WCP1951

[1]¹

To C.Darwin.) Holly House, Barking E. March 3rd. [18]72/

Dear Darwin Many thanks for your new Edition of "The Origin" which I have been too busy to acknowledge before. I think your answer to Mivart², on initial stages of modification, ample & complete; & the comparison of Whale & duck most beautiful. I always saw the fallacy of these objections, of course. The eye & ear objection you have not so satisfactorily answered, — and to me the difficulty exists of how three times over, an organ of sight was developed with the apparatus even approximately identical. Why should not, in one case out of the three, the heat waves rays or the chemical rays have been utilised for the same purpose in which case no translucent media would have been required, and yet vision might have been ^just as perfect. The fact that the eyes of insects & molluscs are transparent to us, shows that the very same limited portion of the rays of the spectrum is utilised for vision by them as by us.

The chances seem to me immense against that having occurred through "fortuitous variation", as Mivart puts it.

I see still further difficulties on this point but cannot go into them now. Many thanks for you[r] kind invitation. I will try & call some day, — but I am now very busy trying to make my house habitable by Lady day, when I must be in it.

Believe me Yours very faithfully | Alfred R. Wallace.

To C.Darwin.) Holly House, Barking E. March 3rd. 72/

Dear Darwin

Many thanks for your new Edition of "The Origin" which I have been too busy to acknowledge before. I think your answer to Mivart, on initial stages of modification, ample & complete, & the comparison of Whale & duck most beautiful. I always saw the fallacy of these objections, of course. The eye & ear objection you have not so satisfactorily answered,- and to me the difficulty exists of how three times over, an organ of sight was developed with the apparatus even approximately identical. Why should not, in one case of the three the heat waves rays or the chemical rays have been utilised [sic] for the same purpose in which case no translucent media would have been required, and yet vision might have been ^just as perfect. The fact that the eyes of insects & molluses are transparent to us, shows that the very same limited portion of the rays of the spectrum is utilised [sic] for vision by them as by us.

The chances seem to me immense against that having occurred through "fortuitous variation", as Mivart¹ puts it.

I see still further difficulties on this point but cannot go into them now. Many thanks for you[r] kind invitation. I will try & call some day,- but I am now very busy trying to make my house habitable by Lady day when I must be in it.

Believe me | Yours very faithfully | Alfred R. Wallace [signature]

[1] [p. 271]

Holly House, Barking, E. March 3, 1872.

Dear Darwin, — Many thanks for your new edition of the "Origin,"¹ which I have been too busy to acknowledge before. I think your answer to Mivart² on the initial stages of modification ample and complete, and the comparison of whale and duck most beautiful. I always saw the fallacy of these objections, of course. The eye and ear objection you have not so satisfactorily answered, and to me the difficulty exists of how three times over an organ of sight was developed with the apparatus even approximately identical. Why should not, in one case out of the three, the heat rays or the chemical rays have been utilised for the same purpose, in which case no translucent media would have been required, and yet vision might have been just as perfect? The fact that the eyes of insects and molluscs are transparent to us shows that the very same limited portion of the rays of the spectrum is utilised for vision by them as by us.

The chances seem to me immense against that having occurred through "fortuitous variation," as Mivart puts it.

I see still further difficulties on this point but cannot go into them now. Many thanks for your kind invitation. I will try and call some day, but I am now very busy trying to make my house habitable by Lady Day,³ when I must be in it. — Believe me yours very faithfully, | ALFRED R. WALLACE.