now no longer imperfect in Mr. Darwin's opinion. It was "brief but
imperfect" in 1861 and in 1866, but in 1876 I see that it is brief
only. Of course, discovering that it was no longer imperfect, I
expected to find it briefer. What, then, was my surprise at finding
that it had become rather longer? I have found no perfectly
satisfactory explanation of this inconsistency, but, on the whole,
incline to think that the "greatest of living men" felt himself
unequal to prolonging his struggle with the word "but," and resolved
to lay that conjunction at all hazards, even though the doing so
might cost him the balance of his adjectives; for I think he must
know that his sketch is still imperfect.

From Isidore Geoffroy I turned to Buffon himself, and had not long to
wait before I felt that I was now brought into communication with the
master-mind of all those who have up to the present time busied
themselves with evolution. For a brief and imperfect sketch of him,
I must refer my readers to "Evolution, Old and New."

I have no great respect for the author of the "Vestiges of Creation,"
who behaved hardly better to the writers upon whom his own work was
founded than Mr. Darwin himself has done. Nevertheless, I could not
forget the gravity of the misrepresentation with which he was
assailed on page 3 of the first edition of the "Origin of Species,"
nor impugn the justice of his rejoinder in the following year, {34}
when he replied that it was to be regretted Mr. Darwin had read his
work "almost as much amiss as if, like its declared opponents, he had
an interest in misrepresenting it." {35a} I could not, again, forget
that, though Mr. Darwin did not venture to stand by the passage in
question, it was expunged without a word of apology or explanation of
how it was that he had come to write it. A writer with any claim to