From S. J. Housley   20 December 1872

70 Boundary Road. N.W.

20th. December 1872.

Sir,

For a whole year I have delayed communicating to you a variation which has occurred in the ear of one of my children, because not being an anatomist I did not know whether the form was important or not—

About this time last year I had a son born to me and my first observation on seeing him was, “Why, he has the primeval point to his right ear!” I had previously read in your Descent of Man of this point being more or less developed in ears and was astonished to find not merely the rudiment but the actual point itself fully developed.1 The edge of the ear folds over all round; therefore at this point, the cartilage of the ear gives the appearance of something having been placed under the fold to force the top of the ear out—

I felt doubtful whether this really was a reversion to the Ancestral form; but when reading your “Expressions” I found the drawing of the ear of the Cynopithecus niger so closely represent the ear of my child that I could no longer be in doubt.2 Another fact which impelled me to write to you was, that I see that Mr. Bree denies the existence of what he calls the “Woolner Ear”—3

diagram

The accompanying sketch will give some idea of the form— It possesses the characteristics but does not pretend to acccuracy— The red lines give the forms in the left ear of the same child—4

I am, Sir, | Yours faithfully | Samuel John Housley

C. Darwin Esqre—

CD had discussed this ‘primeval’ or Woolnerian point in Descent 1: 22.
See Expression, p. 136 fig. 16.
This claim was made by Charles Robert Bree in his An exposition of fallacies in the hypothesis of Mr. Darwin (Bree 1872, p. 122). For CD’s view of Bree, see the letter to Nature, 3 August [1872].
The red lines in the diagram are represented here by dotted lines.

Please cite as “DCP-LETT-8689,” in Ɛpsilon: The Charles Darwin Collection accessed on 5 June 2025, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/dcp-data/letters/DCP-LETT-8689