Greatly praises AG’s discussion of Origin in Proc. Am. Acad. Arts & Sci. [4 (1860): 411–15; 424–6].
Mentions other reviews of Origin; believes the BAAS meeting at Oxford greatly advanced the subject. Has heard his views are gaining ground in Germany.
Agassiz is strongly opposed to Origin, but CD thinks K. E. von Baer may come out in support.
Discusses the possibility of favourable monstrosities in the light of Theophilus Parsons’ essay ["On the origin of species", Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 30 (1860): 1–13].
Has received second part of AG’s Atlantic Monthly article ["Darwin on the origin of species", 6 (1860): 109–16, 229–39], and would like to have it reprinted in England with the first part.
Regrets no reviewer has touched upon embryology, which he feels provides one of his strongest arguments.
Has read sheets of AG’s third Atlantic Monthly article [Oct 1860] and praises it and AG’s other reviews and articles highly.
Is surprised at the inability of others to grasp the meaning of natural selection.
Has been testing the sensitivity of Drosera, which he finds remarkable.
Asks if AG will be able to make some observations on orchids for him.
Is thinking of publishing AG’s three-part Origin review [from Atlantic Monthly] in England.
Has been consulting with John Murray about the possibility of publishing AG’s three Atlantic Monthly articles [see 2910] as a pamphlet, but has been strongly advised against it.
Talks of getting copies of AG’s Atlantic Monthly articles for distribution in England.
Describes the pollinating mechanisms of Orchis pyramidalis and Spiranthes autumnalis.
Has reread AG’s third Atlantic Monthly article. It is admirable, but CD cannot go as far as AG on design.
Mentions other opinions and reviews of Origin.
Relates some experiments on Drosera showing its extreme sensitivity; requests some observations on orchids.
The pamphlet of AG’s Origin reviews [Natural selection not inconsistent with natural theology (1861)]. CD will bear half the costs of publishing.
Will write to Huxley about Chauncey Wright’s review of Origin.
Encloses note from Huxley [see 3022], who would be grateful for Chauncey Wright’s review.
Asks AG to send his reviews [of Origin] as soon as he has definitely fixed on a title for the pamphlet.
Is glad AG will publish [pamphlet of his reviews of Origin]. Insists on bearing the costs. Encloses list of institutions and individuals to whom he would send copies.
Distribution of AG’s pamphlet.
Insectivorous plants.
Informs AG of his [CD’s] notice on Pumilio in Gardeners’ Chronicle [5 Jan 1861; Collected papers 2: 36–8].
Believes AG’s pamphlet will do natural selection "right good service".
Has received Chauncey Wright’s article.
Reports on favourable response to AG’s pamphlet.
Huxley and CD fear Chauncey Wright’s review is too general.
Reports the praise for AG’s pamphlet.
J. S. Henslow is dying.
Francis Bowen strikes CD as weak and unobservant; presumes he is a metaphysician, which accounts for his "entire want of common sense".
Does wild Apocynum catch flies in U. S.?
AG’s review of John Phillips’ book [Life on earth (1860), in Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 31 (1861): 444–9].
Thinks his experiments will explain Primula dimorphism.
Insect fertilisation of orchids.
Wishes that the "greatest curse on Earth", slavery, were abolished.
Is writing his paper on orchids.
Is surprised that AG gets little or no response with Drosera.
Describes the two forms of Primula and asks whether AG knows any analogous cases of dimorphism.
Reports that John Stuart Mill approves of CD’s scientific method.
Discusses American politics.
Gives some observations on the sensitivity of Drosera species and comments on cases of "dioecio-dimorphism".
Is interested in cases of dimorphism like Primula. Discusses Primula and Linum.