Parkstone, Dorset.
June 16th. 1892
My dear Poulton
Many thanks for sending me Weismann’s additional Essays, which I look forward to reading with much pleasure. I have however read the first, and am much disappointed with it. It seems to me the weakest and most inconclusive thing he has yet written. At p. 1<7?> [number illeg.] he states his theory as to degeneration of eyes; and again on p.18 — of anthers & filaments, — but in both cases entirely fails to prove it, & apparently does not see that his panmixia or "cessation of selection" cannot possibly [2] produce continuous degeneration culminating in the total or almost total disappearance of an organ. Romanes & others have pointed out this weakness in his theory, but he does not notice it, & goes on calmly throughout the essay to assume that mere panmixia must cause progressive degeneration to an unlimited extent; whereas all it can do is to effect a reduction to the average of the total population on which selection has previously worked. He says — "individuals with weak eyes would not be eliminated," but omits to notice that individuals with strong eyes would also "not be [3] eliminated["], — and [letter deleted] as there is no reason alleged why variations in all directions sh[oul]d not occur as before, the free intercrossing would tend to keep up a mean condition only a little below that which was kept up by selection. It is clear that some form of selection must always cooperate in degeneration, such as economy of growth, — which he hardly notices except as a possible but not a necessary factor, or actual injuriousness. It appears to me that what is wanted is to take [4]1 a number of typical cases & in each of them show how nat[ural] select[ion] comes in to carry on the degeneration begun by panmixia. Weismann’s treatment of the subject is merely begging the question.
Yours very truly| Alfred R. Wallace [signature]
P.S. What a very weak article that was of Beddard’s on Mimicry in No.1 of "Natural Science".
A.R.W. [signature]
E.B. Poulton Esq. F.R.S.
Status: Draft transcription [Letter (WCP4389.4645)]
For more information about the transcriptions and metadata, see https://wallaceletters.myspecies.info/content/epsilon
Envelope addressed to "E. B. Poulton F.R.S. &c., Wykeham House, Banbury Road, Oxford", with stamp, postmarked "PARKSTONE | B | JU 17 | 92". A note is written on front of envelope in Poulton's hand "Wallace 1892"; postmark on back. [Envelope (WCP4389.4646)]
[1] [p. 51]
Parkstone, Dorset
June 16, 1892.
My dear Mr. Poulton1,—Many thanks for sending me Weismann's2 additional Essays3, which I look forward to reading with much pleasure. I have, however, read the first and am much disappointed with it. It seems to me [2] [p. 52] the weakest and most inconclusive thing he has yet written. At p. 17 he states his theory as to degeneration of eyes, and again, on p. 18 of anthers and filaments; but in both cases he fails to prove it, and apparently does not see that his panmixia, or "cessation of selection," cannot possibly produce continuous degeneration culminating in the total or almost total disappearance of an organ. Romanes4 and others have pointed out this weakness in his theory, but he does not notice it, and goes on calmly throughout the essay to assume that mere panmixia must cause progressive degeneration to an unlimited extent; whereas all it can do is to effect a reduction to the average of the total population on which selection has been previously worked. He says "individuals with weak eyes would not be eliminated," but omits to notice that individuals with strong eyes would also "not be eliminated," and as there is no reason alleged why variations in all directions should not occur as before, the free intercrossing would tend to keep up a mean condition only a little below that which was kept up by selection. It is clear that some form of selection must always co-operate in degeneration, such as economy of growth, which he hardly notices except as a possible but not a necessary factor, or actual injuriousness. It appears to me that what is wanted is to take a number of typical cases, and in each of them show how Natural Selection comes in to carry on the degeneration begun by panmixia. Weismann's treatment of the subject is merely begging the question. — Yours faithfully,
A. R. Wallace
Status: Draft transcription [Published letter (WCP4389.6417)]
For more information about the transcriptions and metadata, see https://wallaceletters.myspecies.info/content/epsilon
Please cite as “WCP4389,” in Beccaloni, G. W. (ed.), Ɛpsilon: The Alfred Russel Wallace Collection accessed on 28 April 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/wallace/letters/WCP4389