AVEBURY.

* * * * *

A lecture delivered by Prof.  Barrett before the Quest Society in London, entitled “Creative Thought,” was published by request, and as it discussed the subject of evolution and the impossibility of explaining the phenomena of life without a supreme Directing and Formative Force behind all the manifestations of life, he was anxious to have Wallace’s criticisms.  At that time he had not read Wallace’s recently published work on a similar subject, and he was greatly surprised to find how closely his views agreed with those of the great naturalist.

TO PROF.  BARRETT

Old Orchard, Broadstone, Wimborne.  February 15, 1911.

My dear Barrett,—­Thanks for your proofs, which I return.  It is really curious how closely your views coincide with mine, and how admirably and clearly you have expressed them.  If it were not for your adopting throughout, as an actual fact, the (to me) erroneous theory of the “subconscious self,” I should agree with every word of it.  I have put “?” where this is prominently put forward, merely to let you know how I totally dissent from it.  To me it is pure assumption, and, besides, proves nothing.  Thanks for the flattering “Postscript,” which I return with a slight suggested alteration.

Reviews have been generally very fair, complimentary and flattering.  But to me it is very curious that even the religious reviewers seem horrified and pained at the idea that the Infinite Being does not actually do every detail himself, apparently leaving his angels, and archangels, his seraphs and his messengers, which seem to exist in myriads according to the Bible, to have no function whatever!—­Yours very truly,

ALFRED R. WALLACE.

* * * * *

PROF.  BARRETT TO A.R.  WALLACE

6 De Vesci Terrace, Kingstown, Co.  Dublin.  February 18, 1911.

My dear Wallace,—­ ...  Thank you very much for your kind letter and comments.  I have modified somewhat the phraseology as regards the “subliminal self.”  I think we really agree but use different terms.  There is a hidden directive power, which works in conjunction with, and is temporarily part of, our own conscious self; but it is below the threshold of consciousness, or is a subliminal part of our self.

I should like to have come over to Broadstone expressly to ask your views on the parts you queried.  For I have an immense faith in the soundness of your judgment, and in the accuracy of your views in the long run.

I should like also immensely to see you again and in your lovely home....—­Yours ever sincerely,

W.F.  BARRETT.

* * * * *

TO PROF.  BARRETT