leave alone transmitted, the other passages of Matthew's book that do contain anything relevant to natural selection. Further, The Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation contain nothing of relevance about natural selection. Combining these facts, Robert Chambers had probably not read or received the message about natural selection in Matthew's book, but has surely not promulgated it in the Vestiges, and probably neither in conversations. Rebuttal of claims Challenges to Matthew's claim to priority, or those made since he died, have essentially made reference to the same issues, that his description of natural selection was not accessible and it lacked lengthier development. Other criticisms have focussed on the differences between Darwin's and Matthew's versions of natural selection, and sometimes Wallace's too (e.g., Weale 2015). If Matthew's ideas had made the impact on subsequent evolutionary thinking, as claimed, the signals ought to be there, either during Matthew's lifetime, or Darwin's. Yet, modern claims for Matthew's priority have been unable to provide evidence for this, that has withstood fact checking. Accessibility and development Historian of science, Peter Bowler succinctly summarised some of those main reasons given for why Matthew does not deserve priority for natural selection over Darwin and Wallace, Ernst Mayr's opinion was even more clear-cut: Richard Dawkins also grants that Matthew had grasped the general concept of natural selection, but failed to appreciate the significance, nor develop it further, In response to Sutton's e-book, Darwin biographer James Moore said many people came towards a similar perception during the 19th century, but Darwin was the only one who fully developed the idea: In response to Sutton (2015) Darwin and Wallace scholar, John van Wyhe commented, To coincide with Sutton's presentation to the Carse of Gowrie Sustainability Group, Darwin author, Julian F. Derry sent an open letter, saying, Biological concepts The History of Science website Natural Histories has compiled a comprehensive series of blog posts on Patrick Matthew that have made a close study of his writings, while importantly ensuring an appropriate historical context. The resulting pieces of evidence largely contradict Sutton's claims. This is especially so from a biological context, one that compares and evaluates core differences between Matthew's and Darwin's concepts, especially that relating to relative adaptation (Matthew's power of occupancy), and diversification as an adaptive process (Darwin's principle of divergence), This exculpates Darwin for the time from his return from the Beagle voyage till 1844. Hence, the period