Summary

Asks CL to address a letter to Charles Maclaren.

Discusses recent publication by David Milne on erratic boulders [Edinburgh New Philos. J. 42 (1847): 154–172].

Views of Bernhard Studer on foliation of gneiss in the Alps. Asks CL to tell Leonard Horner of Studer’s views.

Summary

Is sending CL an arrow-head. Says John Lubbock tells of vast numbers of flint tools in peat in France. Urges CL to conduct further research on the subject.

Comments on paper by J. S. Newberry concerning palaeozoic deposits in America [Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 29 (1860): 208–18]

and on A. von Keyserling’s view of species change.

Mentions J. W. Salter’s chart arranging Spirifer.

Comments on Andrew Murray’s paper on the Origin ["On Mr Darwin’s theory of the origin of species", Proc. R. Soc. Edinburgh 4 (1860): 274–91].

A Manchester newspaper article says CD has proved "might is right".

Summary

Comments on letter from Georg Hartung to CL dealing with erratic boulders.

Discusses migration of plants and animals.

A letter from Thomas Thomson on heat endured by temperate plants.

Summary

Quotes from South America [p. 167] on the foliation of metamorphic rocks.

Summary

Encloses letter concerning Edward Blyth’s application for a position with the China expedition.

Mentions reviews of the Origin. Guesses that Huxley wrote the Times review.

Alludes to discussion of relations between fossil and modern types [in Principles of geology 3: 144].

Discusses destruction of tropical forms in the glacial period.

Mentions letter from Dana concerning Dana’s illness.

Summary

Discusses letter of recommendation for Edward Blyth.

Sedgwick’s review of the Origin in the Spectator [24 Mar 1860].

Mentions breaks between geological formations.

Summary

Returns "excellent" MS in which CD favours hybrid origin of domestic dog, which CL believes strengthens case for common progenitor of wild species.

Doubts CD’s authorities for antiquity of dingo.

Variation will raise many points for investigation.

"Leporine" hare–rabbit hybrid should be investigated.

Has re-read passages in Origin that CD suggested.

Annals of Natural History would probably reprint Gray’s review of Origin at their own expense.

CD’s thought that modern reptiles could not develop into existing Mammalia but only into another high form is a "grand notion" compatible with "the infinite capacity of the creative power".

Comments on New Guinea marsupials.

Still thinks that the Australian genera and species are so well fitted for extraordinary droughts that they would get the better of the dingo.

Suggests that once there were more races of man, though from common stock. Competition and then hybridity checked divergence.

Falconer’s views on elephant classification. CL attaches little value to Falconer’s objection that mastodons and elephants do not come in chronologically, as they should in CD’s view.

Summary

Is sending off last proof-sheets of Origin.

Asks CL’s opinion of final chapter. Mentions difficulties of his argument.

Is too unwell to start for Ilkley.

Murray’s printing of 1250 copies seems too large to CD.

Summary

Discusses progress of CL’s work [on Antiquity of man (1863)].

CD had not thought of subsidence in connection with "roads" of Glen Roy.

Discusses habits of ants.

Summary

Sale of Origin requires new edition [3d (Apr 1861)].

Further discussion of geological elevation and subsidence in Europe. Compares evidence to that of South America. His theory that semi-fluid matter underlies earth’s crust.

Mentions David Forbes’s explanation of South American nitrate deposits.

Has followed CL’s advice not to reply directly to reviewers.

Summary

Mentions Etty’s illness.

A "coarsely contemptuous" review of Origin by Samuel Haughton ["On the form of the cells made by various wasps and by the honey bee; with an appendix on the origin of species", Proc. Nat. Hist. Soc. Dublin 3 (1860): 128–40].

Comments on reception of Malthus’ ideas.

Says William Hopkins does not understand him.

Discusses problem of term "natural selection".

J. A. Lowell’s review of Origin [Christian Examiner (1860): 449–64].

Relationship between instinct and structure.

Discusses blindness of cave animals.

The fallacy of Andrew Murray and others; the slight importance of climate.

Summary

Criticises Élie de Beaumont’s view of a right angle junction of a stream of lava and a dike.

Mentions his misgivings in voting to recommend J. D. Forbes for Royal Medal.

Notes Daniel Sharpe’s work on mica schist.

Summary

CD’s criticism of his book [Travels in North America (1845)].

Compares invertebrate animals of Tasmania and England.

Mentions views of C. J. F. Bunbury on climate of the Carboniferous period.

Robert Brown says Australian flora has the widest range.

Summary

Discusses CL’s refutation of CD’s concept of "craters of elevation" and CL’s new concept of "craters of denudation". Mentions examples of such craters. Admits that his own concept of these craters was unsatisfactory. Urges CL to publish article ["On craters of denudation", Q. J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 6 (1850): 207–34].

Summary

Galapagos land birds and reptiles.

No two naturalists agree on any fundamental idea [of species]. "Everything is arbitrary."

Has been with Richard Owen going over the S. American fossils.

Has worked out the non-relation between animals’ bulk and luxuriance of vegetation.

The horse once common on the Pampas. The mystery of the extinction of these animals.

Summary

Suggests that the height of the water which formed the shelves in Glen Roy was determined not by the height of the blocking glacier but by the height of a col. Notes problems in the idea.

Summary

Comments on BAAS meeting: "our side seems to have got on very well". Asa Gray, too, is fighting nobly.

Comments on review [by Samuel Wilberforce] in the Quarterly [Rev. 108 (1860): 225–64].

Mentions a favourable review in the London Review.

Wonders if German translation [of the Origin] by Bronn has drawn attention to the subject.

The Natural History Review to be edited by Huxley and others.

Expects CL’s book [Antiquity of man (1863)] to be a bombshell.

Summary

Comments on CL’s Anniversary address [Q. J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 6 (1850): xxvii–lxvi]. Notes CL’s criticism of R. I. Murchison’s catastrophism.

Asks whether there are Lower Cretaceous beds in Scandinavia. Thinks Leopold von Buch must have neglected them.

Summary

Quotes passage from letter from Asa Gray dealing with views of Francis Bowen on heredity and Agassiz "(foolish man)" on heredity and languages.

Sent CL the Calcutta Review [with Edward Blyth’s review of Origin, 35 (1860): 64–88].

Summary

To cast doubt on CD’s view that volcanic action is associated with elevation of land, CL suggests that local oscillations in strata underlying volcanoes could also explain how active volcanoes have uplifted fossil deposits of marine shells. Overall he is more inclined to believe that recent volcanoes belong to areas of subsidence rather than of elevation.