On Naval Timber and Arboriculture

On Naval Timber and Arboriculture: With Critical Notes on Authors who Have Recently Treated the Subject of Planting is a book by Patrick Matthew published in 1831.

It is noted for parts of it appendices in which Matthew discusses natural selection, 28 years prior to Charles Darwin's publication of On the Origin of Species.

The book On Naval Timber and Arboriculture; with critical notes on authors who have recently treated the subject of planting by Patrick Matthew (1831) is not one long argument, but a jumble of issues.

[1] The book is divided into an Introduction followed by four different Parts and an Appendix consisting of Notes A to F that have been too long to be included as footnotes in the main text.

This easily overlooked addendum is of course where Matthew combined the old ideas of natural selection and species transmutation in a hitherto unheard of way.

390–391) mentioning changes in the political scenery of Europe and the implications for the book's main topic of naval timber and rural affairs, and finally by an erratum.

Luckily Matthew is quite informative and open about the events occurring simultaneous to his writing, and that he found them to be of such considerable importance that not only did they distract his attention so he completely forgot about his book sitting with the printers, but they also had consequence for the relevancy of some of his ideas already committed to the page.

Since this volume went to press, there has been some changes of scenery on the political European stage, even rivalling what has ever been accomplished of sylvan metamorphosis on the face of nature by Sir Henry Steuart.

ourselves in the hands of the printer, while yet unborn […] We had intended to bring out Naval Timber and Arboriculture as a portion of a work embracing Rural Economy in general, but this is not a time to think of rural affairs.Given the lack of integration of the subjects covered: arboriculture, empire, entail and, evolution, with most commonality between the latter pair, it strongly suggests that the manuscript submitted for printing solely comprised the main body text of Matthew's management rules, and his criticism of other planters.

This further suggests that the appendices were added to the first two sections, along with the three footers in a different typeface (see § Possible third instalment, below), and the additional Contents page, as a subsequent stage in the book's construction.

This followed Matthew's examination of his galley proof, sent out as standard practise for Edinburgh letterpress printers in 1830 (confirmed by Robert Smail's Printing Works).

He would have followed the Guide to Authors in Correcting the Press, an example of which is provided in the later Neill & Co.'s specimen catalog,[15] and also add in thoughts that he held about Malthusian pressures on life and the exacerbation of survival from competition, inspired by current events in France, that had seen the rejection of the hereditary monarchy and royal succession, in preference for an elective monarchy, There is a law universal in nature, tending to render every reproductive being the best possibly suited to its condition that its kind, or that organized matter, is susceptible of, which appears intended to model the physical and mental or instinctive powers, to their highest perfection, and to continue them so.

How far hereditary nobility, under effective government, has operated to retard "the march of intellect," and deteriorate the species in modern Europe, is an interesting and important question.

[p.365-6] [...] The self-regulating adaptive disposition of organized life may, in part, be traced to the extreme fecundity of Nature, who, as before stated, has, in all the varieties of her offspring, a prolific power much beyond (in many cases a thousandfold) what is necessary to fill up the vacancies caused by senile decay.

As the field of existence is limited and pre-occupied, it is only the hardier, more robust, better suited to circumstance individuals, who are able to struggle forward to maturity, these inhabiting only the situations to which they have superior adaptation and greater power of occupancy than any other kind; the weaker, less circumstance-suited, being prematurely destroyed.

Matthew then submitted his manuscript, then forgot all about it, distracted by the political and civil unrest on the continent, as he explains in his later addition, specifically the final paragraph of colophon, on the last page of the book.

This would then constitute a 2nd draft, after the July Revolution, likely adding the following in its final form, as these sections are unaffected by later additions, This then produced in total a book on timber and marine, critique of competitors and a scathing attack on entail.

Both are left aligned to correspond with the each appendix entry, but only the addendum is separated from the preceding text (Note F) by a sizeable line break.

The finishing touches must have included the eighth Contents page with the list of appendices, and at the same time, or even later, the entry for the addendum and the "Retrospective glance," both aligned equal to the appendix notes.

If the book was to be banned for heresy or sedition, its publisher, bookseller or owner could at least remove the appendix in order to save the rest from the bonfire.

[3]However, this proposal, for a preconceived structure, also needs to explain why Matthew would think it necessary to hide ideas on theistic evolution, when prominent challenges to natural theology already stretched back over half a century, to Hume and Maupertuis, and were current at his alma mater, the University of Edinburgh, because of Robert Edmond Grant, Robert Jameson, Henry Hulme Cheek[16] and the Plinians.

A final oddity can be observed in what appear to be "wet ink marks" visible in the scanned PDF copy of the book held at the University of Oxford's Bodleian Library.

The final sentence in that section is another one of those potential sources for confusion, as it states, "We regret that our allusion to the lamented Mr Huskisson was printed off before we knew of his death".

Seeking out Huskisson's earlier mention, he appears in passing within the section Concerning Our Marine (in Part III: Miscellaneous Matter Connected With Naval Timber, p. 130), "Can it be believed that our very liberal late minister (Mr Huskisson), and our very non-liberal member for Newark (Mr Sadler), have both made a full exposè [sic][18] of the distresses of our shipping interest ..." (p. 136).

It was in particularly frequent use during 1830 in the context of the aftermath of the July Revolution in France; for example, an editorial in the Perthshire Courier of 2 September 1830 remarked "To appease the popular fury, it is almost certain that the lives of some of the late Ministers are to be sacrificed".

Either way, the net new material in this final instalment was as follows, The final manuscript comprised, a book on timber and marine, including a critique of Matthew's competitors in arboriculture, his scathing attack on entail, and significantly in retrospect, the expanded account of a natural law he called a natural process of selection, added as afterthought, but central to his argument against degeneration of nobility through entail, and its culmination into the recent rebellion on the Continent.

THERE is a law universal in nature, tending to render every reproductive being the best possibly suited to its condition that its kind, or that organized matter, is susceptible of, which appears intended to model the physical and mental or instinctive powers, to their highest perfection, and to continue them so.

As Nature, in all her modifications of life, has a power of increase far beyond what is needed to supply the place of what falls by Time's decay, those individuals who possess not the requisite strength, swiftness, hardihood, or cunning, fall prematurely without reproducing—either a prey to their natural devourers, or sinking under disease, generally induced by want of nourishment, their place being occupied by the more perfect of their own kind, who are pressing on the means of subsistence.

Although his book was reviewed in several periodical publications of the time, the significance of Matthew's insight was apparently lost upon his readers, as it languished in obscurity for nearly three decades.

Despite the suggestion that this through the librarian, "having no doubt spotted its hidden heresy", considering the historical context, it is more likely that the heretical content would be seen as the attacks on Sir Walter Scott, Paley's teleological immutability by Special Creation, and his other gripe, nobility and entail.