oncerned
(of course not accidental as to their cause or origin), then I can see
no reason why he should rank the accumulated variations by which the
beautifully adapted woodpecker has been formed, as providentially
designed. For it would be easy to imagine the enlarged crop of the
pouter, or tail of the fantail, as of some use to birds in a state of
nature, having peculiar habits of life. These are the considerations
which perplex me about design; but whether you will care to hear them, I
know not....

[On the subject of design, he wrote (July 1860) to Dr. Gray:--]

One word more on "designed laws" and "undesigned results." I see a bird
which I want for food, take my gun and kill it; I do this _designedly_.
An innocent and good man stands under a tree and is killed by a flash of
lightning. Do you believe (and I really should like to hear) that God
_designedly_ killed this man? Many or most persons do believe this; I
can't and don't. If you believe so, do you believe that when a swallow
snaps up a gnat, that God designed that that particular swallow should
snap up that particular gnat at that particular instant? I believe that
the man and the gnat are in the same predicament. If the death of
neither man nor gnat is designed, I see no good reason to believe that
their _first_ birth or production should be necessarily designed.

CORRESPONDENCE

From 'The Life and Letters'

C. DARWIN TO J.D. HOOKER

DOWN, February 24th [1863].

_My Dear Hooker:_

I am astonished at your note. I have not seen the Athenaeum, but I have
sent for it, and may get it to-morrow; and will then say what I think.

I have read Lyell's book ['The Antiquity of Man']. The whole certainly
struck me as a compilation, but of the highest class; for when possible
the facts have been verified on the spot, making it almost an original
work. The Glacial chapters seem to me best, and in parts magnificent. I
could hardly judge about Man, as all the gloss of novelty was completely
worn off. But certainly the aggregation of the evidence produced a very
striking effect on my mind. The chapter comparing language and changes
of species seems most ingenious and interesting. He has shown great
skill in picking out salient points in the argument for change of
species; but I am deeply disappointed (I do not mean personally) to find
that his timidity prevents him giving any judgment.... From all my
communications with him, I must ever think that h