[{498}] Origin, Ed. i. p. 454, vi. p. 625.
[{499}] See Origin, Ed. i. p. 454, vi. p. 625. The author there discusses monstrosities in relation to rudimentary organs, and comes to the conclusion that disuse is of more importance, giving as a reason his doubt “whether species under nature ever undergo abrupt changes.” It seems to me that in the Origin he gives more weight to the “Lamarckian factor” than he did in 1844. Huxley took the opposite view, see the Introduction.
[{500}] Origin, Ed. i. p. 455, vi. p. 627.
[{501}] Origin, Ed. i. p. 11, vi. p. 13, where drooping-ears of domestic animals are also given.
[{502}] Origin, Ed. i. p. 137, vi. p. 170.
[{503}] These words seem to have been inserted as an afterthought.
[{504}] Origin, Ed. i. p. 444, vi. p. 611.
[{505}] This and similar cases occur in the Origin, Ed. i. p. 452, vi. p. 621.
[{506}] The metaphor of the dishes is given in the Essay of 1842, [p. 47, note 3].
[{507}] Compare however Darwin’s later view:—“The possibility of making distinct races by crossing has been greatly exaggerated,” Origin, Ed. i. p. 20, vi. p. 23. The author’s change of opinion was no doubt partly due to his experience in breeding pigeons.