Both Hooker's and Bates's letters are excellent. Hooker has said all that can be said against direct effect of conditions, but Darwin still sticks to his own and Bates's side. Darwin should have done what Hooker suggests (since naturally he is pleased to attribute little to conditions) – viz., started on the fundamental principle that variation is innate and stated that afterwards, perhaps, this principle would be made explicable. Variation will show that "use and disuse" have some effect. Does not believe in perfect reversion. Demurs at Hooker's "centrifugal variation"; the doctrine of the good of diversification amply accounts for variation being centrifugal. The wonderful mechanism of Mormodes ignea.
This image has the following copyright:
Do you want to download this image?
This metadata has the following copyright:
Do you want to download metadata for this document?