Thanks JJW for his paper on apterous insects [see 5939], which contained much new information.

Asks JJW for any information he may have on sexual selection.

Describes an experiment, still untried, of staining tail-feathers of male pigeons in bright colours to find the effect on courtship.

JJW’s note on birds was one of the most interesting CD has ever received. Asks several questions. CD is puzzled by cases of magpies whose mates were killed but who always immediately found others.

Alexander Wallace denies any effect of colour in sexual selection among Lepidoptera.

Discusses beaks and relative numbers of the sexes of goldfinches.

Comments on sexual selection among butterflies.

Mentions Kerguelen moth collected by Hooker.

Comments on JJW’s observations on coloured birds.

Thanks for facts about birds displaying plumage during courtship; "for Butterflies I must trust to analogy altogether in regard to sexual selection".

Invites JJW to visit in summer.

Glad to hear about pigeons. Did not know some birds could win affections of females more than others, except among peacocks.

Comments on polygamy in birds.

Discusses sex ratios among birds.

Thanks for information [about sex ratios] received from bird-catchers.

"Can you form any theory about all the many cases which you have given me and others which have been published, of when one pair is killed, another soon appearing?"

Facts about gay-coloured caterpillars very satisfactory.

Comments on Pangenesis.

CD thanks JJW for the mine of information his last "ten!" letters contain. Comments on sexual display of pheasants and colour preferences of pigeons.

Asks about hens that pair earliest in spring and about possible existence of unpaired birds.

Discusses rapid replacement of mates among birds. "I begin to think that the pairing of birds must be as delicate and tedious an operation as the pairing of young gentlemen and ladies. If I can convince myself that there are habitually many unpaired birds it will be a great aid to me in sexual selection". Notes rivalry of singing birds.

Heard from George Rolleston of the inherited effects of an eye injury.

Disagrees with A. R. Wallace’s idea "that birds learn to make their nests from having seen them whilst young" ["The philosophy of birds’ nests", Intellect. Obs. 11 (1867): 413–20].

Thanks JJW for his great assistance.

Discusses sexual selection in birds.

Sends queries on secondary sexual characteristics of birds.

Has often marvelled at the different growth of the flowering and creeping branches of ivy.

CD cannot remember whether correspondent believed the wing that Gallus bankiva opens and scrapes before the female, is ornamented. He fears it is not.

Glad to have JJW’s opinion on nest-building. Wallace’s view [that skill is learned] is opposed to many facts.

Asks JJW about birds and their behaviour.

Wants information on the first plumage of different breeds of canaries.

Sorry JJW cannot visit.

Will go to sea-side for five weeks at end of July.

Does Vidua have double annual moult? [See Descent 2: 181.]

CD thanks JJW for letter about the crimson breast of linnets

and the fate of a pugnacious female bullfinch.

Refers to JJW’s pointing out the number of Jenners and Weirs who have been naturalists, and cites some writings by men of those families about striking cases of birds.

Invites JJW to visit Down. Will try to get A. R. Wallace and H. W. Bates also.

Enjoyed JJW’s visit.

Interested in changes in plumage of pheasants.

Still at work on sexual selection in birds.

Comments on paper by JJW ["On insects and insectivorous birds", Trans. R. Entomol. Soc. Lond. (1869): 21–6]. JJW’s verification of A. R. Wallace’s suggestion regarding inheritance is quite a discovery.

Asks for information about male birds migrating before females.

Thanks for information about bird migration.

Comments on canary hybridisation.

"My health got so bad I could do nothing at Down".

Gives information about migration of male and female birds.

CD thinks JJW’s account [in 7137] is significant for a theory of generation and should go to some scientific society; suggests additional data is needed. Quotes cases of subsequent progeny apparently affected by a previous impregnation. Perhaps not prudent to allude to "despised" Pangenesis, which CD fully believes will have its day.