[illus. of Origin spines]

[page] 340

R. B. FREEMAN

ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES 1859

UNTIL A FEW years ago it was customary for booksellers who were offering copies of On the origin of species which were dated 1859 on the title-page to describe them as first edition, first issue. They usually added that the word species was misspelt speceies on page 20 line 11, and that the whale-bear story was in its original form on page 184. I have never seen a catalogue which offered a first edition, second issue, of this year, but its existence is certainly implied. However, Casey Wood has two entries dated 1859 which would lead one to suppose that the libraries of McGill held both issues; of the first he notes, "This copy (very rare) is the first impression of the first edition in which the story of the bear (p. 184), afterwards suppressed is given', and of the second, "The (so-called) first edition'. This second copy is a ghost. Mrs J. Schachter of the Blacker-Wood Library informs me that in Casey Wood's time McGill held only one copy, the one which he described as the first impression. In his preface (paragraph 5) Casey Wood states that his list includes 'a few titles of importance "on order" but not yet acquired at the time of going to press'. In other examples these are marked 'wanting', but not in this one.

More recently E. A. Osborne and Dr William B. Todd (THE BOOK COLLECTOR Spring 1960 Notes 130, 131) have agreed that there is only one text dated 1859. I have followed them in my Handlist (1965), and Peckham in his comparative edition (1959) considers only the one. Todd also noticed two case variants in Texas copies, and two variants of the inserted advertisements. Osborne doubted Todd's B variant of the case, suggesting that the copy had been put into a case of the fifth thousand of 1860, and Todd (in lit.) now agrees with this. If we are correct then, there is only one text, one case and two variants of the inserted advertisements for copies dated 1859. I am, however, certain that we are wrong about the case and about the advertisements. After examining 53 copies, I have found two cases and three variants of the advertisements. I have also found two

[page] 341

texts; but as I have only been able to locate a single copy of the second, its status must for the present remain a little doubtful. For simplicity's sake, I describe it here as second edition, first issue.

The first text is the first edition. I have seen 52 copies of it and have detected no variation. Three points by which it may be recognized are: 1. Two quotations only on page [ii]; 2. The misprint 'speceies' on page 20 line 11; 3. The whale-bear story in full on page 184. There are several hundred others which may be found in Peckham's edition.

The second 1859 text is the first issue of the second edition. Neither this nor the usual second edition dated 1860 are called second edition on the title-pages, and Darwin at the time considered them only slightly corrected. However the next edition, of 1861, is called third edition on the title-page. it can be distinguished from the first edition by the same three points: 1. Three quotations of page [ii]; 2. 'species', now in line 14, corrected; 3. whale-bear story diluted. In this issue the preliminaries are identical with those of the first edition, except that page [ii] has been entirely reset. The text, so far as I have examined it, is identical with the usual second edition of 1860. Page [ii] is identical with that of the 1860 issue except in the note at the foot. In this first issue it reads Down, Bromley, Kent,/ October 1st, 1859., as it does in the first edition, although here reset. In the second issue the note reads Down, Bromley, Kent / October 1st, 1859. (1st Thousand)., the setting of type being the same, with the addition. Except for this point, it would be possible to make up a spurious copy of the 1859 issue from a1+a4-b1 of the second issue, sewed with a2+a3 of the first edition, and an 1860 text.

The only copy known to me is at Yale; it is in rather poor condition, with no inserted advertisements, but in the original case and with the case-maker's ticket. The case is number 3 of those described below and corresponds to Variant b of No. 113 in my Handlist. Of its provenance, it is only known that it was bought from a bookseller in London before the last war, and presented to Yale in 1958.

Peckham suggested that some copies may have been on the market by 26 December because The Times of this date contains an advertisement by Murray stating that the fifth thousand was now ready. Similar advertisements appeared in. The Athenaeum and

[page] 342

The Saturday Review on New Year's eve, Darwin himself states that the edition was published on 7 January, a Saturday. His own copy, at Cambridge, and the only author's presentation copy that I have seen are both dated 1860. It is to be hoped that the publication of this note will bring more copies of the 1859 issue to light.

As I have stated above, the text of all the 52 copies of the first edition which I have examined seems to be the same. I have examined in detail only five copies which are immediately available to me, but I have checked selected points on the others.

The cases and the inserted advertisements, however, deserve some comment. The cases of the first three editions, 1859, 1860, 1861 are closely similar; the blind-stamping on both boards, the gilding of the title and author at the top of the spine, and the cloth, royal green ripple grain (Blanck, TZ; Sadleir, xiii), are, so far as I have seen, identical. The style of the spine imprint and its position in relation to the gilt rules above and below it, as well as the exact position of the two gilt triangles which decorate the spine, vary. The variations are small but constant. The imprint in all cases reads LONDON/JOHN MURRAY, the letters being 3 mm high in all except one of 1860 where they are 2 mm. A full point after MURRAY may or may not be present.

Some of the cases on 1860 and 1861 editions are closely similar to those on 1850s, and I do not believe that it is possible to be certain about the authenticity of a case on a text of 1859, on this evidence alone, without comparison between unimpeachable copies. I have seen three variant cases on 1859 copies, and the base of the spine of an example of each is shown in the plate.

1. Full point absent. Upright of L of LONDON slightly to the right of right hand upright of H in JOHN. Right hand upright of second N in LONDON over upright of second R in MURRAY. Length of LONDON 16 mm. Gap between lower triangle and gilt rule below it 2 mm. This case occurs on Darwin's own copy of the first edition, which is the one illustrated, and on others of this edition.

2. Full point absent. Upright of L of LONDON over or very slightly to the left of right hand upright of H in JOHN. Right hand upright of second N in LONDON well to right of up-

[page] 343

right of second R in MURRAY. Length of LONDON 18 mm. Triangle gap 2 mm. Occurs on first editions. The one illustrated is on an author's presentation copy to Rev. John Brodie Innes, Vicar of Downe.

3. Full point present. Imprint as No. 1. Triangle gap 1 mm. Occurs on the only copy seen of second edition first issue 1859, which is the one illustrated, and also, one of the two common cases, on second editions second issue 1860. This is variant b of No. 113 in my Handlist.

All the 44 copies of the first edition which I have examined in the original cloth have 32 pages of inserted advertisements of Murray's General List dated June 1859, and with the edges uncut. I have seen a copy in commerce with [4] pages of Murray's popular works dated July 1859 following the general works, The copy gave no indication of being sophisticated and is probably a freak. The general list occurs in three forms:

1. With the text of each page surrounded by a frame of a single rule; page [1] signed B; on page 2 the fourth item of Admiralty publications retains the numeral 4, and on page 3 item 22 the name HARRISON'S retains the genitive S.

2. The text of each page is not surrounded by a frame, but page [1] is signed B; on page 2 the numeral 4 is retained, but on page 3 the genitive S has dropped out, reading HARRISON.

3. There is no frame, and signature B has dropped out on page [1]; 4 has dropped out on page 2, and the genitive S is still absent on page 3.

The other anomalies in the Admiralty list, that is the repetition of number 17, and the number 22 coming before 21, are the same in all issues. This situation would seem to suggest that the advertisements were printed from standing type at least three times.

Of the first of these three, I have seen only two copies, Darwin's own at Cambridge and one other in private hands, not an author's presentation. Of the second I have seen nine, including author's presentation copies to J. D. Dana, Leonard Horner, Sir Charles Lyell and to The Royal Society. Of the third, 33, including author's presentation copies to Louis Agassiz, Sir Charles Bunbury, Samuel Butler, John Innes, Joseph Prestwich, Adam

[page] 344

Sedgwick, A. R. Wallace, and to the Linnean Society of London. I can find no correlation between the case variants and the advertisement variants, nor can I see any priority of issue. Darwin's own copy has case (1) [which is why I have called it 1.] and advertisements (x), but the only other copy that I have seen of advertisements (1) has case (2). From what we know of the publication history of the edition, all the copies must have passed through Edmonds and Remnants bindery with considerable speed. Darwin received his copy early in Nov. 1859. Peckham says that Murray sent it on 'Wednesday 2nd, although I do not know his authority for this statement. The overseas presentation copies were sent out before Friday 11th, for Darwin wrote several letters over that weekend saying that they had been sent. The home presentation copies must also have gone out at about this time, because Darwin received thanks from Sir John Lubbock on Tuesday 15th or earlier. Yet in both overseas and home presentation copies we find both (2) and (3) advertisements. The whole edition was sold at Murray's trade sale on 22 Nov., and the publication day usually given was the 24th, so that the binding and dispatch cannot have taken three weeks at most. Lyell got a (2) but Wallace got a (3), two names which must have been foremost in Darwin's mind when he compiled his complimentary list. All copies seem to me to be first firsts in every sense. Perhaps a copy in case (1) with advertisements (1) might have some sentimental value as being identical with Darwin's own, but, for all the evidence that we have, the actual text might have been one of the last off the press.