Sends paper on the "Origin of genera".

J. Decaisne, in last week’s Gardeners’ Chronicle, on the apple, cannot mean there are no intermediates between Malus and Pyrus.

Robert Fenn exhibited potatoes at the Horticultural Society which showed general failure of graft-hybrids and provided an example of reversion to a wild Peruvian tuber resulting from cross-fertilisation.

After reading Descent, MTM sends report of a dog that woke its master at 7 a.m. on work days and 8 a.m. on Sunday.

Asks CD’s opinion of John Denny’s idea that males have prepotent transmission power in plants. A. J. F. Wegmann says the females are prepotent.

Seeks an interview with CD to discuss reorganisation of Gardeners’ Chronicle.

Thanks for the monoecious hop. It was the first monstrosity he ever observed.

Contemplates an article in Gardeners’ Chronicle on the horticultural bearing of CD’s fertilisation work.

Will publish note forwarded by CD on a male hop with apparently female flowers (Gardeners’ Chronicle, 8 August 1874, p. 174). 

Has told publisher to send a copy of Insectivorous plants.

Thanks MTM for his excellent review [of Insectivorous plants]

and for his trouble about the gooseberry.

Discusses views of [Alexander James] Maule on potatoes.

Discusses graft-hybrids.

Reports on the flowering and growth of a branch of Echeveria stolonifera.

Thanks for note. CD had had misgivings about Chatin but had assumed he was trustworthy [see Movement in plants, p. 389].

Much interested in MTM’s lecture at Royal Institution ["On the relation between the abnormal and normal formations in plants", Notes Proc. R. Inst. G. B. 3 (1860): 223–7].

Asks for information about crossing of varieties of peas. Describes his own experimental results: "the offspring out of the same pod, instead of being intermediate, was very nearly like the two pure parents; yet in one, there was a trace of the cross & the next generation showed still more plainly their mongrel origins".

Discusses crosses in sweetpeas and the difference between monstrosities and slight variations. Discusses peloric flowers.

Thanks for correction about furze.

Obliged for MTM’s ["Vegetable morphology", Br. & Foreign Med.-Chir. Rev. 29 (1862): 202–18].

CD has been experimenting on the fertility of peloric flowers, with the forlorn hope of illustrating sterility of hybrids; seeks further plants or seeds.

CD grateful to have had the distinction of the two sorts of peloria pointed out to him.

His very sick son rallied; is out of danger, thanks to port wine.

Comments on MTM’s article ["On the existence of two forms of peloria", Nat. Hist. Rev. n.s. 3 (1863): 258–62]. Cites interesting case of peloric flower.

Sends two spikes of Corydalis.

Admits he may have drawn false inference from MTM’s division of peloria into two classes.

CD sends thanks for MTM’s note on monsters. Adds comment on MTM’s point that some species become monstrous more frequently than others.

Glad to hear of MTM’s papers [? "On a peloria and semidouble flower of Ophrys aranifera, Huds.", J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 8 (1865): 207–11 and "Observations on the morphology and anatomy of the genus Restio, Linn.", J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 8 (1865): 211–55].

CD doubts the value, for origin of species, of parallels between peloria in "distinct groups".

Gärtner proved the stigma can select its own pollen from a mixture of foreign pollens. But much evidence shows varieties of same species are prepotent over a plant’s own pollen.

MTM’s father [William] believes that variation goes on for a long time once it has commenced.