Editing Patrick Matthew (section)

==Charles Darwin and natural selection==
In 1860, Matthew read in the ''[[Gardeners' Chronicle]]'' for 3 March a review (by [[Thomas Henry Huxley|Huxley]]<ref>[T. H. Huxley] (26 December 1859) [http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?pageseq=1&itemID=A166&viewtype=text ''Darwin on the origin of species''], ''The Times'', pp. 8–9</ref>), republished from ''[[The Times]]'', of [[Charles Darwin]]'s ''[[On the Origin of Species]]'', which said Darwin "professes to have discovered the existence and the ''modus operandi'' of [[natural selection]], and described its principles". A letter by Matthew, published in the ''Gardeners' Chronicle'' on 7 April 1860, said that this was what he had "published very fully and brought to apply practically to forestry" in ''Naval Timber and Arboriculture'' in 1831, as publicised in reviews. He quoted extracts from his book, firstly the opening words of Note B from pages 364–365 of [[#Appendix|the Appendix]], stopping before his discussion of hereditary nobility and entail.<ref name="7 April">Matthew, P. 1860. [http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?itemID=A143&viewtype=text&pageseq=1 Nature's law of selection.] ''Gardeners' Chronicle and Agricultural Gazette'' (7 April): 312-13</ref>

He then quoted in its entirety a section from pages 381 to 388 of the Appendix.{{sfn|Matthew|1831|pp=[http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?pageseq=19&itemID=A154&viewtype=side 381–388]}} This lacked a heading, but in the Contents appeared as "Accommodation of organized life to circumstance, by diverging ramifications".{{sfn|Matthew|1831|p=xvi}} In it, he commented on the difficulty of distinguishing "between species and variety". The change of the [[Biostratigraphy|fossil record]] between [[geological era]]s implied living organisms having "a power of change, under a change of circumstances", in the same way as the "derangements and changes in organised existence, induced by a change of circumstance from the interference of man" gave "proof of the plastic quality of superior life" which he called "a circumstance-suiting power". Following [[catastrophism|past deluges]], "an unoccupied field would be formed for new diverging ramifications of life" in "the course of time, moulding and accommodating their being anew to the change of circumstances". He proposed that "the progeny of the same parents, under great difference of circumstance, might, in several generations, even become distinct species, incapable of co-reproduction."<ref name="7 April" />

{{blockquote|
The self-regulating adaptive disposition of organised life, may, in part, be traced to the extreme fecundity of Nature, who, as before stated, has, in all the varieties of her offspring, a prolific power much beyond (in many cases a thousandfold) what is necessary to fill up the vacancies caused by senile decay. As the field of existence is limited and pre-occupied, it is only the hardier, more robust, better suited to circumstance individuals, who are able to struggle forward to maturity, these inhabiting only the situations to which they have superior adaptation and greater power of occupancy than any other kind; the weaker, less circumstance-suited, being prematurely destroyed.<ref name="7 April" />}}

He described this as a "circumstance-adaptive law, operating upon the slight but continued natural disposition to sport in the progeny". Matthew then quoted the opening three paragraphs from Part III of his book, ''Miscellaneous Matter Connected with Naval Timber: Nurseries'', pages 106 to 108, on "the luxuriance and size of timber depending upon the particular variety of the species" and the need to select seed from the best individuals when growing trees.<ref name="7 April" />{{sfn|Matthew|1831|pp=106–108}}

On reading this, Darwin commented in a letter to [[Charles Lyell]] dated 10 April:

{{blockquote|
Now for a curious thing about my Book, & then I have done. In last Saturday Gardeners' Chronicle, a Mr Patrick Matthews{{sic}} publishes long extract from his work on ''Naval Timber & Arboriculture'' published in 1831, in which he briefly but completely anticipates the theory of Nat. Selection. I have ordered the Book, as some few passages are rather obscure but it, is certainly, I think, a complete but not developed anticipation! Erasmus always said that surely this would be shown to be the case someday. Anyhow one may be excused in not having discovered the fact in a work on ''Naval Timber''.<ref name="Letter 2754">Darwin, C. R. to Lyell, Charles, 10 Apr (1860) Darwin Correspondence Project, "Letter no. 2754," accessed on 4 February 2011, http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/DCP-LETT-2754</ref>
}}

Darwin then wrote a letter of his own to the ''Gardener's Chronicle'', stating,
{{blockquote|
I have been much interested by Mr. Patrick Matthew's communication in the Number of your Paper, dated April 7th. I freely acknowledge that Mr. Matthew has anticipated by many years the explanation which I have offered of the origin of species, under the name of natural selection. I think that no one will feel surprised that neither I, nor apparently any other naturalist, had heard of Mr. Matthew's views, considering how briefly they are given, and that they appeared in the appendix to a work on Naval Timber and Arboriculture. I can do no more than offer my apologies to Mr. Matthew for my entire ignorance of his publication. If another edition of my work is called for, I will insert a notice to the foregoing effect.<ref name="Letter 2766">Darwin, C. R. to Gardeners' Chronicle, 13 Apr (1860) Darwin Correspondence Project,  "Letter no. 2766," accessed on  4 February 2011, http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/DCP-LETT-2766</ref>
}}

As promised, Darwin included a statement in the third (1861) and subsequent editions of ''On the Origin of Species'', acknowledging that Matthew had anticipated "precisely the same view on the origin of species" and "clearly saw...the full force of the principle of natural selection". The statement referred to the correspondence, and quoted from a response by Matthew published in the ''Gardener's Chronicle''. Darwin wrote that.
{{blockquote|Unfortunately the view was given by Mr. Matthew very briefly in scattered passages in an Appendix to a work on a different subject, so that it remained unnoticed until Mr. Matthew himself drew attention to it in the 'Gardener's Chronicle,' on April 7th, 1860. The differences of Mr. Matthew's view from mine are not of much importance: he seems to consider that the world was nearly depopulated at successive periods, and then re-stocked; and he gives, as an alternative, that new forms may be generated ''without the presence of any mould or germ of former aggregates.'' I am not sure that I understand some passages; but it seems that he attributes much influence to the direct action of the conditions of life. He clearly saw, however, the full force of the principle of natural selection. In answer to a letter of mine (published in Gard. Chron., April 13th), fully acknowledging that Mr. Matthew had anticipated me, he with generous candour wrote a letter (Gard. Chron. May 12th) containing the following passage:—"To me the conception of this law of Nature came intuitively as a self-evident fact, almost without an effort of concentrated thought. Mr. Darwin here seems to have more merit in the discovery than I have had; to me it did not appear a discovery. He seems to have worked it out by inductive reason, slowly and with due caution to have made his way synthetically from fact to fact onwards; while with me it was by a general glance at the scheme of Nature that I estimated this select production of species as an à priori recognisable fact—an axiom requiring only to be pointed out to be admitted by unprejudiced minds of sufficient grasp."<ref>Darwin, C.R. (1861) ''[[On the Origin of Species]]'', 3rd Edition, John Murray, London, pp. [http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?viewtype=text&itemID=F381&pageseq=22 xiv–xv]</ref> }}

In June 1864, after visiting his son who was farming in [[Province of Schleswig-Holstein|Schleswig-Holstein]], Matthew wrote to Darwin about his pamphlet publishing five of his letters.<ref name="Letter 4522">Darwin, C. R. to Matthew, Patrick, 6 June 1864, Darwin Correspondence Project,  "Letter no. 4522," accessed on  19 February 2023, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-4522.xml</ref> The title page of this political pamphlet by Matthew stated his claim to be "solver of the problem of species".<ref name="Matthew 1864 p. 3">{{cite book | last=Matthew | first=Patrick | title=Schleswig-Holstein: Letter I. To the Right Hon. Lord Palmerston. Attempted Dismemberment of Germany. Letter II. To the British People. The British Press Versus Constitutional Rights and Nationalities. Letter III. ... | publisher=Spottiswoode | series=Redpath Tracts | year=1864 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jfEyAQAAMAAJ&pg=PP3 | access-date=19 February 2023 | page=3 |quote=Solver Of The Problem Of Species; First Proposer Of Steam Rams, Metallic Cover, Sloping Sides, Heavy Gun Boats, Etc.}}</ref> In a letter to Hooker (22 and 28 October 1865), Darwin commented that [[William Charles Wells]], in an essay "read in 1813 to Royal Soc. but not printed", had applied "most distinctly the principle of N. Selection to the races of man.— So poor old Patrick Matthew, is not the first, & he cannot or ought not any longer put on his Title pages 'Discoverer of the principle of Natural Selection'!."<ref name="Letter 4921">Darwin, C. R. to J. D. Hooker 22 and 28 [October 1865] Darwin Correspondence Project, "Letter no. 4921," accessed on 2017-05-29, http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/DCP-LETT-4921</ref>