Search: Henslow, George in correspondent 
letter in document-type 
Darwin, C. R. in correspondent 
Sorted by:

Showing 2137 of 37 items

From:
George Henslow
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
28 Mar 1868
Source of text:
DAR 166: 165
Summary:

Thanks for criticism of his paper [on Variation].

If external conditions induce variability, what is the internal cause?

Does not agree with Duke of Argyll that "Origin of Species" is an incorrect term.

Sees playfulness of animals as a mark of the Deity’s creative playfulness.

Will visit soon.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
George Henslow
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
13 Apr 1868
Source of text:
DAR 166: 166
Summary:

Thanks for Casimir de Candolle’s paper ["Théorie de l’angle unique en phyllotaxie", Arch. Sci. Phys. & Nat. 23 (1865): 199–212].

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
George Henslow
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[after 22 Feb 1869]
Source of text:
DAR 166: 167
Summary:

Sends information from a Kent sheep-breeder.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
George Henslow
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
22 Feb 1869
Source of text:
DAR 166: 168
Summary:

Asks CD for references to animal breeders in order to test the hypothesis that mimicry arises through direct action of mental impressions received through the sense of sight.

Supports natural selection and Pangenesis.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
George Henslow
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
25 Sept 1869
Source of text:
DAR 166: 169
Summary:

Thanks for a paper on phyllotaxy.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
George Henslow
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
22 Nov 1869
Source of text:
DAR 166: 170
Summary:

Observations on fertilisation of Lapageria rosea by E. G. Henderson, florist of St John’s Wood.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
George Henslow
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
3 Mar 1870
Source of text:
DAR 166: 171
Summary:

Experiments with Lapageria.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
George Henslow
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
5 Dec 1871
Source of text:
DAR 166: 172
Summary:

Has frequently defended evolution and natural selection among his clergy brethren.

Now elicits CD’s views on chance.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
George Henslow
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[c. 7 Dec 1876]
Source of text:
DAR 166: 149
Summary:

Considers some flowers especially adapted for self-fertilisation, and believes all flowers are self-fertilising under some conditions. Gives examples of plants in which he believes all flowers are cleistogamous. Believes self-fertilisation is the primordial condition of flowering plants.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
23 Oct [1876]
Source of text:
Darwin Library–CUL, Henslow 1888 (tipped in opposite p. 190)
Summary:

Floral structure. The order of the development of the whorls and its relationship to a protandrous or protogynous condition in flowers.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
11 Feb 1879
Source of text:
DAR (CD Library - G. Henslow 1888)
Summary:

Disagrees with GH over the value of cross-fertilisation.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
[2–5 Nov 1865]
Source of text:
Journal of the Linnean Society ( Botany ) 9 (1867): 328 n.
Summary:

Reports the results of an experiment to compare the weight of seeds produced in plants of [Medicago sativa] by self-pollination and by insect pollination.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
16 Apr [1866]
Source of text:
Linnean Society of London, C451: Opuscula
Summary:

F. Hildebrand, in his recent article [Bot. Ztg. 10 (1866): 73–8], describes what GH showed CD about Indigofera’s irritability.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
[before 19 Apr 1866]
Source of text:
Journal of the Linnean Society ( Botany ) 9 (1867): 358
Summary:

Describes the pollination of broom by bees.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
12 June [1866]
Source of text:
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (GEN/D/DARWIN (C)/9)
Summary:

Returns proofs of GH’s paper ["On hybridization among plants", Pop. Sci. Rev. 5 (1866): 304–13] with his criticisms. Prefers that GH not state that CD has read the proofs.

Does C. V. Naudin really say that ovules (not seed) of hybrid Luffa and Cucumis are imperfect?

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
15 [June 1866]
Source of text:
DAR Library: tipped into George Henslow’s copy of Variation
Summary:

CD believes most strongly in reversion. J. G. Kölreuter’s, K. F. v Gärtner’s, and some of Charles Naudin’s cases leave no doubt in his mind. Forgets whether Herbert gave cases but in conversation he certainly believed in it. Thinks Gärtner is right to say reversion occurs only rarely in plant hybrids which have not been cultivated. [See 5120.]

Variation

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
7 Dec [1871]
Source of text:
Linnean Society of London (C.452)
Summary:

Refers GH to vol. 2, p. 431 of Variation for the "perplexed conclusion" at which CD has arrived on variation and design. Has nothing to add to this statement.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project