My dear Mr Lewes

I shall be delighted to propose you for the Linn. Soc.   As Mr Busk is familiar with what is usually done will you ask him to fill up the printed form with your claims for admission, & second it, & be so kind as to forward it to me.¹ I will then return it to the Society or to you as I may be directed. I think you will not repent of joining the Society which deserves patronage.

As Sir C. Lyell is very much engaged, not to mention his advanced years, I am very doubtful whether he will feel inclined to put his remarks on paper, though he was certainly very much interested by your articles.² I will however write to him by today’s post & hint your request, leaving it quite open to him to comply or not.³

As for my own opinion I have no objection to your “germinal membrane” developing 1000 forms of life, if you will allow me to kill all in the course of time except as many as there are leading types.⁴ I do not think I shall ever be convinced that organisms belonging to the same type, having a similar embryological development or homological structure, & graduating into each other with no very wide intervals, are the offspring of primordially distinct so-called creations.

All the arguments from Geograph Distrib, Geolog: Succession & mutual affinities, which arguments appear now to be fairly harmonious, w^d be greatly invalidated, as it appears to me, if your views were admitted. This I think is Lyell’s main objection.

I thoroughly enjoyed my hour’s talk with you & M^rs Lewes⁵—& I remain | yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin

P.S.— There is much truth in what Prof. Weismann insists on, that the nature of the organism which is acted on is as important as, or more important a factor in the resultant variability, than the conditions of life.—⁶ This I have also insisted on in very strong language & shown to be the case in my last book.—⁷ Now if two distinct independently produced primordial organisms, were exposed to precisely similar conditions, they would vary differently, besides inheriting differently, & therefore I cannot believe that they could be developed to form members of the same type or group.— All the curious cases insisted on by Fritz Müller of the same end being gained by analogous & not strictly homologous structures, seem to me to point to a similar conclusion.—⁸