Send thanks for informing him of barnacles and asks that they be sent, directed to him, to the Geological Society.
CD makes progress with barnacles. Describes "supplemental" males in detail. In working out metamorphosis, their crustacean homologies followed automatically.
CD opposes appending first describer’s name to specific name.
Hugh Falconer’s misbehaviour.
Waiting out rains at Brian Hodgson’s.
Will make botanical transverse section of Himalayas from plains to snow.
Arrangements to pass Sikkim Rajah’s territory.
No evidence of glacial or diluvial action in sub-Himalayan mountains. No evidence of detrital coal formation.
Hodgson’s replies to CD on introduced species and hybrids.
Thanks for note and enclosure. Has written to [David?] Landsborough to say dried specimen was just what he wanted. Would like some more in spirits.
Very unwell.
Thanks LA and sends thanks to A. A. Gould for specimens. Describes principal findings of his research on cirripedes. Is obliged for information Joseph Leidy gave about cirripede eyes. Describes anatomical features and chief aspects of growth. Describes discovery of parasitic males and a species parasitic upon other cirripedes.
No summary available.
On the deviation from the perpendicular of falling bodies.
Col. Ouseley had a son at Addiscombe. Has ascertained the relative value of the various branches of study in the final examination. Gives table of values. Hears that military drawing puzzles some. Children are well. If Johnny [Herschel] draws as well as Louisa [Herschel] at 14 he will do well.
Outlining the apparent controversy between himself and W. C. Bond over the discovery of the satellites.
Further regarding W. C. Bond's discovery of the Neptunian satellites.
Criteria for deciding who can claim to be the discoverer of the satellite. [This letter marked 'not sent on second thoughts; see RS:HS 23.41 for letter sent.]
Some question of Harvard University observer having observed the satellite [see JH's 1848-9-22] one day before WL.
Will now work with S. J. A. Compton, the President of the R.S.L., to try to get fair treatment for another applicant for the Admiralty money [see GA's 1848-9-25].
Further clarification to JH's 1848-10-26.
Sends GA's correspondence on the subject of the Admiralty grant, with further explanatory comments [see JH's 1848-10-28].
Replies to JH's letter of [9]-11 stating that he will do the article on statistics for JH's Admiralty Manual, and outlines what he expects it to include and to exclude. Asks JH for directions.
[Addressed to 'General ?'.] Comments on memo on refraction sent to Thomas Maclear.
Regrets Admiralty's giving whole of grant to [Charles] Brooke, when [Francis] Ronalds's photographic processes seem at least as satisfactory. Will join SC in supporting Ronalds's claims.
Is glad that WH is trying in his Lectures on Quaternions to clarify principles of quaternions. Suggests that WH define highly abstract terms.
Sends letter of Lord P [Palmerston, i.e., Henry John Temple] on 'Ch. Reventlow's [Count de Reventlow, Danish Ambassador to London?] case.' Comments on the present political situation and the causes for conflict, citing William Shakespeare.