Wishes CD would enlarge on the doctrines of [Pyotr Simon] Pallas about the various races of dogs having come from several distinct wild species or sub-species.

Suggests organisms have a latent principle of improvement which is brought out by selection or breeding.

Discusses P. S. Pallas’ theory of origin of domestic dog breeds. CD believes domestic dogs descended from more than one aboriginal wild species but ultimately "we believe all canine species have descended from one parent and the only question is whether the whole or only part of difference in our domestic breeds has arisen since man domesticated them".

Races of man offer great difficulty. The doctrine of Pallas and Agassiz that there are several species "does not help us" in the least.

Hopes Henry Holland will not review Origin.

CD’s and CL’s difference on "principle of improvement" and "power of adaptation" is profound. Improvement in breeds of cattle requires neither. Urges him to reread first four chapters of Origin carefully. Natural selection is not to be contrasted with "improvement": every step involves improvement in relation to the conditions of life. There is no need for a "principle" to intervene.

Since dogs have same gestation period as the wolf it is likely that the wolf is the ancestral wild species, if it is just one species.

CD’s belief that domestic dogs are descended from several distinct aboriginal species seems to contradict views on sterility of hybrids and variation in Origin. If domestic varieties came from hybrids of wild species it will be impossible to trace ancestry. Opponents will exploit these problems.

Further discussion of origin of domestic dog breeds.

Effects of crossing separate races.

Comments on rate of artificial and natural selection.

The origin of pigeon breeds.

Questions CD’s view in Origin that domestic dogs are not descended from a single stock. Occasional crossings of domestic stock with wild species could explain cases of reversion towards wild specific forms. CD’s views on hybridity do not then have to be contradicted in constructing an ancestral stock.

Comments on pp. 201, 211, and 218 [of Origin].

Thanks CL for his decision to accept CD’s "doctrine of modification" [in Elements of geology, 6th ed. (1865)]. Believes it "morally impossible that investigators of truth, like you and Hooker, can be wholly wrong". Does not think CL’s decision will injure his works.

Thinks CL overrates importance of multiple origin of dogs.

Mentions sending copy of Origin to Herschel. Asks CL about Herschel’s reaction.

Sales of Origin.

Discusses revisions for second edition. Mentions possible French translation.

Views of Quatrefages [de Bréau].

Discusses corrections for second edition [of Origin]. Will leave out the reference to whale and bear. Discusses pheasant crosses. Success of the book.

Asks how many kinds of supposed birds’ footprints were found in North American sandstone.

Making progress on second edition of Origin.

Encloses letter from Adam Sedgwick [2548].

Mentions conversion of A. C. Ramsay.

Comments on note from Charles Kingsley saying CD’s theory is not opposed to a high conception of the Deity.

Mentions negative views of Origin of Sedgwick, John Crawfurd, Roderick Murchison, John Phillips, and Joseph Prestwich.

Encloses a letter from FitzRoy to the Times.

Mentions letter from W. B. Carpenter accepting single progenitor for major animal classes.

Speculates about Richard Owen’s opinion.

Discuss CL’s suggestions for revisions to the chapter on the geological record [Origin, ch. 9].

Henry Holland’s reaction to the book.

Comments on CL’s work on flint tools of early men.

Describes at length a conversation with Owen concerning Origin. Notes "that at bottom he goes immense way with us", but emphasises Owen’s unfriendly manner. Remarks that Owen accepted a relationship between bears and whales. "By Jove I believe he thinks a sort of Bear was the grandpapa of Whales!"

Has heard Herschel considered his book "the law of higgledy-piggledy".

Comments on Hooker’s introductory essay [in Flora Tasmaniae].

Cites C. V. Naudin’s article ["Considérations philosophiques sur l’espèce et la variété", Rev. Hortic. 4th ser. 1 (1852): 102–9].

Mentions letter from William Jardine criticising discussion of the Galapagos in the Origin.

Mentions William Clift ["Report in regard to the fossil bones found in New Holland", Edinburgh New Philos. J. 10 (1830–1): 394–6].

Discusses relations between fossil and living types.

Discusses Hooker’s introductory essay [in Flora Tasmaniae]. Criticises Hooker’s views on flora of rising and sinking islands.

Encloses letter concerning Edward Blyth’s application for a position with the China expedition.

Mentions reviews of the Origin. Guesses that Huxley wrote the Times review.

Alludes to discussion of relations between fossil and modern types [in Principles of geology 3: 144].

Discusses destruction of tropical forms in the glacial period.

Mentions letter from Dana concerning Dana’s illness.