My dear Wallace,

I have at last finished the gigantic job of reading D^r. Bastian’s book, & have been deeply interested by it. You wished to hear my impression, but it is not worth sending.²

He seems to me an extremely able man, as indeed I thought when I read his first essay.³ His general argument in favour of Archebiosis⁴ is wonderfully strong, tho’ I cannot think much of some few of his arguments. The result is that I am bewildered & astonished by his statements, but am not convinced; tho’ on the whole it seems to me probable that Archebiosis is true. I am not convinced partly I think owing to the deductive cast of much of his reasoning; & I know not why but I never feel convinced by deduction even in the case of H. Spencer’s writings.⁵

If D^r. B’s book had been turned upside down, & he had begun with the various cases of Heterogenesis,⁶ & then gone on to organic & afterwards, to saline solutions, & had then given his general arguments, I sh^d. have been I believe much more influenced. I suspect however that my chief difficulty is the effect of old convictions being stereotyped on my brain. I must have more evidence that germs or the minutest fragments of the lowest forms are always killed by 212^o of Fahr^t. Perhaps the mere reiteration of the statements given by D^r. B, by other men whose judgment I respect & who have worked long on the lower organisms, w^d. suffice to convince me.⁷

Here is a fine confession of intellectual weakness; but what an inexplicable frame of mind is that of belief.

As for Rotifers & Tardigrades being spontaneously generated, my mind can no more digest such statements, whether true or false, than my stomach can digest a lump of lead.

D^r. B. is always comparing Archebiosis as well as growth to crystallzation but on this view a Rotifer or Tardigrade is adapted to its humble conditions of life by a happy accident; & this I cannot believe.⁸ That observations of the above nature may easily be altogether wrong is well shewn by D^r. B. having declared to Huxley that he had watched the entire developement of a leaf of Sphagnum.⁹ He must have worked with very impure materials in some cases, as plenty of organisms appeared in a saline solution not containing an atom of Nitrogen.

I wholly disagree with D^r. B. about many points in his latter chapters. Thus the frequency of generalised forms in the older strata seem to me clearly to indicate the common descent with divergence of more recent forms.¹⁰ Notwithstanding all his sneers I do not strike my colours as yet about Pangenesis.¹¹ I sh^d. like to live to see Archebiosis proved true, for it w^d. be a discovery of transcendent importance; or if false I sh^d like to see it disproved, & the facts otherwise explained; but I shall not live to see all this. If ever proved D^r. B. will have taken a prominent part in the work. How grand is the onward rush of Science; it is enough to console us for the many errors which we have committed & for our efforts being overlaid & forgotten in the mass of new facts & new views which are daily turning up.

This is all I have to say about D^r B.’s book, & it certainly has not been worth saying. Nevertheless reward me whenever you can by giving me any news about your appointment to the Bethnal Green Museum¹²

My dear Wallace | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin