Summary

Gives his and CD’s thanks for information on consanguinity among parents of asylum inmates.

Summary

Returns and sends comments on Clarke Hawkshaw’s essay ‘The persistence of forms of life in the depths of the sea’.

Summary

Has finished the index [for Descent, 2d ed.].

Summary

Finds statistical evidence that cousin marriages are at least three times as frequent in "our rank" as in the lower.

Summary

Sends queries [on proofs of Descent, 2d ed.]. Will be finished, except for the index, in two days.

Is now less satisfied than formerly with his statistics on cousin marriage.

[Enclosure is a copy by GHD of J. S. Mill’s statement about Origin (Logic 2: 18 n.).]

Summary

Is sorry to hear the news about the cousin question – a real misfortune.

Congratulates GHD on being nearly finished with work on Descent.

Summary

Sends Descent material. Is staggered by CD’s power of marshalling facts and his conciseness and clearness of thought. The only fault he finds is some slight want of conciseness of diction.

He feels CD’s power more now "that I quail before the thought of arranging the few paltry facts I’ve got about those d––d cousins".

Summary

GHD’s corrections seem very good. Murray hopes there will be few corrections in Descent. CD assured him no changes have been made merely for improving style.

Wants very much to hear about "the terrible cousin affair".

Summary

D. A. Spalding has asked for information to help with his experiments on sense of direction in animals. Has arrived at same results as GHD with blindfolded children. Will GHD let him have his results?

Summary

CD has forwarded proofs of Descent [2d edition]. Urges GHD not to work on them if his poor health makes them too tiring.

Thanks GHD about Spalding [i.e., for responding to Spalding’s request, see 9472].

Summary

Intends to keep working on [Descent, 2d ed.] proofs despite his illness.

Summary

Comments on GHD’s paper ["Marriages between first cousins in England and their effects", Fortn. Rev. n.s. 18 (1875): 22–41]. Hopes it will be published and read at the Statistical Society.

Summary

Advises GHD to get an eminent counsel. If counsel’s opinion is that the reviewer [Mivart, in "Primitive man", Q. Rev. 137 (1874): 40–77] has falsified GHD’s statements, GHD should send the opinion to the Quarterly Review and demand publication, and if refused publish elsewhere. Then CD must decide whether to cut John Murray [publisher of Q. Rev.] which will put CD in a nice perplexity [over his rights to the stereotyped editions of past works].

Summary

After taking advice he has decided to write an explicit denial and short account of his essay and send it to the Quarterly Review.

Summary

Hasty note to express his most decided opinion that letter [to Q. Rev.] should not give a sketch of GHD’s essay – only an explicit denial "& do not allude to me".

Summary

GHD’s article will not do. It is too long and the denial seems weak and confused; also, it ought to be in the form of a letter to the editor. Encloses draft of the sort of letter of denial he thinks GHD should write.

Summary

Has no objection to sending GHD’s letter as it is. The only accusation it seems necessary to rebut is about licentiousness. Regrets this is not made more prominent.

Gives some suggestions for GHD’s reply to Mivart’s attack.

Summary

Regrets he cannot follow the line of denial CD suggests. Explains why he must defend himself against charge that he approves of oppressive laws.

Summary

Urges CD not to break with Murray even if he does not force the editor [of Q. Rev.] to insert GHD’s letter [in response to Mivart’s attack]. Murray may have a rule not to meddle with editor.

Summary

Sends a draft of his letter to the editor of the Quarterly Review [137 (1874): 587–9], answering Mivart’s charges. Encloses draft of CD’s letter to John Murray, urging publication of GHD’s defence, with George’s amendments.