Summary

Thanks GM for his fair review [of Origin, Zoologist 19 (1861): 7577–611].

Feels it is a pity to mingle science and religion;

explains why he did not deal with the case of man.

Summary

Asks for a testimonial for Edward Newman.

Discusses the Origin, considers natural selection works well when applied to the evolution of nations and groups of men; on the other hand feels the classification of mineral elements is a damaging analogy as it parallels organic classification but could not be derived by any evolutionary means.

Summary

Distribution of varieties and subspecies.

George Maw’s review of the Origin [Zoologist 19 (1861): 7577–611].

Summary

Knows nothing of the habits of earwigs. Thinks Edward Newman may be trusted on the point [as to whether or not earwigs can fly].

Summary

Mentions George Maw’s "good review" of Origin [Zoologist 19 (1861): 7577–611].

Relates remark by J. S. Mill concerning soundness of logic and method of Origin.

Is at work [on Orchids and Variation].

Summary

Is glad AG will publish [pamphlet of his reviews of Origin]. Insists on bearing the costs. Encloses list of institutions and individuals to whom he would send copies.

Summary

Thanks GM for his excellent criticisms. His observations on the classification of minerals force him to "own that classification may be closely like that due to descent yet have no relation to it".

Asks whether GM has observed any cases of "bud-variations".

Summary

He is no longer able to answer any of the correspondent’s questions concerning corals.

Places "much trust" in J. D. Dana.

Summary

Thanks CD for his letter about GM’s review of the Origin.

Sends instances of correlative organisation and functions which he finds difficult to believe could have accumulated by gradual modifications.

[Letter erroneously dated 1862 by GM.]

Summary

CD is not surprised at CC’s entire rejection of his views. Agrees that there is no direct proof of unlimited variation. Says natural selection should be viewed as comparable to wave theory of light: it is probable because it groups and explains a host of facts in several fields of science.

Agrees Louis Agassiz’s review [Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 30 (1860): 142–55] is not unfair, but Agassiz misunderstands CD. His "categories of thought" are to CD merely empty words.

Summary

Comments on QdeB’s Unité de l’espèce humaine [1861].

Discusses acceptance of his theory among scientists, especially geologists.

C. V. Naudin did not show how selection applied in nature, but Patrick Matthew clearly anticipated CD’s views.