My dear Father,

I have been talking to Sachs about sleeping plants that move with & without growth & it appears he fully agrees that the cause of the movement is the same in both. He has expressed this in the 4^th edition of his book which you have—it is at p 852.² He says he doesn’t agree with Pfeffer about these things—³ He thinks that the cause lies in the protoplasm which causes variations in the turgescence, & that the growth along the convex side is only in consequence of the increased turgescence which precedes it. I am glad to find he doesn’t think very much of Pfeffer, that is he says he is very learned & does very good work, but he doesn’t think clearly. Sachs seemed to think any work in cutting sections asleep & awake would be useless, as there was no doubt about it that whether there was a joint or / not the cause was the same in principle—⁴ I send the extract from Cieselski—⁵ Many thanks for the splendid twisters, the beast of a Sipho wont act with hot & cold water   I must try the tamus— I find Convulvulus arvensis is most splendidly twisted.⁶ I have talked to Sachs about the oats, & he thinks the best way will be to cut the tips off & extract them in alcohol.⁷ My elasticity of wet & dry wood experiments seem likely to fail, but it is worth going on at.⁸ I can always do some microscoping if it fails quite   The Sunday Society want me to lecture, are they supposed to be done for a charity? if so I feel as if I ought to do it, but if they pay I wont, would you tell me, or send a post card addressed to me to Uncle Ras for him to write on it “paid” or “not paid”⁹

Yr affec | FD