My dear Hooker

I do hope that this note may arrive in time to save you trouble in one respect. I am perfectly ashamed of myself, for I find in introduction to Flora of Fuegia a short discussion on Tristan plants,² which though scored I had quite forgotten at time & had thought only of looking into introduction to New Zealand Flora. It was very stupid of me.—

In my sketch, I am forced to pick out the most striking cases of species which favour the multiple creation doctrine, without indeed great continental extensions are admitted. Of the many wonderful cases in your books, the one which strikes me most is that list of species, which you made for me, common to N. Zealand & America, & confined to Southern hemisphere; & in this list those common to Chile & N. Zealand seem to me the most wondrous. I have copied these out & enclosed them.³ Now I will promise to ask no more questions, if you will tell me a little about these. What I want to know is whether any or many of these are mountain plants of Chile, so as to bring them in some degree (like the Chonos plants) under the same Category with the Fuegian plants. I see that all the genera (Edwardsia even having Sandwich Is^d & Indian species) are wide ranging genera, except Myosurus, which seems extra wonderful. Do any of these genera cling to sea-side?— Are the other species of these genera wide rangers?

Do be a good Christian & not hate me.

Ever yours | C. Darwin

I began last night to reread your Galapagos paper,⁴ & to my taste it is quite admirable: I see in it, some of the points which I thought best in A. Decandolle! such is my memory.—

Lyell will not express any opinion on continental extensions.