Search: letter in document-type 
Darwin, C. R. in addressee 
1860-1869::1860::09 in date 
Sorted by:

Showing 110 of 10 items

From:
Charles Lyell, 1st baronet
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
8 Sept 1860
Source of text:
The University of Edinburgh Centre for Research Collections (Lyell collection Coll-203/A3/6: 179–86)
Summary:

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.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Jeffries Wyman
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[c. 15] Sept 1860
Source of text:
DAR 47: 165–6
Summary:

Cases of monstrosities becoming transmissible.

Comments on passages in Origin on the blindness of the tucu-tucu (Ctenomys) and Mammoth Cave rats.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Thomas Vernon Wollaston
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[16 Sept 1860]
Source of text:
DAR 205.3: 302
Summary:

Has received a batch of S. African specimens which contain many of the Atlantic genera he found in Madeira and the Canaries.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
James Drummond
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
17 Sept 1860
Source of text:
DAR 157a
Summary:

Reports observations on the fertilisation of Goodeniaceae, and particularly Leschenaultia. [See 2992.]

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Lyell, 1st baronet
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
18 Sept 1860
Source of text:
The University of Edinburgh Centre for Research Collections (Lyell collection Coll-203/A3/6: 187–95d)
Summary:

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.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Daniel Oliver
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
19 Sept 1860
Source of text:
DAR 58.1: 12–13
Summary:

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.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Lyell, 1st baronet
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
25 Sept 1860
Source of text:
The University of Edinburgh Centre for Research Collections (Lyell collection Coll-203/A3/7: 3–12)
Summary:

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.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Daniel Oliver
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
25 Sept 1860
Source of text:
DAR 58.1: 1–3
Summary:

His results with pure gum on Drosera spathulata entirely support CD’s opinion. Other observations on insectivorous plants.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Lyell, 1st baronet
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
27 Sept 1860
Source of text:
The University of Edinburgh Centre for Research Collections (Lyell collection Coll-203/A3/7: 12)
Summary:

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.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Lyell, 1st baronet
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
30 Sept 1860
Source of text:
The University of Edinburgh Centre for Research Collections (Lyell collection Coll-203/A3/7: 13–19)
Summary:

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".

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project