Summary

Returns and sends comments on Clarke Hawkshaw’s essay ‘The persistence of forms of life in the depths of the sea’.

Summary

Regrets the trouble GHD has had.

Summary

Is sorry to hear the news about the cousin question – a real misfortune.

Congratulates GHD on being nearly finished with work on Descent.

Summary

GHD’s corrections seem very good. Murray hopes there will be few corrections in Descent. CD assured him no changes have been made merely for improving style.

Wants very much to hear about "the terrible cousin affair".

Summary

D. A. Spalding has asked for information to help with his experiments on sense of direction in animals. Has arrived at same results as GHD with blindfolded children. Will GHD let him have his results?

Summary

CD has forwarded proofs of Descent [2d edition]. Urges GHD not to work on them if his poor health makes them too tiring.

Thanks GHD about Spalding [i.e., for responding to Spalding’s request, see 9472].

Summary

Comments on GHD’s paper ["Marriages between first cousins in England and their effects", Fortn. Rev. n.s. 18 (1875): 22–41]. Hopes it will be published and read at the Statistical Society.

Summary

Advises GHD to get an eminent counsel. If counsel’s opinion is that the reviewer [Mivart, in "Primitive man", Q. Rev. 137 (1874): 40–77] has falsified GHD’s statements, GHD should send the opinion to the Quarterly Review and demand publication, and if refused publish elsewhere. Then CD must decide whether to cut John Murray [publisher of Q. Rev.] which will put CD in a nice perplexity [over his rights to the stereotyped editions of past works].

Summary

Hasty note to express his most decided opinion that letter [to Q. Rev.] should not give a sketch of GHD’s essay – only an explicit denial "& do not allude to me".

Summary

GHD’s article will not do. It is too long and the denial seems weak and confused; also, it ought to be in the form of a letter to the editor. Encloses draft of the sort of letter of denial he thinks GHD should write.

Summary

Has no objection to sending GHD’s letter as it is. The only accusation it seems necessary to rebut is about licentiousness. Regrets this is not made more prominent.

Gives some suggestions for GHD’s reply to Mivart’s attack.

Summary

Approves of GHD’s letter [to Q. Rev. 137 (1874): 587–9] and his present plan, which removes all CD’s objections. Will make his own letter to Murray less imperious. "It will be a dreadful evil to me, if … we come to a quarrel."

Summary

Advice to GHD on whether to accept invitation to lecture at the Royal Institution.

Murray has sent the Quarterly Review issue. CD has told Murray that he is convinced Mivart is the author and what he thinks of him.

Summary

Sends index [of Descent, 2d ed.] with instructions for proof-reading.

Asks GHD questions about heat transmission; he wants to use it as an analogy to illustrate transmission of motor impulses through leaves of Dionaea.

Summary

Writes about instructions to compositor and return of proofs [of Descent]. Requests return of 2d volume of Descent, to which he may want to refer.

Summary

Thanks GHD for clear lecture on heat.

Will keep paper on proportion of sexes, in case GHD wants it again.

Wants him to translate some pages of Swedish or Norwegian sent by A. W. Malm, "a good man".

Glad to see the statistical paper ["Theory of exchange value", Fortn. Rev. n.s. 17 (1875): 243–53].

Summary

Likes GHD’s article ["Professor Whitney on the origin of language", Contemp. Rev. (1874): 894]. "You have defended me nobly."

Summary

Mainly family news.

Eager to read GHD’s political economy MS "though Heaven knows whether I shall understand it".

Summary

Sends Murray’s report of November sales of CD’s books. "I am well content."

Summary

CD thinks better of "cousin paper" than GHD does.

With respect to GHD’s "viscous work", remembers endless discussions of movement of viscous matter 20 years back, apropos of movement of glaciers.