From:
Henry Holland, 1st baronet
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
26 Mar [1862]
Source of text:
DAR 166.2: 241
Summary:
Gives CD advice on the illness of one of his sons [presumably Horace].
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
Date:
26 [Mar 1862]
Source of text:
DAR 115: 147
Summary:
Both JDH’s and Bates’s letters are excellent. JDH has said all that can be said against direct effect of conditions, but CD still sticks to his own and Bates’s side. CD should have done what JDH suggests (since naturally he is pleased to attribute little to conditions) – viz., started on the fundamental principle that variation is innate and stated that afterwards, perhaps, this principle would be made explicable. Variation will show that "use and disuse" have some effect. Does not believe in perfect reversion. Demurs at JDH’s "centrifugal variation"; the doctrine of the good of diversification amply accounts for variation being centrifugal.
The wonderful mechanism of Mormodes ignea.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
Text Online
From:
James Timmins Chance
To:
Michael Faraday
Date:
26 March 1862
Source of text:
LMA CLC/526/MS 30108/4/125
Summary:
No summary available.
Contributor:
Faraday Project
Text Online
From:
Michael Faraday
To:
Caroline Deacon
Date:
26 March 1862
Source of text:
Elizabeth M. Milton
Summary:
No summary available.
Contributor:
Faraday Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[after 26 Mar 1862?]
Source of text:
DAR 47: 214
Summary:
Variations are centrifugal because the chances are a million to one that identity of form once lost will return.
In the human race, we find no reversion "that would lead us to confound a man with his ancestors".
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
