See page in:
1859
1860
1861
1866
1869
1872

Compare with:
1859
1860
1861
1869
1872

Comparison with 1869

which nevertheless are generally admitted to have arisen through ordinary generation from one or a few parent-stocks, we ought not to lay too much stress on our ignorance of the precise cause of the slight analogous differences between species. I might have adduced for this same purpose the differences between the races of man, which are so strongly marked; I may add that some .. light can apparently be thrown on ... these differences, .. through sexual selection of a particular kind, but without .. entering on full details my reasoning would appear frivolous.
Utilitarian Doctrine how far true: Beauty how acquired. ..
The foregoing remarks lead me to say a few words on the protest lately made by some naturalists, against the utilitarian doctrine that every detail of structure has been produced for the good of its possessor. They believe that .. many structures have been created for beauty in the eyes of man, or, as already discussed, for the sake of mere variety. This doctrine, if true, would be absolutely fatal to my theory. Yet I fully admit that many structures are now of no direct use to their possessors, and may never have been of any use to their progenitors.
Text in this page (from paragraph 5000, sentence 410 to paragraph 5000, sentence 900, word 28) is not present in 1869
which nevertheless we generally admit to have arisen through ordinary generation, we ought not to lay too much stress on our ignorance of the precise cause of the slight analogous differences between species. I might have adduced for this same purpose the differences between the races of man, which are so strongly marked; I may add that some little light can apparently be thrown on the origin of these differences, chiefly through sexual selection of a particular kind, but without here entering on copious details my reasoning would appear frivolous.
Utilitarian Doctrine how far true: Beauty how acquired .
The foregoing remarks lead me to say a few words on the protest lately made by some naturalists, against the utilitarian doctrine that every detail of structure has been produced for the good of its possessor. They believe that very many structures have been created for beauty in the eyes of man, or, as already mentioned and discussed, for the sake of mere variety. Such doctrines, if true, would be absolutely fatal to my theory. Yet I fully admit that many structures are of no direct use to their possessors. Physical conditions probably have had some little direct effect on structure, quite independently of any good thus gained. Correlation of growth .. no doubt has largely come into action, and a useful modification of one part has often .. entailed on other parts .. changes of structure of no direct use. So again characters which formerly were useful, or which formerly had arisen from correlation of growth, or from other unknown causes, may reappear from the law of reversion, though now of no direct use. But by far the most important consideration is that the chief part of the organisation of every being is simply due to inheritance; and consequently, though each being