FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70  
71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   >>   >|  
m before I went to the East.... --Yours very faithfully, A.R. WALLACE. * * * * * TO MR. CLEMENT REID _Parkstone, Dorset. November 18, 1894._ My dear Clement Reid,-- ... The great, the grand, and long-expected, the prophesied discovery has at last been made--Miocene or Old Pliocene Man in India!!! Good worked flints found _in situ_ by the palaeontologist to the Geological Survey of India! It is in a ferruginous conglomerate lying beneath 4,000 feet of Pliocene strata and containing hippotherium, etc. But perhaps you have seen the article in _Natural Science_ describing it, by Rupert Jones, who, very properly, accepts it! Of course we want the bones, but we have got the flints, and they may follow. Hurrah for the missing link! Excuse more.--Yours very faithfully, ALFRED R. WALLACE. * * * * * The next letter relates to the rising school of biologists who, in opposition to Darwin's views, held that species might arise by what was at the time termed "discontinuous variation." TO PROF. MELDOLA _February 4, 1895._ My dear Professor Meldola,--I hope to have copies of my "Evolution" article in a few days, and will send you a couple. The article was in print last September, but, being long, was crowded out month after month, and only now got in by being cut in two. I think I have demolished "discontinuous variation" as having any but the most subordinate part in evolution of species. Congratulations on Presidency of the Entomological Society. A.R. WALLACE. * * * * * TO PROF. POULTON _Parkstone, Dorset. March 15, 1895._ My dear Poulton,--I have now nearly finished reading Romanes, but do not find it very convincing. There is a large amount of special pleading. On two points only I feel myself hit. My doubt that Darwin really meant that _all_ the individuals of a species could be similarly modified without selection is evidently wrong, as he adduces other quotations which I had overlooked. The other point is, that my suggested explanation of sexual ornaments gives away my case as to the utility of all specific characters. It certainly does as it stands, but I now believe, and should have added, that all these ornaments, where they differ from species to species, are also recognition characters, and as such were rendered stable by Natural Selection from their first appearance. I rather do
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70  
71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
species
 

WALLACE

 

article

 

discontinuous

 
flints
 

ornaments

 
Natural
 

Darwin

 

Pliocene

 

Dorset


Parkstone

 

characters

 
faithfully
 
variation
 

convincing

 
special
 

amount

 
points
 

pleading

 

finished


Congratulations

 
POULTON
 

evolution

 

Society

 
Presidency
 

Entomological

 

subordinate

 

reading

 

Romanes

 

Poulton


demolished

 

evidently

 
differ
 

stands

 
utility
 

specific

 

appearance

 

Selection

 

stable

 
recognition

rendered

 
similarly
 

modified

 

selection

 

individuals

 

suggested

 

explanation

 

sexual

 

overlooked

 

adduces