Down, | Beckenham, Kent. | Railway Station | Orpington. S.E.R.
Feb 13. 77
Dear Sir,
I thank you for your very kind, long & interesting letter1 The case is so wonderful & difficult that I dare not express any opinion on it. Of course I regret that Hilgendorf has been proved to be so greatly in error, but it is some selfish comfort to me that I always felt so much misgiving that I never quoted his paper.2 The variability of these shells is quite astonishing, & seems to exceed that of Rubus or Hieracium amongst plants.3 The result which surprises me most is that the same form should be developed from various & different progenitors. This seems to show how potent are the conditions of life, irrespectively of the variations being in any way beneficial. The production of a species out of a chaos of varying forms reminds me of Nägelis conclusion as deduced from the study of Hieracium that this is the common mode in which species arise.4 But I still continue to doubt much on this head, & cling to the belief expressed in the first edit of the Origin that protean or Polymorphic species are those which are now varying in such a manner that the variations are neither advantageous nor disadvantageous.5 I am glad to hear of the Brunswick deposit, as I feel sure that the careful study of such cases is highly important.6
I hope that the Smithsonian Institn. will publish your memoir,7 & I remain | dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin
Please cite as “DCP-LETT-10842,” in Ɛpsilon: The Charles Darwin Collection accessed on