Comments at length on CL’s book [Antiquity of man (1863)]. CD is "greatly disappointed that you have not given judgment and spoken fairly out what you think about the derivation of species".

Lists large number of queries concerning minor points.

Praises especially the chapters on language and glaciers.

Comments on the temperature of Africa during the glacial period, especially with regard to the views of Hooker.

Mentions Owen’s paper on the aye-aye [Rep. BAAS 32 (1862) pt 2: 114–16].

Will send portion of copied manuscript [of Variation 2: 8–10] for WB to examine. Asks about inherited abnormalities of the eye.

[On Antiquity of man] CD is "convinced that at times … you have … given up immutability". "A clear expression from you, if you could have given it, would have been potent with the public."

Objects to CL’s description of CD’s view "as a modification of Lamarck’s doctrine". Quotes Henrietta [Darwin]’s observations on this description.

Comments on CL’s controversy with Owen concerning the human brain.

The controversy between Falconer and CL.

The "wretched" review of CL [Antiquity of man, Athenæum 14 Feb 1863, pp. 219–21] and Huxley [Man’s place in nature].

Reports the observations of Hermann Crüger and John Scott that fruit is set by orchids whose flowers never open and that pollen-tubes are emitted from pollen-masses still in their proper position. These cases convince CD that in Orchids he underestimated the power of tropical orchids to produce seed without insect aid but he is not shaken in his belief that the structure of the flowers is mainly related to insect agency.

His better opinion [of work of Boucher de Perthes].

Explains his position on CL’s treatment of species.

Mentions positive response to his ideas on the part of a German professor [Ernst Haeckel], Alphonse de Candolle, and a botanical palaeontologist [Gaston de Saporta].

Notes negative reaction of entomologists.

Mentions Falconer’s objections [to Antiquity].

Mentions work of Hooker.

Comments on paper by Owen ["On the aye-aye", Rep. BAAS 32 (1862) pt 2: 114–16]

and CD’s review of Bates’s paper [Collected papers 2: 87–92].

Thinks Natural History Review is excellent.

Thanks WDF for authentic details of number and colour of lambs [Variation 2: 30].

Complains of his eczema.

Thanks GHKT for specimens of Sethia. Discusses functions of their dimorphism for insect fertilisation.

Discusses polymorphism and fertilisation in Lythraceae.

Asks for seed of Limnanthemum.

Describes his interest in galls.

Discusses curious specimens of Gomphia and Lesemia.