[131] Ibid. p. 176: italics mine.
[132] Origin of Species, p. 122.
[133] A Manual of Dental Anatomy, p. 455.
[134] It may be observed that this distinction was not propounded by Mr. Wallace—nor, so far as I am aware, by anybody else—until he joined issue with me on the subject of specific characters. Whether he has always held this important distinction between specific and generic characters, I know not; but, as originally enunciated, his doctrine of utility as universal was subject to no such limitation: it was stated unconditionally, as applying to all taxonomic divisions indifferently. The words have already been quoted on page [180]; and, if the reader will turn to them, he may further observe that, prior to our discussion, Mr. Wallace made no allowance for the principle of correlation, which, as we have seen, furnishes so convenient a loop-hole of escape in cases where even the argument from our ignorance of possible utility appears absurd. In his latest work, however, he is much less sweeping in his statements. He limits his doctrine to the case of "specific characters" alone, and even with regard to them makes unlimited drafts upon the principle of correlation.
[135] Darwinism, p. 297.
[136] Darwinism, pp. 292-3.
[137] Since the above was written both Mr. Gulick and Professor Lloyd Morgan have independently noticed the contradiction.
[138] Darwinism, p. 302.
[139] American Journal of Science, Vol. XL. art. I. on The Inconsistencies of Utilitarianism as the Exclusive Theory of Organic Evolution.
[140] Vol. xli. p. 438.