I am afraid, however, the whole subject is above and beyond the
average "entomologist" or insect collector, but it will be of great
value to all students of evolution. It is curious how few even of the
more acute minds take the trouble to reason out carefully the teaching
of certain facts--as in the case of Romanes and the "variable
protection," and as I showed also in the case of Mivart (and also
Romanes and Gulick) declaring that isolation alone, without Natural
Selection, could produce perfect and well-defined species (see _Nature_,
Jan. 12, 1899).... --Yours faithfully,
A.R. WALLACE.
* * * * *
TO SIR FRANCIS DARWIN
_Broadstone, Wimborne. October 29, 1905._
Dear Mr. Darwin,--I return you the two articles on "Mutation" with many
thanks. As they are both supporters of de Vries, I suppose they put his
case as strongly as possible. Professor Hubrecht's paper is by far the
clearest and the best written, and he says distinctly that de Vries
claims that all new species have been produced by mutations, and none by
"fluctuating variations." Professor Hubrecht supports this and says that
de Vries has proved it! And all this founded upon a few "sports" from
one species of plant, itself of doubtful origin (variety or hybrid), and
offering phenomena in no way different from scores of other cultivated
plants. Never, I should think, has such a vast hypothetical structure
been erected on so flimsy a basis!
The boldness of his statements is amazing, as when he declares (as if it
were a fact of observation) that fluctuating variability, though he
admits it as the origin of all domestic animals and plants, yet "never
leads to the formation of species"! (Hubrecht, p.
Pages:
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107