WCP6802

[1]

St Aldate's,

Oxford.

Dec 9/[18]90.

Dear Mr. Gulick,

I have two of your letters to answer, both of which I have had to delay answering on account of their having been packed up with others during a change of residence. The above will henceforth be my permanent address.

I note your approval of the terms Homogamy & Apogamy. Also your view upon hybrid inferiority as one means of negative segregation. I though I remembered this as being your view, but wished to make sure. I have not yet seen your paper on [2] "The Preservation & accumulation of Cross-Infertility" in print; but as I think it must have been published by this time I refer to it in this week's Nature. It appears probable that the reference may lead to an animated controversy with Wallace; but I think it is just as well to have the matter brought out with him before my book appears: hence my paper in the Monist to which he refers, and a copy of which I send herewith. That paper was written before I received your letter saying you do recognize in some degree that physiol. sel. [3] may act alone; so in this respect the paper rather misrepresents you. I should have corrected it if the Editor had sent me a proof. But I should like to have a fuller statement of your view upon this point before I publish my book. In your papers you seem to agree with Wallace that the physiological form of isolation as between incipient species cannot act as a cause of further divergence, unless it be associated with some other form of homogamy; and I do not quite understand from your letter in what way you suppose that in some cases it may. [4]

It appears to me that the time will soon come when our minds views will be better understood. There is an interesting book by Prof. Lloy Lloyd Morgan just published on "Animal Life & Intelligence", which shows more toleration of them than is usual.

Yours very truly,| Geo. J. Romanes [signature]