Summary

Cannot see how J. W. Dawson can accuse JDH of asserting a subsidence of Arctic America. Much of evidence for subsidence during glacial period will prove false as it largely rests on ice action which is more and more viewed as subaerial.

Dawson is biased against Darwinism.

Suggests Greenland may have been repopulated after glacial period extinguished flora, by migration in sea-currents.

Max Müller’s view of origin of language is weakest part of his book [see 3752].

Would like to examine the rare Cypripedium hirsutissimum.

Summary

CD finds JT’s discourse "grand and most interesting" [On the scientific use of the imagination (1870)]. Flattered by what JT says about him.

He is "a rash man to say a good word for Pangenesis for it has hardly a friend among naturalists".

CD is much struck with what JT says about "pondering" and delighted by his "as if" argument.

Summary

Whether or not there should be movement of particles according to Tyndall’s theory of glacial action ["Observations on glaciers", Not. Proc. R. Inst. G. B. 2: 54–8, 441–3].

CD subscribes to H. C. Sorby’s view of gneiss [Edinburgh New Philos. J. 55 (1853): 137–50].

Seed-salting.

Pigeons.

Significant differences in skeletons of domesticated rabbits.

Summary

Thanks JDH for agreeing to observe coats of asses and mules in Middle East.

Asks for observations on vigour of plants as JDH ascends mountains.

Ad hominem article in Athenæum [review of John Tyndall, Glaciers of the Alps, 1 Sept 1860, pp. 280–2].

Reports extensive experiments on Drosera.

Observations on orchid anatomy.

Summary

Has gone over Huxley’s letter, thinks it a model. All must now await developments. If Mivart does not apologise, JDH will write to him.