Thanks for his memoir ["On the appendicular skeleton of the Primates"].
Thanks StGJM for prompt answer correcting inaccuracies in CD’s notes on StGJM’s opinions. Expects "universal disapprobation" when he publishes Descent.
In his reply to [7227] CD questions the significance of the supposed likeness of the bee, spider, and fly orchids to their presumed namesakes.
He thinks that the beauty of shells is altogether incidental and of no use to the animals.
Is obliged for StGJM’s book [On the genesis of species (1871)].
Would not have sent him vol. 1 [of Descent] if he had known that StGJM’s book was already published.
Comments on StGJM’s book [Genesis of species (1871)]. Has no personal objection to a word of it, but regrets their views differ so much.
Acknowledges StGJM’s kind letter. [See 7451.]
Offers to alter the "dogmatic assertion" referred to on page 102 [of StGJM’s On the genesis of species] but in 5th ed. of Origin and in Variation CD finds only qualified expressions.
CD apologises for having thought that StGJM’s religious feelings had led him to feel personal animosity towards him. [See 7454.]
He remembers having thought and written that belief in evolution is infinitely more important for science than belief in Natural Selection. For his own part he would have felt little interest in evolution apart from the explanation "in a general manner" of how each organism is so adapted to its conditions.
He has found passage on false belief, Variation 2: 414, and does not think the whole with context is dogmatic. [Encloses copy of the passage.]
"If you feel astonished at my bringing man & brutes so near together in their whole nature (though with a wide hiatus) I feel still more astonished, as I believe, at your judgment on this head. I much wish you had enlarged your concluding sentence a little so as to say whether you consider the ordinary mental faculties so distinct, or whether you confine the enormous difference to spiritual powers including the moral sense.––"
On amount of modification and lines of descent in determining the position in man.
Reference to StGJM’s article "On the appendicular skeleton of the primates" Phil. Trans. R. Soc. [157 (1867): 299–430],
and his [and James Murie’s] article on lemurs ["On the anatomy of Lemuroidea"] Trans. Zool. Soc. [7 (1872): 1–114].
Sends a reprint of Chauncey Wright’s article ["Darwinism", North Am. Rev. 113 (1871): 63–103].
Feels that StGJM’s review of Descent [Q. Rev. 131 (1871): 47–90] greatly misrepresents CD’s opinions and conclusions. Feels their differences of opinion are so great that discussion of almost any subject would be a waste of both their time.
Wishes their correspondence regarding their differences to be dropped, as CD feels that nothing he could say would have any influence on StGJM.
CD believes that StGJM has been unfair in his criticisms and has misrepresented him; he begs him not to write again. "Agassiz has uttered splendid sarcasms on me, but I still feel quite friendly towards him. M. Flourens cd. not find words to express his contempt of me: Pictet & Hopkins argued with great force against me: Fleeming Jenkin covered me with first-rate ridicule; & his crticisms were true & most useful: but none of their writings have mortified me as yours have done …" [See 8154.]
A severe letter of rebuke to Mivart for his attack on G. H. Darwin.
StGJM’s article in the Quarterly Review [137 (1874): 40–77] contains wholly false and malicious accusations against CD’s son George. Since StGJM has refused to make any sort of retraction, CD will not hold any future communication with him.
