From J. D. Hooker   10 July 1856

Dear Darwin

We have flowered D^r Bell Salters hybrid Epilobium from seeds he sent us, & it is so clearly E. roseum and nothing else, having no trace of either parent that I have no faith whatever in his experiments—¹ he himself remarks in the Phytologist that it is to all appearance similar to E roseum, but differs in the slightly 4 Cleft stigma—² now though E. roseum is put in the section with entire stigmata, it is described both by Babington³ & Hook Arnott⁴ as having a slightly 4-cleft stigma— This is just the way, whenever I do make an experiment it is sure to end either in smoke, or disappointment, or in a disgusting opposition to some preconceived theory of my own. (As the Entada seeds.)⁵

Per contra Henslow is going ahead with his Ægilops & procured a sport from it very like Revet wheat after the 3^d. year!⁶

I have been just reading Ed. Forbes first 112 pages of his little work on the European seas, all that is which Van Voorst had printed before Forbes death:⁷ would you like to see it?

I have read Huxleys response to Falconer with eminent gusto—how admirably neatly & clearly he puts the whole question.⁸ I never understood the distinctions between Morphology & Physiology in their relation to systematic Zoology half so well before. I certainly only half understood the question before & I do not think that Huxleys original Lecture was particularly good at all.—⁹ he has put forth his strength here & will I think startle old Falconer. I had a note from the latter a week ago from Paris, in which he alluded to the subject as if he had eaten Huxley without salt & left no bones at all; by Jove he will find this pungent

Huxley & Mrs H staid with us from Saturday till Monday last, but I had not then read his response.

I began this letter intending to tell you why I had not earlier attended to your letters which is because my father is in Scotland: so you may set your mind at ease on the score of the Tristan d’Acunha list.¹⁰

The said Tristan d’Acunha list is I think capable of some modification in my favor, a most remarkable and wholly distinct grass inhabiting it having been lately found in the Island of S^t. Pauls (N. of Kerguelens land)— I see you have a note of this I shall hunt up the Tristan d’Acunha plants & let you know.

With regard to the Chili + N.Z. list I have gone over it— none are mountain plants in any sense that I know of— As a rule none of the genera have wide ranging species except Epilobium though none are remarkably restricted as to the ranges of their individual species— they are nothing particular in short.¹¹

Upon the whole the most wonderful cases, almost demanding double centres, are the presence of the European plants in the Australian Alps & in Tasmania as Cardamine pratensis, ^x Lysimachia vulgaris, Aphanes arvensis, ^x Turritis glabra, ^x Veronica serpyllifolia—besides various Carices, & grasses plants that are not common in Australia & are found no where else in the Southern Hemisphere & are not very widely distrib^d in the Northern except the Card. ¹²

^x These on the faith of D^r. Ferd. Mueller Govt Bot. of Victoria an able Botanist.¹³

It appears however true that multiple centres are worse for your theory than any thing else.

Lyell has not sent me your letter,¹⁴ I wish he would.

The Aristolochia was A. labiosa or an allied species, the brute of a Viscum is diœcious after all, it looked Hermaphrodite, & certainly the pollen is all out before the bud opens, so that observation is worthless.—¹⁵ The Aristolochia stigma seemed all ready for pollen but I will look again. Its anthers are on the stigmata hence the necessity of Insect or other action to shake out the grains

I shall try to get you cases of well marked varieties being common & the intermediates rare¹⁶ —but these cases are always explained away by the assumption of hybridism— e.g. Geum urbanum, rivale & intermedium— Wheat & Ægilops— Hewett Watson would probably give you more good cases than I could.

Ever yours | Jos D Hooker

Has it ever struck you that the fact of Parnassia, Saxifraga & anthers approaching & being applied to the Stigma in pairs or in turns is against cross hybrid impregnation, in as much as that a plants own pollen shoots its tubes on its own stigma before that of another species will applied at same time & in general overcomes the latter.— You know what I mean.