Believes CD’s argument against special creation based on absence of terrestrial mammals on islands isolated before Pliocene era is very strong. However, the absence means Cetacea and bats have not modified towards terrestrial existence. There is similar lack of development of bats and rodents in Australia. Constancy among land shells of Madeira over long period shows that the majority of their species are immutable: a minority of "metamorphic" species maintains the overall number of true species while extinction removes many. Emphasis on the role of extinction discomfits CD’s opponents since the power of generation of new species ought to keep pace. Mentions Ammonite deposits with reference to CD’s comments on their apparent sudden extinction [Origin, pp. 321–2]. Perhaps absence of transmutation on slowly subsiding atolls indicates the slow rate of selective change.
Cites descriptions of melastomads in C. V. Naudin, Annales des Sciences Naturelles 3d ser., vols. 12–18.
Has received a batch of S. African specimens which contain many of the Atlantic genera he found in Madeira and the Canaries.
Reports observations on the fertilisation of Goodeniaceae, and particularly Leschenaultia. [See 2992.]
It is strange that Agassiz, who is for the "sanctity of species", should favour Pallas’s view of hybrid origin of domestic dog.
CL has not meant to advocate successive creation of types but to question assumption that all mammals descended from single stock. Why should a Triassic reptile or bird not move towards mammalian form because an ancestral marsupial has appeared? Believes recent appearance of rodents and bats in Australia explains their lack of development.
Can CD supply a reference on plant extinction on St Helena?
Believes marsupials better adapted for surviving drought in Australia than higher mammals.
Will not press argument about lack of development of mammalian forms on islands, but CD should note objection.
Does CD’s belief in multiple origin of dogs affect faith in single primates in different regions?
Does time lapse between putative independently descended mammalian forms mean first form will "keep down" later incipient one? Thus Homo sapiens has prevented improvement of other anthropomorphs; bats and rodents on islands would prevent improvement of lower forms into mammalian.
CD’s observations on preference of Drosera for milk and nitrogenous fluids, and the effect of nitrate of ammonia are interesting. Asks whether CD is satisfied that the effect is not due to density of fluid or to a chemical irritant. His own observations suggest such possibilities.
His results with pure gum on Drosera spathulata entirely support CD’s opinion. Other observations on insectivorous plants.
Returns "excellent" MS in which CD favours hybrid origin of domestic dog, which CL believes strengthens case for common progenitor of wild species.
Doubts CD’s authorities for antiquity of dingo.
Variation will raise many points for investigation.
"Leporine" hare–rabbit hybrid should be investigated.
Has re-read passages in Origin that CD suggested.
Annals of Natural History would probably reprint Gray’s review of Origin at their own expense.
CD’s thought that modern reptiles could not develop into existing Mammalia but only into another high form is a "grand notion" compatible with "the infinite capacity of the creative power".
Comments on New Guinea marsupials.
Still thinks that the Australian genera and species are so well fitted for extraordinary droughts that they would get the better of the dingo.
Suggests that once there were more races of man, though from common stock. Competition and then hybridity checked divergence.
Falconer’s views on elephant classification. CL attaches little value to Falconer’s objection that mastodons and elephants do not come in chronologically, as they should in CD’s view.
Fears that multiple origin of the domestic dog will be extended to mammals or man. Believes, with Hooker, that whatever occurs in domestication is possible in nature.
Expects lack of diversification of immigrant mammals on long isolated islands will come to show slowness of selective change.
Asks whether CD has speculated on turtles becoming terrestrial on remote islands.
Perhaps non-diversification on islands is explained by tiny proportion of variable species. Those that vary on continent may not do so on island.
A. Gray is afraid of objections to Origin from imperfection of fossil record.
His argument with Falconer over the hypothesis of limited modifiability.
Are the bird-like characters of the Apteryx parts not yet suppressed or nascent organs?
Extinctions of ammonites, belemnites, and hippurites are striking. Perhaps ammonites made way for higher cuttle-fish.
Believes hybrid origin of domestic dog would weaken objections to treating white man and negro as species. Are there not many reputed species among the Mammalia more closely related than these races?
Objects not to the term "selection" but to what CD assigns to it. It should not be confused with the "Creative power" behind variation and the "capacity of ascending in the scale of being".
Does not remember his criticisms of CD’s theory. Can CD locate them in book?
Criticises analogy between knowledge of electricity and knowledge of origin of life.
Explains A. E. Brehm’s concept of subspecies. Discusses subspecies of Certhia.
CD would have carried the public more if he had explained adaptations by multiple causes, some unknown and some well known, i.e., natural selection.
Discusses Hooker’s views of extinction on St Helena.
Work on antiquity of man suspended.
Stopped by 11th edition of Principles of geology [1872].
Wonders why the coracoid bone in the flightless Apteryx is so large when the clavicles are reduced. The clavicles are even separate in the ostrich. The large coracoid in reptiles is explained by the connection to the forelimbs.
Thanks CD for his patience and good-nature; does not want a controversial correspondence but wishes to reply to matters in CD’s letter, and does.
Observations of Brunonia and a case of a malvaceous flower, which never opened and was self-fertilised.
Sends an account of the destruction of wild rabbits by rats introduced from a wrecked ship.
On the suggestion of Jeffries Wyman, he writes about the rats that he captured in Mammoth Cave in 1850. They were indeed blind. Reginald Mantell studied them and learned that with long exposure to graduated light, they became somewhat sensitised. Sends copy of an abstract which he wrote as a letter to A. H. Guyot ["On the Mammoth Cave of Kentucky", Am. Journal of Sci. and Arts 2d ser. 11 (1851)]. [See 3007.]
Sends CD passages from A. S. Taylor’s book [On poisons in relation to medical jurisprudence and medicine, 2d ed. (1859)], citing smallest portions of poisons that are chemically detectable. "Drosera beats the chemists hollow."
Observations on his white blue-eyed cat. There is no sign of deafness.
Apropos of ch. 5 of Origin, tells of blind rats found when a Roman bridge was excavated.
Quotes note by Julius Milde on Drosera rotundifolia from Botanische Zeitung (1852): 540.
