Two Nepenthes have devoured two pieces of fibrin [sketch shows size] in three days.

Has CD any objection to JDH’s giving an account of CD’s Drosera observations at Belfast [BAAS meeting] in a résumé of pitcher-plant results ["Address to the department of botany and zoology", Rep. BAAS 44 (1874): 102–16]?

WED encloses a letter from H. M. Wilkinson about Utricularia and sundew.

H. M. Wilkinson has examined bladders of Utricularia; doubts that they absorb or digest insects.

H. M. Wilkinson describes dragonfly trapped by sundew [Drosera].

Thanks CD for Coral reefs [2d ed. (1874)].

JDD will correct his misunderstanding of CD on one point in the next edition of his book [Corals and coral islands].

Suggests CD consult Charles Wilkes’s Narrative [1844] for more accurate observations on Pacific islands.

Thanks for CD’s son’s observations

and for allowing DAS to visit Down.

Stupefied by CD’s trouble and kindness. All he wanted for Belfast meeting was assurance that mention of published work on Drosera, etc., in Nature, etc., would not interfere with CD’s book.

Would like his Nepenthes results to go to CD or to Royal Society, but prefers CD take them.

Cephalotus very puzzling.

Peas and cabbage grow twice as fast after two days’ immersion in Nepenthes as when placed in distilled water, but four days’ immersion seems to kill them.

Has a splendid Australian Drosera twice as big as D. rotundifolia.

Is glad CD approves of his book;

has not yet done any more experiments on snake poison.

Encloses a tracing of a portrait of John Bunyan showing the differences of the two sides of the face.

Encloses a copy of a letter from H. Spencer giving his opinion on GJR’s views on disuse and a draft of GJR’s reply to Spencer.

Gives details of the smallest micrococci distinctly discernible under a microscope.

Has observed in his garden hive-bees using the holes bored at the base of flowers by humble-bees.

Orchids is at last sold out. Settles account.

The Origin [6th ed.] is making good [sales] progress.

Expression is not selling.

After taking advice he has decided to write an explicit denial and short account of his essay and send it to the Quarterly Review.

Sends a volume and will send next volumes of a work intended to contribute to the study of mankind.

Regrets he is unable to republish Whitney’s article in the Contemporary Review. Would much appreciate an article from CD on the subject and suggests that CD might quote from Whitney to any extent he likes.

Regrets he cannot follow the line of denial CD suggests. Explains why he must defend himself against charge that he approves of oppressive laws.

Reports his observations of Utricularia [in their natural state] as CD requested.

Asks CD to look over those parts of the proofs of his Belfast address [Rep. BAAS 44 (1874): lxvi–xcvii] that mention CD.

Encloses specimen of a male hop with female flowers. It is the only peculiarity in the ground.

Sends a draft of his letter to the editor of the Quarterly Review [137 (1874): 587–9], answering Mivart’s charges. Encloses draft of CD’s letter to John Murray, urging publication of GHD’s defence, with George’s amendments.

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).