Has put Drosera off while amusing himself with Primula and orchids.

Dionaea is prettily adapted to weight detection.

Asks DO to look for nectar in Stanhopea saccata labellum. CD’s theory predicts nectar should be present, but afraid there is none.

Requests that DO examine enclosed microscope slides of Acropera ovules, to confirm CD’s opinion that females are non-functional.

Can DO comment on disagreement between Robert Brown and John Lindley over the number of Acropera carpels?

O. Heer’s Atlantis theory vs CD’s hypothesis of a migration north during warm periods.

Trusts DO’s opinion on Acropera ovules.

Asks DO to identify enclosed Fumaria or Corydalis flower, with springing hood adaptation.

DO’s observations on polymorphism in Primula and Campanula. CD recognises three classes of dimorphism, as in Primula, Thymus, and Campanula and violets.

DO’s Campanula paper and Royal Institution lecture [Not. Proc. R. Inst. G. B. 3 (1858–62): 431–3].

CD’s interest in Fumariaceae from A. Gray’s comments on "selfing".

Bees bite holes in flowers when same species grows in high density.

Organisation of CD’s notes.

Requests Oxalis acetosella, which he suspects is dimorphic.

Thanks for Oxalis. Only experimentation will show whether disproportion of long- to short-styled flowers is a functional dimorphism.

Case of aestival flowers is very curious.

Asa Gray approves of Orchids; his work on American species confirms CD’s findings.

Asks DO to identify a plant grown from earth adhering to the foot of a woodcock.

Describes floral anatomy of a Catasetum sent by DO.

Has gone on from orchids to studying insect agency in Pelargonium.

His doubts on the worth of publishing Orchids.

Asa Gray has a self-fertilising Platanthera, like the bee orchid. CD believes problem of the latter will some day be explained. Speculates [Ophrys] arachnites may be crossing form and bee orchid self-fertilising form of the same species.

Cytisus adami is a puzzle.

Pleased if DO will review Orchids [Nat. Hist. Rev. n.s. 2 (1862): 371–6] .

His review of Primula paper was capital. [Nat. Hist. Rev. n.s. 2 (1862): 235–43].

Requests peloric plants.

Cares more for dimorphism now than for orchids. Today saw the three forms of Lythrum, which means there should be 18 different practicable crosses.

Exciting work on trimorphism in Lythrum salicaria. Requests Lythraceae from Kew.

Wants to know of plants other than Melastoma and Lythrum with coloured pollen.

Performed a large number of Lythrum crosses before leaving home.

Working on Drosera for amusement. Has tried effect on plants of vegetable substances active on animal nervous systems, e.g., opium; makes Drosera inactive for hours.

Asks DO to name enclosed Lythrum received from CD’s sister-in-law [Sarah Elizabeth Wedgwood]

Requests Linum, for dimorphism study.

Reviewer of Orchids [Nat. Hist. Rev. n.s. 2 (1862): 371–6]is correct about the organisation of the book; he wonders who the reviewer is.

Has been copying out references from Natural History Review [possibly D. Oliver, "The structure of the stem in dicotyledons; being references to the literature of the subject", Nat. Hist. Rev. n.s. 2 (1862): 298–329].

Suggests DO study high incidence of separate sexes in freshwater plants.

Examined Epilobium 20 or 30 years ago at Shrewsbury. In a flash remembered it as dimorphic, but had forgotten its name.

Having trouble understanding laws of phyllotaxy in order to grasp Hugh Falconer’s objections.

L. C. Treviranus on Primula [see 3980] misses the "prettiness" of the adaptations.

John Scott says P. scotica is never dimorphic.