Summary

Discusses the Duke of Argyll’s article on the supernatural [Edinburgh Rev. 116 (1862): 378–97].

Has heard that the Incas married their sisters; this may be worth investigating as a case of inbreeding.

Summary

Possible dimorphism in Phlox.

Knows of no U. S. law prohibiting marriage of cousins.

Gives references to papers on phyllotaxy.

Summary

Thanks AG for references about phyllotaxy

and information on marriage laws.

Has been looking for dimorphism in Phlox and Euonymus.

Has observed the irritability of tendrils of Echinocystis with great interest. Was also struck by the rotating movements of the leading shoots, which he proposes to investigate.

Summary

Discusses the ill-will between England and U. S.

Considers the bases for deciding which plant species are "high" and which "low".

Comments on Alphonse de Candolle’s paper on oaks ["Étude sur l’espèce", Ann. Sci. Nat. (Bot.) 4th ser. 18 (1862): 59–110].

Encloses S. H. Scudder’s letter on Lepidoptera and fertilisation of orchids which identifies a butterfly with Platanthera pollinia adhering to it. Jokingly applies natural selection to butterflies acted on by orchid pollinia.

Summary

CD despairs when men like AG and Lyell consider themselves incapable of judging on change of species by descent.

Is confused over phyllotaxy.

Has been looking at Plantago lanceolata.

Summary

Comments on his own review of Bates’s butterfly paper [Collected papers 2: 87–92].

Thanks AG for information on Platanthera.

Has been wasting more time with Melastomataceae; can find no nectar in Monochaetum; is there any in Rhexia?

Hopes Lincoln’s "fiat against Slavery" will have some effect.

Summary

Has extracted CD’s Linum paper [Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 36 (1863): 279–84].

Elaborate co-adaptations of orchids and insects demonstrate against "chance blows", whether few, as Oswald Heer would have, or many and slight as CD proposes.

Summary

Discusses the meaning of C. K. Sprengel’s term "dichogamy". Dichogamous plants are functionally monoecious; Primula is functionally dioecious.

Reports Hermann Crüger’s observations of Cattleya and of bees pollinating Catasetum. Crüger will observe Melastomataceae.

Has built a hothouse.

Fears Amsinckia cannot be dimorphic.

Ill health slows his work on Variation.

Summary

Gives some observations on Drosera.

Comments on Richard Owen’s "transmutation theory" in his aye-aye paper [Trans. Zool. Soc. Lond. 5 (1866): 33–101].

Summary

The war is nearly finished, "rebeldom is ""gone up"" ".

Summary

Sees difficulties in adhering to the concept of design in nature.

Is surprised at Hooker’s and Daniel Oliver’s ignorance regarding spontaneous movements of tendrils.

CD should continue his work on climbing plants, "it will be fruitful in your hands".

Summary

CD’s poor health.

Agassiz’s attempt to do away with Darwinism.

Summary

AG’s review of Alphonse de Candolle’s paper [Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 35 (1863): 430–44] is excellent.

Does not AG consider that orchids oppose Oswald Heer’s view that species arise suddenly by monstrosities?

Infers that AG cannot explain the angles of phyllotaxy; has been looking at Carl Nägeli on the subject.

Reports Gaston de Saporta’s belief that natural selection will ultimately triumph in France.

Is working slowly at Variation.

Reports his observations on the imperfect flowers of Viola and Oxalis.

Summary

Discusses recent correspondence in the Athenæum: the disagreement between Lyell and Hugh Falconer and Owen’s remarks on heterogeny [see 4110].

Briefly discusses orchids and some problems in phyllotaxy.

Mentions the political situation and the quarrelsome behaviour of the English.

Summary

Hopes CD will finish and bring out his book on variation.

AG will publish extracts of H. W. Bates’s paper on mimetic analogy [Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 36 (1863): 279–94].

Summary

Recommends Lyell’s book [Antiquity of man (1863)].

Quotes praise of AG’s pamphlet [see 2938].

Comments on U. S. politics.

Summary

Fears England and U. S. will drift into war; he and AG must "keep to Science".

Thanks for facts on Incas; regrets he has always avoided the case of man.

Has sent his Linum paper [Collected papers 2: 93–105].

Is it true that Ohio has legislated against marriage of cousins?

Can AG explain the invariable angles in phyllotaxy; are they the consequence of packing in the early bud?

Owen’s comments on heterogeny in the Athenæum [28 Mar 1863] have vexed W. B. Carpenter; CD has replied [Collected papers 2: 78–80].

Hopes AG will observe Gymnadenia; John Scott has been experimenting on its fertilisation.

Gives his observation on pollination of Cypripedium.

Summary

Anticipated AG’s attitude on design in orchids. Does he not think that the variations that gave rise to fancy pigeon varieties were accidental?

Has been working hard at Lythrum

and spontaneous movements of tendrils.

Defends Drosera as a "sagacious animal" but does not know whether he will ever publish on it.

Comments on political situation in U. S.

Summary

Includes comments about George Bentham’s anniversary address to the Linnean Society with particular notice of the favourable attention to Darwin, except for Natural Selection, and to AG’s essay in the Atlantic Monthly.

He defends [W. B.] Carpenter and [Jeffries] Wyman against [Richard] Owen.

Gossip about scientific honours and other matters.

Summary

Thanks AG for Cypripedium and Mitchella.

Plans to investigate pollination of Cypripedium.

Has finished Linum paper [Collected papers 2: 93–105].

Would welcome facts on "bud-variations".

Hears that Cinchona is dimorphic.