No summary available.
Showing 1–20 of 26 items
No summary available.
No summary available.
Asks if CD will have corrections for 2d German ed. of Origin.
CD’s theory only natural way to explain creation but contradicts current knowledge about origin of life from inorganic matter.
Has read Primula paper [Collected papers 2: 45–63] with interest.
Belated thanks for CD’s photograph.
When in London at Rucker’s wonderful gardens she learned he had sent CD a Mormodes.
Will experiment on hollyhocks as CD suggests.
On desirability of a place for experiments to be set up by Government or a scientific society. Kew is too busy for experiments.
Had it not been for CD, JDH would never have written such papers as his one on Arctic flora. The "evulgation" of CD’s views is the purest pleasure he derives from them.
He too is staggered that Greenland ought to have been depopulated during the glacial period. Absence of Caltha is fatal to its re-population by chance migration.
GEH, a tailor, wishes to trade some work for a presentation copy of the Origin.
Will observe Rhexia for CD to see whether it is dimorphic.
CD wishes he could sympathise with Asa Gray’s politics.
Orchids to appear soon.
Pre-glacial Arctic distribution.
Work on floral dimorphism.
High opinion of Buckle as a writer.
Pleased that new German edition of Origin is wanted. Wishes to make corrections.
Suggests German translation of Orchids.
Comments on HGB’s book [Untersuchungen (1858)].
Informs CD where, at Kew, to find Epipactis palustris.
Has never trusted Donald Beaton.
Thinks JDH is a bit hard on Asa Gray.
Bates’s letter is that of a true thinker. Asks to see JDH’s to Bates. Point raised in it is most difficult. "There is one clear line of distinction; – when many parts of structure as in woodpecker show distinct adaptation to external bodies, it is preposterous to attribute them to effect of climate etc. – but when a single point, alone, as a hooked seed, it is conceivable that it may thus have arisen." His study of orchids shows nearly all parts of the flower co-adapted for fertilisation by insects and therefore the result of natural selection. Mormodes ignea "is a prodigy of adaptation".
JDH has probably influenced Bates by pointing out applicability of CD’s views to his cases.
Is greatly puzzled by difference in effect of external conditions on individual animals and plants. Cannot conceive that climate could affect even such a single character as a hooked seed.
Does not think Huxley is right about "saltus".
He has only an uncertain memory of the placement of stamens in the [monstrous?] primrose CD asked about.
On effect of external conditions: CD thinks all variability due to changes in conditions of life because there is more variability under unnatural domestic conditions than under nature, and changed conditions affect the reproductive organs. But why one seedling out of thousands presents some new character transcends the wildest powers of conjecture.
Not shaken by "saltus" – he had examined all cases of normal structure resembling monstrosities which appear per saltum. Has fought his tendency to attribute too much to natural selection; perhaps he has too much conquered it.
Lighthearted thoughts on "the development of an Aristocracy" after a visit to Walcot Hall, Shropshire.
On CD’s point about the effect of changed conditions on the reproductive organs, JDH does not see why this is not "itself a variation, not necessarily induced by domestication, but accompanying some variety artificially selected".
Asks JDH to correct names of two species of Calanthe.
Note from Asa Gray ends "Yours cordially", so CD hopes he is forgiven.
His Catasetum paper will be read 3 Apr [Collected papers 2: 63–70].
Plants and seeds sent will be of great use, especially Lythrum, which according to J. P. E. Vaucher seems grand case of trimorphism. Asks what sort of man Vaucher is.
Identifies Calanthe masuca.
Asa Gray would not quarrel with them – "snubbing from us may have done him more good than our sympathy".
If CD means the old Vaucher, he was considered a very accurate, acute, able observer.
Both JDH’s and Bates’s letters are excellent. JDH has said all that can be said against direct effect of conditions, but CD still sticks to his own and Bates’s side. CD should have done what JDH suggests (since naturally he is pleased to attribute little to conditions) – viz., started on the fundamental principle that variation is innate and stated that afterwards, perhaps, this principle would be made explicable. Variation will show that "use and disuse" have some effect. Does not believe in perfect reversion. Demurs at JDH’s "centrifugal variation"; the doctrine of the good of diversification amply accounts for variation being centrifugal.
The wonderful mechanism of Mormodes ignea.
Gives CD advice on the illness of one of his sons [presumably Horace].