My dear Sir

I send the Catalogue of plants by this post, marked in some degree according to your want.¹ Perhaps I have marked too many as resembling pairs, by including some species that are always known when once understood. For instance, Chrysosplenium oppositifolium & alternifolium, tho very like, can always be known by the one character implied in the specific names. So again with Drosera intermedia & anglica, plants having a close general similarity, & the names of which have been often misapplied in printed books & on labels with specimens; while the species are always distinguishable by so trifling a character as that of a straight or curved-at-base flower stalk (combined with some other less obvious characters, to make them species).— Not knowing your special object, I cannot, of course, select to suit; & may include what do not apply.

On the other hand, many which I do not mark as close species, simply because entered in the Catalogue as Species & Var^y., other botanists would consider to be the close species, while those marked would by them be deemed not close enough to mark, as in the two instances given.

In answer to your query, I do not recollect any stray paper published by myself elsewhere than in Phytologist & London Journal of Botany that would be likely to have interest for you. The enclosed list of papers &c. printed before 1847, (& which was subjoined to Testimonials sent in on my behalf when a Candidate for a Chair of Botany)² may be received as a general answer.

Lastly, Allow me to say that if I can be of any use to you in small matters, do not hesitate to point out how. From you I shall receive any such application as a Compliment;—altho’ phrenologically speaking, I am not much given to ‘venerate’ others.—³

[Truely] Sincerely Yours | Hewett C^l. Watson To | C. Darwin | Esq