[page] 11

[…]

[Letter to Karl Marx]

"October 1st, 1873.

"Dear Sir, – I thank you for the honour which you have done me by sending me your great work on Capital; and I heartily wish that I were more worthy to receive it, by understanding more of the deep and important subject of political economy. Though our studies have been so different, I believe that we both earnestly desire the extension of knowledge; and this, in the long-run, is sure to add to the happiness of mankind.

"I remain, dear Sir, yours faithfully,

"CHARLES DARWIN"

[…]

[page] 12

As to Darwin, with him my immediate personal relations were fuller. As a young man I studied his works, and upon several occasions, when I met with difficulties I wrote to him and laid the difficulties before him. I am sure now that in most cases, if not in all, I ought to have worked out the difficulties for myself. Certainly I had no right to take up his time, which belonged not to me but to the whole world. Nevertheless, in every case I received from him a courteous and most helpful answer. Indeed, that has always been the way with the great men of genius. They were always so ready to help students. That was the way with Marx, as everyone that applied to him would bear witness, and that was the way with Darwin.

I never met the latter face to face until the year 1881. In September of that year a Conference of Freethinkers was held in London. One of the Presidents over the Conference was Dr. Ludwig Büchner, who is well known in Germany as one of the popularisers of the teachings of Darwin. Büchner expressed a wish to see Darwin. I wrote to the latter, and told him of this wish. A letter came back asking us both to pay him a visit and lunch with him.

So on Wednesday, September 28th, 1881, Büchner and myself took train to Orpington in Kent, and drove four miles to the little village of Down, where Darwin lived. He met us on the threshold of his house. Here, again, was a man of commanding presence, although his health was fragile. He stood some six feet in height, and here, again, were the immensely powerful head, and strong and yet gentle eyes. We lunched with him and some of his family. His wife was at the end of the table towards the large garden in which so many of his experiments were carried on. We learned afterwards that she held strongly the orthodoxies on all points. In fact, he explained to us later how he had experienced no little pain in publishing his scientific discoveries from the fact that the statement of them in some cases was liable to hurt those who were very near and dear to him.

It may have been an accident, but the fact remains that, whilst Büchner was placed next to Darwin at table, between myself and Mrs. Darwin there was a clergyman of the Church of England. He was a broad-minded clergyman, and a most charming fellow; but there he was. Besides these, Francis Darwin, who assisted his farther in his latest work, and his child were also present. At lunch the conversation was on scientific subjects.

Afterwards, in his study, as he rested and smoked a cigarette, Darwin himself at once led the talk to religion. Now, although a man's views on speculative subjects have, in a sense, nothing to do with his scientific work and beliefs, either in biology or Socialism, it is always of interest to know what are the religious views of any great thinker. Darwin's first question to us was,

"Why do you call yourselves Atheists, and say there is no God?"

A question showing that, absorbed in his biological studies, he was not in touch with the controversies going on in the world outside, just as he was out of touch with the great conflict between Capital and Labour raging without his door. We explained to him that we were Atheists, but did not say there was no God. Only being unable to realise and believe in the idea of Deity, we were without God; neither asserting, however, nor denying His existence. We found that Darwin held the same opinion, only, as he put it, he called himself an Agnostic. Personally, I have always held that "Atheist" is only "Agnostic" writ aggressive, and "Agnostic" is only "Atheist" writ respectable. We found, upon further enquiry, that he was some forty years of age before he became an Agnostic. Asked why he gave up the Christian religion, he made the reply,

"Because I found no evidence for it."

And this, coming from perhaps the greatest and most careful weigher of evidence ever known, has its significance.

[…]