Summary

Has received Earthworms.

Summary

Explains source of error [in Earthworms].

Summary

Supports the statements on Henry Hicks in JL’s address.

Bonney is an "objector general".

CD has always supported A. C. Ramsay.

Summary

It is impossible to trace the direct connections between stimuli and responses in plant movements. Disagrees with much of Julius von Wiesner [Die Bewegungsvermögen der Pflanzen (1881)]. Disagrees with CD on induced movements and circumnutation.

Summary

Praise for Earthworms.

Summary

Discusses additional printing of Earthworms.

Summary

Sends his observations on the behaviour of a worm. They seem to indicate some sensory apparatus enabling it to "see".

Summary

Would like to cite the case of the celt in a new printing of Earthworms. Asks for details.

Summary

Sends CD an abstract of his 1871 paper on the earthworm, and requests information on the phenomenon of luminosity.

Summary

Can CD explain why in a mollusc (Bulimus decollatus) immature forms are always broken at the apex.

Summary

Summarises letter of William Nation [13350]. The facts given strongly support the conclusion that there is some close connection between the parasitic habits of birds that lay their eggs in others’ nests and the fact of their laying eggs at "considerable intervals of time".

Summary

"Roots often run down worm burrows, but can penetrate the ground without such aid."

Summary

Describes the soil in which he found prehistoric tools.

Summary

Thanks CD for his letter and gives permission to use his observations, although not considering himself a worthy authority. Enlarges upon some of his previous observations.

Summary

Cannot explain worm behaviour observed by AEG. Cannot believe in power of vision. Inclined to speculate on capacity for distinguishing damp air.

Summary

Comments on two letters received from W. F. P. Pfeffer [13425, 13464] who thinks Julius Wiesner’s view that light, etc. acts directly on plants is wrong.

Is frantic over the number of letters received about worms; feels the enthusiasm of the reception of Earthworms is laughable.

Is confounded by Euphorbia rootlets and has re-examined the effect of carbonate of ammonia.

Has thought of three good experiments to oppose Wiesner.

Summary

Thanks for Earthworms.

Summary

Explains that the animals in the cask cannot have developed from the wheat.

Summary

CD has misunderstood his views on heliotropism. Agrees that his experiments on the movement of root tips are weak. Will conduct further research. Thinks that since mechanical conception of botany is not so widespread, those who agree with CD probably are in majority.

Summary

Discusses GJR’s controversy with the Duke [of Argyll] concerning Roux’s book [Der Kampf der Theile im Organismus (1881)].