No summary available.

Everything in Wallace’s sketch also appears in CD’s sketch of 1844. A year ago CD sent a short sketch of his views to Asa Gray. Can CD honourably publish his sketch now that Wallace has sent outline of his views? "I would far rather burn my whole book than that he or any man shd. think that I had behaved in a paltry spirit." Does not believe Wallace originated his views from anything CD wrote to him.

No summary available.

Is it fair to take advantage of knowing that Wallace is in the field? Seems hard on CD to lose priority of many years, but does not feel this alters justice of case.

Baby [Charles Waring Darwin] has much fever. Frightened because three children in village have died from scarlet fever.

Communicate papers by CD and A. R. Wallace on "The Laws which affect the Production of Varieties, Races, and Species". Explain that CD and Wallace have, independently and unknown to each other, arrived at the same theory to account for the appearance and perpetuation of specific forms, and that neither has yet published, although CD first sketched his theory in 1839. Give their reasons for arranging the joint presentation.

No summary available.

Thanks for abstract of Etna paper [Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. 148 (1858): 703–86]. Never expected to see Élie de Beaumont’s theory ["craters of elevation"] so completely upset. "He must have picked out favourable cases for measurement."

More than satisfied by what was done at Linnean Society [joint reading of CD’s and Wallace’s papers: "Tendency of species to form varieties", Collected papers 2: 3–19]. Intends to prepare longer abstract.

Has heard that CL has spoken to John Murray about publication [of Origin]. Encloses prospective title-page. Asks whether he ought to tell John Murray about unorthodoxy of the book.

CD is grateful to CL for his help in arranging with Murray for publication [of Origin]. Sorry Murray objects to term "abstract" in title, but will defer to him and CL.

Extended discussion of their respective difficulties with the definition and status of species and with the extent to which the theory of transmutation may be applied.

Has rediscovered S. S. Haldeman’s 1844 paper defending the transmutation theory with great skill.

Asks for reference to Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire’s first enunciation of the progressive development and transmutation theory.

Discusses S. S. Haldeman’s paper ["Enumeration of the recent freshwater Mollusca", Boston J. Nat. Hist. 4 (1844): 468–84].

Centres of species origin.

Describes his corrections of Origin.

Thanks CL for copy of his paper ["Structure of lavas", Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. 148 (1858): 703–86].

Promises him a copy of Origin.

CL’s research on flint tools.

Promises to send proof-sheets of Origin. Discusses his view of species.

Ill health of himself and his family.

Thanks CL for his favourable remarks to the Geological Section of the BAAS concerning the forthcoming publication of the Origin. Hopes CL will accept his view of species.

Comments on CL’s paper ["On the occurrence of works of human art in post-Pliocene deposits", Rep. BAAS 29 (1859): 93–5].

Discusses text of Origin.

Compares Eocene and modern climates.

Mentions Hooker’s view of his geographical [distribution] chapters.

Asks CL’s opinion of his statements on distribution during "glacial and preceding warmer periods".

Mentions chapters on geological record and embryology.

Is sending off last proof-sheets of Origin.

Asks CL’s opinion of final chapter. Mentions difficulties of his argument.

Is too unwell to start for Ilkley.

Murray’s printing of 1250 copies seems too large to CD.

Praises the Origin: a "splendid case of close reasoning".

Objects to CD’s having ignored Lamarck and Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire.

Thinks CD should omit mentioning problem of explaining the eye at the beginning of chapter 14. Suggests rewording several passages.

Thinks want of peculiar birds in Madeira a difficulty, considering presence of them in Galapagos.

Has always felt that the case of man and his races is one and the same with animals and plants.

Response to Origin. Praise for summary of chapter 10 and chapter 11.

The dissimilarity of African and American species is ‘necessary result of “Creation” adapting new species to the pre-existing ones. Granting this unknown & if you please miraculous power acting’.

C. T. Gaudin writes of Oswald Heer’s finding many species common between Miocene floras of Iceland and Switzerland. Interesting for CD’s migration theory.

CL’s comments on Origin. Mentions corrections to last chapter suggested by CL.

Comments on lack of peculiar bird species on Madeira and Bermuda. Emphasises importance of American types in Galapagos.

Denies necessity of continued creation of primitive "Monads".

Denies need for new powers and any principle of improvement.

Discusses gradations of intellectual powers.

Adaptive inferiority and extinction of groups of species and genera.

Asserts that climate is less important than the struggle with other organisms.

Suggests an experiment involving primroses and cowslips.

The chapter on hybridisation.

Rudimentary organs.

Gives opinion of Lamarck’s work.

Comments on CL’s letters.

Discusses foreign animals naturalised in Australia and elsewhere.

Affirms man’s capacity to survive in Eocene climate.

Comments on American types.

Denies necessity for "continued intervention of creative power".