From J. D. Hooker [2 June 1865]1
Kew
Friday Nt.
Dear Darwin
I am most anxious to hear what you say to the Lyell & Lubbock correspondence.2 My wife & I have gone over the letters with the books & Lubbocks original papers3 & can find but little that fairly appears to be plagiarism.— So far as the Danish part is concerned, 2 sentences, of very few lines, not involving any new facts nor theory, are all we can find.4 Do ask Hetty to enlighten me if there is any thing worse,5 as I should like to join you in healing this ugly breach.6 As matters appear to me, Lyell should have said frankly & at once, I had either forgotten that I copied your expressions, or I did so quite unwittingly—& I should have quoted you more pointedly in a foot note & in the preface.7
Lubbock on the other hand has taken up the matter in a very evil spirit. The first 9 lines of his note are more than uncourteous, they are rude & insulting— The last 5 lines are hardly intelligable—& do not appear to concern the public, at least as they stand without explanation.8 They imply that Lyell told a fib to screen himself— Now really between two Scientific men, not to talk of between 28 & 70 this is too bad:9 & except Lubbock can prove malice or a perverse intention on Lyells part to crush him (as Owen tried to crush Huxley)10 it I think requires an apology.
This comes of your divine art of Compilation!.11 Both, as it appears to me were making capital compilations, & from precisely the same sources & to illustrate the same subject And I am astonished at Lubbocks reclamation, even under his own exaggerated? idea of the mischief intentionally done him.
One statement of Lubbocks letter of 29th. May is explicit & may be cleared up— Lubbock says “You might have obtained all your information from Danish sources & from Morlots paper, but it is evident you did not do so”.12
This is giving Lyell’s statement, in his letter of May 25, the lie direct—& is inconsistent with Lubbocks opening sentence, “of course neither of us claim originality.”13
No excuse can be made for Lubbocks not quoting Lyells correspondence,—Lyell may fairly attribute that to malevolence.14
This is altogether far worse than the Falconer affair,15 & will take a deal of forgetting & forgiving. And now my dear D. shall I tell you what is at the bottom of it all?—perhaps you wont believe it— it is just this—that Lady Lyell will not call on Mrs Busk nor invite the Busks to her parties.16 This the Lubbocks’ & Huxley’s resent.17 You never agreed with me about the Lyells position respecting their Scientific reunions—but I always told you they were playing with the fire, & would assuredly burn their fingers.—18 Here is Busk, an FRS, a Secy of Linn. Soc.—Hunterian Profr.—elected by Committee in Athenæum Examiner to the Army Medical Board, & God knows what all, besides being a universal favorite—is called on by Lyell to be pumped dry of his knowledge; living in the same street for years with the Lyells’,19 & never otherwise noticed by them.— His wife, a most thoroughly accomplished clever person, excellent wife & mother, really scientific, & the kindest & most hospitable charitable person alive, more of a Lady than others asked to Lady Ls. soirées— I do say that the Busks’ must feel this to be social ostracism & nothing else. It is all very well to say that an Englishman house is his castle, & that it is no one elses affair who is invited to the house & so forth—but Lady Lyells Soirees are quasi public.— Every Englishman & foreigner of distinction—friend or stranger is invited, & the Owens & Carpenters & Busks alone, of people of their scientific standing, that live in London, are excluded20—for it is exclusion in such a case & remarked by every one to be so. The nobility are wiser in their generation & invite those they hate, because it is “de rigeur”!
Many thanks for the Peloria, every seedling being Peloric is a very important fact which I hope you will make something of. 21
My wife has had a miscarriage but is recovering.22 I am ordered to take her to the country as soon as she can be moved. I think of Yorkshire.
I have got through a deal of troublesome work here, & caught a most promising youth to be assist in the Herbarium, the other day.23
Ever yrs affec | J D Hooker
Footnotes
Bibliography
Correspondence: The correspondence of Charles Darwin. Edited by Frederick Burkhardt et al. 29 vols to date. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1985–.
Desmond, Adrian. 1994–7. Huxley. 2 vols. London: Michael Joseph.
Desmond, Ray. 1994. Dictionary of British and Irish botanists and horticulturists including plant collectors, flower painters and garden designers. New edition, revised with the assistance of Christine Ellwood. London: Taylor & Francis and the Natural History Museum. Bristol, Pa.: Taylor & Francis.
Grayson, Donald K. 1985. The first three editions of Charles Lyell’s The geological evidences of the antiquity of man. Archives of Natural History 13: 105–21.
Hutchinson, Horace Gordon. 1914. Life of Sir John Lubbock, Lord Avebury. 2 vols. London: Macmillan.
Jensen, J. Vernon. 1977. "The most intimate and trusted friend I have": a note on Ellen Busk, young T. H. Huxley’s confidante. Historical studies 17 (1977): 315–22.
Morlot, Charles Adolphe. 1859. Etudes géologico-archéologiques en Danemark et en Suisse. [Read January 1859.] Bulletin des séances. Société Vaudoise des Sciences Naturelles 6: 263–328.
Post Office London directory: Post-Office annual directory. … A list of the principal merchants, traders of eminence, &c. in the cities of London and Westminster, the borough of Southwark, and parts adjacent … general and special information relating to the Post Office. Post Office London directory. London: His Majesty’s Postmaster-General [and others]. 1802–1967.
Rupke, Nicolaas A. 1994. Richard Owen, Victorian naturalist. New Haven, Conn., and London: Yale University Press.
Wilson, Leonard Gilchrist. 2002. A scientific libel: John Lubbock’s attack upon Sir Charles Lyell. Archives of Natural History 29: 73–87.
Summary
JDH on the Lyell–Lubbock plagiarism controversy. His view of the true cause of Lubbock’s behaviour.
Letter details
- Letter no.
- DCP-LETT-4849
- From
- Joseph Dalton Hooker
- To
- Charles Robert Darwin
- Sent from
- Kew
- Source of text
- DAR 102: 24–7
- Physical description
- ALS 7pp
Please cite as
Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 4849,” accessed on 17 August 2024, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-4849.xml
Also published in The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, vol. 13