11.vii.09
Dear Dr Wallace,
I could not go to Cambridge as I was taken up with our Gloucester Show and had to lend a hand with Horticulture, Forestry and Education.
But I managed to write an article for the Gardeners' Chroncle under your purview, because I did not want any of the minimising to do it. You may like to see it.
I have just got F[rancis] Darwin's 'Foundations'3 He tries to make one that his father could have [2] dispensed with that thin[?]. But[?] the selection death rate in a slightly varying large [?] population is the pith[?] of the whole business. The Darwin-Wallace theory is as you say 'the continuous adjustment of the organic to the inorganic will'. It is what mathematicians call 'a moving equilibrium' [.] In fact I have always maintained that it is a mathematical conception.
It seemed to me there was a touch[?] of[?] [word illeg.] about the [3]4 whole celebration, as the younger Cambridge school as a whole do not even begin to understand the theory; F. Darwin5, Bateson6, A. Sedgwick7, Gadow8 and the rest are all at sea about it. I take it that the reason is, as you have pointed out, that none of them are naturalists.
Roy Lankester9 was immensely pleased at your approval of his speech. From the talk about it in London it seems to have been the most impressive thing in the whole celebration.
Yours sincerely | W. T. Thistleton-Dyer [signature]10
Status: Draft transcription [Letter (WCP2958.2848)]
For more information about the transcriptions and metadata, see https://wallaceletters.myspecies.info/content/epsilon
[1] [p. 92]
SIR W. T. THISELTON-DYER TO A. R. WALLACE
The Ferns, Witcombe, Gloucester.
July 11, 1909.
Dear Mr. Wallace,—...
I have just got F. Darwin’s "Foundations." He tries to make out that his father could have dispensed with Malthus. But the selection death-rate in a slightly varying large population is the pith of the whole business. The Darwin-Wallace theory is, as you say, "the continuous adjustment of the organic to the inorganic world." It is what mathematicians call "a moving equilibrium." In fact, I have always maintained that it is a mathematical conception.
It seemed to me there was a touch of insincerity about the whole celebration,1 as the younger Cambridge School as a whole do not even begin to understand the theory.... I take it that the reason is, as you pointed out, that none of them are naturalists.—
Yours sincerely,
W. T. THISELTON-DYER.
Status: Draft transcription [Published letter (WCP2958.7892)]
For more information about the transcriptions and metadata, see https://wallaceletters.myspecies.info/content/epsilon
Please cite as “WCP2958,” in Beccaloni, G. W. (ed.), Ɛpsilon: The Alfred Russel Wallace Collection accessed on 2 May 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/wallace/letters/WCP2958