Showing 61–80 of 125 items
Two criticisms (one by Henrietta Darwin) of THH’s Lectures [to working men].
Pleads guilty to both criticisms of "Miss Henrietta Minor Rhadamanthus Darwin" [see 3896] of points in his Lectures [to working men].
Praise of Man’s place.
Owen’s muddling letter in Athenæum [21 Feb 1863, pp. 262–3].
Is disappointed in Lyell’s excessive caution on species and origin of man [in Antiquity of man].
Has caught a frog and examined its possibly rudimentary toe. Asks THH if he will dissect it.
Has heard THH is abused in Edinburgh Review and in Anthropological Review [reviews of Man’s place in nature, Edinburgh Rev. 117 (1863): 541–69 and Anthrop. Rev. 1 (1863): 107–17].
Owen on heterogeny and the aye-aye.
Has been very ill.
Too busy to examine specimen. Will ask W. H. Flower to do it. Long catalogue of what keeps him busy and concerned.
C. Carter Blake, "a jackal of Owen’s", is the reviewer in Edinburgh Review and Anthropological Review [see 4223]. Has sent back his diploma of Hon. Fellowship to Anthropological Society.
Will be obliged if Flower examines specimens. States questions he wants answered.
Asks CD to sign certificate nominating Flower for Royal Society.
Thanks for Lectures on the elements of comparative anatomy [1864].
If Owen wrote article on "Oken" [Encyclopaedia Britannica, 8th ed.] and French work on archetype he never did a baser act [see ML 1: 246 n.].
Bad health lately.
No doubt that Owen wrote "Oken" and the archetype book, which appeared in its second edition in French.
Pressures of work and family.
Admires THH’s article on Kölliker’s and Flourens’ criticisms of Origin [in Natural History Review (1864): 566–80].
Surprised at Kölliker’s misunderstanding; of Flourens he could have believed anything.
Family news.
His pleasure at Royal Society Copley Medal for CD. Recounts meeting of Royal Society Council.
Appreciates THH’s note more than Medal.
Encourages THH to write a popular treatise on zoology.
Sends Mrs Huxley a quotation from Tennyson, with sarcastic comment.
His suspicions regarding [Edward] Sabine’s treatment of CD were justified by the Anniversary Address. THH, [George] Busk, and [Hugh] Falconer insisted on a more accurate account of the grounds on which the Copley Medal was awarded to CD.
Sabine’s Royal Society address [awarding the Copley Medal to CD], in referring to the Origin, did not contain the words "expressly excluded". The actual words were "expressly omitted from the grounds of our award". This was not meant to place the Origin on a sort of index expurgatorium, but was a simple statement of fact.
Wishes to correct an expression in his last letter which is "perhaps not rigorously exact": he should not have said "declining to honour it [the Origin] with the Copley Medal" but simply "not honouring it with the Copley medal". "Declining implies having been asked and there was no asking in the present case."
He is certain he heard "expressly excluded" [of Origin from consideration in Royal Society award of Copley Medal]. Believes GGS may have inadvertently substituted "excluded" for "omitted". THH then submits his reasons for objecting to the passage as a whole even with the word "omitted".
It is improbable that he changed the wording of Sabine’s address without his noticing. Proceeds to defend the passage by quoting the rules of the award of the Copley Medal and the Royal Society Council’s action in this case, which is accurately presented in the wording of the award.
THH never imagined that "we" referred to anyone but the [Royal] Society Council. Still objects to inclusion of the passage, since "an agreement to say nothing" [about the Origin] does not justify comment on it by one party to the agreement.
Corrects a minor error in his last letter.
Urges THH to return proofs of his paper to Royal Society. Some authors are more ready to come down on reviewers and secretary for delay than to get on with their own proofs.
