Summary

AG’s review of Alphonse de Candolle’s paper [Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 35 (1863): 430–44] is excellent.

Does not AG consider that orchids oppose Oswald Heer’s view that species arise suddenly by monstrosities?

Infers that AG cannot explain the angles of phyllotaxy; has been looking at Carl Nägeli on the subject.

Reports Gaston de Saporta’s belief that natural selection will ultimately triumph in France.

Is working slowly at Variation.

Reports his observations on the imperfect flowers of Viola and Oxalis.

Summary

Encloses reviews by Asa Gray and Bronn. Comments on Bronn review. Mentions review by Wollaston.

Comments on paper by W. H. Harvey in Gardeners’ Chronicle [(1860): 145–6]. Discusses Harvey’s belief in the permanence of monsters.

Discusses CL’s objection that still-living primitive forms failed to develop.

The survival of Lepidosiren and other primitive types of fish and mammals.

Summary

Comments on CD’s Cross and self-fertilisation: its usefulness to florists, and his solution of a long standing puzzle in showing the increase of monstrosities in self-fertilised plants.

Summary

CD’s letter on his behalf made a great impression, but his candidacy nevertheless failed, largely owing to the hostility of Claude Bernard. CD’s opinion sustains his belief that his work will be a service to science.

Summary

Sends abnormal pig’s foot. Does abnormality occur often?

Summary

Has not studied Geum, but suppression of one sex is not rare in plants.

Summary

Is glad CD does not believe he is biased by an odium theologicum. Comments on the first volume of Descent. Is convinced of the truth of evolution, but believes natural selection plays only a secondary role and that man is fundamentally different from the rest of creation.

Summary

Reports a monstrous pig that looks like an elephant. It was born of a pregnant sow which had been frightened by a circus elephant. He offers the monster, which died at birth, to any London museum.

Summary

Sends CD his photo

and a copy of his address at Hartford ["Change by gradual modification not the universal law", Proc. Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci. (1874) pt 2: 7–12]. Does not believe his observations are unfavourable to natural selection but feels there are other factors involved in the origin of form.

Discusses further his work on colour and sex in plants; the linking of high colour and maleness.

Summary

Glad to hear of MTM’s papers [? "On a peloria and semidouble flower of Ophrys aranifera, Huds.", J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 8 (1865): 207–11 and "Observations on the morphology and anatomy of the genus Restio, Linn.", J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 8 (1865): 211–55].

CD doubts the value, for origin of species, of parallels between peloria in "distinct groups".

Gärtner proved the stigma can select its own pollen from a mixture of foreign pollens. But much evidence shows varieties of same species are prepotent over a plant’s own pollen.

MTM’s father [William] believes that variation goes on for a long time once it has commenced.

Summary

Gradation in the eye.

Hooker intends to reply [to W. H. Harvey’s article in Gard. Chron. (1860): 145–6].

Discusses Aspicarpa with respect to correlation.

Comments on monstrous animals.

Discusses objections of Bronn and Asa Gray to natural selection. Cites parallel between natural selection and Newton’s concept of gravitation.

Mentions German experiments on spontaneous generation.

Summary

Obliged for letter about appendages on faces of goats.

Summary

Discusses how best to simulate the light at a particular point on the earth’s surface using coloured glass; considers sunlight as composed of three "principles", varying in proportion according to latitude, which affect germination, lignification, and floriation.

Summary

Discusses dimorphic and trimorphic plants; mentions especially Rubiaceae and a dimorphic monocotyledon.

Notes observations on the monstrous male flowers of Begonia,

and on self-sterile plants.

Summary

Sends MS of 13 pages in answer to Nägeli, for new edition of Origin [5th ed., p. 151].

Summary

Origin of domestic varieties. EB ascribes "abnormal" variations to man’s propagation of casual monstrosities; believes "normal" variations, e.g. European races of cattle, are a consequence of man’s selecting the choicest specimens. Gives examples of "abnormal" variations; they give rise to features that have no counterpart among possible wild progenitors. Divides domestic animals into those whose origin is known and those whose origin is unknown. Considers that the wild progenitors of nearly all domestic birds are known. Fowls and pigeons show many varieties but if propagated abnormalities are ignored each group can be seen to be variations of a single species, the ancestors of which can be recognised without difficulty. Discusses varieties and ancestry of the domestic fowl. Variation in the wild; the ruff shows exceptional variability; other species of birds show variability in size of individuals. Remarks that markings sometimes vary on different sides of the same animal. Comments on the want of regularity in leaf and petal patterns of some plants. Discusses domestic varieties of reindeer and camels. Origin of humped cattle. Reports the rapid spread of a snail in lower Bengal that was introduced as a single pair five or six years previously.

[CD’s notes are an abstract of part of this memorandum. Memorandum originally enclosed with 1760.]

Summary

Difficulty of distinguishing varieties and species. Did HCW suggest a printed list that might help?

Polymorphic genera.

Summary

Progress of experiments. Wants CD’s advice on best way to cross-fertilise his plants.

Summary

Tells JS Acropera capsule should be left to grow.

JS was correct on "bud-variation" in fern frond.

Does not believe Primula structure necessarily related to dioecism, but the difference in fertility of the two forms forced him to admit the possibility.

Summary

Urges JS to publish on orchid pollen-tubes.

Suggests comparing stigmatic tissue of sterile hybrids and fertile parent; he would expect hybrid plant’s cell contents not to be coagulated after 24 hours in spirits of wine.

Suggests JS coat orchid stigmas with plaster of Paris for his work on rostellar germination.

Asks for list of "bud-variation" cases; CD has devoted a chapter to the subject.

Inquiries about I. Anderson-Henry’s observational competence.