5-6-03 tific usefulness as constraint on opinion of a college professor is to the scientific usefulness of a college. Consequently I should dislike, as I am sure you would, to see a paper rejected from Biometrika because of its conclusions per se. I take it then [crossed out 'yo'] that your reference to my conclusions is intended in the way of friendly criticism and opinion that may call my attention to points that I have overlooked or in which I have been in error that will serve to lead me to modify my conclusions. Such a letter, written in such a spirit, I regard as one of the greatest pieces of friendship that one scientific man can do another. I am certainly willing to modify my conclusions in view of new evidence. My own position is one of universal scepticism. I [underscore]know[end underscore] nothing and hold fast to no great theory in Biology. Every conclusion I reach is an hypothesis - the sole exception being the theory or principles of Evolution itself. Natural selection, Mutation, Effect of Environment in Species production - are all together with many others - things whose role in Evolution is still to be discovered. I am so constituted that it seems to me not inpossible that two or more of these factors of Evolution may be working simultaneously, and be of coordinate value in Evolution. Certainly to say that [crossed out 'spe'] mutation may be a factor in Evolution does not, to my mind, make it less probable that Natural Selection plays a role or that Environment acting directly on a form unit[?] may not permanently alter it. In a word, the evidence as I would see it leads me to conclude that the differences that naturalists call specific result from a great variety, and from [end]