Abstract
IN my review of “The Primrose and Darwinism,” I thought it necessary to call attention to the inaccuracy of the author in the matter of quotation, but I had not the least intention of accusing him of anything more than carelessness. For instance, in the case of Sarothamnus, to which he refers in his letter, I was quite ready to believe that the omission of words within inverted commas was an oversight. But in his letter he tells us that they were omitted because “the bees in this reference—as they were excluded by the net—had nothing whatever to do with the subject.” He stands self-convicted of knowingly altering what he quotes, but I readily believe that he is guilty of nothing worse than ignorance of the usage of literary work.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
“The Primrose and Darwinism”. Nature 66, 576 (1902). https://doi.org/10.1038/066576a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/066576a0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.