From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[21 July 1863]
Source of text:
DAR 101: 152–3
Summary:
Encourages CD to continue observations on tendrils.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[31 July 1863]
Source of text:
DAR 101: 154–5
Summary:
Sends "tendrilliferous" plants.
Plans visit to Down.
Naudin’s paper on tendrils [Ann. Sci. Nat. (Bot.) 4th ser. 9 (1863): 180–203].
T. V. Wollaston snubs Bates’s work.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
26 Aug 1863
Source of text:
DAR 101: 157–8
Summary:
JDH working on the New Zealand flora.
Jules Planchon excited about CD’s Linum experiments.
T. F. Jamieson’s paper on glaciers gives great pleasure.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[27 Aug 1863]
Source of text:
DAR 101: 156
Summary:
Suggests CD consult George Busk about his stomach.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
15 Sept 1863
Source of text:
DAR 101: 163–6
Summary:
Pleased CD accepts continental extension for New Zealand, whose flora has many genera like Rubus with great diversity and connecting intermediates. Suggests geological uplifting creates more space, hence opportunities for preservation of intermediates. Sees clash with CD on causes of extreme diversity of form in a group.
JDH’s attitude toward democratisation of science.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[28 Sept 1863]
Source of text:
DAR 101: 159
Summary:
Grieves over the death of his second daughter [Maria Elizabeth].
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
1 Oct 1863
Source of text:
DAR 101: 160–2
Summary:
Sorrow at loss of his daughter.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
23 Oct 1863
Source of text:
DAR 101: 167–70
Summary:
With scientific party to Amiens to look at gravel-pits, the geology of which JDH describes at length.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[1 or 3] Nov 1863
Source of text:
DAR 101: 173–5
Summary:
Anxious to see Haast’s letter.
JDH’s views on Poles and Franco-Prussian conflict.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
24 Jan 1864
Source of text:
DAR 101: 176–9
Summary:
JDH’s opinion of Herbert Spencer.
Rejects CD’s view of inheritance of induced modifications.
Huxley grows fat.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
5 Feb 1864
Source of text:
DAR 100: 161; DAR 101: 180–1, 201
Summary:
John Scott’s paper [see 4332] read at Linnean Society; praised by George Bentham.
Himalayan pine in Macedonia.
JDH is in a quarrel with H. C. Watson.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[before 9 Feb 1864]
Source of text:
DAR 101: 182
Summary:
Bentham proposes John Scott be made an associate of the Linnean Society.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
16 Feb 1864
Source of text:
DAR 101: 183–5
Summary:
CD’s climbing plant experiments make it impossible to deny nerve force in plants.
Has discussed Frankland’s new glacial theory with Lyell.
Bishop Colenso’s trial.
Possibility of Scott’s coming to Kew as a curator.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[20 Feb 1864]
Source of text:
DAR 101: 186–7
Summary:
Sends a Corydalis.
Hermann Crüger’s paper [see 4394] splendid, but he has made a mess of propagating Cinchona in Trinidad.
JDH’s opinion of Germans.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
9 [Mar] 1864
Source of text:
DAR 101: 189–92
Summary:
Reception of Scott’s paper.
Difficulty of writing Boott’s obituary.
Critical of Edward Frankland’s glacial theory.
Falconer’s and Ramsay’s views on Himalayan lakes lack support of basic evidence.
Taxonomic distribution of climbing plants.
Huxley picks quarrels with minor figures and thus magnifies them.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
16 Mar 1864
Source of text:
DAR 101: 188
Summary:
List of four plants sent.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
29 Mar 1864
Source of text:
DAR 101: 193–7
Summary:
John Scott’s career.
Huxley’s vicious attack on anthropologists.
Critique of Joseph Prestwich’s theory of rivers.
Bitter feelings between the Hookers and the Veitch family of nurserymen.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[2 Apr 1864]
Source of text:
DAR 101: 198–200, 203; DAR 104: 222
Summary:
JDH explains why he cannot take Scott on at Kew.
John Tyndall cannot answer CD’s questions on glaciers. Edward Frankland’s ignorance. In JDH’s opinion, heaviness of winter snowfall is the greatest element in size of glaciers and this is a function of low mean temperature. Discusses descent of glaciers.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[4 Apr 1864]
Source of text:
DAR 101: 202
Summary:
JDH has written to J. H. Balfour for a character reference for John Scott.
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Joseph Dalton Hooker
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
6 Apr 1864
Source of text:
DAR 101: 204–5; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (Directors’ Correspondence English letters Balfour 1866–1900 vol. 78: 311)
Summary:
J. H. Balfour gives Scott excellent character reference, but says he is unfit either to superintend or be subordinate.
Herbert Spencer’s review of J. M. Schleiden is interesting [see 4457].
Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
