Summary

Thanks GHL for his support of Pangenesis.

Summary

Gratified by CD’s approval of his articles, which the public has not much liked.

Clarifies the obscure sentence CD criticised – forms having a different genesis can be similar.

Calls CD’s attention to Kovalevsky’s memoir on Amphioxus [Mem. Acad. Imp. Sci. St.-Pétersbourg 7th ser. 11 (1868) no.4]. K’s views are all in favour of CD’s and against GHL’s.

Summary

Asks CD to propose him for Linnean Society.

Would like to have Lyell put his objections to GHL’s papers [Fortn. Rev. 9 (1868): 353–73, 611–28; 10 (1868): 61–80, 492–509] in the form of notes, so he can have them before him when he recasts his papers into a book.

Summary

Will propose GHL for the Linnean Society.

Writes of his objections to GHL’s views.

Considers Weismann’s remarks on the importance of the nature of the organism as well as conditions of life in determining variability have much truth.

Summary

Thinks GHL’s articles are quite excellent; hopes they will be republished.

Discusses adaptation. Doubts whether similar conditions without selection can produce similar organs independent of blood relationship: "resemblances due to descent and adaptation can commonly be distinguished".

Discusses luminous insects, electrical organs of fish, thorns and spines.