.  But  it  hardly  can  be  wrong  to 
have  said  thus  much  of  so  noble  and  so  timely  a 
pattern  of  allegiance  to  all  truth  discerned  ;  and  of 
this  great  lesson  in  a  life  which  seemed  even  here  to 
have  the  earnest  of  that  promise — '  He  that  seeketh, 
findeth  ' — a  life  which  seemed  to  be  moving  steadily 
towards  the  blessing  of  the  pure  in  heart,  the  vision 
of  Almighty  God.1 

F.  P. 

A  letter  from  Mr.  Gladstone  cannot  be  omitted, 
and  seems  to  come  in  fittingly  at  this  place  : 

1  Carlton  Gardens :  June. 

Dear  Mrs.  Eomanes, — My  present  circumstances 
are  not  very  favourable  to  direct  personal  communi- 
cation, and  my  personal  intercourse  with  Mr.  Eomanes 
was  so  scanty  in  its  quantity  as  hardly  to  warrant  my 
present  intrusion,  but  I  cannot  help  writing  a  few 
words  for  the  purpose  of  conveying  my  deep  sympathy 
on  the  heavy  bereavement  you  have  sustained,  and 
further  of  saying  how  deep  an  impression  he  left  upon 
my  mind  in  the  point-  of  character  not  less  than  of 
capacity.  He  was  one  of  the  men  whom  the  age 
specially  requires  for  the  investigation  and  solution 
of  its  especial  difficulties,  and  for  the  conciliation 
and  harmony  of  interests  between  which  a  factitious 
rivalry  has  been  created. 

1  Reprinted  from  the  Guardian  of  June  6. 


1894  THE   END  387 

Your  heavy  private  loss  is  then  coupled  in  my 
view  with  a  public  calamity ;  but  while  I  can  rejoice 
in  your  retrospect  of  his  labour,  I  also  trust  it  may 
please  God  in  His  wisdom  to  raise  up  others  to  fill 
up  his  place  and  carry  forward  his  work.  May  you 
enjoy  the  abundance  of  the  Divine  consolations  in 
proportion  to  your  great  need. 

Believe  me,  most  truly  yours, 

W.  E.  GLADSTONE. 

Not  much  remains  to  be  said.  The  life  here 
described  would  seem  to  have  been  cut  short,  but,  as 
was  said  by  a  friend,  l  in  a  short  time  he  fulfilled  a 
long  time,' 1  and  few  have  won  for  themselves  more 
love  in  the  home  and  beyond  it.  He  left  no  enemy, 
and  those  who  loved  him  and  to  whom  his  loss  has  left 
a  blank  and  a  desolation  of  which  it  is  not  well  to  speak, 
can  only  be  thankful  for  what  he  was  and  for  what  he 
is.  Not  indeed  that  one  would  forget  those  words  of 
Dean  Church  quoted  in  the  beautiful  preface  to  his 
Life  : 2 

<  I  often  have  a  kind  of  waking  dream-:  up  one 
road,  the  image  of  a  man  decked  and  adorned  as  if 
for  a  triumph,  carried  up  by  rejoicing  and  exulting 
friends,  who  praise  his  goodness  and  achievements; 
and,  on  the  other  road,  turned  back  to  back  to  it, 
there  is  the  very  man  himself,  in  sordid  and  squalid 
apparel,  surrounded  not  by  friends  but  by  ministers  of 
justice,  and  going  on,  while  his  friends  are  exulting, 
to  his  certain  and  perhaps  awful  judgment.  That 
vision  rises  when  I  hear,  not  just  and  conscientious 
endeavours  to  make  out  a  man's  character,  but  when 


1  Wisdom,  iv.  13. 

2  Preface  to  Life  and  Letters  of  Dean  ChurcJi,  p.  xxiv, 


388  GEOEGE  JOHN   ROMANES  1894 

I  hear  the  loose  things  that  are  said — often  in  kind- 
ness and  love — of  those  beyond  the  grave.' 

But  there  have  been  men  and  women  who  have 
lifted  the  minds  and  the  hearts  of  those  who  knew 
and  loved  them  to  increasing  love  for  goodness,  to  in- 
creasing loftiness  of  ideal,  and  for  these,  whom  now 
no  praise  can  hurt,  no  blame  can  wound,  one  can  but 
lift  one's  heart  in  ever  growing  thankfulness  for 
the  gifts  and  graces  which  made  them  what  they 
were,  and  which  will  grow  and  increase  in  them  until 
the  Perfect  Day. 

Beati  mundo  corde,  quoniam  ipsi  Deinn  videlunt. 

May  23,  1895. 


INDEX 


ACTON,  Lord,  307 
Agassiz,  16,  31,  33 
Allen.  Grant,  57 
Allman,  Professor,  156,  157 
Arnold,  AL,  85,  156 


BALFOUR,  Rt.  Hon.  A.  J.,  148 

-  Mr.  Francis,  15,  154 
Bishop  of  Oxford  (Wilberforce),  83 
Boys,  Mrs.  Vernon,  letter  to,  315 
Bramwell,  Sir  F.,  227 
British  Association,  65,  73 
Browning,  Robert,  148,  156 
Brunton,  Dr.  Lauder,  15,  62,  154,  347 
Brydon,  Dr.,  4 
Burney  prize,  won  by  G.  J.  Romanes, 

9,85 
Butcher,  Professor,  155,  203,  283,  295 


CAIRD,    Professor    (now     Master     of 

Balliol),  95,  380 
Cats,  sense  of  direction  in,  112 
Cautley,  Rev.  Proby,  6,  7 
Children,  poem  to,  145 
Church,   Dean,   163,    164,    234,   371, 

387 

Churchill,  Mr.,  213 
Clarke,  Rev.  R.,  S.J.,  197 
Clodd,  E.  M.,  156 
Compton,  Earl  and  Countess,  290,  294, 

295,  307 

Correvon,  Professor,  185,  216,  217 
Crookes,  Professor,  328,  329 
Croonian  Lectures,  16,  97 
Curtei?,  Canon,  158 


DARWIN,  Charles,  first  introduction  to, 
13 

—  first  meeting  with,  14 

Darwin,  Charles,  letters  from,  33,  35, 
36,  40,  46,  49,  51,  57,  62,  64,  68,  74, 
77,  80,  88,  99,  102,  105,  106,  110, 
113,  114,119,122,125,129 

—  letters  to,  21,  22,  30,  34,  36,  41,  44, 
47,  48,  52,  53,  54,  59,  63,  65,  70,  72, 
73,  75,  79,  81,  89,  98,  100,  101,  103, 
104,  107,  108,   109,  110,  112,  114, 
117,  121,  123,  124,  126,  130,  132 

—  quoted,   206,  210,  215,   225,  226, 
228,  229,  230,  333,  350,  369 

—  death  of,  135 

—  memorial  volume,  138 

—  Mr.  F.,  8,  51,  52,  56,  58,  60,  81, 
110,  135,  137,  139,  178,  180,  181, 
194,  214,  329,  345 

Darwin  and  after  Darwin,  186,  298 
Dawkins,  Professor  Boyd,  158 
Delboeuf ,  La  Psyclwlogie,  son  Present 

et  son  Avenir,  78 
Diggle,  Mr.,  170 
Dyer,  Mr.  Thiselton-,  93,  209, 216,  217, 

243,  330,  333,  340,  341,  344 


EIMER,  Dr.,  46,  228,  312 

Eliot,  George,  49 

Evidences  of  Organic  Evolution,  lec- 
tures on,  68 

Ewart,  Professor  Cossar,  15,  97,  104, 
133,  156,  270,  311,  337 


FABRE,M.,  116,  118,  206 


390 


GEOEGE  JOHN   EOMANES 


Flower,  Sir  W.,  76,  328 

Foster,  Dr.  Michael,  8,  13,  32,  39,  53 

GALTON,  Mr.  Francis,   56,   168,   169, 

243,  278,  325,  345 

Germination,  experiments  on,  328, 353 
Giard,  M.,  285 
Gill,  Mr.  and  Mrs.,  290 
Gotch  (Professor),  273 
Gladstone,  Rt.  Hon.  W.  E.,  169,  235, 

291,  292,  305,  306,  386 
Gore,  Rev.  C.,  83,  289,  295,  328,  337, 

371,  380,  381 

Gosse,  Mr.  E.  W.,  234,  295 
Gounod,  71 

Graham,  Mr.  H.  M.,  M.P.,  290,  295 
Gray,  Professor  Asa,  161,  162 
Green,  Mr.  J.  B.,  150 
Gulick,  Kev.  J.,  221, 222,  237,  242,  269 


HIcKEL,  48,  51,  52,  54,  63,  68,  98 
Heliotropism,  experiments  on,  355 
Helmholts,  Professor,  350 
Henslow,  Eev.  George,  letters  to  and 

from,  356-371 
Hobhouse,  Sir  A.,  78 
-  Rev.  W.,  294,  319 
Holland- Scott,  Rev.  H.,  148,  150,  194, 

303 

Hooker,  Sir  Joseph,  22,  56,  76,  184 
Horsley,  Mr.  Victor,  227,  273,  282 
Huggins,  Dr.,  150 
Hullah,  Professor,  94 
Huxley,  Professor,  16, 57,  76,  150, 206, 

275,  296,  305,  306,  307,  326,  327, 

328,  342,  346 
Hybridism,  104-107 

INGHAM,  Mrs.  W.,  300 
Instinct,  article  on,  135 


JOACHIM,  Dr.  Joseph,  72,  290 

LAMARCK,  226,  229,  333 

Lankester,  Professor,  47,  93,  294 

Latham,  Dr.,  9 

Lawless,  Hon.  E.,  58 

Lecky,  Mr.,  169,  305 

Le  Co.nte,  Professor,  237,  295 


Liddon,  Rev.  Dr.,  148,  150,  163,  272, 

273,  274,  276 
Lincoln,  Bishop  of,  379 
Linnean  Society,  40,  122 
Lister,  C.  E.,  5,  270 
Lockyer,  Mr.  Norman,  131,  148,  154 
Logan,  Mr.  C.,  96,  203 
Lubbock,  Sir  John,  156 
Lux  Mundi,  261,  264,  275 


McKENDRiCK,  Professor,  96 

Medusae,  work  on,  16,  17,  18,  19,  20, 

24,  25,  26,  27,  28,  29,  30,  31,  32,  33 

34,  39,  41,  48,  49 
Meldola,  Professor,  93 
Mivart,  Professor  St.  George,  \  04 
Moberly,  Rev.  Dr.,  371,  373,  374 
Moore,  Rev.  Aubrey,  2(51,   262,   263, 

264,  265 

Morgan,  Professor  Lloyd  C.,  337 
Murray,  Mrs.  T.  M.,  96 
Myers,  Mr.  F:  W.,  82 

NEWALL,  Mr.,  96,  104 

PAGET,  Rev.  H.  L.,  2,  237 

—  Miss  M.  M.,  146,  307 

—  Very  Rev.  Francis,   2,    148,   150, 
155,  158,  165,  167,  232,  265,  31d, 
336,  349,  375,  376,  380 

—  Sir  James,  380 
Palgrave,  Professor,  234,  296 
Pangenesis,  letters  on,  20,  21,  22,  23, 

36,  48,  50,  112,  113,  205,  228,  229, 

268 
Panmixia,  205,  208,  216,  229,  230,  244, 

268,  270 
Pascal,  371 

Pembroke,  Master  of,  377 
Perrier,  M.,  206,  208,  227 
Pfleiderer,  Professor,  168 
Physiological  selection,  169-184,  211- 

213,  214-222,  238,  246-253 
Physiological  Society,  53,  67,  343 
Pollock,  Mr.  W.  H.,  97 
—  Mr.  Henry,  197* 
-  Mrs.  H.,  letters  to,  270,  309 
Poulton,  Professor  E.  B.,  202,  203,  205, 

208,  225,  267 
Psychology,  woik  on,  198,  201 


INDEX 


391 


EEDE  LECTURE,  ICO 
Romanes,  Rev.  Dr.,  1,  2 

-  Major  R.,  96 

—  Mr.,  1,  9,  97 

-  Miss  C.  E.,  letters  to,  67,  134,  149, 
151,  169,  175,  180,  192,  194 

—  Miss  Georgina,  71 

-  Mrs.  G.  J.,  letters  to,  94,  159,  170, 
190,   271-276,    278,  281-283,   291, 
317-323,  376 

-  Mr.  James,  letters  to,  12,  158,  197, 
244,  311,  313,  317,  339,  348 

Rosebery  Lectureship,  165 
Roux,  Dr.,  115,  130 


ST.  ALBANS,  Bishop  of,  163 

'  Sally,'  letter  on,  253 

Sanderson,  Professor  Burdon,  14, 19,53, 

68,  71,  122,  135,  155,  202,  274,  337, 

338,  356 
Schafer,  Professor,  letters  to,  23,  26, 

30,  38,  297,  378 
Sharpey,  Professor,  14     , 
Shorthouse,  Mr.,  150 
Smith,  Rev.  Robert,  2 
Spencer,  Herbert,  49,  98, 101, 150,  225, 

244,  323,  324,  330,  333,  344 
Spottiswoode,  Mr.    William,  15,  148, 

156 
Strong,  Mr.,  276 


Sully,  Mr.,  101,  294 

TAIT,  LAWSON,  22 

Talbot,  Dr.,  337 

Taylor,  Canon  Isaac,  312,  317 

Teesdale,  Mr.  J.  MM  103,  104,  134 

Tlieism,  a  Candid  Examination  of,  86, 

156,  160,  161,  372 

Thompson,  Sir  W.  (Lord  Kelvin),  95 
Thoughts  on  Religion,  372 
Turner,  George,  170,  276 
Turner,  Professor,  94 
Tyndall,  Professor,  109,  150 


VIVISECTION,  62,  64,  121, 126, 127, 128, 
130,  131 


WAGGETT,  Rev.  P.  W.,  197,  245,  246, 
250,  337,  380,  381 

Wallace,  Mr.,  57,  93,  179,  214,  215, 
216,  224,  278,  367 

Wedgwood,  Miss,  103,  104,  105 

Weismann,  Professor,  203,  204,  205, 
206,  207,  208,  215,  225,  227,  223, 
229,  230,  240,  243,  245,  267,  208, 
284,  309,  323,  324,  342,  378 


YEO,  Professor  Gerald,  67 


rmxTr.n  RY 
AND  co.,  NKW-STUEET  sQr.\r.E 

LONDON 


THIS   BOOK  IS   DUE   ON   THE   LAST  DATE 
STAMPED   BELOW 

RENEWED  BOOKS  ARE  SUBJECT  TO  IMMEDIATE 
RECALL 


LIBRARY,  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  DAVIS 

Book  Slip-35m-7,'62(D296s4)458 


2U800? 


Romanes,  G.J. 

Life  and  letters  of 


Call  Number: 

(3131 

R7 

A2 


A*. 


248007