Hasty note to express his most decided opinion that letter [to Q. Rev.] should not give a sketch of GHD’s essay – only an explicit denial "& do not allude to me".

GHD’s article will not do. It is too long and the denial seems weak and confused; also, it ought to be in the form of a letter to the editor. Encloses draft of the sort of letter of denial he thinks GHD should write.

Has no objection to sending GHD’s letter as it is. The only accusation it seems necessary to rebut is about licentiousness. Regrets this is not made more prominent.

Gives some suggestions for GHD’s reply to Mivart’s attack.

Approves of GHD’s letter [to Q. Rev. 137 (1874): 587–9] and his present plan, which removes all CD’s objections. Will make his own letter to Murray less imperious. "It will be a dreadful evil to me, if … we come to a quarrel."

Likes GHD’s article ["Professor Whitney on the origin of language", Contemp. Rev. (1874): 894]. "You have defended me nobly."

Advice to GHD on whether to accept invitation to lecture at the Royal Institution.

Murray has sent the Quarterly Review issue. CD has told Murray that he is convinced Mivart is the author and what he thinks of him.

Sends index [of Descent, 2d ed.] with instructions for proof-reading.

Asks GHD questions about heat transmission; he wants to use it as an analogy to illustrate transmission of motor impulses through leaves of Dionaea.

Writes about instructions to compositor and return of proofs [of Descent]. Requests return of 2d volume of Descent, to which he may want to refer.

Thanks GHD for clear lecture on heat.

Will keep paper on proportion of sexes, in case GHD wants it again.

Wants him to translate some pages of Swedish or Norwegian sent by A. W. Malm, "a good man".

Glad to see the statistical paper ["Theory of exchange value", Fortn. Rev. n.s. 17 (1875): 243–53].

Mainly family news.

Eager to read GHD’s political economy MS "though Heaven knows whether I shall understand it".

Sends Murray’s report of November sales of CD’s books. "I am well content."

CD thinks better of "cousin paper" than GHD does.

With respect to GHD’s "viscous work", remembers endless discussions of movement of viscous matter 20 years back, apropos of movement of glaciers.

Appleton will bring out the new edition of Descent in the U. S., so GHD’s work will now be in three editions.

Returns historical sketch [of GHD’s "cousin paper"?] with comments. "For Heavens sake put a sentence in some conspicuous place that your results seem to indicate that consanguineous marriage, as far as insanity is concerned, cannot be injurious in any very high degree."

Regrets the trouble GHD has had.

J. T. Knowles [editor of Contemp. Rev.] hopes W. D. Whitney’s article will be a long one.

CD is sorry about GHD’s account of his low spirits. "I know well the feeling of life being objectless & all being vanity of vanities."

CD recounts events of the April-fool’s day séance at Hensleigh [Wedgwood]’s. Asks GHD to find out whether Sidgwick’s account of it agrees with what he has heard. "What rubbish the whole does seem to be!"

Suggests GHD write a supplement to his review [of A. H. Huth’s The marriage of near kin (1875)]. Feels sorry Huth was taken in by the Legrain fraud. [See Autobiography (1958), pp. 143–4.]

Sends comments and suggestions for Huth’s experiment on crossbreeding rabbits.

Pleased by W. Stanley Jevons’ letter.

Has ordered Dr Cohn’s book.

Is sure that GHD’s energy will lead to success with work on viscous fluids.