Charles Darwin's Origin of Species (1859) is one of the most important books ever published, written by one of the greatest scientists of all times. Understandably, therefore, a scholarly “Darwin industry” has arisen, one that discusses his writings and their impacts on both science and society. Piers Hale's Political Descent is the latest contribution to that industry, even though it has Malthus's name in the title, not Darwin's. Three leaders of that industry—Janet Browne, Peter Bowler, and Michael Ruse—provide high praise on the book's jacket (Ruse: “This is scholarship at its best”), which Political Descent deserves.

There is also a more diffuse Victorian culture industry, to which Hale contributes, for his subject is the influence of Darwinian science upon cultural spokesmen (and one spokeswoman: Harriet Martineau). Those cultural spokespersons debated the writings of primarily three authors: Englishmen Malthus and Darwin and German August Weismann. Hale tells us rather little about their biographies; it is their key conclusions that are relevant. Malthus concluded (1798) that human populations will always increase faster than their food supply; Darwin concluded (1859) that the struggle for resources leads to many early deaths, with only the fittest surviving, a claim that he softened in Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex (1871); and Weismann concluded (1880s) that acquired characteristics are not inherited. A fourth author lurks in the background, Frenchman Lamarck, whose main idea (1809) was that evolution does involve inheritance of acquired characteristics. The co-discoverer of evolution by natural selection with Darwin (both published on the subject in 1858) was Alfred Russel Wallace, who is a protagonist in Hale's book, but not as a key focus of debate. Herbert Spencer is another important Hale protagonist—though a philosopher, he was respected by scientists, including Darwin—but his evolution concept was not different enough from Darwin's to call him a key author.

One thesis that Hale argues is that scientists can be influenced by current political ideology. Darwin was quite aware that Robert Chambers's Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation (London, 1844) was dismissed by scientists partly because it was tainted with radicalism, and Hale argues that Darwin gave prominence to his use of Malthus's key concept to show that Origin was not similarly tainted. However, Wallace abandoned Malthusian competition when he wrote on human evolution (1864), and Darwin did likewise, to some extent, in 1871. Humans compete, but they also cooperate, and that fact had to be acknowledged. Darwin read banker-economist Walter Bagehot's five essays on “Physics and Politics” while writing Descent, and he agreed with Bagehot that cohesive societies could out-compete more individualistic societies. Philosopher John Stuart Mill's progressive Whig writings also interested Darwin.

By 1870, most scientists accepted evolution, but few accepted natural selection as cause. Whiggish ideologists, however, liked Darwin's emphasis on competition in Origin as being supportive of capitalism. Yet, British industrial success had byproducts of poverty, vice, squalor, disease, low wages, and child labor. Prime Minister Palmerston focused on government having a role in curbing capitalistic abuses with legal reforms. Mill and Darwin shared a concern for the origin and development of altruistic sentiments. But so did socialists, who rose to some prominence during the 1880s and 1890s, including Fabians among whose ranks were Beatrice Potter and husband Sidney Webb, George Bernard Shaw, and H. G. Wells.

In 1865 “Darwin's bulldog,” Thomas H. Huxley, formed an exclusive X Club, whose membership consisted of himself and eight other prominent scientists interested in forwarding science through government support of science education. Huxley did not follow Wallace and Darwin in believing that cooperation had softened the impact of Malthusian struggle in human evolution. The death in 1887 of Huxley's beautiful daughter, Marion, in her twenties, was a shock that strengthened his belief that only education and industry could bring prosperity to society. An essay that he published in 1888, “The Struggle for Existence in Human Society,” expressed his view of the human condition and its salvation. The essay provoked a strong response.

Petr Kropotkin was a Russian aristocratic refugee in London, with deep interests in science and in social change. He had explored Siberia and felt that his natural history observations contradicted Huxley's harsh portrayal of nature. He wrote a rebuttal, “Mutual Aid among Animals” (1890), and later argued the same case for cooperation of humanity, resulting in a book, Mutual Aid (1902). It was widely read, and Hale devotes most of a long chapter to expounding Kropotkin's ideas. Kropotkin believed Huxley had distorted Darwin's message. Hale also expounded at some length on the writings of a less well remembered Huxley opponent, Benjamin Kidd, whose Social Evolution (1894) enjoyed a wide readership.

Huxley also had defenders, including a former pupil, H. G. Wells. Wells was a member of the socialist organization, the Fabians, and he split with many Fabians over Weismann's conclusion on acquired characteristics not being inherited. Wells followed his mentor, Huxley, in accepting Weismann's conclusions. Wells's most articulate and persistent critic was fellow Fabian, George Bernard Shaw, who rejected both Darwin's natural selection and Weismann's heredity claims. Another Fabian with whom Wells disagreed was William Morris, and Hale summarizes the arguments of all three Fabians. Weismann's critics also included a mainstream scientist-mathematician, Karl Pearson, whose writings Hale also summarizes.

So runs this book's wide-ranging historical narrative. Hale provides extensive documentation with endnotes and bibliography. The only relevant title I notice missing from his bibliography is Jensen, “The X Club.” Like any ambitious history, Hale's account does open itself to a few quibbles. For instance, Wells retrospectively commented on having studied under Huxley when he was an “old man,” though Huxley had been only 59; Hale seems misled by Wells's characterization into referring to Huxley at that time as in “advancing years and declining health,” despite Huxley living another eleven years. Political Descent is enhanced with thirteen portraits and four other illustrations, including two images of Huxley and one of his daughter, Marion, but none of Darwin, Wallace, or Wells. These are very minor complaints about a book that shows “scholarship at its best.”