Did Charles Darwin 'borrow' the theory of natural selection?

When Charles Darwin published ‘On the Origin of Species by Natural Selection’ in 1859 one Scottish fruit farmer was, understandably, rather put out.

Decades before, Patrick Matthew had written a book in which he described ‘the natural process of selection’ explaining how ‘a law universal in nature’ ensured the survival of the fittest.

Darwin, although accepting that Matthew ‘anticipated’ the theory, always denied plagiarism, maintaining that he arrived at the theory independently.

Now, one academic believes that Darwin must not only have been aware of Matthew’s work, but borrowed from it heavily.

Dr Mike Sutton, a criminology expert at Nottingham Trent University, has spend years cross-referencing the passages in both books, checking citations, and studying the influential figures who influenced both men.

He claims to have unearthed a wealth of hidden information which taken together with Darwin’s unpublished notes, prove the naturalist lied.

“Contrary to Darwin’s claim that Matthew’s ideas went completely unnoticed, the newly discovered data proves that his book was, in fact, widely advertised and read,” said Dr Sutton.

“I have no doubt, based on the weight of new evidence, that Darwin did read Matthew’s book and then went on to replicate his discovery and key themes.

"It was Matthew’s work that convinced Darwin of the importance of natural selection.

“Darwin was awarded scientific priority for natural selection on the grounds that it is not enough simply to discover something first if you then fail to convince anyone of its importance. But that argument only stands up if Darwin was not influenced by Matthew’s prior discovery. We can now be certain that he was.”

Dr Sutton began his research after trying to prove that Darwin coined the phrase ‘natural selection. But he soon found it cropped up earlier than expected.

Matthew was born in Perthshire and heavily influenced by a local naval hero Viscount Admiral Adam Duncan. As an orchard owner he devoted much of his time to silviculture – the husbandry of trees – and became an expert in forest management.

He believed it was important to continuously search for and carefully manage the best Naval timber resources for ships in the expanding British Empire.

In 1832 he published his book On Naval and Timber Aboration setting out his theory of natural selection based on his knowledge of trees.

“There is a law universal in nature, tending to render every reproductive being the best possible suited to its condition that its kind, or 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.

“Those individuals who possess not the requisite strength, swiftness, hardihiood, or cunning, fall prematurely at without reproducing, “ he wrote.

When Matthew pointed out the similarities to Darwin’s work in the Saturday Gardener’s Chronicle, the naturalist responded saying he had never seen the book, although he admitted that the landowner appeared to have ‘anticipated’ the theory.

However, Dr Sutton has discovered that many of Darwin’s close acquaintences were aware of Matthew’s work, some citing it, and one who edited the work of Alfred Russell Wallace, who is also credited of coming up with evolution.

And he found unpublished essays by Darwin, which, he claims bears striking resemblance in theme.

“In my opinion Charles Darwin committed the greatest known science fraud in history by plagiarising Matthew’s complete hypothesis of natural selection, his terminology, observations and creative explanations,” said Dr Suttn

“Without Patrick Matthew, On the Origin of Species would never have been written. Matthew, not Darwin, should be celebrated as the discover of the unifying theory of biology and the solver of the origin of species.”

However not all experts agree. James Moore, of the Open University, who has written three biographies on Darwin, said thousands of people were coming to the same understanding at around the same time, but only Darwin took it forward.

“Patrick Matthew has always struck me as a non-issue,” he said.

“Many people understood the issue of natural selection but it was only Darwin who applied it to everything on the planet, as an entire vision of life. That was his legacy.

“I would be extremely surprised if there was any new evidence had not been already seen and interpreted in the opposite way.”

* ‘Nullius in verba: Darwin’s greatest secret’ is available from Thinking Books.

How the two theories compare

Patrick Matthew in 1831:

"The consequences are now being developed of our deplorable ignorance of, or inattention to, one of the most evident traits of natural history, that vegetables as well as animals are generally liable to an almost unlimited diversification, regulated by climate, soil, nourishment, and new commixture of already formed varieties."

Charles Darwin in 1859: "The truth of the principle, that the greatest amount of life can be supported by great diversification of structure, is seen under many natural circumstances."