{213} In the Origin, Ed. i. p. 41, vi. p. 46 the question is differently treated; it is pointed out that a large stock of individuals gives a better chance of available variations occurring. Darwin quotes from Marshall that sheep in small lots can never be improved. This comes from Marshall’s Review of the Reports to the Board of Agriculture, 1808, p. 406. In this Essay the name Marshall occurs in the margin. Probably this refers to loc. cit. p. 200, where unshepherded sheep in many parts of England are said to be similar owing to mixed breeding not being avoided.
{214} See Origin, Ed. i. p. 8, vi. p. 8.
{215} See Origin, Ed. i. p. 42, vi. p. 48.
{216} «Note in the original.» There are white peacocks.
{217} «Note in the original.» There are varieties of asparagus.
{218} In Chapter II of the first edition of the Origin Darwin insists rather on the presence of variability in a state of nature; see, for instance, p. 45, Ed. vi. p. 53, “I am convinced that the most experienced naturalist would be surprised at the number of the cases of variability ... which he could collect on good authority, as I have collected, during a course of years.”
{219} See Origin, Ed. i. p. 44, vi. p. 52.
{220} «Note in the original.» Here discuss what is a species, sterility can most rarely be told when crossed.—Descent from common stock.
{221} «Note in the original.» Give only rule: chain of intermediate forms, and analogy; this important. Every Naturalist at first when he gets hold of new variable type is quite puzzled to know what to think species and what variations.
{222} The author had not at this time the knowledge of the meaning of dimorphism.
{223} «Note in original.» Compare feathered heads in very different birds with spines in Echidna and Hedgehog. «In Variation under Domestication, Ed. ii. vol. II. p. 317, Darwin calls attention to laced and frizzled breeds occurring in both fowls and pigeons. In the same way a peculiar form of covering occurs in Echidna and the hedgehog.»
Plants under very different climate not varying. Digitalis shows jumps «?» in variation, like Laburnum and Orchis case—in fact hostile cases. Variability of sexual characters alike in domestic and wild.
{224} A corresponding passage occurs in Origin, Ed. i. p. 83, vi. p. 101, where however Nature takes the place of the selecting Being.
{225} The mistletoe is used as an illustration in Origin, Ed. i. p. 3, vi. p. 3, but with less detail.
{226} «Note in original.» The selection, in cases where adult lives only few hours as Ephemera, must fall on larva—curious speculation of the effect «which» changes in it would bring in parent.
{227} This section forms part of the joint paper by Darwin and Wallace read before the Linnean Society on July 1, 1858.
{228} Occurs in Origin, Ed. i. p. 64, vi. p. 79.
{229} Corresponds approximately with Origin, Ed. i. pp. 64-65, vi. p. 80.
{230} This simile occurs in Origin, Ed. i. p. 67, not in the later editions.
{231} «Note in the original.» In case like mistletoe, it may be asked why not more species, no other species interferes; answer almost sufficient, same causes which check the multiplication of individuals.
{232} See Origin, Ed. i. pp. 104, 292, vi. pp. 127, 429.
{233} Recognition of the importance of minute differences in the struggle occurs in the Essay of 1842, p. 8 note 3.
{234} See Origin, Ed. i. p. 90, vi. p. 110.
{235} These two forms of sexual selection are given in Origin, Ed. i. p. 87, vi. p. 107. The Guiana rock-thrush is given as an example of bloodless competition.
{236} «Note in original.» Seals? Pennant about battles of seals.
{237} In the Linnean paper of July 1, 1858 the final word is mate: but the context shows that it should be male; it is moreover clearly so written in the MS.
{238} In the Origin the author would here have used the word variety.
{239} The whole of p. 94 and 15 lines of p. 95 are, in the MS., marked through in pencil with vertical lines, beginning at “Races produced, &c.” and ending with “to these conditions.”
{240} See Origin, Ed. i. p. 83, vi. p. 102.
{241} In the present Essay there is some evidence that the author attributed more to sports than was afterwards the case: but the above passage points the other way. It must always be remembered that many of the minute differences, now considered small mutations, are the small variations on which Darwin conceived selection to act.
{242} See Var. under Dom., Ed. ii. vol. II. p. 230.
{243} «Note in the original.» If domestic animals are descended from several species and become fertile inter se, then one can see they gain fertility by becoming adapted to new conditions and certainly domestic animals can withstand changes of climate without loss of fertility in an astonishing manner.
{244} See Suchetet, L’Hybridité dans la Nature, Bruxelles, 1888, p. 67. In Var. under Dom., Ed. ii. vol. II. hybrids between the fowl and the pheasant are mentioned. I can give no information on the other cases.
{245} Origin, Ed. i. p. 250, vi. p. 370.
{246} This was the position of Gärtner and of Kölreuter: see Origin, Ed. i. pp. 246-7, vi. pp. 367-8.
{247} «Note in the original.» Yet this seems introductory to the case of the heaths and crocuses above mentioned. «Herbert observed that crocus does not set seed if transplanted before pollination, but that such treatment after pollination has no sterilising effect. (Var. under Dom., Ed. ii. vol. II. p. 148.) On the same page is a mention of the Ericaceæ being subject to contabescence of the anthers. For Crinum see Origin, Ed. i. p. 250: for Rhododenron and Calceolaria see p. 251.»
{248} «Note in original.» Animals seem more often made sterile by being taken out of their native condition than plants, and so are more sterile when crossed.
We have one broad fact that sterility in hybrids is not closely related to external difference, and these are what man alone gets by selection.
{249} See Var. under Dom., Ed. ii. vol. II. p. 132; for the case of the cheetah see loc cit. p. 133.
{250} Var. under Dom., Ed. ii. vol. II. p. 148.
{251} Quoted in the Origin, Ed. i. p. 9.
{252} See Var. under Dom., Ed. ii. vol. II. p. 147.
{253} Var. under Dom., Ed. ii. vol. II. p. 89.
{254} See Var. under Dom., Ed. ii. vol. II. p. 147.
{255} Origin, Ed. i. p. 267, vi. p. 392. This is the principle experimentally investigated in the author’s Cross-and Self-Fertilisation.
{256} Origin, Ed. i. p. 268, vi. p. 398.
{257} «Notes in original.» Mere difference of structure no guide to what will or will not cross. First step gained by races keeping apart. «It is not clear where these notes were meant to go.»
{258} Origin, Ed. i. p. 272, vi. p. 404.
{259} This section seems not to correspond closely with any in the Origin, Ed. i.; in some points it resembles pp. 15, 16, also the section on analogous variation in distinct species, Origin, Ed. i. p. 159, vi. p. 194.
{260} The law of compensation is discussed in the Origin, Ed. i. p. 147, vi. p. 182.
{261} «Note in original.» Boitard and Corbié on outer edging red in tail of bird,—so bars on wing, white or black or brown, or white edged with black or «illegible»: analogous to marks running through genera but with different colours. Tail coloured in pigeons.
{262} «Note in original.» Oxalis and Gentian. «In Gentians blue, yellow and reddish colours occur. In Oxalis yellow, purple, violet and pink.»
{263} This section corresponds roughly to that on Hybrids and Mongrels compared independently of their fertility, Origin, Ed. i. p. 272, vi. p. 403. The discussion on Gärtner’s views, given in the Origin, is here wanting. The brief mention of prepotency is common to them both.
{264} See Animals and Plants, Ed. ii. vol. I. p. 435. The phenomenon of Telegony, supposed to be established by this and similar cases, is now generally discredited in consequence of Ewart’s experiments.
{266} I do not know the authority for this statement.
{267} In the Origin no limit is placed to variation as far as I know.
{268} «Note in original.» History of pigeons shows increase of peculiarities during last years.
{270} «Note in original.» Certainly «two pages in the MS.» ought to be here introduced, viz., difficulty in forming such organ, as eye, by selection. «In the Origin, Ed. i., a chapter on Difficulties on Theory follows that on Laws of Variation, and precedes that on Instinct: this was also the arrangement in the Essay of 1842; whereas in the present Essay Instinct follows Variation and precedes Difficulties.»
{271} A similar proviso occurs in the chapter on instinct in Origin, Ed. i. p. 207, vi. p. 319.
{272} The discussion occurs later in Chapter VII of the Origin, Ed. i. than in the present Essay, where moreover it is fuller in some respects.
{273} In the margin occurs the name of Poeppig. In Var. under Dom., Ed. ii. vol. I. p. 28, the reference to Poeppig on the Cuban dogs contains no mention of the wildness of their offspring.
{274} «Note in original.» Several authors.
{275} In the margin “Hogg” occurs as authority for this fact. For the reference, see p. 17, note 4.
{276} In the Origin, Ed. i., he speaks more decidedly against the belief that instincts are hereditary habits, see for instance pp. 209, 214, Ed. vi. pp. 321, 327. He allows, however, something to habit (p. 216).
{277} A suggestion of Hering’s and S. Butler’s views on memory and inheritance. It is not, however, implied that Darwin was inclined to accept these opinions.
{278} Lord Brougham’s Dissertations on Subjects of Science, etc., 1839, p. 27.
{279} This case is more briefly given in the Origin, Ed. i. p. 213, vi. p. 326. The simile of the butterfly occurs there also.
{280} “A little dose, as Pierre Huber expresses it, of judgment or reason, often comes into play.” Origin, Ed. i. p. 208, vi. p. 320.
{281} In the margin is written “Retriever killing one bird.” This refers to the cases given in the Descent of Man, 2nd Ed. (in 1 vol.) p. 78, of a retriever being puzzled how to deal with a wounded and a dead bird, killed the former and carried both at once. This was the only known instance of her wilfully injuring game.
{282} See Origin, Ed. i. p. 214, vi. p. 327.
{283} «Note in original.» Give some definition of instinct, or at least give chief attributes. «In Origin, Ed. i. p. 207, vi. p. 319, Darwin refuses to define instinct.» The term instinct is often used in «a» sense which implies no more than that the animal does the action in question. Faculties and instincts may I think be imperfectly separated. The mole has the faculty of scratching burrows, and the instinct to apply it. The bird of passage has the faculty of finding its way and the instinct to put it in action at certain periods. It can hardly be said to have the faculty of knowing the time, for it can possess no means, without indeed it be some consciousness of passing sensations. Think over all habitual actions and see whether faculties and instincts can be separated. We have faculty of waking in the night, if an instinct prompted us to do something at certain hour of night or day. Savages finding their way. Wrangel’s account—probably a faculty inexplicable by the possessor. There are besides faculties “means,” as conversion of larvæ into neuters and queens. I think all this generally implied, anyhow useful. «This discussion, which does not occur in the Origin, is a first draft of that which follows in the text, p. 123.»
{284} A short discussion of a similar kind occurs in the Origin, Ed. i. p. 211, vi. p. 324.
{285} This sentence agrees with the MS., but is clearly in need of correction.
{286} This corresponds to Origin, Ed. i. p. 212, vi. p. 325.
{287} This discussion is interesting in differing from the corresponding section of the Origin, Ed. i. p. 216, vi. p. 330, to the end of the chapter. In the present Essay the subjects dealt with are nest-making instincts, including the egg-hatching habit of the Australian bush-turkey. The power of “shamming death.” “Faculty” in relation to instinct. The instinct of lapse of time, and of direction. Bees’ cells very briefly given. Birds feeding their young on food differing from their own natural food. In the Origin, Ed. i., the cases discussed are the instinct of laying eggs in other birds’ nests; the slave-making instinct in ants; the construction of the bee’s comb, very fully discussed.
{288} The distinction between faculty and instinct corresponds in some degree to that between perception of a stimulus and a specific reaction. I imagine that the author would have said that the sensitiveness to light possessed by a plant is faculty, while instinct decides whether the plant curves to or from the source of illumination.
{289} «Note in the original in an unknown handwriting.» At the time when corn was pitched in the market instead of sold by sample, the geese in the town fields of Newcastle «Staffordshire?» used to know market day and come in to pick up the corn spilt.
{290} «Note in original.» Macculloch and others.
{291} I can find no reference to the transandantes sheep in Darwin’s published work. He was possibly led to doubt the accuracy of the statement on which he relied. For the case of the sheep returning to their birth-place see p. 17, note 4.
{292} Origin, Ed. i. p. 224, vi. p. 342.
{294} The difficulties discussed in the Origin, Ed. i. p. 171, vi. p. 207, are the rarity of transitional varieties, the origin of the tail of the giraffe; the otter-like polecat (Mustela vison); the flying habit of the bat; the penguin and the logger-headed duck; flying fish; the whale-like habit of the bear; the woodpecker; diving petrels; the eye; the swimming bladder; Cirripedes; neuter insects; electric organs.
Of these, the polecat, the bat, the woodpecker, the eye, the swimming bladder are discussed in the present Essay, and in addition some botanical problems.
{295} In the Origin, Ed. vi. p. 275, the author replies to Mivart’s criticisms (Genesis of Species, 1871), referring especially to that writer’s objection “that natural selection is incompetent to account for the incipient stages of useful structures.”
{296} «The following sentence seems to have been intended for insertion here» “and that each eye throughout the animal kingdom is not only most useful, but perfect for its possessor.”
{297} Origin, Ed. i. p. 190, vi. p. 230.
{298} This is one of the most definite statements in the present Essay of the possible importance of sports or what would now be called mutations. As is well known the author afterwards doubted whether species could arise in this way. See Origin, Ed. v. p. 103, vi. p. 110, also Life and Letters, vol. iii. p. 107.
{299} See Origin, Ed. i. p. 210, vi. p. 322, where the question is discussed for the case of instincts with a proviso that the same argument applies to structure. It is briefly stated in its general bearing in Origin, Ed. i. p. 87, vi. p. 106.
{300} «Note in original.» No one will dispute that the gliding is most useful, probably necessary for the species in question.
{301} «Note in original.» Is this the Galeopithecus? I forget. «Galeopithecus “or the flying Lemur” is mentioned in the corresponding discussion in the Origin, Ed. i. p. 181, vi. p. 217, as formerly placed among the bats. I do not know why it is described as partly aquatic in its habits.»
{302} In the Origin, Ed. vi. p. 221, the author modified the statement that it never climbs trees; he also inserted a sentence quoting Mr Hudson to the effect that in other districts this woodpecker climbs trees and bores holes. See Mr Darwin’s paper, Zoolog. Soc. Proc., 1870, and Life and Letters, iii. p. 153.
{303} Note by the late Alfred Newton. Richardson in Fauna Boreali-Americana, i. p. 49.
{304} «Note in original.» See Richardson a far better case of a polecat animal «Mustela vison», which half-year is aquatic. «Mentioned in Origin, Ed. i. p. 179, vi. p. 216.»
{305} In the Origin the division of the work into Parts I and II is omitted. In the MS. the chapters of Part II are numbered afresh, the present being Ch. I of Pt. II. I have thought it best to call it Ch. IV and there is evidence that Darwin had some thought of doing the same. It corresponds to Ch. IX of Origin, Ed. i., Ch. X in Ed. vi.
{306} In the Essay of 1842 the author uses astronomy in the same manner as an illustration. In the Origin this does not occur; the reference to the action of secondary causes is more general, e.g. Ed. i. p. 488, vi. p. 668.
{307} It is interesting to find the argument from sterility given so prominent a place. In a corresponding passage in the Origin, Ed. i. p. 480, vi. p. 659, it is more summarily treated. The author gives, as the chief bar to the acceptance of evolution, the fact that “we are always slow in admitting any great change of which we do not see the intermediate steps”; and goes on to quote Lyell on geological action. It will be remembered that the question of sterility remained a difficulty for Huxley.
{308} Similar statements occur in the Essay of 1842, p. 24, note 1, and in the Origin, Ed. i. p. 299.
{309} In the Origin, Ed. i. p. 280, vi. p. 414 he uses his newly-acquired knowledge of pigeons to illustrate this point.
{310} Compare the Origin, Ed. i. p. 281, vi. p. 414.
{311} Origin, Ed. i. p. 301, vi. p. 440.
{312} Origin, Ed. i. p. 329, vi. p. 471.
{313} The structure of the Pachyderm leg was a favourite with the author. It is discussed in the Essay of 1842, p. 48. In the present Essay the following sentence in the margin appears to refer to Pachyderms and Ruminants: “There can be no doubt, if we banish all fossils, existing groups stand more separate.” The following occurs between the lines “The earliest forms would be such as others could radiate from.”
{314} Origin, Ed. i. p. 307, vi. p. 448.
{315} «Pencil insertion by the author.» The parent-forms of Mollusca would probably differ greatly from all recent,—it is not directly that any one division of Mollusca would descend from first time unaltered, whilst others had become metamorphosed from it.
{316} Origin, Ed. i. p. 291, vi. p. 426.
{317} «Note in original.» Reflect on coming in of the Chalk, extending from Iceland to the Crimea.
{318} Origin, Ed. i. p. 282, vi. p. 416.
{319} Origin, Ed. i. pp. 288, 300, vi. pp. 422, 438.
{320} «Note in original.» Neither highest or lowest fish (i.e. Myxina «?» or Lepidosiren) could be preserved in intelligible condition in fossils.
{321} Origin, Ed. i. p. 290, vi. p. 425.
{322} See Origin, Ed. i. p. 310, vi. p. 452 for Lyell's metaphor. I am indebted to Prof. Judd for pointing out that Darwin’s version of the metaphor is founded on the first edition of Lyell’s Principles, vol. I. and vol. III.; see the Essay of 1842, p. 27.
{323} See More Letters, vol. I. pp. 344-7, for Darwin’s interest in the celebrated observations of Hilgendorf and Hyatt.
{324} This corresponds partly to Origin, Ed. i. p. 294, vi. p. 431.
{325} Origin, Ed. i. p. 299, vi. p. 437.
{326} This chapter corresponds to ch. X of Origin, Ed. i., vi. ch. XI, “On the geological succession of organic beings.”
{327} Origin, Ed. i. p. 312, vi. p. 453.
{328} In the margin the author has written “Lonsdale.” This refers to W. Lonsdale’s paper “Notes on the age of the Limestone of South Devonshire,” Geolog. Soc. Trans., Series 2, vol. V. 1840, p. 721. According to Mr H. B. Woodward (History of the Geological Society of London, 1907, p. 107) “Lonsdale’s ‘important and original suggestion of the existence of an intermediary type of Palæozoic fossils, since called Devonian,’ led to a change which was then ‘the greatest ever made at one time in the classification of our English formations’.” Mr Woodward’s quotations are from Murchison and Buckland.
{329} «Note in original.» Better begin with this. If species really, after catastrophes, created in showers over world, my theory false. «In the above passage the author is obviously close to his theory of divergence.»