i5 
Mr. Wallace even contends that the fittest cannot 
always survive:— 
“ Of the whole number of the increase produced annually, only 
a small per centage of the best adapted can be preserved.”— 
(.Darwinism. ft. 413.) 
And yet elsewhere he says:— 
“ Whatever is really ‘the fittest’ can never be destroyed by Natural 
Selection, which is but another name for the survival of the fittest.”— 
(Darwinism, ft. 423.) 
So that according to Mr. Wallace, Natural Selection 
means, the survival of the fittest only; the survival of the 
fittest in company with some not the fittest; the non 
survival of all the fittest; and again the necessary survival 
of the fittest. 
This difference sometimes escapes notice through the 
employment of the word preservation. 
“This preservation during the battle for life of varieties which 
possess any advantage in structure, constitution, or instinct, I have 
called Natural Selection.”—(The Variation, i., ft. 6.) 
Sometimes the word preserved is treated as identical 
with the word selected. 
“The severe and often recurrent struggle for existence will deter 
mine that those variations, however slight, which are favourable, shall 
be preserved or selected, and those which are unfavourable shall be 
destroyed.” 
Mr. Darwin himself seems to have hesitated in his choice 
between these two terms. 
“Talking of ‘Natural Selection,’ if I had to commence de 7tovo, 
I would have used ‘Natural Preservation.’—{Life and Letters, 
vol. ii., ft. 346.) 
“ I suppose ‘ Natural Selection’ was a bad term, but to change it 
now, I think, would make confusion worse confounded, nor can I 
think of abetter. ‘Natural Preservation’ would not imply a preser 
vation of particular varieties, and would seem a truism, and would 
not bring man’s and nature’s selection under one point of view.”— 
{Life and Letters, vol. ii., ft. 318.)