Tierra del Fuego and the barren coasts of Patagonia are "singularly unfavourable to the insect world". In the tropics, however, CD captured minute Coleoptera by the hundreds – which should result in his bringing home many undescribed species.

Discusses insect specimens he left with FWH. Asks if he may state on FWH’s authority that a third or a half of the specimens from Sydney and Hobart Town are undescribed – a striking fact, showing imperfect knowledge of the insects in the close neighbourhood of the two Australian capitals.

Thanks HAW for columbine and asparagus seeds and for counting pods for him. CD is astonished at the number of pods. Needs more seeds for one of his experiments.

Has he met Huxley yet? He is a very clever man.

Would like to borrow the bees that, as reported in Gardeners’ Chronicle, were sent to JOW with pollen-masses of orchids sticking to them. CD has never seen a bee visit an orchid. He believes he could identify the genus and perhaps species of the orchids the pollen comes from.

His health is too bad to attend the meeting [of British Association for the Advancement of Science].

Thanks JOW for the bees. The pollen-masses that were attached to one of them have unaccountably been lost.

Does not know of a paper by Charles Morren on orchids and insects, and would be glad to have the reference [see 3267, and Orchids, p. 270 n.].

Has spent so much money recently he is unwilling to subscribe for the purchase of T. V. Wollaston’s collection for the [Oxford] Museum.

As a general rule CD thinks it best to deposit specimens in the British Museum, and "bitterly regrets" he did not send all his specimens there. Nevertheless he agrees to sending his crustaceans to the Oxford Museum.

CD is at work on Orchids. He would be greatly obliged if JOW could send him specimens of pollen-masses attached to head or base of proboscis of moths.

Asks for reference to Morren’s paper that JOW mentioned before [see 2862].

Is certain he never had Morren’s paper from JOW or heard of it before JOW’s note; will write to Gardeners’ Chronicle about it [see 3252].

Thanks for the two Sphinx moths; unfortunately the pollen-masses do not belong to orchids but to Asclepias.

Asks whether R. B. Todd’s Cyclopedia of Anatomy and Physiology [1835–59] has an article on fertilisation of orchids.

Thanks RM for information on case of hexadactyly [see RM’s paper, "Hexadactylism", Land and Water, 11 March 1871, p. 179.

Mentions the difficulties in explaining the separation of sexes and Carl Nägeli’s view that the sexes of plants were primordially distinct.

Has been experimenting for five or six years to demonstrate that the benefits of crossing are the same as those derived from a slight change of conditions.

Cannot accept JJW’s invitation to a party. His health has been worse than usual for some months – can see no one nor can he go anywhere.

Is preparing a cheap edition of the Origin [6th] and will answer Mivart’s objections.

CD is pleased JJW likes C. Wright’s "Darwinism" [see 7940]. Huxley will publish a splendid review of it in Contemporary Review [Nov 1871].

Discusses the problems of mimicry as related to natural selection; the general variability of colour as a character; and the conditions necessary for natural selection to fix firmly a character.

Encloses a Fritz Müller letter speculating that organisms respond to certain colours because of the prevalence of those colours in their environment.

Invites RM to keep some specimens as long as he wishes.

Recalls vaguely the mention of a butterfly species in which the male alone is mimetic.

Feels it would be worth while but difficult to investigate mimicked and mimicking forms for structural similarities that would indicate a closer alliance in the past.

Thanks RM for note on ocelli.

Forwards photograph, sent by [J. L. G.] Krefft, of a chrysalis attached to its food-plant; the chrysalis has adjusted its colour remarkably.

Thanks RM for his paper on mimicry.

Cannot answer RM’s query because he believes it impossible to define large variations.

Believes monstrosities are generally injurious and are not often, if ever, taken advantage of in nature.

Is doubtful about the publication of Fritz Müller’s letter after so long an interval.

Thinks the facts in Fritz Müller’s letter could be published.

Recommends August Weismann’s essay on dimorphism ["Über den Saison-Dimorphismus der Schmetterlinge", Studien zur Descendenz-Theorie 1 (1875)]

and has no doubt that intermediate forms could be eliminated as RM suggests.

Does not think Fritz Müller can object to anything RM has said in his essay.

Has alluded to colour preference among butterflies in Descent [1: 400–1].

Interesting article by Fritz Müller on sexual selection in butterflies, Kosmos [1 (1877): 388–95].