Thanks HS for his 'highly interesting' paper on the 'Universal Postulate,' which will appear in the Westminster Review.

Thanks for copy of HS’s Principles of psychology [1855].

No summary available.

Thanks for HS’s Essays: [scientific, political, and speculative, vol. 1 (1858)]. Admires his general argument for the development theory.

CD is preparing an abstract on change of species. He treats subject as a naturalist, not from a general point of view. Otherwise he might have quoted HS’s argument to great advantage.

CD particularly liked articles on music and style. Expression is a favourite topic with CD. Agrees all expression is biological.

Sending JH his Essays [Essays: Scientific, Political, and Speculative, 1857] and HS's 'Recent Astronomy and the Nebular Hypothesis,' the latter just published in the Westminster Review. Requests JH's comments on the latter publication.

Thanks HS for sending [see HS's 1859-1-10] HS's Essays and his 'Recent Astronomy and the Nebular Hypothesis.' Regarding the latter, points out a geometrical error, expresses reservations about HS's and Auguste Comte's views of the nebular hypothesis, and argues against HS's theory of sunspot structure. Agrees with HS's idea that some nebulae may be nearer than commonly thought.

No summary available.

[Responding to JH's 1859-1-16,] HS defends the nebular hypothesis, HS's theory of comets, and sets out HS's theory of sunspot formation, noting that John Tyndall supports it.

[Responding to HS's 1859-12-31,] JH presents additional problems in the nebular hypothesis, critiques in detail HS's views of the distribution of cometary orbits, and argues against HS's theory of sunspot formation.

[Responding to JH's 1860}-1-12,] HS admits some of JH's objections to HS's views on distribution of cometary orbits, but attempts to salvage HS's cyclonic theory of sunspot formation.

Has prepared a historical sketch [of writers on origin of species] for foreign editions of Origin. It includes HS. He was too ill to provide it for the 1st ed.

Sorry Murray has not sent HS his copy of Origin, as he was instructed.

Huxley will put CD and E. A. Darwin down for HS’s gigantic [publishing] programme. Suggests Dr Drysdale be approached about it.

CD has caused a great change in HS’s views, in showing how a great proportion of adaptation should be explained by natural selection not direct adaptation to changing conditions. HS had remarked on the survival of the best individuals as a cause of improvement in man, but he "& every one" overlooked selection of spontaneous variation. Believes so many kinds of indirect evidence must add up to a conclusive demonstration of the doctrine.

HS put the case of selection strikingly and clearly in his article [Anonymous, "A theory of population, deduced from the general law of animal fertility", Westminster Rev. 57 (1852): 468–501]. Of CD’s numerous private critics only HS has rendered the philosophy fairly: his argument is an hypothesis that explains groups of facts.

Asks JH to become a subscriber to a work that HS is bringing out. Lists prominent persons who have already done so.

Thanks JH for agreeing [1860-3-17] to be a subscriber to HS's project and for JH's critique of HS's use of the term 'Absolute.' Admits that it has difficulties.

Recalls JH having written that an 'annulus of stars might be in equilibrium.' Asks where this claim appears in JH's writings.

Thanks JH for sending HS a copy of JH's dialogue ['On Atoms']. Comments on it.

Doubts the claim that Auguste Comte has significantly influenced English scientists. Asks whether JH believes Comte has influenced JH or others. Asks whether it is more difficult to calculate the moon's motion or the motion of a projectile through a resisting medium.

In response to HS's query [1864-3-1] about the influence of Auguste Comte on English scientists, JH refers HS to JH's 1845 B.A.A.S. presidential address. States that calculating the motion of a projectile through a resisting medium is extremely difficult.

No summary available.