Summary

Thanks for three last lectures and the account of cirripedes.

Difficulty of classifying the higher groups.

Summary

Thinks naturalists look for something further than Cuvier’s view of classification. Poses a theoretical problem on the classification of the races of man to prove that a genealogical system is best.

Summary

Thanks THH for his cautionary response on Brullé, but departs from THH in thinking that Barnéoud, if true, would shed light on Milne-Edwards’ proposition that the wider apart classes of animals are the earlier they depart from common embryonic plan.

Summary

Glad THH has taken up aphid question versus Owen ["On the agamic reproduction and morphology of Aphis", Trans. Linn. Soc. Lond. 22 (1858): 193–236].

Fertilisation and inheritance discussed. Speculates that fertilisation may be a mixture rather than a fusion. Can understand in no other way why crossed forms tend to go back to ancestral forms.

Summary

Agassiz’s superficiality and wretched reasoning powers. But he stirred up Europe on glaciers. Lyell has been working on their effects – testing work of others.

CD believes "Natural Systems" ought to be simply genealogical. "Time will come when we shall have true genealogical trees of each great kingdom of nature."

Summary

Thanks THH for his response on glacial movement. Hopes Tyndall will experiment on broken ice and explain how two pieces of ice can freeze together.

Sorry to hear of THH’s row with Richard Owen.

Summary

On classification and possibilities of a scientific morphology and zoology. CD’s "pedigree business" is important for physiology but has nothing to do with pure zoology any more than human pedigree has to do with the census. Zoological classification is a census of the animal world.

Summary

Asks THH’s opinion on embryological views of G. A. Brullé [Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 13 (1844): 484–6] and F. M. Barnéoud [Ann. des Sci. Nat. ser. 3, Bot. 6 (1846): 268–96] and on Milne-Edwards’ classification.

Has been reading John Goodsir ["On the morphological constitution of the skeleton of the vertebrate head", Edinburgh New Philos. J. 2d ser. 5 (1857): 123–78].

Has embryology of bats ever been worked out?

Summary

Congratulations [on Mrs H’s delivery].

Balanus balanoides positively identified by CD.

Summary

THH comments on G. A. Brullé’s paper ["Researches upon the transformations of the appendages of the Articulata", Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 13 (1844): 484–6].

Summary

Asks THH question on flow of glaciers after ice has been fractured and fragmented.

CD had to leave Royal Society lecture [joint paper by THH and J. Tyndall, "On the structure and motions of glaciers", Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. 147 (1857): 327–46] before the end because of headache.

Summary

THH’s catalogue [THH and R. Etheridge, A catalogue of the collection of fossils in the Museum of Practical Geology (1865), part published in 1857] best résumé he has seen of science of natural history. On classification he is not quite sure that he wholly goes along with THH. Encloses a few criticisms of THH’s preface.[enclosure survives as copy only].

Summary

CD is "as ignorant of mechanics as a pig", but glaciers have interested him greatly. Hopes to hear that JT’s experiments with ice will explain the freezing together of ice below the freezing point.

Summary

Species with marked varieties.

Dana’s pamphlet also too metaphysical for CD.

Natural selection chapter on hybridism completed.

Doubts JDH will resist theory in his introduction to Flora Tasmaniae.

Summary

CD will advise Daniell not to apply for Royal Society grant.

CD’s experiment: fish fed seeds, which germinated when voided.

Summary

Thanks him for information concerning Crustacea.

Comments on natural history study in the U. S.

Mentions work done by Huxley on Crustacea ["Description of a new crustacean", J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 13 (1857): 363–9];

John Lubbock on larvae of Diptera.

Summary

CD finds Alphonse de Candolle very useful, though JDH has low opinion.

CD argues for accidental introductions explaining some odd distributions, e.g., New Zealand vs Australian plants.

CD’s method.

Diverging affinities in isolated genera.