Dear Bentham
I am particularly obliged to you for telling me a little about Delpino, as it would have broken my wife’s heart to have made out so good an abstract of his notions.2
I will send tomorrow by railway Haeckel’s Morphol: as you can then return all the books together & it will cost you no more trouble.3
I think highly of what little I have read, as does Huxley who has read more. He is dreadful in inventing new terms.4 I also send Sprengel which is a wonderful book, tho’ here and there fanciful. I know R. Brown thought highly of it. It is really curious that he missed the chief key viz. the crossing of distinct individuals.5 Reading the book with this in one’s mind makes many points far clearer than he perceived. I have also remembered & sent a short paper on Martha which is really worth reading.6 With respect to Viola see p. 191 of my Lythrum paper, likewise sent. With respect to the closed flowers I can hardly doubt that they play the same part as detached bulbs.7 Under the unnatural conditions of cultivation Ononis columnæ produces with me only the closed flowers, whilst O. minutissima produces both kinds.8 With some plants, as Lathyrus nissolia, flowers are produced in a state intermediate between perfect & closed flowers.9 When you return all the books & pamphlets (but do not hurry) please direct them exactly as follows
Ch. Darwin Esq.
Bromley Station
Per Rail Kent
(to be left till called for)
As you seem a little interested at present about the descent theory, I cannot resist telling you that two of the best paleontologs in Europe viz. A. Gaudry & Rutimeyer have declared more or less completely in favour of my views.10
Believe me dear Bentham | yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin
Please cite as “DCP-LETT-6154,” in Ɛpsilon: The Charles Darwin Collection accessed on