Experiments with Lapageria.

Has frequently defended evolution and natural selection among his clergy brethren.

Now elicits CD’s views on chance.

Refers GH to vol. 2, p. 431 of Variation for the "perplexed conclusion" at which CD has arrived on variation and design. Has nothing to add to this statement.

Asks whether CD’s conclusions on cross- and self-fertilising plants agree with his own as set out in a notice in Nature [14 (1876): 543–4].

Floral structure. The order of the development of the whorls and its relationship to a protandrous or protogynous condition in flowers.

Thanks for CD’s book [Cross and self-fertilisation] and information on protandry and protogyny.

Health better, but paralysis lingers.

Considers some flowers especially adapted for self-fertilisation, and believes all flowers are self-fertilising under some conditions. Gives examples of plants in which he believes all flowers are cleistogamous. Believes self-fertilisation is the primordial condition of flowering plants.

Discusses various authors’ interpretations of the structure of the embryo of grasses.

GH no longer believes in the value of cross-fertilisation in plants.

Disagrees with GH over the value of cross-fertilisation.