Summary

Thanks GHL for his support of Pangenesis.

Summary

Thinks GHL’s articles are quite excellent; hopes they will be republished.

Discusses adaptation. Doubts whether similar conditions without selection can produce similar organs independent of blood relationship: "resemblances due to descent and adaptation can commonly be distinguished".

Discusses luminous insects, electrical organs of fish, thorns and spines.

Summary

Arranges to call on GHL.

Summary

Will propose GHL for the Linnean Society.

Writes of his objections to GHL’s views.

Considers Weismann’s remarks on the importance of the nature of the organism as well as conditions of life in determining variability have much truth.

Summary

Is engaged on an article for Fortnightly Review on Variation ["Mr Darwin’s hypotheses", n.s. 9: 353–73, 611–28; n.s. 10: 61–80, 492–509]. Asks CD some questions.

While he agrees with natural selection, he believes many "organic details" develop irrespective of advantage.

Summary

Replies to CD’s letter [missing]. He does intend to treat of Pangenesis "as the most remarkable hypothesis yet put forth".

His articles in Fortnightly Review have grown in number so that he plans to make a book of them. Asks CD to send him notes of his objections.

Summary

In consideration of CD’s health, withdraws his request for notes on GHL’s articles.

While in Freiburg, heard that August Weismann’s inaugural address on CD’s views [Über die Berechtigung der Darwin’schen Theorie (1868)] created a sensation.

Summary

Gratified by CD’s approval of his articles, which the public has not much liked.

Clarifies the obscure sentence CD criticised – forms having a different genesis can be similar.

Calls CD’s attention to Kovalevsky’s memoir on Amphioxus [Mem. Acad. Imp. Sci. St.-Pétersbourg 7th ser. 11 (1868) no.4]. K’s views are all in favour of CD’s and against GHL’s.

Summary

Disappointed that he missed CD. Hopes still to see him in the flesh.

Has CD seen August Weismann’s inaugural address [see 6297]?

Summary

Asks CD to propose him for Linnean Society.

Would like to have Lyell put his objections to GHL’s papers [Fortn. Rev. 9 (1868): 353–73, 611–28; 10 (1868): 61–80, 492–509] in the form of notes, so he can have them before him when he recasts his papers into a book.