From J. D. Hooker [15 and] 20 November 1
Royal Gardens Kew
I thought you might care to see these W. Ireland Soundings, showing the bank tailing off to the South, burn it when done with, as I have a copy in Nautical Journal2
I am horrified at your telling me that I have made an allusion to R Brown that might seem Lindleyitish, for certainly that was the last point in which I should have tried to write like him.3 I had indeed forgotten that I made any allusion to Brown In apeing Lindly I went no further, to my knowledge, than trying to treat the subject as I thought he might could would or should have, & setting out with a rather clumsy force of wording, which he delights in. I have not reread any of it but the last column of the last article, where I was at first exceedingly puzzled to recover my meaning, (which is not very like Lindley!) I mean where I allude to the bearing of the whole thing on your theory.4
What a capital article Bates has made in his paper in Linn. Trans.5 I have written to him about it, calling attention to the weakness of the paragraph at p. 508 about the effect of physical causes on variation.—6
What a poor paper Murrays is! he does not in the least see how he is playing into your hands, from sheer ignorance of your hand, which he thinks he quite understands—7 nevertheless it is a sort of Entomological paper I am glad to see in the Transactions.
I was too late to send the London journal of Botany with Bonafuss on Thursday, I am trying to find a copy of vol VII. for Linn. Soc.—8 They have put me on council of R.S. “heu me miserum!”9 & with Owen too, for my sins.10 I wish you would come up on Monday & substitute Falconer’s11 name for his!— There is a talk about organising an opposition to his election, but I suppose it will come to nothing.12
By the way I see you are alluded to in no less than 3 of the papers in Linn. Trans!—13 I do not think you are conceited, but really I do think you have a good right to be so. I have said nothing of your writing but what I verily think & believe, & I find people are fast coming round to my way of thinking.14
Nov 20th | I send letter written 4 days ago15
I have no recollection of applying N.S. to Polynesians, though I dare say I have alluded to so obvious a deduction— none but a German would dig out such a passage & attach importance to it (if it exists in print)16 The idea is of course not new to the future author of “‘The Aristocracy,” or Darwin in all in all.’17
I have caused Tyndall to modify extensively his pseudo geology, but do not know to what extent— He is awfully wrong about Valleys.18
I have not seen D of Argylls review— he did not understand it the least little bit about Orchids when I saw him nor understand fully the Origin.19 I shall hunt up a clue I have to his proceedings I do know something of the origin of his book on Church matters at time of Scotch disruption.20
Would you like our dried strawberries we have all the wild forms from insular localities &c.21 Oliver reminds me of curious remark on sexualism of strawberries by an American, he says it is alluded to at length in Technologist.22 He also tells me to call your attention to 2 states of Epilobium angustifolium 23
I am ashamed of so long neglecting Oxalis sensitiva I have a plant for you but this is worst season.24
Our admirable (perfect) governess is so ill with Lungs, that we must part with her, & she has no home poor thing—25 My wife is in pack of troubles, I take her today to get tooth pulled, a worse affair for me than for her! for she behaves shockingly ill; & I am afraid to have her chloroformed indeed I doubt if dentist will do it—as I must tell him her heart action is not what it should be.26
Yours perplexed | J D Hooker
Sends CD West Ireland soundings.
More detail on his review "a la Lindley" [see 3797].
Bates’s paper ["Contributions to an insect fauna of the Amazon valley", Trans. Linn. Soc. Lond. 23 (1862): 495–566] is capital.
Andrew Murray’s article plays into CD’s hands through sheer ignorance.
JDH is on Royal Society Council.
Has no recollection of applying natural selection to Polynesians. None but a German would dig out such a passage if it exists [see 3812].
Has caused Tyndall to modify his pseudo-geology.
Has not seen Duke of Argyll’s review [Edinburgh Rev. 116 (1862): 378–97]. [The Duke] did not understand Orchids the least little bit, nor the Origin, when JDH saw him.
- geographical distribution
- information, data, scientific description
- negative attitude/assessment
- negative criticism of correspondent
- positive attitude/assessment
- reception of Darwinism
- sea, sea-currents
- theory (including philosophy)
Please cite as
Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 3807,” accessed on 25 October 2016, http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/DCP-LETT-3807