WCP1481

[1]¹

To Mr. Thistelton-Dyer.) Parkstone, Dorset.

Sept. 26th. 1893.

My dear Mr. Thistelton-Dyer

I am very sorry to hear of Romanes'² illness because I think he would have done much good work in carrying out experiments which require the leisure, means, & knowledge which he possesses. I cannot however at all understand his wishing to have any communication from myself. I do not think I ever met Romanes in private more than once; when he called on me more than 20 years ago about some curious psychical phenomena occurring in his own family; and perhaps half a dozen letters — if so many — may have passed between us since. There is therefore no question of personal friendship disturbed. I consider however that he made a very gross misstatement & personal attack on me when he stated, both in England³ & American periodicals, that, in my Darwinism⁴, I adopted his theory of "Physiological Selection" and claimed it as my own — that I adopted it "purely and simply without any modification whatever" — & that my adoption of it was "unequivocal and complete". This accusation he supported by such a flood of words & quotations and explanations, as to obscure all the chief issues and render it almost impossible for the ordinary reader to disentangle the facts. I told him then, that unless he withdrew this accusation as publicly as he had made it I should decline all future correspondence with him, & sh[oul]d avoid referring to him in any of my writings.

This is of course very different from any criticism of my theories; that, or even ridicule, would never disturb me — but when a man has made an accusation of literary & scientific dishonesty, and has done all he can to spread this accusation over the whole civilised world my only answer can be — after showing as I have done (see Nature⁵ vol. 43. pp. 79 & 150) that his accusations are wholly untrue — to ignore his existence.

I cannot believe that he can want any sympathy from a man he says has wilfully & grossly plagarised [sic] him, unless he feels that his accusations were unfounded. If he does so, & will write to me to that effect (for publication if I wish after his death) I will accept it as full reparation & write him such a letter as you suggest.

Believe me | Yours very faithfully | Alfred R. Wallace.

[1]¹

To Mr. Thistelton-Dyer.) Parkstone, Dorset.

Sept. 26th. 1893.

My dear Mr. Thistelton-Dyer

I am very sorry to hear of Romanes'² illness because I think he would have done much good work in carrying out experiments which require the leisure, means, & knowledge which he possesses. I cannot however at all understand his wishing to have any communication from myself. I do not think I ever met Romanes in private more than once; when he called on me more than 20 years ago about some curious psychical phenomena occurring in his own family; and perhaps half a dozen letters — if so many — may have passed between us since. There is therefore no question of personal friendship disturbed. I consider however that he made a very gross misstatement & personal attack on me when he stated, both in England³ & American periodicals, that, in my Darwinism⁴, I adopted his theory of "Physiological Selection" and claimed it as my own — that I adopted it "purely and simply without any modification whatever" — & that my adoption of it was "unequivocal and complete". This accusation he supported by such a flood of words & quotations and explanations, as to obscure all the chief issues and render it almost impossible for the ordinary reader to disentangle the facts. I told him then, that unless he withdrew this accusation as publicly as he had made it I should decline all future correspondence with him, & sh[oul]d avoid referring to him in any of my writings.

This is of course very different from any criticism of my theories; that, or even ridicule, would never disturb me — but when a man has made an accusation of literary & scientific dishonesty, and has done all he can to spread this accusation over the whole civilised world my only answer can be — after showing as I have done (see Nature⁵ vol. 43. pp. 79 & 150) that his accusations are wholly untrue — to ignore his existence.

I cannot believe that he can want any sympathy from a man he says has wilfully & grossly plagarised [sic] him, unless he feels that his accusations were unfounded. If he does so, & will write to me to that effect (for publication if I wish after his death) I will accept it as full reparation & write him such a letter as you suggest.

Believe me | Yours very faithfully | Alfred R. Wallace.

[1] [p. 235]

Parkstone, Dorset. September 26, 1893.

My dear Thiselton-Dyer, — I am sorry to hear of Romanes' illness, because I think he would have done much good work in carrying out experiments which require the leisure, means and knowledge which he possesses. I cannot, however, at all understand his wishing to have any communication from myself. I do not think I ever met Romanes in private more than once, when he called on me. more than twenty years ago about some curious psychical phenomena occurring in his own family; and perhaps half a dozen letters — if so many — may have passed between us since. There is therefore no question of personal friendship disturbed. I consider, however, that he made a very gross misstatement and personal attack on me when he stated, both in English and American periodicals, that in my "Darwinism" I adopted his theory of "physiological selection" and claimed it as my [2] own, and that my adoption of it was "unequivocal and complete." This accusation he supported by such a flood of words and quotations and explanations as to obscure all the chief issues and render it almost impossible for the ordinary reader to disentangle the facts. I told him then that unless he withdrew this accusation as publicly as he had made it I should decline all future correspondence with him, and should avoid referring to him in any of my writings.

This is, of course, very different from any criticism of my theories; that, or even ridicule, would never disturb me; but when a man has made an accusation of literary and scientific dishonesty, and has done all he can to spread this accusation over the whole civilised world, my only answer can be — after showing, as I have done (see Nature, vol. xliii., pp. 79 and 150), that his accusations are wholly untrue — to ignore his existence. I cannot believe that he can want any sympathy from a man he says has wilfully and grossly plagiarised him, unless he feels that his accusations were unfounded. If he does so, and will write to me to that effect (for publication, if I wish, after his death), I will accept it as full reparation and write him such a letter as you suggest. — Believe me yours very faithfully, ALFRED R. WALLACE.