Two things however strike me.  I think there is too much of the letter about Henslow.  I should be disposed to quote only the most characteristic passages.

The other point is that I think strength would be given to your panegyric by a little pruning here and there.

I am not likely to take a low view of Darwin’s position in the history of science, but I am disposed to think that Buffon and Lamarck would run him hard in both genius and fertility.  In breadth of view and in extent of knowledge these two men were giants, though we are apt to forget their services.  Von Baer was another man of the same stamp; Cuvier, in a somewhat lower rank, another; and J. Muller another.

“Colossal” does not seem to me to be the right epithet for Darwin’s intellect.  He had a clear rapid intelligence, a great memory, a vivid imagination, and what made his greatness was the strict subordination of all these to his love of truth.

But you will be tired of my carping, and you had much better write what seems right and just to yourself.

Ever yours very faithfully,

T.H.  Huxley.

[Two scientific papers published this year were on subjects connected with his work on the fisheries, one “A Contribution to the Pathology of the Epidemic known as the ‘Salmon Disease’” read before the Royal Society on the occasion of the Prince of Wales being admitted a Fellow (February 21; “Proceedings of the Royal Society” 33 pages 381-389); the other on “Saprolegnia in relation to the Salmon Disease” ("Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science” 22 pages 311-333).  A third, at the Zoological Society, was on the “Respiratory Organs of Apteryx” ("Proceedings of the Zoological Society” 1882 pages 560-569).  He delivered an address before the Liverpool Institution on “Science and Art in Relation to Education” ("Collected Essays” 3 page 160), and was busy with the Medical Acts Commission, which reported this year.

The aim of this Commission was to level up the varying qualifications bestowed by nearly a score of different licensing bodies in the United Kingdom, and to establish some central control by the State over the licensing of medical practitioners. (For a fuller account of this Commission and the part played in it by Huxley, see his “State and Medical Education” ("Collected Essays” 3 323) published 1884.)

The report recommended the establishment of Boards in each division of the United Kingdom containing representatives of all the medical bodies in the division.  These boards would register students, and admit to a final examination those who had passed the preliminary and minor examinations at the various universities and other bodies already granting degrees and qualifications.  Candidates who passed this final examination would be licensed by the General Medical Council, a body to be elected no longer by the separate bodies interested in medical education, but by the Divisional Boards.