Search: Lyell, Charles in correspondent 
1860-1869::1860::08 in date 
letter in document-type 
Charles Darwin in collection 
Sorted by:

Showing 13 of 3 items

From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
Charles Lyell, 1st baronet
Date:
11 Aug [1860]
Source of text:
American Philosophical Society (Mss.B.D25.223)
Summary:

Comments on his fear that "so many heavy guns fired by great men" might influence the public and scientists.

Sends CL the Owen-inspired Wilberforce review [Q. Rev. 108 (1860): 225–64].

Mentions defence of Origin by Asa Gray at American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

Agassiz and Theophilus Parsons have poor criticisms ["Prof. Agassiz on the origin of species", Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 30 (1860): 142–54].

Lists other negative reviews by Rudolph Wagner ["An essay on classification by Louis Agassiz", Göttingische Gelehrte Anz. (1860) pt 2: 761–800], Charles Daubeny ["Remarks on the final causes of the sexuality of plants, with particular reference to Mr Darwin’s work On the origin of species by natural selection", Rep. BAAS 30 (1860) pt 2: 109–10], and two anonymous ones (one favourable).

Huxley says K. E. von Baer "goes a long way with us".

Comments on "pipes" in chalk as evidence of geological processes still at work.

Is writing on origin of dog breeds [Variation 1: 15–43].

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
Charles Lyell, 1st baronet
Date:
28 Aug [1860]
Source of text:
American Philosophical Society (Mss.B.D25.224)
Summary:

The adultery of Lady [Harriet Spencer] Grey and Captain Keppell.

A new species of elephant discovered by Hugh Falconer.

Comments on excellent review by Asa Gray [Atlantic Monthly 6 (1860): 229–39].

Still believes dogs descended from several wild stocks.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Lyell, 1st baronet
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
28 Aug 1860
Source of text:
The University of Edinburgh Centre for Research Collections (Lyell collection Coll-203/A3/6: 164–71)
Summary:

Objections to Origin which Owen and Wilberforce could have used. Why have incipient mammalian forms not arisen from lower vertebrates on islands separated since Miocene period? Knows CD would not derive Eocene Mammalia from higher reptiles, but would bats not be modified into other mammalian forms on an ancient island? This is not the case in New Zealand. Why have island seals not become terrestrial? Assumes rate of change is greatest in mammals. Difficulties are small compared with ability to explain absence of Mammalia in pre-Pliocene islands. Asks about descent of Amblyrhynchus. Believes objections apply equally well to independent creation of animal types, but not if the First Cause is allowed completely free agency.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project