ii. In fairness to Darwin, the book’s title On Naval Timber and Arboriculture, gave no indication that, as Matthew alleged, its ‘Appendix’ contained a ground-breaking new theory about ‘natural selection’.
iii. Henslow, at the time in question, was a regular contributor to Gardeners’ Magazine, and a paper by him entitled ‘Henslow’s examination of a Hybrid Digitalis’,14 appeared in the very same volume in which the review of Matthew’s book is to be found. And in Volume XIII (1837) Henslow is mentioned on no fewer than eight separate occasions. As for Hooker, it is equally difficult to imagine that anything of any significance which appeared in Gardeners’ Magazine would have escaped his notice. However, if they were aware of Matthew’s book (and of its reviews), none of Darwin’s colleagues drew his attention to it, even after his return to England in late 1836.
iv. It was not obvious to any of the reviewers of Matthew’s book that it contained a new theory about natural selection. (However, as already mentioned, the review in Gardeners’ Magazine did refer to the fact that ‘the origin of species and varieties’ had been discussed by Matthew in his Appendix.)
Was Darwin telling the truth when he claimed only to have become aware of Matthew’s book in April 1860 – i.e. twenty-nine years after its publication?
a. The fact that a copy of On Naval Timber & Arboriculture is to be found in Darwin’s personal library with an autograph signature ‘C. Darwin Apr. 13th 1860’ inside the front cover of the volume, corroborates Darwin’s assertion that he was telling the truth in this matter.15
b. Volumes 2–13 (1827–37) of Gardeners’Magazine (i.e. including the 1832 number which contained the review of Matthew’s book) were also to be found in Darwin’s personal library. However, inside the front board of volume 7 (for 1831), at the top left-hand corner, are to be found the initials of Robert Waring Darwin, Charles’s father. Clearly, therefore, these volumes (which include those from 1831–36 when Darwin was at sea on HMS Beagle) were acquired by Robert for his library at ‘The Mount’ in Shrewsbury,16 and Darwin presumably acquired them only after his father’s death in November 1838.
Finally, and crucially, was Darwin correct in believing that Matthew had ‘got there first’, in respect of his great theory? This will be discussed shortly.
* * *
On Naval Timber and Arboriculture by Patrick Matthew
This is a substantial volume of approximately 90,000 words in which the author does not confine himself solely to the subject of timber, but devotes six pages to the subject of ‘universal free trade’; to the ‘absolute necessity of abolishing every monopoly and restriction of trade in Britain’, and speaks of the ‘insane duty on the importation of naval timber and hemp’.17 He also includes a vociferous rant against ‘the law of entail [which requires that property and wealth remains within a family]’, which, he said, was ‘an outrage’.18
When Darwin described some passages of Matthew’s work On Naval Timber as being ‘rather obscure’, this is not surprising, as the latter’s writings often lack clarity of meaning. (Heretical as it may seem to say so, Darwin himself was guilty, on occasion, of the same fault!) However, when Matthew speaks of the ‘infinite variety existing in what is called species’,19 which applies to ‘vegetables as well as animals …’,20 Darwin would surely have agreed.
Matthew’s so-called law of self-adaptation
In respect of fossils, Matthew remarks how
Geologists discover … an almost complete difference to exist between the species or stamp of life on one epoch from that of every other. We are therefore led to admit, either of a repeated miraculous creation; or of a power of change, under a change of circumstances, to belong to living organised matter … .21
Is the inference then unphilosophic, that living things which are proved to have a circumstance-suiting power – a very slight change of circumstance by culture inducing a corresponding change of character – may have gradually accommodated themselves to the variations of the elements containing them, and, without new creation, have presented the diverging changeable phenomena of past and present organized existence?22
Matthew speaks of animals and plants ‘in the course of time, moulding and accommodating their being anew to the change of circumstances …’,23 and of ‘the self-regulating adaptive disposition of organized life …’.24 In other words, it was Matthew’s view that, rather than having been spontaneously created, animals and plants had, by virtue of their own inherent ability, adapted themselves in order to suit the environment in which they found themselves, and had diverged in character accordingly.
Finally, so confident is Matthew of his theory that he goes so far as to describe it as ‘this self-adaptive law’.25
Conclusion
When, in his book, Matthew made reference to ‘A principle of selection existing in nature of the strongest varieties for reproduction’,26 he was in no way proposing a theory of natural selection in the Darwinian sense (and Darwin was incorrect in believing him to have done so). Instead, he was referring to an alleged (but unproven) innate ability of certain organisms to self-adapt to their particular environment.
Darwin himself believed that changes in the environment had a part to play in inducing variations to occur in organisms, and modern research suggests that yes, this might well be the case, as will shortly be seen.
Sequel
Darwin wrote to Matthew on 13 June 1862 as follows:
Dear Sir – I presume that I have the pleasure of addressing the Author of the work on Naval Architecture and the first enunciator of the theory of Natural Selection. Few things would give me greater pleasure than to see you; but my health is feeble and I have at present a son ill and can receive no one here, nor leave home at present.
I wish to come up to London as soon as I can; if, therefore, you are going to stay for more than a week, would you be so kind as to let me hear, and if able to come up to London, I would endeavour to arrange an interview with you, which [would] afford me high satisfaction. With much respect I remain, dear sir, yours very faithfully Ch. Darwin.27
Two years later, yet another offer to meet was made by Matthew, which Darwin was obliged to decline on the grounds of his own ill health.
NOTES
1. In fact, Matthew matriculated in 1804/5 as a medical student, but did not graduate. Information kindly supplied by Edinburgh University Library, Special Collection.
2. Quarterly Journal of Agriculture, Volume III, February 1831-September 1832.
3. ‘Patrick Matthew of Gourdiehill, Naturalist’ by Scottish zoologist William T. Calman, published in 1912 in the British Association’s Handbook and Guide to Dundee and District. A. W. Paton and A.H. Millar (editors). For his article, Calman relied upon information given to him by Patrick Matthew’s daughter ‘Miss Euphemia Matthew of Newburgh [Fife]’.
4. Matthew, On Naval Timber and Arboriculture, Appendix, Note A, p.363.
5. Letter from Darwin to Gardeners’ Chronicle, published 21 April 1860, in Francis Darwin, op. cit., Volume II, p.95.
6. Darwin, Charles, Origin, pp.62–3.
7. Darwin, Francis, op. cit., Part II, p.96.
8. Darwin, Charles, Origin, p.20.
9. Quarterly Review, vol. xix, April–July 1833, p.125.
10. Loudon, John Claudius (1783–1834), was a designer of gardens and cemeteries, author of The Encyclopaedia of Gardening (1822) and of The Encyclopaedia of Trees and Shrubs (1842), and founder of the Magazine of Natural History (1828).
11. The review appeared under the heading ‘Matthew, Patrick: On Naval Timber and Arboriculture; with Critical Notes on Authors who have recently treated the Subject of Planting’.
12. Gardeners’ Magazine, Volume VIII (1832), pp.703–4.
13. United Services Journal and Naval and Military Magazine, 1831 Part II, p.457.
14. Gardeners’ Magazine, Volume VIII, p.208.
15. Information kindly supplied by Department of Manuscripts and University Archives, Cambridge University Library.
17. Matthew, op. cit., p.xi.
18. Ibid, pp.366–7.
19. Ibid, p.x.
20. Ibid, p.106.
21. Ibid, p.381.
22. Ibid, p.382.
23. Ibid, p.383.
24. Matthew, op. cit., p.384.
25. Ibid, p.385.
26. Ibid, p.x.
27. Darwin to Patrick Matthew, 13 June, Darwin Correspondence Project, Letter 3600.
Chapter 26
William Charles Wells
In October 1865 Darwin wrote to Hooker in respect of a learned paper, published no less than forty-seven years previously, which had just been brought to his notice.
In 1813 Dr W. C. Wells read before the Royal Society ‘An Account of a White Female, part of whose Skin resembles that of a Negro’; but his paper was not published until his famous ‘Two Essays upon Dew and Single Vision’ appeared in 1818 [i.e. the year after Wells’s death]. In this paper1, he distinctly recognizes the principle of natural selection, and this is the first recognition which has been indicated; but he applies it only to the races of man, and to certain characters [i.e. characteristics] alone.2
I am indebted to Mr Rowley, of the United States, for having called my attention, through Mr Brace, to the above passage in Dr Wells’s work.3
(Charles Loring Brace was a US anthropologist from the city of Hudson, New York, and Robert S. Rowley was his friend and neighbour.) Darwin therefore concluded that
poor old Patrick Matthew is not the first, and he cannot, or ought not, any longer to put on his title-pages ‘Discoverer of the principle of Natural Selection’!4
Wells was born in Charles Town (Charleston), South Carolina in 1757; his parents, Robert, a printer and bookseller and Mary, having emigrated to the USA from Scotland. However, Wells returned to Scotland to attend school. From 1775–78 he attended Edinburgh University where he studied medicine (and subsequently graduated as MD in 1780).5 His career was to be a distinguished one, culminating in his election to the post of Physician to London’s St Thomas’s Hospital, and to the Royal Societies of both London and Edinburgh.
The full title of Wells’s paper, to which Darwin refers, is ‘An account of a female of the white race of mankind, part of whose skin resembles that of a negro, with some observations on the cause of the differences in colour and form between the white and negro races of man’. Its subject was Hannah West of Sussex, who had been admitted to St Thomas’s Hospital ‘on account of some bodily ailment’, and who had ‘blackness on part of her skin, which was observed at her birth’. This latter fact led Wells into a discussion as to the possible role of skin colour in relation to survival in hot or cold climates. First, however, Wells stated that
those who attend to the improvement of domestic animals, when they find individuals possessing, in a greater degree than common, the qualities they desire, couple a male and female of these together, then take the best of their offspring as a new stock, and in this way proceed, till they approach as near the point of view [objective], as the nature of things will permit.
Now comes the crucial sentence.
But, what is here done by art, seems to be done, with equal efficacy though more slowly, by nature, in the formation of varieties of mankind, fitted for the country which they inhabit.
Wells now gives a practical example of his theory.
Of the accidental varieties of man, which would occur among the first few and scattered inhabitants of the middle regions of Africa, some one would be better fitted than the others to bear the diseases of the country.
This race would consequently multiply, while the others would decrease, not only from their inability to sustain the attacks of disease, but from their incapacity of contending with their more vigorous neighbours. The colour of this vigorous race I take for granted, from what has been already said, would be dark. But the same disposition to form varieties still existing, a darker and a darker race would in the course of time occur, and as the darkest would be the best fitted for the climate, this would at length become the most prevalent, if not the only race, in the particular country in which it had originated.
In like manner, that part of the original stock of the human race, which proceeded to the colder regions of the earth, would in process of time become white, if they were not originally so, from persons of this colour being better fitted to resist the diseases of such climates, than others of a dark skin.6
This demonstrates, conclusively, that Wells had indeed grasped both the phenomenon of variation, and most importantly, the principle of natural selection.
‘The negro race is better fitted to resist the attacks of the diseases of hot climates than the white,’ Wells asserted, but he was not naïve enough to suppose that the ‘different susceptibility’ of the black and white races of man to disease was purely the result of ‘their difference in colour’. This was due, he said, ‘to some difference in them … [as] yet too subtle to be discovered.’
Darwin was, therefore, correct in regarding Wells as being the first known person to have recognized the principle of natural selection, albeit in respect of human beings only.
NOTES
1. The full title was ‘Two Essays: Upon a Single Vision with Two Eyes, the Other on Dew’, published by Constable of London.
2. Darwin, Origin, op. cit., pp.18–19.
3. Ibid.
4. Darwin to Hooker, October 1865 in Francis Darwin, op. cit., Part II, p.225.
5. Information kindly supplied by the Centre for Research Collections, University of Edinburgh.
6. Wells, ‘Two Essays: Upon a Single Vision with Two Eyes, the Other on Dew’, pp.425–39.
Chapter 27
Darwin’s Chronic Illness: Dr James M. Gully
For all of his adult life Darwin suffered from ill health. Various suggestions have been made as to the reason for this, and it has even been implied that his symptoms were of psychoneurotic origin (see below). So is it possible to discover the truth of the matter?
In the absence of any surviving medical records it is necessary to rely on the words of Darwin himself, over the years, for a description of his medical condition. In his correspondence and in his diary, he described his symptoms factually, in the manner of the trained scientist, as might be expected. He did not grumble, per se, or express self-pity, but rather bore his physical discomforts stoically. However, this did not prevent him from expressing exasperation at having to convalesce when his work beckoned, and anxiety lest he become a burden to his family. And despite his own sufferings, he was always concerned for the health and well-being of others.
During the two months spent at Plymouth prior to the departure of HMS the Beagle on 27 December 1831, Darwin declared that he was
troubled with palpitation and pain about the heart, and like many a young ignorant man, especially one with a smattering of medical knowledge, was convinced that I had heart disease.1
The following year in early summer, when Beagle with Darwin aboard was in the vicinity of the Brazilian city of Rio de Janeiro, Captain FitzRoy stated,
Upon making … inquiry respecting those streams which run into the great basin of Rio de Janeiro, I found that the Macacu was notorious among the natives as being often the site of pestilential malaria, fatal even to themselves … .2
This indicates just how dangerous the region could be for the crew of HMS Beagle (Darwin included), some of whom paid with their lives.
On 14 October 1837, a year after the return of HMS Beagle, Darwin remarked:
Of late, anything which flurries me completely knocks me up afterwards and brings on a b[ad] palpitation of the heart.3
Between January 1839, which was the month before he married Emma, and September 1842,
I did less scientific work, though I worked as hard as I possibly could, than during any other equal length of time in my life. This was owing to frequently occurring
unwellness, and to one long and serious illness.4
In the summer of 1842 Darwin undertook a solo expedition to North Wales with the object of
observing the effects of the old glaciers which formerly filled all the larger valleys … [This] was the last time I was ever strong enough to climb mountains or to take long walks such as are necessary for geological work.5
Why should this be? How could a man of only thirty-three years of age, who had showed such stamina and resilience during the Beagle voyage, have deteriorated to such an extent?
Having relocated to Down House on 14 September, Darwin declared that
During the first part of our residence we went a little into society, and received a few friends here; but my health almost always suffered from the excitement, violent shivering and vomiting attacks being thus brought on.6
Sadly, therefore, the move to the country had failed to achieve the desired restorative effect.
On several occasions throughout his life Darwin refers to problems with his hands. For example, to Emma in October 1843, he speaks of a ‘dreadful numbness in my finger ends …’.7
In August 1844,
My health during the last three years has been exceedingly weak, so that I am able to work only two or three hours in the 24 … .8
In early February 1845,
I have given up acids & gone to puddings again … My stomach is baddish again this morning … .9
And again on 31 March,
I believe I have not had one whole day or rather night, without my stomach having been greatly disordered, during the last three years, & most days great prostration of strength … .10
While in early September,
I have taken my Bismuth [an ingredient of medicines used to treat gastrointestinal diseases] regularly, I think it has not done me quite so much good, as before … .11
Charles Darwin Page 22
