Disputes Thomas Meehan’s observations on the hardiness of exposed buds, and believes bud-scales are for the protection of the bud-leaves. Reiterates his opinion that the phyllotaxy of a plant is determined by causes acting when the leaves are crowded into close contact. Attempts to explain how a different phyllotaxy on the upper and lower parts of the same shoot could have arisen.

Thanks for letter, in which CD cited [Anton] Kerner’s alpine observations.

Describes with diagrams the curious disposition of leaves on some Acacia twigs, and points out that his theory should account for these anomalies as well as normal cases.

Discusses works lent him by CD: Candolle, Kerner, Braun, Sachs, and CD’s own notes on relative positions of leaves. Plans paper on subject for Royal Society.

Just appointed medical inspector under local government board.

HA’s paper on leaf arrangement is almost ready; asks CD to communicate it to the Royal Society. Seeks permission to quote from CD’s notes.

Has sent phyllotaxy paper to G. G. Stokes with the letter from CD to show credentials.

Will not have time to read new Sachs edition CD offered.

Thanks for CD’s sponsorship of paper [Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 21 (1873): 176–9].

Thanks for congratulations on appearance of abstract of HA’s paper [Nature 7 (1873): 343–4].

Explains again his theory of "contraction with twist" by which compact buds and a spiral phyllotaxy have evolved. Explains how the peculiar phyllotaxy of the teasel is explicable by this process of "condensation".

The Royal Society referees have rejected HA’s phyllotaxy paper, and it will not be printed in Philosophical Transactions. HA is not sorry for he has found new facts which limit the applicability of his views. Now believes that the original leaf arrangement was not necessarily always two-ranked but rather that existing arrangements have developed from a variety of forms with differing numbers of leaf-ranks.

Illustrates, with reference to different species of Gasteria, the role of twisting in the development of leaf arrangement.

W. J. Beal’s paper ["Phyllotaxis of cones", Am. Nat. 7 (1873): 449–53] shows incompleteness of HA’s theory, but does not invalidate his basic principles on origin of leaf arrangement or the broad applicability of the theory.

Has rewritten paper on leaf arrangement after criticism by Royal Society referees. Has found new factor influencing leaf arrangement, i.e., spontaneous variability in the number of vertical leaf-ranks.

On his new paper for Royal Society on a point of leaf arrangement. Asks CD to communicate it and "gives some details of its contents", e.g., recorded observations of changing leaf-order on individual specimens.

Comments on a paper by George Henslow ["Helianthus tuberosus", Trans. Linn. Soc. Lond. 26 (1876): 647].

Reports that Pinguicula is found in north of Scotland. Gives local names and uses. None of his patients, who are from all parts of Scotland, has heard of the use of Pinguicula to curdle milk.

No summary available.

No summary available.

Replies to CD’s letter;

inquires about CD’s intended terms for Italian translator of Descent; hopes to offer best terms herself.

Birthday congratulations from the editors of Kosmos. They will mark the occasion with a special number of Kosmos.

Is currently at work on the development in birds of organs of flight according to CD’s principles; asks permission to quote CD in stating the theory.

Urges CD to republish his works in a collected edition, to make them more readily available to Germans.

CD has omitted in all his works one of the most interesting causes of variation, domestic or wild – i.e., frightening of a pregnant animal; quotes case of eight-footed horse from a French translation of G. S. W. von Adler.

No summary available.

Hopes JH's argument favoring pound sterling will be read by members of Parliament.