Summary

CD has spoken to Hooker of JS’s scientific merit, but has not suggested him for a colonial appointment.

Advice on style of writing.

Making extensive extract of JS’s orchid paper to communicate to Linnean Society [J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 8 (1865): 162–7].

Summary

Hooker is impressed by JS’s MS on closing of stigma.

He will help find him a position. Hooker says if it is known that JS agrees with CD’s views, he will be unpopular in Edinburgh.

Summary

Orchid paper in press.

Asks CD to correct MS of his Primula paper [J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 8 (1865): 78–126].

Summary

CD’s great interest in JS’s work on fertility of Primula crosses.

Thanks for Passiflora trials.

"By no means modify even in slightest degree any result."

CD wishes he had counted rather than weighed Primula seeds.

Summary

Discusses heterostyly in Hottonia.

Criticises L. C. Treviranus’ statements on Primula longiflora’s having short-styled form.

Describes his results with crossing different coloured primroses. Will let CD, when he reads his paper, decide whether his finding white and red varieties perfectly sterile when crossed, yet fertile inter se, ought to be published.

Difficulty in getting his orchid paper published in Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal.

Summary

Encourages JS to continue work on coloured primrose. No one has noticed this since Gärtner. CD will send his own data for JS’s use and will read MS when ready. Advises JS to repeat experiments if evidence is weak – for his reputation’s sake and for satisfaction at fully establishing a fact.

Treviranus made a slip of pen in writing of Primula longiflora as short-styled.

Summary

Thanks JS for orchid paper [Trans. Bot. Soc. Edinburgh 7 (1863): 543–50]. JS presents excellent new facts on sterility of orchids.

His argument that coloured primroses are not hybrids is good, as is idea of discovering primrose parentage by breeding for colours.

Summary

Sends Primula MS, which CD has promised to communicate to Linnean Society [see 4213].

Will soon send results on peloric Antirrhinum.

Summary

Has read JS’s paper [MS of "Observations on the functions and structure of the reproductive organs in the Primulaceae", J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 8 (1865): 78–126] which has interested him greatly. Will communicate it to the Linnean Society if JS carries out a few corrections.

Would like to hear about his Verbascum and Passiflora experiments.

Summary

Has finished correcting Primula paper [see 4332].

Has presented paper on monoecious spikes of maize [Edinburgh New Philos. J. 2d ser. 19 (1864): 213–20].

Summary

Glad CD is sending his Primula paper to Linnean Society.

Sends promised Linum seeds.

Summary

Regrets sending his MS missing two pages.

Has proofs of his paper on the monoecious spikes of maize [Edinburgh New Philos. J. 2d ser. 19 (1864): 213–20].

J. H. Balfour objected to notion of maize descent from a hermaphrodite.

Reading of JS’s paper on Selaginella hybrid [Edinburgh New Philos. J. 2d ser. 19 (1864): 192–9] deferred until March. Believes it is first example of experimentally produced hybridity in higher cryptogams.

Summary

JS’s Primula paper was read at the Linnean Society and praised warmly by G. Bentham. Hooker was not present.

Summary

Bentham so impressed with JS’s paper that he is invited to become Associate Member of Linnean Society.

Summary

Has left his position at Edinburgh Botanic Garden.

Summary

On fertilisation of Gongora.

His work on peloric Antirrhinum, Passiflora, and Verbascum, done at CD’s suggestion, is at CD’s disposal.

Summary

Surprised at CD’s account of Bryanthus.

H. Crüger’s approach to Gongora fertilisation is beset with difficulties.

Reports his work on self-sterility of Oncidium.

Summary

Regrets that JS has left the [Edinburgh] Botanic Garden and that [J. D.] Hooker is not in a position to secure a foreign appointment for him. Offers financial assistance on the grounds of science.

Has sent JS a copy of the Reader.

Summary

Thanks for CD’s consoling letter. His mind cannot concentrate after losing his position, and he feels "an inward dread of life’s future". Would have been glad to work for CD. Understands why Hooker cannot recommend him.

Summary

Encloses MS of his paper ["On individual sterility of Oncidium", J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 8 (1865): 162–7].

His next will be on Passiflora, Disemma, and Tacsonia [J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 8 (1865): 197–206].

When he receives proofs of his Primula paper he will add CD’s case about equal-styled cowslip.