Summary

Complies with correspondent’s request; encloses photographs of himself.

Summary

Letter of reference giving his opinion of the character of a man who has been his footman for a year.

Summary

In an article in Das Ausland, Zacharias explains CD’s objections to a theory of heredity outlined by Marcus Cohen. The text is an excerpt from CD’s letter to Zacharias on the subject.

Summary

Thanks for the copies of the Garden, which contain a drawing of CD and notice of his work.

Summary

Asks GHD to calculate average or mean heights of crossed and self-fertilised plant species.

Summary

Accepts WR’s offer of copies of the Garden for the next half-year.

Summary

CD has read all of WHD’s and J. J. Drysdale’s papers [on spontaneous generation, monads, and the origin of life] and finds them the best work on the subject.

The function of bladders in Utricularia is not to float the plant.

Summary

Thanks FG for his report [on the statistical validity of CD’s experiments; see Cross and self-fertilisation, pp. 16–18]. Discusses FG’s comments, his own experiments, and the means by which the results may be analysed.

Summary

Thanks EH for Arabische Korallen [1876].

Summary

EH’s Arabische Korallen is spirited, clear, and poetical. With respect to formation of islands, thinks EH lays too much stress on views of Ehrenberg. Admires drawings.

Summary

Thanks for KHvS’s book [La province de Smyrne (1873)].

Discusses possible meeting.

Summary

Obliged for Belfast Journal.

Almost impossible to determine what constitutes an individual. Definition for sexually reproducing organisms does not apply to lower ones.

Summary

Agrees to aid HA in applying for membership in a society.

Summary

Thanks for reviews of Insectivorous plants and of Climbing plants in Nation and American Journal Science [see 10329].

AG’s essay on seed dispersal ["Burs in the borage family", Am. Nat. 10 (1876): 1–4].

Preparing book on advantages of crossing [Cross and self-fertilisation].

Summary

Thanks for SL’s [Études sur les echinoïdées (1875)]. Nothing could be more difficult than the homologies of this group.

Summary

Promises to vote for Lankester.

Acknowledges faults of R. L. Tait’s paper.