■ •

ORE LETTERS 01

*

$*sT/r+/c^

MORE LETTERS OF
CHARLES DARWIN

A RECORD OF HIS WORK
IN A SERIES OF HITHERTO
UNPUBLISHED LETTERS

EDITED BY FRANCIS DARWIN, FELLOW OF
CHRIST'S COLLEGE, AND A. C. SEWARD, FELLOW
OF EMMANUEL COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE .

IN TWO VOLUMES
ILLUSTRATED

VOL. II

LONDON
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET

1903

[All lights rturvcd]

PRINTED BY

HAZELL, WATSON AND VINEY, LD.,

LONDON AND AYLESBURY.

AUG 1 it 1957

CONTEXTS OF VOLUME II

CHAPTER VII
GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION, 1867—1882.

PAGE

CHAPTER VIII

man, i860— 18S2 3°

I. Descent of Man, 1S60— 1S82 . -3°

II. Sexual Selection, 1S66— 1872 • 5^

III. EaTression, 1868—1874 • • 9S

CHAPTER IX

GEOLOGY, 1840— 1882 113

I. VuLCANicnv and Earth-movements, 1840— 18S1 113
II. Ice-action, 1S41— 18S2 . . . • .148

III. The Parallel Roads of Glen Rov, 1S41 — 1SS0 171

IV. Coral Reefs, Fossil and Recent, 1841— 1SS1 . 193
V. Cleavage and Foliation, 1S46— 1856 . -199

VI. Age of the World, 186S— 1S77 . .211

VII. Geological Action of Earth-worms, 18S0— 1SS2 212

VIII. Miscellaneous, 1S46— 187S . . . -217

CHAPTER X

BOTANY, 1843 — 1 87 1 242

I. Miscella:. 1S43 — 1S62 .... 242

II. Melastomace.*:, 1862— 1SS1 . . .

III. Correspondence with John Scott, 1S62 — iSri . 302

vi CONTENTS

CHAPTER XI

PAGE

BOTANY, 1863— 1 88 1 333

I. Miscellaneous, 1863 — 1866 .... 333

II. Correspondence with Fritz Muller, 1865— 1881 344

III. Miscellaneous, 1868— 1881 .... 371

CHAPTER XII

VIVISECTION AND MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS, 1 86?—

1882 435

I. Vivisection, 1875— 1882 • • ■ • -435
II. Miscellaneous Subjects, 1867— 1882. . . 441

ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME II

Charles Darwin, 1881 Frontispiece

From a photograph by Elliott & Fkv.

Alfred Russel Wallace, 1878 .... To face page 12

From a photograph by MAULL & Fox.

George J. Romanes, 1891 „ „ 4S

From a photograph by ELLIOTT & Fkv.
(Romanes' Life.)

Charles Lvf.i.i -.113

From a photograph by MAULL & F(
(Lycll's Life, Vol. II.i

Charles Darwin, 1854 (?) ....

From a photograph by MAULL & Fox.

Fritz Muller 344

From a photograph.

FACSIMILES OF SKETCHES IN THE

LETTERS.

PAGE

Figure i. Hypothetical Section illustrating Conti-
nental Elevation 123

„ 2. Diagram of Junction between Dike and Lava 129

„ 3. Outline of an Elliptic Crater . . .129

„ 4. Hypothetical Section showing the Relation

of Dikes to Volcanic Vents . . .130

„ 5. Map illustrating the Linear Arrangement
of Volcanic Islands in relation to Con-
tinental Coast-lines 143

„ 6. Sketch showing the Form and Distribution

of Quartz in a Foliated Rock . . . 207

7. Sketch showing the Arrangement of Felspar

and Quartz in a Metamorphic Series . 208

„ 8. Floral Diagram of an Orchid .... 274

„ 9. Dissected Flower of Habenaria Chlorantha . 277

„ 10. Diagram of a Cruciferous Flower . . . 286

„ 11. Longitudinal Section of a Cruciferous

Flower 287

„ 12. Transverse Section of the Ovary of a

Crucifer 289

„ 13.* LEAF OF Trifolium resupinatum .... 412
(Drawn by Miss Pertz.)

* Not a facsimile.

Vlll

CHARLES DARWIN

CHAPTER VII

ERRATA

Vol. II. l'agc 5, note I : for Marten's read Martins' [the name is wrongly

spelt in the Origin of Species.]
,, ,, 21, penultimate line of note : for CO' read C< >:.

,, ,, 67, note 2 : for Tryphcea read Tryphcena.

,, ,, 90, heading of letter : /<;>- G. K. II. Thwaites rtad (>. II. K.

Thwaites.
,, 113, note 1 : for Milne-IIume read Milne-Home.
,, 179, line 1. p. 193, line 10 : for Loch Loggan read Loch Laggan.
,, 211, line 13 : for Whittaker rtad Whitaker.
Pages 297, 298, headings ot" letters : for I. A. Henry I. Auderson-

Ilenry.
Page 379, note 2 : for Jenkins' r«a</Jenkin's.

0

European genera; but this is a very difficult point, and
would require a careful study of such genera and allies with
this object in view. The subject has often presented itself to
me as a grand one for analytic botany. No doubt its estab-
lishment would account for the community of the peculiar
genera on the several groups and islets, but whilst so many
species are common we must allow for a good deal of migra-
tion of peculiar genera too.

By Jove ! I will write out next mail to the Governor of
St. Helena for boxes of earth, and you shall have them to
VOL. II. ■ I

FACSIMILES OF SKETCHES IN THE

LETTERS.

PAGE

Figure i. Hypothetical Section illustrating Conti-
nental Elevation 123

,, 2. Diagram of Junction between Dike and Lava 129

„ 3. Outline of an Elliptic Crater . . .129

Crucifer 289

13. * LEAF OF Trifolium resupinatum .... 412
(Drawn by Miss Pertz.)

* Not a facsimile.

CHARLES DARWIN

CHAPTER VII

GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION

1843 — 1882

(Continued)

J. D. Hooker to C. Darwin. Letter 378

Kew, Jan. 20th, 1S67.

Prof. Miquel, of Utrecht, begs me to ask you for your
carte, and offers his in return. I grieve to bother you on
such a subject. I am sick and tired of this carte corre-
spondence. I cannot conceive what Humboldt's I'yrenean
violet is: no such is mentioned in Webb, and no alpine one
at all. I am sorry I forgot to mention the stronger African
affinity of the eastern Canary Islands. Thank you for
mentioning it. I cannot admit, without further analysis, that
most of the peculiar Atlantic Islands genera were derived
from Europe, and have since become extinct there. I have
rather thought that many are only altered forms of existing
European genera; but this is a very difficult point, and
would require a careful study of such genera and allies with
this object in view. 1 he subject has often presented itself to
me as a grand one for analytic botany. No doubt its estab-
lishment would account for the community of the peculiar
genera on the several groups and islets, but whilst so many
species are common we must allow for a good deal of migra-
tion of peculiar genera too.

By Jove ! I will write out next mail to the Governor of
St. Helena for boxes of earth, and you shall have them to
VOL. 11. » 1

2 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 378 grow. Thanks for telling me of having suggested to me the
working out of proportions of plants with irregular flowers in
islands. I thought it was a deuced deal too good an idea
to have arisen spontaneously in my block, though I did not
recollect your having done so. No doubt your suggestion
was crystallised in some corner of my sensorium. I should
like to work out the point.

Have you Kerguelen Land amongst your volcanic islands?
I have a curious book of a sealer who was wrecked on the
island, and who mentions a volcanic mountain and hot springs
at the S. W. end ; it is called the Wreck of the Favourite}

Letter 379 To J- D- Hooker.

Down, March 17 th, 1867.

It is a long time since I have written, but I cannot boast
that I have refrained from charity towards you, but from

having lots of work You ask what I have been doing.

Nothing but blackening proofs with corrections. I do not
believe any man in England naturally writes so vile a style
as I do

In your paper on Insular Floras (p. 9) there is what I
must think an error, which I before pointed out to you : viz.,
you say that the plants which are wholly distinct from those
of nearest continent are often very common2 instead of very
rare. Etty,3 who has read your paper with great interest, was
confounded by this sentence. By the way, I have stumbled

1 Narrative of the Wreck of the " Favourite" on the /stand of Desola-
tion; detailing the Adventures, Sufferings and Privations offohn Munnj
an Historical Account of the Island and its Whale and Sea Fisheries.
Edited by W. B. Clarke : London, 1850.

2 Insular Floras, pamphlet reprinted from the Gardeners' Chronicle,
p. 9 : "Asa general rule the species of the mother continent are propor-
tionally the most abundant, and cover the greatest surface of the islands.
The peculiar species are rarer, the pecular genera of continental affinity
are rarer still ; whilst the plants having no affinity with those of the
mother continent are often very common." In a letter of March 20th,
1867, Sir Joseph explains that in the case of the Atlantic islands it is
the "peculiar genera of European affinity that are so rare," while
Clethra, Dracana and the Laurels, which have no European affinity, are
common.

3 Mr. Darwin's daughter, now Mrs. Litchfield.

i867— 18S2] INSULAR FLORAS 3

on two old notes : one, that twenty-two species of European Letter 379
birds occasionally arrive as chance wanderers to the Azores ;
and, secondly, that trunks of American trees have been
known to be washed on the shores of the Canary Islands by
the Gulf- stream, which returns southward from the Azores.
\\ hat poor papers those of A. Murray are in Gardeners
Chronicle. What conclusions he draws from a single Carabus}
and that a widely ranging genus ! He seems to me con-
ceited ; you and I are fair game geologically, but he refers
to Lyell, as if his opinion on a geological point was worth
no more than his own. I have just bought, but not read
a sentence of, Murray's big book,2 second-hand, for 3CW., new,
so I do not envy the publishers. It is clear to me that
the man cannot reason. I have had a very nice letter from
Scott at Calcutta3: he has been making some good obser-
vations on the acclimatisation of seeds from plants of same
species, grown in different countries, and likewise on how-
far European plants will stand the climate of Calcutta. He
says he is astonished how well some flourish, and he main-
tains, if the land were unoccupied, several could easily cross,
spreading by seed, the Tropics from north to south, so he
knows how to please me ; but I have told him to be cautious,
else he will have dragons down on him. . . .

As the Azores are only about two-and-a-half times more
distant from America (in the same latitude) than from Europe,
on the occasional migration view (especially as oceanic
currents come directly from West Indies and Elorida, and
heavy gales of wind blow from the same direction), a large
percentage of the flora ought to be American ; as it is, we
have only the Sanicula, and at present we have no expla-
nation of this apparent anomaly, or only a feeble indication
of an explanation in the birds of the Azores being all
European.

1 "Dr. Hooker on Insular Floras" {Gardeners' Chronicle^ 1867, pp.
152, 181). The reference to the Carabidous beetle [Aplothorax) is at
p. 181.

3 Geographieal Distribution of Mammals, 1866.

3 See Letter 1 50.

4 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 380 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, March 21st [1867].

Many thanks for your pleasant and very amusing letter.
You have been treated shamefully by Etty and me, but now
that I know the facts, the sentence seems to me quite clear.
Nevertheless, as we have both blundered, it would be well
to modify the sentence something as follows : M whilst, on
the other hand, the plants which are related to those of
distant continents, but have no affinity with those of the
mother continent, are often very common." I forget whether
you explain this circumstance, but it seems to me very
mysterious.1 . . . Do always remember that nothing in the
world gives us so much pleasure as seeing you here whenever
you can come. I chuckle over what you say of And. Murray,
but I must grapple with his book some day.

Letter 381 To C. Lyell.

Down, Oct. 31st [1867].

Mr. [J. P. Mansel] Weale sent to me from Natal a small
packet of dry locust dung, under | oz., with the statement
that it is believed that they introduce new plants into a
district.2 This statement, however, must be very doubtful.
From this packet seven plants have germinated, belonging
to at least two kinds of grasses. There is no error, for I
dissected some of the seeds out of the middle of the pellets.
It deserves notice that locusts are sometimes blown far out
to sea. I caught one 370 miles from Africa, and I have
heard of much greater distances. You might like to hear the
following case, as it relates to a migratory bird belonging to
the most wandering of all orders — viz. the woodcock.3 The
tarsus was firmly coated with mud, weighing when dry

1 Sir Joseph Hooker wrote (March 23rd, 1867): "I see you 'smell a
rat ' in the matter of insular plants that are related to those of [a] distant
continent being common. Yes, my beloved friend, let me make a clean
breast of it. I only found it out after the lecture was in print ! . . . I
have been waiting ever since to ' think it out,' and write to you about it,
coherently. I thought it best to squeeze it in, anyhow or anywhere, rather
than leave so curious a fact unnoticed."

8 See Vol. I., Letter 221.

3 Origin, Ed. VI., p. 328.

1867-1882] DISPERSAL OF SEEDS 5

9 grains, and from this the /uncus bufonius, or toad rush, Letter 381
germinated. By the way, the locust case verifies what I said
in the Origin, that many possible means of distribution would

be hereafter discovered. I quite agree about the extreme
difficult}' of the distribution of land moliusca. You will have
seen in the last edition of Origin* that my observations on the
effects of sea-water have been confirmed. I still suspect that
the legs of birds which roost on the ground may be an efficient
means ; but 1 was interrupted when going to make trials on
this subject, and have never resumed it.

We shall be in London in the middle or latter part of
November, when I shall much enjoy seeing you. Emma
sends her love, and many thanks for Lady Lyell's note.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 3S2

Down, Wednesday [1867].
I daresay there is a great deal of truth in your remarks
on the glacial affair, but we are in a muddle, and shall
never agree. I am bigoted to the last inch, and will not
yield. I cannot think how you can attach so much weight
to the physicists, seeing how Hopkins, Hennessey, Haughton,
and Thomson have enormously disagreed about the rate of
cooling of the crust ; remembering Herschel's speculations
about cold space,- and bearing in mind all the recent specula-
tions on change of axis, I will maintain to the death that
your case of Fernando Po and Abyssinia :1 is worth ten times

1 Origin, Ed. iv., p. 429. The reference is to MM. Marten's experi-
ments on seeds " in a box in the actual sea."

* The reader will find some account of Herschel's views in Lyell's
Principles, 1872, Ed. xi., Vol. I., p. 283.

3 See Origin, Ed. VI., p. 337: "Dr. Hooker has also lately shown
that several of the plants living on the upper parts of the lofty island of
Fernando Po and on the neighbouring; Cameroon mountains, in the Gulf
of Guinea, are closely related to those in the mountains of At'
and likewise to those of temperate Europe." Darwin evidently means
that such facts as these are better evidence of the gigantic periods of
time occupied by evolutionary changes than the discordant conclusions
of the physicists. See Linn. Soc.Journ., Vol. VII., p. 180, for Hooker's
general conclusions ; also Hooker and Ball's Afaroa . Appendix F. p. 421.
For the case of Fernando Po see Hooker {Linn. Soc.Journ. VI., 1
p. 3, where he sums up : " Hence the result of comparm- Clarence Peak
flora [Fernando Po] with that of the African continent is — \i) the

6 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 382 more than the belief of a dozen physicists. Your remarks on
my regarding temperate plants and disregarding the tropical
plants made me at first uncomfortable, but I soon recovered.
You say that all botanists would agree that many tropical
plants could not withstand a somewhat cooler climate. But
I have come not to care at all for general beliefs without
the special facts. I have suffered too often from this : thus
I found in every book the general statement that a host
of flowers were fertilised in the bud, that seeds could not
withstand salt water, etc., etc. I would far more trust such
graphic accounts as that by you of the mixed vegetation on
the Himalayas and other such accounts. And with respect
to tropical plants withstanding the slowly coming on cool
period, I trust to such facts as yours (and others) about seeds
of the same species from mountains and plains having
acquired a slightly different climatal constitution. I know
all that I have said will excite in you savage contempt
towards me. Do not answer this rigmarole, but attack me to
your heart's content, and to that of mine, whenever you can
come here, and may it be soon.

Letter 383 J- D. Hooker to C. Darwin.

Kew, 1870.

The following extract from a letter of Sir J. D. Hooker shows the
tables reversed between the correspondents.

Grove is disgusted at your being disquieted about VV.
Thomson. Tell George from me not to sit upon you with his
mathematics. When I threatened your tropical cooling views
with the facts of the physicists, you snubbed me and the facts
sweetly, over and over again ; and now, because a scarecrow

intimate relationship with Abyssinia, of whose flora it is a member, and
from which it is separated by 1800 miles of absolutely unexplored
country ; (2) the curious relationship with the East African islands,
which are still farther off; (3) the almost total dissimilarity from the
Cape flora." For Sir J. D. Hooker's general conclusions on the Cameroon
plants see Linn. Soc.Joitrn. VII., p. 180. More recently equally striking
cases have come to light : for instance, the existence of a Mediterranean
genus, Adcnocarpus, in the Cameroons and on Kilima Njaro, and nowhere
else in Africa ; and the probable migration of South African forms along
the highlands from the Natal district to Abyssinia. See Hooker, Linn.
Soc.Journ. XIV., 1874, pp. 144-5.

i867— 1SS2] FLORA OF JAPAN ~

of x+y has been raised on the selfsame facts, you boo-bcx 383

Take another dose of Huxley's penultimate G. S. Addr>
and send George back to college.

To J. D. Hooker.

Feb. 3rd [1868].
I am now reading Miquel on Flora of J> and like

it : it is rather a relief to me (though, of course, not ne
to you) to find so very much in common with A-ia. I
wonder if A. Murray's3 notion can be correct, that a [profound]
arm of the sea penetrated the west cc - : N Americ
and prevented the Asiatico-Japan element colonising that
side of the continent so much as the eastern side ; or will
climate suffice ? I shall to the day of my death keep up
my full interest in Geograph. Distribution, but I doubt whether
I shall ever have strength to come in any fuller detail than in
the Origi)i to this grand subject. In fact. I do not suppose
any man could master so comprehensive a subject as it
now has become, if all kingdoms of nature are included. I
have read Murray's book, and am disappointed — though,
as you said, here and there clever thoughts occur. H

1 Huxley's Anniversary Address to the Geological Soc, 1S69 (Q
Essays, VIII.. p. 305). This is a criticism of Lord Kelvin's paper "On
Geological Time" (Trans. Geolog. Soc. Glasgo^c. III. . At 1 Mr.

Huxley deals with Lord Kelvin's "third line of argument, based on the
temperature of the interior of the earth." This was no doubt the point
most disturbing to Mr. Darwin, since it led Lord Kelvin to as
quoted by Huxley, "Are modern geologists prepared to say that all
life was killed off the earth 50,000, 100,000. or 200,000 years ago ? " Mr.
Huxley, after criticising Lord Kelvin's data and conclusion, gives his
conviction that the case against Geology has broken down. With regard
to evolution, Huxley (p. 32S1 ingeniously points out a case of circular
reasoning. " But it may be said that it is b and not geolo,

which asks for so much time— that the succession of life demand
intervals; but this appears to me to be reasoning in a circle. Bi
takes her time from geology. The only reason we have for be!
in the slow rate of the change in living forms is the fact that they
through a series of deposits which, geology informs us. have taken a long
while to make. If the geological clock is wrong, all the natural -
have to do is to modify his notions of the rapidity of change accordingly."

1 Miquel, " Flore du Japon " : 67.

3 Geograpk f Mammals, by Andrew Murray, 1S66.

See Chapter Y.. p. 47. See Letter 37

8 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 384 strange it is, that his view not affording the least explanation
of the innumerable adaptations everywhere to be seen
apparently does not in the least trouble his mind. One
of the most curious cases which he adduces seems to me
to be the two allied fresh-water, highly peculiar porpoises
in the Ganges and Indus ; and the more distantly allied
form of the Amazons. Do you remember his explanation
of an arm of the sea becoming cut off, like the Caspian,
converted into fresh-water, and then divided into two
lakes (by upheaval), giving rise to two great rivers. But
no light is thus thrown on the affinity of the Amazon form.
I now find from Flower's paper1 that these fresh-water
porpoises form two sub-families, making an extremely
isolated and intermediate, very small family. Hence to us
they are clearly remnants of a large group ; and I cannot
doubt we here have a good instance precisely like that of
ganoid fishes, of a large ancient marine group, preserved
exclusively in fresh-water, where there has been less
competition, and consequently little modification.2 What
a grand fact that is which Miquel gives of the beech not
extending beyond the Caucasus, and then reappearing in
Japan, like your Himalayan Pinus? and the cedar of
Lebanon. I know of nothing that gives one such an idea
of the recent mutations in the surface of the land as
these living "outlyers." In the geological sense we must,

1 Zoolog. Trans. VI., 1869, p. 115. The toothed whales are divided
into the Physeteridae, the Delphinidae, and the Platanistidae, which latter
is placed between the two other families, and is divided into the sub-
families Iniinae and Platanistinae.

3 See Vol. I., p. 143, Letter 95.

3 For Pinus read Deodar. The essential identity of the deodar and
the cedar of Lebanon was pointed out in Hooker's Himalayan Journals
in 1854 (Vol. I., p. 257. n). In the Nat. History Review, Jan., 1862,
the question is more fully dealt with by him, and the distribution
discussed. The nearest point at which cedars occur is the Bulgar-dagh
chain of Taurus — 250 miles from Lebanon. Under the name of Cedrus
atlantica the tree occurs in mass on the borders of Tunis, and as
Deodar it first appears to the east in the cedar forests of Afghanistan.
Sir J. D. Hooker supposes that, during a period of greater cold, the cedars
on the Taurus and on Lebanon lived many thousand feet nearer the
sea-level, and spread much farther to the east, meeting similar belts of
trees descending and spreading westward from Afghanistan along the
Persian mountains,

i867— 1882] INSULAR FLORAS 9

I suppose, admit that every yard of land has been Leu**
successively covered with a beech forest between the
Caucasus and Japan !

I have not yet seen (for I have not sent to the station)
Falconer's works. When you say that you sigh to think
how poor your reprinted memoirs would appear, on my
soul I should like to shake you till your bones rattled for
talking such nonsense. Do you sigh over the Insular
Floras, the Introduction to New Zealand Flora, to Australia,
your Arctic Flora, and dear Galapagos, etc., etc., etc. ? In
imagination I am grinding my teeth and choking you till
I put sense into you. Farewell. I have amused myself by
writing an audaciously long letter. By the way, we heard
yesterday that George has won the second Smith's Prize,
which I am excessively glad of, as the Second Wrangler
by no means always succeeds. The examination consists
exclusively of [the] most difficult subjects, which such men
as Stokes, Cayley, and Adams can set.

A. R. Wallace to C Darwin. Letter 385

March 8th, 1S68.

. . . While writing a few pages on the northern alpine
forms of plants on the Java mountains I wanted a few cases
to refer to like Teneriffe, where there are no northern forms
and scarcely any alpine. I expected the volcanoes of
Hawaii would be a good case, and asked Dr. Seemann about
them. It seems a man has lately published a list of
Hawaiian plants, and the mountains swarm with European
alpine genera and some species ! ' Is not this most
extraordinary, and a puzzler? They are, I believe, truly
oceanic islands, in the absence of mammals and the extreme
poverty of birds and insects, and they are within the
Tropics.

Will not that be a hard nut for you when you come
to treat in detail on geographical distribution ? I enclose
Seemann's note, which please return when you have copied
the list, if of any use to you.

1 "This turns out to be inaccurate, or greatly exaggerated. There are
no true alpines, and the European genera are comparatively few. See
my Island Life, p. 323."— A. R. W.

lO GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 386 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, Feb. 21st [1870].
I read yesterday the notes on Round Island l which I
owe to you. Was there ever such an enigma? If, in the
course of a week or two, you can find time to let me hear
what you think, I should very much like to hear : or we
hope to be at Erasmus' on March 4th for a week. Would
there be any chance of your coming to luncheon then ?
What a case it is. Palms, screw-pines, four snakes — not
one being in main island — lizards, insects, and not one
land bird. But, above everything, such a proportion of
individual monocotyledons ! The conditions do not seem
very different from the Tuff Galapagos Island, but, as
far as I remember, very few monocotyledons there. Then,
again, the island seems to have been elevated. I wonder
much whether it stands out in the line of any oceanic
current, which does not so forcibly strike the main island ?
But why, oh, why should so many monocotyledons have come
there? or why should they have survived there more than
on the main island, if once connected ? So, again, I cannot
conceive that four snakes should have become extinct in
Mauritius and survived on Round Island. For a moment
I thought that Mauritius might be the newer island but the
enormous degradation which the outer ring of rocks has
undergone flatly contradicts this, and the marine remains
on the summit of Round Island indicate the island to be
comparatively new — unless, indeed, they are fossil and extinct
marine remains. Do tell me what you think. There never
was such an enigma. I rather lean to separate immigration,
with, of course, subsequent modification ; some forms, of

1 In Wallace's Island Life, p. 410, Round Island is described as an
islet " only about a mile across, and situated about fourteen miles
north-east of Mauritius." Wallace mentions a snake, a python belonging
to the peculiar and distinct genus Casarea, as found on Round Island,
and nowhere else in the world. The palm Latania Loddigesii is
quoted by Wallace as " confined to Round Island and two other adjacent
islets." See Baker's Flora of the Mauritius and the Seychelles. Mr.
Wallace says that, judging from the soundings, Round Island was
connected with Mauritius, and that when it was "first separated [it]
would have been both much larger and much nearer the main
island."

1867 -1882] ROUND ISLAND II

course, also coming from Mauritius. Speaking of Mauritius Letter 386
reminds me that I was so much pl< ased the day bei

yesterday by reading a review of a book on the geol
St. Helena, by an officer who knew nothing of my hurried
observations, but confirms nearly all that 1 have said on
the general structure of the island, and on its marvellous
denudation. The geology of that island was like a novel.

To A. Blytt.1 Letter 387

Down, March 28th, 1876.

The following refers to Blytt's Essay on the Immigration of the Nor-
wegian Flora during Alternating Rainy and Dry Periods, Christiania,
1876.

I thank you sincerely for your kindness in having sent
me your work on the Immigration of the Norwegian Flora,
which has interested me in the highest degree. Your view,
supported as it is by various facts, appears to me the most
important contribution towards understanding the present
distribution of plants, which has appeared since Forbes' essay
on the effects of the Glacial Period.

To Aug. Forel. Letter 3SS

Down, June 19th, 1876.

I hope you will allow me to suggest an observation,
should any opportunity occur, on a point which has interested
me for many years — viz., how do the coleoptera which inhabit
the nests of ants colonise a new nest?2 Mr. Wallace, in
reference to the presence of such coleoptera in Madeira,
suggests that their ova may be attached to the winged
female ants, and that these are occasionally blown across
the ocean to the island. It would be very interesting to

1 Axel Gudbrand Blytt (1843-98), the son of the well-known systematist
M. N. Blytt. He was attached to the Christiania Herbarium in i^
and in [880 became Professor of Botany in the University. His best-known
work is the essay referred to above, but he was also known for purely
systematic work in Botany as well as for meteorological and geological
contributions to science. The above tacts are taken from C. Holtermani
obituary notice in the Berichte der Deutschen Bot. Gesell., Vol. XVI 1..
1899.

Auguste Forel, the distinguished author of Les Fourtm't de la Suisse,
Zurich, 1874, and of a long series of well-known papers.

12 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 388 discover whether the ova are adhesive, and whether the
female coleoptera are guided by instinct to attach them to
the female ants 1 ; or whether the larvae pass through an
early stage, as with Sitaris or Meloe, or cling to the bodies
of the females. This note obviously requires no answer.
I trust that you continue your most interesting investigations
on ants.

Letter 389 To A. R. Wallace.2

The following five letters refer to Mr. Wallace's Geographical Distri-
bution of Animals, 1876.

[Hopedene]3, June 5th, 1876.

I must have the pleasure of expressing to you my
unbounded admiration of your book,4 though I have read only
to page 184 — my object having been to do as little as
possible while resting. I feel sure that you have laid a
broad and safe foundation for all future work on Distribution.
How interesting it will be to see hereafter plants treated in
strict relation to your views ; and then all insects, pulmonate
molluscs and fresh-water fishes, in greater detail than I
suppose you have given to these lower animals. The point
which has interested me most, but I do not say the most
valuable point, is your protest against sinking imaginary
continents in a quite reckless manner, as was stated by
Forbes, followed, alas, by Hooker, and caricatured by
Wollaston and [Andrew] Murray ! By the way, the main
impression that the latter author has left on my mind is his
utter want of all scientific judgment. I have lifted up my
voice against the above view with no avail, but I have no

1 Dr. Sharp is good enough to tell us that he is not aware of any such
adaptation. Broadly speaking, the distribution of the nest-inhabiting
beetles is due to co-migration with the ants, though in some cases the
ants transport the beetles. Sitaris and Meloe are beetles which live " at
the expense of bees of the genus Anthophora." The eggs are laid not in
but near the bees' nest ; in the early stage the larva is active and has the
instinct to seize any hairy object near it, and in this way they are carried by
the Anthophora to the nest. Dr. Sharp states that no such preliminary
stage is known in the ant's-nest beetles. For an account of Sitaris and
Meloe, see Sharp's Insects, II., p. 272.

2 Published in Life and Letters, III., p. 230.

3 Mr. Hensleigh Wedgwood's house in Surrey.

4 Geographical Distribution, 1876.

From n /'/■■■ >tograph by Maul! d Fox

Mr. A. R. Wai i ace
1878

1867—1882] Wallace's book 13

doubt that you will succeed, owing to your new argument! 389

and the coloured chart. Of a special value, as it seems to
me, is the conclusion that we must determine the an
chiefly by the nature of the mammals. When I worked
many years ago on this subject, I doubted much whether
the now-called Palaearctic and Nearctic regions ought to be
separated ; and I determined if 1 made another region that
it should be Madagascar. I have, therefore, been able to
appreciate your evidence on these points. What progress
Palaeontology has made during the last twenty years ! but
if it advances at the same rate in the future, our views on
the migration and birthplace of the various groups will, I
fear, be greatly altered. I cannot feel quite easy about the
Glacial period, and the extinction of large mammals, but I
must hope that you are right. I think you will have to
modify your belief about the difficulty of dispersal of land
molluscs ; I was interrupted when beginning to experimentise
on the: just hatched young adhering to the feet of ground-
roosting birds. I differ on one other point — viz. in the belief
that there must have existed a Tertiary Antarctic continent,
from which various forms radiated to the southern extremities
of our present continents. But I could go on scribbling for
ever. You have written, as 1 believe, a grand and memorable
work, which will last for years as the foundation for all future
treatises on Geographical Distribution.

P.S. — You have paid me the highest conceivable com-
pliment, by what you say of your work in relation to my
chapters on distribution in the Origin, and I heartily thank
you for it.

From A. R. Wallace to C. Darwin. Letter 390

The Dell, Grays, Essex, June 7th. 1S76.
Many thanks for your very kind letter. So f« w people
will read my book at all regularly, that a criticism from one
who does so will be very welcome. If, as I sup] ose, it
only to p. 1S4 of Vol. I. that you have read, you cannot
yet quite see my conclusions on the points you refer to inland
molluscs and Antarctic continent). My own conclusion
fluctuated during the progress of the book, and 1 hive, I
know, occasionally used expressions (the relics of earlier
ideas) which are not quite consistent with what I say

14 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 390 further on. I am positively against any Southern continent
as uniting South America with Australia or New Zealand,
as you will see at Vol. I., pp. 398-403, and 459-66. My
general conclusions as to distribution of land mollusca1 are
at Vol. II., pp. 522-9. When you have read these passages,
and looked at the general facts which lead to them, I shall
be glad to hear if you still differ from me.

Though, of course, present results as to the origin and
migrations of genera of mammals will have to be modified
owing to new discoveries, I cannot help thinking that much
will remain unaffected, because in all geographical and
geological discoveries the great outlines are soon reached,
the details alone remain to be modified. I also think much
of the geological evidence is now so accordant with, and
explanatory of, Geographical Distribution, that it is prima
facie correct in outline. Nevertheless, such vast masses of
new facts will come out in the next few years that I quite
dread the labour of incorporating them in a new edition.

I hope your health is improved ; and when, quite at your
leisure, you have waded through my book, I trust you will
again let me have a few lines of friendly criticism and advice.

Letter 391 To A. R. Wallace.

Down, June 17th, 1876.
I have now finished the whole of Vol. I., with the same
interest and admiration as before ; and I am convinced that
my judgment was right and that it is a memorable book,
the basis of all future work on the subject. I have nothing
particular to say, but perhaps you would like to hear my
impressions on two or three points. Nothing has struck
me more than the admirable and convincing manner in
which you treat Java. To allude to a very trifling point,
it is capital about the unadorned head of the Argus-pheasant.2

1 Geogr. Distrib., II., pp. 524, 525. Mr. Wallace points out that
"hardly a small island on the globe but has some land- shells peculiar to
it " — and he goes so far as to say that probably air-breathing mollusca
have been chiefly distributed by air- or water-carriage, rather than by
voluntary dispersal on the land.

2 See Descent of Man, Ed. 1., pp. 90 and 143, for drawings of the
Argus pheasant and its markings. The ocelli on the wing feathers were
favourite objects of Mr. Darwin, and sometimes formed the subject of the

1867-1882] WALLACE'S BOOK I 5

How plain a thing is, when it is once pointed out ! What letter 391
a wonderful case is that of Celebes : I am glad that you
have slightly modified your views with respect to Africa.1
And this leads me to say that I cannot swallow the so-called
continent of Lemuria — i.e., the direct connection of Africa
and Ceylon.2 The facts do not seem to me many and
strung enough to justify so immense a change of level.
Moreover, Mauritius and the other islands appear to me
oceanic in character. But do not suppose that I place my
judgment on this subject on a level with yours. A wonder-
fully good paper was published about a year ago on India,
in the Geolog. Journal, 1 think by Blanford.3 Ramsay
agreed with me that it was one of the best published for a
long time. The author shows that India has been a continent

little lectures which on rare occasions he would give to a visitor interested
in Natural History. In Mr. Wallace's book the meaning of the ocelli
comes in by the way, in the explanation of Plate IX., "A Malayan Forest
with some of its peculiar Birds. >: Mr. Wallace (vol. i., p. 340) points out
that the head of the Argus pheasant is, during the display of the wings,
concealed from the view of a spectator in front, and this accounts for the
absence of bright colour on the head — a most unusual point in a pheasant.
The case is described as a "remarkable confirmation of Mr. Darwin's
views, that gaily coloured plumes are developed in the male bird for the
purpose of attractive display." For the difference of opinion between the
two naturalists on the broad question of coloration see Life and Letters,
III., p. 123. See Letters 440-453, pp. 72 et seq.

1 " I think this must refer to the following passage in Geog. Dist. of
Animals, Vol. I., pp. 286-7. 'At this period (Miocene) Madagascar was
no doubt united with Africa, and helped to form a great southern continent
which must at one time have extended eastward as far as Southern India
and Ceylon; and over the whole of this the lemurine type no doubt
prevailed.' At the time this was written I had not paid so much attention
to islands, and in my Island Life I have given ample reasons for un-
belief that the evidence of extinct animals does not require any direct
connection between Southern India and Africa." — Note by Mr. Wallace.

3 See Geog. Dist., I., p. 76. The name Lemuria was proposed by Mr.
Sclater for an imaginary submerged continent extending from M ar

to Ceylon and Sumatra. Mr. Wallace points out that if we confine our-
selves to facts Lemuria is reduced to Madagascar, which he makes a
subdivision of the Ethiopian Region.

3 H. F. Blanford " On the Age and Correlations of the Plant-bearing
Series of India and the Former Existence of an Indo-Oceanic Continent "
{Quart. fottrn. Geo/. Soc.y XXXI.. 1 875, p. 519). The name Gondwana-Land
was subsequently suggested by Professor Suess for this Indo-Oceanic

l6 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 391 with enormous fresh-water lakes, from the Permian period to
the present day. If I remember right, he believes in a former
connection with S. Africa.

I am sure that I read, some twenty to thirty years ago
in a French journal, an account of teeth of Mastodon x found
in Timor ; but the statement may have been an error.

With respect to what you say about the colonising of
New Zealand, I somewhere have an account of a frog frozen
in the ice of a Swiss glacier, and which revived when thawed.
I may add that there is an Indian toad which can resist
salt-water and haunts the seaside. Nothing ever astonished
me more than the case of the Galaxias ; 2 but it does not
seem known whether it may not be a migratory fish like
the salmon.

Letter 392 To A. R. Wallace.

Down, June 25th, 1876.

I have been able to read rather more quickly of late, and
have finished your book. I have not much to say. Your
careful account of the temperate parts of South America
interested me much, and all the more from knowing some-
thing of the country. I like also much the general remarks
towards the end of the volume on the land molluscs. Now
for a few criticisms.

P. 122.3 — I am surprised at your saying that "during the
whole Tertiary period North America was zoologically far
more strongly contrasted with South America than it is now."
But we know hardly anything of the latter except during the
Pliocene period ; and then the mastodon, horse, several great
edentata, etc., etc., were common to the north and south. If

continent. Since the publication of Blanford's paper, much literature has
appeared dealing with the evidence furnished by fossil plants, etc., in
favour of the existence of a vast southern continent.

1 In a letter to Falconer (Letter 155), Jan. 5th, 1863, Darwin refers
to the supposed occurrence of Mastodon as having been "smashed" by
Falconer.

2 The only genus of the Galaxida?, a family of fresh-water fishes
occurring in New Zealand, Tasmania, and Terra del Fuego, ranging
north as far as Queensland and Chile (Wallace's Geogr. Distrib., II.,
p. 448).

3 The pages refer to Vol. II. of Wallace's Geographical Distribution.

i867— 1882] WALLACE'S HOOK 1 7

you are right, I erred greatly in my Journal^ where I insisted Letter 392
on the former close connection between the two.

P. 252 and elsewhere. — I agree thoroughly with the general
principle that a great area with many competing forms is
necessary for much and high development ; but do you not
extend this principle too far — I should say much too far,
considering how often several species of the same genus have
been developed on very small islands?

P. 265.— You say that the Sittidae extend to Madagascar,
but there is no number in the tabular heading. [The number
(4) was erroneously omitted. — A. R. \V.]

p. 359. — Rhinochetus is entered in the tabular heading
under No. 3 of the neotropical subregions. [An error: should
have been the Australian. — A. R. \\ '.]

Reviewers think it necessary to find some fault ; and if I
were to review you, the sole point which I should blame is
your not giving very numerous references. These would
save whoever follows you great labour. Occasionally I
wished myself to know the authority for certain statements,
and whether you or somebody else had originated certain
subordinate views. Take the case of a man who had collected
largely on some island, for instance St. Helena, and who
wished to work out the geographical relations of his collec-
tions : he would, I think, feel very blank at not finding in
your work precise references to all that had been written on
St. Helena. I hope you will not think me a confoundedly
disagreeable fellow.

1 may mention a capital essay which I received a feu-
months ago from Axel Blytt x on the distribution of the
plants of Scandinavia ; showing the high probability of
there having been secular periods alternately wet and dry.
and of the important part which they have played in dis-
tribution.

I wrote to Forel,2 who is always at work on ants, and told
him your views about the dispersal of the blind coleoptcra,
and asked him to observe.

I spoke to Hooker about your book, and feel sure that he
would like nothing bitter than to consider the distribution of

1 Axel Blytt, Essay on the Immigration of th N
Christiania, 1876. See Letter 387.
s See Letter 388.
VOL. II. 2

l8 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 392 plants in relation to your views ; but he seemed to doubt
whether he should ever have time.

And now I have done my jottings, and once again con-
gratulate you on having brought out so grand a work. I
have been a little disappointed at the review in Nature}

Letter 393 A. R. Wallace to C. Darwin.

Rosehill, Dorking, July 23rd, 1876.

I should have replied sooner to your last kind and
interesting letters, but they reached me in the midst of my
packing previous to removal here, and I have only just now
got my books and papers in a get-at-able state.

And first, many thanks for your close observation in
detecting the two absurd mistakes in the tabular headings.

As to the former greater distinction of the North and
South American faunas, I think I am right. The edentata
being proved (as I hold) to have been mere temporary
migrants into North America in the post-Pliocene epoch,
form no part of its Tertiary fauna. Yet in South America
they were so enormously developed in the Pliocene epoch
that we know, if there is any such thing as evolution, etc.,
that strange ancestral forms must have preceded them in
Miocene times.

Mastodon, on the other hand, represented by one or two
species only, appears to have been a late immigrant into
South America from the north.

The immense development of ungulates (in varied
families, genera, and species) in North America during the
whole Tertiary epoch is, however, the great feature which
assimilates it to Europe, and contrasts it with South America.
True camels, hosts of hog-like animals, true rhinoceroses,
and hosts of ancestral horses, all bring the North American
[fauna] much nearer to the Old World than it is now.
Even the horse, represented in all South America by Equus
only, was probably a temporary immigrant from the north.

As to extending too far the principle (yours) of the
necessity of comparatively large areas for the development
of varied faunas, I may have done so, but I think not.
There is, I think, every probability that most islands, etc.,

1 June 22nd, 1876, pp. 165 et seq.

i867— 1882] WALLACE'S BOOK 19

where a varied fauna now exists, have been once more Letter 393
extensive — e.g., New Zealand, Madagascar: where there is
no such evidence {e.g., Galapagos , the fauna is very restricted.

Lastly, as to want of references : I confess the justice of
your criticism ; but 1 am dreadfully unsystematic. It is my
first large work involving much of the labour of others. I
began with the intention of writing a comparatively short
sketch, enlarged it, and added to it bit by bit ; remodelled
the tables, the heading, and almost everything else, more
than once, and got my materials in such confusion that it
is a wonder it has not turned out far more crooked and
confused than it is. I, no doubt, ought to have given
references ; but in many cases I found the information so
small and scattered, and so much had to be combined and
condensed from conflicting authorities, that I hardly knew
how to refer to them or where to leave off. Had I referred
to all authors consulted for ever}' fact, I should have greatly
increased the bulk of the book, while a large portion of the
references would be valueless in a few years, owing to later
and better authorities. My experience of referring to re-
ferences has generally been most unsatisfactory. One finds,
nine times out of ten, the fact is stated, and nothing more ;
or a reference to some third work not at hand !

I wish I could get into the habit of giving chapter and
verse for every fact and extract ; but I am too lazy, and
generally in a hurry, having to consult books against time,
when in London for a day.

However, I will try to do something to mend this matter,
should I have to prepare another edition.

I return you Forel's letter. It does not advance the
question much ; neither do I think it likely that even
the complete observation he thinks necessary would be of
much use, because it may well be that the ova, or lar\ .
or imagos of the beetles are not carried systematically by
the ants, but only occasionally, owing to some exceptional
circumstances. This might produce a great effect in distri-
bution, yet be so rare as never to come under observation.

Several of your remarks in previous letters I shall
carefully consider. I know that, compared with the extent
of the subject, my book is in many parts crude and
ill-considered ; but I thought, and still think, it better to

20 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 393 make some generalisations wherever possible, as I am not
at all afraid of having to alter my views in many points of
detail. I was so overwhelmed with zoological details, that
I never went through the Geological Society's Journal as I
ought to have done, and as I mean to do before writing more
on the subject.

Letter 394 To F. Buchanan White.1

Down, Sept. 23rd [1878].
I have now read your paper, and I hope that you will not
think me presumptuous in writing another line to say how
excellent it seems to me. I believe that you have largely
solved the problem of the affinities of the inhabitants of this
most interesting little island, and this is a delightful triumph.

Letter 395 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, July 22nd [1879].
I have just read Ball's Essay.2 It is pretty bold. The
rapid development as far as we can judge of all the higher
plants within recent geological times is an abominable

1 " Written in acknowledgment of a copy of a paper (published by me
in the Proceedings of the Zoolog. Soc.) on the Hemiptera of St. Helena,
but discussing the origin of the whole fauna and flora of that island." —
F. B. W.

s The late John Ball's lecture " On the Origin of the Flora of the
Alps" in the Proceedings of the R. Geogr. Soc, 1879. Ball argues (p. 18)
that " during ancient Palaeozoic times, before the deposition of the Coal-
measures, the atmosphere contained twenty times as much carbonic acid
gas and considerably less oxygen than it does at present." He further
assumes that in such an atmosphere the percentage of CO. in the higher
mountains would be excessively different from that at the sea-level,
and appends the result of calculations which gives the amount of C02
at the sea-level as 100 per 10,000 by weight, at a height of 10,000 feet
as I2"5 per 10,000. Darwin understands him to mean that the Vascular
Cryptogams and Gymnosperms could stand the sea-level atmosphere,
whereas the Angiosperms would only be able to exist in the higher
regions where the percentage of C02 was small. It is not clear to us that
Ball relies so largely on the condition of the atmosphere as regards C02.
If he does he is clearly in error, for everything we know of assimilation
points to the conclusion that 100 per 10,000 (1 per cent.) is by no
means a hurtful amount of CO.,, and that it would lead to an especially
vigorous assimilation. Mountain plants would be more likely to descend
to the plains to share in the rich feast than ascend to higher regions to

i867— 1882] EVOLUTION OF ANGIOSPERMS 21

mystery. Certainly it would be a great step if \vc could Letter 395
believe that the higher plants at first could live only at a high
level; but until it is experimentally [proved] that Cycadeae,

ferns, etc., can withstand much more carbonic acid than the.
higher plants, the hypothesis seems to me far too rash.
Saporta believes that there was an astonishingly rapid
development of the high plants, as soon [as] flower-frequent-
ing insects were developed and favoured intercrossing. I
should like to see this whole problem solved. I have fancied

avoid it. Ball draws attention to the imperfection of our plant records
as regards the floras of mountain regions. It is, he thinks, conceivable
that there existed a vegetation on the Carboniferous mountains of which
no traces have been preserved in the rocks. See Fossil Plants as Tests
of Climate, p. 40, A. C. Seward, 1892.

Since the first part of this note was written, a paper has been read
(May 29th, 1902) by Dr. H. T. Brown and Mr. F. Escombe, before the
Royal Society on "The Influence of varying amounts of Carbon Dioxide
in the Air on the Photosynthetic Process of Leaves, and on the Mode of
Growth of Plants.1' The author's experiments included the cultivation
of several dicotyledonous plants in an atmosphere containing in one case
180 to 200 times the normal amount of CO., and in another between
three and four times the normal amount. The general results were
practically identical in the two sets of experiments. " All the species
of flowering plants, which have been the subject of experiment, appear
to be accurately 'tuned' to an atmospheric environment of three parts
of CO. per 10,000, and the response which they make to slight increases
in this amount are in a direction altogether unfavourable to their growth
and reproduction." The assimilation of carbon increases with the increase
in the partial pressure of the CO._. But there seems to be a disturbance
in metabolism, and the plants fail to take advantage of the increased
supply of CO.,. The authors say : — " All we are justified in concluding
is, that if such atmospheric variations have occurred since the advent of
flowering plants, they must have taken place so slowly as never to outrun
the possible adaptation of the plants to their changing conditio'..

Prof. Farmer and Mr. S. E. Chandler gave an account, at the same
meeting of the Royal Society, of their work "On the Influence of an
Excess of Carbon Dioxide in the Air on the Form and Internal Structure
of Plants." The results obtained were described as differing in a remark-
able way from those pieviously recorded by Teodoresco \Rr,\ Gen.
Botaniqut, II., 1899).

It is hoped that Dr. Horace Brown and Mr. Escombe will extend
their experiments to Vascular Cryptogams, and thus obtain evidence
bearing more directly upon the question of an increased amount of CO1
in the atmosphere of the Coal-period forests.

22 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 395 tjiat perhapS there was during long ages a small isolated
continent in the S. Hemisphere which served as the birth-
place of the higher plants — but this is a wretchedly poor
conjecture. It is odd that Ball does not allude to the obvious
fact that there must have been alpine plants before the
Glacial period, many of which would have returned to the
mountains after the Glacial period, when the climate again
became warm. I always accounted to myself in this manner
for the gentians, etc.

Ball ought also to have considered the alpine insects
common to the Arctic regions. I do not know how it may
be with you, but my faith in the glacial migration is not at all
shaken.

Letter 396 A. R. Wallace to C. Darwin.

This letter is in reply to Mr. Darwin's criticisms on Mr. Wallace's
Island Life, 1880.

Pen-y-Bryn, St. Peter's Road, Croydon, Nov. 8th, 1880.
Many thanks for your kind remarks and notes on my book.
Several of the latter will be of use to me if I have to prepare a
second edition, which I am not so sure of as you seem to be.

1. In your remark as to the doubtfulness of paucity of
fossils being due to coldness of water, I think you overlook
that I am speaking only of water in the latitude of the Alps,
in Miocene and Eocene times, when icebergs and glaciers
temporarily descended into an otherwise warm sea ; my
theory being that there was no Glacial epoch at that time, but
merely a local and temporary descent of the snow-line and
glaciers owing to high excentricity and winter in aphelion.

2. I cannot see the difficulty about the cessation of the
Glacial period.

Between the Miocene and the Pleistocene periods geo-
graphical changes occurred which rendered a true Glacial
period possible with high excentricity. When the high
excentricity passed away the Glacial epoch also passed away
in the temperate zone ; but it persists in the arctic zone,
where, during the Miocene, there were mild climates, and this
is due to the persistence of the changed geographical con-
ditions. The present arctic climate is itself a comparatively
new and abnormal state of things, due to geographical
modification.

1867-1882] ISLAND LIFE 23

As to " epoch " and " period," I use them as synonyms to Letter 396
avoid repeating the same word.

3. Rate of deposition and geological time. Here no doubt
I may have gone to an extreme, but my " 2S million

may be anything under 100 millio: i state. I In r i n

enormous difference between mean and maximum denudation
and deposition. In the case of the great faults the upheaval
along a given line would itself facilitate the denudation
(whether sub-aerial or marine) of the upheaved portion at a
rate perhaps a hundred times above the average, just as
valleys have been denuded perhaps a hundred times faster
than plains and plateaux. So local subsidence might itself
lead to very rapid deposition. Suppose a portion of the Gulf
of Mexico, near the mouths of the Mississippi, were to subside
for a few thousand years, it might receive the greater portion
of the sediment from the whole Mississippi valley, and thus
form strata at a very rapid rate.

4. You quote the Pampas thistles, etc., against my state-
ment of the importance of preoccupation. But I am referring
especially to St. Helena, and to plants naturally introduced
from the adjacent continents. Surely if a certain number of
African plants reached the island, and became modified into
a complete adaptation to its climatic conditions, they would
hardly be expelled by other African plants arriving subse-
quently. They might be so, conceivably, but it does not seem
probable, i he cases of the Pampas, New Zealand, Tahiti, etc.,
are very different, where highly developed aggressive plants
have been artificially introduced. Under nature it is these
very aggressive species that would first reach any island in
their vicinity, and, being adapted to the island and colonising
it thoroughly, would then hold their own against other plants
from the same country, mostly less aggressive in character.

I have not explained this so fully as I should have done
in the book. Your criticism is therefore useful.

5. My Chapter Will, is no doubt very speculative, and
I cannot wonder at your hesitating at accepting my views.
To me, however, your theory of hosts of existing species
migrating over the tropical lowlands from the N. temperate
to the S. temperate zone appears more speculative and more
improbable. For where could the rich lowland equatorial
flora have existed during a period of general refrigeration

24 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 396 sufficient for this ? and what became of the wonderfully rich
Cape flora, which, if the temperature of tropical Africa had
been so recently lowered, would certainly have spread north-
wards, and on the return of the heat could hardly have been
driven back into the sharply defined and very restricted area
in which it now exists.

As to the migration of plants from mountain to mountain
not being so probable as to remote islands, I think that is
fully counterbalanced by two considerations : —

a. The area and abundance of the mountain stations along
such a range as the Andes are immensely greater than those
of the islands in the N. Atlantic, for example.

b. The temporary occupation of mountain stations by
migrating plants (which 1 think I have shown to be probable)
renders time a much more important element in increasing
the number and variety of the plants so dispersed than in the
case of islands, where the flora soon acquires a fixed and
endemic character, and where the number of species is
necessarily limited.

No doubt direct evidence of seeds being carried great
distances through the air is wanted, but 1 am afraid can
hardly be obtained. Yet I feel the greatest confidence that
they are so carried. Take, for instance, the two peculiar
orchids of the Azores {Habenaria sp.) What other mode of
transit is conceivable? The whole subject is one of great
difficulty, but I hope my chapter may call attention to a
hitherto neglected factor in the distribution of plants.

Your references to the Mauritius literature are very
interesting, and will be useful to me ; and I again thank
you for your valuable remarks.

Letter 397 To J- D- Hooker.

The following letters were written to Sir J. D. Hooker when he was
preparing his Address as President of the Geographical Section of the
British Association at its fiftieth meeting, at York. The second letter
(August 1 2th) refers to an earlier letter of August 6th, published in Life
and Letters, III., p. 246.

4, Bryanston Street, W., Saturday, 26th [Feb., 188 1].

I should think that you might make a very interesting
address on Geographical Distribution. Could you give a little
history of the subject. I, for one, should like to read such

1867-1882] ISLAND LIF1 25

history in petto ; but I can see one very great difficulty — that Letter 397

you yourself ought to figure most prominently in it ; and this

you would not do, for you are just the man to treat yourself

in a dishonourable manner. I should very much like to

you discuss some of Wallace's views, especially his ignor

the all-powerful effects of the Glacial period ' with respect

alpine plants. 1 d»> not know what you think, but it appears

to me that he exaggerates enormously the influence of debacles

or slips and new surface of soil being exposed for the reception

of wind-blown seeds. What kinds of seeds have the plants

which are common to the distant mountain-summits in

Africa ? Wallace lately wrote to me about the mountain

plants of .Madagascar 2 being the same with those on mountains

in Africa, and seemed to think it proved dispersal by the wind,

1 " Having been kindly permitted by Mr. Francis Darwin to read this
letter, I wish to explain that the above statement applies only to my
rejection of Darwin's view that the presence of arctic and north temperate
plants in the southern hemisphere was brought about by the lowering of
the temperature of the tropical regions during the Glacial period, so that
even ' the lowlands of these great continents were everywhere tenanted
under the equator by a considerable number of temperate forms {Origin
of Species, Ed. VI., p. 338). My own views are fully explained in
Chapter XXI 1 1 of my Island Life, published in 1880. I quite accept all
that Darwin, Hooker, and Asa Gray have written about the effect of the
Glacial epoch in bringing about the present distribution of alpine and
arctic plants in the northern hemisphere." — Note by Mr. Wallace.

! The affinity with the flora of the Eastern African islands was long
ago pointed out by Sir J. D. Hooker, Linn. Soc. Journal, VI., 1861, p. 3.
Speaking of the plants of Clarence Peak in Fernando Po, he says, " The
next affinity is with Mauritius, Bourbon, and Madagascar : of the whole 76
species, 16 inhabit these places and 8 more are closely allied to plants
from there. Three temperate species are peculiar to Clarence Peak and
the East African islands. ..." The facts to which Mr. Wallace called
Darwin's atU'iuion are given by Mr. J. < '. Baker in Nature, Dec. 9th, 1S80,
p. 125. He mentions the Madagascar I'io.'a. which occurs elsewhere only
at 7,000 ft. in the Cameroons, at 10.000 ft. in Fernando Po and in the
Abyssinian mountains ; and the same thing is true of the Ma ir

Geranium. In Mr. Wallace's letter to Darwin, dated Jan 1st, 18S1, he
evidently uses the expression "passing through the air"' in contradis-
tinction to the migration of a species by gradual extension of its area
on land. " Through the air " would moreover include occasional modes
of transport other than simple carriage by wind : e.g., the seeds might
be carried by birds, either attached to the feathers or to the mud on their
feet, or in their crops or intestines.

26 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 397 without apparently having inquired what sorts of seeds the
plants bore.

I suppose it would be travelling too far (though for the
geographical section the discussion ought to be far-reaching),
but I should like to see the European or northern element in
the Cape of Good Hope flora discussed. I cannot swallow
Wallace's view that European plants travelled down the
Andes, tenanted the hypothetical Antarctic continent (in
which I quite believe), and thence spread to South Australia
and the Cape of Good Hope.

Moseley told me not long ago that he proposed to search
at Kerguelen Land the coal beds most carefully, and was
absolutely forbidden to do so by Sir W. Thomson, who said
that he would undertake the work, and he never once visited
them. This puts me in a passion. I hope that you will keep
to your intention and make an address on distribution.
Though I differ so much from Wallace, his Island Life seems
to me a wonderful book.

Farewell. I do hope that you may have a most prosperous
journey. Give my kindest remembrances to Asa Gray.

Letter 398 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, Aug. 12th, 1881.

... I think that I must have expressed myself badly
about Humboldt. I should have said that he was more
remarkable for his astounding knowledge than for originality.
I have always looked at him as, in fact, the founder of the
geographical distribution of organisms. I thought that I had
read that extinct fossil plants belonging to Australian forms
had lately been found in Australia, and all such cases seem to
me very interesting, as bearing on development.

I have been so astonished at the apparently sudden coming
in of the higher phanerogams, that I have sometimes fancied
that development might have slowly gone on for an immense
period in some isolated continent or large island, perhaps near
the South Pole. I poured out my idle thoughts in writing, as
if I had been talking with you.

No fact has so interested me for a heap of years as your
case of the plants on the equatorial mountains of Africa ;
and Wallace tells me that some one (Baker ?) has described

i867— 1882] I •< OLUTION OF ANGIOSPERMS

analogous cases on the mountains of Madagascar.1 ... I Letter 398
think that you ought to allude to these cases.

I most fully agree that no problem is more interesting
than that of the temperate forms in the southern hemisphere,
common to the north. I remember writing about this after
Wallace's book appeared, and hoping that you would take it
up. The frequency with which the drainage from the land
passes through mountain-chains seems to indicate some
general law — viz., the successive formation of cracks and
lines of elevation between the nearest ocean and the already
upraised land ; but that is too big a subject for a note.

I doubt whether any insects can be shown with any
probability to have been flower feeders before the middle
of the Secondary period. Several of the asserted cases have
broken down.

Your long letter has stirred many pleasant memories of
long past days, when we had many a discussion and many
a good fight.

To J. D. Hooker. T M „„„

•> Letter 399

Down, Aug. 21st, 1881.

I cannot aid you much, or at all. I should think that no
one could have thought on the modification of species without
thinking of representative species. Rut I feel sure that no
discussion of any importance had been published on this
subject before the Origin, for if I had known of it 1 should
assuredly have alluded to it in the Origin, as I wished to
gain support from all quarters. I did not then know of
Von Buch's view (alluded to in my Historical Introduction
in all the later editions). Von Buch published his Isles
Canaries in 1836, and he here briefly argues that plants
spread over a continent and vary, and the varieties in time
come to be species. He also argues that closely allied species
have been thus formed in the separate valleys of the Canary
Islands, but not on the upper and open parts. I could lend
you Von Buch's book, if you like. I have just consulted
the passage.

I have not Baer's papers ; but, as far as I remember, the
subject is not fully discussed by him.

1 See Letter 397, Note 2.

28 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION [Chap. VII

Letter 399 I quite agree about Wallace's position on the ocean and
continent question.

To return to geographical distribution : As far as I know,
no one ever discussed the meaning of the relation between
representative species before I did, and, as I suppose, Wallace
did in his paper before the Linnean Society. Von Buch's is
the nearest approach to such discussion known to me.

Letter 400 To W. D. Crick.

The following letters are interesting not only for their own sake, but
because they tell the history of the last of Mr. Darwin's publications — his
letter \.o Nature on the "Dispersal of Freshwater Bivalves," April 6th, 1882.

Down, Feb. 21st, 1882.

Your fact is an interesting one, and I am very much
obliged to you for communicating it to me. You speak a
little doubtfully about the name of the shell, and it would be
indispensable to have this ascertained with certainty. Do
you know any good conchologist in Northampton who could
name it ? If so I should be much obliged if you would inform
me of the result.

Also the length and breadth of the shell, and how much
of leg (which leg ?) of the Dytiscus [a large water-beetle] has
been caught. If you cannot get the shell named I could take
it to the British Museum when I next go to London ; but
this probably will not occur for about six weeks, and you may
object to lend the specimen for so long a time.

I am inclined to think that the case would be worth
communicating to Nature.

P.S. — I suppose that the animal in the shell must have
been alive when the Dytiscus was captured, otherwise the
adductor muscle of the shell would have relaxed and the shell
dropped off.

Letter 401 To W. D. Crick.

Down, Feb. 25th, 1882.
I am much obliged for your clear and distinct answers to
my questions. I am sorry to trouble you, but there is one
point which I do not fully understand. Did the shell rertiain
attached to the beetle's leg from the 18th to the 23rd, and
was the beetle kept during this time in the air ?

Do I understand rightly that after the shell had dropped

i867 — 18S2] DISPERSAL OF BIVALVES 20

off, both being in water, that the beetle's antenna wa n Letter 401

temporarily caught by the shell ?

I presume that I may keep the specimen till I go to
London, which will be about the middle of next month.

I have placed the shell in fresh-water, to see if the valve-
will open, and whether it is still alive, fur this seems to me a
very interesting point. As the wretched beetle was still feebly
alive, I have put it in a bottle with chopped laurel leaves, that
it may die an easy and quicker death. I hope that I shall
meet with your approval in doing so.

One of my sons tells me that on the coast of N. Wales
the bare fishing hooks often bring up young mussels which
have seized hold of the points ; but I must make further
enquiries on this head.

To YV. D. Crick. Letter 402

Down, March 23rd, 1S82.

I have had a most unfortunate and extraordinary accident
with your shell. I sent it by post in a strong box to Mr.
Gwyn Jeffreys to be named, and heard two days afterwards that
he had started for Italy. I then wrote to the servant in charge
of his house to open the parcel (within which was a cover
stamped and directed to myself) and return it to me. This
servant, I suppose, opened the box and dropped the glass tube
on a stone floor, and perhaps put his foot on it, for the tube
and shell were broken into quite small fragments. These
were returned to me with no explanation, the box being quite
uninjured. I suppose you would not care for the fragments to
be returned or the Dytiscus; but if you wish for them they shall
be returned. I am very sorry, but it has not been my fault.

It seems to me almost useless to send the fragments of
the shell to the British Museum to be named, more especially
as the umbo has been lost. It is many yi ars since 1 have
looked at a fresh-water shell, but 1 should have said that the
shell was Cyclas cornea} Is Sphamium corneum a synonym
of Cyclas} Perhaps you could tell by looking to Mr. G.
Jeffreys' book. If so, may we venture to call it so, or shall I
put an (?) to the name ?

As soon as I hear from you I will send my letter to Nature.
Do you take in Nature^ or shall I send you a copy ?

1 It was Cyclas cornea.

CHAPTER VIII

MAN

I. Descent of Man. — II. Sexual Selection. — III. Expression

of the Emotions

Letter 403 I. DESCENT OF MAN, 1860-82

To C. Lyell.

Down, April 27th [i860].

I cannot explain why, but to me it would be an infinite
satisfaction to believe that mankind will progress to such a
pitch that we should [look] back at [ourselves] as mere
Barbarians. I have received proof-sheets (with a wonderfully
nice letter) of very hostile review by Andrew Murray,1 read
before the Royal Society of Edinburgh. But I am tired with
answering it. Indeed I have done nothing the whole day but
answer letters.

Letter 404 To L. Horner.

The following letter occurs in the Memoir of Leonard Horner,
edited by his daughter Katherine M. Lyell, Vol. II., p. 300 (privately
printed, 1890).

Down, March 20th [1861].

I am very much obliged for your Address,2 which has
interested me much. ... I thought that I had read up pretty
well on the antiquity of man ; but you bring all the facts so well

1 " On Mr. Darwin's Theory of the Origin of Species," by Andrew
Murray. Proc. Roy. Soc, Edi?ib., Vol. IV., pp. 274-91, 1862. The
review concludes with the following sentence : " I have come to be of
opinion that Mr. Darwin's theory is unsound, and that I am to be spared
any collision between my inclination and my convictions " (referring to
the writer's belief in Design).

3 Mr. Horner's Anniversary Address to the Geological Society {Proc.
Geol. Soc, XVII., 1861).

30

1860-18S2] HORNER 31

together in a condensed focus, that the case seems much Letter 404
clearer to me. How curious about the Bible ! ! 1 declare I
had fancied that the date was somehow in the Bible. You are
coming out in a new light as a Biblical critic. I must thank
you for some remarks on the Origin of Species- (though I sup-
pose it is almost as incorrect to do so as to thank a judge for
a favourable verdict) : what you have said has pleased me ex-
tremely. I am the more pleased, as I would rather have been
well attacked than have been handled in the namby-pamby,
old-woman style of the cautious Oxford Professor.3

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 405

Mr. Wallace was, we believe, the first to treat the evolution of Man in
any detail from the point of view of Natural Selection, namely, in a paper
in the Anthropological Review and Journal of the Anthropological Society,
May 1864, p. clviii. The deep interest with which Mr. Darwin read his
copy is graphically recorded in the continuous series of pencil-marks along
the margins of the pages. His views are fully given in Letter 406. The
phrase, "in this case it is too far," refers to Mr. Wallace's habit of
speaking of the theory of Natural Selection as due entirely to Darwin.

May 22nd 1864.
I have now read Wallace's paper on Man, and think it
most striking and original and forcible. I wish he had written

1 At p. lxviii. Mi. Horner points out that the "chronology, given in
the margin of our Bibles," i.e. the statement that the world was created
4004 B.C., is the work of Archbishop Usher, and is in no way binding on
those who believe in the inspiration of Scripture. Mr. Horner goes on
(p. lxx) : " The retention of the marginal note in question is by no means
a matter of indifference ; it is untrue, and therefore it is mischievous."
It is interesting that Archbishop Sumner and Dr. Dawes, Dean of
Hereford, wrote with approbation of Mr. Horner's views on Man. The
Archbishop says : " I have always considered the first verse of Genesis
as indicating, rather than denying, a preadamitc world" {Memoir of
Leonard Homer, II., p. 303).

1 Mr. Horner (p. xxxix) begins by disclaiming the qualifications of a
competent critic, and confines himself to general remarks on the
philosophic candour aud freedom from dogmatism of the Origin : he
does, however, give an opinion on the geological chapters IX. and X. As
a general criticism he quotes Mr. Huxley's article in the Westminster
Review, which may now be read in Collected Essays, II.. p. 22.

3 This no doubt refers to Professor Phillips' Life on the Earth. 1S60,
a book founded on the author's " Rede Lecture,'' given before the
University of Cambridge. Reference to this work will be found in Life
and Letters, II., pp. 309, 358, 373.

32 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 405 Lyell's chapters on Man.1 I quite agree about his high-
mindedness, and have long thought so ; but in this case it is
too far, and I shall tell him so. 1 am not sure that I fully
agree with his views about Man, but there is no doubt, in my
opinion, on the remarkable genius shown by the paper. I
agree, however, to the main new leading idea.

Letter 406 To A. R. Wallace.2

Down, [May] 28th [1864].

I am so much better that I have just finished a paper for
the Linnean Society 3 ; but I am not yet at all strong, I felt
much disinclination to write, and therefore you must forgive
me for not having sooner thanked you for your paper on
Man 4 received on the nth.5 But first let me say that I have
hardly ever in my life been more struck by any paper than
that on " Variation," etc., etc., in the Reader? I feel sure that
such papers will do more for the spreading of our views
on the modification of species than any separate treatises
on the simple subject itself. It is really admirable ; but
you ought not in the Man paper to speak of the theory as
mine ; it is just as much yours as mine. One correspondent

1 See Life and Letters, III., p. 11 et seq. for Darwin's disappointment
over Lyell's treatment of the evolutionary question in his Antiquity of
Man ; see also p. 29 for Lyell's almost pathetic words about his own
position between the discarded faith of many years and the new one not
yet assimilated. See also Letters 132, 164, 170.

2 This letter was published in Life and Letters, III., p. 89.

3 On the three forms, etc., oi Ly thrum.

4 Anthropological Review, May 1864.

5 Mr. Wallace wrote, May 10th, 1864 : " I send you now my little
contribution to the theory of the origin of man. I hope you will be able
to agree with me. If you are able [to write] I shall be glad to have
your criticisms. I was led to the subject by the necessity of explaining
the vast mental and cranial differences between man and the apes
combined with such small structural differences in other parts of the
body, — and also by an endeavour to account for the diversity of human
races combined with man's almost perfect stability of form during all
historical epochs.''

6 Reader, April 16th, 1864, an abstract of Mr. Wallace: "On the
Phenomena of Variation and Geographical Distribution as illustrated by
the Papilionidae of the Malayan Region." Linn. Soc. Trans., XXV.

1860-1882] DESCENT OF MAN 33

has already noticed to me your " high-minded " conduct on Letter 406
this head.

But now for your Man paper, about which I should like
to write more than I can. The great leading idea is quite
new to me — viz. that during late ages the mind will have
been modified more than the body ; yet I had got as far as
to see with you, that the struggle between the races of man
depended entirely on intellectual and moral qualities. The
latter part of the paper I can designate only as grand and
most eloquently done. I have shown your paper to two or
three persons who have been here, and they have been equally
struck with it. I am not sure that I go with you on all
minor points : when reading Sir G. Grey's account of the
constant battles of Australian savages, I remember thinking
that Natural Selection would come in, and likewise with the
Esquimaux, with whom the art of fishing and managing
canoes is said to be hereditary. I rather differ on the rank,
under a classificatory point of view, which you assign to
man ; I do not think any character simply in excess ought
ever to be used for the higher divisions. Ants would not be
separated from other hymenopterous insects, however high
the instinct of the one, and however low the instincts of the
other. With respect to the differences of race, a conjecture
has occurred to me that much may be due to the correlation
of complexion (and consequently hair) with constitution.
Assume that a dusk)- individual best escaped miasma, and
you will readily see what I mean. I persuaded the Director-
General of the Medical Department of the Army to send
printed forms to the surgeons of all regiments in tropical
countries to ascertain this point, but I daresay I shall never
get any returns. Secondly, I suspect that a sort of sexual
selection has been the most powerful means of changing the
races of man. I can show that the different races have a
widely different standard of beauty. Among savages the
most powerful men will have the pick of the women, and they
will generally leave the most descendants. I have collected
a few notes on man, but I do not suppose I shall ever use
them. Do you intend to follow out your views? and if
would you like at some future time to have my few references
and notes? lam sure 1 hardly know whether they are of
any value, and they are at present in a state of chaos.
VOL. II. 3

406

34 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 406 There is much more that I should like to write, but I
have not strength.

P.S. Our aristocracy is handsomer (more hideous accord-
ing to a Chinese or Negro) than the middle classes, from
[having the] pick of the women ; but oh, what a scheme is
primogeniture for destroying Natural Selection ! I fear my
letter will be barely intelligible to you.

Letter A. R. Wallace to C. Darwin.

5, Westbourne Grove Terrace, W.,

May 29th [1864].

You are always so ready to appreciate what others do,
and especially to overestimate my desultory efforts, that I
cannot be surprised at your very kind and flattering remarks
on my papers. I am glad, however, that you have made a
few critical observations (and am only sorry that you were
not well enough to make more), as that enables me to say
a few words in explanation.

My great fault is haste. An idea strikes me, I think over
it for a few days, and then write away with such illustrations
as occur to me while going on. I therefore look at the
subject almost solely from one point of view. Thus, in my
paper on Man,1 I aim solely at showing that brutes are
modified in a great variety of ways by Natural Selection, but
that in none of these particular ways can Man be modified,
because of the superiority of his intellect. I therefore no
doubt overlook a few smaller points in which Natural Selec-
tion may still act on men and brutes alike. Colour is one of
them, and I have alluded to this in correlation to constitution,
in an abstract 1 have made at Sclatcr's request for the
Natural History Review? At the same time, there is so much
evidence of migrations and displacements of races of man,
and so many cases of peoples of distinct physical characters
inhabiting the same or similar regions, and also of races of
uniform physical characters inhabiting widely dissimilar
regions— that the external characteristics of the chief races
of man must, 1 think, be older than his present geographical
distribution, and the modifications produced by correlation
to favourable variations of constitution be only a secondary

1 Published in the Anthropological Review, 1864.

2 Nat. Hist. Review, 1864, p. 328.

1 860-1882] DEs< INT OF MAN 35

cause of external modification. I hope you may get the Letter
returns from the Army.1 They would be very inter
but I do not expect the results would be favourable to
your view.

\\ ith regard to the constant battles of savages leading to
selection of physical superiority, 1 think it would be very
imperfect and subject to so many exceptions and irregulari-
ties that it could produce no definite result. For in.-tance :
the strongest and bravest men would lead, and expose them-
selves most, and would therefore be most subject to wounds
and death. And the physical energy which led to any one
tribe delighting in war, might lead to its extermination, by
inducing quarrels v, ith all surrounding tribes and leading
them to combine against it. Again, superior cunning, stealth,
and swiftness of foot, or even better weapons, would often
lead to victory as well as mere physical strength. Moreover,
this kind of more or less perpetual war goes on among all
savage peoples. It could lead, therefore, to no differential
characters, but merely to the keeping up of a certain average
standard of bodily and mental health and vigour.

So with selection of variations adapted to special habits
of life as fishing, paddling, riding, climbing, etc., etc., in
different races, no doubt it must act to some extent, but will
it be ever so rigid as to induce a definite physical modifica-
tion, and can we imagine it to have had any part in producing
the distinct races that now exist ?

The sexual selection you allude to will also, I think, have
been equally uncertain in its results. In the very lowest
tribes there is rarely much polygamy, and women are more
or less a matter of purchase. There is also little difference
of social condition, and I think it rarely happens that any
healthy and undeformed man remains without wife and
children. I very much doubt the often-repeated assertion
that our aristocracy are more beautiful than the middle
classes. 1 allow that they present specimens of the highest
kind of beaut)-, but I doubt the average. I have noticed in
country places a greater average amount of good looks am<
the middle classes, and besides we unavoidably combine in

1 Measurements taken of more than one million soldiers in the
United States showed that "local influences of some kind act directly on
structure.'' — Descent of Man, 1901, p. 45.

36 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter our idea of beauty, intellectual expression, and refinement of
406 manner, which often makes the less appear the more beauti-
ful. Mere physical beauty — i.e. a healthy and regular
development of the body and features approaching to the
mean and type of European man, I believe is quite as
frequent in one class of society as the other, and much more
frequent in rural districts than in cities.

With regard to the rank of man in zoological classification,
I fear I have not made myself intelligible. I never meant to
adopt Owen's or any other such views, but only to point out
that from one point of view he was right. I hold that a
distinct family for Man, as Huxley allows, is all that can
possibly be given him zoologically. But at the same time, if
my theory is true, that while the animals which surrounded
him have been undergoing modification in all parts of their
bodies to a generic or even family degree of difference, he
has been changing almost wholly in the brain and head —
then in geological antiquity the species man may be as old as
many mammalian families, and the origin of the family man
may date back to a period when some of the orders first
originated.

As to the theory of Natural Selection itself, I shall always
maintain it to be actually yours and yours only. You had
worked it out in details I had never thought of, years before
I had a ray of light on the subject, and my paper would
never have convinced anybody or been noticed as more than
an ingenious speculation, whereas your book has revolution-
ised the study of Natural History, and carried away captive
the best men of the present age. All the merit I claim is the
having been the means of inducing you to write and publish
at once. I may possibly some day go a little more into this
subject (of Man), and if I do will accept the kind offer of
your notes.

I am now, however, beginning to write the " Narrative of
my Travels," which will occupy me a long time, as I hate
writing narrative, and after Bates' brilliant success rather
fear to fail.

I shall introduce a few chapters on Geographical Distribution
and other such topics. Sir C. Lyell, while agreeing with my
main argument on Man, thinks I am wrong in wanting to
put him back into Miocene times, and thinks I do not appre-

i860— 1 882] DESCENT OF MAN ^

ciatc the immense interval even to the later Pliocene. Hut L«

I still maintain my view, which in fact is a logical result of
my theory ; for if man originated in later Pliocene, when
almost all mammalia were of closely allied species to those
now living, and many even identical, then man has not been
stationary in bodily structure while animals have been
varying, and my theory will be proved to be all wrong.

In Murchison's address to the Geographical Society, just
delivered, he points out Africa as being the oldest existing
land. He says there is no evidence of its having been ever
submerged during the Tertiary epoch. Here then is evidently
the place to find early man. I hope something good may be
found in Borneo, and that the means may be found to explore
the still more promising regions of tropical Africa, for we can
expect nothing of man very early in Europe.

It has given me great pleasure to find that there are
symptoms of improvement in your health. I hope you will
not exert yourself too soon or write more than is quite agree-
able to you. I think I made out every word of your letter,
though it was not always easy.

For Wallace's later views see the small type on p. 39.

To W. Turner. Letter 407

Sir William Turner is frequently referred to in the Descent of Man as
having supplied Mr. Darwin with information.

Down, Dec. 14th [1S66].
Your kindness when I met you at the Royal Society
makes me think that you would grant me the favour of a
little information, if in your power. I am preparing a book on
Domestic Animals, and as there has been so much discussion
on the bearing of such views as I hold on Man, I have some
thoughts of adding a chapter on this subject. The point on
which 1 want information is in regard to any part which may
be fairly called rudimentary in comparison with the same
part in the Quadrumana or any other mammal. Now the
os coccyx is rudimentary as a tail, and 1 am anxious to hear
about its muscles. Mr. Flower found for me in some work
that its one muscle (with striae) was supposed only to bring
this bone back to its proper position after parturition. This
seems to me hardly credible. He said he had never par-
ticularly examined this part, and when I mentioned your

38 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 407 name, he said you were the most likely man to give me
information.

Are there any traces of other muscles ? It seems
strange if there are none. Do you know how the muscles
are in this part in the anthropoid apes ? The muscles of
the ear in man may, I suppose, in most cases be considered
as rudimentary ; and so they seem to be in the anthropoids ;
at least, I am assured in the Zoological Gardens they do not
erect their ears. I gather there are a good many muscles in
various parts of the body which are in this same state : could
you specify any of the best cases ? The mamma in man
are rudimentary. Are there any other glands or other organs
which you can think of? I know I have no right whatever
to ask all these questions, and can only say that I should be
grateful for any information. If you tell me anything about
the os coccyx or other structures, I hope that you will
permit me to quote the statement on your authority, as that
would add so greatly to its value.

Pray excuse me for troubling you, and do not hurry
yourself in the least in answering me.

I do not know whether you would care to possess a copy,
but I told my publisher to send you a copy of the new
edition of the Origin last month.

Letter 408 To W- Turner.

Down, Feb. 1st [1867].
I thank you cordially for all your full information, and
I regret much that I have given you such great trouble at a
period when your time is so much occupied. But the facts
were so valuable to me that I cannot pretend that I am sorry
that I did trouble you ; and I am the less so, as from what
you say I hope you may be induced some time to write a full
account of all rudimentary structures in Man : it would be a
very curious and interesting memoir. I shall at present give
only a brief abstract of the chief facts which you have so very
kindly communicated to me, and will not touch on some of
the doubtful points. I have received far more information
than I ventured to anticipate. There is one point which has
occurred to me, but I suspect there is nothing in it. If,
however, there should be, perhaps you will let me have a brief
note from you ; and if I do not hear I will understand there

i86o— 1882] I ) I-: S ■ I ■: NT OF M A \ 39

is nothing in the notion. [ have included the down on the Letter 408

human body and the lanugo on the foetus as a rudimentary

representation of a hairy coat.1- I do not know whether there

is any direct functional connection between the presence of

hair and the panniculus ear: osusJ (to put the question u

another point of view, is it the primary or aboriginal function

of the panniculus to move the dermal appendages or the

skin itself?) ; but both are superficial, and would perl

together become rudimentary. I was led to think of this

by the places (as far as my ignorance of anatomy has allowed

me to judge) of the rudimentary muscular fasciculi which you

specif)'. Now, some persons can move the skin of their hairy

heads ; and is this not effected by the panniculus ? How is

it with the eyebrows? You specify the axillae and the front

region of the chest and lower part of scapula- : now, these are

all hur\- spot- in man. On the other hand, the neck, and as

I suppose the covering of the gluteus medius, are not hairy;

so, as I said, 1 presume there is nothing in this notion. If

there were, the rudiments of the panniculus ought perhaps to

occur more plainly in man than in woman. . . .

P.S — If the skin on the head is moved by the panniculus,
I think I ought just to allude to it, as some men alone having
power to move the skin shows that the apparatus is generally
rudimentary.

In March 1869 Darwin wrote to Mr. Wallace : " I shall be intensely
curious to read the Quarterly. I hope you have not murdered too
completely your own and my child." The reference is to Mr. Wallace's
review, in the April number of the Quarterly, of LyelTs Principles of
Geology (tenth edition), and of the sixth edition of the Elements of

ology. Mr. Wallace points out that here for the first time Sir l
Lyell gave up his opposition to evolution ; and this leads Mr. Wallace
to give a short account of the views set forth in the On)
In this article Mr. Wallace makes a definite statement as to his views
on the evolution of man, which were opposed to those ot Mr. Darwin.
He upholds the view that the brain of man. as well as the organs of
speech, the hand and the external form, could not have been evolved by
Natural Selection (the child he is supposed to murder). At p. 391 he

1 Descent of Man I., p. 25 ; II., p. 375.

* Professor Macalister draws our attention to the fact that Mr.
Darwin uses the term panniculus in the generalised sense of any

sheet of muscle acting on the skin.

40 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 408 writes : " In the brain of the lowest savages, and, as far as we know,
of the prehistoric races, we have an organ . . . little inferior in size and
complexity to that of the highest types. . . . But the mental require-
ments of the lowest savages, such as the Australians or the Andaman
Islanders, are very little above those of many animals. . . . How, then,
was an organ developed so far beyond the needs of its possessor ?
Natural Selection could only have endowed the savage with a brain
a little superior to that of an ape, whereas he actually possesses one
but very little inferior to that of the average members of our learned
societies." This passage is marked in Mr. Darwin's copy with a triply
underlined " No," and with a shower of notes of exclamation. It was
probably the first occasion on which he realised the extent of this great
and striking divergence in opinion between himself and his colleague.
He had, however, some indication of it in Wallace's paper on
Man, Anthropological Review, 1864. (See Letter 406.) He wrote
to Lyell, May 4th, 1869, " I was dreadfully disappointed about Man; it
seems to me incredibly strange." And to Mr. Wallace, April 14th, 1869,
" If you had not told me, I should have thought that [your remarks on
Man] had been added by some one else. As you expected, I differ
grievously from you, and I am very sorry for it."

Letter 409 To T. H. Huxley.

Down, Thursday, Feb. 21st [1868-70?].

I received the Jermyn Street programme, but have hardly
yet considered it, for I was all day on the sofa on Tuesday
and Wednesday. Bad though I was, I thought with constant
pleasure of your very great kindness in offering to read the
proofs of my essay on man. I do not know whether I said
anything which might have appeared like a hint, but I assure
you that such a thought had never even momentarily passed
through my mind. Your offer has just made all the differ-
ence, that I can now write, whether or no my essay is ever
printed, with a feeling of satisfaction instead of vague dread.

Beg my colleague, Mrs. Huxley, not to forget the
corrugator supcrcilii : it will not be easy to catch the exact
moment when the child is on the point of crying, and is
struggling against the wrinkling up [of] its little eyes ; for
then I should expect the corrugator, from being little under
the command of the will, would come into play in checking
or stopping the wrinkling. An explosion of tears would tell
nothing.

i860- i 882] 1 1 1 S< I N T O F M A N .} I

To Francis Galton. Letta 410

I).jwn, Dec. 23rd [1870?].

I have only read about fifty p >f your book (to the

fudges),1 but I must exhale myself, else something will go
wrong in my inside. I do not think I ever in all my life
read anything more interesting and original. And how well
and clearly you put every point ! George, who has finished
the book, and who expressed himself just in the same terms,
tells me the earlier chapters are nothing in interest to the
later ones! It will take me some time to get to these later
chapters, as it is read aloud to me by my wife, who is also
much interested. You have made a convert of an oppon
in one sense, for I have always maintained that, excepting
fools, men did not differ much in intellect, only in zeal and
hard work ; and I still think [this] is an eminently important
difference. I congratulate you on producing what I am
convinced will prove a memorable work. 1 look forward
with intense interest to each reading, but it sets me thinking
so much that I find it very hard work ; but that is wholly the
fault of my brain, and not of your beautifully clear style.

To W. R. Greg.2 Letter 411

March 21st [1871 ?].

Many thanks for your note. I am very glad indeed to
read remarks made by a man who possesses such varied and
odd knowledge as you do, and who is so acute a reasoner. I
have no doubt that you will detect blunders of many kinds in
my book.3 Your MS. on the proportion of the sexes at birth
seems to me extremely curious, and I hope that some day
you will publish it. It certainly appears that the males are
decreasing in the London districts, and a most Strang- fact it
is. Mr. Graham, however, I observe in a note enclosed, does
not seem inclined to admit vour conclusion. 1 have never

1 Hereditary Genius : an Inquiry into its Laws ana
by Francis Galton, London, 1869. "The Judges of England between
1660 and 1865" is the heading of a section of this work ^p. 55). See
Deseent of Man (1901), p. 41.

8 Author of Tiie Enigmas of Life, i8~:

3 Tfie Descent of Man,

42 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 411 much considered the subject of the causes of the propor-
tion. When I reflected on queen bees producing only males
when not impregnated, whilst some other parthenogenetic
insects produced, as far as known, only females, the subject
seemed to me hopelessly obscure. It is, however, pretty clear
that you have taken the one path for its solution. I wished
only to ascertain how far with various animals the males
exceeded the females, and I have given all the facts which I
could collect. As far as I know, no other data have been
published. The equality of the sexes with race-horses is
surprising. My remarks on mankind are quite superficial,
and given merely as some sort of standard for comparison
with the lower animals. M. Thury is the writer who makes
the sex depend on the period of impregnation. His pamphlet1
was sent me from Geneva. I can lend it you if you like. I
subsequently read an account of experiments which convinced
me that M. Thury was in error ; but I cannot remember what
they were, only the impression that I might safely banish
this view from my mind. Your remarks on the less ratio
of males in illegitimate births strikes me as the most doubtful
point in your MS. — requiring two assumptions, viz. that the
fathers in such cases are relatively too young, and that the
result is the same as when the father is relatively too old.

My son George, who is a mathematician, and who read
your MS. with much interest, has suggested, as telling in the
right direction, but whether sufficient is another question, that
many more illegitimate children are murdered and concealed
shortly after birth, than in the case of legitimate children ;
and as many more males than females die during the first few
days of life, the census of illegitimate children practically
applies to an older age than with legitimate children, and
would thus slightly reduce the excess of males. This might
possibly be worth consideration. By a strange coincidence
a stranger writes to me this day, making the very same
suggestion.

I am quite delighted to hear that my book interests you
enough to lead you to read it with some care.

1 Mhnoire sur la lot de Production des Sexes, 2nd edit., 1863 (a
pamphlet published by Cherbuliez, Geneva).

1860-1882] DESCENT OF MAN 43

To Francis Galton. Letter 412

Down, Jan. 4th, 1873.

Very many thanks for Fraser:1 I have been greatly
interested by your article. The idea of castes being
spontaneously formed and leading to intermarriage '-' is quite
new to me, and I should suppose to others. I am not,
however, so hopeful as you. Your proposed Society 3 would
have awfully laborious work, and I doubt whether you
could ever get efficient workers. As it is, there is much
concealment of insanity and wickedness in families ; and
there would be more if there was a register. But the
greatest difficulty, I think, would be in deciding who deserved
to be on the register. How few are above mediocrity in
health, strength, morals and intellect; and how difficult
to judge on these latter heads. As far as I see, within the
same large superior family, only a few of the children would
deserve to be on the register ; and these would naturally stick
to their own families, so that the superior children of distinct
families would have no good chance of associating much and
forming a caste. Though I see so much difficulty, the object
seems a grand one ; and you have pointed out the sole
feasible, yet I fear Utopian, plan of procedure in improving
the human race. I should be inclined to trust more (and this
is part of your plan) to disseminating and insisting on the
importance of the all-important principle of inheritance. I
will make one or two minor criticisms. Is it not possible that

' "' Hereditary Improvement," by Francis Galton, Frascr's .'.' . iw,
Jan. 1873. p. 1 16.

s " My object is to build up, by the mere process of extensive enquiry
and publication of results, a sentiment of caste among those who are
naturally gifted, and to procure for them, before the system lias fairly
taken root, such moderate social favours and preference. DO more no
less, as would seem reasonable to those who were justly informed of the
precise measure of their importance to the nation " he. tt"/., p. 1 2

3 Mr. Galton proposes that "Some society should undertake three
scientific services : the first, by means of a moderate number of influential
local agencies, to institute continuous enquiries into the facts of human
heredity ; the second to be a centre of information on heredity for
breeders of animals and plants ; and the third to discuss and classify the
facts that were collected" {Joe. «'/., p. 124).

44 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 412 the inhabitants of malarious countries owe their degraded and
miserable appearance to the bad atmosphere, though this does
not kill them, rather than to " economy of structure " ? I
do not see that an orthognathous face would cost more than
a prognathous face ; or a good morale than a bad one. That
is a fine simile (p. 1 19) about the chip of a statue ; : but surely
Nature does not more carefully regard races than individuals,
as (I believe I have misunderstood what you mean) evidenced
by the multitude of races and species which have become
extinct. Would it not be truer to say that Nature cares only
/for the superior individuals and then makes her new and
better races ? But we ought both to shudder in using so
freely the word " Nature " 2 after what De Candolle has said.
Again let me thank you for the interest received in reading
your essay.

Many thanks about the rabbits ; your letter has been sent
to Balfour : 3 he is a very clever young man, and I believe owes
his cleverness to Salisbury blood. This letter will not be
worth your deciphering. I have almost finished Greg's
Enigmas?- It is grand poetry — but too Utopian and too full
of faith for me ; so that I have been rather disappointed.
What do you think about it ? He must be a delightful man.

I doubt whether you have made clear how the families on
the Register are to be kept pure or superior, and how they
are to be in course of time still further improved.

1 ". . . The life of the individual is treated as of absolutely no
importance, while the race is as everything ; Nature being wholly
careless of the former except as a contributor to the maintenance and
evolution of the latter. Myriads of inchoate lives are produced in what,
to our best judgment, seems a wasteful and reckless manner, in order that
a few selected specimens may survive, and be the parents of the next
generation. It is as though individual lives were of no more consideration
than are the senseless chips which fall from the chisel of the artist who
is elaborating some ideal form from a rude block " {loc. cit., p. 119).

2 See Letter 190, Vol. I., p. 269.

3 Francis Maitland Balfour (1851-82) was Professor of Animal
Morphology at Cambridge. (See Life and Letters, III., p. 250.)

4 The Enigmas of Life, 1872.

i860— 1882] DESCENT OF MAN 45

To Max Miiller. Utter 413

Down, July 3rd, 1873.

In June, 1873, Professor Max Miiller sent to Mr. Darwin a copy of
the sixth edition of his Lectures on the Science of Language? with a letter
concluding with these words : " I venture to send you my three lectures,
trusting that, though I differ from some of your conclusions, you will
believe me to be one of your diligent readers and sincere admirers."

I am much obliged for your kind note and present of
your lectures. 1 am extremely glad to have received them
from you, and I had intended ordering them.

I feel quite sure from what I have read in your works that
you would never say anything of an honest adversary to
which he would have any just right to object ; and as for
myself, you have often spoken highly of me — perhaps more
highly than I deserve.

As far as language is concerned I am not worthy to be
your adversary, as I know extremely little about it, and that
little learnt from very few books. I should have been glad
to have avoided the whole subject, but was compelled to take
it up as well as I could. He who is fully convinced, as I am,
that man is descended from some lower animal, is almost
forced to believe a priori that articulate language has been
developed from inarticulate cries- ; and he is therefore hardly
a fair judge of the arguments opposed to this belief.

In October, 1875, Mr. Darwin again wrote cordially to Professor Max
Miiller on receipt of a pamphlet entitled /// Self-Defence? which is a
reply to Professor Whitney's " Darwinism and Language " in the North
American Review, July, 1874. This essay had been brought before the
"general reader" in England by an article of Mr. G. Darwin's in the
Contemporary Review, November, 1S74, p. 894, entitled, " Professor
Whitney on the Origin of Language." The article was followed by
"My Reply to Mr. Darwin," contributed by Professor Muller to the
Contemporary Review, January, 1875, p. 305.

1 A reference to the first edition occurs in Life and Letters, II.,

P- 390-

* Descent of Man (1901), p. 133,

3 Printed in Chips from a German Works/up, Vol. IV.. 1S75, p. 473.

46 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 414 G. Rolleston l to C. Darwin.

British Association, Bristol, August 30th, 1875.

In the first edition of the Descent of Man Mr. Darwin wrote : " It is
a more curious fact that savages did not formerly waste away, as Mr.
Bagehot has remarked, before the classical nations, as they now do
before modern civilised nations. . . .2 In the second edition (p. 183) the
statement remains, but a mass of evidence (pp. 183-92) is added, to which
reference occurs in the reply to the following letter.

At pp. 4-5 of the enclosed Address 3 you will find that
I have controverted Mr. Bagehot's view as to the extinction
of the barbarians in the times of classical antiquity, as also
the view of Poppig as to there being some occult influence
exercised by civilisation to the disadvantage of savagery
when the two come into contact.

I write to say that I took up this subject without any wish
to impugn any views of yours as such, but with the desire of
having my say upon certain anti-sanitarian transactions and
malfeasance of which I had had a painful experience.

On reading however what I said, and had written some-
what hastily, it has struck me that what I have said might
bear the former interpretation in the eyes of persons who
might not read other papers of mine, and indeed other parts
of the same Address, in which my adhesion, whatever it is
worth, to your views in general is plainly enough implied. I
have ventured to write this explanation to you for several
reasons.

1 George Rolleston (1829-81) obtained a first-class in Classics at
Oxford in 1850; he was elected Fellow of Pembroke College in 1851,
and in the same year he entered St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Towards
the close of the Crimean War, Rolleston was appointed one of the
Physicians to the British civil hospital at Smyrna. In i860 he was
elected the first Linacre Professor of Anatomy and Physiology, a post
which he held until his death. " He was perhaps the last of a school
of English natural historians or biologists in the widest sense of the
term." In 1862 he gave the results of his work on the classification
of brains in a lecture delivered at the Royal Institution, and in 1870
published his best known book, Forms of Animal Life (Diet. Nat.
Biography).

2 Bagehot, "Physics and Politics," Fortnightly Review, April, 1868,

P- 455-

3 British Association Reports, 1875, p. 142.

i860 l88a] DESCENT OF MAN 47

To G. Rollcston. Letter 415

Bassett, Southampton, Sept. 2nd [1875].
I am much obliged to you for having sent me your
Address, which has interested me greatly. I quite subscribe
to what you say about Mr. Bagehot's striking remark, and
wish I had not quoted it. I can perceive no sort of reflection
or blame on anything which I have written, and I know well
that I deserve many a good slap on the face. The decrease
of savage populations interests me much, and I should like
you some time to look at a discussion on this subject which
I have introduced in the second edition of the Descent of Man,
and which you can find (for I have no copy here) in the list
of additions. The facts have convinced me that lessened
fertility and the poor constitution of the children is one chief
cause of such decrease ; and that the case is strictly parallel
to the sterility of many wild animals when made captive,
the civilisation of savages and the captivity of wild animals
leading to the same result.

To Ernst Krause. Letter 416

Down, June 30th, 1877.

I have been much interested by your able argument x against
the belief that the sense of colour has been recently acquired
by man. The following observation bears on this subject.

I attended carefully to the mental development of my
young children, and with two, or as I believe three of them,
soon after they had come to the age when they knew the
names of all common objects, I was startled by observing that
they seemed quite incapable of affixing the right names to the
colours in coloured engravings, although I tried repeatedly to
teach them. 1 distinctly remember declaring that they were
colour-blind, but this afterwards proved a groundless fear.

On communicating this fact to another person he told
me that he had observed a nearly similar case. Therefore
the difficulty which young children experience either in dis-
tinguishing, or more probably in naming colours, seems to

1 See /Cosmos, June 1877, p. 264, a review of Dr. Hugo Magnus'
Die Geschichtliche Entwickelung des Farbensinnes, 1S77. The first part
is chiefly an account of the author's views ; Dr. Krause's argument
begins at p. 269. The interest felt by Mr. Darwin is recorded by the
numerous pencil-marks on the margin of his copy.

48 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 416 deserve further investigation. I will add that it formerly
appeared to me that the gustatory sense, at least in the case
of my own infants, and very young children, differed from
that of grown-up persons. This was shown by their not
disliking rhubarb mixed with a little sugar and milk, which
is to us abominably nauseous ; and in their strong taste for
the sourest and most austere fruits, such as unripe gooseberries
and crab apples.

Letter 417 To G. J. Romanes.

[Barlaston], Aug. 20th, 1878.

Part of this letter (here omitted) is published in Life and Letters,
III., p. 225, and the whole in the Life and Letters of G. J. Romanes,
p. 74. The lecture referred to was on animal intelligence, and was given
at the Dublin meeting of the British Association.

. . . The sole fault which I find with your lecture is that
it is too short, and this is a rare fault. It strikes me as
admirably clear and interesting. I meant to have remon-
strated that you had not discussed sufficiently the necessity
of signs for the formation of abstract ideas of any complexity,
and then I came on the discussion on deaf mutes. This
latter seems to me one of the richest of all the mines, and is
worth working carefully for years, and very deeply. I should
like to read whole chapters on this one head, and others on
the minds of the higher idiots. Nothing can be better, as it
seems to me, than your several lines or sources of evidence,
and the manner in which you have arranged the whole
subject. Your book will assuredly be worth years of hard
labour ; and stick to your subject. By the way, I was pleased
at your discussing the selection of varying instincts or mental
tendencies ; for I have often been disappointed by no one
having ever noticed this notion.

I have just finished La PsycJiologie, son Present et son
Avenir, 1876, by Delbceuf (a mathematician and physicist of
Belgium) in about a hundred pages. It has interested me
a good deal, but why I hardly know ; it is rather like Herbert
Spencer. If you do not know it, and would care to see it,
send me a postcard.

Thank Heaven, we return home on Thursday, and I shall
be able to go on with my humdrum work, and that makes
me forget my daily discomfort.

• /. /

i86o— 1882] DESCENT OF MAN 49

Have you ever thought of keeping a young monkey, so as Letter 417
to observe its mind ? At a house where we have been stayii
there were- Sir A. and Lady Hobhouse, not Ion returned

from India, and she and he kept [a] young monkey and
told me some curious particulars. One was that her monkey
was very fond of looking through her eyeglass at objects, and
moved the glass nearer and further so as to vary the focus.
This struck me, as Frank's son, nearly two years old (and we
think much of his intellect ! !) is very fond of looking through
my pocket lens, and I have quite in vain endeavoured to
teach him not to put the glass close down on the object, but
he always will do so. Therefore I conclude that a child
under two years is inferior in intellect to a monkey.

Once again I heartily congratulate you on your well-
earned present, and I feel assured, grand future success.

Later in the year Mr. Darwin wrote : " I am delighted to hear that you
mean to work the comparative Psychology well. I thought your letter to
the Times ' very good indeed. Bartlett, at the Zoological Gardens, I feel
sure, would advise you infinitely better about hardiness, intellect, price,
etc., of monkey than F. Buckland ; but with him it must be viva voce.

" Frank says you ought to keep an idiot, a deaf mute, a monkey, and
a baby in your house."

To G. A. Gaskell.

Down, Nov. 15th, 1S78.
This letter has been published in Clapperton's Scientific Meliorism,
18S5, p. 340, together with Mr. Gaskell's letter of Nov. 13th (p. 337).
Mr. GaskelPs laws are given in his letter of Nov. 13th, 1878. They
are : —

I. The Organological Law :

Natural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest.
II. The Sociological Law :

Sympathetic Selection, or Indiscriminate Survival.
III. The Moral Law:

Social Selection, or the Birth of the Fittest.

Your letter seems to me very interesting and clearly
expressed, and I hope that you are in the right. Your

1 Romanes wrote to the Times August 28th, 1878, expressing his
views regarding the distinction between man and the lower animals,
in reply to criticisms contained in a leading article in the Tunes of
August 23rd on his lecture at the Dublin meeting of the British
Association.

VOL. II. 4

Letter 41S

5© MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 418 second law appears to be largely acted on in all civilised
countries, and I just alluded to it in my remarks to the effect
(as far as I remember) that the evil which would follow by
checking benevolence and sympathy in not fostering the
weak and diseased would be greater than by allowing them
to survive and then to procreate.

With regard to your third law, I do not know whether
you have read an article (I forget when published) by F.
Galton, in which he proposes certificates of health, etc., for
marriage, and that the best should be matched. I have
lately been led to reflect a little (for, now that I am growing
old, my work has become [word indecipherable] special)
on the artificial checks, but doubt greatly whether such would
be advantageous to the world at large at present, however it
may be in the distant future. Suppose that such checks had
been in action during the last two or three centuries, or even
for a shorter time in Britain, what a difference it would have
made in the world, when we consider America, Australia,
New Zealand, and S. Africa ! No words can exaggerate
the importance, in my opinion, of our colonisation for the
future history of the world.

If it were universally known that the birth of children
could be prevented, and this were not thought immoral by
married persons, would there not be great danger of extreme
profligacy amongst unmarried women, and might we not
become like the " arreoi " societies in the Pacific? In the
course of a century France will tell us the result in many
ways, and we can already see that the French nation does
not spread or increase much.

I am glad that you intend to continue your investigations,
and I hope ultimately may publish on the subject.

Letter 419 To K. Hochberg.

Down, Jan. 13th, 1879.

I am much obliged for your note and for the essay which
you have sent me. I am a poor german scholar, and your
german is difficult ; but I think that I understand your
meaning, and hope at some future time, when more at leisure,
to recur to your essay. As far as I can judge, you have made
a great advance in many ways in the subject ; and I will

1860-1882] DESCENT OF MAN 5 1

send your paper to Mr. Edmund Gurney,1 who has written Letter 419
on and is much interested in the origin of the taste for mi;
In reading youressay.it occurred to me that facility in the
utterance of prolonged sounds (I do not think that you allu'le
to this point) may possibly come into play in rendering them
musical ; for I have heard it stated that those who vary their
voices much, and use cadences in long continued speaking,
feel less fatigued than those who speak on the same note.

To G. J. Romanes. Letter 420

Down, Feb. 5th, 1880.

Romanes was at work on what ultimately came to be a book on
animal intelligence. Romanes's reply to this letter is given in his I
p. 95. The table referred to is published as a frontispiece to his Mental
Evolution in Animals, 1885.

As I feared, I cannot be of the least use to you. I could
not venture to say anything about babies without reading my
Expression book and paper on Infants, or about animals
without reading the Descent of Man and referring to my
notes ; and it is a great wrench to my mind to change from
one subject to another.

I will, however, hazard one or two remarks. Firstly, I
should have thought that the word " love " (not sexual
passion), as shown very low in the scale, to offspring and appa-
rently to comrades, ought to have come in more prominently
in your table than appears to be the case. Secondly, if you
give any instance of the appreciation of different stimulants
by plants, there is a much better case than that given by you
— namely, that of the glands of Drosera, which can be touched
roughly two or three times and do not transmit any effect,
but do so if pressed by a weight of yg-ocru grain (/
Plants 263). On the other hand, the filament of Dioncea may
be quietly loaded with a much greater weight, while a touch
by a hair causes the lobes to close instantly. This has alw
seemed to me a marvellous fact. Thirdly, I have been accus-
tomed to look at the coming in of the sense of pleasure and
pain as one of the most important steps in the development
of mind, and I should think it ought to be prominent in your
table. The sort of progress which I have imagined is tl
a stimulus produced some effect at the point affected, and

1 The late Edmund Gurney, author of The Power of Sound, 1SS0.

52 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 420 that the effect radiated at first in all directions, and then that
certain definite advantageous lines of transmission were
acquired, inducing definite reaction in certain lines. Such
transmission afterwards became associated in some un-
known way with pleasure or pain. These sensations led at
first to all sorts of violent action, such as the wriggling of a
worm, which was of some use. All the organs of sense would
be at the same time excited. Afterwards definite lines of
action would be found to be the most useful, and so would be
practised. But it is of no use my giving you my crude notions.

Letter 4*1 To S. Tolver Preston.

Down, May 22nd, 1880.

Your letter ! appears to me an interesting and valuable
one ; but I have now been working for some years exclu-
sively on the physiology of plants, and all other subjects have
gone out of my head, and it fatigues me much to try and
bring them back again into my head. I am, moreover, at
present very busy, as I leave home for a fortnight's rest at
the beginning of next week. My conviction as yet remains
unchanged, that a man who (for instance) jumps into a river
to save a life without a second's reflection (either from an
innate tendency or from one gained by habit) is deservedly
more honoured than a man who acts deliberately and is
conscious, for however short a time, that the risk and sacrifice
give him some inward satisfaction.

You are of course familiar with Herbert Spencer's writings
on Ethics.

1 Mr. Preston wrote (May 20th, 1880) to the effect that "self-interest
as a motive for conduct is a thing to be commended — and it certainly
[is] I think . . . the only conceivable rational motive of conduct : and
always is the tacitly recognised motive in all rational actions." Mr.
Preston does not, of course, commend selfishness, which is not true
self-interest.

There seem to be two ways of looking at the case given by Darwin.
The man who knows that he is risking his life, — realising that the
personal satisfaction that may follow is not worth the risk — is surely
admirable from the strength of character that leads him to follow the
social instinct against his purely personal inclination. But the man who
blindly obeys the social instinct is a more useful member of a social
community. He will act with courage where even the strong man
will fail.

1 860— 1 S82] D I : S C E NT OF M A N 5 j

The observations to which the following letters refer were continued
by Mr. Wallis,- who gave an account of his work in an interesting j
in the Proceedings of the Zoological Society^ March 2nd, 1897. The
results on the whole confirm the belief that traces of an anccstial puinted
ear exist in man.

To H. M. Wallis. Letter 422

Down, March 22nd, 18

I am very much obliged for your courteous and kind note.
The fact which you communicate is quite new to me, and as I
was laughed at about the tips to human cars, I should like to
publish in Nature some time your fact. But I must first
consult Eschricht, and see whether he notices this fact in
his curious paper on the lanugo on human embryos ; and
secondly I ought to look to monkeys and other animals which
have tufted ears, and observe how the hair grows. This I
shall not be able to do for some months, as I shall not be
in London until the autumn so as to go to the Zoological
Gardens. But in order that I may not hereafter throw away
time, will you be so kind as to inform me whether I may
publish your observation if on further search it seems
desirable ?

To H. M. Wallis. Leuer A2\

Down, March 31st, iSb>i

I am much obliged for your interesting letter. I am glad
to hear that you are looking to other ears, and will visit the
Zoological Gardens. Under these circumstances it would be
incomparably better (as more authentic) if you would publish
a notice of your observations in Nature or some scientific
journal. Would it not be well to confine your attention to
infants, as more likely to retain any primordial character, and
offering less difficulty in observing. I think, though, it would
be worth while to observe whether there i- any relation
(though probably none) between much hairiness on the ears
of an infant and the presence of the " tip " on the folded

54 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 423 margin. Could you not get an accurate sketch of the
direction of the hair of the tip of an ear ?

The fact which you communicate about the goat-sucker
is very curious. About the difference in the power of flight
in Dorkings, etc., may it not be due merely to greater weight
of body in the adults ?

1 am so old that I am not likely ever again to write on
general and difficult points in the theory of Evolution.

I shall use what little strength is left me for more confined
and easy subjects.

Letter 424 To Mrs. Talbot.

Mrs. Emily Talbot was secretary of the Education Department of
the American Social Science Association, Boston, Mass. A circular and
register was issued by the Department, and answers to various questions
were asked for. See Nature, April 28th, p. 617, 188 1. The above letter
was published in The Field Naturalist, Manchester, 1883, p. 5, edited by
Mr. W. E. Axon, to whom we are indebted for a copy.

Down. July 19th [1881 ?]

In response to your wish, I have much pleasure in ex-
pressing the interest which I feel in your proposed investigation
on the mental and bodily development of infants. Very little
is at present accurately known on this subject, and I believe
that isolated observations will add but little to our knowledge,
whereas tabulated results from a very large number of ob-
servations, systematically made, would probably throw much
light on the sequence and period of development of the
several faculties. This knowledge would probably give a
foundation for some improvement in our education of young
children, and would show us whether the system ought to be
followed in all cases.

I will venture to specify a few points of inquiry which, as
it seems to me, possess some scientific interest. For instance,
does the education of the parents influence the mental powers
of their children at any age, either at a very early or some-
what more advanced stage ? This could perhaps be learned
by schoolmasters and mistresses if a large number of children
were first classed according to age and their mental attain-
ments, and afterwards in accordance with the education of their
parents, as far as this could be discovered. As observation

1860-1882] DESCENT OF MAN 55

is one of the earliest faculties developed in young children, Letter 424
and as this power would probably be exercised in an equal
degree by the children of educated and uneducated persons,
it seems not impossible that any transmitted effect from
education could be displayed only at a somewhat advanced
age. It would be desirable to test statistically, in a similar
manner, the truth of the oft-repeated statement that coloured
children at first learn as quickly as white children, but that
they afterwards fall off in progress. If it could be proved
that education acts not only on the individual, but, by trans-
mission, on the race, this would be a great encouragement to
all working on this all-important subject. It is well known
that children sometimes exhibit, at a very early age, strong
special tastes, for which no cause can be assigned, although
occasionally they may be accounted for by reversion to the
taste or occupation of some progenitor ; and it would be
interesting to learn how far such early tastes are persistent
and influence the future career of the individual. In some
instances such tastes die away without apparently leaving any
after effect, but it would be desirable to know how far this is
commonly the case, as we should then know whether it were
important to direct as far as this is possible the early tastes of
our children. It may be more beneficial that a child should
follow energetically some pursuit, of however trifling a nature,
and thus acquire perseverance, than that he should be turned
from it because of no future advantage to him. I will mention
one other small point of inquiry in relation to very young
children, which may possibly prove important with respect to
the origin of language ; but it could be investigated only by
persons possessing an accurate musical ear. Children, even
before they can articulate, express some of their feelings and
desires by noises uttered in different notes. For instance,
they make an interrogative noise, and others of assent and
dissent, in different tones ; and it would, I think, be worth
while to ascertain whether there is any uniformity in different
children in the pitch of their voices under various frames of
mind.

I fear that this letter can be of no use to you, but it will
serve to show my sympathy and good wishes in your
researches.

56 MAN [Chap. VIII

II. Sexual Selection, 1866-72.
Letter 425 To James Shaw.

Down, Feb. nth [1866].

I am much obliged to you for your kindness in sending me
an abstract of your paper1 on beauty. In my opinion you
take quite a correct view of the subject. It is clear that
Dr. Dickson has either never seen my book, or overlooked
the discussion on sexual selection. If you have any precise
facts on birds' " courtesy towards their own image in mirror
or picture," I should very much like to hear them. Butterflies
offer an excellent instance of beauty being displayed in
conspicuous parts ; for those kinds which habitually display
the underside of the wing have this side gaudily coloured, and
this is not so in the reverse case. I daresay you will know
that the males of many foreign butterflies are much more
brilliantly coloured than the females, as in the case of birds.
I can adduce good evidence from two large classes of facts
(too large to specify) that flowers have become beautiful to
make them conspicuous to insects.2

M

r. Darwin wrote again to Mr. Shaw in April, 1866 : —

I am much obliged for your kind letter and all the great
trouble which you have taken in sending on all the various
and interesting facts on birds admiring themselves. I am
very glad to hear of these facts. I have just finished writing
and adding to a new edition of the Origin, and in this I
have given, without going into details (so that I shall not
be able to use your facts), some remarks on the subject
of beauty.

1 A newspaper report of a communication to the Dumfries Anti- ,
quarian and Natural History Society.

2 This letter is published in A Country Schoolmaster, James Shaw.
Edited by Robert Wallace, Edinburgh, 1899.

1866-1872] SEXUAL SELECTION

To A. I). Bartlett.1 Utter

Down, Feb. 16th, [1867?]

I want to beg two favours of you. I wish to ascertain
whether the Bower-Bird discriminates colours.- Will you
have all the coloured worsted removed from the cage and
bower, and then put all in a row, at some distance from
bower, the enclosed coloured worsted, and mark whether the
bird at first makes any selection. Each packet contains an
equal quantity ; the packets had better be separate, and each
thread put separate, but close together ; perhaps it would be
fairest if the several colours were put alternately — one thread
of bright scarlet, one thread of brown, etc., etc. There are six
colours. Will you have the kindness to tell me whether the
birds prefer one colour to another ?

Secondly, I very much want several heads of the fancy
and long-domesticated rabbits, to measure the capacity of
skull. I want only small kinds, such as Himalaya, small
Angora, Silver Grey, or any small-sized rabbit which has long
been domesticated. The Silver Grey from warrens would be
of little use. The animals must be adult, and the smaller the
breed the better. Now when any one dies would you send
me the carcase named ; if the skin is of any value it might be
skinned, but it would be rather better with skin, and I could
make a present to any keeper to whom the skin is a perquisite.
This would be of great assistance to me, if yuii would have
the kindness thus to aid me.

To W. B. Tegetmeier. Utter "7

We are not aware that the experiment here suggested has ever been
carried out.

Down, March 5th I.1S67].

I write on the bare and very improbable chance of your
being able to try, or get some trustworthy person to try,

1 Abraham Dee Bartlett (1812-97) was resident superintendent of
the Zoological Society's Gardens in Regent's Park from 1S59 to 1S97.
He communicated several papers to the Zoological Society. His
knowledge was always at the service of Mr. Darwin, who had a sincere
respect for him.

' Mr. Bartlett does not seem to have supplied any information on the
point in question. The evidence for the Bower- Birds taste in colour is
in Descent of Man, II., p. 112.

58 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 427 the following little experiment. But I may first state, as
showing what I want, that it has been stated that if two
long feathers in the tail of the male Widow-Bird at the Cape
of Good Hope are pulled out, no female will pair with him.

Now, where two or three common cocks are kept, I
want to know, if the tail sickle-feathers and saddle-feathers
of one which had succeeded in getting wives were cut and
mutilated and his beauty spoiled, whether he would continue
to be successful in getting wives. This might be tried with
drakes or peacocks, but no one would be willing to spoil
for a season his peacocks. I have no strength or opportunity
of watching my own poultry, otherwise I would try it. I
would very gladly repay all expenses of loss of value of the
poultry, etc. But, as I said, I have written on the most
improbable chance of your interesting any one to make the
trial, or having time and inclination yourself to make it.
Another, and perhaps better, mode of making the trial
would be to turn down to some hens two or three cocks,
one being injured in its plumage.

I am glad to say that I have begun correcting proofs.1
I hope that you received safely the skulls which you so
kindly lent me.

Letter 428 To W. B. Tegetmeier.

Down, March 30th [1867].

I am much obliged for your note, and shall be truly
obliged if you will insert any question on the subject. That
is a capital remark of yours about the trimmed game cocks,
and shall be quoted by me.2 Nevertheless 1 am still inclined
fro.-1 many facts strongly to believe that the beauty of the
male bird determines the choice of the female with wild
birds, however it may be under domestication. Sir R.
Heron has described how one pied peacock was extra
attentive to the hens This is a subject which I must take
up as soon as my present book is done.

I shall be most particularly obliged to you if you will

1 The Variation of Animals a7id Plants.

2 Descent of Man, Ed. I., Vol. II., p. 117. "Mr. Tegetmeier is
convinced that a game cock, though disfigured by being dubbed with
his hackles trimmed, would be accepted as readily as a male retaining
all his natural ornaments."

i866— 1872] SEXUAL SELECTION 59

dye with mag nta a pigeon or two.1 Would it not be better Letter 428
to dye the tail alone and crown of head, so as not to make
too great difference? I shall be very curious to hear how
an entirely crimson pigeon will be received by the others
as well as his mate.

I'.S. — Perhaps the best experiment, for my purpose, would
be to colour a young unpaired male and turn him with other
pigeons, and observe whether he was longer or quicker than
usual in mating.

To A. R. Wallace. Letter 429

Down, April 29th [1867].

I have been greatly interested by your letter,2 but your
view is not new to me. If you will look at p. 240 of the
fourth edition of the Origin you will find it very briefly given
with two extreme examples of the peacock and black grouse.
A more general statement is given at p. 101, or at p. 89
of the first edition, for I have long entertained this view,
though I have never had space to develop it. But I had
not sufficient knowledge to generalise a- far as you do
about coh airing and nesting. In your paper perhaps you
will just allude to my scanty remark in the fourth edition,
because in my Essay on Man I intend to discuss the whole
subject of sexual selection, explaining as I believe it does
much with respect to man. 1 have collected all my old
notes, and partly written my discussion, and it would be
flat work for me to give the leading idea as exclusively

1 " Mr. Tegetmeier, at my request, stained some of his birds with
magenta, but they were not much noticed by the others." — Descent of
Man (1901), p. 637.

' We have not been able to find Mr. Wallace's letter to which this
is a reply. It evidently refers to Mr. Wallaces belief in the paramount
importance of protection in the evolution of colour. This is clear from
the P.S. to the present letter and from the passages in the On
referred to. The first reference, Ed. iv., p. 240, is as follows :
" We can sometimes plainly see the proximate cause of the trans-
mission of ornaments to the males alone ; for a pea-hen with the
long tail of the male bird would be badly fitted to sit on her eggs,
and a coal-black female capercailzie would be far more conspicuous on
her nest, and more exposed to danger, than in her present modest
attire." The passages in Ed. I. (pp. 89, ion do not directly bear on
the question of protection.

60 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 429 from you. But, as I am sure from your greater knowledge
of Ornithology and Entomology that you will write a much
better discussion than I could, your paper will be of great
use to me. Nevertheless I must discuss the subject fully
in my Essay on Man. When we met at the Zoological
Society, and I asked you about the sexual differences in
kingfishers, I had this subject in view ; as I had when I
suggested to Bates the difficulty about gaudy caterpillars,
which you have so admirably (as I believe it will prove)
explained.1 I have got one capital case (genus forgotten) of
a [Australian] bird in which the female has long tail-plumes,
and which consequently builds a different nest from all her
allies.2 With respect to certain female birds being more
brightly coloured than the males, and the latter incubating,
I have gone a little into the subject, and cannot say that
1 am fully satisfied. I remember mentioning to you the
case of RhyncJioca, but its nesting seems unknown. In some
other cases the difference in brightness seemed to me hardly
sufficiently accounted for by the principle of protection.
At the Falkland Islands there is a carrion hawk in which
the female (as I ascertained by dissection) is the brightest
coloured, and I doubt whether protection will here apply ;
but I wrote several months ago to the Falklands to make
enquiries. The conclusion to which I have been leaning
is that in some of these abnormal cases the colour happened
to vary in the female alone, and was transmitted to females
alone, and that her variations have been selected through
the admiration of the male.

It is a very interesting subject, but I shall not be able
to go on with it for the next five or six months, as I am
fully employed in correcting dull proof-sheets. When I
return to the work I shall find it much better done by you
than I could have succeeded in doing.

1 See a letter of Feb. 26th, 1867, to Mr. Wallace, Life and Letters III.,
p. 94.

2 Menura superba: see Descent of Man (1901), p. 687. Rkynchcea,
mentioned a line or two lower down, is discussed in the Descent,
p. 727. The female is more brightly coloured than the male, and has
a convoluted trachea, elsewhere a masculine character. There seems
some reason to suppose that " the male undertakes the duty of
incubation."

i866— 1872] SEXUAL SELECTION 6l

It is curious how we hit on the same ideas. I I
endeavoured to show in my MS. discussion that nearly the
same principles account for young birds not being gaily
coloured in many cases, but this is too complex a point
for a note.

On reading over your letter again, and on further
reflection, I do not think (as far as I remember my words)
that I expressed myself nearly strongly enough on the
value and beauty of your generalisation,1 viz., that all birds
in which the female is conspicuously or brightly coloured
build in holes or under domes. I thought that this was
the explanation in many, perhaps most cases, but do
not think I should ever have extended my view to your
generalisation. Forgive me troubling you with this P.S.

To A. K Wallace. Letter 430

Down, May 5th [1867].

The offer of your valuable notes is most generous, but it
would vex me to take so much from you, as it is certain that
you could work up the subject very much better than I could.
Therefore 1 earnestly, and without any reservation, hope that
you will proceed with your paper, so that I return your notes.
You seem already to have well investigated the subject. I
confess on receiving your note that I felt rather flat at my
recent work being almost thrown away, but I did not intend
to show this feeling. As a proof how little advance I had
made on the subject, I may mention that though I had been
collecting facts on the colouring, and other sexual differences
in mammals, your explanation with respect to the females
had not occurred to me. I am surprised at my own stupidity,
but I have long recognised how much clearer and deeper
your insight into matters is than mine. I do ne>t know ho\
far you have attended to the laws of inheritance, so wk
follows may be obvious to you. I have begun my discussion
on sexual selection by showing that new characters often
appear in one sex and are transmitted to that sex , and

that from some unknown cause such characters apparently
appear oftener in the male than in the female. Secondly,
characters may be developed and be confined to the male,

1 See Letter 203, Vol. I., p. 2S3.

62 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 430 and long afterwards be transferred to the female. Thirdly,
characters may arise in either sex and be transmitted to both
sexes, either in an equal or unequal degree. In this latter
case I have supposed that the survival of the fittest has come
into play with female birds and kept the female dull-coloured.
With respect to the absence of spurs in the female gallinaceous
birds, I presume that they would be in the way during incu-
bation ; at least I have got the case of a German breed of
fowls in which the hens were spurred, and were found to
disturb and break their eggs much. With respect to the
females of deer not having horns, I presume it is to save the
loss of organised matter. In your note you speak of sexual
selection and protection as sufficient to account for the
colouring of all animals, but it seems to me doubtful how far
this will come into play with some of the lower animals, such
as sea anemones, some corals, etc., etc. On the other hand
Hackel x has recently well shown that the transparency and
absence of colour in the lower oceanic animals, belonging to
the most different classes, may be well accounted for on the
principle of protection.

Some time or other I should like much to know where
your paper on the nests of birds has appeared, and I shall be
extremely anxious to read your paper in the Westminster
Review? Your paper on the sexual colouring of birds will, I
have no doubt, be very striking. Forgive me, if you can, for
a touch of illiberality about your paper.

Letter 431

To A. R. Wallace.

March 19th, 1868.

The Variation of Animals and Plants having been published on
Jan. 30th, 1868, Mr. Darwin notes in his diary that on Feb. 4th he
"Began on Man and Sexual Selection." He had already (in 1864 and
1867) corresponded with Mr Wallace on these questions — see for
instance the Life and Letters, III., p. 89; but, owing to various interrup-
tions, serious work on the subject did not begin until 1869. The following
quotations show the line of work undertaken early in 1868.

Mr. Wallace wrote (March 19th, 1868) : " I am glad you have got
good materials on sexual selection. It is no doubt a difficult subject.
One difficulty to me is, that I do not see how the constant minute
variations, which are sufficient for Natural Selection to work with,

1 See Descent of Man (1901) p. 402.
3 Westminster Review, July, 1867.

i866— 1872] SEXUAL SELECTION 63

could be sexually selected. We seem to require a series of bold and Letter 431
abrupt variations. How can we imagine that an inch in the tail of
the peacock, or J-inch in that of the Bird of Paradise, would be noticed
and preferred by the female."

In regard to sexual selection. A girl sees a handsome
man, and without observing whether his nose or whiskers are
the tenth of an inch longer or shorter than in some other
man, admires his appearance and says she will marry him.
So, I suppose, with the pea-hen; and the tail has been
increased in length merely by, on the whole, presenting a
more gorgeous appearance. J. Jenner Weir, however, has
given me some facts showing that birds apparently admire
details of plumage.

To F. MUller. Letter 432

March 28th [1868].

I am particularly obliged to you for your observations on
the stridulation of the two sexes of Lamellicorns.1 I begin to
fear that I am completely in error owing to that common
cause, viz. mistaking at first individual variability for sexual
difference.

I go on working at sexual selection, and, though never
idle, I am able to do so little work each day that I make very
slow progress. I knew from Azara about the young of the
tapir being striped, and about young deer being spotted ;- 1
have often reflected on this subject, and know not what to
conclude about the loss of the stripes and spots. From the
geographical distribution of the striped and unsti iped species
of Equus there seems to be something very mysterious about
the loss of stripes ; and I cannot persuade myself that the
common ass has lost its stripes owing to being rendered
more conspicuous from having stripes and thus exposed to
danger.

1 We are unable to find any mention of F. M tiller's observations

on this point ; but the reference is clearly to Darwin's observations on

Vecrophorus and Pelobius^'itx which the stridulating rasp u.i* biggei in

the males in the first individuals examined, but not so in succeeding

specimens. Descent of Man, Ed. 11., Vol. I., p. 382.

* Fritz Midler's views are discussed in the Descent 0/ Man, Ed. 11 ,
Vol. II., p. 305.

64 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 433 To J. Jenner Weir.

Mr. John Jenner Weir,1 to whom the following letters are addressed,
is frequently quoted in the Descent of Man as having supplied Mr.
Darwin with information on a variety of subjects.

Down, Feb. 27th [1868].

I must thank you for your paper on apterous lepidoptera,2
which has interested me exceedingly, and likewise for the
very honourable mention which you make of my name. It
is almost a pity that your paper was not published in some
Journal in which it would have had a wider distribution. It
contained much that was new to me. I think the part about
the relation of the wings and spiracles and tracheae might have
been made a little clearer. Incidentally, you have done me
a good service by reminding me of the rudimentary spurs on
the legs of the partridge, for I am now writing on what I
have called sexual selection. I believe that I am not mistaken
in thinking that you have attended much to birds in confine-
ment, as well as to insects. If you could call to mind any
facts bearing on this subject, with birds, insects, or any animals
— such as the selection by a female of any particular male —
or conversely of a particular female by a male, or on the rivalry
between males, or on the allurement of the females by the
males, or any such facts, I should be most grateful for
the information, if you would have the kindness to com-
municate it.

P.S. — I may give as instance of [this] class of facts, that
Barrow asserts that a male Emberisai^') at the Cape has im-
mensely long tail-feathers during the breeding season ; 3 and
that if these are cut off, he has no chance of getting a wife. I
have always felt an intense wish to make analogous trials, but
have never had an opportunity, and it is not likely that you or
anyone would be willing to try so troublesome an experiment.
Colouring or staining the fine red breast of a bullfinch with

1 For a biographical note see Vol. I., Letter 235.

2 Published by the West Kent Natural History, Microscopical and
Photographic Society, Greenwich, 1867. Mr. Weir's paper seems chiefly
to have interested Mr. Darwin as affording a good case of gradation
in the degree of degradation of the wings in various species.

3 Barrow describes the long tail feathers of Emberiza longicauda as
enduring "but the season of love." An Account of Travels into the
Interior of Southern Africa: London, 1801, Vol. I., p. 244.

iS66— 1872] SEXUAL S] 1 TION

some innocuous matter into a dingy tint would be an Letter 433
analogous case, and then putting him and ordinary mali
with a female. A friend promised, but failed, to try a
converse exp< riment with white pigeons — viz., to stain their
tails and wings with magi nta or other colours, and then
observe what effect such a prodigious alteration would have
on their courtship.1 It would be a fairer trial to cut off the
eyes of the tail-feathers of male peacocks; but who would
sacrifice the beauty of their bird for a whole season to please
a mere naturalist?

To J. Jenner Weir. Utter 434

Down, Feb. 29th '1868].

I have hardly ever received a note which has interested
me more than your last ; and this is no exaggeration. I had
a few cases of birds perceiving slight changes in the dn
their owners, but your facts are of tenfold value. I shall cer-
tainly make use of them, and need not say how much obliged
I should be for any others about which you feel confident.

Do you know of any birds besides some of the gallinace;
which are polygamous? Do you know of an)- birds besides
pigeons, and, as it is said, the raven, which pair for their
whole lives?

Many years ago I visited your brother, who showed me
his pigeons and gave me some valuable information. Could
you persuade him (but I fear he would think it high treason)
to stain a male pigeon some brilliant colour, and observe
whether it excited in the other pigeons, especially the female
admiration or contempt ?

lor the chance of your liking t<> have a copy and being
able to find some parts which would interest you, I have
directed Mr. Murray to send you my recent book on / 'aviation
under Domestication.

P.S. — I have somewhere safe references to cases of magpies,
of which one of a pair has been repeatedly ,1 think seven
times) killed, and yet another mate was always immediately
found.'-1 A gamekeeper told me yesterday of analog< us cas

1 See Letter 42

- On this subject see Descent of Man, Ed. I., Vol. II., p. 104, where
Mr. Weir's observations were made use of. This statement is quoted
from Jenner {Phil. Trans., 1824) in the Descent of Man 1.1901 . p. 20.

VOL. II. 5

66 MAN [Chap. VIIT

Letter 434 This perplexes me much. Are there many unmarried birds ?
I can hardly believe it. Or will one of a pair, of which the
nest has been robbed, or which are barren, always desert his
or her mate for a strange mate with the attraction of a nest,
and in one instance with young birds in the nest ? The
gamekeeper said during breeding season he had never
observed a single or unpaired partridge. How can the sexes
be so equally matched ?

P.S. 2nd. — 1 fear you will find me a great bore, but I will
be as reasonable as can be expected in plundering one so
rich as you.

P.S. 3rd. — I have just received a letter from Dr. Wallace,1
of Colchester, about the proportional numbers of the two
sexes in Bombyx ; and in this note, apropos to an inci-
dental remark of mine, he stoutly maintains that female
lepidoptera never notice the colours or appearance of the
male, but always receive the first male which comes ;
and this appears very probable. He says he has often seen
fine females receive old battered and pale-tinted males. I
shall have to admit this very great objection to sexual selec-
tion in insects. His observations no doubt apply to English
lepidoptera, in most of which the sexes are alike. The
brimstone or orange-tip would be good to observe in this
respect, but it is hopelessly difficult. I think I have often
seen several males following one female ; and what decides
which male shall succeed ? How is this about several males ;
is it not so ?

Letter 435 To J. Jenner Weir.

6, Queen Anne Street, Cavendish Square, W. [March 6th, 1868].
I have come here for a few weeks, for a little change and
rest. Just as I was leaving home I received your first note,
and yesterday a second ; and both are most interesting and
valuable to me. That is a very curious observation about
the goldfinch's beak,2 but one would hardly like to trust it
without measurement or comparison of the beaks of several

1 See Descent of Man, Ed. I., Vol. I., pp. 386-401, where Dr.
Wallace's observations are quoted.

2 Descent of Man, Ed. I., Vol. I., p. 39. Mr. Weir is quoted as
saying that the birdcatchers can distinguish the males of the goldfinch,
Carduelis elegans, by their " slightly longer beaks."

1866-1872] SEXUAL SELECTION 67

male and female birds; for I do not understand that you Letter 435
yourself assert that the beak of the male is sensibly Ion
than that of the female. If you come ; any acute bird-

catchers (I do not mean to ask you to go after them;, I wish
you would ask what is their impression on the rel tive
numbers of the sexes of any birds which they habitually
catch, and whether some years males are more numerous and
some years fi males. I see that I must trust to analogy an
unsafe support) for sexual selection in regard to colour in
butterflies. You speak of the brimstone butterfly and genus
Edusa1 (I forget what this is, and have no books here, unless
it is Coitus) not opening their wings. In one of my notes to
Mr. Stainton I asked him (but he could or did not answer)
whether butterflies such as the Fritillaries, with wings bright
beneath and above, opened and shut their wings more than
Vanessa, most of which, I think, are obscure on the under
surface. That is a most curious observation about the red
underwing moth and the robin,- and strongly supports a
suggestion (which I thought hardly credible) of A. R. Wallace,
viz. that the immense wings of some exotic lepidoptera served
as a protection from difficulty of birds seizing them. I will
probably quote your case.

No doubt Dr. Hooker collected the Kerguelen moth, for
I remember he told me of the case when I suggested in the
Origin, the explanation of the coleoptcra of Madeira being
apterous ; but he did not know what had become of the
specimens.

I am quite delighted to hear that you arc observing
coloured birds,3 though the probability, I suppose, will be
that no sure result will be gained. I am accustomed with
my numerous experiments with plants to be well sa d if

1 get any good result in one case out of five.

You will not be able to read all my book too much
detail. Some of the chapters in the second volume are

1 Colias Edusa.

' Descent of Man, Ed. [., Vol. I., p. 395. Mr. Weir describes the pur-
suit of a red-underwin^. Triphoea pronuba, by .1 robin which was attracted
by the bright colour of the moth, and constantly mi>sed the insect by
breaking pieces off the wing instead of seizing the body. Mr. Wallace's
facts are given on the same p. . .

s Descent of Man, Ed. I., Vol. II., p. no.

68 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 435 curious, I think. If any man wants to gain a good opinion
of his fellow-men, he ought to do what I am doing, pester
them with letters.

, , To J. Tenner Weir.

Letter 436 J J

4, Chester Place, Regent's Park, N.W., March 13th [1868].

You make a very great mistake when you speak of " the
risk of your notes boring me." They are of the utmost value
to me, and I am sure I shall never be tired of receiving them ;
but I must not be unreasonable. I shall give almost all the
facts which you have mentioned in your two last notes, as
well as in the previous ones ; and my only difficulty will be
not to give too much and weary my readers. Your last note
is especially valuable about birds displaying the beautiful
parts of their plumage. Audubon l gives a good many facts
about the antics of birds during courtship, but nothing nearly
so much to the purpose as yours. I shall never be able to
resist giving the whole substance of your last note. It is
quite a new light to me, except with the peacock and Bird of
Paradise. I must now look to turkey's wings ; but I do not
think that their wings are beautiful when opened during
courtship. Its tail is finely banded. How about the drake
and Gallus bankiva ? I forget how their wings look when
expanded. Your facts are all the more valuable as I now
clearly see that for butterflies I must trust to analogy
altogether in regard to sexual selection. But I think I shall
make out a strong case (as far as the rather deceitful guide of
analogy will serve) in the sexes of butterflies being alike or
differing greatly — in moths which do not display the lower
surface of their wings not having them gaudily coloured,
etc., etc. — nocturnal moths, etc. — and in some male insects
fighting for the females, and attracting them by music.

My discussion on sexual selection will be a curious one —
a mere dovetailing of information derived from you, Bates,
Wallace, etc., etc., etc.

We remain at above address all this month, and then
return home. In the summer, could I persuade you to pay
us a visit of a day or two, and I would try and get Bates and
some others to come down ? But my health is so precarious,

1 In his Ornithological Biography, 5 vols., Edinburgh, 1831-49.

1866-1S72] SEXUAL SELECTION

I can ask no one who will not allow me the privilege of a Letter 436
poor old invalid ; for talking, I find by long and dear-bought

experience, tries my head more than anything, and I am
utterly incapable of talking more than half an hour, except
on rare occasions.

I fear this note is very badly written ; but I was very ill
all yesterday, and my hand shakes to-day.

To J. Jenner Weir. Letter 437

A, Chester Place, Regent's Park. N.W., March 22nd [1868].

I hope that you will not think me ungrateful that I have
not sooner answered your note of the 16th ; but in fact I
have been overwhelmed both with calls and letters ; and, alas !
one visit to the British Museum of an hour or hour and a half
does for me for the whole day.

I was particularly glad to hear your and your brother's
statement about the "gay" deceiver-pigeons.1 I did not at
all know that certain birds could win the affections of the
females more than other males, except, indeed, in the case
of the peacock. Conversely, Mr. Hewitt, I remember, states
that in making hybrids the cock pheasant would prefer
certain hen fowls and strongly dislike others. I will write
to Mr. H. in a few days, and ask him whether he has
observed anything of this kind with pure unions of fowls,
ducks, etc. I had utterly forgotten the case of the ruff,- but
now I remember having heard that it was polygamous ; but
polygamy with birds, at least, does not seem common enough
to have played an important part. So little is known of
habits of foreign birds : Wallace does not even know whether
Birds of Paradise are polygamous. Have you been a large
collector of caterpillars ? I believe so. I inferred from a
letter from Dr. Wallace, of Colchester, that he would account
for Mr. Stainton and others rearing more female than male
by their having collected the larger and finer caterpillars.
But I misunderstood him, and he maintains that collectors
take all caterpillars, large and small, for that they collect the

1 Some cock pigeons " called by our English fanciers gay birds are
so successful in their gallantries that, as Mr. H. Weir informs me, they
must be shut up, on account of the mischief which they cause.''

* The ruff. Machetes pugnaxx was believed by Montagu to be
polygamous. Descent of Man, Ed. l„ Vol. I., p. 270.

7° MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 437 caterpillars alone of the rarer moths or butterflies. What
think you? I hear from Professor Canestrini 1 in Italy that
females are born in considerable excess with Bombyx mori,
and in greater excess of late years than formerly ! Quatrefages
writes to me that he believes they are equal in France. So
that the farther I go the deeper I sink into the mire. With
cordial thanks for your most valuable letters.

We remain here till April 1st, and then hurrah for home
and quiet work.

Letter 438 To J. Jenner Weir.

4, Chester Place, N.W., March 27th [1868].

I hardly know which of your three last letters has
interested me most. What splendid work I shall have
hereafter in selecting and arranging all your facts. Your last
letter is most curious — all about the bird-catchers — and
interested us all. I suppose the male chaffinch in " pegging "
approaches the captive singing-bird, from rivalry or jealousy —
if I am wrong please tell me ; otherwise I will assume so.
Can you form any theory about all the many cases which you
have given me, and others which have been published, of when
one [of a] pair is killed, another soon appearing? Your fact
about the bullfinches in your garden is most curious on this
head.2 Are there everywhere many unpaired birds ? What
can the explanation be ?

Mr. Gould assures me that all the nightingales which first
come over are males, and he believes this is so with other
migratory birds. But this does not agree with what the bird-
catchers say about the common linnet, which I suppose
migrates within the limits of England.

Many thanks for very curious case of Pavo nigripennis?
I am very glad to get additional evidence. I have sent your
fact to be inserted, if not too late, in four foreign editions
which are now printing. I am delighted to hear that you

1 See Descent of Man (1901), p. 385.

3 Mr. Weir stated that at Blackheath he never saw or heard a wild
bullfinch, yet when one of his caged males died, a wild one in the course
of a few days generally came and perched near the widowed female, whose
call-note is not loud. Descent of Man (1901), p. 623.

3 See Animals and Plants, Ed. 11., vol. I., p. 306.

1866—1872] SEXUAL SELECTION 71

approve of my book ; I thought every mortal man would find Letter 438
the details very tedious, and have often repented of
so many. You will find pangenesis stiff reading, and i f
will shake your head in disapproval. Wallace sticks up for
the great god Pan like a man.

The fertility of hybrid canaries would be a fine subject for
careful invei tigation.

To J. Jenner Weir. ttCT 439

Down, April 4th [1868].

I read over your last ten (!) letters this morning, and made
an index of their contents for easy reference; and what a
mine of wealth you have bestowed on me. I am glad you
will publish yourself on gay-coloured caterpillars and birds ; '
it seems to me much the best plan ; therefore, I will not
forward your letter to Mr. Wallace. I was much in the
Zoological Gardens during my month in London, and picked
up what scraps of knowledge I could. Without my having
mentioned your most interesting observations on the display
of the Fringillidae,8 Mr. Bartlett told me how the Gold
Pheasant erects his collar and turns from side to side,
displaying it to the hen. I le has offered to give me notes on
the display of all Gallinacea? with which he is acquainted ;
but he is so busy a man that I rather doubt whether he will
ever do so.

I received about a week ago a remarkably kind letter from
your brother, and I am sorry to hear that he suffers much in
health. He gave me some fine facts about a Dun Hen
Carrier which would never pair with a bird of any other
colour. He told me, also, of some one at Lewes who paints

1 See Descent of Man, Ed. 1., vol. I., p. 417, where Mr. Weir's
experiments arc given ; they were made to test Mr. Wallace's theory that
caterpillars, which are pro _;.iin>t birds by an unpleasant taste, have

been rendered conspicuous, so that they are easily recognised. Tl
thus escape being pecked or tasted, which to soft-skinned animals would
be as fatal as being devoured. See Mr. Jenner Weir's papers, Transa :
Entomolog. So&, i860, p. 2 ; 1870, p. 337. In regard to one of these
papers Mr. Darwin wrote (May 13th, 1869) : "Your verification of
Wallace's suggestion seems to me to amount to quite a discovery.

s Descent 0/ Man (1901), p. 738.

72 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 439 his dog ! and will inquire about it. By the way, Mr. Trimen
tells me that as a boy he used to paint butterflies, and that
they long haunted the same place, but he made no further
observations on them. As far as colour is concerned, I see I
shall have to trust to mere inference from the males displaying
their plumage, and other analogous facts. I shall get no
direct evidence of the preference of the hens. Mr. Hewitt,
of Birmingham, tells me that the common hen prefers a
salacious cock, but is quite indifferent to colour.

Will you consider and kindly give me your opinion on
the two following points. Do very vigorous and well-
nourished hens receive the male earlier in the spring than
weaker or poorer hens ? I suppose that they do. Secondly,
do you suppose that the birds which pair first in the season
have any advantage in rearing numerous and healthy off-
spring over those which pair later in the season ? With
respect to the mysterious cases of which you have given me
so many, in addition to those previously collected, of when
one bird of a pair is shot another immediately supplying its
place, I was drawing to the conclusion that there must be in
each district several unpaired birds ; yet this seems very
improbable. You allude, also, to the unknown causes which
keep down the numbers of birds ; and often and often have I
marvelled over this subject with respect to many animals.

Letter 440 To A. R. Wallace.

The following refers to Mr. Wallace's article "A Theory of Birds'
Nests," in Andrew Murray's Journal of Travel, Vol. I., p. 73. He here
treats in fuller detail the view already published in the Westminster
Review, July, 1867, p. 38. The rule which Mr. Wallace believes, with
very few exceptions, to hold good is, "that when both sexes are
of strikingly gay and conspicuous colours, the nest is . . . such as to
conceal the sitting bird ; while, whenever there is a striking contrast of
colours, the male being gay and conspicuous, the female dull and obscure,
the nest is open, and the sitting bird exposed to view." At this time
Mr. Wallace allowed considerably more influence to sexual selection (in
combination with the need of protection) than in his later writings.
The following extract from a letter from Mr. Wallace to Darwin (July 23rd,
1877) fixes the period at which the change in his views occurred : "lam
almost afraid to tell you that in going over the subject of the colours of
animals, etc., etc., for a small volume of essays, etc., I am preparing, I have
come to conclusions directly opposed to voluntary sexual selection, and

1866-1872] SEXUAL SELECTION 73

believe thai I can explain in a general way all the phem ll Lettei

ornaments and colours by laws of development aided by simple ' Natural
He finally rejected Mr. Darwin's theory that colours " have
been developed by the preferen e ol the females, the more ornamented
male ring the parents of each successive generation." Darwinism,

1889, p. 285. See also Letters 442, 443, 449, 450, etc.

Down. April 15th, [1868].

I have been deeply interested by your admirable article on
birds' nests. I am delighted to see that we really differ very
little, — not more than two men almost always will. Von do
not lay much or any stress on new characters spontaneously
appearing in one sex (generally the male), and bein^ trans-
mitted exclusively, or more commonly only in excess, to that
sex. 1, on the other hand, formerly paid far too little attention
to protection. I had only a glimpse of the truth; but even
now 1 do not go quite as far as you. I cannot avoid thinking
rather more than you do about the exceptions in nesting to
the rule, especially the partial exceptions, i.e., when there is
some little difference between the sexes in species which build
concealed nests. I am not quite satisfied about the incubating
males ; there is so little difference in conspicuousness betu
the sexes. I wish with all my heart I could go the whole
length with you. You seem to think that male birds probably
seleet the most beautiful females ; I must feel some doubt on
this head, for I can find no evidence of it. Though I am
writing so carping a note, I admire the article thoroughly.

And now 1 want to ask a question. When female
butterflies are more brilliant than their males you believe
that the>- have in most cases, or in all cases, been rendered
brilliant so as to mimic some other species, and thus escape
danger. Rut can you account for the males not having been
rendered equally brilliant and equally protected ? : Although
it may be most for the welfare of the species that the female
should be protected, yet it would be some advantage, certainly

1 See Wallace in the Westminster Review, July, 1S67. p. 37, on the
protection to the female insect afforded by its resemblance cither to an
inanimate object or to another insect protected by its unpalatableness.
The cases are discussed in relation to the much greater importance (to
the species as a whole) of the preservation of the female insect with her
load of eggs than the male who may safely be sacrificed after pairing.
See Letter 189, note 3.

74 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 440 no disadvantage, for the unfortunate male to enjoy an equal
immunity from danger. For my part, I should say that the
female alone had happened to vary in the right manner, and
that the beneficial variations had been transmitted to the
same sex alone. Believing in this, I can see no improbability
(but from analogy of domestic animals a strong probability)
that variations leading to beauty must often have occurred
in the males alone, and been transmitted to that sex alone.
Thus 1 should account in many cases for the greater beauty of
the male over the female, without the need of the protective
principle. I should be grateful for an answer on the point.

Letter 441 To J. Jenner Weir.

Down, April 18th [1868].

You see that I have taken you at your word, and have
not (owing to heaps of stupid letters) earlier noticed your
three last letters, which as usual are rich in facts. Your
letters make almost a little volume on my table. I daresay
you hardly knew yourself how much curious information
was lying in your mind till I began the severe pumping
process. The case of the starling married thrice in one day
is capital, and beats the case of the magpies of which one
was shot seven times consecutively. A gamekeeper here
tells me that he has repeatedly shot one of a pair of jays,
and it has always been immediately replaced. I begin to
think that the pairing of birds must be as delicate and tedious
an operation as the pairing of young gentlemen and ladies.
If I can convince myself that there are habitually many
unpaired birds, it will be a great aid to me in sexual selection,
about which I have lately had many troubles, and am there-
fore rejoiced to hear in your last note that your faith keeps
staunch. That is a curious fact about the bullfinches all
appearing to listen to the German singer * ; and this leads
me to ask how much faith may I put in the statement that
male birds will sing in rivalry until they injure themselves.
Yarrell formerly told me that they would sometimes even
sing themselves to death. I am sorry to hear that the
painted bullfinch turns out to be a female ; though she has

1 See p. 81, note 1.

1866-1872] SEXUAL SELECTION 75

done us a good turn in exhibiting her jealousy, of which I Letter 441

had no id(

Thank yon for telling mc about the wildness of the
hybrid canaries : nothing has hardly ever surprised me
more than the many c; f reversion from crossing. Do

you not think it a very curious subject? I have not heard
from Mr. Bartlett about the Gallinaceae, and 1 daresay I
never shall. He told me about the Tragopan, and he is
positive that the blue wattle becomes gorged with blood,
and not air.

Returning to the first of the last three letters. It is
most curious the number of persons of the name of Jenner
who have had a strong taste for Natural History. It is a
pity you cannot trace your connection with the great Jenner,
for a duke might be proud of his blood.

I heard lately from Professor Rolleston of the inherited
effects of an injury in the same eye. Is the scar on your
son's leg on the same side and on exactly the same spot
where you were wounded ? And did the wound suppurate,
or heal by the first intention ? I cannot persuade myself of
the truth of the common belief of the influence of the
mother's imagination on the child. A point just occurs to
me (though it does not at present concern me) about birds'
nests. Have you read Wallace's1 recent articles ? I always
distrust myself when I differ from him ; but I cannot admit
that birds learn to make their nests from having seen them
whilst young. I must think it as true an instinct as that
which leads a caterpillar to suspend its cocoon in a particular
manner. Have you had any experience of birds hatched
under a foster-mother making their nests in the proper
manner? I cannot thank you enough for all your kindness.

1 A full discussion of Mr. Wallace's views is given in .
Man, Ed. I., Vol. II., Chap. xv. Briefly, Mr. Wallace's point is that
the dull colour of the female bird is protective by rendering her
inconspicuous during incubation. Thus the relatively bright colour
of the male would not simply depend on sexual selection, but also on
the hen being "saved, through Natural Selection, from acquit ing the
conspicuous colours of the male" (,/<><". <"//., p. 155).

76 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 442 To A. R. Wallace.

Dr. Clifford Allbutt's view probably had reference to the fact that
the sperm-cell goes, or is carried, to the germ-cell, never vice versa.
In this letter Darwin gives the reason for the " law " referred to. Mr.
A. R. Wallace has been good enough to give us the following note : —
"It was at this time that my paper on 'Protective Resemblance'" first
appeared in the Westminster Review, in which I adduced the greater,
or, rather, the more continuous, importance of the female (in the lower
animals) for the race, and my 'Theory of Birds' Nests' {Journal of
Travel and Natural History, No. 2) in which I applied this to the usually
dull colours of female butterflies and birds. It is to these articles as
well as to my letters that Darwin chiefly refers." — Note by Mr. Wallace,
May 27th, 1902.

Down, April 30th [1868].

Your letter, like so many previous ones, has interested
me much. Dr. Allbutt's view occurred to me some
time ago, and I have written a short discussion on it. It
is, I think, a remarkable law, to which I have found no
exception. The foundation lies in the fact that in many-
cases the eggs or seeds require nourishment and protection
by the mother-form for some time after impregnation.
Hence the spermatozoa and antherozoids travel in the lower
aquatic animals and plants to the female, and pollen is borne
to the female organ. As organisms rise in the scale it seems
natural that the male should carry the spermatozoa to the
female in his own body. As the male is the searcher, he
has required and gained more eager passions than the
female ; and, very differently from you, I look at this as
one great difficulty in believing that the males select the
more attractive females ; as far as I can discover, they are
always ready to seize on any female, and sometimes on
many females. Nothing would please me more than to
find evidence of males selecting the more attractive females.
I have for months been trying to persuade myself of this.
There is the case of man in favour of this belief, and I know
in hybrid unions of males preferring particular females, but,
alas, not guided by colour. Perhaps I may get more
evidence as I wade through my twenty years' mass of notes.

I am not shaken about the female protected butterflies.
I will grant (only for argument) that the life of the male is
of very little value, — I will grant that the males do not vary,

i866— 1872] SEXUAL SELECTION "JJ

yet why has not the protective beauty of the femali b< ( n Letter 442
transferred by inheritance to the male? The beauty would
be a gain to the male, as far as we can sec, as a prot< ction ;
and I cannot believe that it would be repulsive t<- the
female as she became beautiful. But we shall never convince
each other. I sometimes marvel how truth progresses, so
difficult is it for one man to convince another, unless his
mind is vacant. Nevertheless, I myself to a certain extent
contradict my own remark, for I believe far more in the
importance of protection than I did before reading your
articlcs.

I do not think you lay nearly stress enough in your
articles on what you admit in your letters : viz., " there
seems to be some production of vividness ... of colour in
the male independent of protection." This I am making a
chief point ; and have come to your conclusion so far that
I believe that intense colouring in the female sex is often
checked by being dangerous.

That is an excellent remark of yours about no known
ca>e of male alone assuming protective colours ; but in the
cases in which protection has been gained by dull colours,
I presume that sexual selection would interfere with the
male losing his beauty. If the male alone had acquired
beauty as a protection, it would be most readily overlooked,
as males are so often more beautiful than their tern il
Moreover, I grant that the life of the male is s< mewhat
less precious, and thus there would be less rigorous selection
with the male, so he would be less likely to be made beautiful
through Natural Selection for protection.1 But it seems t<>
me a good argument, and very good if it could be
thoroughly established. I do not know whether you will
care to read this scrawl.

To A. R. Wallace. Letter 44 j

Down, May 5U1 [1868?].
I am afraid I have caused you a great deal of trouble in
writing to me at such length. I am glad to say that I agree
almost entirely with your summary, except that I should

1 This does not apply to sexual selection, for the greater the excess
of males, and the less precious their lives, so much the better tor sexual
selection. [Note in original.]

yS MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 443 put sexual selection as an equal, or perhaps as even a more
important agent in giving colour than Natural Selection for
protection. As I get on in my work I hope to get clearer
and more decided ideas. Working up from the bottom of
the scale, I have as yet only got to fishes. What I rather
object to in your articles is that I do not think any one
would infer from them that you place sexual selection even
as high as No. 4 in your summary. It was very natural that
you should give only a line to sexual selection in the summary
to the Westminster Review, but the result at first to my
mind was that you attributed hardly anything to its power.
In your penultimate note you say " in the great mass of
cases in which there is great differentiation of colour between
the sexes, I believe it is due almost wholly to the need of
protection to the female." Now, looking to the whole
animal kingdom, I can at present by no means admit this
view ; but pray do not suppose that because I differ to a
certain extent, I do not thoroughly admire your several
papers and your admirable generalisation on birds' nests.
With respect to this latter point, however, although, following
you, I suspect that 1 shall ultimately look at the whole case
from a rather different point of view.

You ask what I think about the gay-coloured females of
Pieris} I believe I quite follow you in believing that the
colours are wholly due to mimicry ; and I further believe
that the male is not brilliant from not having received
through inheritance colour from the female, and from not
himself having varied ; in short, that he has not been
influenced by selection.

I can make no answer with respect to the elephants.
With respect to the female reindeer, I have hitherto looked
at the horns simply as the consequence of inheritance not
having been limited by sex.

Your idea about colour being concentrated in the smaller
males seems good, and I presume that you will not object
to my giving it as your suggestion.

1 See Westminster Review, July, 1867, p. yj ; also Letter 440.

1866-1S72] SEXUAL SELECTION

To J. Jenner Weir. *"

Down, May 7th

I have now to thank you for no less than four letters!
You are so kind that I will not apologise for the trouble I
cause you ; but it has lately occurred to me that you • ught to
publish a paper or book on the habits of the birds which you
have so carefully observed. But should you do this, 1 do not
think that my giving some of the facts for a special object
would much injure the novelty of your work. There is such
a multitude of points in these last letters that I hardly know
what to touch upon. Thanks about the instinct of nidification,
and for your answers on many points. I am glad to hear
reports about the ferocious female bullfinch. I hope you will
have another try in colouring males. I have now finished
lepidoptera, and have used your facts about caterpillars, and
as a caution the case of the yellow-underwings. 1 have now
begun on fishes, and by comparing different classes of facts
my views are getting a little more decided. In about a
fortnight or three weeks 1 shall come to birds, and then I
dare say that I shall be extra troublesome. 1 will now
enclose a few queries for the mere chance of your being able
to answer some of them, and I think it will save you trouble
if 1 write them on a separate slip, and then you can sometimes
answer by a mere " no " or "yes."

Your last letter on male pigeons and linnets has interested
me much, for the precise facts which you have given me on
display are of the utmost value for my work. I have written
to Mr. Bartlett on Gallinacear, but 1 dare say I shall not
an answer. I had heard before, but am glad to have con-
firmation about the ruffs being the most numerous. I am
greatly oblige d to your brother for sending out circulars. I
have not heard from him as yet I want to ask him whether
he has ever observed when several male pigeons arc courti
one female that the latter decides with which male she will
pair. The story about the black mark on the lambs must be
a hoax. The inaccuracy of many persons is wonderful. I
should like to tell you a story, but it is too long, about beans
growing on the wrong side o\' the pod during certain years.

Queries :

Docs any female bird regularlv sing ?

Do you know any case of both sexes, more especially

80 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 444 the female, [being] more brightly coloured whilst young than
when come to maturity and fit to breed ? An imaginary
instance would be if the female kingfisher (or male) became
dull coloured when adult.

Do you know whether the male and female wild canary
bird differ in plumage (though I believe I could find this out
for myself), and do any of the domestic breeds differ sexually ?

Do you know any gallinaceous bird in which the female
has well developed spurs ?

It is very odd that my memory should fail me, but I
cannot remember whether, in accordance with your views, the
wing of Gallus bankiva (or Game-Cock, which is so like the
wild) is ornamental when he opens and scrapes it before the
female. I fear it is not ; but though I have often looked at
wing of the wild and tame bird, I cannot call to mind the exact
colours. What a number of points you have attended to ; I
did not know that you were a horticulturist. I have often
marvelled at the different growth of the flowering and
creeping branches of the ivy ; but had no idea that they
kept their character when propagated by cuttings. There is
a S. American genus (name forgotten just now) which differs
in an analogous manner but even greater degree, but it is
difficult to cultivate in our hot-house. I have tried and failed.

Letter 445 To J- Jenner Weir.

Down, May 30th [1868].
I am glad to hear your opinion on the nest-making
instinct, for I am Tory enough not to like to give up all old
beliefs. Wallace's view 1 is also opposed to a great mass of
analogical facts. The cases which you mention of suddenly
reacquired wildness seem curious. I have also to thank you
for a previous valuable letter. With respect to spurs on
female Gallinaceae, 1 applied to Mr. Blyth, who has wonderful
systematic knowledge, and he tells me that the female Pavo
muticus and Fire-back pheasants are spurred. From various
interruptions I get on very slowly with my Bird MS., but
have already often and often referred to your volume of letters,
and have used various facts, and shall use many more. And
now I am ashamed to say that I have more questions to ask ;
but I forget — you told me not to apologise.

1 See Letter 440, etc.

i866— 1872] SEXUAL SELECTION 8 1

(1) In your letter of April 14th you mention the case of Letter 445
about twenty birds which seemed to listen with much interest

to an excellent piping bullfinch.1 What kind of birds were
these twenty?

(2) Is it true, as often stated, that a bird reared by foster-
parents, and who has never heard the song of its own species,
imitates to a certain extent the song of the species which it
may be in the habit of hearing ?

Now for a more troublesome point. I find it very necessary
to make out relation of immature plumage to adult plumage,
both when the sexes differ and are alike in the adult state.
Therefore, I want much to learn about the first plumage
(answering, for instance, to the speckled state of the robin
before it acquires the red breast) of the several varieties of the
canary. Can you help me ? What is the character or colour
of the first plumage of bright yellow or mealy canaries which
breed true to these tints ? So with the mottled-brown
canaries, for I believe that there are breeds which always
come brown and mottled. Lastly, in the " prize-canaries,"
which have black wing- and tail-feathers during their first (?)
plumage, what colours are the wings and tails after the
first (?) moult or when adult? I should be particularly glad
to learn this. Heaven have mercy on you, for it is clear that
I have none. I am going to investigate this same point with
all the breeds of fowls, as Mr. Tegetmeier will procure for me
young birds, about two months old, of all the breeds.

In the course of this next month I hope you will come
down here on the Saturday and stay over the Sunday. Some
months ago Mr. Bates said he would pay me a visit during
June, and I have thought it would be pleasanter for you to
come here when I can get him, so that you would have a
companion if I get knocked up, as is sadly too often my
bad habit and great misfortune.

Did you ever hear of the existence of any sub-breed of the
canary in which the male differs in plumage from the female?

1 Quoted in (he Descent of Man ^i9oi\p. 564. "A bullfinch which
had been taught to pipe a German waltz . . . when this bird was first
introduced into a room where other birds were kept and he began to sing
all the others, consisting of about twenty linnets and canaries, ranged
themselves on the nearest side of their cages, and listened with the
greatest interest to the new performer."

VOL. II. 6

82 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 446 To R MUller-

Down, June 3rd [1868].

Your letter of April 22nd has much interested me. I am
delighted that you approve of my book, for I value your
opinion more than that of almost any one. I have yet hopes
that you will think well of pangenesis. I feel sure that our
minds are somewhat alike, and I find it a great relief to have
some definite, though hypothetical view, when I reflect on the
wonderful transformations of animals, the re-growth of parts,
and especially the direct action of pollen on the mother form,
etc. It often appears to me almost certain that the characters
of the parents are " photographed " on the child, only by
means of material atoms derived from each cell in both
parents, and developed in the child. I am sorry about the
mistake in regard to Leptotes} I daresay it was my fault, yet
I took pains to avoid such blunders. Many thanks for all
the curious facts about the unequal number of the sexes
in Crustacea, but the more I investigate this subject the
deeper I sink in doubt and difficulty. Thanks, also, for the
confirmation of the rivalry of Cicadce? I have often reflected
with surprise on the diversity of the means for producing
music with insects, and still more with birds. We thus
get a high idea of the importance of song in the animal
kingdom. Please to tell me where I can find any account of
the auditor)' organs in the orthoptera ? Your facts are quite
new to me. Scudder has described an annectant insect in
Devonian strata, furnished with a stridulating apparatus.3 I
believe he is to be trusted, and if so the apparatus is of

1 See Animals and Plants, Ed. I., Vol. II., p. 134, where it is
stated that Oncidium is fertile with Leptotes, a mistake corrected in the
2nd edition.

2 See Descent of Man, Ed. I., Vol. I., p. 351, for F. Miiller's observa-
tions ; and for a reference to Landois' paper.

3 The insect is no doubt Xenoneura antiquorum, from the Devonian
rocks of New Brunswick. Scudder compared a peculiar feature in the
wing of this species to the stridulating apparatus of the Locustarite, but
afterwards stated that he had been led astray in his original description,
and that there was no evidence in support of the comparison with a
stridulating organ. See the "Devonian Insects of New Brunswick,"
reprinted in S. H. Scudder's Fossil Insects of N. America, Vol. I., p. 179,
New York, 1890.

1866-1872] -KXUAL SELECTION 83

astonishing antiquity. After reading Landois' paper I have Letter 446
been working .it the stridulating organ in the lamellicorn
beetles, in expectation of finding it sexual, but I have only
found it as yet in two cases, and in these it was equally
developed in both sexes. I wish you would look at any
of your common lamellicorns and take hold of both males
and females and observe whether they make the squeaking
or grating noise equally. If they do not, you could perhaps
send me a male and female in a light little box. How curious
it is that there should be a special organ for an object appar-
ently so unimportant as squeaking. Here is another point :
have you any Toucans ? if so, ask any trustworthy hunter
whether the beaks of the males, or of both sexes, arc more
brightly coloured during the breeding season than at other
times (if the year? I have also to thank you for a previous
letter of April 3rd, with some interesting facts on the variation
of maize, the sterility of Bignonia and on conspicuous seeds.
Heaven knows whether I shall ever live to make use of half
the valuable facts which you have communicated to me. . . .

To J. Jenner Weir. Letter 447

Down, June iSth [1S6S].

Many thanks. I am glad that you mentioned the linnet,
for I had much difficulty in persuading myself that the
crimson breast could be due to change in the old feathers, as
the books say. I am glad to hear of the retribution of the
wicked old she-bullfinch. You remember telling me how
man}- Weirs and Jcnners have been naturalists ; now this
morning I have been putting together all my references about
one bird of a pair being killed, and a new mate being soon
found; you, Jenner Weir, have given me some most striking
cases with starlings ; Dr. Jenner gives the most curious case
of all in Philosophical Transactions} and a Air. Weir gives the
next most striking in Macgillivray.8 Now, is this not odd ?
Pray remember how very glad we shall be to see you here
whenever you can come.

1 Phil. Trans., 1824.

-' Maegillivray's History of British Birds. Vol. I., p. 570. See 1
of Man (,1901), p. 621.

84 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 447 Did some ancient progenitor of the Weirs and Jenners
puzzle his brains about the mating of birds, and has the
question become indelibly fixed in all your minds?

Letter 448 To A. R. Wallace.

Aug. 19th [1868].

I had become, before my nine weeks' horrid interruption
of all work, extremely interested in sexual selection, and was
making fair progress. In truth it has vexed me much to find
that the farther I get on the more I differ from you about the
females being dull-coloured for protection. I can now hardly
express myself as strongly, even, as in the Origin. This has
much decreased the pleasure of my work. In the course of
September, if I can get at all stronger, I hope to get Mr. J.
Jenner Weir (who has been wonderfully kind in giving me
information) to pay me a visit, and I will then write for the
chance of your being able to come, and I hope bring with you
Mrs. Wallace. If I could get several of you together it would
be less dull for you, for of late I have found it impossible to
talk with any human being for more than half an hour, except
on extraordinary good days.

On September 16th Darwin wrote to Wallace on the same subject :—

You will be pleased to hear that I am undergoing severe
distress about protection and sexual selection ; this morning
I oscillated with joy towards you ; this evening I have swung
back to old position, out of which I fear I shall never get.

Letter 449 T° A" R" WalW

Down, Sept. 23rd [1868].

I am very much obliged for all your trouble in writing me
your long letter, which I will keep by me and ponder over.
To answer it would require at least 200 folio pages ! If you
could see how often I have rewritten some pages you would
know how anxious I am to arrive as near as I can to the
truth. I lay great stress on what I know takes place under
domestication ; I think we start with different fundamental
notions on inheritance. I find it is most difficult, but not, I
think, impossible to see how, for instance, a few red feathers

1 From Life and Letters, Vol. III., p. 123.

[866 1873] SEXUAL SELEi I I « > N

appearing on the head of a male bird, and which arc at first Letter 449
transmitted to both sexes, would come to be transmitt d
to males alone. It is not enough that females should
produced from the males with red feathers, which should
be destitute of red feathers; but these females must have a
latent tendency to produce such feathers, otherwise th
would cause deterioration in the red head-feathers of their
male offspring. Such latent tendency would be shown by
their producing the red feathers when old, or diseased in their
ovaria. But I have no difficulty in making the whole head
red if the few red feathers in the male from the first tended
to be sexually transmitted. I am quite willing to admit that
the female may have been modified, either at the same time
or subsequently, for protection by the accumulation of varia-
tions limited in their transmission to the female sex. I
to your writings the consideration of this latter point. But 1
cannot yet persuade myself that females alone have often
been modified for protection. Should you grudge the trouble
brieily to tell me, whether you believe that the plainer head
and less bright colours of female ch iffinch, the less red on th
head and less clean colours of female goldfinch, the much le
red on the breast of the female bullfinch, the paler crest of
golden-crested wren, etc., have been acquired by them for
protection? I cannot think so, any more than I can t!
the considerable differences between fern de and male house-
sparrow, or much greater brightness of male Pa
(both of which build under cover) than of female Par:.
related to proteccion. I even misdoubt much whether the
less blackness of female blackbird is for

Again, can you give me reasons for be'.' the

moderate differences between the female pheasant, the lie

Gallus b< 1, the female of black grouse, ti the

female partridge, have all special referen :ction

under slightly different conditions? I, of cou Imit that

they are all protected by dull colours, deri\ I think,

from some dull-ground progenitor ; and 1 account partly I
their difference by partial transference of colour t lie

male, and by other means too long to specify ; but I e '■>'

wish to .see reason to believe that each is specially adapted
for concealment to its environment.

I grieve to differ from you, and it actually terrifies me and

86 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 449 makes me constantly distrust myself. I fear we shall never
quite understand each other. I value the cases of bright-
coloured, incubating male fisher, and brilliant female butter-
flies, solely as showing that one sex may be made brilliant
without any necessary transference of beauty to the other
sex ; for in these cases I cannot suppose that beauty in the
other sex was checked by selection.

I fear this letter will trouble you to read it. A very short
answer about your belief in regard to the female finches and
Gallinaceae would suffice.

Letter 450 A. R. Wallace to C. Darwin.

9, St. Mark's Crescent, N.W., Sept. 27th, 1868.

Your view seems to be that variations occurring in one
sex are transmitted either to that sex exclusively or to both
sexes equally, or more rarely partially transferred. But we
have every gradation of sexual colours, from total dissimilarity
to perfect identity. If this is explained solely by the laws
of inheritance, then the colours of one or other sex will be
always (in relation to the environment) a matter of chance.
I cannot think this. I think selection more powerful than
laws of inheritance, of which it makes use, as shown by cases
of two, three or four forms of female butterflies, all of which
have, I have little doubt, been specialised for protection.

To answer your first question is most difficult, if not
impossible, because we have no sufficient evidence in indi-
vidual cases of slight sexual difference, to determine whether
the male alone has acquired his superior brightness by sexual
selection, or the female been made duller by need of protec-
tion, or whether the two causes have acted. Many of the
sexual differences of existing species may be inherited dif-
ferences from parent forms, which existed under different
conditions and had greater or less need of protection.

I think I admitted before, the general tendency (probably)
of males to acquire brighter tints. Yet this cannot be universal,
for many female birds and quadrupeds have equally bright
tints.

To your second question I can reply more decidedly. I
do think the females of the Gallinacese you mention have
been modified or been prevented from acquiring the brighter
plumage of the male, by need of protection. I know that the

i866— 1872] SEXUAL SELE< 1 I

G alius bankiva frequents drier and more open situations than Lettei 450

the pea-hen of Java, which is found amm. I leafy

vegetation, corresponding with the colours of tl

the Argus pheasant, male an i female, are, 1 feel su

by their tints corresponding to the dead lea

forest in which they dwell, and the female of th

fire-back pheasant Lophura viellottii is of a very similar rich

brown colour.

I do not, however, at all think the question can be settled
by individual cases, but by only large masses of facts. The
colours of the mass of female birds seem to me strictly
analogous to the colours of both sexes of snipes, woodcock
plovers, etc., which are undoubtedly protective.

Now, supposing, on your view, that the colours of a male
bird become more and more brilliant by sexual selection, and
a good deal of that colour is transmitted to the female till it
becomes positively injurious to her during incubation, and the
race is in danger of extinction ; do you not think that all the
females who had acquired less of the male's bright colours,
or who themselves varied in a protective direction, would be
preserved, and that thus a good protective colouring would
soon be acquired ?

If you admit that this could occur, and can show no good
reason why it should not often occur, then we no longer differ,
for this is the main point of my view.

Have you ever thought of the red wax-tips of the B
cilia beautifully imitating the red fructification of lichens used
in the nest, and therefore the females have it too ? Yet this
is a very sexual-looking character.

If sexes have been differentiated entirely by sexual selec-
tion the females can have no relation to environment. But
in groups when both sexes require protection durinj I ling
or repose, as snipes, woodcock, ptarmigan, desert birds and
animals, green forest birds, etc., arctic birds of prey, and
animals, then both sexes are modified for pr I n.

\\ hy should that power entirely cease to act when sexual
differentiation exists and when the female requires protection,
and why should the colour of so many female birds seem to
be protective, if it has not been made protective by select:

It is contrary to the principles of Origin x . that

colour should have been produced in both sexes by sexual

88 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 450 selection and never have been modified to bring the female
into harmony with the environment. " Sexual selection is
less rigorous than Natural Selection," and will therefore be
subordinate to it.

I think the case of female Pieris pyrrJta proves that
females alone can be greatly modified for protection.1

Letter 451 A. R. Wallace to C. Darwin.

On October 4th, 1868, Mr. Wallace wrote again on the same
subject without adding anything of importance to his arguments of
September 27th. We give his final remarks : —

October 4th, 1868.

I am sorry to find that our difference of opinion on this
point is a source of anxiety to you. Pray do not let it
be so. The truth will come out at last, and our difference
may be the means of setting others to work who may set
us both right. After all, this question is only an episode
(though an important one) in the great question of the
" Origin of Species," and whether you or I are right will
not at all affect the main doctrine — that is one comfort.

I hope you will publish your treatise on " Sexual
Selection " as a separate book as soon as possible ; and then,
while you are going on with your other work, there will
no doubt be found some one to battle with me over your
facts on this hard problem.

Letter 452 To A. R. Wallace.

Down, October 6th [1868].
Your letter is very valuable to me, and in every way very
kind. I will not inflict a long answer, but only answer your
queries. There are breeds (viz. Hamburg) in which both
sexes differ much from each other and from both sexes of
Gallus bankiva ; and both sexes are kept constant by
selection. The comb of the Spanish male has been ordered
to be upright, and that of Spanish female to lop over, and
this has been effected. There are sub-breeds of game fowl,
with females very distinct and males almost identical ; but
this, apparently, is the result of spontaneous variation, without

1 My latest views on this subject, with many new facts and argu-
ments, will be found in the later editions of my Darwinism, Chap. X.
(A. R. W.)

i866— 1872] SEXUAL SELECTION 89

special selection. I am very ..lad to hear of case of female Letter 452
Birds of Paradise.

I have never in the least doubted possibility of modifyii
female birds alone for protection, and I have long b<
it for butterflies. 1 have wanted only evidence for the
female alone of birds having had their colour modified
for protection. Hut then I believe that the variations by
which a female bird or butterfly could get or has got
protective colouring have probably from the first been
variations limited in their transmission to the female sex.
And so with the variations of the male : when the male is
more beautiful than the female, I believe the variations
were sexually limited in their transmission to the males.

To B. D. Walsh.1 Letter 453

Down, October 31st, 1868.
I am very much obliged for the extracts about the
" drumming," which will be of real use to me.

I do not at all know what to think of your extraordinary
case of the Cicadas.2 Professor Asa Gray and Dr. Hooker
were staying here, and I told them of the facts. Th

1 For a biographical note see Vol. I., p. 248.

* A short account of the Periodical Cicada (C. septenrfecim) is given
by Dr. Sharp in the Cambridge Natural History, Insects II., p. 570.
We are indebted to Dr. Sharp for calling our attention to Mr. C. L.
Marlatt's full account of the insect in Bulletin No. 14 \N.S."\ofth* I.
Department of Agriculture, 1898. The Cicada lives for long periods
underground as larva and pupa, so that swarms of the adults of one
race {septendecini) appear at intervals of 17 years, while those of the
southern form or race {tredecim) appear at intervals of 13 years.
This fact was first made out by Phares in 1845, but was overlooked
or forgotten, and was only re-discovered by Walsh and Riley in 1808,
who published a joint paper in the American Ento/n Vol. I., p.

Walsh appears to have adhered to the view that the 13- and 17-
year forms are distinct species, though, as we gather from Marlatt's
paper [p. 14"), he published a letter to Mr. Darwin in which he speaks
of the 13-year form as an incipient species ; see 1>:
Entomolog. Reports Bull. 6, i'.S.E.C. p. - is given by Marlatl
With regard to the cause of the difference in period of the two forms,
Marlatt (pp. 15, 16) refers doubtfully to difference of temperature as the
determining factor. Experiments have been instituted by moving 17-
year eggs to the south, and ersav/ith 13-year eggs. The results
were, however, not known at the time of publication of Marlatt's paper.

90 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 453 thought that the 13-year and the 17-year forms ought
not to be ranked as distinct species, unless other differences
besides the period of development could be discovered. They
thought the mere rarity of variability in such a point was
not sufficient, and I think I concur with them. The fact of
both the forms presenting the same case of dimorphism is
very curious. I have long wished that some one would
dissect the forms of the male stag-beetle with smaller
mandibles, and see if they were well developed, i.e., whether
there was an abundance of spermatozoa ; and the same
observations ought, I think, to be made on the rarer form
of your Cicada. Could you not get some observer, such as
Dr. Hartman,1 to note whether the females flocked in equal
numbers to the " drumming " of the rarer form as to the
common form ? You have a very curious and perplexing
subject of investigation, and I wish you success in your
work.

Letter 454 To A. R. Wallace.

Down, June 15th [1869?].
You must not suppose from my delay that I have not
been much interested by your long letter. I write now
merely to thank you, and just to say that probably you
are right on all the points you touch on, except, as I think,
about sexual selection, which I will not give up. My belief
in it, however, is contingent on my general belief in sexual
selection. It is an awful stretcher to believe that a peacock's
tail was thus formed ; but, believing it, I believe in the same
principle somewhat modified applied to man.

Letter 455 To G. K. H. Thwaites.2

Down, February 13th [n.d.].

I wrote a little time ago asking you an odd question
about elephants, and now I am going to ask you an odder.

1 Mr. Walsh sent Mr. Darwin an extract from Dr. Hartman's
" Journal of the doings of a Cicada septe?idecim" in which the females
are described as flocking round the drumming males. Descent of Man
(1901), p. 433.

2 Dr. G. H. K. Thwaites (181 1-82) held for some years the post of
Director of the Botanic Gardens at Peradenyia, Ceylon ; and in 1864
published an important work on the flora of the island, entitled
Enumeratio Plantarum Zeylania:.

1866—1872] SEXUAL SELECTION 91

I hope thai you will not think mc an intolerable bore. It Letter 455
is most improbable that you could get me an answer, but

I ask on mere chance. M silenus1 has a great mane

of hair round neck, and passing into large whiskei
beard. Now what I want most especially to know is whether
these monkeys, when they fight in confinement and I have
seen it stated that they are sometimes kept in confinement),
are protected from bites by this mane and beard. Any one
who watched them fighting would, I think, be able to
judge on this head. My object is to find out with various
animals how far the mane is of any use, or a mere ornament.
Is the male Macacus silenus furnished with longer hair than
the female about the neck and face? As 1 said, it is a
hundred or a thousand to one against your finding out
any one who has kept these monkeys in confinement.

To F. Miilli r. Le"" 456

Down, August 28th [1S70].

I have to thank you very sincerely for two letters : one of
April 25th, containing a very curious account of the structure
and morphology of Bonatea. I f< el that it is quite a sin that
your letters should not all be published ! but, in truth, I have
no spare strength to undertake any extra work, which, though
slight, would follow from seeing your Utters in English
through the press — not but that you write alm< rly

as any Englishman. This same letter also contained some

ds for Mr. Farrer, which he was very .dad to recei\ .

Your second letter, of July 5th, was chiefly devoted to
mimicry in lepidoptera: many of your remarks seem to me
so good, that 1 have forwarded your letter to Mr. Bates ; but
he is out of London having his summer holiday, and 1 i. .
not yet heard from him. Your remark about imitators and
imitated being of such different sizes, and the lower sun
of the wings not bring altered in colour, strike me as the m
curious points. I should not be at all surprised if your sug-
gestion about sexual selection ware to prove true ; but it
seems rather too speculative to be introduced in my book,
more especially as my book is already far too speculative.
The very same difficulty about brightly- coloured caterpillars

1 Macacus silenus L., an Indian ape.

92 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 456 had occurred to me, and you will see in my book what, I
believe, is the true explanation from Wallace. The same
view probably applies in part to gaudy butterflies. My MS.
is sent to the printers, and, I suppose, will be published in
about three months : of course I will send you a copy. By
the way, I settled with Murray recently with respect to
your book,1 and had to pay him only £21 2s. $d., which
I consider a very small price for the dissemination of your
views ; he has 547 copies as yet unsold. This most terrible
war will stop all science in France and Germany for a long
time. I have heard from nobody in Germany, and know
not whether your brother, Hackel, Gegenbaur, Victor Carus,
or my other friends are serving in the army, Dohrn has
joined a cavalry regiment. I have not yet met a soul in
England who does not rejoice in the splendid triumph of
Germany over France:2 it is a most just retribution against
that vainglorious, war-liking nation. As the posts are all
in confusion, I will not send this letter through France.
The Editor has sent me duplicate copies of the Revue des
Cours S cientifiques , which contain several articles about my
views ; so I send you copies for the chance of your liking
to see them.

Letter 457 A. R. Wallace to C. Darwin.

Holly House, Barking, E., Jan. 27th, 187 1.

Many thanks for your first volume,3 which I have just
finished reading through with the greatest pleasure and
interest ; and I have also to thank you for the great tender-
ness with which you have treated me and my heresies.

On the subject of " sexual selection " and " protection,"
you do not yet convince me that I am wrong ; but I expect
your heaviest artillery will be brought up in your second
volume, and I may have to capitulate. You seem, however,
to have somewhat misunderstood my exact meaning, and
I do not think the difference between us is quite so great
as you seem to think it. There are a number of passages
in which you argue against the view that the female has
in any large number of cases been "specially modified" for

1 The translation of Fur Darwin, published 1869.
■ See Letter 239, Vol. I.
3 The Descent of Man.

1866-1872] SEXUAL SELECTION

prot lion, or that colour has generally been obtained by Letter 457
cither sex for purposes of protection. Hut my view i
I thought I had made it clear, that the female has (in most
cases) been simply prevented from acquiring the gay tints
of the male (even when there was a tendency for her to
inherit it), because it was hurtful ; and that, when protec-
tion is not needed, gay colours are so generally acquired
by both sexes as to show that inheritance by both sexes
of colour variations is the most usual, when not prevented
from acting by Natural Selection. The colour itself may be
acquired either by sexual selection or by other unknown
causes.

There are, however, difficulties in the very wide applica-
tion you give to sexual selection which at present stagger
me, though no one was or is more ready than myself to
admit the perfect truth of the principle or the immense
importance and great variety of its applications.

Your chapters on " Man " arc of intense interest — but
as touching my special heresy, not as yet altogether con-
vincing, though, of course, I fully agree with every word
and ever)- argument which goes to prove the " evolution "
or " development " of man out of a lower form. My only
difficulties are, as to whether you have accounted for evei
step of the development by ascertained laws.

I feel sure that the book will keep up and increase
your high reputation, and be immensely successful, as it
deserves to be. . . .

To G. B. Murdoch. Lctter

Down, March 13th, 1S71.
I am much obliged for your valuable letter.1 I am
strongly inclined to think that I have made a great and

1 We are indebted to Mr. Murdoch tor a drift of his letter dated
Much 10th, 1871. It is too long to be quoted at length ; the following
citations give some idea of its contents: " In your Descent of Man, in
treating of the extern. d differences between males and females of the
same variety, have you attached sufficient importance to the different
amount and kind of energy expended by them in reproduction?" Mr.
Murdoch sums up: "Is it wrong, then, to suppose that extra growth,
complicated structure, and activity in one sex exist as escape-valves for
surplus vigour, rather than to please or fight with, though they may serve
these purposes and be modified by them ? "

94 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 458 complete oversight with respect to the subject which you
discuss. I am the more surprised at this, as I remember
reflecting on some points which ought to have led me to
your conclusion. By an odd chance I received the day
before yesterday a letter from Mr. Lowne1 (author of an
excellent book on the anatomy of the Blow-fly) with a
discussion very nearly to the same effect as yours. His
conclusions were drawn from studying male insects with
great horns, mandibles, etc. He informs me that his paper
on this subject will soon be published in the Transact.
Entomolog. Society? I am inclined to look at your and
Mr. Lowne's view as specially valuable from probably throw-
ing light on the greater variability of male than female
animals, which manifestly has much bearing on sexual
selection. I will keep your remarks in mind whenever a
new edition of my book is demanded.

Letter 459 To George Fraser.

The following letter refers to two letters to Mr. Darwin, in which Mr.
Fraser pointed out that illustrations of the theory of Sexual Selection
might be found amongst British butterflies and moths. Mr. Fraser, in
explanation of the letters, writes : " As an altogether unknown and far
from experienced naturalist, I feared to send my letters for publication
without, in the first place, obtaining Mr. Darwin's approval." The
information was published in Nature, Vol. III., April 20th, 1871, p. 489.
The article was referred to in the second edition of the Descent of Man
(1874), pp. 312, 316, 319. Mr. Fraser adds : " This is only another illus-
tration of Mr. Darwin's great conscientiousness in acknowledging sug-
gestions received by him from the most humble sources." (Letter from
Mr. Fraser to F. Darwin, March 21, 1888.)

Down. April 14th [1871].

I am very much obliged for your letter and the interesting
facts which it contains, and which are new to me. But I am
at present so much engaged with other subjects that I cannot

1 The Anatomy and Physiology of the Blow-Fly {Musca vomitaria L.),
by B. T. Lowne. London, 1870.

2 " Observations on Immature Sexuality and Alternate Generation in
Insects." By B. T. Lowne. Trans. Entomol. Soc, 1871 [Read March 6th,
1871]. "I believe that certain cutaneous appendages, as the gigantic
mandibles and thoracic horns of many males, are complemental to the
sexual organs ; that, in point of fact, they are produced by the excess
of nutriment in the male, which in the female would go to form the
generative organs and ova" (Joe. cit., p. 197).

i866— 187a] SEXUAL SELECTD

fully consider them ; and, even if I had time, I do not Letta 459

suppose that I should have anything to say worth printing

in a scientific journal. It would obviously be absurd in me

to allow a mere note of thanks from me to be printed.

Whenever I have to bring out a corrected edition of my

book I will well consider your re marks (which I hope that you

will send to Nature), but the difficulty will be that my friends

tell me that I have already introduced too many facts, and

that I ought to prune rather than to introduce more.

To E. S. Morse.1 Letter 460

Down, Dec. 3rd, 1871.

I am much obliged to you for having sent me your two
interesting papers, and for the kind writing on the cover.
1 am very glad to have my error corrected about the pro-
tective colouring of shells.- It is no excuse for my broad
statement, but I had in my mind the species which are
brightly or beautifully coloured, and I can as yet hardly
think that the colouring in such cases is protective.

To Aug. Wcismann. Letter 461

Down, Feb. 29th, 1872.

I am rejoiced to hear that your eyesight is somewhat better;
but I fear that work with the microscope is still out of your
power. I have often thought with sincere sympathy how
much you must have suffered from your grand line of em-
bryological research having been stopped. It was very good
of you to use your eyes in writing to me. I have just re-
ceived your essay ; 3 but as I am now staying in London for
the sake of rest, and as German is at all times very difficult
to me, I shall not be able to read your essay for some little
time. I am, however, very curious to learn what you have to
say on isolation and on periods of variation. I thought much

1 Prof. E. S. Mors- [em, Mass.

* " On Adaptive Coloration of the Mollusca," B
Proc, Vol. XIV., April 5th, 1871. Mr. Morse quotes from the Descent of
Man, I., p 316, a passage to the effect that the colours of the mollusca
do not in general appear to be protective. Mr. Morse goes on to give
instances of protective coloration.

3 Ueber der Einfltiss der Isolirung auf die Artbildung : Leipzig, 1872,

96 - MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 461 about isolation when I wrote in Chapter IV. on the circum-
stances favourable to Natural Selection. No doubt there
remains an immense deal of work to do on " Artbildung."
I have only opened a path for others to enter, and in the
course of time to make a broad and clear high-road. I am
especially glad that you are turning your attention to sexual
selection. I have in this country hardly found any naturalists
who agree with me on this subject, even to a moderate extent.
They think it absurd that a female bird should be able to
appreciate the splendid plumage of the male ; but it would
take much to persuade me that the peacock does not spread
his gorgeous tail in the presence of the female in order to
fascinate or excite her. The case, no doubt, is much more
difficult with insects. I fear that you will find it difficult to
experiment on diurnal lepidoptera in confinement, for I have
never heard of any of these breeding in this state.1 I was
extremely pleased at hearing from Fritz Muller that he liked
my chapter on lepidoptera in the Descent of Alan more than
any other part, excepting the chapter on morals.

Letter 462 To H. Miiller.

Down [May, 1872].

I have now read with the greatest interest your essay,2
which contains a vast amount of matter quite new to me. I
really have no criticisms or suggestions to offer. The per-
fection of the gradation in the character of bees, especially
in such important parts as the mouth-organs, was altogether
unknown to me. You bring out all such facts very clearly
by your comparison with the corresponding organs in the
allied hymenoptera. How very curious is the case of bees
and wasps having acquired, independently of inheritance from
a common source, the habit of building hexagonal cells and

1 We are indebted to Mr. Bateson for the following note : " This
belief does not seem to be well founded, for since Darwin's time several
species of Rhopalocera (e.g. Pieris, Pararge, Caenonymphd) have been
successfully bred in confinement without any special difficulty ; and by
the use of large cages members even of strong-flying genera, such as
Vanessa, have been induced to breed."

2 " Anwendung der Darwin'schen Lehre auf Bienen," Verhandl.
d. naturhist. Vereins fiir fireuss. Rheinld. u. West/., 1872. References
to Miiller's paper occur in the second edition of the Descent of Man.

i866 — 1S72] SEXUAL SELECTION 97

of producing sterile workers ! But I have been most inter- L.-tte:
estcd by your discussion on secondary sexual differences ; I
do not suppose so full an account of such differences in any
other group of animals has ever been published. It delights
me to find that we have independently arrived at almost
exactly the same conclusion with respect to the more im-
portant points deserving investigation in relation to sexual
selection. For instance, the relative number of the two
sexes, the earlier emergence of the males, the Laws of in-
heritance, etc. What an admirable illustration you give of
the transference of characters acquired by one sex — namely,
that of the male of Bombus possessing the pollen-collecting
apparatus. Many of your facts about the differences between
male and female bees are surprisingly parallel with those
which occur with birds. The r your essay has given

me great confidence in tin.' efficacy of sexual selection, and
1 wanted some encouragement, as extremely few naturalis:
in England seem inclined to believe in it. I am, however,
glad to find that Prof. Wiesmann has some faith in this
principle.

The males of Bombus follow one remarkable habit, which I
think it would interest you to investigate this coming summer,
and no one could do it better than you.1 I have therefore
enclosed a briefly and roughly drawn-up account of this habit.
Should you succeed in making any observations on this sub-
ject, and if you would like to use in any way my MS. you are
perfectly welcome. I could, should you hereafter wish to
make any use of the facts, give them in rather fuller detail ;
but I think that I have given enough.

1 hope that you may long have health, leisure, and in-
clination to do much more work as excellent as your recent
essay.

1 Mr. Darwin's observations on this curious subject were sent to
Hermann Muller, and after his death were translated and published in
Kxause's Gesammelte kleinere Schriften von Charles Darwin^ 18S7, p. 84.
The male bees had certain regular lines of flight at Down, as from t lie end ot"
the kitchen garden to the corner of the "sand-walk," and certain regular
"buzzing places'' where they stopped on the wing for a moment or two.
Mr. Darwin's children remember vividly the pleasure of helping in the
investigation of this habit.

VOL. II. 7

98 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 463 EXPRESSION, 1 868-1 874.

To F. Miiller.

Down, January 30th [1868].

I am very much obliged for your answers, though few in
number (October 5th), about expression. I was especially
glad to hear about shrugging the shoulders. You say that
an old negro woman, when expressing astonishment, wonder-
fully resembled a Cebits when astonished ; but are you sure
that the Cebus opened its mouth ? I ask because the
Chimpanzee does not open its mouth when astonished, or
when listening.1 Please have the kindness to remember
that I am very anxious to know whether any monkey,
when screaming violently, partially or wholly closes its eyes.

Letter 464 To W. Bowman.

The late Sir W. Bowman, the well-known surgeon, supplied a good
deal of information of value to Darwin in regard to the expression of the
emotions. The gorging of the eyes with blood during screaming is an
important factor in the physiology of weeping, and indirectly in the
obliquity of the eyebrows— a characteristic expression of suffering.
See Expression of the Emotions ; pp. 160 and 192.

Down, March 30th [1868].

I called at your house about three weeks since, and heard
that you were away for the whole month, which I much
regretted, as I wished to have had the pleasure of seeing
you, of asking you a question, and of thanking you for
your kindness to my son George. You did not quite under-
stand the last note which I wrote to you — viz., about Bell's
precise statement that the conjunctiva of an infant or young
child becomes gorged with blood when the eyes are forcibly
opened during a screaming fit.2 I have carefully kept your
previous note, in which you spoke doubtfully about Bell's
statement. I intended in my former note only to express

1 Darwin, in the Expression of the Emotions, adheres to this
statement as being true of monkeys in general.

8 Sir C. Bell's statement in his Anatomy of Expression (1844, p. 106)
is quoted in the Expression of t/ie Emotions, p. 158.

1868-1874] I X ill -

a wish that if, during your profe ssional work, you were led Letter
to open the eyelids of a screaming child, you would specially
observe this point about the eye showing signs of becoming
gorged with blood, which interests me extremely. Could you
ask any one to observe this for me in an eye-dispensary or
hospital? But I now have to beg you kindly to consider
one other question at any time when you have half an hour's
leisure.

When a man coughs violently from choking or retches
violently, even when he yawns, and when he laughs violently,
tears come into the eyes. Xow, in all these cases I observe-
that the orbicularis muscle is more or less spasmodically
contracted, as also in the crying of a child. So, again,
when the muscles of the abdomen contract violently in a
propelling manner, and the breath is, I think, always held,
as during the evacuation of a very costive man, and as
(I hear) with a woman during severe labour-pains, the
orbicularis contracts, and tears come into the eyes. Sir
J. E. Tennant states that tears roll down the cheeks of
elephants when screaming and trumpeting at first being
captured ; accordingly 1 went to the Zoological Gardens,
and the keeper made two elephants trumpet, and when
they did this violently the orbicularis was invariably plainly
contracted. Hence I am led to conclude that there must
be some relation between the contraction of this muscle
and the secretion of tears. Can you tell me what this
relation is ? Does the orbicularis preys against, and so
directly stimulate, the lachrymal gland? As a slight blow
on the eye causes, by reflex action, a copious effusion of
tears, can the slight spasmodic contraction of the orbicularis
act like a blow? This seems hardly possible. Does the
same nerve which runs to the orbicularis send off fibrils to
the lachrymal glands ; and if so, when the order goes for the
muscle to contract, is nervous force sent sympathetically at
the same time to the glands ? l

I should be extremely much obliged if you [would] have
the kindness to give me your opinion on this point.

1 See Expression of the Emotions, p. 169.

100 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 465 To F. C. Donders.

Mr. Darwin was indebted to Sir W. Bowman for an introduction to
Professor Donders, whose work on Sir Charles Bell's views is quoted
in the Expression of the Emotions^ pp. 160-62.

Down, June 3rd [1870?].

I do not know how to thank you enough for the very
great trouble which you have taken in writing at such length,
and for your kind expressions towards me. I am particularly
obliged for the abstract with respect to Sir C. Bell's 1 views, as
I shall now proceed with some confidence ; but I am intensely
curious to read your essay in full when translated and pub-
lished, as I hope, in the Dublin Journal, as you speak of the
weak point in the case — viz., that injuries are not known
to follow from the gorging of the eye with blood. I may
mention that my son and his friend at a military academy
tell me that when they perform certain feats with their heads
downwards their faces become purple and veins distended,
and that they then feel an uncomfortable sensation in their
eyes ; but that as it is necessary for them to see, they cannot
protect their eyes by closing the eyelids. The companions of
one young man, who naturally has very prominent eyes, used
to laugh at him when performing such feats, and declare that
some day both eyes would start out of his head.

Your essay on the physiological and anatomical relations
between the contraction of the orbicular muscles and the
secretion of tears is wonderfully clear, and has interested
me greatly. I had not thought about irritating substances
getting into the nose during vomiting ; but my clear im-
pression is that mere retching causes tears. I will, however,
try to get this point ascertained. When I reflect that in
vomiting (subject to the above doubt), in violent coughing
from choking, in yawning, violent laughter, in the violent
downward action of the abdominal muscle . . . and in your

1 See Expression of the Emotions, pp. 1 58 et seq. : Sir Charles Bell's
view is that adopted by Darwin— viz. that the contraction of the muscles
round the eyes counteracts the gorging of the parts during screaming,
etc. The essay of Donders is, no doubt, " On the Action of the Eyelids
in Determination of Blood from Expiratory Effort " in Beale's Archives
of MediJne, Vol. V., 1870, p. 20, which is a translation of the original
in Dutch.

1868 — 1874] EX PR] SSlON IOI

very curious case of the spasms1 — that in .ill these cases the Letter
orbicular muscles are strongly and unconsciously contracted,
and that at the same time tears often certainly flow, I must

think that there is a connection of some kind between these
phenomena ; but you have clearly shown me th.it the nature
of the relation is at present quite obscure.

To A. 1). Bartlett. Letter 466

6. Queen Anne Street, \Y., Dec. 19th [1S70 ?].

I was with Mr. Wood this morning, and he expn
himself strongly about your and your daughter's kindness in
aiding him. lie much wants assistance on another point ;
and if you would aid him, you would greatly oblige me.
You know well the appearance of a dog when approaching
another dog with hostile intentions, before the)- come close
together. The dog walks very stiffly, with tail rigid and
upright, hair on back erected, ears pointed and eyes directed
forwards. When the dog attacks the other, down go the
ears, and the canines are uncovered. Now, could you any-
how arrange so that one of your dogs could see a strange
dog from a little distance, so that Mr. Wood 2 could sketch
the former attitude, viz., of the stiff gesture with erected hair
and erected ears. And then he could afterwards sketch the
same dog, when fondled by his master and wagging his tail
with drooping ears. These two sketches I want much, and
it would be a great favour to Mr. W ood, and myself, if you
could aid him.

P.S. — When a horse is tinned out into a field he trots
with high, elastic steps, and carries his tail aloft. Even when
a cow frisks about she throws up her tail. I have seen a
drawing of an elephant, apparently trotting with high steps,
and with the tail erect. When the elephants in the garden
are turned out and arc excited so as to move quickly, do they

1 In some cases a sliyht touch to the eye causes spasms of the
orbicularis muscle, which may continue tor so long as an hour, being
accompanied by a flow of tears. See Expression of the Emotions, p. 166.

s In Chapter II. of the Expression of theEnu tions there are sketches
of dogs in illustration oi the " Principle of Antithesis," drawn by Mr.
Riviere and by Mr. A. May (tigs. 5-8). Mr. T. YV. Wood supplied
similar drawings of a cat (tigs. 9. 10 1, also a sketch of the head of a
snarling dog (ri^. [4).

t02 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 466 carry their tails aloft ? How is this with the rhinoceros ?
Do not trouble yourself to answer this, but I shall be in
London in a couple of months, and then perhaps you will
be able to answer this trifling question. Or, if you write
about wolves and jackals turning round,1 you can tell me
about the tails of elephants, or of any other animals.

Letter 467 To A. D. Bartlett.

Down, Jan. 5th, [1871 ?]
Many thanks about Limulus. I am going to ask another
favour, but I do not want to trouble you to answer it by letter.
When the CaUitkrix sciureus"1 screams violently, does it wrinkle
up the skin round the eyes like a baby always does ? When
thus screaming do the eyes become suffused with moisture ?
Will you ask Sutton 3 to observe carefully ? Could you make
it scream without hurting it much ? I should be truly obliged
some time for this information, when in spring I come to
the Gardens.

Letter 468 To W. Ogle.

Down, March 7 th [187 1].
I wrote to Tyndall, but had no clear answer, and have
now written to him again about odours.4 I write now to ask
you to be so kind (if there is no objection) to tell me the
circumstances under which you saw a man arrested for
murder 5 I say in my notes made from your conversation :

1 In the Expression of the Emotions, p. 44, reference is made under the
head of " Associated habitual movements in the lower animals," to dogs
and other animals turning round and round and scratching the ground
with their fore-paws when they wish to go to sleep on a carpet, or other
similar surface.

2 " Humboldt also asserts that the eyes of the CaUitkrix sciureus
' instantly fill with tears when it is seized with fear ' ; but when this
pretty little monkey in the Zoological Gardens was teased, so as to cry
out loudly, this did not occur. I do not, however, wish to throw the
least doubt on the accuracy of Humboldt's statement." {The Expression
of the Emotions in Man and Anima/s, 1872, p. 137.)

3 One of the keepers who made many observations on monkeys for
Mr. Darwin.

4 Dr. Ogle's work on the Sense of Smell {Medico-Chirurgical Trans.
LI 1 1., p. 268) is referred to in the Expression of the Emotions,^. 256.

5 Given in the Expression of the Emotions, p. 294.

1868-187 »] 1 CPRESSION 103

utmost horror — extreme pallor — mouth relaxed and open Utter
— genera] prostration — perspiration — mu cle of face con-
tracted-hair observed on account of having been dyed,
and apparently not erected. Secondly, may I quote you that
you have often (?) seen persons (young or old ? men or
women ?) who, evincing no great fear, were about to unde
severe operation under chloroform, showing resignation by
(alternately ?) folding one open hand over the other on
the lower part of chest (whilst recumbent?)—! know
this expression, and think I ought to notice it. Could you
look out for an additional instance ?

I fear you will think me very troublesome, especially
when I remind you (not that 1 am in a hurry) about the
Eustachian tube.

To J. Jenner Weir. Letter 469

1 I iwn, June 14th [1S70].

As usual, I am going to beg for information. Can you tell

me whether any Fringillidae or Sylviadae erect their feathers

when frightened or enraged ? l I want to show that this

expression is common to all or most of the families of birds.

I know of this only in the fowl, swan, tropic-bird, owl, ruff

and reeve, and cuckoo. 1 fancy that 1 remember having seen

nestling birds erect their feathers greatly when looking into

nests, as is said to be the case with young cuckoos. I should

much like to know whether nestlings do really thus erect their

feathers. I am now at work on expression in animals of all

kinds, and birds ; and if you have any hints I should be very

glad for them, and you have a rich wealth (4 facts of all kind-.

Any cases like the following : the sheldrake pats or dances on

the tidal sands to make the sea-worms come out ; and when

Mr. St. John's tame sheldrakes came to ask for their dinners

they used to pat the ground, and this I should call an

expression of hunger and impatience. How about the

Quagga case ? -

I am working away as hard as I can on my book ; but
good heavens, how slow my progress is.

1 See Expression of the Emotions, p. 99.

s See Letter 235, Vol. I.

104 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 470 To F. C. Donders.

Down, March 18th, 1871.

Very many thanks for your kind letter. I have been
interested by what you tell me about your views published in
1848, and I wish I could read your essay. It is clear to me
that you were as near as possible in preceding me on the
subject of Natural Selection.

You will find very little that is new to you in my last
book ; whatever merit it may possess consists in the grouping
of the facts and in deductions from them. I am now at work
on my essay on Expression. My last book fatigued me much,
and I have had much correspondence, otherwise I should have
written to you long ago, as I often intended to tell you in how
high a degree your essay published in Beale's Archives1
interested me. I have heard others express their admiration
at the complete manner in which you have treated the
subject. Your confirmation of Sir C. Bell's rather loose
statement2 has been of paramount importance for my work.
You told me that I might make further inquiries from you.

When a person is lost in meditation his eyes often appear
as if fixed on a distant object,3 and the lower eyelids may be
seen to contract and become wrinkled. I suppose the idea is
quite fanciful, but as you say that the eyeball advances4 in
adaptation for vision for close objects, would the eyeball have
to be pushed backwards in adaptation for distant objects ?
If so, can the wrinkling of the lower eyelids, which has often
aerplexed me, act in pushing back the eyeball ?

But, as I have said, I daresay this is quite fanciful.
Gratiolet says 5 that the pupil contracts in rage, and dilates
enormously in terror. I have not found this great anatomist
quite trustworthy on such points, and am making enquiries
on this subject. But I am inclined to believe him, as the old
Scotch anatomist Munro says, that the iris of parrots contracts

1 Beale's Archives of Medicine, Vol. V., 1870.

2 On the contraction of the muscles surrounding the eye. See
Expressio?i of the Emotions, p. 158. See Letters 464, 465.

3 The appearance is due to divergence of the lines of vision produced
by muscular relaxation. See Expression of the Emotions, Ed. II., p. 239.

4 Darwin seems to have misunderstood a remark of Donders.

5 See Expression of the Emotions, Ed. II., p. 321.

r868 1874] EXPRESSJION

and dilates under passions, independently of the amount ol l^
1 i <_; H t . Can you give any explanation of this statement?
\\ hen the heart beats hard and quick, and the head becomi s
somewhat congested with blood in any illness, does the pupil

contract? Does the pupil dilate in incipient faintness, or in
utter prostration, as when after a severe race a man is pallid.

bathed in perspiration, with all his muscles quivering? Or in

extreme prostration from any illness?

To W. Turner. Letter 471

Down, March 28th [1871].

I am much obliged for your kind note, and especially for
your offer of sending me some time corrections, for which I
shall be truly grateful. I know that there are many blunders
to which I am very liable. There is a terrible one confusing
the supra-condyloid foramen with another one.1 This, how-
ever, I have corrected in all the copies struck off after the first
lot of 2500. I daresay there will be a new edition in the
course of nine months or a year, and this I will correct as
well as I can. As yet the publishers have kept up type, and
grumble dreadfully if I make heavy corrections. I am very
far from surprised that "you have not committed yourself to
full acceptation " of the evolution of man. Difficulties and
objections there undoubtedly arc, enough and to spare, to
stagger any cautious man who has much knowledge like
yourself.

I am now at work at my hobby-horse essay on Expression,
and I have been reading some old notes of yours. In one
you say it is easy to see that the spines of the hedgehog .
moved by the voluntary panniculus. Now, can you tell me
whether each spine has likewise an oblique un striped or

1 In the first edition of the Descent of Man, I.. j>. 28, in quoting Mr.
Busk " On the Caves of Gibraltar," Mr. Darwin confuses together the

inter-condyloid foramen in the humerus with the supra-condyloid foramen.
His attention was called to the mistake by Sir William Turner, to whom
he had been previously indebted for other information on the anatomy
of man. The error is one, as Sir William Turner points out in a lei
" which might easily arise where the writer is not minutely acquainted
with human anatomy." In speaking of his correspondence with
Darwin, Sir William remarks on a characteristic of Darwin's method of
askiny for information, namely, his care in avoiding leading questions.

Io6 MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 471 striped muscle, as figured by Lister? x Do you know whether
the tail-coverts of peacock or tail of turkey are erected by
unstriped or striped muscles, and whether these are homo-
logous with the panniculus or with the single oblique
unstriped muscles going to each separate hair in man and
many animals ? I wrote some time ago to Kolliker to ask
this question (and in relation to quills of porcupine), and I
received a long and interesting letter, but he could not answer
these questions. If I do not receive any answer (for I know
how busy you must be), I will understand you cannot aid me.

I heard yesterday that Paget was very ill ; I hope this is
not true. What a loss he would be ; he is so charming a man.

P.S. — As I am writing I will trouble you with one other
question. Have you seen anything or read of any facts which
could induce you to think that the mind being intently and
long directed to any portion of the skin (or, indeed, any organ)
would influence the action of the capillaries, causing them
either to contract or dilate ? Any information on this head
would be of great value to me, as bearing on blushing.

If I remember right, Paget seems to be a great believer in
the influence of the mind in the nutrition of parts, and even in
causing disease. It is awfully audacious on my part, but I
remember thinking (with respect to the latter assertion on
disease) when I read the passage that it seemed rather
fanciful, though I should like to believe in it. Sir H. Holland 2
alludes to this subject of the influence of the mind on local
circulation frequently, but gives no clear evidence.

Letter 472 To W. Turner.

Down, March 29th [1871].
Forgive me for troubling you with one line. Since writing
my P.S. I have read the part on the influence of the nervous
system on the nutrition of parts in your last edition of Paget's
Lectures} 1 had not read before this part in this edition, and
I see how foolish I was. But still, I should be extremely
grateful for any hint or evidence of the influence of mental
attention on the capillary or local circulation of the skin, or of

1 Expression of the Emotions, p. 101.

2 Ibid., pp. 339 et seq.

3 Lectures on Surgical Pathology, Ed. in., revised by Professor
Turner, 1870.

i86S — 1S7.1 1 EXPRESSION 10?

any part to which the mind maybe intently and long directed. L r 472

For instance, if thinking intently about a local eruption on I
skin (not on the face, for shame might possibly intervene
caused it temporarily to redden, or thinking of a tumour
caused it to throb, independently of increased heart action.

To Hubert Airy. Letter 473

Dr. Airy had written to Mr. Darwin on April 3rd: —
" With regard to the loss of voluntary movement of the ears in man
and monkey, may I ask if you do not think it might have heen caused, as
it is certainly compensated, by the facility and quickness in turning the
head, possessed by them in virtue of their more erect stature, and the
freedom of the atlanto-axial articulation ? (in birds the same end is
gained by the length and flexibility of the neck.) The importance, in
case of danger, of bringing the eyes to help the ears would call for a
quick turn of the head whenever a new sound was heard, and so would
tend to make superfluous any special means of moving the ears, except
in the case of quadrupeds and the like, that have great trouble (com-
paratively speaking] in making a horizontal turn of the head — can only
do it by a slow bend of the whole neck."1

Down, April 5th [1S71].

I am greatly obliged for your letter. Your idea about
the easy turning of the head instead of the ears themselves
strikes me as very good, and quite new to me, and I will
keep it in mind ; but I fear that there arc some cases opposed
to the notion.

If I remember right the hedgehog has very human cars,
but birds support your view, though lizards are opposed to it.

Several persons have pointed out my error about the
platysma.- Nor can I remember how I was misled. I find
I can act on this muscle myself, now that I know the corners
of the mouth have to be drawn back. 1 know of the case
of a man who can act on this muscle on one side, but not on
the other; yet he asserts positively that both contract when
he is startled. And this leads me to ask you to be so kind
as to observe, if any opportunity should occur, whether the

1 We are indebted to Dr. Airy for furnishing us with a copy of his
letter to Mr. Darwin, the original of which had been mislaid.

'-' The error in question occurs on p. 19 of the Descent of Man, Ed. I.,
where it is stated that the Platysma myoides cannot be voluntarily brought
into action. In the Expression of the Emotions Darwin remarks that
this muscle is sometimes said not to be under voluntary control, and
he shows that this is not universally true.

I08 MAN [Chap. VII

Letter 473 platysma contracts during extreme terror, as before an
operation ; and, secondly, whether it contracts during a
shivering fit. Several persons are observing for me, but I
receive most discordant results.

I beg you to present my most respectful and kind
compliments to your honoured father [Sir G. B. Airy].

Letter 474 T° FrandS Galt°n*

Mr. Galton had written on Nov. 7th, 1872, offering to send to
various parts of Africa Darwin's printed list of questions intended to
guide observers on expression. Mr. Galton goes on : " You do not, I
think, mention in Expression what I thought was universal among
blubbering children (when not trying to see if harm or help was coming
out of the corner of one eye) of pressing the knuckles against the eyeballs,
thereby reinforcing the orbicularis."

Down, Nov. 8th [1872].

Many thanks for your note and offer to send out the
queries ; but my career is so nearly closed that I do not
think it worth while. What little more I can do shall be
chiefly new work. I ought to have thought of crying
children rubbing their eyes with their knuckles, but I did
not think of it, and cannot explain it. As far as my memory
serves, they do not do so whilst roaring, in which case
compression would be of use. I think it is at the close of
the crying fit, as if they wished to stop their eyes crying, or
possibly to relieve the irritation from the salt tears. I wish I
knew more about the knuckles and crying.

What a tremendous stir-up your excellent article on
prayer 1 has made in England and America !

To F. C Donders.
Letter 475 ,

We have no means of knowing whether the observations suggested

in the following letter were made— if not, the suggestion is worthy of

record.

Down, Dec. 21st, 1872.

You will have received some little time ago my book on
Expression, in writing which I was so deeply indebted to your

1 The article entitled " Statistical Inquiries into the Efficacy of Prayer"
appeared in the Fortnightly Review, 1872. In Mr. Francis Galton's
book on Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development, London,
1883, a section (pp. 277-94) is devoted to a discussion on the "Objective
Efficacy of Prayer."

i868— 1S74I EXPRESSION IOQ

kindness. I want now to beg a favour of you, if you have the I'ettcr 475
means to grant it. A clergyman, the head of an institution
for the blind in Kngland,1 has been observing the expression
of those born blind, and he informs me that they never or
very rarely frown. He kept a record of several casts, but at
last observed a frown on two ol the children who he thought
never frowned; and then in a foolish manner tore up his
notes, and did not write to me until my book was published.
He may be a bad observer and altogether mistaken, but 1
think it would be worth while to ascertain whether those born
blind, when young, and whilst screaming violently, contract
the muscles round the eyes like ordinary infants. And
secondly, whether in after years they rarely or never frown.
If it should prove true that infants born blind do not contract
their orbicular muscles whilst screaming (though I can hardly
believe it) it would be interesting to know whether they
shed tears as copiously as other children. The nature of the
affection which causes blindness may possibly influence the
contraction of the muscles, but on all such points you will
judge infinitely better than I can. Perhaps you could get
some trustworthy superintendent of an asylum for the blind
to attend to this subject. I am sure that you will forgive me
asking this favour.

To D. Hack Tuke. Letter 476

I >own, I (ec 22nd, 1872.

I have now finished your book,2 and have read it with
great interest.

Many of your cases are very striking. As I felt sure
would be the ease, I have learnt much from it ; and I should
have modified several passages in my book on Expression, if
I had had the advantage of reading your work before my
publication. I always felt, and said so a year ago to Professor
Dondcrs, that I had not sufficient knowledge of Physiology
to treat my subject in a proper way.

With many thanks for the interest which I have felt in
reading your work . . .

1 The Rev. R. 11 Blair, Principal of the Worcester College: Expression

of the Emotions, Ed. II., p. 237.

3 Influence of the Mind upon the Body. the

Power of the Imagination. 1S72

HO MAN [Chap. VIII

Letter 4-- To A. R. Wallace.

Down. Jan. 10th [1S73].

I have read your Review with much interest, and I thank
you sincerely for the very kind spirit in which it is written.
I cannot say that I am convinced by your criticisms.1 If
vou have ever actuallv observed a kitten sucking and
pounding, with extended toes, its mother, and then seen the
same kitten when a little older doing the same thing on a soft
shawl, and ultimately an old cat (as I have seen), and do not
admit that it is identically the same action. I am astonished.
With respect to the decapitated frog,- I have always heard of
Pfluger as a most trustworthy observer. If, indeed, any one
knows a frog's habits so well as to say that it never rubs off
a bit of leaf or other object which may stick to its thigh, in
the same manner as it did the acid, your objection would be
valid. Some of Flourens' experiments, in which he removed
the cerebral hemispheres from a pigeon, indicate that acts
apparently performed consciously can be done without con-
sciousness. I presume through the force of habit, in which
case it would appear that intellectual power is not brought
into play. Several persons have made suggestions and
objections as yours about the hands 3 being held up in
astonishment ; if there was any straining of the muscles, as
with protruded arms under fright. I would agree ; as it is I

1 Quarterly Journal of Science, Jan., 1S73. p. 116: "I can hardly
believe that when a cat. lying on a shawl or other soft material, pats or
pounds it with its feet, or sometimes sucks a piece of it, it is the persist-
ence of the habit of pressing the mammary glands and sucking during
kittenhood." Mr. Wallace goes on to say that infantine habits are
generally completely lost in adult life, and that it seems unlikely that
they should persist in a few isolated instances.

: Mr. Wallace speaks of "a readiness to accept the most marvellous
conclusions or interpretations of physiologists on what seem very insuffi-
cient grounds," and he goes on to assert that the frog experiment is
either incorrectly recorded or else that it " demonstrates volition, and
not reflex action."

3 The raising of the hands in surprise is explained [Expression of
Emotions, Ed. I., p. 2S7) on the doctrine of antithesis as being the
opposite of listlessness. Mr. Wallace's view (given in the 2nd edit, of
Expression of the Emotions, p. 300) is that the gesture is appropriate to
sudden defence or to the giving of aid to another person.

186S-1S74] 'N III

must keep to my old opinion, and 1 dare say you will say that Lena 477
I am an obstinate old blockhead.

The book has sold wonderful .,000 copies have now

been printed.

! • Chauncey \\ ri ;ht.

Down, Sept 21

I have read your long letter with the greatest interest,
and it was extremely kind of you to take such great trouble.
Now that you call my attention to the fact, I well know the
appearance of persons moving the head from side to side
when critically viewing any object : and I am almost sure
that I have seen the same gesture in an affected person when
speaking in exaggerated terms of some beautiful object not
present. 1 should think your explanation of this gesture was
the true one. But there seems to me a rather w ide difference
between inclining or moving the head laterally, and moving
it in the same plane, as we do in negation, and, as you truly
add, in disapprobation. It may, however, be that these two
movements of the head have been confounded by travellers
when speaking of the Turks. Perhaps Prof. Lowell would
remember whether the movement was identically the same.
Your remarks on the effects of viewing a sun- , with

the head inverted are very curious.1 We have a looking-^
in the drawing-room opposite the flower garden, and I have

1 The letter dated Sept. 3rd, 1 3 published in Mr. Thayer s

Letters of Chauncey Wright, privately printed, Cambridge, Mass., 1
Wright quotes Mr. Sophocles, a native of Greece, at the time Professor
o\ Modern and Ancient Greek at Harvard University, to the effect that
the Turks do not express affirmation by a shake of the head, but '
bow or grave nod. negation being expressed by a backward nod. From
the striking effect produced by looking at a landscape with the head
inverted, or by looking at its reflection, Chauncey Wright was led to the
lateral movement of the head, which is characteristic ot critical inspec-
tion— e.g. of a picture. He thinks that in this wa; . .ire of delibera-
tive assent arose which may have been confused with our ordinary s
of negation. lie thus attempts to account for the contradictions between
Liebers statement that a Turk or G.eek expresses "yes" by a shake of
the head, and the opposite opinion of Prof. Sophocles, and, lastly, Mr.
Lowell's assertion that in Italy our negative shake of the head is used in
affirmation (see E.\ the Emotions, Ed. 11., p. j

112 MAN [Chap. VIII

letter 478 often been struck how extremely pretty and strange the
flower garden and surrounding bushes appear when thus
viewed. Your letter will be very useful to me for a new
edition of my Expression book ; but this will not be for a
long time, if ever, as the publisher was misled by the very
large sale at first, and printed far too many copies.

I daresay you intend to publish your views in some essay,
and I think you ought to do so, for you might make an
interesting and instructive discussion.

I have been half killing myself of late with microscopical
work on plants. I begin to think that they are more wonder-
ful than animals.

P.S., Jan. 29th, 1875. — You will see that by a stupid
mistake in the address this letter has just been returned to
me. It is by no means worth forwarding, but I cannot bear
that you should think me so ungracious and ungrateful as
not to have thanked you for your long letter.

As I forget whether " Cambridge " is sufficient address, I
will send this through Asa Gray.

I

'

CHAPTER IX

GEOLOGY

I. Vulcanicity and Earth-movements. — II. Ice-action. — III. T/ie
Parallel Roads of Gloi Roy. — IV '. Coral Reefs, Fossil
and Recent. — V. Cleavage and Foliation. — VI. A
the World. — VII. Geological Action of Earthworms. —
VIII. Miscellanea >us.

I. Vulcanicity and Earth-movements, 1840-81. Letter
To David Milne.1

12, Upper Gower Street, Thursday [March] 20th [1S40].

I much regret that I am unable to give you any informa-
tion of the kind you desire. You must have misunderstood
Mr. Lyell concerning the object of my paper.- It is an
account of the shock of February, 1835, in Chile, which is
particularly interesting, as it ties most closely together
volcanic eruptions and continental elevations. In that paper
I notice a very remarkable coincidence in volcanic eruptions
in S. America at very distant places. I have also drawn up
some short tables showing, as it appears to me, that there
are periods of unusually great volcanic activity affecting large

1 David .Milne-Hume (1805-90) was a country gentleman in Berwick-
shire who became interested in geology at an early age. He wrote on
the Midlothian Coal-field, the Geology of Roxburghshire, the Parallel
Roads of Glen Roy, and compiled the Reports presented byaCommitti
appointed by the Royal Society of Edinburgh to in. e the observa-

tion and registration of boulders in Scotland [Quart, fount, c. . 5
Vol. XLVIL, 1891 ; Proc, p. 59).

3 "On the Connexion of certain Volcanic Phenomena, and on the
Formation of Mountain-chains and the Effects of Continental Elevations."
Trans. Geol. Soc, Vol. Y., 1S40. pp. 601-3: [March 7th, 1838].

8

114 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 479 portions of S. America. I have no record of any coinci-
dences between shocks there and in Europe. Humboldt, by
his table in the Pers. Narrative (Vol. IV. p. 36, English
Translat.), seems to consider the elevation of Sabrina off
the Azores as connected with S. American subterranean
activity : this connection appears to be exceedingly vague.
I have during the past year seen it stated that a severe shock
in the northern parts of S. America coincided with one in
Kamstchatka. Believing, then, that such coincidences are
purely accidental, I neglected to take a note of the reference ;
but I believe the statement was somewhere in Ulnstitut for
1839.1 I was myself anxious to see the list of the 1200 shocks
alluded to by you, but I have not been able to find out that
the list has been published. With respect to any coin-
cidences you may discover between shocks in S. America and
Europe, let me venture to suggest to you that it is probably
a quite accurate statement that scarcely one hour in the year
elapses in S. America without an accompanying shock in
some part of that large continent. There are many regions
in which earthquakes take place every three and four days ;
and after the severer shocks the ground trembles almost
half-hourly for months. If, therefore, you had a list of the
earthquakes of two or three of these districts, it is almost
certain that some of them would coincide with those in
Scotland, without any other connection than mere chance.

My paper will be published immediately in the Geo/.
Transactions, and I will do myself the pleasure of sending
you a copy in the course of (as I hope) a week or ten days.
A large part of it is theoretical, and will be of little interest
to you ; but the account of the Concepcion shock of 1835 will,
I think, be worth your perusal. I have understood from Mr.
Lyell that you believe in some connection between the state
of the weather and earthquakes. Under the very peculiar
climate of Northern Chile, the belief of the inhabitants in such
connection can hardly, in my opinion, be founded in error.
It might possibly be worth your while to turn to pp. 430 — 433

1 LInstitut, Journal General des Society's et Travaux Scientifiques de
la France et de I'fctranger, Tome VIII. p. 412, Paris, 1840. In a note
on some earthquakes in the province Maurienne it is stated that they
occurred during a change in the weather, and at times when a south
wind followed a north wind, etc.

1S40— i8Si] EARTH-MOVEMENTS I 15

in my Journal of Researches during the Voyage of the . Lettrr 479

where I have stated this circumstance.1 On the hypothesis
of the crust of the earth resting on fluid matter, would the
influence of the moon (as indexed by the tides) affect the
periods of the shocks, when the force which causes them is
just balanced by the resistance of the solid crust ? The fact
you mention of the coincidence between the earthquakes of
Calabria and Scotland appears most curious. Your paper will
possess a high degree of interest to all geologists. I fancied
that such uniformity of action, as sen ms here indicated, was
probably confined to large continents, such as the Americas.
How interesting a record of volcanic phenomena in Iceland
would be, now that you are collecting accounts of ever)' slight
trembling in Scotland. I am astonished at their frequency in
that quiet country, as any one would have called it. I wish
it had been in my power to have contributed in any way to
your researches on this most interesting subject.

To L. Horner.- Le»er 4S°

Down, Aug. 29th [1S44].

I am greatly obliged for your kind note, and much pleased
with its contents. If one-third of what you say be really true,
and not the verdict of a partial judge (as from pleasant ex-
perience I much suspect), then should I be thoroughly well

1 Journal of Researches into the Natural History and Geology of the
Countries visited during the Voyage of I {.M.S. Beagle round the World.
London, 1870, p. 351.

* Leonard Horner, F.R.S. (1785-18' i born in Edinburgh; at

the age of twenty-one he settled in London, and devoted himself more
particularly to Geology ami Mineralogy, returning a lew years liter to
Edinburgh, where he took a prominent part in founding the School of
Ait and other educational institutions. In 1827 Mr. Horner was invited
to occupy the post of Warden in the London University, a position which
he resigned in 1X31 ; he also held for some years an Inspectorship of
Factories. As a Fellow of the Royal Society. Mr. Horner "took an
active part in bringing about certain changes in the management of the
Society, which resulted in limiting to fifteen the number of new members
to be annually elected. . . ." In 1S46 Horner was elected President of
the Geological Society ; and in i860 he again presided over the Society,
to the interests of which he had long devoted himself. His contributions
to the Society include papers on Stratigraphical Geology, Mineral
and other subjects. — Memoirs of Leonard Horner, edited by his daughter,
(Catherine M. Lyell (privately printed, 1890).

Il6 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 480 contented with my small volume,1 which, small as it is, cost
me much time. The pleasure of observation amply repays
itself: not so that of composition ; and it requires the hope of
some small degree of utility in the end to make up for the
drudgery of altering bad English into sometimes a little better
and sometimes worse. With respect to craters of elevation,2
I had no sooner printed off the few pages on that subject
than I wished the whole erased. 1 utterly disbelieve in
Von Buch and de Beaumont's views ; but on the other hand,
in the case of the Mauritius and St. Jago, I cannot, perhaps
unphilosophically, persuade myself that they are merely
the basal fragments of ordinary volcanoes ; and therefore I
thought I would suggest the notion of a slow circumferential
elevation, the central part being left unelevated, owing to the
force from below being spent and [relieved?] in eruptions. On
this view, I do not consider these so-called craters of elevation
as formed by the ejection of ashes, lava, etc., etc., but by a
peculiar kind of elevation acting round and modified by
a volcanic orifice. I wish I had left it all out ; I trust that
there are in other parts of the volume more facts and less
theory. The more I reflect on volcanoes, the more I appre-
ciate the importance of E. de Beaumont's measurements3
(even if one does not believe them implicitly) of the natural
inclination of lava-streams, and even more the importance of
his view of the dikes, or unfilled fissures, in every volcanic
mountain, being the proofs and measures of the stretching
and consequent elevation which all such mountains must have
undergone. I believe he thus unintentionally explains most
of his cases of lava-streams being inclined at a greater angle
than that at which they could have flowed.

But excuse this lengthy note, and once more let me thank
you for the pleasure and encouragement you have given me —

1 Geological Observations on the Volcanic Islands visited during the
Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle : London, 1844. A French translation has
been made by Professor Renard of Ghent, and published by Reinwald
of Paris in 1902.

2 Geological Observations, pp. 93-6.

3 Elie de Beaumont's views are discussed by Sir Charles Lyell both
in the Principles of Geology (Ed. x., 1867, Vol. I. pp. 633 et seq.)
and in the Elements of Geology (Ed. ill., 1878, pp. 495, 496). See
also Darwin's Geological Observations, Ed. II., 1876, p. 107.

1840-1S81] EARTH-MOVEMENTS I 17

which, together with Lyell's never-failing kindness, will help Letto 480

me on with South America, and, as my books will not sell, I

sometimes want such aid. I have been lately reading with

care A. d'Orbigny's work x on South America, and I cannot

say how forcibly impressed I am with the infinite superiority

of the Lyellian school of Geology over the continental. I

always feel as if my books came half out of Lyell's brain,

and that I never acknowledge this sufficiently ; nor do

I know how I can without saying so in so many words

— for I have always thought that the great merit of the

Principles was that it altered the whole tone of one's mind,

and therefore that, when seeing a thing never seen by I. yell,

one yet saw it partially through his eyes— it would have been

in some respects better if I had done this less: but again

excuse my long, and perhaps you will think presumptuous,

discussion. Enclosed is a note from Emma to Mrs. Horner,

to beg you, if you can, to give us the great pleasure of seeing

you here. We are necessarily dull here, and can offer no

amusements ; but the weather is delightful, and if you could

sec how brightly the sun now shines you would be tempt d

to come. Tray remember me most kindly to all your family,

and beg of them to accept our proposal, and give us the

pleasure of seeing them.

To C. Lyell.- Letter 4S1

• 1844].

I was glad to get your note, and wanted to hear about
your work. I have been looking to see it advertised ; it has

1 Voyage dans PAmerique MSridionale—exicuU pendant les ann

1826-33: six vols., Paris, [835-43.

s Sir Charles Lyell, Bart., F.R.S. (1797-1875), was born at Kinnordy,
the family home in central Forfarshire. At the age of seventeen he
entered at Exeter College, Oxford, and afterwards obtained a second
class in the final Honours School in Classics. As an undergraduate
Lyell attended Prof. Buckland's lectures on Geology. On leaving
Oxford Lyell was entered at Lincoln's Inn : a weakness of the eyes soon
compelled him to give up reading, and he travelled abroad, finding many
opportunities for field work. He was called to the Bar in 1825, and in
the same year published some papers on geological subjects. From
1823-26 Lyell filled the post of Secretary to the Geological Society, and in
1S20 was elected into the Royal Society. In 1830 the first volume of the
Principles of Gt was published ; the second volume appeared two

Il8 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 481 been a long task. I had, before your return from Scotland,
determined to come up and see you ; but as I had nothing
else to do in town, my courage has gradually eased off, more
especially as I have not been very well lately. We get so
many invitations here that we are grown quite dissipated, but
my stomach has stood it so ill that we are going to have a
month's holidays, and go nowhere.

The subject which I was most anxious to talk over with
you I have settled, and having written sixty pages of my
6". American Geology, I am in pretty good heart, and am
determined to have very little theory and only short descrip-

years later. Speaking of this greatest of Lyell's services to Geology,
Huxley writes : " I have recently read afresh the first edition of the
Principles of Geology, and when I consider that this remarkable book had
been nearly thirty years in everybody's hands [in 1859], and that it brings
home to any reader of ordinary intelligence a great principle and a great
fact — the principle that the past must be explained by the present, unless
good cause be shown to the contrary ; and the fact that, so far as our
knowledge of the past history of life on our globe goes, no such cause can
be shown — I cannot but believe that Lyell, for others, as for myself, was the
chief agent in smoothing the road for Darwin " (Huxley's Life and Letters,
Vol. II., p. 190). As Professor of Geology in King's College, London,
Lyell delivered two courses of lectures in 1832-33 ; in the latter year he
received a Royal medal, and in 1858 he was the recipient of the Copley
medal of the Royal Society. The Elements of Geology was published in
1833 ; this work is still used as a text-book, a new edition having been
lately (1896) brought out by Prof. Judd ; in 1S45 and in 1849 appeared
the Travels in North America and A Second Visit to the United States of
North America. The Antiquity of Man was published in 1863. Lyell
was knighted in 184S, and in 1864 was raised to the rank of a Baronet.
He was buried in Westminster Abbey.

Darwin wrote in his Autobiography: "The Science of Geology is
enormously indebted to Lyell, more so, as I believe, than to any other
man who ever lived " {Life and Letters, Vol. I., p. 72). In a letter to
Lyell — November 23rd, 1859 — Darwin wrote : " I rejoice profoundly that
you intend admitting the doctrine of modification in your new edition
[a new edition of the Manual published in 1865] ; nothing, I am con-
vinced, could be more important for its success. I honour you most
sincerely. To have maintained, in the position of a master, one side of a
question for thirty years, and then deliberately give it up, is a fact to
which I much doubt whether the records of science offer a parallel " {Life
and Letters, Vol. II., pp. 229-30). See Life, Letters, and Journals of
Sir Charles Lyell, Bart., edited by his sister-in-law, Mrs. Lyell, 2 Vols.,
London, 1S81. Charles Lyell and Modern Geology, Prof. T. G. Bonney,
London, 1S95.

1840 ivsi] EARTH- MOVEMENTS lig

tions. The two first chapters will, I think, be prett; I, letter 481

on the great gravel terraces and plains of Patagonia and Chili
and Peru.

I am astonished and grieved over D'Orbigny's ' nonsense
of sudden elevations. I must give you one of his cases: He
finds an old beach 600 feet above sea. He finds still attached
to the rocks at 300 feet six species of truly littoral shells.
He finds at 20 to 30 feet above sea an immense accumulation
of chiefly littoral shells. lie argues the whole 600 feet up-
lifted at one blow, because the attached shells at jOO feet
have not been displaced. Therefore when the sea formed a
beach at 600 feet the present littoral shells were attached to
rocks at 30c feet depth, and these same shells were accumu-
lating by thousands at 600 feet.

Hear this, oh Forbes. Is it not monstrous for a professed
conchologist ? This is a fair specimen of his reasoning.

One of his arguments against the Pampas being a slow
deposit, is that mammifers are very seldom washed by rivers
into the sea !

Because at 12,000 feet he finds the same kind of clay with
that of the Pampas he never doubts that it is contemporaneous
with the Pampas [debacle ?] which accompanied the right
royal salute of every volcano in the Cordillera. What a pity
these Frenchmen do not catch hold of a comet, and return to
the good old geological dramas of Burnett and Whiston. 1
shall keep out of controversy, and just give my own facts.
It is enough to disgust one with Geology; though I have
been much pleased with the frank, decided, though courteous
manner with which D'Orbigny disputes my conclusions, given,
unfortunately, without facts, and sometimes rashly, in my
journal.

Enough of S. America. I wish you would ask Mr. Horner
(for I forgot to do so, and am unwilling to trouble him again)

1 D'Orbigny's views are referred to by Lyell in chapter vii. of the
Principles, Vol. I. p. 131. "This mud \i.e. the Pampean mud] contains
in it recent species of shells, some of them proper to brackish water, and
is believed by Mr. Darwin to be an estuary or delta deposit. M. A.
D'Orbigny, however, has advanced an hypothesis . . . that the agitation
and displacement of the waters of the ocean, caused by die elevation of
the Andes, gave rise to a deluge, of which this Pampean mud, which
reaches sometimes the height of [2,000 feet, is the result and monument,"

120 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 481 whether he thinks there is too much detail (quite independent
of the merits of the book) in my volcanic volume ; as to know
this would be of some real use to me. You could tell me
when we meet after York, when I will come to town. I had
intended being at York, but my courage has failed. I should
much like to hear your lecture, but still more to read it, as I
think reading is always better than hearing.

I am very glad you talk of a visit to us in the autumn if
you can spare the time. I shall be truly glad to see Mrs.
Lyell and yourself here ; but I have scruples in asking any
one — you know how dull we are here. Young Hooker l talks
of coming ; I wish he might meet you, — he appears to me a
most engaging young man.

I have been delighted with Prescott, of which I have
read Vol. I. at your recommendation ; I have just been a
good deal interested with W. Taylor's (of Norwich) Life and
Correspondence.

On your return from York I shall expect a great supply
of Geological gossip.

Letter 482 To C. Lyell.

[October 3rd, 1846.]

I have been much interested with Ramsay,2 but have no
particular suggestions to offer ; I agree with all your remarks
made the other day. My final impression is that the only
argument against him is to tell him to read and re-read the
Principles, and if not then convinced to send him to Pluto.
Not but what he has well read the Principles ! and largely
profited thereby. I know not how carefully you have read
this paper, but I think you did not mention to me that he does
(p. 327)3 believe that the main part of his great denudation was

1 Sir J. D. Hooker.

2 " On the Denudation of South Wales and the Adjacent Counties of
England." A. C. Ramsay, Mem. Geo/. Survey Great Britain, Vol. I.,
London, 1846.

3 Ramsay refers the great outlines of the country to the action of the
sea in Tertiary times. In speaking of the denudation of the coast, he
says : " Taking unlimited time into account, we can conceive that any
extent of land might be so destroyed ... If to this be added an ex-
ceedingly slow depression of the land and sea bottom, the wasting process
would be materially assisted by this depression" (loc. cit., p. 327).

1840— i88i] EARTH-MOVEMENTS (21

effected during a vast (almost gratuitously assumed) slow Leitei
Tertiary subsidence and subsequent Tertiary oscillating
slow elevation. So our high cliff argument is inapplicable.
He seems to think his great subsidence only favourable for
great denudation. I believe from the general nature of the
off-shore sea's bottoms that it is almost necessary ; do look at
two pages — p. 25 of my S. American volume — on this subject.1

The foundation of his views, viz., of one great sudden
upheaval, strikes me as threefold. First, to account for the
great dislocations. This strikes me as the odder, as he admits
that a little northwards there were man)- and some violent
dislocations at many periods during the accumulation of the
Palaeozoic series. If you argue against him, allude to the
cool assumption that petty forces arc conflicting : look at
volcanoes ; look at recurrent similar earthquakes at same
spots; look at repeatedly injected intrusive masses. In my
paper on Volcanic Phenomena in the C . Transact? I have
argued (and Lonsdale thought well of the argument, in
favour, as he remarked, of your original doctrine) that if
Hopkins' views are correct, viz., that mountain chains are
subordinate consequences to changes of level in mass, then,
as we have evidence of such horizontal movements in mass
having been slow, the foundation of mountain chains (differing
from volcanoes only in matter being' injected instead of ejected)
must have been slow.

Secondly, Ramsay has been influenced, I think, by his

1 Geological Observations on S. America, 1846, p. 25. " When
viewing the sea-worn cliffs of Patagonia, in some parts between Soo and
900 feet in height, and formed of horizontal Tertiary strata, which must
once have extended far seaward ... a difficulty often occurred to me,
namely, how the strata could possibly have been removed by the action
of the sea at a considerable depth beneath its surface. ' The cliffs of
St. Helena are referred to in illustration of the same problem ; speakii
of these, Darwin adds: "Now, if we had any reason to suppose that
St. Helena had, during a long period, gone on slowly subsiding, every
difficulty would be removed ... I am much inclined to suspect that we
shall hereafter find in all such cases that the land with the adj lining bed
of the sea has in truth subsided . . ." {loc. eif.. pp. 25-6).

1 "On the Connection of certain Volcanic Phenomena, and on the
Formation of Mountain-chains and the Effects of Continental 1 Novations."
. Vol. II., pp. 654-60, 18 . Vol. V.,

pp. 601-32, 1842. [Read March 7th, 1858.]

122 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 482 Alpine insects ; but he is wrong in thinking that there is any
necessary connection of tropics and large insects — videlicet —
Galapagos Arch., under the equator. Small insects swarm in
all parts of tropics, though accompanied generally with large
ones.

Thirdly, he appears influenced by the absence of newer
deposits on the old area, blinded by the supposed necessity of
sediment accumulating somewhere near (as no doubt is true)
and being preserved — an example, as I think, of the common
error which I wrote to you about. The preservation of
sedimentary deposits being, as I do not doubt, the exception
when they are accumulated during periods of elevation or of
stationary level, and therefore the preservation of newer
deposits would not be probable, according to your view that
Ramsay's great Palaeozoic masses were denuded, whilst slowly
rising. Do pray look at end of Chapter II., at what little I
have said on this subject in my S. American volume.1

I do not think you can safely argue that the whole
surface was probably denuded at same time to the level of
the lateral patches of Magnesian conglomerate.

The latter part of the paper strikes me as good, but
obvious.

I shall send him my S. American volume, for it is curious
on how many similar points we enter, and I modestly hope
it may be a half-oz. weight towards his conversion to better
views. If he would but reject his great sudden elevations,
how sound and good he would be. I doubt whether this
letter will be worth the reading.

Letter 483 To C. Lyell.

Down [Sept. 4th, 1849].
It was very good of you to write me so long a letter,
which has interested me much. I should have answered it
sooner, but I have not been very well for the few last days.
Your letter has also flattered me much in many points. I
am very glad you have been thinking over the relation of
subsidence and the accumulation of deposits ; it has to me
removed many great difficulties ; please to observe that I

1 The second chapter of the Geological Observations concludes with a
Summary on the Recent Elevations of the West Coast of South America,

(P- 53). '

1840—188] ]

1 A kTII- \lo\ EM EN I

1 '

have carefully abstained from saying that sediment is not Letto
deposited during periods of elevation, but only that it is n<»t
accumulated to sufficient thickness to withstand subsequent
beach action ; on both coasts of S. America the amount
of sediment deposited, worn away, and redeposited, often-
times must have been enormous, but still there have been no
wide formations produced: just read my discussion (p. 135
of my S. American book1) again with this in your mind.
I never thought of your difficulty {i.e. in relation to this
discussion) of where was the land whence the three miles
of S. Wales strata- were derived! Do you not think that
it may be explained by a form of elevation which I have
always suspected to have been very common (and, indeed,
had once intended getting all facts together), viz. thus? —

'? ^

'"&

Fig. 1.

The frequency of a deep ocean close to a rising continent
bordered with mountains, seems to indicate these opposite
movements of rising and sinking close together \ this would

1 See Letter 556, footnote 1, p. 222. The discussion referred to
{Geological Observations on South Ameri -. 1 846 ideals with the causes
of the absence of recent conchiferous deposits on the coasts of South
America.

2 In his classical paper "On the Denudation of South Wales and
the Adjacent Counties of England " {Mem. Geol. Survey^ Vol. I., p. ;
1846), Ramsay estimates the thickness of certain Pakeozoic formations in
South Wales, and calculates the cubic contents of the strata in the area
they now occupy together with the amount removed by denudation ; and
he goes on to say that it is evident that the quantity oi matter employed
to form these strata was many times greater than the entire amount of
solid land they now represent above the waves. ''To form, therefore,
so great a thickness, a mass of matter oi nearly equal cubic contents
must have been worn by the waves and the outpourings of rivers from
neighbouring lands, of which perhaps no original trace now remains'
(P- 334).

124 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 483 easily explain the S. Wales and Eocene cases. I will only
add that I should think there would be a little more
sediment produced during subsidence than during elevation,
from the resulting outline of coast, after long period of rise.
There are many points in my volume which I should like to
have discussed with you, but I will not plague you : I should
like to hear whether you think there is anything in my
conjecture on Craters of Elevation l ; I cannot possibly believe
that Saint Jago or Mauritius are the basal fragments of
ordinary volcanoes ; I would sooner even admit E. de Beau-
mont's views than that — much as I would sooner in my
own mind in all cases follow you. Just look at p. 232 2 in
my vS. America for a trifling point, which, however, I
remember to this day relieved my mind of a considerable
difficulty. I remember being struck with your discussion on
the Mississippi beds in relation to Pampas, but I should

1 In the Geological Observations on Volcatiic Islands, 1844, pp. 93-6,
Darwin speaks of St. Helena, St. Jago and Mauritius as being bounded
by a ring of basaltic mountains which he regards as " Craters of Eleva-
tion." While unable to accept the theory of Elie de Beaumont and
attribute their formation to a dome-shaped elevation and consequent
arching of the strata, he recognises a "very great difficulty in admitting
that these basaltic mountains are merely the basal fragments of great
volcanoes, of which the summits have been either blown off, or, more
probably, swallowed by subsidence." An explanation of the origin and
structure of these volcanic islands is suggested which would keep them
in the class of "Craters of Elevation," but which assumes a slow
elevation, during which the central hollow or platform having been
formed "not by the arching of the surface, but simply by that part
having been upraised to a less height."

3 This probably refers to a paragraph (p. 232) " On the Eruptive
Sources of the Porphyritic Claystone and Greenstone Lavas." The
opinion is put forward that "the difficulty of tracing the streams of
porphyries to their ancient and doubtless numerous eruptive sources,
may be partly explained by the very general disturbance which the
Cordillera in most parts has suffered"; but, Darwin adds, "a more
specific cause may be that 'the original points of eruption tend to
become the points of injection.' ... On this view of there being a
tendency in the old points of eruption to become the points of sub-
sequent injection and disturbance, and consequently of denudation, it
ceases to be surprising that the streams of lava in the porphyritic
claystone conglomerate formation, and in other analogous cases, should
most rarely be traceable to their actual sources." The latter part of
this letter is published in Life and Letters, I., pp. 377, 378.

1840— iSSiJ EARTH-MOVEMENTS 125

wish to read them over again ; I have, however, re-lent your Letter
work to Mrs. Rich, who, like all whom I have met, has been
much interested by it. 1 will stop about my own Geology.
But I see I must mention that Scrope did suggest (and I
have alluded to him, p. [18,1 but without distinct reference
and I fear not sufficiently, though I utterly forgot what he
wrote) the separation of basalt and trachyte ; but he does not
appear to have thought about the crystals, which I belii
to be the keystone of the phenomenon. 1 cannot but think
this separation of the molten elements has played a great
part in the metamorphic rocks: how else could the basaltic
dykes have come in the great granitic districts such as
those of Brazil ? What a wonderful book for labour is
d'Archiac ! . . . -

To Lady Lyell. Letter 484

Down, Wednesday night [1S49 ?]•
I am going to beg a very very great favour of you : it
is to translate one page (and the title) of either Danish or
Swedish or some such language. I know not to whom else
to apply, and I am quite dreadfully interested about the
barnacles therein described. Does Lyell know Loven,3 or
his address and title? for I must write to him. If Lyell
knows him 1 would use his name as introduction ; Loven I
know by name as a first-rate naturalist.

Accidentally I forgot to give you the Footsteps^ which 1
now return, having ordered a copy for myself.

I sincerely hope the " Craters of 1 denudation " 4 prosper ; I
pin my faith to this view.

1 Geological Observations^ Ed. 11., 1876. Chapter VI. opens with a
discussion "On the Separation of the Constituent Minerals of Lava,
according to their Specific Gravities." Mr. Darwin calls attention to the
fa< t that Mr. P. Scrope had speculated on the subject of the separation
of the trachytic and basaltic series of lavas (p. 113).

3 Possibly this refers to d'Archiac's Histoire des Progris tic hi

logie, 1848.

3 S. L. Loven published numerous papers on Cirripedes and other
zoological subjects in the Stockholm Ofversigt and elsewhere between
1838 and 1882.

4 " On Craters of Denudation, with Observations on the Structure
and Growth oi Volcanic Cones.'' Pr . i Vol. VI., 1S50,
pp. 207-34. In a letter to Bunbury (Jan. 17th, 1850) Lyell wrote:

126 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 484 Please tell Sir C. Lyell that outside the crater-like
mountains at St. Jago,1 even throughout a distance of two
or three miles, there has been much denudation of the older
volcanic rocks contemporaneous with those of the ring of
mountains.

I hope that you will not find the page troublesome, and
that you will forgive me asking you.

Letter 485 To C. Lyell.

[Nov. 6th, 1849].
I have been deeply interested in your letter, and so far,
at least, worthy of the time it must have cost you to write it.
I have not much to say. I look at the whole question as
settled. Santorin 2 is splendid ! it is conclusive ! it is perfect !
You have read Dufr6noy3 in a hurry, I think, and added
to the difficulty — it is the whole hill or " colline " which is
composed of tuff with cross-stratification ; the central boss
or " monticule " is simply trachyte. Now, I have described
one tuff crater at Galapagos (p. 108)4 which has broken
through a great solid sheet of basalt : why should not an
irregular mass of trachyte have been left in the middle after

"... Darwin adopts my views as to Mauritius, St. Jago, and so-called
elevation craters, which he has examined, and was puzzled with." — Life
of Sir Charles Lyell, Vol. II., p. 158.

1 The island of St. Jago, one of the Cape de Verde group, is fully
described in the Volcanic Islands, Chap. I.

2 "The Gulf of Santorin, in the Grecian Archipelago, has been for
two thousand years a scene of active volcanic operations. The largest
of the three outer islands of the groups (to which the general name of
Santorin is given) is called Thera (or sometimes Santorin), and forms
more than two-thirds of the circuit of the Gulf" {Principles of Geology,
Vol. II., Ed. x., London, 1868, p. 65). Lyell attributed "the moderate
slope of the beds in Thera ... to their having originally descended the
inclined flanks of a large volcanic cone . . . " ; he refuted the theory of
" Elevation Craters " by Leopold von Buch, which explained the slope
of the rocks in a volcanic mountain by assuming that the inclined beds
had been originally horizontal and subsequently tilted by an explosion.

3 Pierre Armand Dufrenoy published Mhnoires pour servir d utie
Description Geologique de la France, as well as numerous papers in the
Annales des Mines, Comptes Rcndus, Bulletin Soc Geol. France, and
elsewhere on mineralogical and geological subjects.

4 The pages refer to Darwin's Geological Observations on the
Volcanic Islands, etc., 1844.

1S40-1881] EARTH-MOVEMENTS 1 2J

the explosion and emission of mud which produced th<
overlying tuff? Or, again, I see no difficulty in a mass of
trachyte being exposed by subsequent dislocations and bared
or cleaned by rain. At Ascension (p. 40), subsequent to
the last great aeriform explosion, which has covered the
country with fragments, there have been dislocations and a
large circular subsidence. . . . Do not quote Banks' case 1
(for there has been some denudation there), but the "elliptic
one" (p. 105), which is 1,500 yards (three-quarters of a
nautical mile) in internal diameter . . . and is the very one
the inclination of whose mud stream on tuff strata I measured
(before I had ever heard the name Dufrenoy) and found
varying from 25 to 30 . Albemarle Island, instead of being
a crater of elevation, as Von Much foolishh sed, is formed

of four great subaerial basaltic volcanoes (p. 103), of one of
which you might like to know the external diameter of the
summit or crater was above three nautical miles. There are
no "craters of denudation" at Galapagos. -

I hope you will allude to Mauritius. I think this is the
instance on the largest scale of any known, though imperfectly
known.

If I were you I would give up consistency (or, at most,
only allude in note to your old edition) and bring out the
Craters of Denudation as a new view, which it essentially is.
You cannot, I think, give it prominence as a novelty and yet
keep to consistency and passages in old editions. I should
grudge this new view being smothered in your address, and
should like to see a separate paper. The one great channel
to Santorin and Palma, etc., etc, is just like the one main
channel being kept open in atolls and encircling barrier
reefs, and on the same principle of water being driven in
through several shallow breaches.

I of course utterly reprobate my wild notion of circular
elevation ; it is a satisfaction to me to think that I perceived
there was a screw loose in the old view, and, so far, I think
I was of some service to you.

Depend on it, you have for ever smashed, crushed, and

1 This refers to Banks' Cove : see Volcanic Islands, p. 107.

1 See Lyell " On Craters of Denudation, with Observations on the
Structure and Growth of Volcanic Cones," Quart. Journ. Geol. S
Vol. VI., 1850, p. 207.

128 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 485 abolished craters of elevation. There must be craters of
engulfment, and of explosion (mere modifications of craters
of eruption), but craters of denudation are the ones which
have given rise to all the discussions.

Pray give my best thanks to Lady Lyell for her trans-
lation, which was as clear as daylight to me, including
" leglessness."

Letter 486 To C. Lyell.

Down [Nov. 20th, 1849].

I remembered the passage in E. de B. [Elie de Beaumont] *
and have now re-read it. I have always and do still entirely
disbelieve it ; in such a wonderful case he ought to have
hammered every inch of rock up to actual junction ; he
describes no details of junction, and if I were in your place
I would absolutely dispute the fact of junction (or articulation
as he oddly calls it) on such evidence. I go farther than
you ; I do not believe in the world there is or has been a
junction between a dike and stream of lava of exact shape
of either (1) or (2) [Fig. 2].

If dike gave immediate origin to volcanic vent we should
have craters of [an] elliptic shape [Fig. 3]. I believe that when
the molten rock in a dike comes near to the surface, some one
two or three points will always certainly chance to afford an
easier passage upward to the actual surface than along the
whole line, and therefore that the dike will be connected (if
the whole were bared and dissected) with the vent by a

1 Elie de Beaumont (1 798-1874) was a pupil in the Ecole Poly-
technique and afterwards in the Ecole des Mines. In 1820 he accom-
panied M. Brochant de Villiers to England in order to study the
principles of geological mapping, and to report on the English mines
and metallurgical establishments. For several years M. de Beaumont
was actively engaged in the preparation of the geological map of France,
which was begun in 1825, and in 1835 ne succeeded M. B. de Villiers in
the Chair of Geology at the Ecole des Mines. In 1853 he was elected
Perpetual Secretary of the French Academy, and in 1861 he became
Vice-President of the Conseil General des Mines and a Grand Officer
of the Legion of Honour. Elie de Beaumont is best known among
geologists as the author of the Systemes des Montagnes and other
publications, in which he put forward his theories on the origin of
mountain ranges and on kindred subjects. {Quart. Jonr/i. Geol. Soc,
Vol. XXXI. ; Proc, p. xliii, 1875.)

1840—188] I

I A l;Tll-M(]\ EM I NTS

column or cone (see my elegant drawing) of lava [Fig. 4]. I do Lettei 486
not doubt that the dikes are thus indirectly connected with
eruptive vents. E. de B. seems to have observed many of his
T ; now without he supposes the whole line of fissure or dike
to have poured out lava (which implies, as above remarked,
craters of an elliptic or almost linear shape) on both sides,

Fig. 2.

how extraordinarily improbable it is, that there should have
been in a single line of section so many intersections of
points of eruption ; he must, I think, make his orifices of
eruption almost linear or, if not so, astonishingly numerous.

Fig. 3-

One must refer to what one has seen oneself : do pray, when
you go home, look at the section of a minute cone of
eruption at the Galapagos, p. 109,1 which is the most perfect
natural dissection of a crater which I have ever heard of, and
the drawing of which you may, I assure you, trust ; here
the arching over of the streams as they were poured out over
the lip of the crater was evident, and are now thus seen
united to the central irregular column. Again, at St. J .
I saw some horizontal sections of the bases of small craters,
and the sources or feeders were circular. I really cannot

1 Geological Observations on Volcanic Islands. London, 1S90, p. 25S.
VOL. 11. 9

130

Letter 486

GEOLOGY

[Chap. IX

to

entertain a doubt that E. de B. is grossly wrong, and that
you are right in your view ; but without most distinct

1840-1881 EAR I ll-MUY 1 M I NTS [31

evidence I will never admit that a dike joins on rectangularly Letter 486
to a stream of lava. Your argument about the perpendicu-
larity of the dike strikes me as good.

The map of Etna, which I have been just looking at,
looks like a sudden falling in, does it not? I am not much
surprised at the linear vent in Santorin (this linear tendency
ought to be difficult to a circular-crater-of-elevati /n-be-
liever), I think Abich ' describes having seen tin- same actual
thing forming within the crater of Vesuvius. In such cases
what outline do you give to the upper surface of the lava in
the dike connecting them ? Surely it would be very irregular
and would send up irregular cones or columns as in my
above splendid drawing.

At the Royal on Friday, after more doubt and misgiving
than I almost ever felt, I voted to recommend Forbes for
Royal Medal, and that view was carried, Sedgwick taking
the lead.

I am glad to hear that all jour party are pretty well.
I know from experience what you must have gone through.
From old age with suffering death must be to all a happy
release.2

I saw Dan Sharpe3 the other day, and he told me he had
been working at the mica schist (t.e. not gnci-s ; in Scotland,
and that he was quite convinced my view was right. You
are wrong and a heretic on this point, I know well.

1 Geologische Beobachtungen uber die vulkanischen Erscheinungen
und Bildungenin Unter- und Mittel-Italien. Braunschweig, 1S41.

3 This seems to refer to the death of Sir Charles Lyell"s father, which
occurred on Nov. 8th, 1849.

3 Daniel Sharpe (1806-56) left school at the age of sixteen, and
became a clerk in the service of a Portuguese merchant. At the
of twenty-four he went for a year to Portugal, and afterwards spent
a considerable amount of time in that country. The results of his
geological work, carried out in the intervals of business, were published
in the Journal of the Geological Society of London {Quart. Journ. t.
Soc., Vol. V., p. 142 ; Vol. VI., p. 1 35 . Although actively 1 1 in

business all his life. Sharpe communicated several papers to the Geo-
logical Society, his researches into the origin of slaty cleavage b
among the ablest and most important of his contributions to geo'.
(Quart. Journ. Geol. S .. Vol. III., p. 74: Vol. V., p. ill). A full
account of Sharpe's work is given in an obituary notice published in the
Quart. Journ. Geo!. So:.. Vol. XIII.. p. xlv.

132 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 487 To C. H. L. Woodd.

Down, March 4th [1850].
I have read over your paper 1 with attention ; but first let
me thank you for your very kind expressions towards myself.
I really feel hardly competent to discuss the questions raised
by your paper ; I feel the want of mathematical mechanics.
All such problems strike me as awfully complicated ; we do
not even know what effect great pressure has on retarding
liquefaction by heat, nor, I apprehend, on expansion. The
chief objection which strikes me is a doubt whether a mass
of strata, when heated, and therefore in some slight degree at
least softened, would bow outwards like a bar of metal. Con-
sider of how many subordinate layers each great mass would
be composed, and the mineralogical changes in any length
of any one stratum : I should have thought that the strata
would in every case have crumpled up, and we know how
commonly in metamorphic strata, which have undergone heat,
the subordinate layers are wavy and sinuous, which has always
been attributed to their expansion whilst heated.

Before rocks are dried and quarried, manifold facts show
how extremely flexible they are even when not at all heated.
Without the bowing out and subsequent filling in of the roof
of the cavity, if I understand you, there would be no sub-
sidence. Of course the crumpling up of the strata would
thicken them, and I see with you that this might compress
the underlying fluidified rock, which in its turn might escape
by a volcano or raise a weaker part of the earth's crust ; but
I am too ignorant to have any opinion whether force would
be easily propagated through a viscid mass like molten rock ;
or whether such viscid mass would not act in some degree
like sand and refuse to transmit pressure, as in the old
experiment of trying to burst a piece of paper tied over the
end of a tube with a stick, an inch or two of sand being only
interposed. I have always myself felt the greatest difficulty
in believing in waves of heat coming first to this and then to
that quarter of the world : I suspect the heat plays quite a

1 The paper was sent in MS., and seems not to have been published.
Mr. Woodd was connected by marriage with Mr. Darwin's cousin, the
late Rev. W. Darwin Fox. It was perhaps in consequence of this that
Mr. Darwin proposed Mr. Woodd for the Geological Society.

1840-1881] I ART II -MOV KM I 133

subordinate part in the upward and downward movements of Letter 4*7
the earth's crust; though of course it must swell the strata
where first affected. I can understand Sir J. Herschel's
manner of bringing heat to unheated strata namely, by
covering them up by a mile or so of new strata, and then
the heat would travel into the lower ones. But who can tell
what effect this mile or two of new sedimentary strata would
have from mere gravity on the level of the supporting
surface? Of course such considerations do not render less
true that the expansion of the strata by heat would have some
effect on the level of the surface ; but they show us how
awfully complicated the phenomenon is. All young geologists
have a great turn for speculation ; 1 have burned my fingers
pretty sharply in that way, and am now perhaps become over-
cautious ; and feel inclined to cavil at speculation when the
direct and immediate effect of a cause in question cannot be
shown. Mow neatly you draw your diagrams ; I wish you
would turn your attention to real sections of the earth's
crust, and then speculate to your heart's content on them;
I can have no doubt that speculative men, with a curb on,
make far the best observers. 1 sincerely wish I could have
made any remarks of more interest to you, and more directly
bearing on your paper ; but the subject strikes me as too
difficult and complicated. With every good wish that you
may go on with your geological studies, speculations, and
especially observations ....

To C Lyell.

1 I iwn, March 24th | 1S53].

I have often puzzled over Dana's case, in itself and in
relation to the trains of S. American volcanoes of different
heights in action at the same lime (p. 605, Vol. V., Geolog.
Trans.1). I can throw no light on the subject. 1 presume
you remember that Hopkins8 in someone (I forget which)

1 " On the Connexion of certain Volcanic Phenomena in South
America, and on the Formation of Mountain Chains and Volcanoes,
the Effect of the same Tower by which Continents are Elevated"
{Trans. Geol. Soc, Vol. V., p. 601, 1S40). On p. 605 Darwin records
instances of the simultaneous activity aftei an earthquake of several
volcanoes in the Cordillera.

s See " Report on the Geological Theories of Elevation and Earth-
quakes," by W. Hopkins, Brit. Assoc. Rep., 1847, p. 34.

134 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 488 of his papers discusses such cases, and urgently wishes the
height of the fluid lava was known in adjoining volcanoes
when in contemporaneous action ; he argues vehemently
against (as far as I remember) volcanoes in action of different
heights being connected with one common source of liquefied
rock. If lava was as fluid as water, the case would indeed
be hopeless ; and I fancy we should be led to look at the
deep-seated rock as solid though intensely hot, and becoming
fluid as soon as a crack lessened the tension of the super-
incumbent strata. But don't you think that viscid lava
might be very slow in communicating its pressure equally in
all directions? I remember thinking strongly that Dana's
case within the one crater of Kilauea proved too much ; it
really seems monstrous to suppose that the lava within the
same crater is not connected at no very great depth.

When one reflects on (and still better sees) the enormous
masses of lava apparently shot miles high up, like cannon-
balls, the force seems out of all proportion to the mere gravity
of the liquefied lava ; I should think that a channel a little
straightly or more open would determine the line of explosion,
like the mouth of a cannon compared to the touch-hole. If a
high-pressure boiler was cracked across, no one would think
for a moment that the quantity of water and steam expelled
at different points depended on the less or greater height of
the water within the boiler above these points, but on the
size of the crack at these points ; and steam and water might
be driven out both at top and bottom. May not a volcano
be likened to a protruding and cracked portion on a vast
natural high-pressure boiler, formed by the surrounding area
of country? In fact, I think my simile would be truer if the
difference consisted only in the cracked case of the boiler
being much thicker in some parts than in others, and there-
fore having to expel a greater thickness or depth of water in
the thicker cracks or parts — a difference of course absolutely
as nothing.

I have seen an old boiler in action, with steam and drops
of water spurting out of some of the rivet-holes. No one
would think whether the rivet-holes passed through a greater
or less thickness of iron, or were connected with the water
higher or lower within the boiler, so small would the gravity
be compared with the force of the steam. If the boiler had

1840-1881] EARTH-MOVEMENTS 135

been not heated, then of course there would be a great dil
once whether the rivet-holes entered the water high or '•
so that th«re was great* i or less pressure of gravity. J low to
close my volcanic rivet-holes I don't know.

I do not know whether you will understand what I am
driving at, and it will not signify much whether you do
or not. 1 reincmber in old days I may mention the subj
as we are on it) often wishing 1 could get you to look
at continental elevations as the phenomenon, and volcanic
outbursts and tilting up of mountain chains as connected, but
quite secondary, phenomena. I became deeply impressed
with the truth of this view in S. America, and I do not think
you hold it, or if so make it clear : the same explanation,
whatever it may be, which will account for the whole coast of
Chili rising, will and must apply to the volcanic action of the
Cordillera, though modified no doubt by the liquefied rock
coming to the surface and reaching water, and so [being]
rendered explosive. To me it appears that this ought to be
borne in mind in your present subject of discussion. I have
written at too great length ; and have amused myself if I
have done you no good — so farewell.

To C. Lyell. Letter 4S9

Down, July 5th [1S56].

1 am very much obliged for your long letter, which has
interested me much; but before coming to the volcanic
cosmogony I must say that I cannot gather your verdict as
judge and jury (and not as advocate) on the continental
extensions of kite authors,1 which I must grapple with, and
which as yet strikes me as quite unphilosophical, inasmuch
such extensions must be applied to every nic island, if to

any one, as to Madeira ; and this 1 cannot admit, seeing that
the skeletons, at least, of our continents are ancient, and
seeing the geological nature of the oceanic islands themselves.
Do aid me with your judgment : if I could honestly admit
these great [extensions], they would do me good service.

With respect to active volcanic areas being rising areas,
which looks so pretty on the coral maps, I have formerly felt
"uncomfortable" on exactly the same grounds with you,

1 See Life and Letters, II.. p. 74 ; Letter to Lyell. June 25th, 1856 :
also letters in the sections of the present work devoted to Evolution and
Geographical Distribution.

136 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 489 viz. maritime position of volcanoes ; and still more from the
immense thicknesses of Silurian, etc., volcanic strata, which
thicknesses at first impress the mind with the idea of sub-
sidence. If this could be proved, the theory would be
smashed ; but in deep oceans, though the bottom were rising,
great thicknesses of submarine lava might accumulate. But
I found, after writing Coral Book, cases in my notes of sub-
marine vesicular lava-streams in the upper masses of the
Cordillera, formed, as I believe, during subsidence, which
staggered me greatly. With respect to the maritime position
of volcanoes, I have long been coming to the conclusion that
there must be some law causing areas of elevation (con-
sequently of land) and of subsidence to be parallel (as if
balancing each other) and closely approximate ; I think this
from the form of continents with a deep ocean on one side,
from coral map, and especially from conversations with you
on immense subsidences of the Carboniferous and [other]
periods, and yet with continued great supply of sediment.
If this be so, such areas, with opposite movements, would
probably be separated by sets of parallel cracks, and would
be the seat of volcanoes and tilts, and consequently volcanoes
and mountains would be apt to be maritime ; but why
volcanoes should cling to the rising edge of the cracks I
cannot conjecture. That areas with extinct volcanic archi-
pelagoes may subside to any extent I do not doubt.

Your view of the bottom of Atlantic long sinking with
continued volcanic outbursts and local elevations at Madeira,
Canaries, etc., grates (but of course I do not know how com-
plex the phenomena are which are thus explained) against
my judgment ; my general ideas strongly lead me to believe
in elevatory movements being widely extended. One ought,
I think, never to forget that when a volcano is in action we
have distinct proof of an action from within outwards. Nor
should we forget, as I believe follows from Hopkins,1 and as
I have insisted in my Earthquake paper,2 that volcanoes and

1 " Researches in Physical Geology," W. Hopkins, Trans. Phil. Soc.
Cambridge, Vol. VI., 1838. See also " Report on the Geological Theories
of Elevation and Earthquakes," W. Hopkins, Brit. Assoc. Rep., p. 33,
1847 (Oxford meeting).

2 "On the Connexion of certain Volcanic Phenomena in S. America,
and on the Formation of Mountain Chains and Volcanoes, as the Effect

1S40— issij 1 AR rJH-MOVEM] 1 37

mountain chains are mere accidents resulting from the eleva- Letter 489
tion of an area, and as mountain chains are generally Ion .
so should I view areas of elevation as generally large.

Votir old original view that great oceans must be sinki.
areas, from there being causes making land and yet there
being little land, has always struck me till lately as very
good. But in some degree this starts from the assumption
that within periods of which we know anything there was
cither a continent in such areas, or at least a sea-bottom of
not extreme depth.

To C. Lyell. Letter 490

King's Head Hotel, Sandown, Isle of Wight, July iSth [1S5S].
I write merely to thank you for the abstract of the Etna
paper.1 It seems to me a very grand contribution to our
volcanic knowledge. Certainly I never expected to see
E. de B.'s [Elie de Beaumont] the ry of slopes so comple:
upset. lie must have picked out favourable cases I
measurement. And such an array of facts he gives ! You
have scotched, and will see die, I now think, the Crater of
Elevation theory. But what vitality there is in a plausible
theory ! -

To C. Lyell. .:er 49,

Down, 5th [i860].

I have endeavoured to think over your discussion, but not
with much success. You will have to lay down, I think,
very clearly, what foundation you argue from— four parts
(which seems to me exceedingly moderate on your part) of

of the same Tower by which Continents are Elevated," Trans.
Vol. V., p. 601, 1840. "Bearing in mind Mr. Hopkins' demonstration,
if there be considerable elevation there must be fissures, and, if I
almost certainly une4u.1l upheaval, or subsequent sinking down, the
argument may be finally thus put: mountain chains are thi ts of

continental elevations ; continental elevations and the eruptive force
ot volcanoes are due to one great motive power, now in
action ..." (/< . p. 029).

1 " On the Structure of Lavas which have Consolidated on Steep
Slopes, with Remarks on the .Mode of Origin of Mount Etna and on the
Theory of ' Craters of Elevation,' " by C. Lyell, Phil. Tram. R. i
Vol. CXLV1IL, p. 703, 1S59.

■ ["he rest of this letter is published in Life and Letters. II., p. 129.

138 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 491 Europe being now at rest, with one part undergoing move-
ment. How it is, that from this you can argue that the
one part which is now moving will have rested since the
commencement of the Glacial period in the proportion of
four to one, I do not pretend to see with any clearness ; but
does not your argument rest on the assumption that within
a given period, say two or three million years, the whole of
Europe necessarily has to undergo movement ? This may be
probable or not so, but it seems to me that you must explain
the foundation of your argument from space to time, which
at first, to me, was very far from obvious. I can, of course,
see that if you can make out your argument satisfactorily to
yourself and others it would be most valuable. I can imagine
some one saying that it is not fair to argue that the great
plains of Europe and the mountainous districts of Scotland
and Wales have been at all subjected to the same laws of
movement. Looking to the whole world, it has been my
opinion, from the very size of the continents and oceans, and
especially from the enormous ranges of so many mountain-
chains (resulting from cracks which follow from vast areas of
elevation, as Hopkins * argues) and from other reasons, it has
been my opinion that, as a general rule, very large portions
of the world have been simultaneously affected by elevation
or subsidence. I can see that this does not apply so strongly

1 William Hopkins, F.R.S. (1793-1866) entered Peterhouse, Cam-
bridge, at the age of thirty, and in 1827 took his degree as seventh
wrangler. For some years Hopkins was very successful as a mathematical
tutor ; about 1833 he began to take a keen interest in geological subjects,
and especially concerned himself with the effects of elevating forces
acting from below on the earth's crust. He was President of the
Geological Society in 1851 and 1852 {Quart. Journ. Geo/. Soc, Vol.
XXIII., p. xxix, 1867). See "Report on the Geological Theories of
Elevation and Earthquakes." By William Hopkins. Brit. Assoc. Rep.,
1847, PP- 33-92 ; also the Anniversary Address to the Geological Society
by W. Hopkins in 1852 {Quart. Journ. Geo/. Soc, Vol. VIII.) j in this
Address, pp. lxviii et seg.) reference is made to the theory of elevation
which rests on the supposition "of the simultaneous action of an up-
heaving force at every point of the area over which the phenomena of
elevation preserve a certain character of continuity . . . The elevated
mass . . . becomes stretched, and is ultimately torn and fissured in
those directions in which the tendency thus to tear is greatest ... It is
thus that the complex phenomena of elevation become referable to a
general and simple mechanical cause. . . ."

1840- i88i] 1 \ R T 1 1 - M < • V I'. M i: N T S

to broken Europe, any more than to the Malay Archipelago. Lettei 491
Yet, had I been asked, 1 should have said that probably nearly

the whole of Europe was subjected during the Glacial period
to periods of elevation and of subsidence. It does not seem
to me so certain that the kinds of partial movement which
we now sec going on show us the kind of movement which
Europe has been subjected to since the commencement of the
Glacial period. These notions are at least possible, and would
they not vitiate your argument? Do you not rest on the
belief that, as Scandinavia and some U\v other parts arc
now rising, and a few others sinking, and the remainder at
rest, so it has been since the commencement of the Glacial
period ? With my notions I should require this to be made
pretty probable before I could put much confidence in your
calculations. You have probably thought this all over, but I
give you the reflections which come across me, supposing for
the moment that you took the proportions of space at rest
and in movement as plainly applicable to time. I have no
doubt that you have sufficient evidence that, at the com-
mencement of the Glacial period, the land in Scotland, Wales,
etc., stood as high or higher than at present, but I forget the
proofs.

Having burnt my own fingers so consumedly with the
Wealden, I am fearful for you, but 1 well know how infinitely
more cautious, prudent, and far-seeing you are than I am ;
but for heaven's sake take care of your fingers ; to burn them
severely, as I have done, is very unpleasant

Your 2\ feet for a century of elevation seems a very
handsome allowance. Can 1). Forbes really show the great
elevation of Chili? I am astounded at it, and I took some-
pains on the point.

I do not pretend to say that you may not be right to
judge of the past movements of Europe by those now and
recently going on, yet it somehow gi jainst my judgment,

— perhaps only against my prejudices.

As a change from elevation to subsidence implies some
great subterranean or cosmical change, one may surely
calculate on long intervals of rest between. Th. ;f the

cause of the change be ever proved to be astronomical, even
this might be doubtful.

P.S. — I do not know whether 1 have made clear what I

I40 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 491 think probable, or at least possible : viz., that the greater part
of Europe has at times been elevated in some degree equably;
at other times it has all subsided equably ; and at other times
might all have been stationary ; and at other times it has
been subjected to various unequal movements, up and down,
as at present.

Letter 492 To C. Lyell.

Down, Dec. 4th [i860].
It certainly seems to me safer to rely solely on the
slowness of ascertained up-and-down movement. But you
could argue length of probable time before the movement
became reversed, as in your letter. And might you not add
that over the whole world it would probably be admitted that
a larger area is now at rest than in movement? and this I
think would be a tolerably good reason for supposing long
intervals of rest. You might even adduce Europe, only
guarding yourself by saying that possibly (I will not say
probably, though my prejudices would lead me to say so)
Europe may at times have gone up and down all together. I
forget whether in a former letter you made a strong point of
upward movement being always interrupted by long periods
of rest. After writing to you, out of curiosity I glanced at
the early chapters in my Geology of South America, and the
areas of elevation on the E. and W. coasts are so vast, and
proofs of many successive periods of rest so striking, that
the evidence becomes to my mind striking. With regard
to the astronomical causes of change : in ancient days in
the Beagle when I reflected on the repeated great oscillations
of level on the very same area, and when I looked at the
symmetry of mountain chains over such vast spaces, I used
to conclude that the day would come when the slow change
of form in the semi-fluid matter beneath the crust would
be found to be the cause of volcanic action, and of all changes
of level. And the late discussion in the Atkenceum,1 by Sir
H. James (though his letter seemed to me mighty poor, and
what Jukes wrote good), reminded me of this notion. In

1 " On the Change of Climate in Different Regions of the Earth."
Letters from Sir Henry James, Col. R.E, Atheticeum, Aug. 25th, i860,
p. 256; Sept. 15th, p. 355 ; Sept. 29th, p. 415 ; Oct. 13th, p. 483. Also
letter from J. Beete Jukes, Local Director of the Geological Survey of
Ireland, loc. cit., Sept. 8th, p. 322; Oct. 6th, p. 451.

1840-1881] l \ RTH-MCH | \< ENTS I.p

case astronomical agencies should ever be proved or rendered Letter 492
probable, I imagine, as in nutation or precession, that an
upward movement or protrusion of fluidified matter below
might be immediately followed by movement of an opposite
nature. This is all that I meant.

I have not read Jamieson,1 or yet got the number. I was
very much struck with Forbes'2 explanation of n[itrate] of
soda beds and the saliferous crust, which I saw and examined
at Iquique. I often speculated on the greater rise inland of
the Cordilleras, and could never satisfy myself. . . .

I have not read Stur,3 and am awfully behindhand in
many things. . . .4

To C. Lyell. Letter 493

Down, July 18th [1867].
The first part of this letter is published in Life and Letters, III. p. 71.

Tahiti," is, I believe, rightly coloured, for the reefs are
so far from the land, and the ocean so deep, that there must
have been subsidence, though not very recently. I looked
carefully, and there is no evidence of recent elevation. I
quite agree with you versus llcrschel on Volcanic Islands.6
Would not the Atlantic and Antarctic volcanoes be the best

1 Possibly William Jameson, "Journey from Quito to Cayambe,"
Geoje. Soc. Jour/i., Vol. XXXI., p. 1S4, 1861.

2 "On the Geology of Bolivia and Southern Peru," by D. Forbes,
Quart- Journ. Geo/. Soc.,Vo\. XVII., p. 7, t86i. Mr. Forbes attributes
the formation of the saline deposits to lagoons of salt water, the com-
munication of which with the sea has been cut off by the rising of the
land [loc. eit., p. 13).

3 Dionys Stur (1827 93), Director of the Austrian Geological Survi
from 18S5 to 1892 ; author of many important memoirs on pakcobotanical
subjects.

4 The end of this letter is published as a footnote in Life ami Letters,
II., p. 352.

B Tahiti (Society Islands) is coloured blue in the map showing the
distribution of the different kinds of reefs in The Structure and Distribu-
tion of Coral Reefs, Ed. in., 1889, p. 185. The blue colour indicates the
existence of barrier reefs and atolls which, on Darwin's theory, point
to subsidence.

6 Sir John Herschel suggested that the accumulation on the sea-
floor of sediment, derived from the waste of the island, presses down
the bed of the ocean, the continent being on the other hand relieved
of pressure ; " this brings about a state of strain in the crust which will

142 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 493 examples for you, as there then can be no coral mud to
depress the bottom? In my Volcanic Islands,^. 126, I just
suggest that volcanoes may occur so frequently in the oceanic
areas as the surface would be most likely to crack when
first being elevated. I find one remark, p. 128,1 which seems
to me worth consideration — viz. the parallelism of the lines
of eruption in volcanic archipelagoes with the coast lines of
the nearest continent, for this seems to indicate a mechanical
rather than a chemical connection in both cases, i.e. the lines
of disturbance and cracking. In my South American Geology \
p. 185,2 I allude to the remarkable absence at present of
active volcanoes on the east side of the Cordillera in relation
to the absence of the sea on this side. Yet I must own I
have long felt a little sceptical on the proximity of water
being the exciting cause. The one volcano in the interior
of Asia is said, I think, to be near great lakes ; but if lakes
are so important, why are there not many other volcanoes
within other continents ? I have always felt rather inclined
to look at the position of volcanoes on the borders of conti-
nents, as resulting from coast lines being the lines of
separation between areas of elevation and subsidence. But
it is useless in me troubling you with my old speculations.

T , „ To A. R. Wallace.

Letter 494

March 22nd [1869].

The following extract from a letter to Mr. Wallace refers to his
Malay Archipelago, 1869.

I have only one criticism of a general nature, and I
am not sure that other geologists would agree with me.

crack in its weakest spot, the heavy side going down, and the light side
rising." In discussing this view Lyell writes {Principles, Vol. II.
Ed. X., p. 229), " This hypothesis appears to me of very partial appli-
cation, for active volcanoes, even such as are on the borders of continents,
are rarely situated where great deltas have been forming, whether in
Pliocene or post-Tertiary times. The number, also, of active volcanoes
in oceanic islands is very great, not only in the Pacific, but equally in the
Atlantic, where no load of coral matter .... can cause a partial
weighting and pressing down of a supposed flexible crust."

1 Volcanic Islands, p. 128 : "The islands, moreover, of some of the
small volcanic groups, which thus border continents, are placed in lines
related to those along which the adjoining shores of the continents
trend " [see fig. 5].

3 Geological Observations on South America, London, 1846, p. 185.

•

3> *

\

9 > \»"

V.:

\

fJL

i'

& - ,.. '*

n

<?

^y _ <z*^^

i

113

144 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 494 You repeatedly speak as if the pouring out of lava, etc.,
from volcanoes actually caused the subsidence of an adjoining
area. I quite agree that areas undergoing opposite move-
ments are somehow connected ; but volcanic outbursts must,
I think, be looked at as mere accidents in the swelling up
of a great dome or surface of plutonic rocks, and there seems
no more reason to conclude that such swelling or elevation in
mass is the cause of the subsidence, than that the subsidence
is the cause of the elevation, which latter view is indeed held
by some geologists. I have regretted to find so little about
the habits of the many animals which you have seen.

Letter 495 To C. Lyell.

Down, May 20th, 1869.

I have been much pleased to hear that you have been
looking at my S. American book,1 which I thought was as
completely dead and gone as any pre-Cambrian fossil. You are
right in supposing that my memory about American geology
has grown very hazy. I remember, however, a paper on the
Cordillera by D. Forbes,2 with splendid sections, which I
saw in MS., but whether " referred " to me or lent to me I
cannot remember. This would be well worth your looking
to, as I think he both supports and criticises my views. In
Ormerod's Index to the Journal,3 which I do not possess,
you would, no doubt, find a reference ; but I think the
sections would be worth borrowing from Forbes. Domeyko 4
has published in the Comptes Rendus papers on Chili, but not,
as far as I can remember, on the structure of the mountains.

1 Geological Observations on South America, London, 1846.

2 " Geology of Bolivia and South Peru," by Forbes, Quart. Journ.
Geol. Soc, Vol. XVII., pp. 7-62, 1861. Forbes admits that there is "the
fullest evidence of elevation of the Chile coast since the arrival of the
Spaniards. North of Arica, if we accept the evidence of M. d'Orbigny
and others, the proof of elevation is much more decided ; and conse-
quently it may be possible that here, as is the case about Lima, according
to Darwin, the elevation may have taken place irregularly in places ..."
(Joe. eit., p. 11).

3 Classified Index to the Transactions, Proceedings and Quarterly
Journal of tlui Geological Society.

4 Reference is made by Forbes in his paper on Bolivia and Peru to
the work of Ignacio Domeyko on the geology of Chili. Several papers
by this author were published in the Annates des Mines between 1840
and 1869, also in the Comptes Rendus of 186 1, 1864, etc.

1840 — 1881] EARTH-M0VEMEN1 [45

Forbes, however, would know. What you say about the 1
plications being steepest in the central and generally hi
part of the range is conclusive to my mind that there ha
been the chief axis of disturbance. The lateral thrusting
has always appeared to me fearfully perplexing. I remember
formerly thinking that all lateral flexures probably occurred
deep beneath the surface, and have been brought into view
by an enormous superincumbent mass having been denuded.
If a large and deep box were filled with layers of damp
paper or clay, and a blunt wedge was slowly driven up from
beneath, would not the layers above it and on both sides
become greatly convoluted, whilst those towards the top
would be only slightly arched ? When I spoke of the Ant:
being comparatively recent, I suppose that I referred to the
absence of the older formations. In looking to my volume,
which I have not done fur many years, I came upon a
passage (p. 232) which would be worth your looking at, if
you have ever felt perplexed, as I often was, about the sources
of volcanic rocks in mountain chains. You have stirred up
old memories, and at the risk of being a bore I should like to
call your attention to another point which formerly perplexed
me much — viz. the presence of basaltic dikes in most great
granitic areas. I cannot but think the explanation given at
p. 123 of my Volcanic Islands is the true one.1

To Victor CarUS.8 Letter 496

Down, March 2lst, iv_
The very kind expressions in your letter have gratified me
deeply.

1 quite forget what I said about my ical works, but

the papers referred to in your letter are the right ones. I
enclose a list with those which are certainly not worth trans-
lating marked with a red line ; but whether those which are

1 On p. 123 of the Geol on //; ids

visited during the Voyage of H. M.S. /■' 44, Darwin quotes several

instances of greenstone and basaltic dikes intersecting granitic and allied
metamorphic rocks. He suggests that these dikes "have been funned
by fissures penetrating into partially cooled rocks of the granitic and
metamorphic series, and by their more fluid parts, consisting chiefly of
hornblende oozing out. and being sucked into such assures."

8 Professor Victor Cams translated several of Mr. Darwin's books
into German (see Life and Letters, III., p.

VOL. II. 10

146 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 496 not thus marked with a red line are worth translation you
will have to decide. I think much more highly of my book
on Volcanic Islands since Mr. Judd, by far the best judge on
the subject in England, has, as I hear, learnt much from it.

I think the short paper on the " formation of mould " is
worth translating, though, if I have time and strength, I hope
to write another and longer paper on the subject.

I can assure you that the idea of any one translating my
books better than you never even momentarily crossed my
mind. I am glad that you can give a fairly good account of
your health, or at least that it is not worse.

Letter 497 To T. Mellard Reade.

London, Dec. 9th, 1880.

I am sorry to say that I do not return home till the middle
of next week, and as I order no pamphlets to be forwarded to
me by post, I cannot return the Geolog. Mag} until my return
home, nor could my servants pick it out of the multitude
which come by the post.

As I remarked in a letter to a friend, with whom I was
discussing Wallace's last book,2 the subject to which you
refer seems to me a most perplexing one. The fact which
I pointed out many years ago, that all oceanic islands are
volcanic (except St. Paul's, and now this is viewed by some
as the nucleus of an ancient volcano), seems to me a strong
argument that no continent ever occupied the great oceans.3
Then there comes the statement from the Challenger that all
sediment is deposited within one or two hundred miles from
the shores, though I should have thought this rather doubtful
with respect to great rivers like the Amazons.

The chalk formerly seemed to me the best case of an
ocean having extended where a continent now stands ; but it
seems that some good judges deny that the chalk is an oceanic

1 Article on " Oceanic Islands," by T. Mellard Reade, Geol. Mag.,
Vol. VIII., p. 75, 1881.

2 Wallace's Island Life, 1880.

3 " During my investigations on coral reefs I had occasion to consult
the works of many voyagers, and I was invariably struck with the fact
that, with rare exceptions, the innumerable islands scattered through, the
Pacific, Indian, and Atlantic Oceans were composed either of volcanic or
of modern coral rocks " {Geological Observations on Volcanic Islands, etc.,
Ed. II., 1876, p. 140).

1840-1881] EARTH-MOVEMENTS 1-17

deposit. On the whole, I lean to the side that the continents Letter
have since Cambrian times occupied approximately their
present positions. But, as 1 have said, the question seem
difficult one, and the more it is discussed the better.

To A. Agassi/..1 ter 498

Down, Jan. 1st, 1 i

I must write a line or two to thank you much for having
written to me so long a letter on coral reefs at a time when
you must have been so busy. Is it not difficult to avoid
believing that the wonderful elevation in the West Indies
must have been accompanied by much subsidence, notwith-
standing the state of Florida?-' When reflecting in old days
on the configuration of our continents, the position of moun-
tain chains, and especially on the long-continued supply of
sediment over the same areas, I used to think (as probably
have man)r other persons) that areas of elevation and subsi-
dence must as a general rule be separated by a single great
line of fissure, or rather of several closely adjoining lines of
fissure. I mention this because, when looking within more
recent times at charts with the depths of the sea marked by
different tints, there seems to be some connection between
the profound depths of the ocean and the trends of the
nearest, though distant, continents ; and I have often wished
that some one like yourself, to whom the subject was familiar,
would speculate on it.

P.S. — I do hope that you will re-urge your views about the
reappearance of old characters,3 for, as far as I can judge,
the most important views are often neglected unless they are
urged and re-urged.

I am greatly indebted to you for sending me very many
most valuable works published at your institution.

1 Alexander Agassiz, of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard
College, Cambridge, U.S.A.

* The Florida reefs cannot be explained by subsidence. Alexander
Agassiz, who has described these reefs in detail {Three Cruises of t lie
U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Steamer Wake, 2 vols., London, i-
shows that the southern extremity of the peninsula " is of comparatively
recent growth, consisting of concentric barrier-reefs, which have been
gradually converted into land by the accumulation of intervening mud-
flats " (see also Appendix II., p. 2S7, to Darwin's Coral Keep, by T. G.
Bonney, Ed. in., 18S9.)

3 See Life and Letters, III., pp. 245, 240.

I48 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

II. Ice-Action.
1841-82.

Letter 499 To C. Lyell.

[1841.]
Your extract has set me puzzling very much, and as I
find I am better at present for not going out, you must let me
unload my mind on paper. I thought everything so beauti-
fully clear about glaciers, but now your case and Agassiz's
statement about the cavities in the rock formed by cascades *
in the glaciers, shows me I don't understand their structure
at all. I wish out of pure curiosity I could make it out.

If the glacier travelled on (and it certainly does travel
on), and the water kept cutting back over the edge of the ice,
there would be a great slit in front of the cascade ; if the
water did not cut back, the whole hollow and cascade, as you
say, must travel on ; and do you suppose the next season
it falls down some crevice higher up ? In any case, how in
the name of Heaven can it make a hollow in solid rock, which
surely must be a work of many years ? I must point out
another fact which Agassiz does not, as it appears to me,
leave very clear. He says all the blocks on the surface of
the glaciers are angular, and those in the moraines rounded,
yet he says the medial moraines whence the surface rocks
come and are a part [of], are only two lateral moraines
united. Can he refer to terminal moraines alone when he
says fragments in moraines are rounded ? What a capital
book Agassiz's is. In [reading] all the early part I gave up
entirely the Jura blocks, and was heartily ashamed of my
appendix 2 (and am so still of the manner in which I
presumptuously speak of Agassiz), but it seems by his own

1 Etudes sur les Glaciers, by Louis Agassiz, 1840, contains a descrip-
tion of cascades (p. 343), and " des cavites interieures " (p. 348).

2 " M. Agassiz has lately written on the subject of the glaciers and
boulders of the Alps. He clearly proves, as it appears to me, that the
presence of the boulders on the Jura cannot be explained by any dtfbdcle,
or by the power of ancient glaciers driving before them moraines. . . .
M. Agassiz also denies that they were transported by floating ice."
(Voyages of the Adve7iture and Beagle, Vol. III., 1839: Journal and
Remarks: Addenda, p. 617.)

E84i — 1882] [( E-ACTION 149

conf ision that ordinary glaciers could not have transported Letter 499
the blocks there, and if an hypothesis is to be introduced
the sea is much simpler ; floating ice seems to me to account
for everything as well as, and sometimes better than the
solid glaciers. The hollows, however, formed by the ice-
cascades appear to me the strongest hostile fact, though
certainly, as you said, one sees hollow round cavities on
present rock-beaches.

I am glad to observe that Agassiz does not pretend that
direction of scratches is hostile to floating ice. By the way,
how do you and Buckland account for the " tails " of diluvium
in Scotland?1 I thought in my appendix this made out
the strongesl argument for rocks having been scratched by
floating ice.

Some facts about boulders in Chiloe will, I think, in a
very small degree elucidate some parts of Jura case. What

;rand new feature all this ice work is in Geology! I low
old Hutton would have stared ! -

I ought to be ashamed of myself for scribbling on so.
Talking of shame, I have sent a copy of my Journal3 with
very humble note to Agassiz, as an apology for the tone I
used, though I say, I daresay he has never seen my appendix,
or would care at all about it.

I did not suppose my note about Glen Roy could have
been of any use to you — I merely scribbled what came
uppermost. 1 made one great oversight, as you would
perceive. 1 forgot the Glacier theory: if a glacier most
gradually disappeared from mouth of Spean Valley [this]
would account for buttresses of shingle below lowest shelf.
The difficulty I put about the ice-barrier of the middle Glen

1 Mr. Darwin speaks of the tails of diluvium in Scotland extending
from the protected side of a hill, of which the opposite side, being the
direction from which the ice came, is marked by grooves and striae
«'/., pp.

2 James Hutton (1726-97), the author of a Theory of the Earth. Sir
Charles Lyell speaks of the Huttonian theory as being characterised
by "the exclusion of all causes not supposed to belong to the present
order of Nature" id. yell's Principles, ed. XII., vol. I., p. 76, 1875). Sir
Archibald Geikie has recently edited the third volume ofHutton's Tk

of the Earth, printed by the Geological Society, 1899. See also
Founders of Geology, by Sir Archibald Geikie ; London, 1S97.
8 Journal and Remarks, 1832-36. See note 2, p, 14S.

150 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 499 Roy shelf1 keeping so long at exactly same level does cer-
tainly appear to me insuperable.

What a wonderful fact this breakdown of old Niagara is.
How it disturbs the calculations about lengths of time before
the river would have reached the lakes.

I hope Mrs. Lyell will read this to you, then I shall trust
for forgiveness for having scribbled so much. I should have
sent back Agassiz sooner, but my servant has been very
unwell. Emma is going on pretty well.

My paper on South American boulders and " till," which
latter deposit is perfectly characterised in Tierra del Fuego,
is progressing rapidly.2

I much like the term post-Pliocene, and will use it in my
present paper several times.

P.S. — I should have thought that the most obvious objec-
tion to the marine-beach theory for Glen Roy would be the
limited extension of the shelves. Though certainly this is
not a valid one, after an intermediate one, only half a mile
in length, and nowhere else appearing, even in the valley
of Glen Roy itself, has been shown to exist.

Letter 500 To C. Lyell.

1842.

I had some talk with Murchison, who has been on a flying

visit into Wales, and he can see no traces of glaciers, but only

of the trickling of water and of the roots of the heath. It is

enough to make an extraneous man think Geology from

beginning to end a work of imagination, and not founded on

observation. Lonsdale,3 I observe, pays Buckland4 and myself

1 For a description of the shelves or parallel roads in Glen Roy see
Darwin's " Observations on the Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, etc.," Phil.
Trans. R. Soc, 1839, p. 39 ; also pp. 171 et scq. of this volume.

8 "On the Distribution of the Erratic Boulders and on the Contem-
poraneous Unstratified Deposits of South America," Trans. Geol. Soc,
Vol. VI., p. 415, 1842.

3 William Lonsdale (1 794-1 871) obtained a commission in the 4th
Regiment at the age of sixteen, and served at Salamanca and Waterloo.
From 1829 to 1842 he held the office of Assistant-Secretary and Curator
of the Geological Society. Mr. Lonsdale contributed important papers
on the Devonian System, the Oolitic Rocks, and on palasontological
subjects. (Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc, Vol. XXVIII., p. xxxv., 1872.)

4 William Buckland (1784- 18 56) became a scholar of Corpus Christi
College, Oxford, in 1801 ; in 1808 he was elected Fellow and ordained

1841 1882] ICE- ACTION 151

the compliment of thinking Murchison not seeing as worth Letter 500

nothing ; but I confess I am astonished, so glaringly clear

after two or three days did the evidence appear to me. Have

you seen last New li<{ in. Phil, fount.} it is ice and glaciers

almost from beginning to end. Agassiz8 says he saw (and ha

laid down) the two lowest terraces of Glen Roy in the valley

of the Spcan, opposite mouth of Glen Roy itself, where no one

else has seen them. I carefully examined that spot, owing to

the sheep tracks [being] nearly but not quite parallel to the

terrace. So much, again, for difference of observation. I do

not pretend to say who is right.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 501

■.n, Oct. 12th, 1849.

I was heartily glad to get your last letter ; but on

my life your thanks for my very few and very dull

letters quite scalded me. I have been very indolent and

selfish in not having oftcner written to you and kept my ears

priest. Buckland travelled on horseback over a large part of the south-
west of England, guided by the geological maps of William Smith. In
1813 he was appointed to the Chair of Mineralogy at Oxford, and soon
afterwards to a newly created Readership in Geology. In 1S23 the
Reliquiae Diluviance was published, a work which aimed at supporting
the records of revelation by scientific investigations. In 1S24 Buckland
was President of the Geological Society, and in the following year he left
Oxford for the living of Stoke Charity, near Whitchurch, Hampshire.
The Bridgewater Treatise appeared in 1836. In 1845 Buckland was
appointed Dean of Westminster ; he was again elected president of the
Geological Society in 1840, and in 184S he received the Wollaston medal.
An entertaining account of Buckland is given in Mr. Tuckwell's Remi-
niscences of Oxford, London, 1900, p. 35, with a reproduction of the
portrait from Gordon's Life of Buckland.

1 The Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal, Vol. XXXIII. (April
October), 1842, contains papers by Sir G. S. .Mackenzie, Prof. H. G. Brown,
Jean de Charpentier, Roderick Murchison, Loui-- A all dealing with

glaciers or ice ; also letters to the Editor relating to Prof. Forbes' account
of his recent observations on Glaciers, and a paper by Charles Darwin
entitled " Notes on the Effects produced by the Ancient Glaciers of
Carnarvonshire, and on the Boulders transported by Floating Ice."

3 The Glacial Theory and its Recent Progress, by Louis Agassiz, he.
cit., p. 216. Agassiz describes the parallel terraces on the flanks of Glen
Roy and Glen Spean ^p. 230), and expresses himself convinced "that the
Glacial theory alone satisfies all the exigencies of the phenomenon " ot
the parallel road.-,.

152 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 501 open for news which would have interested you ; but I have
not forgotten you. Two days after receiving your letter,
there was a short leading notice about you in the Gardefiers'
Chronicle ; l in which it is said you have discovered a noble
crimson rose and thirty rhododendrons. I must heartily
congratulate you on these discoveries, which will interest the
public ; and I have no doubt that you will have made plenty
of most interesting botanical observations. This last letter
shall be put with all your others, which are now safe together.
I am very glad that you have got minute details about the
terraces in the valleys : your description sounds curiously like
the terraces in the Cordillera of Chili ; these latter, however, are
single in each valley ; but you will hereafter see a description
of these terraces in my Geology of S. America? At the
end of your letter you speak about giving ,up Geology, but you
must not think of it ; I am sure your observations will be
very interesting. Your account of the great dam in the
Yangma valley is most curious, and quite full ; I find that I
did not at all understand its wonderful structure in your
former letter. Your notion of glaciers pushing detritus into
deep fiords (and ice floating fragments on their channels), is
in many respects new to me ; but I cannot help believing
your dam is a lateral moraine : I can hardly persuade myself3
that the remains of floating ice action, at a period so
immensely remote as when the Himalaya stood at a low level
in the sea, would now be distinguishable. Your not having
found scored boulders and solid rocks is an objection both to
glaciers and floating ice ; for it is certain that both produce
such. I believe no rocks escape scoring, polishing and
mammillation in the Alps, though some lose it easily when
exposed. Are you familiar with appearance of ice-action ?
If I understand rightly, you object to the great dam having

1 The Gardeners' Chronicle, 1849, p. 628.

2 Geological Observations, pp. 10 et passim.

3 Hooker's Himalayan Journals, Vol. II., p. 121,1854. In describing
certain deposits in the Lachoong valley, Hooker writes : " Glaciers
might have forced immense beds of gravel into positions that would
dam up lakes between the ice and the flanks of the valley" (p. 121).
In a footnote he adds : " We are still very ignorant of many details of
ice action, and especially of the origin of many enormous deposits which
are not true moraines." Such deposits are referred to as occurring in
the Yangma valley.

1841 — 1882] ICE-Ai TIO 153

been produced by a glacier, owing to the dryness of the lateral Letter 501
valley and general infrequency of glaciers in Himalaya ; but
pray observe that we may fairly 1 from what we see in Europe)

assume that the climate was formerly colder in India, and
when the land stood at a lower height more snow might have
fallen. Oddly enough, 1 am now inclined to believe that
I saw a gigantic moraine crossing a valley, and formerly
causing a lake above it in one of the great valleys (Valle
del Ycso) of the Cordillera : it is a mountain of detritus,
which has always puzzled me. If you have any further
opportunities, do look for scores on steep faces of rock ; and
here and there remove turf or matted parts to have a look.
Again I beg, do not give up Geology : — I wish you had
Agassiz's work ' and plates on Glaciers. I am extremely sorry
that the Rajah, ill luck to him, has prevented your crossing to
Thibet ; but you seem to have seen most interesting
country : one is astonished to hear of Fuegian climate in
India. I heard from the 'Sabines that you were thinking of
giving up Borneo ; I hope that this report may prove true.

To C. Lycll. Letter 502

Down, May 8th [1855].

The notion you refer to was published in the Geological
Journal: Vol. 1 Y. (1848), p. 315, with reference to all the cases
which I could collect of boulders apparently higher than the
parent rock.

The argument of probable proportion of rock dropped by
sea ice compared to land glaciers is new to me. I have often
thought of the idea of the viscosity and enormous momentum
of great icebergs, and still think that the notion I pointed out
in appendix3 to Ramsay's paper is probable, and can hardly
help being applicable in some cases. I wonder whether the
Phil. Journal [Magazine?] ' would publish it. if I could get

1 Etudes sur les Glaciers. L. Agassiz, Neuchatel, 1840.

1 " On the TransportaJ of Erratic Boulders from a lower to a higher
Level." By C. Darwin.

:! The paper by Ramsay has no appendix ; probably, therefore,
Mr. Darwin's notes were published separately as a paper in the Phil.
Mag.

4 " On the Power of Icebergs to make rectilinear, uniformly-directed
grooves across a Submarine Undulatory Surfa By C. Darwin, Phil,

Mag., Vol. X., p. 96, 1855.

154 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 502 it from Ramsay or the Geological Society. If you chance to
meet Ramsay will you ask him whether he has it ? I think it
would perhaps be worth while just to call the N. American
geologists' attention to the idea ; but it is not worth
any trouble. I am tremendously busy with all sorts of
experiments. By the way, Hopkins at the Geological Society
seemed to admit some truth in the idea of scoring by (viscid)
icebergs. If the Geological Society takes so much [time] to
judge of truth of notions, as you were telling me in regard
to Ramsay's Permian glaciers,1 it will be as injurious to
progress as the French Institut.

Letter 503 To J. D. Hooker.

Cliff Cottage, Bournemouth, [Sept.] 21st [1862].
I am especially obliged to you for sending me Haast's 2
communications. They are very interesting and grand about
glacial and drift or marine glacial. I see he alludes to the
whole southern hemisphere. I wonder whether he has read
the Origin. Considering your facts on the Alpine plants of
N. Zealand and remarks, I am particularly glad to hear of the
geological evidence of glacial action. I presume he is sure
to collect and send over the mountain rat of which he speaks.
I long to know what it is. A frog and rat together would, to
my mind, prove former connection of New Zealand to some
continent ; for I can hardly suppose that the Polynesians
introduced the rat as game, though so esteemed in the
Friendly Islands. Ramsay sent me his paper3 and asked my
opinion on it. I agree with you and think highly of it. I
cannot doubt that it is to a large extent true ; my only doubt
is, that in a much disturbed country, I should have thought
that some depressions, and consequently lakes, would almost

1 " On the Occurrence of angular, sub-angular, polished, and striated
Fragments and Boulders in the Permian Breccia of Shropshire, Worcester-
shire, etc.; and on the Probable Existence of Glaciers and Icebergs in the
Permian Epoch." By A. C. Ramsay, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc, Vol. XL,
p. 185, 1855.

2 Sir Julius von Haast (1824-87), published several papers on the
Geology of New Zealand, with special reference to glacial phenomena.
(Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc, Vol. XXL, pp. 130, 133, 1865 ; Vol. XXIII. ,
p. 342, 1867.)

3 " On the Glacial Origin of certain Lakes in Switzerland, etc.," Quart.
Journ. Geol. Soc, Vol. XVIII., p. 185, 1862.

1S41 -1882] ICE-A< riON 155

certainly have been left. I su g< -ted a careful consideration Letter 503

of mountainous tropical countries such as Brazil, peninsula of
India, etc. ; if lakes are there, [they are] very rare. I should
fully subscribe to Ramsay's views.

What presumption, as it seems to me, in the Council of
Geological Society that it hesitated to publish the paper.

W'c return home on the 30th. I have made up [my] mind,
if I can keep up my courage, to start on the Saturday for
Cambridge, and stay the last few days of the [British]
Association there. I do so hope that you may be there then.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 504

Nov. 3rd [1S64].

When 1 wrote to you I had not read Ramsay.1 How
capitally it is written ! It seems that there is nothing for
style like a man's dander being put up. I think I agree
largely with you about denudation — but the rocky-lake-basin
theory is the part which interests me at present. It seems
impossible to know how much to attribute to ice, running
water, and sea. I did not suppose that Ramsay would deny
that mountains had been thrown up irregularly, and that the
depressions would become valleys. The grandest valh
I ever saw were at Tahiti, and here I do not believe ice
has done anything ; anyhow there were no erratics. I said
in my S. American Geology* that rivers deepen and the sea
widens valleys, and I am inclined largely to stick to this,
adding ice to water. I am sorry to hear that Tyndall has
grown dogmatic. H. Wedgwood 3 was saying the other day
that T.'s writings and speaking gave him the idea of intense
conceit. I hope it is not so, for he is a grand man of science.

. . .1 have had a prospectus and letter from Andrew
Murray'1 asking me for suggestions. I think this almost shows

1 " On the Erosion of Valleys ami Lakes : a Reply to Sir Roderick
Murchison's Anniversary Address to the Geographical Society.'- Phil.
Mag., Vol. XXVIII., p. 293, 1S64.

s " Finally, the conclusion at which I have arrived with respect to the
relative powers of rain and sea-water on the land is, that the latter is by
far the most efficient agent, and that its chief tendency is to widen the
valleys, whilst torrents and rivers tend to deepen them and to remove the
wreck of the sea's destroying action" (Geol. Observations, pp. 06, 67).

3 Hensleigh Wedgwood, brother-indaw to Charles Darwin.

' See Vol. II., Letters 379, 3S4, etc.

156 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 504 he is not fit for the subject, as he gives me no idea what his
book will be, excepting that the printed paper shows that all
animals and all plants of all groups are to be treated of! Do
you know anything of his knowledge ?

In about a fortnight I shall have finished, except con-
cluding chapter, my book on Variation under Domestication ; x
but then I have got to go over the whole again, and this will
take me very many months. I am able to work about two
hours daily.

Letter 505 To J. D. Hooker.

Down [July, 1865].

I was glad to read your article on Glaciers, etc., in York-
shire. You seem to have been struck with what most deeply
impressed me at Glen Roy (wrong as I was on the whole
subject) — viz. the marvellous manner in which every detail
of surface of land had been preserved for an enormous period.
This makes me a little sceptical whether Ramsay, Jukes, etc.,
are not a little overdoing sub-aerial denudation.

In the same Reader 2 there was a striking article on
English and Foreign Men of Science,3 and I think unjust
to England except in pure Physiology ; in biology Owen and
R. Brown ought to save us, and in Geology we are most rich.

It is curious how we are reading the same books. We
intend to read Lecky and certainly to re-read Buckle — which
latter I admired greatly before. I am heartily glad you like
Lubbock's book so much. It made me grieve his taking to
politics, and though I grieve that he has lost his election, yet
I suppose, now that he is once bitten, he will never give up

1 Published in 1868.

2 Sir J. D. Hooker wrote to Darwin, July 13th, 1865, from High Force
Inn, Middleton, Teesdale : " I am studying the moraines all day long
with as much enthusiasm as I am capable of after lying in bed till nine,
eating heavy breakfasts, and looking forward to dinner as the summuni
bonum of existence." The result of his work, under the title "Moraines
of the Tees Valley," appeared in the Reader (July 15th, 1865, p. 71),
of which Huxley was one of the managers or committee-men, and
Norman Lockyer was scientific editor {Life and Letters of T. H. Huxley,
I., p. 211). Hooker describes the moraines and other evidence of glacial
action in the upper part of the Tees valley, and speaks of the effect of
glaciers in determining the present physical features of the country.

3 "British and Foreign Science," The Reader, loc. at., p. 61. The
writer of the article asserts the inferiority of English scientific workers.

1841— 1882] ICE-Al TION

politics, and science is done for. Many men can make fair Letter 505
M.l'.s ; ;md how few can work in science like him!

I have been reading a pamphlet by Yerlot on " Variation
of Flowers," which seems to me very good ; but I doubt
whether it would be worth your reading. It was published
originally in the Journal (fl/ort., and so perhaps you have
seen it. It is a very good plan this republishing separately
for sake of foreigners buying, and I wish I had tried to get
permission of Linn. Soc. for my Climbing paper, but it is
now too late.

Do not forget that you have my paper on hybridism, by-
Max W'ichura.1

I hope you are returned to your work, refreshed like a
giant by your huge breakfasts. How unlucky you are about
contagious complaints with your children !

I keep very weak, and had much sickness yesterday, but
am stronger this morning.

Can you remember how we ever first met?2 It was in
Park Street ; but what brought us together ? I have been
re-reading a few old letters of yours, and my heart is very
warm towards you.

To C. Lyell. Letter 506

Down, March Sth [1866].
In a letter from Sir Joseph Hooker to Mr. Darwin on Feb. 21st,
1866, the following passage occurs : " I wish I could explain to you
my crude notions as to the Glacial period and your position towards it.
I suppose I hold this doctrine : that there was a Glacial period, but
that it was not one of universal cold, because I think that the
existing distribution of glaciers is sufficiently demonstrative of the
proposition that by comparatively slight redispositions of sea and
land, and perhaps axis of globe, you may account for all the leading
palaeontological phenomena." This letter was sent by Mr. Darwin to
Sir Charles Lyell, and the latter, writing on March 1st, 1866, expresses
his belief that "the whole globe must at times have been superficially
cooler. Still," he adds, "during extreme excentricity the sun would
make great efforts to compensate in perihelion for the chill of a long
winter in aphelion in one hemisphere, and a cool summer in the
other. I think you will turn out to be right in regard to meridional
lines of mountain-chains by which the migrations across the equator
took place while there was contemporaneous tropical heat of certain

1 W'ichura. M. E., " L'Hybridisation dans le rcgne vegetal etudiee
sur les Saules," Arch, Set. Phys. Nat., XX111., p. 129, 1. -
* See Life and Letters. II., p. 19.

158 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 506 lowlands, where plants requiring heat and moisture were saved from
extinction by the heat of the earth's surface, which was stored up
in perihelion, being prevented from radiating off freely into space by
a blanket of aqueous vapour caused by the melting of ice and snow.
But though I am inclined to profit by Croll's maximum excentricity for
the glacial period, I consider it quite subordinate to geographical causes
or the relative position of land and sea and the abnormal excess of land
in polar regions." In another letter (March 5th, 1866) Lyell writes:
" In the beginning of Hooker's letter to you he speaks hypothetically of
a change in the earth's axis as having possibly co-operated with redis-
tribution of land and sea in causing the cold of the Glacial period. Now,
when we consider how extremely modern, zoologically and botanically,
the Glacial period is proved to be, I am shocked at any one introducing,
with what I may call so much levity, so organic a change as a deviation
in the axis of the planet . . ." (see Lyell's Principles, 1875, Chap. XIII.;
also a letter to Sir Joseph Hooker printed in the Life of Sir Charles Lyell,
Vol. II., p. 410.)

Many thanks for your interesting letter. From the serene
elevation of my old age I look down with amazement at your
youth, vigour, and indomitable energy. With respect to
Hooker and the axis of the earth, I suspect he is too much
overworked to consider now any subject properly. His mind
is so acute and critical that I always expect to hear a torrent
of objections to anything proposed ; but he is so candid that
he often comes round in a year or two. I have never thought
on the causes of the Glacial period, for I feel that the subject
is beyond me ; but though I hope you will own that I have
generally been a good and docile pupil to you, yet I must
confess that I cannot believe in change of land and water,
being more than a subsidiary agent.1 I have come to this
conclusion from reflecting on the geograph. distribution of the
inhabitants of the sea on the opposite sides of our continents
and of the inhabitants of the continents themselves.

1 In Chapter XI. of the Origin, Ed. v., 1869, p. 451, Darwin
discusses Croll's theory, and is clearly inclined to trust in Croll's con-
clusion that " whenever the northern hemisphere passes through a cold
period the temperature of the southern hemisphere is actually raised . . ."
In Ed. VI., p. 336, he expresses his faith even more strongly. Mr. Darwin
apparently sent his MS. on the climate question, which was no doubt
prepared for a new edition of the Origin, to Sir Charles. The arrival
of the MS. is acknowledged in a letter from Lyell on March 10th, 1866
{Life of Sir Charles Lyell, II. p. 408), in which the writer says that
he is " more than ever convinced that geographical changes . . . are
the principal and not the subsidiary causes."

1841—1882] noN

To C Lyell. Uum 5°7

n, Sept. 8th [i>

Many thanks for the pamphlet, which was returned this
morning. I was very glad to read it, though chiefly as a
psychological curiosity. I quite follow you in thinking
Agassiz glacier-mad.1 His evidence reduces itself to sup-
posed moraines, which would be difficult to trace in a
forest-clad country ; and with respect to boulders, these are
not said to be angular, and their source cannot be known
in a country so imperfectly explored. When I was at Rio,
I was continually astonished at the depth (sometimes 100 ft.)
to which the granitic rocks were decomposed in situ, and this
soft matter would easily give rise to great alluvial accumula-
tion-; ; 1 well remember finding it difficult to draw a line
between the alluvial matter and the softened rock in situ.
What a splendid imagination Agassiz has, and how energetic
he is ! What capital work he would have done, if he had
sucked in your Principles with his mother's milk. It is
wonderful that he should have written such wild nonsense
about the valley of the Amazon ; yet not so wonderful when
one remembers that he once maintained before the British
Association that the chalk was all deposited at once.

With respect to the insects of Chili, I knew only from
Bates that the species of C ambus showed no special affinity
to northern species ; from the great difference of climate and
vegetation I should not have expected that many insects
would have shown such affinity. It is more remarkable that
the birds on the broad and lofty Cordillera of Tropical S.
America show no affinity with European species. The little
power of diffusion with birds has often struck me as a \v. st
singular fact — even more singular than the great power of

1 Agassiz's pamphlet 1 of the Am is referred to by Lyell

in a letter written to Bunbury in September, 1866 /
Lyell^ II., p. 409): "Agassiz has written an interesting paper on the
'Geology of the Amazons,' but, I regret to say, he has gone wild about
glaciers, and has actually announced his opinion that the whole of the
great valley, down to its mouth in hit. o , was filled by ice. . .
Agassiz published a paper, "Observations Geologiques faites dans la
Vallee de FAmazone," in the Comptes Rendus, Vol. LXIV.. p. 1269, 1
See also a letter addressed to M. Marcou, published in the Bull. S
Ceol. France. Vol. XXIV., p. 100. 1S66.

160 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 507 diffusion with plants. Remember that we hope to see you in
the autumn.

P.S. — There is a capital paper in the September number
of Annals and Magazine, translated from Pictet and Humbert,
on Fossil Fish of Lebanon,1 but you will, I daresay, have
received the original. It is capital in relation to modification
of species ; I would not wish for more confirmatory facts,
though there is no direct allusion to the modification of
species. Hooker, by the way, gave an admirable lecture at
Nottingham;2 I read it in MS., or rather, heard it I am
glad it will be published, for it was capital.

Sunday morning.

P.S. — I have just received a letter from Asa Gray with the
following passage, so that, according to this, I am the chief
cause of Agassiz's absurd views : —

" Agassiz is back (I have not seen him), and he went at
once down to the National Academy of Sciences, from which
I sedulously keep away, and, I hear, proved to them that the
Glacial period covered the whole continent of America with
unbroken ice, and closed with a significant gesture and the
remark : ' So here is the end of the Darwin theory.' How do
you like that ?

" I said last winter that Agassiz was bent on covering
the whole continent with ice, and that the motive of the
discovery he was sure to make was to make sure that there
should be no coming down of any terrestrial life from Tertiary
or post-Tertiary period to ours. You cannot deny that he has
done his work effectually in a truly imperial way."

Letter 508 T° C LyelL

Down, July 14th, 1868.

Mr. Agassiz's book 3 has been read aloud to me, and I am
wonderfully perplexed what to think about his precise state-
ments of the existence of glaciers in the Ceara Mountains, and

1 "Recent Researches on the Fossil Fishes of Mount Lebanon," Ann.
Mag. Nat. Hist., Vol. XVIII., p. 237, 1866.

2 Sir Joseph Hooker delivered a lecture at the Nottingham meeting
of the British Association (1866) on " Insular Floras," published in the
Gardeners' Chronicle, 1867. See Letters 366 — 377, etc.

3 "Sur la Geologie de FAmazone," by MM. Agassiz and Continho,
Bull. Soc. Geol. France, Vol. XXV., p. 685, 1868. See also A Journey
in Brazil, by Professor and Mrs. Louis Agassiz, Boston, 1868.

1841 — 1S82] [1 E- ACTION 11

about the drift formation near Rio. There is a sad want of Letter 508
details. Thus lie never mentii ns whether any of the blocks
arc angular, nor whether the embedded rounded boulders,
which cannot all be disint- I, are scored. Yet how

can so experienced an observer as A. be deceived about
lateral and terminal moraines ? If there really were glaciers
in the Ccara Mountains, it seems to me one of the most
important facts in the history of the inorganic and organic
world ever observed. Whether true or not, it will be widely
believed, and until finally decided will greatly interfere with
future progress on many points. I have made these remarks
in the hope that you will coincide. If so, do you think it
would be possible to persuade some known man, such as
Ramsay, or, what would be far better, some two men, to go
out for a summer trip, which would be in man)- respects
delightful, for the sole object of observing these phenomena
in the Ccara Mountains, and if possible also near Rio? I
would gladly put my name down for jCs° in aid of the
expense of travelling. Do turn this over in your mind. I
am so very sorry not to have seen you this summer, but for
the last three weeks I have been good for nothing, and have
had to stop almost all work. I hope we may meet in the
autumn.

To James Croll.1 Lettei 509

I >ow . 24th, 1 •

I have read with the greatest interest the last paper which
you have kindly sc.it me." If we are to admit that all the

1 James Croll (1821-90) was born at Little Whitefield, in Perthshire.
After a short time passed in the village s< hool, lie was apprenticed as a
wheelwright, but lack of strength compelled him to seek less arduous
employment, ami he became agent to an insurance company. In 185
he was appointed keeper in the Andersonian University and Museum,
Glasgow. His first contribution to science was published in the .
sophical Magazine iox [861, and tin-, was followed in 18.64 by the essay
"On the Physical Cause of the Change of Climate during the Glacial
Period." From 1867 to iSS 1 he held an appointment in the department
of the Geological Survey in Edinburgh. In 1876 Croll was elected a
Fellow of the Royal Society. His last work. The I Basis of

Evolution, was published in the year of his death. {Nature, Vol. XLIII.,
p. 1S0, 1S91.)

■' Croll discussed the power of icebergs as grinding and striating
agents in the latter part of a paper (" On Geological Time, and the

VOL. II. 1 1

162 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 509 scored rocks throughout the more level parts of the United
States result from true glacier action, it is a most wonderful
conclusion, and you certainly make out a very strong case ;
so I suppose I must give up one more cherished belief. But
my object in writing is to trespass on your kindness and ask
a question, which I daresay I could answer for myself by
reading more carefully, as I hope hereafter to do, all your
papers ; but I shall feel much more confidence in a brief reply
from you. Am I right in supposing that you believe that
the glacial periods have always occurred alternately in the
northern and southern hemispheres, so that the erratic
deposits which I have described in the southern parts of
America, and the glacial work in New Zealand, could not
have been simultaneous with our Glacial period ? From the
glacial deposits occurring all round the northern hemisphere,
and from such deposits appearing in S. America to be as
recent as in the north, and lastly, from there being some
evidence of the former lower descent of glaciers all along the
Cordilleras, I inferred that the whole world was at this period
cooler. It did not appear to me justifiable without distinct
evidence to suppose that the N. and S. glacial deposits
belonged to distinct epochs, though it would have been an
immense relief to my mind if I could have assumed that this
had been the case. Secondly, do you believe that during the
Glacial period in one hemisphere the opposite hemisphere
actually becomes warmer, or does it merely retain the same
temperature as before ? I do not ask these questions out of
mere curiosity ; but I have to prepare a new edition of my
Origin of Species, and am anxious to say a few words on this
subject on your authority. I hope that you will excuse my
troubling you.

Letter 510 To J. Croll.

Down, Jan. 31st, 1869.

To-morrow I will return registered your book, which I
have kept so long. I am most sincerely obliged for its loan,

probable Dates of the Glacial and the Upper Miocene Period")
published in the Philosophical Magazine, Vol. XXXV., p. 363, 1868,
Vol. XXXVI., pp. 141, 362, 1868. His conclusion was that the advocates
of the Iceberg theory had formed "too extravagant notions regarding
the potency of floating ice as a striating agent."

1S41-1882] [i E-A< TION 163

and especially for the MS., without which I should have been Letter 510
afraid of making mistakes. If you require it, the MS. shall
be returned. Your results have b< en of more use to me than,
I think, any other set of papers which I can remember. Sir
C. Lyell, who is staying lure, is very unwilling to admit
the greater warmth of the S. hemisphere during the Glacial
period in the X. ; but, as I have told him, this conclusion
which you have arrived at from physical considerations,
explains so well whole classes of facts in distribution, that I
must joyfully accept it ; indeed, 1 go so far as to think that
your conclusion is strengthened by the facts in distribution.
Your discussion on the flowing of the great ice-cap south-
ward is most interesting. I suppose that you have read Mr.
Moseley's1 recent discussion on the force of gravity being
quite insufficient to account for the downward movement of
glaciers : if he is right, do you not think that the unknown
force may make more intelligible the extension of the great
northern ice-cap? Notwithstanding your excellent remarks
on the work which can be effected within a million years,3 I
am greatly troubled at the short duration of the world accord-
ing to Sir \V. Thomson,3 for I require for my theoretical

1 Canon Henry Moseley. "On the Mechanical Impossibility of the
Descent of Glaciers by their Weight only." Proc. R. Soc, Vol. XVII.,
p. 202, 1S69; Phil. Mag., Vol. XXXVII., p. 229, 1869.

* In his paper "On deological Time, and the probable Date of
the Glacial and the Upper Miocene Period'' {Phil. Mag., Vol. XXXV.,
p 363, 1868), Croll endeavours to convey to the mind some idea of what
a million years really is : " Take a narrow strip of paper, an inch broad
or more, and 83 ft. 4 in. in length, and stretch it along the wall of
a large hall, or round the walls of an apartment somewhat over 20 ft.
square. Recall to memory the days oi your boyhood, so as to get some
adequate conception of what a period of a hundred years is. Then mark
off from one of the ends of the strip one-tenth of an inch. The one-tenth
of an inch will then represent a hundred years, and the entire length of
the strip a million of years " {foe. cil., p. 375).

3 In a paper communicated to the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Lord
Kelvin (then Sir William Thomson) stated his belief that the age of our
planet must be more than twenty million oi years, but not more than
four hundred millions of years (Trans. R. i , Vol. XXIII., p. 157,

1861, "On the Secular Cooling of the Earth"). This subject has been
recently dealt with by Sir Archibald Ceikie in his address as President
of the Geological Section of the British Association, 1S99 {Brit. A
Report, Dover Meeting, 1S99, p. 718).

164 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 510 views a very long period before the Cambrian formation. If
it would not trouble you, I should like to hear what you think
of Lyell's remark on the magnetic force which comes from
the sun to the earth: might not this penetrate the crust of the
earth and then be converted into heat ? This would give a
somewhat longer time during which the crust might have been
solid ; and this is the argument on which Sir W. Thomson
seems chiefly to rest. You seem to argue chiefly on the
expenditure of energy of all kinds by the sun, and in this
respect Lyell's remark would have no bearing.

My new edition of the Origin1 will be published, I suppose,
in about two months, and for the chance of your liking to have
a copy I will send one.

P.S. — I wish that you would turn your astronomical know-
ledge to the consideration whether the form of the globe does
not become periodically slightly changed, so as to account for
the many repeated ups and downs of the surface in all parts
of the world. I have always thought that some cosmical
cause would some day be discovered.

Letter 511 To C. Lyell.

Down, July 12th [1872].

I have been glad to see the enclosed and return it. It
seems to me very cool in Agassiz to doubt the recent up-
heaval of Patagonia, without having visited any part; and he
entirely misrepresents me in saying that I infer upheaval
from the form of the land, as I trusted entirely to shells
embedded and on the surface. It is simply monstrous to
suppose that the terraces stretching on a dead level for
leagues along the coast, and miles in breadth, and covered
with beds of stratified gravel, 10 to 30 feet in thickness, are
due to subaerial denudation.

As for the pond of salt-water twice or thrice the density
of sea-water, and nearly dry, containing sea-shells in the same
relative proportions as on the adjoining coast, it almost passes
my belief. Could there have been a lively midshipman on
board, who in the morning stocked the pool from the adjoin-
ing coast ?

As for glaciation, I will not venture to express any
opinion, for when in S. America I knew nothing about

1 Fifth edition, May, 1869.

[841 1882] ICE- ACTION ir'5

glaciers, and perhaps attributed much to iceb which Letter 511

ought to be attributed to glaciers. On the other hand,
A rassiz seems to me mad about glaciers, and apparently
never thinks of drift ice.

I did sec one clear case of former great extension of a
glacier in T. del Fuego.

To J. Gcikie. Letter 512

The following letter was in reply to a request from Prof. James Geikie
for permission to publish Mr. Darwin's views, communicated in a previous
letter (Nov. 1876), on the vertical position of stones in gravelly drift
mar Southampton. Prof. Geikie wrote (July 15th, 1880): "You may
remember that you attributed the peculiar position of those stones to
differential movements in the drift itself arising from the slow melting
of beds of frozen snow interstratified into the gravels. ... I have fo
this explanation of great service even in Scotland, and from what I have
seen of the drift-gravels in variou of southern England and

northern France, I am inclined to think that it has a wide application."

I .vn. July 191I1, 1SS0.

Your letter has pleased me very much, and I truly feel it
an honour that anything which I wrote on the drift, etc.,
should have been of the least use or interest to you. Pray
make any use of my letter ' : I forget whether it was written
carefully or clearly, so pray touch up any passages that you
may think fit to quote.

All that I have seen since near Southampton and else-
where has strengthened my notion. Here I live on a chalk
platform gently sloping down from the edge of the escarp-
ment" to the south (which is about 800 feet in height) to
beneath the Tertiary beds to the north. The3 beds of the
large and broad valleys (and only of these) are covered with
an immense mass of closely packet 1 broken and angular
flints ; in which mass the skull of the musk-ox [musk-
sheep] and woolly elephant have been found. This great
accumulation of unworn Hints must therefore have been made
when the climate was cold, and I believe it can be accounted
for by the larger valleys having been filled up to a great

1 Professor James Geikie quotes the letter in Prehistoric Eurq
London, 1881 (p. 141). Practically the whole of it is given in the .
and Letters, III., p. 213.

3 Id est, sloping down from the escarpment which is to the south.

3 From here to the end of the paragraph is quoted by Prof. Geikie,
he, C*/., p. 142.

l66 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 512 depth during a large part of the year with drifted frozen
snow, over which rubbish from the upper parts of the plat-
forms was washed by the summer rains, sometimes along one
line and sometimes along another, or in channels cut through
the snow all along the main course of the broad valleys.

I suppose that I formerly mentioned to you the frequent
upright position of elongated flints in the red clayey residue
over the chalk, which residue gradually subsides into the
troughs and pipes corroded in the solid chalk. This letter
is very untidy, but I am tired.

P.S. Several palaeolithic celts have recently been found
in the great angular gravel-bed near Southampton in several
places.

Letter 513 To D. Mackintosh.1

Down, Nov. 13th, 1880.

Your discovery is a very interesting one, and I congratu-
late you on it.2 I failed to find shells on Moel Tryfan,
but was interested by finding (P/ii/osop/i. Mag., 3rd series,
Vol. XXL, p. 184) shattered rocks3 and far-distant rounded

1 Daniel Mackintosh (1815-91) was well known in the South of
England as a lecturer on scientific subjects. He contributed several
papers to the Geological Society on Surface Sculpture, Denudation,
Drift Deposits, etc. In 1869 he published a work On the Scenery of
Englci7id and Wales (see Geo/. Mag., 1891, p. 432).

2 " On the Precise Mode of Accumulation and Derivation of the
Moel-Tryfan Shelly Deposits ; on the Discovery of Similar High-level
Deposits along the Eastern Slopes of the Welsh Mountains ; and on the
Existence of Drift-Zones, showing probable Variations in the Rate of
Submergence." By D. Mackintosh, Quart. Journ. Geo/. Soc, Vol.
XXXVII., pp. 351-69, 1 88 1. [Read April 27th, 1881.]

3 In reviewing the work by previous writers on the Moel-Tryfan
deposits, Mackintosh refers to Darwin's " very suggestive description of
the Moel-Tryfan deposits. . . . Under the drift he saw that the surface
of the slate, to a depth of several feet, had been shattered and contorted in
a very peculiar manner." The contortion of the slate, which Mackintosh
regarded as "the most interesting of the Moel-Tryfan phenomena," had
not previously been regarded as " sufficiently striking to arrest attention "
by any geologist except Darwin. The Pleistocene gravel and sand
containing marine shells on Moel-Tryfan, about five miles south east
of Caernarvon, have been the subject of considerable controversy. By
some geologists the drift deposits have been regarded as evidence of a
great submergence in post-Pliocene times, while others have explained

[841—1882] [CE-ACTK \r>7

boulders, which 1 attributed to the violent impact of icebergs Letter 513
or coast-ice. I can offer on whether the more

recent changes of level in 1 md were or were not accom-
panied l>y earthquakes. It does not seem to me a correct
expression ("which you use probably from haste in your note)
to speak of elevations or depressions as caused by earth-
quakes : I suppose that every one admits that an earthquake
is merely the vibration from the fractured crust when it
yields to an upward or downward force. I must confess that
of late years 1 have often begun to suspect (especially when
I think of the step-like plains of Patagonia, the heights of
which were measured by me) that many of the changes of
level in the land are due to changes of level in the sea.1 I
suppose that there can be no doubt that when there was
much ice piled up in the Arctic regions the sea would be
attracted to them, and the land on the temperate regions
would thus appear to have risen. There would also be some
lowering of the sea by evaporation and the fixing of the
water as ice near the Pole.

I shall read your paper with much interest when
published.

To J. Geikie. Letter 514

Down, Dec. 13th, 1SS0.
You must allow me the pleasure of thanking you for the
great interest with which I have read your Prehistoric Europe?
Nothing has struck me more than the accumulated evidence of
interglacial periods, and assuredly the establishment of such
periods is of paramount importance for understanding all the

their occurrence at a height of 1300 feet by assuming that the gravel
ami sand had been thrust uphill by an advancing ice-sheet. (See
II. IS. Woodward, inof and ','.'■ Ed. 11., 1SS7,

pp. 491, 492.) Darwin attributed the shattering and contorting of the
slates below the drift to " icebe tting over the surfai e."

1 This view is an agreement with the theory recently put forward by
Sucss in his Antlitz der Erde (Prag and Leipzig, 1885). Suess believes
that " the local invasions and transgressions of the continental areas by
the sea " are due to " secular movements of the hydrosphere itselfV
(See J. Geikie, F.R.S., Presidential Address before Section E at the
Edinburgh Meeting of the British Association, Annua! Report,

P- 794-)

- Prehistoric Europe : a Ge -A//, London, 188 1.

168 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 514 later changes of the earth's surface. Reading your book has
brought vividly before my mind the state of knowledge, or
rather ignorance, half a century ago, when all superficial
matter was classed as diluvium, and not considered worthy
of the attention of a geologist. If you can spare the time
(though I ask out of mere idle curiosity) I should like to hear
what you think of Mr. Mackintosh's paper, illustrated by a
little map with lines showing the courses or sources of the
erratic boulders over the midland counties of England.1 It
is a little suspicious their ending rather abruptly near Wolver-
hampton, yet I must think that they were transported by
floating ice. Fifty years ago I knew Shropshire well, and
cannot remember anything like till, but abundance of gravel
and sand beds, with recent marine shells. A great boulder2
which I had undermined on the summit of Ashley Heath,
720 (?) ft. above the sea, rested on clean blocks of the under-
lying red sandstone. I was also greatly interested by your
long discussion on the Loss ; 3 but I do not feel satisfied that
all has been made out about it. I saw much brick-earth near

1 " Results of a Systematic Survey, in 1878, of the Directions and Limits
of Dispersion, Mode of Occurrence, and Relation to Drift-Deposits of the
Erratic Blocks or Boulders of the West of England and East of Wales,
including a Revision of Many Years' Previous Observations," D. Mack-
intosh, Quart. Journ. Geo/. Soc, Vol. XXXV., p. 425, 1879.

2 Mackintosh alludes {loc. cit., p. 442) to felstone boulders around
Ashley Heath, the highest ground between the Pennine and Welsh hills
north of the Wrekin ; also to a boulder on the summit of the eminence
(774 ft. above sea-level), " probably the same as that noticed many years
ago by Mr. Darwin." In a later paper, " On the Correlation of the Drift-
Deposits of the North-West of England with those of the Midland and
Eastern Counties" {Quart. Journ. Geo/. Soc, Vol. XXXVI., p. 178, 1880)
Mackintosh mentions a letter received from Darwin, " who was the first
to elucidate the boulder-transporting agency of floating ice," containing
an account of the great Ashley Heath boulder, which he was the first to
discover and expose, ... so as to find that the block rested on frag-
ments of New Red Sandstone, one of which was split into two and deeply
scored. . . . The facts mentioned in the letter from Mr. Darwin would
seem to show that the boulder must have fallen through water from floating
ice with a force sufficient to split the underlying lump of sandstone, but
not sufficient to crush it."

3 For an account of the Loss of German geologists — " a fine-grained,
more or less homogeneous, consistent, non-plastic loam, consisting of an
intimate admixture of clay and carbonate of lime," see J. Geikie, loc. cit.,
p. 144 et sea.

[841— J E- ACTION

Southampton in some manner connected with the angular Lettei 514
gravel, but had not strength enough to make out relatioi
It might be worth your while to bear in mind the possibility

of fine sediment washed over and interstratified with thick
beds of frozen snow, and therefore ultimately dr irre-

spective of the present contour of the country.

I remember as a boy that it was said that the floods of
the Severn were more muddy when the floods were caused
by melting snow than from the heaviest rains ; but why this
should be I cannot sec.

Another subject has interested me much — viz. the sliding
and travelling of angular debris. Ever since seeing the
" streams of stones " at the Falkland Islands,1 I have felt
uneasy in my mind on this subject. I wish Mr. Kerr's notion
could be fully elucidated about frozen snow. Someone ought
to observe the movements of the fields of snow which supply
the glaciers in Switzerland.

Yours is a grand book, and I thank you heartily for the
instruction and pleasure which it has given me.

For heaven's sake forgive the untidiness of this whole
note.

To John Lubbock [Lord Avebury]. ! .,, -I;

Down, Nov. 6th, r

If I had written your Address- (but this requires a fearful
stretch of imagination on my part) I should not alter what I
had said about Hicks. You have the support of the President
[of the] Geolog. Soc.,3 and I think that Hicks is more likely
to be right than X. The latter seems to me to belong to the
class of objectors general. If Hicks should be hereafter proved
to be wrong about this third formation, it would signify very
little to you.

1 Geological Observah 1846), p. 19 £/ j

- Address delivered by Lord Avebury as President of the British
Association at York in 1SS1. Dr. Hicks is mentioned as having classed
the pre-Cambrian strata in '* four great groups of immense thickness
and implying a great lapse of time" and giving no evidence of life.
Hicks' third formation was named by him the Arvonian (Quart. Jourtt.
Geo/. Soc., VoL XXXVII., 1881, Proc., p. 55).

3 Robert Etheridge, F.R.S., President of the Geological Society in
1 880-8 1.

lyo GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 515 I forget whether you go as far as to support Ramsay1
about lakes as large as the Italian ones : if so, I would myself
modify the passage a little, for these great lakes have always
made me tremble for Ramsay, yet some of the American
geologists support him about the still larger N. American
lakes. I have always believed in the main in Ramsay's views
from the date of publication, and argued the point with Lyell,
and am convinced that it is a very interesting step in Geology,
and that you were quite right to allude to it.

Letter 516 To D. Mackintosh.

Down, Feb. 28th, 1882.

I have read Professor Geikie's essay,2 and it certainly
appears to me that he underrated the importance of floating
ice. Memory extending back for half a century is worth a
little, but 1 can remember nothing in Shropshire like till or
ground moraine, yet I can distinctly remember the appearance
of many sand and gravel beds — in some of which I found
marine shells. I think it would be well worth your while to
insist (but perhaps you have done so) on the absence of till,
if absent in the Western Counties, where you find many erratic
boulders.

I was pleased to read the last sentence in Geikie's essay
about the value of your work.3

1 " Glacial Origin of Lakes in Switzerland, Black Forest, etc." (Quart.
Journ. Geol. Soc, Vol. XVIII., pp. 185-204, 1862). Sir John Lubbock
(Lord Avebury) gives a brief statement of Ramsay's views concerning the
origin of lakes (Presidential Address, Brit. Assoc. 1881, p. 22): "Prof.
Ramsay divides lakes into three classes : (1) Those which are due to
irregular accumulations of drift, and which are generally quite shallow ;
(2) those which are formed by moraines ; and (3) those which occupy
true basins scooped by glaciers out of the solid rocks. To the latter
class belong, in his opinion, most of the great Swiss and Italian lakes.
. . . Professor Ramsay's theory seems, therefore, to account for a large
number of interesting facts." Sir Archibald Geikie has given a good
summary of Ramsay's theory in his Memoir of Sir Andrew Crombie
Ramsay, p. 361, London, 1895.

2 "The Intercrossing;of Erratics in Glacial Deposits," by James Geikie,
Scottish Naturalist, 1881.

3 The concluding paragraph reads as follows : " I cannot conclude
this paper without expressing my admiration for the long-continued and
successful labours of the well-known geologist whose views I have been

1841-1882] ICE-ACTION i;i

With respect to the main purport of your note, I hardly Letter 516
know what to say. Though no evidence worth anything has

as yet, in my opinion, been advanced in favour of a living
being, being developed from inorganic matter, yet I cannot
avoid believing the possibility of this will be proved some
day in accordance with the law of continuity. I remember
the time, above fifty years ago, when it was said that no sub-
stance found in a living plant or animal could be produced
without the aid of vital forces. As far as external form is
concerned, Eozoon shows how difficult it is to distinguish
between organised and inorganised bodies. If it is ever
found that life can originate on this world, the vital pheno-
mena will come under some general law of nature. Whether
the existence of a conscious God can be proved from the
existence of the so-called laws of nature {i.e. fixed sequence
of events) is a perplexing subject, on which I have often
thought, but cannot sec my way clearly. If you have not
read \V. Graham's Creed of Science} it would, I think,
interest you, and he supports the view which you are
inclined to uphold.

III. The Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, 1S41-S0.

In the bare hilly country of Lochaber, in the Scotch Highlands, the
slopes of the mountains overlooking the vale of Glen Roy are marked
by narrow terraces or parallel roads, which sweep round the shoulders of
the hills with "undeviating horizontality." These roads are described by
Sir Archibald Geikie .t^ having long been "a subject of wonderment and
legendary story anion- the Highlanders, and for so many years a source
of sore perplexity among men of science."1 In Glen Kin- itself there
are three distinct shelves or terraces, and the mountain sides of the valley
of the Spean and other glens hear traces of these horizontal "roads."

The first important papers dealing with the origin of this striking

controverting. Although I entered my protest against his
hypothesis, and have freely criticised his theoretical opinions. I most
willingly admit that the results of his unwearied devotion to the study of
those interesting phenomena with which he is so familiar have laid all his
fellow-workers under a debt of gratitude.-' Mr. Darwin used to speak
with admiration of Mackintosh's work, carried on as it was under
considerable difficulties.

1 The Creed of Science : Religious, Moral, an> Social,] »n, 1SS1.

3 The Scenery of Scotland, 1887, p. 266.

Ij2 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

physical feature were those of MacCulloch1 and Sir Thomas Lauder
Dick,2 in which the writers concluded that the roads were the shore-lines
of lakes which once filled the Lochaber valleys. Towards the end of
June 1838 Mr. Darwin devoted "eight good days"3 to the examination
of the Lochaber district, and in the following year he communicated
a paper to the Royal Society of London, in which he attributed their
origin to the action of the sea, and regarded them as old sea beaches
which had been raised to their present level by a gradual elevation
of the Lochaber district.

In 1840 Louis Agassiz and Buckland4 proposed the glacier-ice theory ;
they described the valleys as having been filled with lakes dammed back
by glaciers which formed bars across the valleys of Glen Roy, Glen
Spean, and the other glens in which the hill-sides bear traces of old
lake-margins. Agassiz wrote in 1842: "When I visited the parallel
roads of Glen Roy with Dr. Buckland we were convinced that the glacial
theory alone satisfied all the exigencies of the phenomenon." 5

Mr. David Milne (afterwards Milne-Home)6 in 1847 upheld the
view that the ledges represent the shore-lines of lakes which were
imprisoned in the valleys by dams of detrital material left in the glens
during a submergence of 3,000 feet, at the close of the Glacial period.
Chambers, in his Ancient Sea Margins (1848), expressed himself in
agreement with Mr. Darwin's marine theory. The Agassiz-Buckland
theory was supported by Mr. Jamieson,7 who brought forward additional
evidence in favour of the glacial barriers. Sir Charles Lyell at first 8
accepted the explanation given by Mr. Darwin, but afterwards9 came
to the conclusion that the terrace-lines represent the beaches of glacial
lakes. In a paper published in 1878,10 Prof. Prestwich stated his accept-
ance of the lake theory of MacCulloch and Sir T. Lauder Dick and of
the glacial theory of Agassiz, but differed from these authors in respect
of the age of the lakes and the manner of formation of the roads.

The view that has now gained general acceptance is that the parallel
roads of Glen Roy represent the shores of a lake " that came into being
with the growth of the glaciers and vanished as these melted away." u

Mr. Darwin became a convert to the glacier theory after the publica-
tion of Mr. Jamieson's paper. He speaks of his own paper as "a great

1 Trans. Geo/. Soc., Vol. IV., p. 314, 1817.

2 Trans. R. Soc. Edinb., Vol. IX., p. 1, 1823.

3 Life and Letters, I., p. 290.

4 Edinb. New Phil. Journal, Vol. XXXIII., p. 236, 1842.

5 Ibid., p. 236.

6 Trans. R. Soc. Edinb., Vol. XVI., p. 395, 1847.

7 Quart. Journ. Gcol. Soc, Vol. XIX., p. 235, 1863.

8 Elements of Geology, Ed. II., 1841.

9 Antiquity of Man, 1863, pp. 252 et seq.

10 Phil. Trans. R. Soc, 1879, p. 663.

11 Sir Archibald Geikie, loc. cit., p. 269.

is i x — 1SS0] GLEN ROY \Jl

failure' ; he argued in favour of se the i ausc of tl tees

"because no other explanation was possible under our then stat<
know] Convinced of his mi take, Darwin looked upon his error

as "a good lesson never to trust in science to the principle of exclusic

To C. Lyell. I a 517

[March 9th, 1841.]

1 have just received your note. It is the greatest pl< asure
to mc to write or talk Geology with you. . . .

I think I have thought over the whole case without
prejudice, and remain firmly convinced the>- [the parallel
roads] are marine beaches. My principal reason for doing
so is what I have urged in m\ paper,2 the buttress-like
accumulations of stratified shingle on sides of valley, especially
those just below the lowest shelf in Spean Valley.

2nd. I can hardly conceive the extension of the glaciers
in fnuit of the valley of KLilfinnin, where I found a new
road — where the sides of Great Glen are not very lofty.

3rd. The fiat watersheds which I describe in places where
there are no roads, as well as those connected with " roads."
These remain unexplained.

I might continue to add many otln r such reasons, all of
which, however, I daresay would appear trifling to any one
who had not visited the district. With respect to equable
elevation, it cannot be a valid objection to any one who thinks
of Scandinavia or the Pampas. With respect to the glacier
theory, the greatest objection appears to me the folio win .
though possibly not a sound one. The water has beyond
doubt remained very long at the levels of each shelf — this is
unequivocally shown by the depth of the notch or beach
formed in many places in the hard mica-sl 1 the lar

accumulations or buttresses of well-rounded pebbles at certain
spots on the level of old beaches. (The time must have been
immense, if formed by lakes without tides.) During the
existence of the lakes their drainage must have been at
the head of the valleys, and has given the flat appearance
of the watersheds. All this is very clear for four of the
shelves (viz., upper and lower in Glen Roy, the 8oo-ft. one

1 Life and Letters, I., p. 69.

* "Observations on the Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, and of other
parts of Lochaber in Scotland, with an attempt to prove that they are of
Marine Origin.-' Phil. Trans. R. See., 1S39, p, 39.

174 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 517 in Glen Spean, and the one in Kilfinnin), and explains the
coincidence of " roads " with the watersheds more simply
than my view, and as simply as the common lake theory.
But how was the Glen Roy lake drained when the water
stood at level of the middle "road"? It must (for there is
no other exit whatever) have been drained over the glacier.
Now this shelf is full as narrow in a vertical line and as
deeply worn horizontally into the mountain side and with a
large accumulation of shingle (I can give cases) as the other
shelves. We must, therefore, on the glacier theory, suppose
that the surface of the ice remained at exactly the same level,
not being worn down by the running water, or the glacier
moved by its own movement during the very long period
absolutely necessary for a quiet lake to form such a beach
as this shelf presents in its whole course. I do not know
whether I have explained myself clearly. I should like to
know what you think of this difficulty. I shall much like to
talk over the Jura case with you. I am tired, so good-bye.

Letter 518 To L. Horner.

Down [1846].

In following your suggestion in drawing out something
about Glen Roy for the Geological Committee,1 I have been
completely puzzled how to do it. I have written down what
I should say if I had to meet the head of the Survey and
wished to persuade him to undertake the task ; but as I have
written it, it is too long, ill expressed, seems as if it came from
nobody and was going to nobody, and therefore I send it to
you in despair, and beg you to turn the subject in your mind.
I feel a conviction if it goes through the Geological part of
Ordnance Survey it will be swamped, and as it is a case for

1 It was agreed at the British Association meeting held at South-
ampton in 1846 "That application be made to Her Majesty's Government
to direct that during the progress of the Ordnance Trigonometrical
Surveys in the North of Scotland, the so-called Parallel Roads of Glen
Roy and the adjoining country be accurately surveyed, with the view
of determining whether they are truly parallel and horizontal, the inter-
vening distances, and their elevations above the present sea-level"
{Brit. Assoc. Rep., 1846, p. xix). The survey was undertaken by the
Government Ordnance Survey Office under Col. Sir Henry James, who
published the results in 1874 {Notes on the Parallel Roads of Glen Roy) ;
the map on which the details are given is sheet 63 (one-inch scale).

is.,1— iS8o] «. I.I N Rl IV 175

mere accurate measurements it might, I think without offence

to the head of the- real Surveyors.

If Agassiz1 or Buckland arc on the Committee they will
sne< r at the whole thing and declare the beaches are those of
a glacier-lake, than which I am sure I could convince you
that there never was a more futile theory.

I look forward to Southampton - with much interest, and

hope to hear to-morrow that the lodgings are secured to us.

You cannot think how thoroughly I enjoyed our geological

talks, and the pleasure of seeing Mrs. 1 [ornerand yourself here.3

[Here follows Darwin's Memorandum.]

The Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, in Scotland, have been
the object of repeated examination, but they have never
hitherto been levelled with sufficient accuracy. Sir T. Lauder
Dick * procured the assistance of an engineer for this purpose,

1 Louis Jean Rodolphi iz (1S07 73) entered a college at Bienne

at the age often, and from 1822 to 1824 he was a student at the Academy
of Lausanne. Agassiz afterwards spent some years as a student in the
Universities of Zurich, Heidelberg, and Munich, where he gained
a reputation as a skilled fencer. It was at Heidelberg that his studies
took a definite turn towards Natural History. He took a Ph.D. degree
at Erlangen in 1829. Agassiz published his first paper in /sis in 1
and for many years devoted himself chiefly to Ichthyology. Duiing
a visit to Paris he became acquainted with Cuvier and Alexander von
Humboldt; in 1833, through the liberality of the latter, he began the
publication of his Recherches sur les Poissons Fossiles, and in 1S40 he
completed his Etudes sur les Glaciers. In 1846 Agassiz went to Boston,
where he lectured in the Lowell Institute, and in the following year
became Professor of Geology and Zoology at Cambridge. During the
last twenty-seven years of his life Agassiz lived in America, and exerted
a great influence on the study of Natural History in the United States.
In 1836 he received the Wollaston Medal of the Geological Society
of London, and in 1861 he was selected for the Copley Medal oi the
Royal Society. In [873 Agassiz dictated an article to Mrs. Agassiz on
"Evolution and Permanence of Type," in which he repeated his strong
conviction against the views embodied in th< See /

Letters, and Works of Louis Agassis, by Jules Marcou, 2 vols., New York.
1896; Louis Agassis : kis Life and Correspondence, edited by Elizabeth
Cary Agassiz, 2 vols., London, 18S5 ; S nian Report, 187;,. p. 1

* The British Association meeting (184 -

3 This letter is published in the privately printed Memoir of Leonard
Horner, II., p. 103.

* "On the Parallel Roads of Lochaber" (with map and plates), by Sir
Thomas Lauder Dick, Trans. R. Soc. .'../. Vol. IX., p. 1. 1823.

176 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 518 but owing to the want of a true ground-plan it was impossible
to ascertain their exact curvature, which, as far as could be
estimated, appeared equal to that of the surface of the sea.
Considering how very rarely the sea has left narrow and well-
defined marks of its action at any considerable height on the
land, and more especially considering the remarkable observa-
tions by M. Bravais x on the ancient sea-beaches of Scan-
dinavia, showing that they are not strictly parallel to each
other, and that the movement has been greater nearer the
mountains than on the coast, it appears highly desirable that
the roads of Glen Roy should be examined with the utmost
care during the execution of the Ordnance Survey of Scotland.
The best instruments and the most accurate measurements
being necessary for this end almost precludes the hope of its
being ever undertaken by private individuals ; but by the means
at the disposal of the Ordnance, measurements would be easily
made even more accurate than those of M. Bravais. It would
be desirable to take two lines of the greatest possible length
in the district, and at nearly right angles to each other, and
to level from the beach at one extremity to that at the other,
so that it might be ascertained whether the curvature does
exactly correspond with that of the globe, or, if not, what is
the direction of the line of greatest elevation. Much attention
would be requisite in fixing on either the upper or lower edge
of the ancient beaches as the standard of measurement, and
in rendering this line conspicuous. The heights of the three
roads, one above the other and above the level of the sea,
ought to be accurately ascertained. Mr. Darwin observed
one short beach-line north of Glen Roy, and he has indicated,
on the authority of Sir David Brewster, others in the valley of
the Spey. If these could be accurately connected, by careful
measurements of their absolute heights or by levelling,
with those of Glen Roy, it would make a most valuable
addition to our knowledge on this subject. Although the
observations here specified would probably be laborious,
yet, considering how rarely such evidence is afforded in any
quarter of the world, it cannot be doubted that one of the
most important problems in Geology — namely, the exact

1 " On the Lines of Ancient Level of the Sea in Finmark," by M. A.
Bravais, translated from Voyages de la Commission Scientifique du Nord,
etc.; Quart. Joum. Geol. Soc, Vol. I., p. 534, 1845.

1841-1880] i.l.l N ROY 177

manner in which the crust of the earth rises in mass — would Letter
be much elucidated, and a great service done to geological
science.

R. Chambers1 to D. Milne-Home.2 Letter 519

St. Andrews. Sept. 7th, 1

1 have had a letter to-day from Mr. Charles Darwin,
beseeching me t<> obtain for him a copy of your paper on

Glen Roy.a I am sure you will have pleasure in sending him
one ; his address is " Down, Farnborough, Kent." I have
again read over your paper carefully, and feel assured that
the careful collection and statement of facts which are found
in it must redound to your credit with all candid persons.
The suspicions, however, which I obtained some time ago as
to land-straits and heights of country being connected with
sea-margins and their ordinary memorials still possesses me,
and I am looking forward to some means of further testing
the Glen Roy mystery. If my suspicion turn out true, I shall
at once be regretful on your account, and shall feel it as a
great check and admonition to myself not to be too confident
about anything in science till it has been proved over and
over again. The ground hereabouts is now getting clear of
the crops ; perhaps when 1 am in town a few days hence we
may be able to make some appointment for an examination
of the beaches of the district, my list of which has been
greatly enlarged during the last two months.

To R. Chambers. Letter 520

Sept. nth. 1S47.
1 hope you will read the first part of my paper before you
go [to Glen Roy], and attend to the manner in which the

1 Robert Chambers (1802 71^ began .1^ a bookseller in Edinburgh
in 1816, and from very modest beginnings he gradually increased bis
business till it became the flourishing publishing tirm of W. cv R.
Chambers. After writing several books on biographical, historical and
other subjects, Chambers published anonymously the Vestiges of the
Natural History of Creation in 1844 ; in 1848 his work on Ancient >
Margins appeared ; and this was followed by the Book of Pars and
other volumes. {Diet, Nat. Biog. 1887 ; see also Darwin's Life and
Letters, I., pp. 355, 356, 362, 363.)

2 See Letter 479.

3 No doubt Mr. Milne's paper " On the Parallel Roads of Lochaber,"
Tram. R. Soe. Edinb., Vol. XVI., p. 305. 1S49. [Read March 1st and
April 5th, 1S47.]

VOL. II. I 2

178 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 520 lines end in Glen Collarig. I wish Mr. Milne had read
it more carefully. He misunderstands me in several re-
spects, but [I] suppose it is my own fault, for my paper
is most tediously written. Mr. Milne fights me very
pleasantly, and I plead guilty to his rebuke about " demon-
stration." * I do not know what you think ; but Mr. Milne
will think me as obstinate as a pig when I say that I think
any barriers of detritus at the mouth of Glen Roy, Collarig
and Glaster more utterly impossible than words can express.
I abide by all that I have written on that head. Conceive
such a mass of detritus having been removed, without great
projections being left on each side, in the very close proximity
to every little delta preserved on the lines of the shelves,
even on the shelf 4, which now crosses with uniform breadth
the spot where the barrier stood, with the shelves dying
gradually out, etc. To my mind it is monstrous. Oddly
enough, Mr. Milne's description of the mouth of Loch Treig
(I do not believe that valley has been well examined in its
upper end) leaves hardly a doubt that a glacier descended
from it, and, if the roads were formed by a lake of any kind,
I believe it must have been an ice-lake. I have given in
detail to Lyell 2 my several reasons for not thinking ice-lakes
probable ; but to my mind they are incomparably more pro-
bable than detritus of rock-barriers. Have you ever attended
to glacier action ? After having seen N. Wales, I can no
more doubt the former existence of gigantic glaciers than I
can the sun in the heaven. I could distinguish in N. Wales
to a certain extent icebergs from glacier action (Lyell has
shown that icebergs at the present day score rocks), and I
suspect that in Lochaber the two actions are united, and that
the scored rock on the watersheds, when tideways, were
rubbed and bumped by half-stranded icebergs. You will,
no doubt, attend to Glen Glaster. Mr. Milne, I think, does
not mention whether shelf 4 enters it, which I should like to
know ; and especially he does not state whether rocks worn
on their upper faces are found on the whole 212 [feet] vertical

1 See p. 180, note 3.

2 Mr. Darwin gives some arguments against the glacier theory in the
letter (517) to Sir Charles Lyell ; but the letter alluded to is no doubt
the one written to Lyell on " Wednesday, 8th " (Letter 522), in which
the reasons are fully stated.

1841-1880] GLEN ROY 1 79

course of this Glen down to near L. Loggan, or whether only Letter 520
in the upper part ; nor does he state whether these rocks are
scored, or polished, or moutonnhsi or whether there are any
" perched " boulders there or elsewhere. I suspect it would
be difficult to distinguish between a river-bed and tidal
channel. Mr. Milne's description of the Pass of Mukkul,
expanding to a width of several hundred yards 21 ft. deep in
the shoalest part, and with a worn islet in the middle, sounds
to me much more like a tidal channel than a river-bed.
There must have been, on the latter view, plenty of fresh
water in those days. With respect to the coincidence of the
shelves with the now watersheds, Mr. Milne only gives half
of my explanation. Please read p. 65 of my paper.1 I allude
only to the head of Glen Roy and Kilfinnin as silted up.
I did not know Mukkul Pass ; and Glen Roy was so much
covered up that I did not search it well, as I was not able to
walk very well. It has been an old conjectural belief of mine
that a rising surface becomes stationary, not suddenly, but by
the movement becoming very slow. Now, this would greatly
aid the tidal currents cutting down the passes between the
mountains just before, and to the level of, the stationary
periods. The currents in the fiords in T. del Fucgo in a
narrow crooked part are often most violent; in other parts
they seem to silt up.

Shall you do any levelling? I believe all the levelling
has been [done] in Glen Roy, nearly parallel to the Great
Glen of Scotland. For inequalities of elevation, the valley
of the Spean, at right angles to the apparent axes of eleva-
tion, would be the one to examine. If you go to the head of
Glen Roy, attend to the apparent shelf above the highest one
in Glen Roy, lying on the south side of Loch Spry, and
therefore beyond the watershed of Glen Roy. It would be
a crucial case. I was too unwell on that day to examine it
carefully, anil I had no levelling instruments. Do tin
fragments coincide in level with Glen Gluoy shelf?

MacCulloch talks of one in Glen Turret above the shelf.
I could not see it. These would be important discoveries.

1 "Observations on the Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, and of other
Parts of Lochaber in Scotland, with an Attempt to Piove that they are
of Marine Origin.'- Phil. Trans. R. S .. 1839, p. 39. [Read Feb.
7th, 1839.]

180 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 520 But I will write no more, and pray your forgiveness for this
long, ill-written outpouring. I am very glad you keep to
your subject of the terraces. I have lately observed that you
have one great authority (C. Prevost), [not] that authority
signifies a [farthing ?] on your side respecting your heretical
and damnable doctrine of the ocean falling. You see I am
orthodox to the burning pitch.

Letter 521 To D. Milne-Home.1

Down, [Sept] 20th, [1847].
I am much obliged by your note. I returned from
London on Saturday, and I found then your memoir,2 which
I had not then received, owing to the porter having been
out when I last sent to the Geolog. Soc. I have read your
paper with the greatest interest, and have been much struck
with the novelty and importance of many of your facts.
I beg to thank you for the courteous manner in which you
combat me, and I plead quite guilty to your rebuke about
demonstration.3 You have misunderstood my paper on a
few points, but I do not doubt that is owing to its being
badly and tediously written. You will, I fear, think me very
obstinate when I say that I am not in the least convinced
about the barriers i : they remain to me as improbable as
ever. But the oddest result of your paper on me (and I
assure you, as far as I know myself, it is not perversity)
is that I am very much staggered in favour of the ice-lake

1 See note, p. 113.

2 " On the Parallel Roads of Lochaber, with Remarks on the Change
of Relative Levels of Sea and Land in Scotland, and on the Detrital
Deposits in that Country," Trans./?. Soc.Edinb., Vol. XVI., p. 395, 1849.
[Read March 1st and April 5th, 1847.]

3 Mr. Milne quotes a passage from Mr. Darwin's paper (Phil. Trans.
R. Soc, 1839, p. 56), in which the latter speaks of the marine origin of
the parallel roads of Lochaber as appearing to him as having been
demonstrated. Mr. Milne adds: "I regret that Mr. Darwin should-
have expressed himself in these very decided and confident terms,
especially as his survey was incomplete; for I venture to think that it
can be satisfactorily established that the parallel roads of Lochaber were
formed by fresh-water lakes " (Milne, loc. tit., p. 400).

4 Mr. Milne believed that the lower parts of the valleys were filled
with detritus, which constituted barriers and thus dammed up the waters
into lakes.

1841— 1SS0] GLEN ROY 1 8 1

theory of Agassiz and Buckland1: until I read your im- Letter 521

portant discovery of the outlet in Glen Glaster1 I never
thought this theory at all tenable. Now it appears to me
that a very good case can be made in its favour. I am not,
however, as yet a believer in the ice-lake theory, but I tremble
for the result. I have had a good deal of talk with Mr. Lyell
on the subject, and from his advice I am going to send a letter
to the Scotsman, it) which 1 give briefly my present impression
(though there is not space to argue with you on such points
as I think I could argue), and indicate what points strike me
as requiring further investigation with respect, chiefly, to the
ice-lake theory, so that you will not care about it. . . .

P.S. — Some facts mentioned in my <. * S. America,

p. 24,''' with regard to the shoaling of the deep fiords of
T. del Fuego near their mouths, and which I have remarked
would tend, with a little elevation, to convert such fiords into
lakes with a great mound-like barrier of detritus at their
mouths, might, possibly, have been of use to you with regard
to the lakes of Glen Roy.

To C. Lyell. UMtcr $2a

I > \s n, We Inesday, Sth.
Many thanks for your paper.4 I do admire your zeal on
a subject on which you are not immediately at work. I will

1 Agassiz and Auckland believed that the lakes which (brined the
"roads" were confined by glaciers or moraines. See "The Glacial
Theory and its Recent Progress," by Louis Agassi/, Edinb. New Phil.
Journ., Vol. XXXIII., p. 217, 1S42 (with map).

• Mr. Milne discovered that the middle shelf of Glen Roy. which
Mr. Darwin stated wis "not on a level with any water-hid '(Darwin,
loc. cit., p. 43), exactly coincided with a watershed at the head of (den
Glaster (Milne, loc. cit., p. 398).

3 The creeks which penetrate the western shores of Tierra del FuegO
are described as "almost invariably much shallower 'lose to the open
sea at their months thin inland. . . . This shoalncss of the sea-channels
near their entrances probably results from the quantity of sediment
formed by the wear and tear of the outer rocks exposed to the full force of
the open sea. I have no doubt that many Likes — for instance, in Scotland
— which are very deep within, and are separated from the sea appa-
rently only by a tract of detritus, were originally sea-channels, with banks
of this nature near their mouths, which have since been upheaved " (6V< .'.
Obs. S. America, p. 24, footnote).

4 " On the Ancient Glaciers of Forfarshire.'' Pt\ . Vol. III.
p. yj, 1840.

182 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 522 give my opinion as briefly as I can, and I have endeavoured
my best to be honest. Poor Mrs. Lyell will have, I foresee,
a long letter to read aloud, but I will try to write better than
usual. Imprimis, it is provoking that Mr. Milne x has read
my paper2 with little attention, for he makes me say several
things which I do not believe — as, that the water sunk sud-
denly! (p. 10), that the Valley of Glen Roy, p. 13, and Spean
was filled up with detritus to level of the lower shelf, against
which there is, I conceive, good evidence, etc., but I suppose
it is the consequence of my paper being most tediously
written. He gives me a just snub for talking of demon-
stration, and he fights me in a very pleasant manner. Now
for business. I utterly disbelieve in the barriers 3 for his
lakes, and think he has left that point exactly where it was
in the time of MacCulloch'1 and Dick.5 Indeed, in showing
that there is a passage at Glen Glaster at the level of the
intermediate shelf, he makes the difficulty to my mind greater.6
When I think of the gradual manner in which the two upper
terraces die out at Glen Collarig and at the mouth of Glen
Roy, the smooth rounded form of the hills there, and the lower
shelf retaining its usual width where the immense barrier
stood, I can deliberately repeat "that more convincing
proofs of the non-existence of the imaginary Loch Roy could
scarcely have been invented with full play given to the
imagination," etc. : but I do not adhere to this remark with
such strength when applied to the glacier-lake theory.
Oddly, I was never at all staggered by this theory until
now, having read Mr. Milne's argument against it. I now
can hardly doubt that a great glacier did emerge from Loch
Treig, and this by the ice itself (not moraine) might have
blocked up the three outlets from Glen Roy. I do not,

1 " On the Parallel Roads of Lochaber, etc." Trans. R. Soc. Edinb.,
Vol. XVI., p. 395, 1849. [Read March 1st and April 5th, 1847.]

2 " Observations on the Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, etc." Phil.
Trans. R. Soc, 1839, p. 39. [Read Feb. 7th, 1S39.]

3 See note 3, Letter 521.

4 " On the Parallel Roads of Glen Roy." Geo/. Trans., Vol. IV.,
p. 314, 181 7 (with several maps and sections).

5 "On the Parallel Roads of Lochaber." Trans. R. Soc. Edinb.,
Vol. IX., p. 1, 1823.

6 See note 2, p. 181.

-iS8o] 183

however, yet believe in the r theory, for reasons which Is---* 5-:

I will presently give.

1 here arc three chief hostile considerations in Mr. Milnr-
paper. First, the Glen [shelf?], not coinciding in height with
the upper one [outlet?], from ob 1 5 ft.,

29 ft., 21 ft. : if the latter arc ;t the terrace mu.st be qu '

independent, and the cac< but Mr. Milne shows that

there is one in Glen I 4 ft. below the upper one, and a

;ond one again ''which I beneath this, and then

we come to the proper second shelf. Hence there is no great
improbability in an independent shelf having been found in
Glen Glu

This leads me to Mr. Milne's -econd class of facts (obvious
to amely the non-extensi the three shelves

beyond Glen Roy ; but I abide by what I have written on
that poirr repeat that if in Glen R :ere circumstances

have been so fa >le for the p: 1 or formation of

the terraces, a terrace could be formed quite plain for three-
quarters of a mile with hardly a trace elsewhere, we cannot
argue, from the non-existence of shelves, that water did not
stand at the same levels in other valleys. Feeling absolutely
convinced that there was no barrier of detritus at the mouth
of Glen Roy, and pre/ il convinced that there was none

of ice, the manner in which the terraces die out when enteri:
Glen Spean, which must have been a tideway, shows on what
small circumstances the formation of these shelves depended.
With respect to the non-existence of - in other of

Scotland, Mr. Milne shows that ma: :rs do exist, and

their heights above the sea have not yet been carefully
measured, nor have even th' hich I suspect

are all IOO feet 1

we must not feel sure that cither the absolute height or the
intermediate hei ten juld be at all the

same at dl.-tant points. -.he terraces in Lochab<

all, I believe, have been taken in Glen Roy
There should b Is taken at right 3 to this line and

to the Great Glen of Scotland or chief line of elevation.

Thirdly, the nature of the outlets from the supposed lakes.

1 '* On the Lines of Ancient Level of the Sea in Finmark. : By A.
Bravais, Member of the Scientific Commission of the Nort'.. \rt.

Journ. Geo/. Soc,

184 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 522 This appears to me the best and newest part of the paper.
If Sir James Clark1 would like to attend to any particular
points, direct his attention to this : especially to follow Glen
Glaster from Glen Roy to L. Laggan. Mr. Milne describes
this as an old and great river-course with a fall of 212 feet.
He states that the rocks are smooth on upper face and rough
on lower, but he does not mention whether this character
prevails throughout the whole 212 vertical feet — a most im-
portant consideration ; nor does he state whether these rocks
are polished or scratched, as might have happened even to a
considerable depth beneath the water (Mem. great icebergs in
narrow fiords of T. del Fuego 2) by the action of icebergs, for
that icebergs transported boulders on to terraces, I have no
doubt. Mr. Milne's description of the outlets of his lake
sound to me more like tidal channels, nor does he give any
arguments how such are to be distinguished from old river-
courses. I cannot believe in the body of fresh water which
must, on the lake theory, have flowed out of them. At the
Pass of Mukkul he states that the outlet is 70 feet wide and
* the rocky bottom 21 feet below the level of the shelf, and that
the gorge expands to the eastwards into a broad channel of
several hundred yards in width, divided in the middle by
what has formerly been a rocky islet, against which the waters
of this large river had chafed in issuing from the pass. We
know the size of the river at the present day which would
flow out through this pass, and it seems to me (and in the
other given cases) to be as inadequate ; the whole seems to
me far easier explained by a tideway than by a formerly
more humid climate.

With respect to the very remarkable coincidence between
the shelves and the outlets (rendered more remarkable by

1 Sir James Clark (1788-1870) was for some years a medical officer
in the Navy ; he afterwards practised in Rome till he moved to London
in 1826. On the accession of Queen Victoria he was made Physician in
Ordinary and received a baronetcy ; he was elected into the Royal
Society in 1832. {Diet. Nat. Bt'og., 1857 ; article by Dr. Norman
Moore.)

2 In the Voyage of the Beagle a description is given of the falling, of
great masses of ice from the icy cliffs of the glaciers with a crash that
" reverberates like the broadside of a man-of-war, through the lonely
channels " which intersect the coast-line of Tierra del Fuego. Loc. cit.
p. 246.

i84i — 1880] GLEN ROV 185

Mr. Milne's discovery of the outlet to the intermediate shelf
at Glen Glaster *), Mr. Milne talf of my explana-

tion ; he alludes to (and disputes) the smoothing and silting-

up action, which I still believe in. I state : If we consider what
must take place during the gradual rise of a group of isla
we shall have the currents endeavouring to cut down and
deepen some shallow parts in the channels as they are suc-
cessively brought near the surface, but tending from the
opposition of tides to choke up others with littoral deposit
During a long interval of rest, from the length of time allowed
to the above processes, the tendency would often prove effect-
ive, both in forming, by accumulation of matter, isthmuses,
and in keeping open channels. Hence such isthmuses and
channels just kept open would oftener be formed at the level
which the waters held at the interval of rest, than at any
other (p. 65). I look at the Pass of Mukkul (21 feet deep,
:lne) as a channel just kept open, and the head of Glen Roy
(where there is a gre.it bay silted up) and of Kilfinnin (at both
which places there are level-topped mounds of detritus above
the level of the terraces) as instances of channels filled up
at the stationary levels. I have long thought it a probable
conjecture that when a rising" surface becomes stationary it
becomes so, not at once, but by the movements first becomit;
very slow ; this would greatly favour the cutting down many
gaps in the mountains to the level of the stationary Is.

Glacier Theory. — If .1 lacialist admitted that the sea,
before the formation of the terraces, covered the country
(which would account for land-straits above level of terra< e .
and that the land gradually emerged, and if he supposed his
lakes were banked by ice alone, he would make out, in my
opinion, the best case against the marine origin of the terraci
From the scattered boulders and till, you and I must look at
it as certain that the sea did cover the whole country, and
I abide quite by my arguments from the buttresses, etc.,
that water of some kind receded slowly from the valleys of
Lochaber (I presume Mr. Milne admits this-. Now, I do n
believe in the icc-lakc theory, from the following weak but
accumulating reasons : because. 1 >t, the receding water must
have been that of a lake in Glen Spean, and of the sea in the

1 See Letter 521, note 2, p. 181.

1 86 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 522 other valleys of Scotland, where I saw similar buttresses
at many levels ; 2nd, because the outlets of the supposed
lakes as already stated seem, from Mr. Milne's statements, too
much worn and too large ; 3rd, when the lake stood at the
three-quarters of a mile shelf the water from it must have
flowed over ice itself for a very long time, and kept at the
same exact level : certainly this shelf required a long time
for its formation ; 4th, I cannot believe a glacier would
have blocked up the short, very wide valley of Kilfinnin, the
Great Glen of Scotland also being very low there ; 5th,
the country at some places where Mr. Milne has described
terraces is not mountainous, and the number of ice-lakes
appears to me very improbable ; 6th, I do not believe any
lake could scoop the rocks so much as they are at the entrance
to Loch Treig or cut them off at the head of Upper Glen
Roy; 7th, the very gradual dying away of the terraces at
the mouth of Glen Roy does not look like a barrier of any
kind ; 8th, I should have expected great terminal moraines
across the mouth of Glen Roy, Glen Collarig, and Glaster,
at least at the bottom of the valleys. Such, I feel pretty-
sure, do not exist.

I fear I must have wearied you with the length of this
letter, which I have not had time to arrange properly. I
could argue at great length against Mr. Milne's theory of
barriers of detritus, though I could help him in one way — viz.,
by the soundings which occur at the entrances of the deepest
fiords in T. del Fuego. I do not think he gives the smallest
satisfaction with respect to the successive and comparatively
sudden breakage of his many lakes.

Well, I enjoyed my trip to Glen Roy very much, but it
was time thrown away. I heartily wish you would go there ;
it should be some one who knows glacier and iceberg action,
and sea action well. I wish the Queen would command you.
I had intended being in London to-morrow, but one of my
principal plagues will, I believe, stop me ; if I do I will
assuredly call on you. I have not yet read Mr. Milne on
Elevation,1 so will keep his paper for a day or two.

P.S. — As you cannot want this letter, I wish you would

1 "On a Remarkable Oscillation of the Sea, observed at Various
Places on the Coasts of Great Britain in the First Week of July, 1843."
Trans. R. Soc. Edinb., Vol. XV., p. 609, 1844.

i s , i _ 1 8So] GLEN i 187

return it to me, as it will serve as a memorandum for me. Letter 522
Possibly I shall write to Mr. Chambers,1 though I do n
know whether he will care about what I think on the
subject. This letter is too long and ill-written for Sir J.
Clark.

To Lady I. Veil. Letter 523

[October 4th, 1S47.]
I enclose a letter from Chambers, which has pleased me
very much (which please return), but I cannot feci quite so
sure as he does. If the Lochaber and Tweed roads really
turn out exactly on a level, the sea theory is proved. What
a magnificent proof of equality of cl< vation, which does not
surprise me much ; but I fear I sec cause of doubt, for as
far as I remember there are numerous terraces, near Gala-
shiels, with small intervals of height, so that the coincidence
of height might be cooked. Chambers does not seem aware
of one very striking coincidence, viz. that I made by careful
measurement my Kilfinnin terrace 1202 feet above sea, and
now Glen Gluoy is 1203 feet, according to the recent more
careful measurements. Even . iz2 would be puzzled to

block up Glen Gluoy and Kilfinnin by the same glacier, and
then, moreover, the lake would have two outlets. With respect
to the middle terrace of Glen Ro) — seen by Chambers
in the Spean (figured by Agassi/, and seen by myself but
not noticed, as I thought it might have been a sheep track)
— it might yet have been formed on the ice-lake theory by
two independent glaciers going across the Spean, but it is
very improbable that two such immense ones should n I
have been united into one. Chambers, unfortunately, does
not seem to have visited the head of the Spey, and 1 have
written to propose joining funds and sending some young
surveyor there. If my letter is published in tin-
how Buckland,r> as 1 have foreseen, will crow over me: he

1 R. Chambers, the author of Ancient St . 1848. ^See

life and Letters^ I., p. 361) ; also note 1 to Letter 510, to Mr. Milne -
Home from Mr. Chambers.

3 "On the Glacial Theory," by Louis Agassi/, Edinb. New P
Journ., Vol. XXXIII., p. 217, 1842. The parallel terraces are dealt with
by Agassiz, pp. 236 et seq.

3 Professor Buckland may be described as joint author, with A.^assiz.
of the Glacier theory.

188 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 523 will tell me he always knew that I was wrong, but now I
shall have rather ridiculously to say, "but I am all right
again."

I have been a good deal interested in Miller,1 but I find it
not quick reading, and Emma has hardly begun it yet. I
rather wish the scenic descriptions were shorter, and that
there was a little less geologic eloquence.

Lyell's picture now hangs over my chimneypicce, and
uncommonly glad I am to have it, and thank you for it.

Letter 524 To C. Lyell.

Down, Sept. 6th [1861].

I think the enclosed is worth your reading. I am smashed
to atoms about Glen Roy. My paper was one long gigantic
blunder from beginning to end.2 Eheu ! Eheu !

Letter 525 To C. Lyell.

Down, Sept. 22nd [1S61].

I have read Mr. Jamieson's last letter, like the former
ones, with very great interest.3 What a problem you have
in hand ! It beats manufacturing new species all to bits.
It would be a great personal consolation to me if Mr. J. can
admit the sloping Spean terrace to be marine, and would
remove one of my greatest difficulties — viz, the vast contrast
of Welsh and Lochaber valleys. But then, as far as I dare
trust my observations, the sloping terraces ran far up the
Roy valley, so as to reach not far below the lower shelf. If
the sloping fringes are marine and the shelves lacustrine,
all I can say is that nature has laid a shameful trap to catch
an unwary wretch. I suppose that I have underrated the
power of lakes in producing pebbles ; this, I think, ought to
be well looked to. I was much struck in Wales on carefully

1 Hugh Miller's First Impressions of England and its People, London,
1847.

2 See Life and Letters, I., pp. 68, 69, also pp. 290, 291.

3 Mr. Jamieson visited Glen Roy in August 1861 and in July 1862.
His paper " On the Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, and their Place in the
History of the Glacial Period," was published in the Quarterly Journal
of the Geological Society in 1863, Vol. XIX., p. 235. His latest con-
tribution to this subject was published in the Quarterly Journal,
Vol. XLVIIL, p. 5, 1892.

i.s4! - i GLEN 1 189

comparing the glacial scratches und r a lal rmed by a Letter 525

moraine and which must have existed since the Glacial
epoch) and above water, and I could perceive no difference.
I believe 1 saw many such bei food pebbles on level of

lower shelf, which at the time I could not believe could have
been found on shores of lake. The land-straits and little
cliffs above them, to which I referred, were quite above the
highest shelf; they may be of much more ancient date than
the shelves. Some terrace-like fringes at head of the Spey
strike me as very suspicious. Mr. J. refers to absence of
pebbles at considerable heights: he must remember that
every storm, every deer, every hare which runs tends to roll
pebbles down hill, and not one ever goes up again. I may
mention that 1 particularly alluded to this on S. Ventanao1
in N. Patagonia, a great isolated rugged quartz-mountain
3,000 ft. high, and I could find not (me pebble exc< pt on
one very small spot, where a ferruginous spring had firmly
cemented a few to the face of mountain. If the Loehaber
kikes had been formed by an ice-period posterior to the
(marine?) sloping terraces in the Spean, would not Mr. J.
have noticed gigantic moraines across the valley opposite
the opening of Lake Treig? I go so far as not to like
making the elevation of the land in Wales and Scotland
considerably different with respect to the ice-period, and
still more do I dislike it with respect to E. and W. Scotland.
But I may be prejudiced by having been - ; accustomed

to the plains of Patagonia. But the equality of level (barring
denudation) of even the Secondary formations in Britain,
after so many ups and downs, always impresses my mind,
that, except when the crust-cracks and mountains are formed,
movements of elevation and subsidence are generally very
equable.

But it is folly my scribbling thus. You have a grand
problem, and heaven help you and Mr. Jamieson through it.
It is out of my line nowadays, and above and beyond me.

1 Geolog. Obs. on South America, p. 79. "On the flanks of the
mountains, at a height of 300 or 400 feet above the plain, there were a
few small patches of conglomerate and breccia, firmly cemented by
ferruginous matter to the abrupt and battered face of the quartz - traces
being thus exhibited of ancient sea-action."

190 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 526

To J. D. Hooker.

Down, Sept. 28th [1861].

It is, I believe, true that Glen Roy shelves (I remember
your Indian letter) were formed by glacial lakes. I persuaded
Mr. Jamieson, an excellent observer, to go and observe them;
and this is his result. There are some great difficulties to be
explained, but I presume this will ultimately be proved the
truth. . . .

Letter 527 To C. Lyell.

Down, Oct. 1st [1861].

Thank you for the most interesting correspondence. What
a wonderful case that of Bedford.1 I thought the problem
sufficiently perplexing before, but now it beats anything I
ever heard of. Far from being able to give any hypothesis
for any part, I cannot get the facts into my mind. What a
capital observer and reasoncr Mr. Jamieson is. The only
way that I can reconcile my memory of Lochaber with the
state of the Welsh valleys is by imagining a great barrier,
formed by a terminal moraine, at the mouth of the Spean,
which the river had to cut slowly through, as it drained the
lowest lake after the Glacial period. This would, 1 can
suppose, account for the sloping terraces along the Spean.
I further presume that sharp transverse moraines would not
be formed under the waters of the lake, where the glacier
came out of L. Treig and abutted against the opposite side
of the valley. A nice mess I made of Glen Roy ! I have no
spare copy of my W^elsh paper 2 ; it would do you no good
to lend it. I suppose I thought that there must have been
floating ice on Moel Tryfan. I think it cannot be disputed
that the last event in N. Wales was land-glaciers. I could
not decide where the action of land-glaciers ceased and marine
glacial action commenced at the mouths of the valleys.

What a wonderful case the Bedford case. Does not the

1 No doubt this refers to the discovery of flint implements in the
Valley of the Ouse, near Bedford, in 1861 (see Lyell's Antiquity of Man,
pp. 163 etseg., 1863).

2 " Notes on the Effects produced by the Ancient Glaciers of
Caernarvonshire, and on the Boulders transported by Floating Ice,"
Edinb. New Phil.Journ., Vol. XXXIII., p. 352, 1842.

1841— iSSo] GLEN ROY 191

N. American view of wanner or more equable period, after Letter 527
great Glacial period, become- much more probable in Europe?
But 1 am very poorly to-day, and very stupid, and hate
everybody ami everything. One lives only to make blunders.
I am going to write a little book for Murray on Orchids,1 and
to-day I hate them wor.se than everything. So farewell, in
a sweet frame of mind.

To C. L\ 1 .ettei 5-zS

Down, Oct. 14th [1S61].

I return Jamieson's capital letter. I have no comments,
except to say that he has removed all my difficulties, and that
now and for evermore 1 give up and abominate Glen Roy
ami all its belongings. It certainly is a splendid case, and
wonderful monument of the old Ice-period, You ought
to give a woodcut. How many have blundered over those
horrid shelves !

That was a capital paper by Jamieson 3 in the last Gcol.
Journal. I was never before fully convinced of the land
glacialisation of Scotland before, though Chambers tried
hard to convince me.

I must say 1 differ rather about Ramsay's3 paper;
perhaps he pushes it too far. It struck me the more from
remembering some years ago marvelling what could be the
meaning of such a multitude of lakes in Friesland and other
northern districts. Ramsay wrote to me, and I suggested
that he ought to compare mountainous tropical regions with
northern regions. I could not remember many hikes in any
mountainous tropical country. When Tyndall talks of
every valley in Switzerland being formed by glaciers, he
seems to forget there are valleys in the tropics ; and it is
monstrous, in my opinion, the accounting for the Glacial
period in the Alps by greater height of mountains, and
their lessened height, if I understand, by glacial erosion.

1 On the Various Contrivances by which Orchids arc Fertilised by

Insects, London, i;-

s " On the Drift and Rolled Gravel of the North of Scotland," Qju \rt.
Journ. Geol. Sac, Vol. XVI., p. 347, 1S60.

3 "On the Glacial Origin of Certain Lakes, etc.." Quart. Journ. Geo/.
Soc, Vol. XVIII., p. 1S5. See Letter 503.

192 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 528 " Ne sutor ultra crepidam," I think, applies in this case to
him. I am hard at work on Variation under Domestication}

P.S. — I am rather overwhelmed with letters at present,
and it has just occurred to me that perhaps you will forward
my note to Mr. Jamieson ; as it will show that I entirely
yield. I do believe every word in my Glen Roy paper is false.

Letter 529 T° C ^^

Down, Oct. 20th [1861].

Notwithstanding the orchids, I have been very glad to
see Jamieson's letter ; no doubt, as he says, certainty will
soon be reached.

With respect to the minor points of Glen Roy, I cannot
feel easy with a mere barrier of ice ; there is so much sloping,
stratified detritus in the valleys. I remember that you some-
where have stated that a running stream soon cuts deeply
into a glacier. I have been hunting up all old references
and pamphlets, etc., on shelves in Scotland, and will send
them off to Mr. J., as they possibly may be of use to him
if he continues the subject. The Eildon Hills ought to
be specially examined. Amongst MS. I came across a very
old letter from me to you, in which I say : " If a glacialist
admitted that the sea, before the formation of the shelves,
covered the country (which would account for the land-straits
above the level of the shelves), and if he admitted that the land
gradually emerged, and if he supposed that his lakes were
banked up by ice alone, he would make out, in my opinion,
the best case against the marine origin of the shelves." 2
This seems very much what you and Mr. J. have come to.

The whole glacial theory is really a magnificent subject.

Letter 530 To C. Lyell.

Down, April 1st [1862].

I am not quite sure that I understand your difficulty, so
I must give what seems to me the explanation of the glacial
lake theory at some little length. You know that there is a
rocky outlet at the level of all the shelves. Please look at my
map.3 I suppose whole valley of Glen Spean filled with ice ;

1 Published 1868.

2 See Letter 522, p. 185.

3 The map accompanying Mr. Darwin's paper in the Phil. Trans.
R. Soc, 1839.

is M_iSSo] GLEN ROY 1 93

then water would escape from an outlet at Loch Spey, and Lettei 530

the highest shelf would be first formed. Secondly, ice be

to retreat, and water will flow for short time over its surface;

hut as soon as it retreated from behind the hill marked Craig

Dhu, where the outlet on level of second shelf was discovered

by Milne,1 the water would How from it and the sec

shelf would be formed. This supposes that a vast barrier

of ice still remains under Ben Nevis, along all the lower

part of the Spean. Lastly, I suppose the ice disappeared

everywhere along L. Loggan, L. Trcig, and Glen Spean,

except close under Ben Nevis, where it still formed a barrier,

the water flowing out at level of lowest shelf by the Pass

of Mukkul at head of L. Loggan. This seems to me to

account for everything. It presupposes that the shelves were

formed towards the close of the Glacial period. I come up

to London to read on Thursday a short paper at the Linncan

Society. Shall I call on Friday morning at 9.30 and sit

half an hour with you ? Pray have no scruple to send a line

to Queen Anne Street to say " No" if it will take anything

out of you. If I do not hear, I will come.

To J. Prestwich. Ut{eT 53,

Down, Jan. 3rd, 1SS0.
You are perfectly right.- As soon as I read Mr. Jamie-
son's article on the parallel roads, I gave up the ghost with
more sighs and groans than on almost any other occasion in
my life.

IV. Coral Reefs, Fossil and Recent, 1841-81. iter 532

To C. Lyell.

Shrewsbury, Tuesday, 6th [July, 1841].
Your letter was forwarded me here. I was the more glad
to receive it, as I never dreamed of your being able to find
time to write, now that you must be so very busy ; and I
had nothing to tell you about myself, else I should have
written. I am pleased to hear how extensive and successful
a trip you appear to have made. You must have worked

1 See note 2 on Letter 521, p. 1S1.

s Prof. Prestwich's paper on Glen Roy was published in the Phil.
Trans. R. Soc. for 1S79, p. 663.

VOL. II. 13

194 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 532 hard, and got your Silurian subject well in your head, to
have profited by so short an excursion. How I should have
enjoyed to have followed you about the coral-limestone. I
once was close to Wenlock,1 something such as you describe,
and made a rough drawing, I remember, of the masses of
coral. But the degree in which the whole mass was regularly
stratified, and the quantity of mud, made me think that the
reefs could never have been like those in the Pacific, but
that they most resembled those on the east coast of Africa,
which seem (from charts and descriptions) to confine extensive
flats and mangrove swamps with mud, or like some imperfect
ones about the West India Islands, within the reefs of which
there are large swamps. All the reefs I have myself seen
could be associated only with nearly pure calcareous rocks.
I have received a description of a reef lying some way off
the coast near Belize {terra firma), where a thick bed of
mud seems to have invaded and covered a coral reef, leaving
but very few islets yet free from it. But I can give you no
precise information without my notes (even if then) on these
heads. . . .

Bermuda differs much from any other island I am
acquainted with. At first sight of a chart it resembles an
atoll ; but it differs from this structure essentially in the
gently shelving bottom of the sea all round to some distance ;
in the absence of the defined circular reefs, and, as a conse-
quence, of the defined central pool or lagoon ; and lastly, in
the height of the land. Bermuda seems to be an irregular,
circular, flat bank, encrusted with knolls and reefs of coral,
with land formed on one side. This land seems once to have
been more extensive, as on some parts of the bank farthest
removed from the island there are little pinnacles of rock of
the same nature as that of the high larger islands. I cannot
pretend to form any precise notion how the foundation of so
anomalous an island has been produced, but its whole history
must be very different from that of the atolls of the Indian
and Pacific oceans — though, as I have said, at first glance of
the charts there is a considerable resemblance.

1 The Wenlock limestone (Silurian) contains an abundance of corals.
" The rock seems indeed to have been formed in part by massive sheets
and bunches of coral" (Geikie, Text-book of Geology, 1882, p. 678).

1S41 1881] CORAL REE1

To C. Lyell. Letter 533

[1842.]
Considering the probability of subsidence in the middle
of the great oceans being very slow; considering in how

man}- spaces, both large ones and small ones (within areas
favourable to the growth of corals), reefs arc absent, which
shows that their presence is determined by peculiar con-
ditions; considering the possible chance of subsidence being
more rapid than the upward growth of the reefs ; considering
that reefs not very rarely perish (as I cannot doubt) on part,
or round the whole, of some encircled islands and atolls :
considering these things, I admit as very improbable that
the polypifers should continue living on and above the same
reef during a subsidence of very man}- thousand feet ; and
therefore that they should form masses of enormous thiekn
say at most above 5,000 feet.1 This admission, I believe, is
in no way fatal to the theory, though it is so to certain {^w
passages in my book.

In the areas where the large groups of atolls stand, and
where likewise a few scattered atolls stand between such
groups, I always imagined that there must have been great
tracts of land, and that on such large tracts there must have
been mountains of immense altitudes. But not, it appears to
me, that one is only justified in supposing that groups of
islands stood there. There are (as I believe) many con-
siderable islands and groups of islands (Galapagos Islands,
Great Britain, Falkland Islands, Marianas, and, I believe,
Yiti groups), and likewise the majority of .single scattered
islands, all of which a subsidence between 4,000 and 5,000
feet would entirely submerge or would leave only one or two
summits above water, and hence they would produce either
groups of nothing but atolls, or of atolls with one or two
encircled islands. 1 am far from wishing to say that the
islands of the great oceans have not subsided, or may not

1 "... As we know that some inorganic causes are highly injurious
to the growth of coral, it cannot be expected that during the round of
change to which earth, air. and water are exposed, the reef-building
polypifers should keep alive for perpetuity in any one place ; and still
less can this be expected during the pro e subsidences ... to

winch by our theory these reefs and islands have been subjected, and
are liable' {The Structure and Distribution • P- 107:

London, 1S42).

196 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 533 continue to subside, any number of feet, but if the average
duration (from all causes of destruction) of reefs on the same
spot is limited, then after this limit has elapsed the reefs
would perish, and if the subsidence continued they would be
carried down ; and if the group consisted only of atolls, only
open ocean would be left ; if it consisted partly or wholly
of encircled islands, these would be left naked and rcefless,
but should the area again become favourable for growth of
reefs, new barrier-reefs might be formed round them. As an
illustration of this notion of a certain average duration of
reefs on the same spot, compared with the average rate
of subsidence, we may take th,e case of Tahiti, an island of
7,000 feet high. Now here the present barrier-reefs would
never be continued upwards into an atoll, although, should
the subsidence continue at a period long after the death of
the present reefs, new ones might be formed high up round
its sides and ultimately over it. The case resolves itself
into : what is the ordinary height of groups of islands, of
the size of existing groups of atolls (excepting as many of
the highest islands as there now ordinarily occur encircling
barrier-reefs in the existing groups of atolls) ? and likewise
what is the height of the single scattered islands standing
between such groups of islands? Subsidence sufficient to
bury all these islands (with the exception of as many of
the highest as there are encircled islands in the present
groups of atolls) my theory absolutely requires, but no more.
To say what amount of subsidence would be required for
this end, one ought to know the height of all existing islands,
both single ones and those in groups, on the face of the
globe — and, indeed, of half a dozen worlds like ours. The
reefs may be of much greater [thickness] than that just
sufficient on an average to bury groups of islands ; and the
probability of the thickness being greater seems to resolve
itself into the average rate of subsidence allowing upward
growth, and average duration of reefs on the same spot.
Who will say what this rate and what this duration is ? but
till both are known, we cannot, I think, tell whether we ought
to look for upraised coral formations (putting on one side
denudation) above the unknown limit, say between 3,000 and
5,000 feet, necessary to submerge groups of common islands.
How wretchedly involved do these speculations become.

1841—1881] CORAL REE1

lo I.. von Mojsisovics. Letter 534

Down, Jan. 29th, 1
I thank you cordially for the continuation of your
fine work on the Tyrolc.se Dolomites,1 with its striking
engravings and the maps, which are quite wonderful from
the amount of labour which they exhibit, and its extreme
difficult}'. I well remember more than forty years ago
examining a section of Silurian limestone containing many
corals, and thinking to myself that it would be for ever
impossible to discover whether the ancient corals had formed
atolls or barrier reefs ; so you may well believe that your
work will interest me greatly as soon as I can find time to
read it. I am much obliged for your photograph, and from
its appearance rejoice to see that much more good work may
be expected from you.

I enclose my own photograph, in case you should like to
possess a copy.

To A. Agassiz.2 uttet

Part of this letter is published in Life and Letters, III., pp. 1S3, 184.

1 1 An, May 5th, 1SS1.
It was very good of you to write to me from Tortugas, as
I always feel much interested in hearing what you are about,
and in reading your many discoveries. It is a surprising
fact that the peninsula of Florida3 should have remained at
the same level for the immense period requisite for the
accumulation of so vast a pile of debris.

You will have seen Mr. Murray's views ' on the formation
of atolls and barrier reefs. Before publishing my book, I
thought long over the same view, but only as far as ordinary
marine organisms are concerned, for at that time little was
known of the multitude of minute oceanic organisms. I
rejected this view, as from the few dredgings made in the

1 Dolomitriffe Siidtirols und Venetiens : Wien, 1878.
- See note, p. 147.

3 Alexander Agassiz published a paper on " The Tortugas and Florida
Reefs " in the Mem. Amer. . Arts ana . XI., p. 107, 1 8S5. See
also his Tliree Cniitcs of the Blake, Vol. 1 .. I

4 "On the Structure and Origin of Coral Reefs and Islands/' Pt

A\ See. Edin., Vol. X., p. 505, 1S80. Prof. Bonney has given a summary
of Sir John Murray's views in Appendix 11. of the third edition of Darwin's
// Reefs, 1889.

I9§ GEOLCfGY [Chap. IX

Letter 535 Beagle in the S. Temperate regions, I concluded that shells,
the smaller corals, etc., etc., decayed and were dissolved
when not protected by the deposition of sediment ; and
sediment could not accumulate in the open ocean. Certainly
shells, etc., were in several cases completely rotten, and
crumbled into mud between my fingers ; but you will know
well whether this is in any degree common. I have expressly
said that a bank at the proper depth would give rise to an
atoll, which could not be distinguished from one formed
during subsidence. I can, however, hardly believe, in the
former presence of as many banks (there having been no
subsidence) as there are atolls in the great oceans, within a
reasonable depth, on which minute oceanic organisms could
have accumulated to the thickness of many hundred feet.
I think that it has been shown that the oscillations from
great waves extend down to a considerable depth, and if so
the oscillating water would tend to lift up (according to an
old doctrine propounded by Playfair) minute particles lying
at the bottom, and ;allow them to be slowly drifted away
from the submarine bank by the slightest current. Lastly,
I cannot understand Mr. Murray, who admits that small
calcareous organisms are dissolved by the carbonic acid in
the water at great depths, and that coral reefs, etc., etc., are
likewise dissolved near the surface, but that this does not
occur at intermediate depths, where he believes that the
minute oceanic calcareous organisms accumulate until the
bank reaches within the reef-building depth. But I suppose
that I must have misunderstood him.

Pray forgive me for troubling you at such a length, but
it has occurred to me that you might be disposed to give,
after your wide experience, your judgment. If I am wrong,
the sooner I am knocked on the head and annihilated so
much the better. It still seems to me a marvellous thing
that there should not have been much and long-continued
subsidence in the beds of the great oceans. I wish that some
doubly rich millionaire would take it into his head to have
borings made in some of the Pacific and Indian atolls, and
bring home cores for slicing from a depth of 500 or 600 feet.1

1 In 1 891 a Committee of the British Association was formed for the
investigation of an atoll by means of boring. The Royal Society took
up the scheme, and an expedition was sent to Funafuti, with Prof. Sollas

1846- 1856] CLEAVAGE AND FOLIATION

V. Cleavage and Foliation, [846-56. Letter 536

To D. Sharj

The following eight letters were written at a time when the subjects
of cleavage and foliation were already occupying the minds of several
geologists, including Sharpc, Sorby, Rogers, Haughton, Phillips, and
Tyndall. The paper by Sharpe referred to was published in 1847 (Quart.
Journ. Geol. Soc, Vol. III.), and his ideas were amplified in two later
papers {ibid., Vol. V., [849, and Phil. Trans., 1852). Darwin's own
views, based on his observations during the expedition, had

appeared in Chap. XIII. of South America (1846) and in the Manual of
Scientific Enquiry (1849), but are perhaps nowhere so clearly expressed
as in this correspondence. His most important contribution to the
question was in establishing the fact that foliation is often a part of
the sanu- process as cleavage, and is in nowise necessarily connected
with planes of stratification. Herein he was opposed to Lyell and the
other geologists of the day, but time has made good his position. The
postscript to Letter 542 is especially interesting. We arc indebted to
Mr. Marker, of St. John's College, for this note.

Down, Aug. 23rd [1846?].

I must just send one line to thank you fur your note, and
to say how heartily glad 1 am that you stick to the cleavage
and foliation question. Nothing will ever convince me that
it is not a noble subject of investigation, which will lead
some day to great views. I think it quite extraordinary
how little the subject seems to interest British geologists.
You will, 1 think, live to see the importance of your

asleader. Another expedition left Sydney in 1897 under the direction of
Prof. Edgeworth David, anil a deeper boring was made. The Reports
will be published in the Philosophical Transactions, and will contain Prof.
David's notes upon the boring and the island generally, Dr. Hindi
description of the microscopic structure of the cores and other examina-
tions of them, carried on at the Royal College of Science, South
Kensington. The boring reached a depth of 11 14 ft. ; the cores were
found to consist entirely of reef-forming corals in situ and in fragments,
with foraminifera and calcareous algae ; at the bottom there were no
traces of any other kind of rock. It seems, therefore, to us, that unless
it can be proved that reef- building corals began their work at depths of
at least 180 fathoms — far below that hitherto assigned — the result gives
the strongest support to Darwin's theory of subsidence ; the test which
Darwin wished to be applied has been fairly tried, and the verdict is
entirely in his favour.

1 Daniel Sharpc. See not. 3, p. 131.

200 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 536 paper 1 recognised. I had always thought that Studer 2 was
one of the few geologists who had taken a correct and enlarged
view on the subject.

Letter 537 To D. Sharpe.

Down [Nov. 1846].

I have been much interested with your letter, and am
delighted that you have thought my few remarks worth
attention. My observations on foliation are more deserving
confidence than those on cleavage ; for during my first year
in clay-slate countries, I was quite unaware of there being
any marked difference between cleavage and stratification ;
I well remember my astonishment at coming to the con-
clusion that they were totally different actions, and my
delight at subsequently reading Sedgwick's views 3 ; hence at
that time I was only just getting out of a mist with respect
to cleavage-laminae dipping inwards on mountain flanks. I
have certainly often observed it — so often that I thought
myself justified in propounding it as usual. I might perhaps
have been in some degree prejudiced by Von Buch's remarks,
for which in those days I had a somewhat greater deference
than I now have. The Mount at M. Video (p. 146 of my
book) 4 is certainly an instance of the cleavage-laminae of a
hornblendic schist dipping inwards on both sides, for I
examined this hill carefully with compass in hand and note-
book. I entirely admit, however, that a conclusion drawn
from striking a rough balance in one's mind is worth nothing
compared with the evidence drawn from one continuous line

1 Probably the paper " On Slaty Cleavage." Quart. Journ. Geol.
Soc., Vol. III., p. 74, 1847.

2 Several of Bernhard Studer's papers were translated and published
in the Edinburgh New Phil. Journ. See Vol. XL 1 1., 1847 ; Vol. XL IV.,
1848, etc.

3 " Remarks on the Structure of Large Mineral Masses, and especially
on the Chemical Changes produced in the Aggregation of Stratified Rocks
during different periods after their Deposition." Trans. Geol. Soc,
Vol. III., p. 461, 1835. In the section of this paper dealing with cleavage
(p. 469) Prof. Sedgwick lays stress on the fact that "the cleavage is in
no instance parallel to the true beds."

4 Geol. Obs. S. America, p. 146. The mount is described as con-
sisting of hornblendic slate ; " the lamina? of the slate on the north and
south side near the summit dip inwards."

1846—1856] CLEAVAG'E \NI> FOLIATION 201

of section. I read Studer's paper carefully, and drew the Letta
conclusion stated from it ; but I may very likely be in an
error. I only state that I have frequently seen cleavage-
laminae dipping inwards on mountain sides; that I cannot
give up, but I daresay a general extension of the rule (as
might justly be inferred from the manner of my statement)
would be quite erroneous. Von Buch's statement is in his
Travels in Norway ' ; I have unfortunately lost the referen<
and it is a high crime, I confess, even to refer to an opinion
without a precise reference. If you never read these travels
they might be worth skimming, chiefly as an amusement ;
and if you like and will send me a line by the general post of
Monday or Tuesday, I will cither send it up with Hopkins
on Wednesday, or bring it myself to the Geological Society.
I am very glad you are going to read Hopkins-; his vie.
appear to me eminently worth well comprehending ; false
views and language appear to me to be almost universally
held by geologists on the formation of fissures, dikes, and
mountain chains. If you would have the patience, I should
be glad if you would read in my / 'oleanic Islands from p. 65,
or even pp. 54 to 72 — viz., on the lamination of volcanic
rocks ; I may add that I sent the scries of specimens there
described to Professor Forbes of Edinburgh, and he thought
they bore out my views.

There is a short extract from Prof. Rogers 3 in the last
Edinburgh New Phil. Journal, well worth your attention, on
the cleavage of the Appalachian chain, and which seems
far more uniform in the direction of dip than in any case
which I have met with ; the Rogers doctrine of the ridge
being thrown up by great waves I believe is monstrous ;
but the manner in which the ridges have been thrown over
(as if by a lateral force acting on one side on a higher level
than on the other) is very curious, and he now states that the
cleavage is parallel to the axis-planes of these thrown-over
ridges. Your case of the limestone beds to my mind is the

1 Travels through \ way and Lapland durin wars iSot>

London, 1S13.

'J " Researches in Physical Geology." By W. Hopkins. Phil. Trans.
A'. Soc, 1839, p. 3S1 ; ibid, 184 2, p. 43, etc.

3 "On Cleavage of Slate-strata." Edinburgh New Phil. Journ.,
Vol. XL I., p. 4:-:, 1846.

202 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 537 greatest difficulty on any mechanical doctrine ; though I did
not expect ever to find actual displacement, as seems to be
proved by your shell evidence. I am extremely glad you
have taken up this most interesting subject in such a philo-
sophical spirit ; I have no doubt you will do much in it ;
Sedgwick let a fine opportunity slip away. I hope you will
get out another section like that in your letter ; these are
the real things wanted.

Letter 538 To. D. Sharpe.

Down, [Jan. 1847].

I am very much obliged for the MS., which I return.
1 do not quite understand from your note whether you have
struck out all on this point in your paper : I much hope not ;
if you have, allow me to urge on you to append a note,
briefly stating the facts, and that you omitted them in your
paper from the observations not being finished.

I am strongly tempted to suspect that the cleavage planes
will be proved by you to have slided a little over each other,
and to have been planes of incipient tearing, to use Forbes'
expression in ice ; it will in that case be beautifully analogical
with my laminated lavas, and these in composition are inti-
mately connected with the metamorphic schists.

The beds without cleavage between those with cleavage
do not weigh quite so heavily on me as on you. You
remember, of course, Sedgwick's facts of limestone, and mine
of sandstone, breaking in the line of cleavage, transversely
to the planes of deposition. If you look at cleavage as I do,
as the result of chemical action or crystalline forces, super-
induced in certain places by their mechanical state of tension,
then it is not surprising that some rocks should yield more or
less readily to the crystalline forces.

I think I shall write to Prof. Forbes * of Edinburgh,
with whom I corresponded on my laminated volcanic rocks,
to call his early attention to your paper.

Letter 539 T° D> SharPe«

Down, Oct. 16th [1851].

I am very much obliged to you for telling me the results
of your foliaceous tour, and I am glad you are drawing up an

1 Prof. D. Forbes.

1846— 1856] CLEAVAGE AND FOLIATK 203

account for the Royal Society.1 I hope you will have a Letter 539
good illustration or map of the waving line of junction of the
slate and schist with uniformly directed cleava iation.

It strikes me as crucial. I remember longing for an oppor-
tunity to observe this point All that I say is that when slate
and the metamorphic schists occur in the same neighbourhood,
the cleavage and foliation arc uniform : of this I have seen
many cases, but I have never observed slate overlying mica-
slate. I have, however, observed many cases of glo
clay-slate included within mica-schist and gneiss. All your
other observations on the order, etc., seem very interesting.
From conversations with Lyell, etc., I recommend you to
describe in a little detail the nature of the metamorphic
schists ; especially whether there are quasi-substrata of
different varieties of mica-slate or gneiss, etc. ; and whether
you traced such quasi beds into the cleavage slate. I ha v
not the least doubt of such facts occurring, from what I have
seen (and described at M. Video) of portions of fine chloritie
schists being entangled in the midst of a gneiss district. Have
you had any opportunity of tracing a bed of marble ? This,
I think, from reasons given at p. 166 of my S. ./
would be very interesting. A suspicion has sometimes
occurred to me (I remember more especially when tracing
the clay-slate at the Cape of Go id Hope turning into true
gneiss) that possibly all the metamorphic schists necessarily
once existed as clay-slate, and that the foliation did not arise
or take its direction in the metamorphic schists, but resulted
simply from the pre-existing cleavage. The so-called beds in

1 "On the Arrangement of the Foliation and Cleavage of the Rocks
of the North of Scotland." Phil. Trans. R. Soc, 1852, p. 445. with
Plates XXIII. and XXIV.

' " I have never had an opportunity of tracing, for any distance, aloi
the line both of strike and dip, the so-called beds in the metamorphic
schists, but I strongly suspect that they would not be found to extend,
with the same character, very far in the line either of their dip or strike.
Hence I am led to believe that most of ti the

nature of complex folia, and have not been separately dep sited. < 't
course, this view cannot be extended to thick masses included in the
metamorphic series, which are of totally different composition from the
adjoining schists, ami which are far-extended, as is sometimes the case
with quartz and marble ; these must generally be of the nature of true
strata" {G. Observations^ p. 166).

204 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 539 the metamorphic schists, so unlike common cleavage lamina?,
seems the best, or at least one argument against such a
suspicion. Yet I think it is a point deserving your notice.
Have you thought at all over Rogers' Law, as he reiterates
it, of cleavage being parallel to his axes-planes of elevation ?

If you know beforehand, will you tell me when your
paper is read, for the chance of my being able to attend ?
I very seldom leave home, as I find perfect quietude suits
my health best.

Letter 540 To C. Lyell.

Down, Jan. 10th, 1855.

I received your letter yesterday, but was unable to answer
it, as I had to go out at once on business of importance. 1
am very glad that you are reconsidering the subject of folia-
tion ; I have just read over what I have written on the subject,
and admire it very much,1 and abide by it all. You will not
readily believe how closely I attended to the subject, and in
how many and wide areas I verified my remarks. I see I
have put pretty strongly the mechanical view of origin ;
but I might even then, but was afraid, have put my belief
stronger. Unfortunately I have not D. Sharpe's paper here
to look over, but I think his chief points [are] (1) the foliation
forming great symmetrical curves, and (2) the proof from
effects of form of shell 2 of the mechanical action in cleaved
rocks. The great curvature would be, I think, a grand
discovery of Sharpe's, but I confess there is some want of
minuteness in the statement of Sharpe which makes me wish
to see his facts confirmed. That the foliation and cleavage
are parts of curves I am quite prepared, from what I have
seen, to believe ; but the simplicity and grandeur of Sharpe's
curves rather stagger me. I feel deeply convinced that when
(and I and Sharpe have seen several most striking and obvious
examples) great neighbouring or alternating regions of true
metamorphic schists and clay-slate have their foliations and
cleavage parallel, there is no way of escaping the conclusion,
that the layers of pure quartz, feldspar, mica, chlorite, etc., etc.,
are due not to original deposition, but to segregation ; and
this is I consider the point which I have established. This'

1 Geological Observations on South America, Chapter VI., 1846.

2 This refers to the distortion of shells in cleaved rocks.

•

■

■/'/ /

I ' i r

//

1846—1856] LEAVAG1 AND FOLIATIOl 205

is very odd, but I suspect that great metamorphic areas an 540

generally derived from the metamorph t clay-slate, and

from alternating layers of ordinary sedimentary matter.

I think you have exactly put the chief difficult}- in
strongest light — viz. what would be the result of pure or
nearly pure layers of very different mineralogical composition
being metamorphosed ? I believe even such might be con-
verted into an ordinary varying mass of metamorphic schis
I am certain of the correctness of my account of patches
chlorite schists enclosed in other schist, and of cnorm
quartzose veins of segregation being absolutely continuous
and contemporaneous with the folia of quartz, and such, I
think, might be the result of the folia crossing a true stratum
of quartz. I think my description of the wonderful and
LUtiful laminated volcanic r< cks at Ascension would be
worth your looking at.1

To C. Lycll. Letter 541

Down, Jan. 14th [1855].

We were yesterday and the day before house-hunting, so
I could not answer your letter. 1 hope we have succeeded in
a house, after infinite trouble, but am not sure, in York Place,
Baker Street.

I do not doubt that I cither read or heard from Sharpe
about the Grampians ; otherwise from my own old suspicion
I should not have inserted the passage in the manual.

The laminated rocks at Ascension are described at p. t

As far as my experience has gone, I should speak only of
clay-slate being associated with mica-slate, for when near the
metamorphic schists I have found stratification so gone that
I should not dare to speak of them as overlying them. With
respect to the difficulty of beds of quartz and marble, this
has for years startled me, and I have longed (since I have felt
its force) to have some opportunity of testing this point, for
without you are sure that the beds of quartz dip, as well as
strike, parallel to the foliation, the case is only just like true
strata of sandstone included in clay-slate and striking parallel

1 Geological Obser, S.Ameri -.pp. 16'.

Observations on the Volcanic Islands, Chap. III. (Ascension), 1S44.

• Volcanic ls!,i>:.;<. p. 54. "Singular laminated beds alternating with
and passing into obsidian."

206 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 541 to the cleavage of the clay-slate, but of course with different
dip (excepting in those rare cases when cleavage and stratifi-
cation are parallel). Having this difficulty before my eyes, I
was much struck with MacCulloch's statement (p. 166 of
my vS\ America) about marble in the metamorphic series not
forming true strata.

Your expectation of the metamorphic schists sending veins
into neighbouring rocks is quite new to me ; but I much doubt
whether you have any right to assume fluidity from almost
any amount of molecular change. I have seen in fine volcanic
sandstone clear evidence of all the calcareous matter travelling
at least 4J ft. in distance to concretions on either hand (p. 113
of .S. America).1 I have not examined carefully, from not
soon enough seeing all the difficulties ; but I believe, from
what I have seen, that the folia in the metamorphic schists
(I do not here refer to the so-called beds) are not of great
length, but thin out, and are succeeded by others ; and the
notion I have of the molecular movements is shown in the
indistinct sketch herewith sent [Fig. 6]. The quartz of
the strata might here move into the position of the folia
without much more movement, of molecules than in the
formation of concretions. I further suspect in such cases as
this, when there is a great original abundance of quartz,
that great branching contemporaneous veins of segregation
(as sometimes called) of quartz would be formed. I can
only thus understand the relation which exists between the
distorted foliation (not appearing due to injection) and the
presence of such great veins.

I believe some gneiss, as the gneiss-granite of Humboldt,
has been as fluid as granite, but I do not believe that this is
usually the case, from the frequent alternations of glossy clay
and chlorite slates, which we cannot suppose to have been
melted.

I am far from wishing to doubt that true sedimentary
strata have been converted into metamorphic schists : all

1 "Some of these concretions (flattened spherical concretions com-
posed of hard calcareous sandstone, containing a few shells, occurring in
a bed of sandstone) were 4 ft. in diameter, and in a horizontal line 9 ft.
apart, showing that the calcareous matter must have been drawn to the
centres of attraction from a distance of four feet and a half on both
sides" {Geological Observations on S. America, p. 113).

1 846—1856]

< l.i:.\\ AG 1. AND FOLIATION

207

I can say is, that in the three or four great is, where I Letta 541

could ascertain the relations of the metamorphic schists to
the neighbouring cleaved rocks, it was impossible (as it
appeared to me) to admit that the foliation was due to
aqueous deposition. Now that you intend agitating the
subject, it will soon be cleared up.

■-■.-■■

Fig. 6.

To C. Lyell.

27, York Place, Baker Street [1S55].

I have received your letter from Down, and I have been
studying my S. American book.

I ought to have stated [it] more clearly, but undoubtedly

Lettei

208 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 542 in W. Tierra del Fuego, where clay-slate passes by alternation
into a grand district of mica-schist, and in the Chonos Islands
and La Plata, where glossy slates occur within the meta-
morphic schists, the foliation is parallel to the cleavage — i.e.
parallel in strike and dip ; but here comes, I am sorry and
ashamed to say, a great hiatus in my reasoning. I have
assumed that the cleavage in these neighbouring or inter-
calated beds was (as in more distant parts) distinct from
stratification. If you choose to say that here the cleavage
was or might be parallel to true bedding, I cannot gainsay
it, but can only appeal to apparent similarity to the great
areas of uniformity of strike and high angle — all certainly
unlike, as far as my experience goes, to true stratification.
I have long known how easily I overlook flaws in my own
reasoning, and this is a flagrant case. I have been amused

Fig. 7.

to find, for I had quite forgotten, how distinctly I give a
suspicion (top of page 155) to the idea, before Sharpe, of
cleavage (not foliation) being due to the laminae forming
parts of great curves.1 I well remember the fine section at
the end of a region where the cleavage (certainly cleavage)
had been most uniform in strike and most variable in dip.

I made with really great care (and in MS. in detail)
observations on a case which I believe is new, and bears
on your view of metamorphosis (p. 149, at bottom).2

In a clay-slate porphyry region, where certain thin sedi-
mentary layers of tuff had by self-attraction shortened

1 " I suspect that the varying and opposite dips (of the cleavage-
planes) may possibly be accounted for by the cleavage-laminae . . .
being parts of large abrupt curves, with their summits cut off and worn
down " {Geological Observations on S. America, p. 155).

" Ibid., p. 149.

1846- 1856] CLEAVAGE AND FOLIATION 209

themselves into little curling pieces, and then again into Letter 542
crystals of feldspar of large size, and which consequently
were all strictly parallel, the scries was perfect and
beautiful. Apparently also the rounded grains of quart/.
had in other parts ag r< fated themselves into crystalline
nodules of quartz. [Fig. 7.]

I have not been able to get Sorb}' yet, but shall not
probably have anything to write on it. I am delighted you
have taken up the subject, even if I am utterly floored.

P.S. — I have a presentiment it will turn out that when
clay-slate has been metamorphosed the foliation in the resultant
schist has been due generally (if not, as 1 think, always)
to the cleavage, and this to a certain degree will "save my
bacon" (please look at my saving clause, p. 107),1 but [with]
other rocks than that, stratification has been the rulin it,

the strike, but not the dip, being in such cases parallel to
any adjoining clay-slate. If this be so, pre-existing planes
of division, we must suppose on my view of the cause, de-
termining the lines of crystallisation and segregation, and not
planes of division produced for the first time during the act
of crystallisation, as in volcanic rocks. If this should ever be
proved, I shall not look back with utter shame at my work.

To J. D. Hooker. L ..,, -4J

Down, Sept. 8th [1S56].
I got your letter of the 1st this morning, and a real good
man you have been to write. Of all the things 1 ever heard,
Mrs. Hooker's pedestrian feats beat them. My brother is
quite right in his comparison of " as strong as a woman," as
a type of strength. Your letter, after what you have seen
in the Himalayas, etc., gives me a wonderful idea of the
beauty of the Alps. How I wish 1 was one-half or one-

1 "As in some cases it appears that where a fissile rock has been
exposed to partial metamorphic action (for instance, from the irruption of
granite) the foliation has supervened on the already existing cleavage-
planes ; so, perhaps in some instances, the foliation of a rock may have
been determined by the original planes of deposition or of oblique current
laminae. I have, however, myself never seen such a case, and I must
maintain that in most extensive metamorphic areas the foliation is the
extreme result of that process, of which cleavage is the first effe<
(Ibid., p. 167).

VOL. II. 14

2IO GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 543 quarter as strong as Mrs. Hooker : but that is a vain hope.
You must have had some very interesting work with
glaciers, etc. When will the glacier structure and motion
ever be settled! When reading Tyndall's1 paper it seemed
to me that movement in the particles must come into play
in his own doctrine of pressure ; for he expressly states that
if there be pressure on all sides, there is no lamination.
I suppose I cannot have understood him, for I should have
inferred from this that there must have been movement
parallel to planes of pressure.

Sorby 2 read a paper to the Brit. Assoc, and he comes
to the conclusion that gneiss, etc., may be metamorphosed
cleavage or strata ; and I think he admits much chemical
segregation along the planes of division. I quite subscribe
to this view, and should have been sorry to have been so
utterly wrong, as I should have been if foliation was identical
with stratification.

I have been nowhere and seen no one, and really have
no news of any kind to tell you. I have been working away
as usual, floating plants in salt water inter alia, and confound
them, they all sink pretty soon, but at very different rates.
Working hard at pigeons, etc., etc. By the way, I have been
astonished at the differences in the skeletons of domestic
rabbits. I showed some of the points to Waterhouse, and
asked him whether he could pretend that they were not as
great as between species, and he answered, " They are a
great deal more." How very odd that no zoologist should
ever have thought it worth while to look to the real structure
of varieties. . . .

1 Prof. Tyndall had published papers " On Glaciers," and " On some
Physical Properties of Ice" (Proc. R. Inst., 1854-58) before the date
of this letter. In 1856 he wrote a paper entitled " Observations on 'The
Theory of the Origin of Slaty Cleavage,' by H. C. Sorby." Phil. Mag.,
XII., 1856, p. 129.

2 "On the Microscopical Structure of Mica-schist :" Brit. Ass. Rep.,
1856, p. 78. See also Letters 540 — 542.

1 •> 1S77J 21 I

VI, AGE "i l Hi: Wi >RLD, [86* 77. Letter 54^

To J. Croll.

Down, Sept. 19th, 1S68.

I hope that you will allow me to thank you for sendin
mc your papers in the Phil. Magazine} I have never, I
think, in my life been so deeply interested by any geological
discussion. I now fust begin to see what a million mean ,
and 1 feel quite ashamed of myself at the silly way in which
I have spoken of millions of years. I was formerly a great
believer in the power of the sea in denudation, and this was
perhaps natural, as must of my geological work was done
near sea-coasts and on islands. Hut it is a consolation to
me to reflect that as soon as I read Mr. Whittaker's paper8
on the escarpments of England, and Ramsay3 and Jukes'1
papers, I gave up in my own mind the case ; but I never
fully realised the truth until reading your papers just
received. How often 1 have speculated in vain on the origin
of the valleys in the chalk platform round this place, but now
all is clear. I thank you cordially for having cleared so
much mist from before my eyes.

To T. Mellard Reade. Letter S4^

I . . I b. 9th, 1877.
I am much obliged for your kind note, and the present
of your essay. 1 have read it with great interest, and the
results are certainly must surprisin It appears to mc

1 doll published several papers in the Philosophical Magazine between
, and the date of this letter (1868).

* "On Subaerial Denudation," ami "On Cliffs and Escarpments o\
the Chalk and Lower Tertiary Beds," Geol. Mag., Vol. 1 V., p. 44~. 1

8 Quart. Joum. Geol. Soc., Vol. XVIII., p. [85, [8 On the

Glacial Origin of certain Lakes in Switzerland, the Black Forest, G

Britain, Sweden, North America, and elsewhere."

4 Quart. Joum. Geol. >, .. Vol. XVIII., p. 378. 1862. - 1 >n the Mode
of Formation of some River-Valleys in the South of Ireland."

•'' Presidential Address delivered by T. Mellaril Reade before the
Liverpool Geological Society [Proc. Liverpool Cool. Soc, VoL III.,
pt. hi., p. 211, 1877). See also "Examination o\ a Calculation of the
of the Earth, based upon the hypothesis of the Permanence of Oceans
and Continents." uoo/. Mag., Vol. X., p. 309, 1SS3.

212 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 545 almost monstrous that Professor Tait * should say that the
duration of the world has not exceeded ten million years.
The argument which seems the most weighty in favour of
the belief that no great number of millions of years have
elapsed since the world was inhabited by living creatures is
the rate at which the temperature of the crust increases, and
I wish that I could see this argument answered.

Letter 546 To J. Croll.

Down, Aug. 9th, 1877.

I am much obliged for your essay, which I have read with
the greatest interest. With respect to the geological part,
I have long wished to see the evidence collected on the time
required for denudation, and you have done it admirably.2 I
wish some one would in a like spirit compare the thickness
of sedimentary rocks with the quickest estimated rate of de-
position by a large river, and other such evidence. Your main
argument with respect to the sun seems to me very striking.

My son George desires me to thank you for his copy, and
to say how much he has been interested by it.

VII. Geological Action of Earthworms, 1880-82.

"My whole soul is absorbed with worms just at present." (From a
letter to Sir W. Thistleton-Dyer, Nov. 26th, 1880.)

Letter 547 To T. H. Farrer (Lord Farrer).3

The five following letters, written shortly before and after the pub-
lication of The Formation of Vegetable Mould through the Action of
IVorms, 1881, deal with questions connected with Mr. Darwin's work
on the habits and geological action of earthworms.

Down, Oct. 20th, 1880.

What a man you are to do thoroughly whatever you
undertake to do ! The supply of specimens has been

1 Lecture on Some Recent Advances in Physical Science, by P. G. Tait,
London, 1876.

2 In a paper " On the Tidal Retardation Argument for the Age of the
Earth" (Brit. Assoc. Report, 1876, p. 88), Croll reverts to the influence of
subaerial denudation in altering the form of the earth as an objection to
the argument from tidal retardation. He had previously dealt with this
subject in Climate and Time, Chap. XX., London, 1875.

3 See note, Vol. I., p. 393.

1880-1882] EARTHWORMS 213

magnificent, and I have worked at them for a day and Letter 547

a half. I find a very few wcll-rounthd grains of brick in
the castings from over the gravel walk, and plenty over the
hole in the field, and over the Roman Hour.1 You have done
me the greatest possible service by making me more cautious
than I should otherwise have been — viz., by sending me the
rubbish from the road itself; in this rubbish I find very many
particles, rounded (I suppose) by having been crushed, angles
knocked off, and somewhat rolled about. But not a few of
the particles may have passed through the bodies of worms
during the years since the road was laid down. I still think
that the fragments arc ground in the gizzards of worms, which
always contain bits of stone ; but I must try and get more
evidence. I have to-day started a pot with worms in very
fine soil, with sharp fragments of hard tiles laid on the surface,
and hope to see in the course of time whether any of those
become rounded. I do not think that more specimens from
Abingcr would aid me. . . .

To G. J. Romanes. Letter 54S

Down, March 7th.

I was quite mistaken about the Gardener^ Chronicle ;
in my index there are only the few enclosed and quite
insignificant references having any relation to the minds of
animals. When I returned to my work, I found that I had
nearly completed my statement of facts about worms plugging
up their burrows with leaves,-' etc., etc., so I waited until I had
naturally to draw up a few concluding remarks. I hope that
it will not bore you to read the few accompanying pages,
and in the middle you will find a few sentences with a sort
of definition of, or rather discussion on, intelligence. I am

1 See The Formation of Vegetable Mould, 1881, pp. 178 et seq. The

Roman remains formed part of a villa discovered at Abinger, Surrey.
Excavations were carried out, under Lord Farrer's direction, in a field
adjoining the ground in which the Roman villa was first found, and
extended observations were made by Lord Farrer, which led Mr. Darwin
to conclude that a large part of the fine vegetable mould covering the
floor of the villa had been brought up from below by worms.

3 Chapter II. of The Formation of Vegetable Mould t/uou.
Action of Worms, 1SS1, contains a discussion on the intelligence shown
by worms in the manner of plugging up their burrows with leaves (pp. 7S
et seq.).

214 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 548 altogether dissatisfied with it. I tried to observe what passed
in my own mind when I did the work of a worm. If I come
across a professed metaphysician, I will ask him to give me a
more technical definition, with a few big words about the
abstract, the concrete, the absolute, and the infinite ; but
seriously, I should be grateful for any suggestions, for it
will hardly do to assume that every fool knows what " in-
telligent" means.1 You will understand that the MS. is
only the first rough copy, and will need much correction.
Please return it, for I have no other copy— only a few
memoranda. When I think how it has bothered me to
know what I mean by " intelligent," I am sorry for you in
your great work on the minds of animals.

I daresay that I shall have to alter wholly the MS.

Letter 549 To Francis Galton.

Down, March 8th [18S1].

Very many thanks for your note. 1 have been observing
the [worm] tracks on my walks for several months, and they
occur (or can be seen) only after heavy rain. As I know that
worms which are going to die (generally from the parasitic
larva of a fly) always come out of their burrows, I have
looked out during these months, and have usually found
in the morning only from one to three or four along the
whole length of my walks. On the other hand, I remember
having in former years seen scores or hundreds of dead
worms 2 after heavy rain. I cannot possibly believe that
worms are drowned in the course of even three or four days'
immersion ; and I am inclined to conclude that the death of

1 " Mr. Romanes, who has specially studied the minds of animals,
believes that we can safely infer intelligence only when we see an
individual profiting by its own experience. . . . Now, if worms try to
drag objects into their burrows, first in one way and then in another,
until they at last succeed, they profit, at least in each particular
instance, by experience" {The Formation of Vegetable Mould, 1881,

P- 95)-

2 " After heavy rain succeeding dry weather, an astonishing number
of dead worms may sometimes be seen lying on the ground. Mr. Galton
informs me that on one occasion (March, 1881), the dead worms
averaged one for every two-and-a-half paces in length on a walk in
Hyde Park, four paces in width " (Joe. cit, p. 14).

1SS0-1SS2] EARTHWORM 215

sickly (probably with orms is thus hastened. I Letter 549

will add a few words to what 1 have said about the e track
Occasionally worms suffer from epidemics (of what nature I
know not) and die by the million on the surface of th

round. Your ruby paper answers capitally, but I suspect
that it is only for dimming the light, and i know not h<
illuminate worms by the same intensity of light, and yet of a
colour which permits the actinic rays to pas--. 1 have tried
drawing triangles of damp paper1 through a small cylindrical
hole, as you suggested, and I can discover no source of error.
Nevertheless I am becoming more doubtful about the intel-
ligence of worms. The worst job is that they will do their
work in a slovenly manner when kept in pots,- and I am
beyond measure perplexed to judge h such observ

ti. >ns are trustwi >rthy.

To E. Ray Lankcster. i...rr .. ,

Mr. Lankcster had written Oct. nth, [881, to thank Mr. Darwin for
the present of the Earthworm book. lie a>ks whether Darwin know
of " any experiments on the influence of sea-water on earthworms. I
have assumed that it is fatal to them. But there is a littoral species
{Pontodrilus of Lerrier) found at Marseilles." Lankester adds, " It is
a great pleasure and source of pride to me to see my drawing of the
earthworm's alimentary canal figuring in your pages."

i.?th [1881].

I have been much pleased and interested by your note.
I never actually tried sea-water, but I was very fond of
angling when a boy, and as I could not bear to see the worms
wriggling on the hook, 1 dipped them always first in salt
water, and this kilted them very quickly. I remember, though
not very distinctly, s< eing several earthworms dead on the beach
close to where a little brook entered, and I assumed that they
had been brought down by the brook, killed by the sea-water,
and cast on shore. With your skill and great knowledge,
I have no doubt thai y u will make out much new about the
anatomy of worms, whenc\ u take up the subject again.

1 Triangles of paper were used in experiments to test the intelligence
of worms {loc. a'/., p. 83 >.
* Loc. cit., p. "

2l6 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 551 To J. H. Gilbert.1

Down, Jan. 12th, 1882.

I have been much interested by your letter, for which I
thank you heartily. There was not the least cause for you
to apologise for not having written sooner, for I attributed
it to the right cause, i.e. your hands being full of work.

Your statement about the quantity of nitrogen in the
collected castings is most curious, and much exceeds what I
should have expected. In lately reading one of your and
Mr. Lawes' great papers in the Philosophical Transactions*
(the value and importance of which cannot, in my opinion,
be exaggerated) I was struck with the similarity of your
soil with that near here ; and anything observed here would
apply to your land. Unfortunately I have never made deep
sections in this neighbourhood, so as to see how deep the
worms burrow, except in one spot, and here there had
been left on the surface of the chalk a little very fine ferru-
ginous sand, probably of Tertiary age ; into this the worms
had burrowed to a depth of 55 and 61 inches. I have never
seen here red castings on the surface, but it seems possible
(from what I have observed with reddish sand) that much of
the red colour of the underlying clay would be discharged in
passing through the intestinal canal.

Worms usually work near the surface, but I have noticed
that at certain seasons pale-coloured earth is brought up from
beneath the overlying blackish mould on my lawn ; but from
what depth I cannot say. That some must be brought
up from a depth of four to five or six feet is certain, as the
worms retire to this depth during very dry and very cold
weather. As worms devour greedily raw flesh and dead
worms, they could devour dead larvae, eggs, etc., etc., in the
soil, and thus they might locally add to the amount of nitrogen
in the soil, though not of course if the whole country is con-
sidered. I saw in your paper something about the difference

1 The late Sir J. Gilbert, of Rothamsted.

2 The first Report on " Agricultural, Botanical, and Chemical
Results of Experiments on the Mixed Herbage of Permanent Grass-
land, conducted for many years in succession on the same land," was
published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in 1880,
the second paper appeared in the Phil. Trans, for 1882, and the third
in the Phil. Trans, of 1900, Vol. 192, p. 139.

1846— 1S7S] MISCELLANEOU 2\;

in the amount of nitrogen at different depths in the suj 55'

mould, and hen- worms may have playi trt. I wish that

the problem had been b I ob ervin ibly

I might have thrown some litt ht on it, which would h

pi ised me greatly.

VII I. MlSCl LLANEOUS, [846 ;

The following tour letters ted with the origin

of coal.

To J. D. Honker.

Down, May [1846].
I am delighted that you arc in the field, ising

or palaeontologising. I beg you to read the two !
account; of the Coal-fields of \. America1; in my opinion
the}- arc eminently instructive and si; I can lend

you their resume* of their own labours, and, indeed, I do not
know that their work is yet published in full. L. Horner2
gives a capital balance of difficulties on the Coal-theory in
his last Anniversary Address, which, if you have not n
will, I think, interest you. In a paper just read an author3
throws out the idea that the Sigillaria was an aquatic plant4
— I suppose a Cycad-Conifer with the habits of the man-
grove. From simple geological reasoning I have for some
time been led to suspect that the great (and great and
difficult it is) problem of the Coal would be solved on the
theory of the upright plants having been aquatic. But even
on Mich, I presume improbable notion, there are, as it stril
me, immense difficulties, and none greater than the width
of the coal-fields. On what kind of coast or land could the
plants have lived ? It is a grand problem, and I trust you will
grapple with it. 1 shall like much to have some discussion
with you. When will you come here again? I am very sorry
to infer from your letter that your sister has been ill.

1 On the Physical Structure Appalach . by W. B. ami

H. D. Rogers. Boston, 1 845. Sec also . by

II. D. Rogers. 4 vols. London and Philadelphia, 1S43.

'-' Quart. Journ. . Vol. II., 1846, p. 1

3 uOn the Remarkable Fossil Trees lately discovered near St. Helen
By E. W. Binney. Phil. Mag., Vol. XXIV., p 1 .4- On p. 173

the author writes : "The .'; or 6 io, whichever name is to

be retained .... was a tree that undoubtedly grew in wati

* See Life and Letters, I., pp. 356 et 1

2l8 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 553 To J. D. Hooker.

[June 2nd, 1847.]

I received your letter the other day, full of curious facts,
almost all new to me, on the coal-question.1 I will bring
your note to Oxford,2 and then we will talk it over. I feel
pretty sure that some of your purely geological difficulties
are easily solvable, and I can, I think, throw a very little
light on the shell difficulty. Pray put no stress in your
mind about the alternate, neatly divided, strata of sandstone
and shale, etc. I feel the same sort of interest in the coal
question as a man does watching two good players at play,
he knowing little or nothing of the game. I confess your
last letter (and this you will think very strange) has almost
raised Binney's notion (an old, growing hobby-horse of mine)
to the dignity of an hypothesis,3 though very far yet below
the promotion of being properly called a theory.

I will bring the remainder of my species-sketch to Oxford
to go over your remarks. I have lately been getting a good
many rich facts. 1 saw the poor old Dean of Manchester 4
on Friday, and he received me very kindly. He looked
dreadfully ill, and about an hour afterwards died ! I am
most sincerely sorry for it.

l etier 554 To J- D- Hooker.

[May 12th, 1847.]

I cannot resist thanking you for your most kind note.
Pray do not think that I was annoyed by your letter. I
perceived that you had been thinking with animation, and
accordingly expressed yourself strongly, and so I understood
it. Forefcnd me from a man who weighs every expression
with Scotch prudence. I heartily wish you all success in

1 Sir Joseph Hooker deals with the formation of coal in his classical
paper " On the Vegetation of the Carboniferous Period, as compared with
that of the Present Day." Mem. Geo/. Surv. Great Britain, Vol. II.,
pt. ii., 1848.

2 The British Association met at Oxford in 1847.

3 Binney suggested that the Coal-plants grew in salt water. (See
Letters 102, 552.) Recent investigations have shown that several of the
plants of the Coal period possessed certain anatomical peculiarities, which
indicate xerophytic characteristics, and lend support to the view that
some at least of the plants grew in seashore swamps.

4 Dean Herbert.

i846— 187S] MISCELLANE01 21

your noble problem, and I shall be very curious to have Letter 554
some talk with you and hear your ultimatum.1 I do really
think, after Binney's pamphlet,2 it will be worth your while
to array your facts and ideas against an aquatic origin of
the coal, though I do not know whether you object to fresh-
water. I am sure I have read somewhere of the cones of
Lepidodendron being found round the stump of a tree, or
am I confusing something else ? How interesting all rooted
— bctter.it seems from what you say, than upright — specimens
become.

I wish Ehrenberg would undertake a microscopical hunt
for infusoria in the underclay and shales ; it might reveal
something. Would a comparison of the ashes of terrestrial
peat and coal give any clue?3 Peat ashes arc good manure,
and coal ashes, except mechanically, I believe are of little
use. Does this indicate that the soluble salts have been
washed out? i.e., if they are not present. I go up to
Geological Council to-day — so farewell.

In a letter to Sir Joseph Hooker, Oct. 6th, 1S47, Mr. Darwin, in
referring to the origin of Coal, wrote : "... I sometimes think it could
not have been formed at all. Old Sir Anthony Carlisle once said to me
gravely that he supposed Megatherium and such cattle were just sent
down from heaven to see whether the earth would support them, and I
suppose the coal was rained down to puzzle mortals. You must work the
coal well in India."

T( 1 J. I). Hooker. 1

Down May 22\\\, r
Lycll tells me that Binney has published in Proceedings

of Manchester Society a paper trying to show that Coal

1 The above paragraph wa p 1 in Life and .' I .

1 "On the Origin of Coal," Mem. Lit. Phil. Soc, Manchester
Vol. VIII., p. 148, 1848.

3 In an article by M. F. Rigaud on "La Formation dc la Iloui'
published in the Revue Scientifique, Vol. II., p. 14. the author lays

stress on the absence of certain elements in the ash of coals, which ought
to be present, on the assumption that the carbon has been derived from
plant tissues. If coal consists of altered vegetable . we ought to

find a certain amount of alkalies and phosphoric acid in its ash. Had
such substances ever been present, it is difficult to understand how they
could all have been removed by the solvent action of water. (Rigaud's
views are given at greater length in an article on the " Structure and
Formation of Coal,'' Science Progress, Vol. II., pp. 355 and 431, 1

220 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 555 plants must have grown in very marine marshes.1 Do you
remember how savage you were long years ago at my
broaching such a conjecture ?

Letter 556 To L. Horner.

Down [1846?].

I am truly pleased at your approval of my book2 : it was
very kind of you taking the trouble to tell me so. I long
hesitated whether I would publish it or not, and now that I
have done so at a good cost of trouble, it is indeed highly
satisfactory to think that my labour has not been quite
thrown away.

I entirely acquiesce in your criticism on my calling the
Pampean formation " recent " 3 ; Pleistocene would have been
far better. I object, however, altogether on principle (whether
I have always followed my principle is another question)
to designate any epoch after man. It breaks through all
principles of classification to take one mammifer as an
epoch. And this is presupposing we know something of
the introduction of man : how few years ago all beds earlier
than the Pleistocene were characterised as being before the
monkey epoch. It appears to me that it may often be con-
venient to speak of an Historical or Human deposit in the
same way as we speak of an Elephant bed, but that to apply
it to an epoch is unsound.

I have expressed myself very ill, and I am not very sure
that my notions are very clear on this subject, except that I
know that I have often been made wroth (even by Lyell) at
the confidence with which people speak of the introduction of

1 " On the Origin of Coal," by E. W. Binney, Mem. Lit. Phil. Soc.
Manchcste?', Vol. VIII., 184S, p. 148. Binney examines the evidence on
which dry land has been inferred to exist during the formation of the
Coal Measures, and comes to the conclusion that the land was covered
by water, confirming Brongniart's opinion that Sigillaria was an aquatic
plant. He believes the Sigillaria "grew in water, on the deposits where
it is now discovered, and that it is the plant which in a great measure
contributed to the formation of our valuable beds of coal." {Loc. cit.,

P- I93-)

2 Geological Observations on South America, London, 1846.

3 " We must, therefore, conclude that the Pampean formation belongs,
in the ordinary geological sense of the word, to the Recent Period."
{Geol. Obs., p. 101).

1846— IS7-S] MISCELLANE01

man, as if they had seen him walk on the stage, and as if, in Letta
a geological chronological sense, it was more important than
the entry of any other mammii

You ask me to do a most puzzling thing, to point out

what is newest in my volume, and 1 found myself incapable
of doing almost the same for Lyell. My mind from

point t<> point without deciding: what has interested oneself
or given most trouble is, perhaps quite falsely, thought
newest. The elevation of the land is perhaps in
carefully tieated than any other subject, but it cannot,
course, be called new. 1 have made out a sort of index,
which will not take you a couple of minutes to skim over,
and then you will perhaps judge what seems newest. The
summary at the end of the book would also serve same
purpose.

I do not know where E. dc 15. [Klie de Beaumont] h
lately put forth on the recent elevation of the Cordillera. He
" rapported " favourably on d'Orbigny, who in late times fin
off a most Royal salute ; every volcano bursting forth in the
Andes at the same time with their elevation, the cUb&cle thus
caused depositing all the Pampean mud and all the Pata-
gonian shingle ! Is not this making Geology nice and simple
for beginners ?

We have been very sorry to hear of Bunbury's severe
illness; I believe the measles are often dangerous to grown-
up people. I am very glad that your last account was so
much better.

1 am astonished that you should have had the courage
to go right through my book. It is quite obvious that
most geologists find it far easier to write than to read a
book.

Ch. I. and II.— Elevation of the land: equability on E.
coast as shown by terraces, p. 19 ; length on W. coast, p. 53 ;
height at Valparaiso, p. 12 ; number of periods of rest at
Coquimbo, p. 49; elevation within Human period near Lima
greater than elsewhere observed ; the discussion (p. 41) on
non-hori/.ontality of terraces perhaps one of newest features —
on formation of terraces rather newish.

Ch. III., p. 6?. Argument of horizontal elevation of
Cordillera 1 believe new. 1 think the connection (p. 54)
between earthquake [shocks] and insensible rising important.

222 GEOLOGY [Chap IX

Letter 556 Ch. IV. — The strangeness of the (Eocene) mammifers,
co-existing with recent shells.

Ch. V. — Curious pumiceous infusorial mudstone (p. 118)
of Patagonia; climate of old Tertiary period, p. 134. The
subject which has been most fertile in my mind is the
discussion from p. 135 to end of chapter on the accumulation
of fossiliferous deposits.1

Ch. VI. — Perhaps some facts on metamorphism, but chiefly
on the layers in mica-slate, etc., being analogous to cleavage.

Ch. VII. — The grand up-and-down movements (and vertical
silicified trees) in the Cordillera : see summary, p. 204 and
p. 240. Origin of the Claystone porphyry formation, p. 170.

Ch. VIII., p. 224. — Mixture of Cretaceous and Oolitic
forms (p. 226) — great subsidence. I think (p. 232) there is
some novelty in discussion on axes of eruption and injection,
(p. 247) Continuous volcanic action in the Cordillera. I think
the concluding summary (p. 237) would show what are the
most salient features in the book.

Letter 557 To C. Lyell.

Shrewsbury [August 10th, 1846].

I was delighted to receive your letter, which was forwarded
here to me. I am very glad to hear about the new edition
of the Principles? and I most heartily hope you may live
to bring out half a dozen more editions. There would not
have been such books as D'Orbigny's S. American Geology 3
published, if there had been seven editions of the Principles
distributed in France. I am rather sorry about the small
type ; but the first edition, my old true love, which I never
deserted for the later editions, was also in small type. I much

1 The last section of Chapter V. treats of " the Absence of extensive
modern Conchiferous Deposits in South America ; and on the contem-
poraneousness of the older Tertiary Deposits at distant points being
due to contemporaneous movements of subsidence." Darwin expresses
the view that " the earth's surface oscillates up and down ; and . . .
during the elevatory movements there is but a small chance of durable
fossiliferous deposits accumulating" {loc. a't., p. 139).

2 The seventh edition of the Principles oj Geology was published in

1847.

3 Voyage dans PAnu'riqite mMdionale execute pendant les Anne'es
1826-37. 6 vols., Paris, 1835-43.

-1878J MISCELLANE01

fear I .shall not he able to give any assistance to Book 111.1 Letter 557
1 think I formerly gave my few criticisms, but I will r<
it over again very soon (though I am striving to finish 1
S. American Geology3) and see whether I can give you any
references. I have been thinking over the subject, and can
remember no one book of consequence, as all my materials
(which arc in an absolute chaos on separate bits of paper)
have been picked out of b not directly treating of the

subjects you have discussed, and which I hope some day to
attempt; thus Hooker's A ntarctic Flora 3 I have found emi-
nently useful, and yet I declare I do not know what precise
facts I could refer you to. Bronn's Geschichte ' (which you
once borrowed) is the only systematic book I have met with
on such subjects ; and there are no general views in such
parts as I have read, but an immense accumulation of refer-
ences, vc 1 y useful to follow up, but not credible in themselves :
thus he gives hybrids from ducks and fowls just as readily
as between fowls and pheasants ! You can have it again
if you like. I have no doubt Forbes' essay,6 which is, I
suppose, now fairly out, will be very good under geographical
head. Kolreuter's German book u is excellent on hybrids,
but it will cost you a good deal of time to work out any
conclusion from his numerous details. With respect to varia-
tion I have found nothing — but minute details scattered over
scores of volumes. But I will look over Book III. again.
What a quantity of work you have in hand! I almost wish
you could have finished America, and thus have allowed
yourself rather more time for the old Principles ; and 1 am
quite surprised that you could possibly have worked your

1 This refers to Hook III. of the Principles — " Changes of the Organic
World now in Progress."

'-' Geological Observations on South America was published in 1

3 Botany of the Antarctic Voyage oj ' H. M.S. " E
in iiic Years 1839-43. !• Flora Antarctica. 2 vols., London, 1844

1 Naturgeschichte der drei Reiche. 11. E. Bronn, Stuttgart, 1834-49.

;' "On the Connection between the Distribution of the existing Fauna
and Flora of the British Isles, and the Geological Changes which have
affected their Area, especially during the Epoch of the Northern Drift,"
by E. Forbes. Memoirs of Geological Survey^ Vol. I., p. 336, 1S46.

6 Joseph Gottlieb Kolreuter's Vorlaufig hricht von eininigen

das Geschlecht der Pjlanzcn betreffenden Wrsuchcn und 1- .->/•

Leipzig, 1 761.

224 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 557 own new matter in within six weeks. Your intention of being
in Southampton will much strengthen mine, and I shall be
very glad to hear some of your American Geology news.

Letter 558 To L. Horner.

Down, Sunday [Jan. 1847].

Your most agreeable praise of my book 1 is enough to turn
my head ; I am really surprised at it, but shall swallow it
with very much gusto. . . .

E. de Beaumont measured the inclination with a sextant
and artificial horizon, just as you take the height of the sun
for latitude.

With respect to my Journal, I think the sketches in the
second edition 2 are pretty accurate ; but in the first they are
not so, for I foolishly trusted to my memory, and was much
annoyed to find how hasty and inaccurate many of my
remarks were, when I went over my huge pile of descriptions
of each locality.

If ever you meet anyone circumstanced as I was, advise
him not, on any account, to give any sketches until his
materials are fully worked out.

What labour you must be undergoing now ; I have
wondered at your patience in having written to me two such
long notes. How glad Mrs. Horner will be when your address 3
is completed. I must say that I am much pleased that you
will notice my volume in your address, for former Presidents
took no notice of my two former volumes.

I am exceedingly glad that Bunbury 4 is going on well.

1 Geological Obse?'vations in S. America, London, 1846.

2 Journal of Researches into the Natural History and Geology of
the Countries visited during the Voyage of H. M.S. " Beagle." Ed. II.
London, 1845.

3 Anniversary Address of the President {Quart, fourn. Geol. Soc.
Vol. III., p. xxii, 1847).

4 Sir Charles James Fox Bunbury, Bart. (1809-85), was born at
Messina in 1809, and in 1829 entered Trinity College, Cambridge. At
the end of 1837 he went with Sir George Napier to the Cape of Good Hope,
and during a residence there of twelve months Bunbury devoted him-
self to botanical field-work, and afterwards (1848) published his Journal
of a Residence at the Cape of Good Hope. In 1844 Bunbury married
the second daughter of Mr. Leonard Horner, Lady Lyell's sister.

In addition to several papers dealing with systematic and geographical

[846 i MlSCl l.l. A N I.OUS 225

To ( '. Lyell. Letter 559

Down, July 3rd [184

I don't know when I have read a book ' so interesting ; some
of your stories are very rich. You ought to be made Minister
of Public Education — not but what I should think even
that beneath the author of the old Principles. Your book
must, I should think, do a great deal of good and set people
thinking. I quite agree with the Athena um - that you have
shown how a man of science can bring his powers of
observation to social subjects. You have made 1 1. Wedgwood,
heart and soul, an American ; he wishes the States would
annex us, and was all day marvelling how anyone who could
pay his 1 e money was so foolish as to remain here-.

To C. Lyell. Letter 560

I (own, [Dec., 1S49].

In this letter Darwin criticises Dana's statements in his volume on
Geology, forming Vol. X. of the Wilkes Exploring Expedition, 1849.

. . . Dana is dreadfully hypothetical in main- parts, and
often as " d — d cocked sure " as Macaulay. 1 Ie writes however
so lucidly that he is very persuasive. I am more struck with
his remarks on denudation than you seem to be. I came to
exactly the same conclusion in Tahiti, that the wonderful
\ alleys there (on the opposite extreme of the scale of wonder

Botany Bunbury published numerous contributions on pakvobotanical
subjects, a science with which his name will always be associated as one
of those who materially assisted in raising the study of Fossil 1 'hints to
a higher scientific level. His papers on fossil plants wore published in the
Journal of the Geological Society between 1846 and 1861, and shortly
before his death a collection of botanical observations made in South
Africa and South America was issued in book form in a volume entitled
Botanical Fragments (London, 1883). Bunbury was elected into the
Royal Society in 1851, and from 1847 to 1853 he acted a< Foreign
Secretary to the Geological Society. Life, Letters, and Journals of
Sir Charles J. F. Bunbury, Bart., edited by his wife Frames Joanna
Bunbury, and privately printed, vl ndated.)

1 A Second Visit to (he United States of North America. 2 vols.,
London, 1849.

s " Sir Charles Lyell, besides the feelings of a gentleman, seems to
carry with him the best habits of scientific observation into other sti
than those of clay, into other ' formations ' than those of rock or river-
margin." The Athenaum, June 23rd, 1849, P- 640.

VOL. II. 15

226 GEOLOGY tCHAP. IX

Letter 560 [to] the valleys of New South Wales) were formed exclusively
by fresh water. He underrates the power of sea, no doubt,
but read his remarks on valleys in the Sandwich group.
I came to the conclusion in 6". America (p. 6j) that the
main effect of fresh water is to deepen valleys, and sea to
widen them ; I now rather doubt whether in a valley or
fiord . . . the sea would deepen the rock at its head during
the elevation of the land. I should like to tour on the W.
coast of Scotland, and attend to this. I forget how far
generally the shores of fiords (not straits) are cliff-formed.
It is a most interesting subject.

I return once again to Coral. I find he does not differ
so much in detail with me regarding areas of subsidence ; his
map is coloured on some quite unintelligible principle, and
he deduces subsidence from the vaguest grounds, such as
that the N. Marianne Islands must have subsided because
they are small, though long in volcanic action : and that the
Marquesas subsided because they are penetrated by deep
bays, etc., etc. I utterly disbelieve his statements that most
of the atolls have been lately raised a foot or two. He does
not condescend to notice my explanation for such appear-
ances. He misrepresents me also when he states that I
deduce, without restriction, elevation from all fringing reefs,
and even from islands without any reefs ! If his facts are
true, it is very curious that the atolls decrease in size
in approaching the vast open ocean S. of the Sandwich
Islands. Dana puts me in a passion several times by
disputing my conclusions without condescending to allude
to my reasons ; thus, regarding S. Lorenzo elevation, he
is pleased to speak of my " characteristic accuracy," l and
then gives difficulties (as if his own) when they are stated
by me, and I believe explained by me — whereas he only
alludes to a few of the facts. So in Australian valleys, he
does not allude to my several reasons. But I am forgetting
myself and running on about what can only interest myself.
He strikes me as a very clever fellow ; I wish he was not
quite so grand a generaliser. I see little of interest except
on volcanic action and denudation, and here and there
scattered remarks ; some of the later chapters are very bald.

1 Dana's Geology (Wilkes expedition), p. 590.

1S46-1878] MI 1 I I.i VNEOl

To J. D. Dana l*u« 561

Down, Dec. 5th, 184';.

I have not for some years been so much pleased as I have
just been by reading your most able discussion on coral reefs.
I thank you most sincerely for the very honourable mention
you make of me.1 This clay I heard that the atlas has
arrived, and this completes your munificent present to me.
I have not yet come to the chapt< r on sub idence, and in that
1 fancy we shall disagree, but in the descriptive part our
agreement has been eminently satisfactory to me, and far
more than I ever ventured to anticipate. I consider that now
the subsidence theory is established. I have read about half
through the descriptive part of the Volcanic Geology* (last
night I ascended the peaks of Tahiti with you, and what
I saw in my slant excursion was most vividly brought before
me by your descriptions), and have been most deeply interested
by it. Your observations on the Sandwich craters strike mc
as the most important and original of any that I have read
for a long time. Now that I have read yours, I believe 1 saw
at the Galapagos, at a distance, instances of those most
curious fissures of eruption. There are many points of resem-
blance between the Galapagos and Sandwich Islands (even
to the shape of the mound-like hills) — viz., in the liquidity
of the lavas, absence of scoria-, and tuff-craters. Man)- of
your scattered remarks on denudation have particularly
interested mc ; but I sec that you attribute less to sea ami
more to running water than I have been accustomed to do.
After your remarks in your last very kind letter I could not
help skipping on to the Australian valleys,3 on which your
remarks strike mc as exceedingly ingenious and novel, but
they have not converted me. I cannot conceive how the great
lateral bays could have been scooped out, and their sides
rendered precipitous by running water. 1 shall go on and
read every word of your excellent volume.

1 United States Exploring Expedition during the Years 1S39 42
under the Command of Charles Wilkes, U.S.N. Vol. X.. & .. ; . by
J. D. Dana, 1849.

* Part of Dana's Geology is devoted to volcanic action.

s Ibid., pp. $2,6etseq.; " The Formation of Valleys, etc, in Now South
Wales."

228 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 561 If you look over my Geological Instructions1 you will be
amused to see that I urge attention to several points which
you have elaborately discussed. I lately read a paper
of yours on Chambers' book, and was interested by it. I
really believe the facts of the order described by Chambers,
in S. America, which I have described in my Geolog. volume.
This leads me to ask you (as I cannot doubt that you
will have much geological weight in N. America) to look
to a discussion at p. 135 in that volume on the importance
of subsidence to the formation of deposits, which are to last
to a distant age. This view strikes me as of some importance.

When I meet a very good-natured man I have that degree
of badness of disposition in me that 1 always endeavour
to take advantage of him ; therefore I am going to mention
some desiderata, which if you can supply I shall be very
grateful, but if not no answer will be required.

Thank you for your Conspectus Crust.,2 but I am sorry
to say I am not worthy of it, though I have always thought
the Crustacea a beautiful subject.

Letter 562 To C. Lyell.

[Down, March 9th, 1850.]

I am uncommonly much obliged to you for your address,3
which I had not expected to see so soon, and which I have
read with great interest. I do not know whether you spent
much time over it, but it strikes me as extra well arranged
and written — done in the most artistic manner, to use an ex-
pression which I particularly hate. Though I am necessarily
pretty well familiar with your ideas from your conversation
and books, yet the whole had an original freshness to me. I
am glad that you broke through the routine of the President's
addresses, but I should be sorry if others did. Your criticisms

1 A Manual of Scientific Enquiry, prepared for the use of Her
Majesty's Navy, and adapted for Travellers in General. Edited by Sir
John F. W. Herschel, Bart. London, 1849 (Sect. VI., Geology. By
Charles Darwin).

2 Conspectus Crustaccorum in orbis terrarum circumnavigatione, C.
Wilkes duce, collectorum. Cambridge (U.S.A.), 1847.

3 Anniversary Address of the President, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc,
Vol. VI., p. 32, 1850.

1846 1878] MISCELLANE01 229

on Murchison3 were to me, and I think would be to man)-, Letter 562
particularly acceptable. Capital, that metaphor of the clock. -
I shall next February he much interested by seeing your
hour-hand of the organic world going.

Many thanks for your kindness in taking the trouble to
tell me of the anniversary dinner. What a compliment that
was which Lord Mahon paid me ! I never had so great a
one. He must be as charming a man as his wife is a woman,
though I was formerly blind to his merit. Bunsen's speech
must have been very interesting and very useful, if any
orthodox clergyman were present. Your metaphor of the
pebbles of pre-existing languages reminds me that I heard Sir
J. Ilcrschel at the Cape say how he wished some one would
treat language as you had Geology, and study the existing
causes of change, and apply the deduction to old lair

We arc all pretty nourishing here, though I have be. 11
retrograding a little, and I think I stand excitement and
fatigue hardly better than in old days, and this keeps me
hum coming to London. My cirripedial task is an eternal
one; I make no perceptible progress. 1 am ^ure that they
belong to the hour-hand, and 1 groan under my task.

C. Lyell to C. Darwin. 1 iter 563

April 2ji<l, 1S55.
I have seen a good deal of French geologists and palaeonto-
logists lately, and there are many whom I should like to
put on the R.S. Foreign List, such as D'Archiac, Frevost, and
others. But the man who has made the greatest sacrifices
and produced the greatest results, who has, in fact, added a
new period to the calendar, is Barrande.8

1 In a paper "On the Geological Structure of the Alps, etc." (Quart.
Journ. (lev/. Soc.y Vol. V., p. 157, 1S49) Murchisoa expressed his bel
that the apparent inversion of certain Tertiary strata along the flanks
of the Alps afforded "a clear demonstration of a sudden operation or

catastrophe." It is this view of paroxysmal energy that Lyell criticises
in the address.

' " In a word, the movement of the inorganic world is obvious and
palpable, and might be likened to the minute-hand of a clock, the progress
of which can be seen and heard, whereas the fluctuations of the living
creation are nearly invisible, and resemble the motion of the hour hand
of a timepiece " {loc. tit., p. xlvi).

3 See biographical note, Letter 40, Vol. I.

230 GEOLOGY [Ckap. IX

Letter 563 The importance of his discoveries as they stand before
the public fully justify your choice of him ; but what is
unpublished, and which I have seen, is, if. possible, still more
surprising. Thirty genera of gastcropods (150 species) and
150 species of lamellibranchiate bivalves in the Silurian!
All obtained by quarries opened solely by him for fossils.
A man of very moderate fortune spending nearly all his
capital on Geology, and with success.

E. Forbes' polarity x doctrines are nearly overturned by
the unpublished discoveries of Barrande.

I have called Barrande's new period Cambrian (see
Manual, 5th ed.), and you will see why. I could not name *
it Protozoic, but had Barrande called it Bohemian, I must
have adopted that name. All the French will rejoice if you
confer an honour on Barrande. Dana 2 is well worthy of
being a foreign member.

Should you succeed in making Barrande F.R.S., send
me word.

Letter 564 To J. D. Hooker.

June 5th [1857].

The following, which bears on the subject of medals, forms part of
the long letter printed in the Life and Letters, II., p. 100.

I do not quite agree with your estimate of Richardson's
merits. Do, I beg you (whenever you quietly see), talk
with Lyell on Prestwich : if he agrees with Hopkins, I am
silenced ; but as yet I must look at the correlation of the
Tertiaries3 as one of the highest and most frightfully difficult
tasks a man could set himself, and excellent work, as 1
believe, P. has done. I confess I do not value Hopkins'
opinion on such a point. I confess I have never thought,
as you show ought to be done, on the future. I quite agree,
under all circumstances, with the propriety of Lindley. How
strange no new geologists are coming forward ! Are there

1 See note 1, Letter 41, Vol. I., p. 84.

2 See biographical note, Letter 162, Vol. I.

3 Prof. Prestwich had published numerous papers dealing with
Tertiary Geology before 1857. The contributions referred to are probably
those " On the Correlation of the Lower Tertiaries of England with those
of France and Belgium," Quart. Journ. Geo/. Soc, Vol. X., 1854, p. 454 ;
and "On the Correlation of the Middle Eocene Tertiaries of England,
France, and Belgium," ibid., XII., 1856, p. 390.

1846—187^] MISCELLANE01 Jji

not lots of gi " "I youn ; ■ hemists and astronomers or physicists ? Letter 564
Fitton is the only old geologist left who has done good work,
except Sedgwick. Have you thought of him? Hi would
be a brilliant companion for Lindley. Only it would never
do to give Lycll a Copley and Sedgwick a Royal in the
same year. It seems wrong that there should be tin
Natural Science medals in the same year. Lindley, Sedgwick,
and Bunsen sounds well, and Lyell next year for the Copley. '
Y*OU will sec that I am speculating as a mere idle amateur.

To S. P. Woodward.- Letter 565

I >own, May 27th [1S56].

I am very much obliged to you for having taken the
trouble to answer my query ;o fully. I can now be at rest,
for from what you say and hum what little I rememb< r
Forbes said, my point is unanswerable. The case of Tere-
bratula is t<> the point as far as it goes, and is negative. I
have already attempted to get a solution through geographical
distribution by Dr. Hooker's means, and he funis that the same
genera which have very variable species in Europe have other
very variable species elsewhere. This seems the general rule,
but with some few exceptions. I see from the several reasons
which you assign, that there is no hope of comparing the
.same genus at two different periods, and seeing whether the
tendency to vary is greater at one period in such genus than
at another period. The variability of certain genera or group
of species strikes me as a very odd fact.3

1 shall have no points, as tar as I can remember, to suggest
for your reconsideration, but only some on which 1 shall
have to beg for a little further information. However, I feel
inclined very much to dispute your doctrine of islands being
generally ancient in comparison, I presume, with continents.
I imagine you think that islands are generally remnants ol
old continents, a doctrine which I feel strongly disposed to
doubt. 1 believe them generally rising points ; you, it seems,
think them sinking points.

1 In 1S57 a Royal medal was awarded to John Lindley ; Lyell rcceh
the Copley in 1858, and Bunsen in 1S60.

3 Sec Letter 50, Vol. I.

1 The late Dr. Neumayi has dealt, to some extent, with this subject
in Die Stamme des Thierreicks^ Vol. I., Wien, 188';.

232 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 566 To T. H. Huxley.

Down, April 14th [i860].

Many thanks for your kind and pleasant letter. I have
been much interested by Deep-sea Soundings} and will return
it by this post, or as soon as I have copied a few sentences.
I think you said that some one was investigating the sound-
ings. I earnestly hope that you will ask the some one to
carefully observe whether any considerable number of the
calcareous organisms are more or less friable, or corroded, or
scaling ; so that one might form some crude notion whether
the deposition is so rapid that the foraminifera are preserved
from decay and thus are forming strata at this profound
depth. This is a subject which seems to me to have been
much neglected in examining soundings.

Bronn 2 has sent me two copies of his MorpJiologiscJie
Studien iiber die Gestaltungsgesetze. It looks elementary.
If you will write you shall have the copy ; if not I will give
it to the Linnean Library.

I quite agree with the letter from Lyell that your ex-
tinguished theologians lying about the cradle of each new
science,3 etc., etc., is splendid.

Letter 567 To T. H. Huxley.

May 10th [1862 or later].

I have been in London, which has prevented my writing
sooner. I am very sorry to hear that you have been ill :
if influenza, I can believe in any degree of prostratiun of
strength ; if from over-work, for God's sake do not be rash
and foolish. You ask for criticisms ; I have none to give,
only impressions. I fully agree with your " skim ming-of- pot
theory," and very well you have put it. With respect [to]
contemporaneity I nearly agree with you, and if you will look

1 Specimens of the mud dredged by H.M.S. Cyclops were sent to
Huxley for examination, who gave a brief account of them in Appendix A
of Capt. Dayman's Report, 1858, under the title Deep-sea Soundings in
the North At 'Ian tic.

2 H. G. Bronn, Morphologische Stud/en iiber die Gestaltungsgesclze
der Naturkbrper iibcrhaupt und der organise/ten insbesonderc : Leipzig,
1858.

3 Danvinia/ia, Collected Essays, Vol. II., p. 52.

1846 1878] Mi-' I I I. A N ; I 01

to the d — d book, 3rd ed., p. 349,' you will find nearly similar letter 507
remarks. Hut at p. 22 ol your Address, in my opinion you
push your ideas too far.- I cannot think that future ;ists

would rank the Suffolk and St. G 3 strata as contempo-

raneous, but as successive sub-stages; they rank X. America
and British stages as contemporaneous, notwithstanding a

percentage of different species (which they, I presume, would
account for by geographical difference) owing to the parallel
succession of the forms in both countries. For terrestrial
productions3 I grant that great errors may creep in; but I
should require strong evidence before believing that, in coun-
tries at all well known, so-called Silurian, Devonian, and

1 '" When the marine forms arc spoken of as having changed simul-
taneously throughout the world, it must not be supposed that this
expression relates to the same year, or to the same century, or even that
it has a very strict geological sense ; for if all the marine animals now
living in Europe, and all those that lived in Europe during the Pleistocene
period (a very remote period as measured by years, including the whole
Glacial epoch), were compared with those now existing in South America
or in Australia, the most skilful naturalist would hardly be able to say
whether the present or the Pleistocene inhabitants of Europe resemhled
most closely those of the Southern hemisphere." Origin, Ed. VI., p. 29S.
The passage in Ed. in., p. 350, is substantially the same.

- Anniversary Address to the Geological Society of London (Quart.
Journ. Geo/. Soc., Vol. XVIII., p. xl, 1862). As an illustration of the
misleading use of the term "contemporaneous" as employed by geologists,
Huxley gives the following illustration : "Now suppose that, a million or
two of years hence, when Britain has made another dip beneath the sea
and has come up again, some geologist applies this doctrine [i.e. the
doctrine of the Contemporaneity of the European and of the North
American Silurians : proof of contemporaneity is considered to be estab-
lished by the occurrence of 60 per cent, of species in common], in
comparing the strata laid bare by the upheaval of the bottom, say, of
St. George's Channel with what may then remain of the Suffolk Craj
Reasoning in the same way, he will at once decide the Suffolk Crag and
the St. George's Channel beds to be contemporaneous; although we
happen to know that a vast period ... of time . . . separates the two"
{he. (/A, p. xlv). 'this address is republished in the Collected E
Vol. VIII. ; the above passage is at p. 284.

3 Darwin supposes that terrestrial productions have probably not
changed to the same extent as marine organisms. " If the Meg "/,

Mylodon . . . had been brought to Europe from La Plata, without any
information in regard to their geological position, no one would have
suspected that they had co-existed with sea shells all still living '
{Origin, Ed. vi., p. 298).

234 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 567 Carboniferous strata could be contemporaneous. You seem
to me on the third point, viz., on non-advancement of organi-
sation, to have made a very strong case. I have not know-
ledge or presumption enough to criticise what you say. I
have said what I could at p. 363 of Origin. It seems to me
that the whole case may be looked at from several points
of view. I can add only one miserable little special case of
advancement in cirripedes. The suspicion crosses me that
if you endeavoured your best you would say more on the
other side. Do you know well Bronn in his last Entwickelung1
(or some such word) on this subject? it seemed to me very
well done. I hope before you publish again you will read
him again, to consider the case as if you were a judge in a
court of appeal ; it is a very important subject. I can say
nothing against your side, but I have an " inner consciousness "
(a highly philosophical style of arguing !) that something could
be said against you ; for I cannot help hoping that you are
not quite as right as you seem to be. Finally, I cannot tell
why, but when I finished your Address I felt convinced that
many would infer that you were dead against change of
species, but I clearly saw that you were not. I am not very
well, so good-night, and excuse this horrid letter.

Letter 568 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, June 30th [1866].

I have heard from Sulivan (who, poor fellow, gives a
very bad account of his own health) about the fossils.2 . . .
The place is Gallegos, on the S. coast of Patagonia.
Sulivan says that in the course of two or three days all
the boats in the ship could be filled twice over ; but to
get good specimens out of the hardish rock two or three

1 Probably " Untersuchungen fiber die Entwickelungsgesetze der

organischen Welt wahrend der Bildungszeit unserer Erdoberflache,"

Stuttgart, 1858. Translated by W. S. Dallas in the Ami. and Mag.

Nat. Hist., Vol. IV., p. 81.

**8 2 In a letter to Huxley (June 4th, 1866) Darwin wrote: "Admiral

1 tii several years ago discovered an astonishingly rich accumulation

der Nat,-\ bones not rar from tlie Straits [of Magellan]. . . . During many

1 5 has seemed to me extremely desirable that these should be

3 7~)

uarwi an(j jiere js an exceiierlt opportunity."

1846—1878] MIS< I II VNEOUS

weeks would be requisite. It would be a grand haul for Letta
Palaeontology. I have been thinking over your lecture.1
Will it not be possible to give enlarged drawn me

leading forms of trees? You will, of course, have a lai
map, and George tells me that he saw at Sir 11. James', at
Southampton, a map of the world on a new principle, a
seen from within, so that almost )ths of the globe was shown
at once on a large scale. Would it not be worth while to
borrow one of these from Sir H. James as a curiosity to
hang up ?

Remember you are to come here before Nottingham. I
have almost finished the last number of II. Spencer, and am
astonished at its prodigality <>f original thought. Hut the
reflection constantly recurred to me that ca< h stion, to

be of real value to science, would require years of work. It
is also very unsatisfactory, the impossibility of conjecturing
where direct action of external circumstances begins and ends
— as he candidly owns in discussing the production of woody
tissue in the trunks of trees on the one hand, and on the
other in spines and the shells of nuts. I shall like to hear
what you think of this number when we meet.

To A. Gaudry.- Letter 569

Down, V . 17th, 1S68.

On my return heme after a short absence I found your
n<>le of Nov. 9th, and your magnificent work on the fossil
animals of Attica.3 I assure you that I feel very grateful
for your generosity, and for the honour which you have thus
conferred on me. I know well, from what I have already
read of extracts, that I shall find your work a perfect mine
of wealth. One long passage which Sir C. Lyell quotes from
you in the 10th and last edition of the Principles of G

1 A lecture on Insular Fl ven at the British Association meeting

at Nottingham, August 27th, [866, published in the Gard, CAron., 1S67.

'' Albert Gaudry, Professor of Palaeontology in the Natural History
Museum, Paris, Foreign Member of the Royal Society of London, author
of Animaux Foss. et Ge"ol de VAttique.

3 The ■ cfe VAttique, 2 vols. uto, 1 • : 7. is the only work of

Gaudry's of this date in Mr. Darwin's library.

236 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 569 is one of the most striking which I have ever read on the
affiliation of species.1

Letter 570 A. Sedgwick to C. Darwin.

In May, 1870, Darwin "went to the Bull Hotel, Cambridge, to see
the boys, and for a little rest and enjoyment."3 The following letter
was received after his return to Down.

Trinity College, Cambridge, May 30th, 1870.

My dear Darwin,

Your very kind letter surprised me. Not that I was
surprised at the pleasant and very welcome feeling with
which it was written. But I could not make out what I
had done to deserve the praise of "extraordinary kindness to
yourself and family." I would most willingly have done my
best to promote the objects of your visit, but you gave me
no opportunity of doing so. I was truly grieved to find that
my joy at seeing you again was almost too robust for your
state of nerves, and that my society, after a little while,
became oppressive to you. But I do trust that your Cam-
bridge visit has done you no constitutional harm ; nay, rather
that it has done you some good. I only speak honest truth
when I say that I was overflowing with joy when I saw you,
and saw you in the midst of a dear family party, and solaced
at every turn by the loving care of a dear wife and daughters.
How different from my position — that of a very old man,
living in cheerless solitude ! May God help and cheer you

1 The quotation in Lyell's Principles, Ed. X., Vol. II., p. 484, is from
M. Gaudry's Animaux Fossilcs dc Pikermi, 1866, p. 34 :—

" In how different a light does the question of the nature of species
now present itself to us from that in which it appeared only twenty years
ago, before we had studied the fossil remains of Greece and the allied
forms of other countries. How clearly do these fossil relics point to the
idea that species, genera, families, and orders now so distinct have had
common ancestors. The more we advance and fill up the gaps, the more
we feel persuaded that the remaining voids exist rather in our knowledge
than in nature. A few blows of the pickaxe at the foot of the Pyrenees,
of the Himalaya, of Mount Pentelicus in Greece, a few diggings in the
sandpits of Eppelsheim, or in the Mauvaises Terres of Nebraska, have
revealed to us the closest connecting links between forms which seemed
before so widely separated. How much closer will these links be drawn
when Palaeontology shall have escaped from its cradle ! "

2 See Life and Letters, III., 125.

I846—I878] M Im 1 I I. AN ! I >TJ 237

all with the comfort of hopeful hearts — you and your wife, L '
and your sons and daughters !

You were talking about my style of writing, — I send you
my last specimen, and it will probably continue to be my
last. It is the continuation of a former pamphlet of which
1 have not one spare copy. I do not ask you to read it.
It is addressed to the old people in my native Dale of Dent,
on the outskirts of Westmorland. While standing at the
door of the old vicarage, I can sec down the valley the Lake
mountains— Hill Bell at the head of Windermere, about
twenty miles off. On Thursday next (D.V.) I am to start for
Dent, which I have not visited for full two years. Tu 1 1 y< ars
ago I could walk three or four miles with comfort. Now,
alas ! I can only hobble about on my stick.

I remain your true-hearted old friend

A. Sedgwick.

To C. Lycll. Letter 571

Down. Sept. 3rd [1874].

Many thanks for your very kind and interesting letter.
I was glad to hear at Southampton from Miss lleathcote a
good account of your health and strength.

With respect to the great subject to which you refer
in your P.S., 1 always try to banish it from my mind as
insoluble ; but if I were circumstanced as you are, no doubt
it would recur in the dead of the night with painful face.
Many persons seem to make themselves quite easy about
immortality ' and the existence of a personal God, by intuition ;
and I suppose that I must differ from such persons, for I
do not feel any innate conviction on any such points.

W'c returned home about ten days ago from Southampton,
and I enjoyed my holiday, which did me much good. But
already I am much fatigued by microscope and experimental
work with insect-eating plants.

When at Southampton I was greatly interested by looking
at the odd gravel deposits near at hand, and speculating
about their formation. You once told me something about
them, but I forget what ; and I think that Prestwich - has

1 See Life and Letters^ 1., p. 312.

s Prof. Prestwich contributed several papers to the Geological
Society on the Superficial Deposits of the South of England.

238 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 571 written on the superficial deposits on the south coasts, and
I must find out his paper and read it.

From what I have seen of Mr. Judd's papers I have
thought that he would rank amongst the few leading British
geologists.

Letter 572 To J. D. Hooker.

The following letter was written before Mr. Darwin knew that Sir
Charles Lyell was to be buried in Westminster Abbey, a memorial which
thoroughly satisfied him. See Life and Letters, III., 197.

Down, Feb. 23rd, 1875.
I have just heard from Miss Buckley of Lyell's death.
I have long felt opposed to the present rage for testimonials ;
but when I think how Lyell revolutionised Geology, and
aided in the progress of so many other branches of science,
I wish that something could be done in his honour. On the
other hand it seems to me that a poor testimonial would be
worse than none ; and testimonials seem to succeed only when
a man has been known and loved by many persons, as in the
case of Falconer and Forbes. Now, I doubt whether of late
years any large number of scientific men did feel much
attachment towards Lyell ; but on this head I am very ill
fitted to judge. I should like to hear some time what you
think, and if anything is proposed I should particularly wish
to join in it. We have both lost as good and as true a friend
as ever lived.

Letter 573 To J. D. Hooker.

This letter shows the difficulty which the inscription for Sir Charles
Lyell's memorial gave his friends. The existing inscription is, " Charles
Lyell . . . Author of ' The Principles of Geology.' . . . Throughout a long
and laborious life he sought the means of deciphering the fragmentary
records of the Earth's history in the patient investigation of the present
order of Nature, enlarging the boundaries of knowledge, and leaving on
Scientific thought an enduring influence. . . ."

Down, June 21st [1876].

I am sorry for you about the inscription, which has almost

burst me. We think there are too many plurals in yours,

and when read aloud it hisses like a goose. I think the

omission of some words makes it much stronger. " World " l

1 The suggested sentence runs : " he gave to the world the results of
his labour, etc'

1846—1878] MISCELLANE01 2 39

is much stronger and truer than " public." As Lycll wrote Letter 573
various other books and memoirs, I have some little doubt
about the Principles of Geology. People lure do not like
your "enduring value": it sounds almost an anticlimax.
They do not much like my "List for endure) as Ion
science lasts." If one reads a sentence often enough, it
always becomes odious.
I ,. id help y< 11

To Oswald Heer.1 Lcltcr 574

Down, March 8th [1875].
I thank you for your very kind and deeply interesting
letter of March 1st, received yesterday, and for the present of
your work, which no doubt 1 shall soon receive from Dr.
Hooker.8 The sudden appearance of so many Dicotyledons
in the Upper Chalk 3 appears to me a most perplexing phe-
nomenon to all who believe in any form of evolution, especially
to those who believe in extremely gradual evolution, to which
view 1 know that you are strongly opposed. The presence of
even one true Angiospcrm in the Lower Chalk4 makes me

1 Oswald Heer (1809 83) was born at Niederulzwyl, in the Canton
of St. Gall, Switzerland, and for many years (1S55 S2) occupied the chair
of Botany in the University of Zurich. While eminent as an entomologist
Heer is chiefly known as a writer on Fossil Plants. He began to write on
paheobotanical subjects in 1X41 ; among his most important publications,
apart from the numerous papers contributed to scientific societies, the
following may be mentioned : Flora Tertiaria Helvetia, 1 S 5 5 59 ; the
Flora Fi^silis Antica, 7 vols., 1869-83 ; Die Urwelt der S, , ;

Flora Fossilis Helvetia, 1876-7. He was awarded the Wollaston medal
of the Geological Society in 1S74, and in 187S he received a Royal medal.
(Oswald Heer, Bibliographic et Tables Tconographiques, par ('.. Malloizel,
//<</<// d*une Notice Biographiqtte par R. Zeiller; Stockholm.)

■ Flora lu'ssilis Arctica, Vol. III., 1874, sent by Prof. Heer through
Sir Joseph Hooker.

3 The volume referred to contains a paper on the Cretaceous Flora of
the Arctic Zone (Spitzbergen and Greenland), in which several dicotyle-
donous plants are described. In a letter written by Heer to Darwin the
author speaks of a species of poplar which he describes as the oldest
Dicotyledon so far recorded.

4 No satisfactory evidence has so far been brought forward of the
occurrence of fossil Angiosperms in pre-Cretaceous rocks. The origin of
the Monocotyledons and Dicotyledons remains one of the most difficult
and attractive problems of Paleobotany.

240 GEOLOGY [Chap. IX

Letter 574 inclined to conjecture that plants of this great division must
have been largely developed in some isolated area, whence,
owing to geographical changes, they at last succeeded in
escaping, and spread quickly over the world.1 But I fully
admit that this case is a great difficulty in the views which
I hold. Many as have been the wonderful discoveries in
Geology during the last half-century, I think none have
exceeded in interest your results with respect to the plants
which formerly existed in the Arctic regions. How I wish
that similar collections could be made in the Southern
hemisphere, for instance in Kerguelen's Land.

The death of Sir C. Lyell is a great loss to science, but I
do not think to himself, for it was scarcely possible that he
could have retained his mental powers, and he would have
suffered dreadfully from their loss. The last time I saw him
he was speaking with the most lively interest about his last
visit to you, and I was grieved to hear from him a very poor
account of your health. I have been working for some time
on a special subject, namely insectivorous plants. I do not
know whether the subject will interest you, but when my
book is published I will have the pleasure of sending you
a copy.

I am very much obliged for your photograph, and enclose
one of myself.

To S. B. J. Skertchly.

Letter March 2nd, 1878.

574*

It is the greatest possible satisfaction to a man nearly at

the close of his career to believe that he has aided or stimu-
lated an able and energetic fellow-worker in the noble cause
of science. Therefore your letter has deeply gratified me. I
am writing this away from home, as my health failed, and I
was forced to rest ; and this will account for the delay in
answering your letter. No doubt on my return home I shall
find the memoir which you have kindly sent me. I shall
read it with much interest, as I have heard something of your
work from Prof. Geikie, and have read his admirable Ice Age?

1 See Letters 395, 398.

2 The Great Ice Age and its Relation to the Antiquity of Man : London,
1874. By James Geikie.

1846—1878] MISCELLANEOU 24 !

I have noticed the criticisms on your work,1 but such oppo- 1
sition must be expected by every one who draws fine grand 574'
conclusions, and such assuredly are. yours as abstracted in
your letter. What magnificent progress Geology has made
within my lifetime !

I shall have very great pleasure in sending you any of my
books with my autograph, but I really do not know which to
send. It will cost you only the trouble of a postcard to tell
me which you would like, and it shall soon be sent. Forgive
this untidy note, as it is rather an effort to write.

With all good wishes for your continued success in science
and for your happiness. . . .

1 Mr. S. B. J. Skertchly recorded " the discovery of pala olithic flint
implements, mammalian bones, and fresh-water shells in brick-earths
below the Boulder-clay of East Anglia," in a letter published in the Geo/,
Mag., Vol. III., p. 476, 1876. (See also The Fenland, Past and Present.
S. H. Miller and S. B. J. Skertchly, London, 1878.) The conclusions of
Mr. Skertchly as to the pie-Glacial age of the flint implements were not
accepted by some authorities. (See correspondence in Nature, Vol. XV.,
'877. PP- 14I] 1 4-) We are indebted to Mr. Marr for calling our atten-
tion to Mr. Skertchly's discovery.

VOL. II. 16

CHAPTER X

BOTANY

I. Miscellaneous. — II. Melastomacece. — III. Correspondence with

John Scott.

I. Miscellaneous, i 843-1 862,
Letter 575 To William Jackson Hooker.1

Down, March 12th [1843].
. . . When you next write to your son, will you please
remember me kindly to him and give him my best thanks
for his note ? I had the pleasure yesterday of reading a
letter from him to Mr. Lyell of Kinnordy, full of the most
interesting details and descriptions, and written (if I may
be permitted to make such a criticism) in a particularly
agreeable style. It leads me anxiously to hope, even more
than I did before, that he will publish some separate natural
history journal, and not allow (if it can be avoided) his
materials to be merged in another work. I am very glad
to hear you talk of inducing your son to publish an Antarctic
Flora. I have long felt much curiosity for some discussion
on the general character of the flora of Tierra del Fuego,
that part of the globe farthest removed in latitude from us.
How interesting will be a strict comparison between the
plants of these regions and of Scotland or Shetland. I am

1 Sir William Jackson Hooker (1 785-1 865) was called to the Chair of

Botany at Glasgow in 1820, where by his success as a teacher he raised

the annual fees from £bo to £700. In 1841 he became Director of the

Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew, which under his administration increased

enormously in activity and importance. His private Herbarium, said to

be " by far the richest ever accumulated in one man's lifetime," formed the

nucleus of the present collection. He produced, as author or editor, about

a hundred volumes devoted to Botany {Diet, of Nat. Biog.).

242

A / •/, .tr/t/t , //, v ■/, / • / . s ,, ;

>■/, .></,

7/

; 1862] VITALITY OP SEEDS 243

sun- I may speak on the part of Pro£ Henslow that all my Letter 575
collection (which gives a fair representation of the Alpine
flora of Tierra del Fuego and oi Southern Patagonia) will
be joyfully laid at his disposal.

To John Lindley.1 Letter 576

Down, Saturday [April 8th, 1 843].

1 take the liberty, at the suggestion of Dr. Royle,s of
forwarding to you a few seels, which have been found under
very singular circumstances. They have been sent to me
by Mr. W. Kemp, of Galashiels, a (partially educated; man,
of whose acutcness and accuracy of observation, from several
communications on geological subjects, I have a very high
opinion, lie found them in a layer under twenty-five feet
thickness of white sand, which seems to have been deposited
on the margins of an anciently existing lake. These seeds
are not known to the provincial botanists of the district. He
states that some of them germinated in eight days after being
planted, and are now alive. Knowing the interest you took
iti some raspberry seeds, mentioned, I remember, in one of
your works, I hope you will not think me troublesome in
asking you to have these seeds carefully planted, and in
begging you so far to oblige me as to take the trouble to
inform me of the result. Dr. Daubeny has started for Spain,
otherwise I would have sent him some. Mr. Kemp is
anxious to publish an account of his discovery himself, so

1 [ohn Lindley (1799- 1 865) was born at C.itton, near Norwich. His
first appointment was that of Assistant Librarian to Sir Joseph Brinks.
He was afterwards Assistant Secretary to the Horticultural Society, and
during his tenure of that office he organised the first fruit and flower
shows held in this country. In 1S29 he was chosen to be the fii^t
Professor of Botany at University College, London, and a few years later
he became Lecturer to the Apothecaries' Company. He is the author of
a large number of botanical books, of which the best known is the
Vegetable Kingdom, 1S46. He was one of the founders of the Gardener?
Chronicle, and was its principal editor up to the time of his death. He
was endowed with great powers of work and remarkable energy. He is
said as a young man to have translated Richard's Analyse du Fruit in
a single sitting of three nights and two days. (From the article on
Lindley in the Dictionary of National Biography, which is founded on
the Gardeners' Chronicle, 1S65, pp. 1058, 10S2.)

3 See Letter 29, note 2, Vol. 1.

244

BOTANY

[Chap. X

Letter 576 perhaps you will be so kind as to communicate the result
to me, and not to any periodical. The chance, though
appearing so impossible, of recovering a plant lost to any
country if not to the world, appears to me so very interesting,
that 1 hope you will think it worth while to have these seeds
planted, and not returned to me.

Letter 577 _ „ »

b// To C. Lyell.

[Sept., 1843.]
An interesting fact has lately, as it were, passed through
my hands. A Mr. Kemp (almost a working man), who has
written on " parallel roads," and has corresponded with me,1
sent me in the spring some seeds, with an account of the
spot where they were found, namely, in a layer at the bottom
of a deep sand pit, near Melrose, above the level of the river,
and which sand pit he thinks must have been accumulated in
a lake, when the whole features of the valleys were different,
ages ago ; since which whole barriers of rock, it appears,
must have been worn down. These seeds germinated freely,
and I sent some to the Horticultural Society, and Lindley
writes to me that they turn out to be a common Rumex and
a species of A triplex, which neither he nor Henslow (as I
have since heard) have ever seen, and certainly not a British
plant ! Does this not look like a vivification of a fossil
seed ? It is not surprising, I think, that seeds should last
ten or twenty thousand [years], as they have lasted two or
three [thousand years] in the Druidical mounds, and have
germinated.

When not building, I have been working at my volume
on the volcanic islands which we visited ; it is almost ready
for press. ... I hope you will read my volume, for, if you
don't, I cannot think of anyone else who will ! We have at
last got our house and place tolerably comfortable, and I am
well satisfied with our anchorage for life. What an autumn
we have had : completely Chilian ; here we have had not a
drop of rain or a cloudy day for a month. I am positively
tired of the fine weather, and long for the sight of mud almost
as much as I did when in Peru.

1 In a letter to Henslow, Darwin wrote : " If he [Mr. Kemp] had not
shown himself a most careful and ingenious observer, I should have
tnought nothing of the case."

1862] VITALITY 0 1 SEEDS 245

The vitality of seeds was a subject in whii h Darwin continued to take
an interest. In July, 1855 (Life and Letters, II., p. 65), he wrote to
rlookei : "A man told tne the other day of, as I thought, a splendid
and splendid it was, for according to his evidence the seed
came up alive out of the lower part of the London Clay ! I disgusted
him by telling him that palms ought to have come up."

In the Gardeners1 Chronicle, 1855, p. 758, appeared a notice (half a
column in length) by Darwin on the "Vitality of Seeds." The facts
related refer to the " Sand-walk" at Down ; the wood was planted in 1
on a piece of pasture land laid down as grass in 1840. In 1855, on the
soil being dug in several pla< es, Charlock (Brassica sinapistrum) sprang
up freely. The subject continued to interest him, and we find a
dated July 2nd, 1874, in which Darwin recorded that forty-six plants of
Charlock sprang up in that yeai over a space (14 x 7 feet) which had
been dug to a considerable depth. In the course of the article in
the Gardeners' Chronicle, Darwin remarks: "The power in seeds of
retaining their vitality when buried in damp soil may well be an element
in preserving the species, ami therefore seeds may be specially endowed
with this capacity; whereas the power of retaining vitality in a dry
artificial condition must be an indirect, and in one sense accidental,
quality in seeds of little or no use to the species."

The point of view expressed in the letter to Lyell above given is
of interest in connection with the research of Horace Brown and F.
Escombe ' on the remarkable power possessed by dry seeds of resistance
to the temperature of liquid air. The point of the experiment is that life
continues at a temperature " below that at whi< h ordinary chemical
n tctions take place." A still more striking demonstration of the fact
lias been made by Thiselton-Dyer and De-war,'-' who employed liquid
hydrogen as a refrigerant. The connection between these facts and
the dormancy of buried seeds is only indirect ; but inasmuch as the
experiment proves the possibility of life surviving a period in which no
ordinary chemical change occurs, it is clear that they help one to believe
in greatly prolonged dormancy in conditions which tend to check
metabolism. For a discussion of the bearing of their results on the
life problem, and for the literature of the subject, reference should be
made to the paper bj Brown and Escombe. £ dso C. de Candolle
"On Latent Life in Seeds," Brit. Assoc. Report, 1896, p. 10:3; and
F, Escombe, Science i , Vol. I., N.S., p. 585, 1.-

To J. S. Henslow. L^ 5?s

Down, Saturday [Nov. 5th, 1843].
I sent that weariful Atriplex to Babington, as 1 said I
would, and he tells me that he has reared a facsimile by sowing

1 Proc. Roy. Sac, Vol. LXII., p. 160.

'-' Read before the British Association (Dover), 1800, and published
in the Comptes rendu*, 1899, and in the Proc. R. >'. ... L.W., p. 361, 1899.

246 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 578 the seeds of A. angustifolia in rich soil. Me says he knows
the A. Ziastata, and that it is very different. Until your last
note I had not heard that Mr. Kemp's seeds had produced
two Polygonums. He informs me he saw each plant bring up
the husk of the individual seed which he planted. I believe
myself in his accuracy, but I have written to advise him not to
publish, for as he collected only two kinds of seeds — and from
them two Polygonums, two species or varieties of A triplex and
a Rumex have come up, any one would say (as you suggested)
that more probably all the seeds were in the soil, than that
seeds, which must have been buried for tens of thousands of
years, should retain their vitality. If the Atrip/ex had turned
out new, the evidence would indeed have been good. I regret
this result of poor Mr. Kemp's seeds, especially as I believed,
from his statements and the appearance of the seeds, that
they did germinate, and I further have no doubt that their
antiquity must be immense. I am sorry also for the trouble
you have had. I heard the other day through a circuitous
course how you are astonishing all the clodhoppers in your
whole part of the county : and [what is] far more wonderful,
as it was remarked to me, that you had not, in doing this,
aroused the envy of all the good surrounding sleeping parsons.
What good you must do to the present and all succeeding
generations.1

Letter 579 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, Nov. 14th [1855].

You well know how credulous I am, and therefore you
will not be surprised at my believing the Raspberry2 story:
a very similar case is on record in Germany — viz., seeds from
a barrow ; I have hardly zeal to translate it for the Gardeners'
CJironicle? I do not go the whole hog — viz., that sixty and
two thousand years are all the same, for I should imagine
that some slight chemical change was always going on in a
seed. Is this not so? The discussions have stirred me up to

1 For an account of Professor Henslow's management of his parish
of Hitcham see Memoir of the Rev. John Stevens Henslow, M. A., by the
Rev. Leonard Jenyns : 8vo, London, 1862.

2 This probably refers to Lindley's story of the germination of
raspberry seeds taken from a barrow 1600 years old*.

"Vitality of Seeds," Gardeners' Chronicle, Nov. 17th, 1855, p. 758.

1843— 1862] VITALITY OF SEFJ 2.;;

send my very small case of the charlock ; but as it required Letter 579
some space to give all details, perhaps Lindley will m >t in »ert ;

and if he does, you, you worse than an unbelieving dog, will
not, 1 know, believe. The reason I do not care to try Mr.
Bentham's plan is that I think it would be very troubl
and it would not, it I did not find seed, convince me m\
that none were in the earth, for I have found in my salting
experiments that the earth clings to the seeds, and the seeds
arc very difficult to find. Whether washing would do 1 1 now
not ; a gold-wash< r would succeed, 1 daresay.

To VV. J. Hooker. 1. •••■ . 580

Testimonial from Charles Darwin, Esq., M.A., F.R.S.andG S.,
late Naturalist to Captain hit/Roy's Voyage.

Down House, Farnborough, August 25th, 1S45.

I have heard with much interest that your son, Dr.
1 looker, is a candidate for the Botanical Chair at Edinburgh.
From my former attendance at that University, I am aware

how important a post it is for the advancement of science,
and I am therefore the more anxious for your son's success
from my firm belief that no one will fulfil its duties with
greater zeal or ability. Since his return from the famous
Antarctic expedition, I have had, as you arc aware, much
communication with him, with respect to the collections
brought home by myself, and on other scientific subjects ;
and I cannot express too strongly my admiration at the
accuracy of his varied knowledge, and at his powers of
generalisation. From Dr. Hooker's disposition, no one, in
my opinion, is more fitted to communicate to beginners
a strong taste for those pursuits to which he is himself so
ardently devoted. Cor the sake of the advance ment of Botany
in all its branches, your son has my warmest wishes for his
success.

To J. D. Hooker. lcUCV S&1

Down, Thursday [June nth, 1S47 J.
Many thanks for your kindness about the lodgings — it
will be of great use to me.1 Please let me know the addn
if Mr. Jacobson succeeds, for I think 1 shall go on the 22nd
and write previously to my lodgings. 1 have since had

1 The British Association met at Oxford in ll

248 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 581 a tempting invitation from Daubeny l to meet Henslovv, etc.
but upon the whole, I believe, lodgings will answer best, for
then I shall have a secure solitary retreat to rest in.

I am extremely glad I sent the Laburnum:'1 the raceme
grew in centre of tree, and had a most minute tuft of leaves,
which presented no unusual appearance : there is now on one
raceme a terminal bilateral [i.e., half yellow, half purple]
flower, and on another raceme a single terminal pure yellow
and one adjoining bilateral flower. If you would like them
I will send them ; otherwise I would keep them to see whether
the bilateral flowers will seed, for Herbert 3 says the yellow
ones will. Herbert is wrong in thinking there are no some-
what analogous facts : I can tell you some, when we meet.
I know not whether botanists consider each petal and stamen
an individual ; if so, there seems to me no especial difficulty
in the case, but if a flower-bud is a unit, are not their flowers
very strange ?

I have seen Dillwyn in the Gardeners' Chronicle, and was
disgusted at it, for I thought my bilateral flowers would have
been a novelty for you.

In a letter to Hooker, dated June 2nd, 1847, Darwin makes a bold
suggestion as to floral symmetry : —

I send you a tuft of the quasi-hybrid Laburnum, with two
kinds of flowers on same stalk, and with what strikes [me] as
very curious (though I know it has been observed before),

1 Charles Giles Bridle Daubeny, F.R.S. (1795 -1867), Fellow of
Magdalen College, Oxford ; elected Professor of Chemistry in the
University 1822; in 1834 he became Professor of Botany, and in 1840
Professor of Rural Economy.

3 This refers to the celebrated form known as Cyiisus Adami, of which
a full account is given in Variation of Animals and Plants, Vol. I., Ed. II.,
p. 413. It has been supposed to be a seminal hybrid or graft-hybrid
between C. laburnum and C. purpureus. It is remarkable for bearing
" on the same tree tufts of dingy red, bright yellow, and purple flowers,
borne on branches having widely different leaves and manner of growth."
In a paper by Camuzet in the Annates dc la SociM a" Horticulture de
Paris, XIII., 1833, p. 196, the author tries to show that Cytisus Adami is
a seminal hybrid between C. alpinus and C. laburnum. Fuchs (Sitz. k.
Akad. Wien, Bd. 107) and Beijerinck (A'. Akad. Amsterdam, 1900) have
written on Cytisus Adami, but throw no light on the origin of the hybrid.
See letters to Jenner Weir in the present volume.

3 Dean Herbert.

is,; r862] FLORAL SYMM ETRY

iKinu :1) , a flow< r bilalerall) diffi rent : one other, I obs< rve, has i iter 581
half its calyx purple. Is this not very curious, and oppo
to the morphological idea that a flower is a d con-

tinuous spire of leaves ? Docs it not look as if flowers were
normally bilateral ; just in the same way as we now know
that the radiating star-fish, etc., are bilateral? The case
rem iii' Is me of those inse< ts with exactly half having sea mdary
male characters and the other half female.

It is interesting to note his 1 hange of view in later years. In an undated
letter written to Mr. Spencer, probably in 1873, he says : "Withres]
to .1 ymmetry in the flowers themselves, I remain contented, from all that
I have seen, with adaptation to visits of insects. There is, however,
another factor which it is likel] '" may have come into play— viz.,

the protection of the anthers and pollen from the injurious effects ol
rain. I think so becau e several flowers inhabiting rainy countries, as
A. Kemer has lately shown, bend their heads down in rainy weather."

To J. D. 1 [ooker. 1 :tc( 5s>

June [1855].

This is an early example of Darwin's interest in the movements of
plants. Sleeping plants, as is well known, may acquire a rhythmic
movement differing from their natural period, but the pre* 1 experiment
here described has not, as far as known, been carried out. See Pfeffi
Periodische Bewegungent [875, p. 32.

I thank you much for Hedysarum : I do hope it is not very
precious, for, as I told you, it is for probably a most foolish
purpose. 1 read somewhere that no plant closes its leaves
so promptly in darkness, and I want to cover it up daily for
hall an hour, and see if I can teach it to close by itself, or
more easily than at first in darkness. 1 am rather puzzled
about its transmission, from not knowing how tender it is. . . .

To J. D. 1 looker. Lettei

Down, July 19th, [856.
I thank you warmly for the very kind manner with which
you have taken 1113- teeniest. It will, in truth, be a most
important service to me ; for it is absolutely necessary that 1
should discuss single and double creations as a very crucial
point on the general origin of species, and I must confess.
with the aid of all sorts o\ visionary hypotheses, a very hostile
one. I am delighted that you will take up possibility of
crossing ; no botanist has done so, which I have long

250 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 583 regretted, and I am glad to see that it was one of A. De Can-
dolle's desiderata. By the way, he is curiously contradictory
on subject. I am far from expecting that no cases of apparent
impossibility will be found ; but certainly I expect that ulti-
mately they will disappear ; for instance, Campanulaceas seems
a strong case, but now it is pretty clear that they must be
liable to crossing. Sweet-peas,1 bee-orchis, and perhaps
hollyhocks are, at present, my greatest difficulties ; and I find
I cannot experimentise by castrating sweet-peas, without
doing fatal injury. Formerly I felt most interest on this
point as one chief means of eliminating varieties ; but I feel
interest now in other ways. One general fact [that] makes
me believe in my doctrine,2 is that no terrestrial animal in
which semen is liquid is hermaphrodite except with mutual
copulation ; in terrestrial plants in which the semen is dry
there are many hermaphrodites. Indeed, I do wish I lived at
Kew, or at least so that I could see you oftener. To return
again to subject of crossing : I have been inclined to speculate
so far, as to think (my ! ?) notion (I say my notion, but I think
others have put, forward nearly or quite similar ideas) perhaps
explains the frequent separation of the sexes in trees, which I
think I have heard remarked (and in looking over the mono-
and dioecious Linnean classes in Persoon seems true) are very
apt to have sexes separated ; for [in] a tree having a vast
number of flowers on the same individual, or at least the same
stock, each flower, if only hermaphrodite on the common plan,
would generally get its own pollen or only pollen from another
flower on same stock, — whereas if the sexes were separate
there would be a better chance of occasional pollen from
another distinct stock. I have thought of testing this in your
New Zealand Flora, but I have no standard of comparison,
and I found myself bothered by bushes. I should propound

1 In Lathyrus odoratus the absence of the proper insect has been
supposed to prevent crossing'. See Variation under Domestication,
Ed. 11., Vol. II., p. 68 ; but the explanation there given for Pisum may
probably apply to Lathyrus,

2 The doctrine which has been epitomised as Nature abhors perpetual
self-fertilisation, and is generally known as Knight's Law or the Knight-
Darwin Law, is discussed by Francis Darwin in Nature, 1898. References
are there given to the chief passages in the Origin of Species, etc., bearing
on the question. See Letter 19, Vol. I.

,,; [862] KNIGHT'S LAW 2; l

that some unknown causes had favoured development ol I
and bushes in New /.calami, and consequent on this tl
had been a development of tion of sexes to previ

too much intermarriage. I do not, of course, suppose the
prevention of too much intermarriage the only go< d "I
separation of sexes. Bui such wild notions are nol worth
troubling you u ith the reading of.

To J. 1). Hooker. Lettei

Moor Park [May 2nil, 1857].

The most striking case, which I have stumbled on, on
apparent, but false relation of structure of plants to climate,
seems to be Meyer and Doege's remark that there is not one
single, even moderately-sized, family at the Cape of G
Hope which has not one or several species with heath-like
foliage ; and when we consider this together with the number
of true heaths, any one would have been justified, had it not
been for our own British heaths,1 in saying that heath-like
foliage must stand in direct relation to a dry and moderately
warm climate. Does this not strike you as a good case of
false relation? I am so pleased with this place and the
people here, that I am greatly tempted to bring Etty here, for
she has not, on the whole, derived any benefit from Hastings.
With thanks for your never failing assistance to me . . .

I remember that you were surprised at number of seeds
germinating in pond mud. I tried a fourth pond, and took
about as much mud (rather moic than in former case) as
would fill a very large breakfast cup, and before I had left
home 118 plants had come up; how many more will be up
on my return I know not. This bears on chance of birds by
their muddy feet transporting fresh-water plants.

This would not be a bad dodge for a collector in country
when plants were not in seed, to collect and dry mud from
ponds.

1 It is well known th.u plants with xerophytic characteristics are not
confined to dry climates ; it is only necessary to mention haloph
alpine plants and certain epiphytes. The heaths of Northern Eui
are placed among the xerophytes by Warming (Lehrbuch tier bkologischen
Pflanzengeographie, p. 234, Berlin, 1S96).

252 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 585 To Asa Gray.

Down [1S57].

I am very glad to hear that you think of discussing the
relative ranges of the identical and allied U. States and Euro-
pean species, when you have time. Now this leads me* to
make a very audacious remark in opposition to what I imagine
Hooker has been writing,1 and to your own scientific conscience.
I presume he has been urging you to finish your great Flora
before you do anything else. Now I would say it is your
duty to generalise as far as you safely can from your as
yet completed work. Undoubtedly careful discrimination of
species is the foundation of all good work ; but I must look
at such papers as yours in Silliman as the fruit. As careful
observation is far harder work than generalisation, and still
harder than speculation, do you not think it very possible
that it may be overvalued ? It ought never to be forgotten
that the observer can generalise his own observations incom-
parably better than any one else. How many astronomers
have laboured their whole lives on observations, and have not
drawn a single conclusion ; I think it is Herschel who has
remarked how much better it would be if they had paused
in their devoted work and seen what they could have deduced
from their work. So do pray look at this side of the ques-
tion, and let us have another paper or two like the last
admirable ones. There, am I not an audacious dog !

You ask about my doctrine which led me to expect that
trees would tend to have separate sexes. I am inclined to
believe that no organic being exists which perpetually self-
fertilises itself. This will appear very wild, but I can venture
to say that if you were to read my observations on this sub-
ject you would agree it is not so wild as it will at first appear
to you, from flowers said to be always fertilised in bud, etc.
It is a long subject, which I have attended to for eighteen
years. Now, it occurred to me that in a large tree with
hermaphrodite flowers, we will say it would be ten to one that
it would be fertilised by the pollen of its own flower, and
a thousand or ten thousand to one that if crossed it would
be crossed only with pollen from another flower of same tree,
which would be opposed to my doctrine. Therefore, on the

1 See Letter 338, Vol. I., p. 443.

1843-1 knight's law 253

great principle of " Nature not lying," I fully expected that Letter 585
trees would be apt to be dioecious <»r monoecious 'which, as

pollen has to be carried from flower to flower every time,
would favour a cross from another individual of tl me

species), and so it seems to be in Britain and N. /.-aland.
Nor can the fact be explained by certain families having this
structure and chancing to be trees, for the rule seems to hold
both in genera and families, as well as in species.

1 give you full permission to laugh your fill at this wild
speculation ; and I do not pretend but what it maybe chance
which, in this case, has led me apparently right. But I repeat
that I feel sure that my doctrine has more probability than
at first it appears to have. If you had not asked, I should
not have written at such length, though I cannot give any of
my reasons.

The Leguminosa are my greatest opposers; yet if I were
to trust to observations on insects made during many yeai
I should fully expect crosses to take place in them; but I
cannot find that our garden varieties ever cross each other.
I do not ask you to take any trouble about it, but if you should
by chance come across any intelligent nurseryman, I wish you
would enquire whether they take any pains in raising the
varieties of papilionaceous plants apart to prevent crossing.
(I have seen a statement of naturally formed crossed Phaseoli
near N. York.) The worst is that nurserymen are apt to
attribute all varieties to crossing.

Finally 1 incline to believe that every living being requires
an occasional cross with a distinct individual ; and as trees
from the mere multitude of flowers offer an obstacle to this,
I suspect this obstacle is counteracted by tendency to have
sexes separated. But I have forgotten to say that my maxi-
mum difficulty is trees having papilionaceous flowers : some
of them, I know, have their keel-petals expanded when ready
for fertilisation ; but Bentham does not believe that this is
general : nevertheless, on principle of nature not lying, I
suspect that this will turn out so, or that they are eminently
sought by bees dusted with pollen. Again I do not ask you
to take trouble, but if strolling under your Robinias when in
full flower, just look at stamens and pistils whether protruded
and whether bees visit them. I must just mention a fact
mentioned to me the other day by Sir W. Macarthur, a clever

254 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 585 Australian gardener : viz., how odd it was that his Erythrinas
in N. S. Wales would not set a seed, without he imitated the
movements of the petals which bees cause. Well, as long as
you live, you will never, after this fearfully long note, ask me
why I believe this or that.

Letter 586 To Asa Gray.

June 18th [1857].

It has been extremely kind of you telling me about the
trees : now with your facts, and those from Britain, N. Zealand,
and Tasmania I shall have fair materials for judging. I am
writing this away from home, but I think your fraction of
y/g is as large as in other cases, and is at least a striking
coincidence.

I thank you much for your remarks about my crossing
notions, to which, I may add, I was led by exactly the same
idea as yours, viz., that crossing must be one means of
eliminating variation, and then I wished to make out how far
in animals and vegetables this was possible. Papilionaceous
flowers are almost dead floorers to me, and I cannot experi-
mentise, as castration alone often produces sterility. I am
surprised at what you say about Compositae and Gramineae.
From what I have seen of latter they seemed to me (and
I have watched wheat, owing to what L. de Longchamps has
said on their fertilisation in bud) favourable for crossing ; and
from Cassini's observations and Kolreuter's on the adhesive
pollen, and C. C. Sprengel's, I had concluded that the
Composite were eminently likely (I am aware of the pistil
brushing out pollen) to be crossed.1 If in some months' time
you can find time to tell me whether you have made any
observations on the early fertilisation of plants in these two
orders, I should be very glad to hear, as it would save me from
great blunder. In several published remarks on this subject
in various genera it has seemed to me that the early fertilisa-
tion has been inferred from the early shedding of the pollen,
which I think is clearly a false inference. Another cause,
I should think, of the belief of fertilisation in the bud, is the

1 This is an instance of the curious ignorance of the essential principles
of floral mechanism which was to be found even among learned and
accomplished botanists such as Gray, before the publication of the
Fertilisation of Orchids. Even in 1863 we find Darwin explaining the
meaning of dichogamy in a letter to Gray.

i84j I \ I ■ I FERTILISAT1

not-rare, abnormal, early maturity of the pistil i scribed Letta

by Gartner. I have hitherto failed in meeting with detai

»unts of regular and normal impregnation in the bud.
Podostemon and Subularia under water (and Legumino
seem and are strongest cases against me, as far as I as yet
know. I am so sorry that you are so overwhelmed with work ;
it makes your very great kindness to me the more striking.

It is really pretty to see how effectual insects are. A short
time ago I found a female holly sixty measured yards from
an>- other holly, and I cut off some twigs and t^ok by chance
twenty stigmas, cut off their tops, and put them under th<
microscope: there was pollen on every one, and in profusion
on most ! weather cloud}- and stormy and unfavourable, wind
in wrong direction to have brought any.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 5S7

Down, Jan. 12th [1S58].
I want to ask a question which will take you only few-
wools to answer. It bcar> on my former belief (and Asa
Gray strongly expressed opinion; that Papilionaceous flowers
were fatal to my notion of there being no eternal herma-
phrodites. First let me say how evidence goes. You will
remember my facts going to show that kidney-beans require
visits of bees to be fertilised. This has been positively stated
to be the case with LatJiyrus grandiflorus> and has been very
partially verified by me. Sir W. Macarthur tells me that
Erytkrina will hardly seed in Australia without the petals
are moved as if by bee. I have just met the statement that.
with common bean, when the humble-bees bite holes at the
base of the flower, and therefore cease visiting the mouth of
the corolla, " hardly .1 bean will set." But now comes a much
more curious statement, that [in] [ 842-43, " since bees were
established at Wellington (X. Zealand), clover seeds all
over the settlement, which it did not before" ' The writ, r
evidently has no idea what the connection can be. Now I
cannot help at once connecting this statement (and all the
foregoing statements in some degree support each other, as
all have been advanced without any sort of theory) with the
remarkable absence of Papilionaceous plants in X. Zealand.
I see in your list CliantJuis, CarmichaeUa four species), a new

1 See Letter 362, Vol. I.

256 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 587 genus, a shrub, and Edtuardsia (is latter Papilionaceous ?).
Now what I want to know is whether any of these have
flowers as small as clover ; for if they have large flowers they
may be visited by humble-bees, which I think I remember
do exist in N. Zealand ; and which humble-bees would not
visit the smaller clover. Even the very minute little yellow
clover in England has every flower visited and revisited by
hive-bees, as I know by experience. Would it not be a
curious case of correlation if it could be shown to be probable
that herbaceous and small Leguminosae do not exist because
when [their] seeds [are] washed ashore (! ! !) no small bees
exist there. Though this latter fact must be ascertained.
I may not prove anything, but does it not seem odd that so
many quite independent facts, or rather statements, should
point all in one direction, viz., that bees are necessary to
the fertilisation of Papilionaceous flowers ?

Letter 588 To John Lubbock (Lord Avebury).

Sunday [1859].

Do you remember calling my attention to certain flowers
in the truss of Pelargoniums not being true, or not having
the dark shade on the two upper petals ? I believe it was
Lady Lubbock's observation. I find, as I expected, it is
always the central or sub-central flower ; but what is far more
curious, the nectary, which is blended with the peduncle of
the flowers, gradually lessens and quite disappears,1 as the
dark shade on the two upper petals disappears. Compare
the stalk in the two enclosed parcels, in each of which there
is a perfect flower.

Now, if your gardener will not be outrageous, do look over
your geraniums and send me a few trusses, if you can find
any, having the flowers without the marks, sending me some
perfect flowers on same truss. The case seems to me rather
a pretty one of correlation of growth ; for the calyx also
becomes slightly modified in the flowers without marks.

Letter 589 To Maxwell Masters.

Down, April 7th [i860].

I hope that you will excuse the liberty which I take in
writing to you and begging a favour. 1 have been very much

1 This fact is mentioned in Maxwell Masters' Vegetable Teratology
(Ray Society's Publications), 1869, p. 221.

1843-1862] IN 1. I FERTILISATION

interested by the abstract (too brief) ol your 1 cture at the Letter 589
Royal Institution. Many of the: luded to are full of in-

terest for me. But on cue point 1 should be infinitely obli
if you could procure mean) information: namely, with r
to sweet-peas. 1 am a greal bi liever in the natural cr
of individuals of the same species. Hut I have been a ui
by Mr. Cattell,1 of Westerham, that the several varieties -l
sweet-pea can be raised close together for a number of y<
without int< rerossing. But on the other hand he stated that
they go over the beds, and pull up an)- false plant, which
they very naturally attribute to wrong seeds getl mixed
in the lot. After many failures, I succeeded in artificially
crossing two varieties, and the offspring out of the same
pod, instead of being intermediate, was very nearly like the
two pure parents ; yet in one, there was a trace of the cross,
and these crossed peas in the next generation showed still
more plainly their mongrel origin. Now, what I want to
know is, whether there is much variation in sweet-peas which
might be owing to natural crosses. What I should expect
would be that they would keep true for many years, but that
occasionally, perhaps at long intervals, there would be a
considerable amount of crossing of the varieties grown cl
together. Can you give, or obtain from your father, an)'
information on this head, and allow me to quote your
authority? It would really be a very great favour and
kindness.

To J. U. Hooker.

■* !.• iter 590

The genera Sccevola and Leschenaultia, to which the following letter
refers, belong to the Goodeniac :eae <(>oodenovie;r. Bentham & Hool
an order allied to the Lobeliaceoj, although the mechanism of fertilisation
resembles rather more nearly that of Campanula. The character
feature of the flower in this order is the indusium, or, as Deli> .Is

it, the "collecting cup :' : this cuplike organ is a development of the
style, and serves the same function as the hairs on the style of Campanx
namely, that of taking the pollen from the anthers and presenting it to
the visiting insect. During this stage the immature stign. the

bottom of the cup, and though surrounded by pollen is incapable of
being pollinated. In most genera of the order the pollen is pushed
out of the indusium by the growth of the style or stigma, very much as

1 The nurseryman he generally dealt with.

s Delpino's observations on Dichogamy, summarised by Hildebrand
in Bot. Zeitung) 1S70, p. 634.

vol. 11. 1;

258 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 590 occurs in Lobelia or the Compositae. Finally the style emerges from the
indusium,1 the stigmas open out and are pollinated from younger flowers.
The mechanism of fertilisation has been described by F. Miiller,2 and
more completely by Delpino (loc. cit.).

Mr. Bentham wrote a paper3 on the style and stigma in the
Goodenovieas, where he speaks of Mr. Darwin's belief that fertilisation
takes place outside the indusium. This statement, which we imagine
Mr. Bentham must have had from an unpublished source, was incom-
prehensible to him as long as he confined his work to such genera as
Goodenia, Sccevola, Velleia, Ccelogyne, in which the mechanism is much
as above described ; but on examining Leschenaultia the meaning became
clear. Bentham writes of this genus : — " The indusium is usually described
as broadly two-lipped, without any distinct stigma. The fact appears to
be that the upper less prominent lip is stigmatic all over, inside and out,
with a transverse band of short glandular hairs at its base outside, while
the lower more prominent lip is smooth and glabrous, or with a tuft of
rigid hairs. Perhaps this lower lip and the upper band of hairs are all
that correspond to the indusium of other genera ; and the so-called upper
lip, outside of which impregnation may well take place, as observed by
Mr. Darwin, must be regarded as the true stigma."

Darwin's interest in the Goodeniaceas was due to the mechanism being
apparently fitted for self-fertilisation. In 1871 a writer signing himself
F.W.B. made a communication to the Gardeners' Chronicle? in which he
expresses himself as " agreeably surprised " to find Leschenaultia adapted
for self-fertilisation, or at least for self-pollinisation. This led Darwin to
publish a short note in the same journal,5 in which he describes the penetra-
tion of pollen-tubes into the viscid surface on the outside of the indusium.
He also describes how a brush, pushed into the flower in imitation of an

1 According to Hamilton (Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S. Wales, X., 1895, P- 301)
the stigma rarely grows beyond the indusium in Dampiera. In the
same journal (1885-6, p. 157, and IX., 1894, p. 201) Hamilton has given
a number of interesting observations on Goodenia, SccEvola, Selliera,
Brunonia. There seem to be mechanisms for cross- and also for self-
fertilisation.

2 In a letter to Hildebrand published in the Bot. Zeitung, 1868,
p. 113.

3 Linn. Soc. Journal, 1869, p. 203.

4 1871, p. 1103.

5 1871, p. 1 166. He had previously written in the Journal of Horticul-
ture and Cottage Gardener, May 28th, 1861, p. 151 : — " Leschenaultia formosa
has apparently the most effective contrivance to prevent the stigma of one
flower ever receiving a grain of pollen from another flower ; for the pollen
is shed in the early bud, and is there shut up round the stigma within a
cup or indusium. But some observations led me to suspect that never-
theless insect agency here comes into play ; for I found by holding a
camel-hair pencil parallel to the pistil, and moving it as if it were a bee

1843— 1862] INSECT FERTILISATION 59

insect, presses "against the slightly projecting lower lip of the indusiun 590

opens it, and some of the hairs enter and become d with pollen."

yield of pollen is ther<
for in the more typical k1-1101"11 it rowth of the style

inside the indusium. Delpino, ho^

«"/.), describes a similar opening of the pressure on the

hairs in some genera of the order.

a, June 7th [i860].

Best and most beloved of men, I supplicate and entreat
you to observe one point for me. Remember that the
Goodeniacea.- have weighed like an incubus for years on my
soul. It relates to SccBVola microcarpa. I find that in bud
the indusium collects all the pollen splendidly, but, differently
from Leschenaultidy cannot be afterwards easily opened.
Further, I find that at an early stage, when the flower first
opens, a boat-shaped stigma lies at the bottom of the
indusium, and further that this stigma, after the flower has
some time expanded, grows very rapidly, when the plant is
kept hot, and pushes out of the indusium a mass of pollen ;
and at same time two horns project at the corners of the
indusium. Now the appearance of these horns makes me
suppose that these are the stigmatic surfaces. \\ ill you louk
to this ? for if they be by the relative position of the parts
(with indusium and stigma bent at right angles to style) [I
am led to think] that an insect entering a flower could not
fail to have [its] whole back (at the period when, as I have
seen, a whole mass of pollen is pushed out) covered with
pollen, which would almost certainly get rubbed on the two
horns. Indeed, I doubt whether, without this aid, pollen
would <jet on to the horns. What interests me in the case is
the analogy in result with the Lobelia, but by very different
means. In Lobelia the stigma, before it is mature, pushes by
Its circular brush of hairs the pollen out of the conjoined
anthers ; here the indusium collects pollen, and then the
growth of the stigma pushes it out. In the cours bout

going to suck the nectar, the straggling hairs of the brush opened the lip
of the indusium, entered it, stirred up the pollen, and brought out some
grains. I did this to five flowers, and marked them. These live dowers
all set pods ; whereas only two other pods set on the whole plant, though
covered with innumerable dowers. . . . I wrote to Mr. James Drummond,
at Swan River in Australia, . . . and he soon wrote to me that he had
seen a bee cleverly opening the indusium and extracting pollen.'

260 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 590 i| hour, I found an indusium with hairs on the outer edge
perfectly clogged with pollen, and horns protruded, which
before the 1^ hour had not one grain of pollen outside the
indusium, and no trace of protruding horns. So you will see
how I wish to know whether the horns are the true stigmatic
surfaces. I would try the case experimentally by putting
pollen on the horns, but my greenhouse is so cold, and my
plant so small, and in such a little pot, that I suppose it
would not seed. . . .

The little length of stigmatic horns at the moment when
pollen is forced out of the indusium, compared to what they
ultimately attain, makes me fancy that they are not then
mature or ready, and if so, as in Lobelia, each flower must be
fertilised by pollen from another and earlier flower.

How curious that the indusium should first so cleverly
collect pollen and then afterwards push it out ! Yet how
closely analogous to Campanula brushing pollen out of the
anther and retaining it on hairs till the stigma is ready. I
am going to try whether Campanula sets seed without insect
agency.

Letter 591 To J- D- Hooker.

The following letters are given here rather than in chronological order,
as bearing on the Leschenaultia problem. The latter part of Letter 591
refers to the cleistogamic flowers of Viola.

Down, May 1st [1862].

If you can screw out time, do look at the stigma of the
blue Leschenaultia biloba. I have just examined a large bud
with the indusium not yet closed, and it seems to me certain
that there is no stigma within. The case would be very
important for me, and I do not like to trust solely to myself.
I have been impregnating flowers, but it is rather difficult. . . .

I have just looked again at Viola canina. The case is odder :
only 2 stamens which embrace the stigma have pollen ; the 3
other stamens have no anther-cells and no pollen. These 2
fertile anthers are of different shape from the 3 sterile others,
and the scale representing the lower lip is larger and differently
shaped from the 4 other scales representing 4 other petals.

In V. odorata (single flower) all five stamens produce
pollen. But I daresay all this is known.

i843— 1862] [NSECT FERTILISATION

To J. D. Hooker. Letter

3rd [1862].

|)<> you remember the scarlet Leschenaultia formosa with
the sticky margin outside the indusium? Well, this is the
stigma at least, I find the pollen-tubes here penetrate and
nowhere else. What a joke it would be if the stigma is always
exterior, and this by far the greatest difficulty in my crossing
notions should turn out a case eminently requiring insect aid,
and consequently almost inevitably insuring crossing. By the
way, have you any other Goodeniacea,- which you could lend
me, besides Leschenaultia and Sccevola, of which I have seen
enough ?

I had a long letter the other day from Crocker of
Chichester ; he has the real spirit of an experimentalist,
but has not done much this summer.

To F. Mtillcr. Letter 593

Down, April 9th and 15th [1S66].

I am very much obliged by your letter of February 13th,

abounding with so many highly interesting facts. Your
account of the Rubiaceous plant is one of the most extraordi-
nary that I have ever read, and I am glad you are going to
publish it. I have long wished some one to observe the
fertilisation of Scavola, and you must permit me to tell you
what I have observed. First, for the allied genus of Leschen-
aultia : utterly disbelieving that it fertilises itself, I introduced
a camel-hair brush into the flower in the same way as a bee
would enter, and I found that the flowers were thus fertilised,
which never otherwise happens ; I then searched for the
stigma, and found it outside the indusium with the pollen-
tubes penetrating it; and I convinced Dr. Hooker that
botanists were quite wrong in supposing that the stigma lax-
inside the indusium. In Scavola tnicrocarpa the structure
is very different, for the immature stigma lies at the ba<e
within the indusium, and as the stigma grows it pushes the
pollen out of the indusium. and it then clings to the hairs
which fringe the tips of the indusium ; and when an insect
enters the flower, the pollen as I have seen is swept from
these long hairs on to the insect's back. The stigma continues
to grow, but is not apparently ready for impregnation until it
is developed into two long protruding horns, at which period

262 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 593 all the pollen has been pushed out of the indusium. But my
observations are here at fault, for I did not observe the pene-
tration of the pollen-tubes. The case is almost parallel with
that of Lobelia. Now, I hope you will get two plants of
Sccevola, and protect one from insects, leaving the other
uncovered, and observe the results, both in the number of
capsules produced, and in the average number of seeds in
each. It would be well to fertilise half a dozen flowers under
the net, to prove that the cover is not injurious to fertility.

With respect to your case of Aristolochia, I think further
observation would convince you that it is not fertilised only
by larvae, for in a nearly parallel case of an Arum and an
Aristolochia, I found that insects flew from flower to flower.
I would suggest to you to observe any cases of flowers which
catch insects by their probosces, as occurs with some of the
Apocyneae x ; I have never been able to conceive for what
purpose (if any) this is effected ; at the same time, if I tempt
you to neglect your zoological work for these miscellaneous
observations I shall be guilty of a great crime.

To return for a moment to the indusium : how curious it
is that the pollen should be thus collected in a special recep-
tacle, afterwards to be swept out by insects' agency !

I am surprised at what you tell me about the fewness of
the flowers of your native orchids which produce seed-capsules.
What a contrast with our temperate European species, with
the exception of some species of Ophrys ! — I now know of
three or four cases of self-fertilising orchids, but all these are
provided with means for an occasional cross.

I am sorry to say Dr. Criiger is dead from a fever.

I received yesterday your paper in the Botanische Zeitung
on the wood of climbing plants.2 I have read as yet only
your very interesting and curious remarks on the subject as
bearing on the change of species ; you have pleased me by
the very high compliments which you pay to my paper. I
have been at work since March 1st on a new English edition3
of my Origin, of which when published I will send you a

1 Probably Asclepiadeas. See H. Muller, Fertilisation of Flowers,
p. 396.

2 Fritz Muller, " Ueber das Holz einiger urn Desterro wachsenden
Kletterpflanzen." Botanische Zeitung, 1866, pp. 57, 65.

3 The 4th Edit.

1843-1862] BEE-ORCHIS 263

copy. I have much regretted the time it has cost me, as it Letter 593
1 pped my other work. On the other hand.it will

ul for a new third German edition, which is now wan'.
I have corrected it largely, and added some discu- but

not nearly so much as I wish< d to do, for, being able to work
only two hours daily, I feared I should never get it finished
I have taken some facts and views from your work "Fiir
Darwin " ; but not one quarter of what 1 should like to
have quoted.

To A. G. More.1 Letter 594

Down, June 24th, i860.
I hope that you will forgive the liberty which I take in
writing to you and requesting a favour. Mr. II. G Watson
has given me your address, and has told me that he thought
that you would be willing to oblige me. Will you please to
read the enclosed, and then you will understand what I wish
observed with respect to the bee-orchis.- What I especially
wish, from information which I have rccciwd since publishing
the enclosed, is that the state of the pollen -masses should be
noted in flowers just beginning to wither, in a district where
the bee-orchis is extremely common. I have been assured
that in parts of Isle of Wight, viz.. Freshwater Gate, numbers
occur almost crowded together : whether anything of this
kind occurs in your vicinity I know not ; but, if in your
power, 1 should be infinitely obliged for any information. As
I am writing, I will venture to mention another wish which
I have : namely, to examine fresh flowers and buds of the
Acer as, Spiranthes, marsh Epipactis, and any other rare orchis.

1 Alexander Goodman More (1S30-95I, botanist and zoologist, dis-
tinguished chiefly by his researches on the distribution of Irish plants
and animals. He was born in London, and was educated at 1
and Trinity College. Cambridge. He became it in the Natural

History Museum at Dublin in 1867. and Curator in [881. He was forced
by ill-health to resign his post in 18S7. and died in i8g;. He is tx
known for the Cybele Hibemica and for various papers pul in the

Ibis. He was also the author of Outlines of th '^

Isle of Wight, of a Supplcnicnt to the Flora ind innumer-

able shorter papers. His Life and Letters has been edited by Mr. C. B.
Moffat, with a preface by Miss Frances More ( 1 89s"). There is a good
obituary notice by Mr. R. Barrington in the Iris \ May. 1S95.

3 Ophrys apifera.

264 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 594 The point which I wish to examine is really very curious, but
it would take too long space to explain. Could you oblige
me by taking the great trouble to send me in an old tin
canister any of these orchids, permitting me, of course, to
repay postage? It would be a great kindness, but perhaps I
am unreasonable to make such a request. If you will inform
me whether you have leisure so far to oblige me, I would tell
you my movements, for on account of my own health and
that of my daughter, I shall be on the move for the next two
or three weeks.

I am sure I have much cause to apologise for the liberty
which I have taken . . .

Letter 595 To A. G. More.

Down, August 3rd, i860.

I thank you most sincerely for sending me the Epipactis
\palustris\ You can hardly imagine what an interesting
morning's work you have given me, as the rostellum exhibited
a quite new modification of structure. It has been extremely
kind of you to take so very much trouble for me. Have you
looked at the pollen-masses of the bee-Ophrys ? I do not
know whether the Epipactis grows near to your house : if it
does, and any object takes you to the place (pray do not for
a moment think me so very unreasonable as to ask you to go
on purpose), would you be so kind [as] to watch the flowers
for a quarter of an hour, and mark whether any insects (and
what?) visit these flowers.

I should suppose they would crawl in by depressing the
terminal portion of the labellum ; and that when within the
flower this terminal portion would resume its former position ;
and lastly, that the insect in crawling out would not depress
the labellum, but would crawl out at back of flower.1 An

1 The observations of Mr. William Darwin on Epipactis palustris
given in the Fertilisation of Orchids, Ed. II., 1877, p. 99, bear on this
point. The chief fertilisers are hive-bees, which are too big to crawl into
the flower. They cling to the labellum, and by depressing it open up the
entrance to the flower. Owing to the elasticity of the labellum and its
consequent tendency to spring up when released, the bees, " as they left
the flower, seemed to fly rather upwards." This agrees with Darwin's
conception of the mechanism of the flower as given in the first edition of
the Orchid book, 1862, p. 100, although at that time he imagined that
the fertilising insect crawled into the flower. The extreme flexibility and

[843 '■ INSEC1 l' ERTILISATIl >N

insect crawling out of a recently opened flower would, I believe, Letter 595
have parts of the pollen-massi - adhering to the back or
shoulder. I have seen this in Listera. How I should lii
to watch the Epipactis.

If you can at anytime send me Spiranthes or Aceras or
O. ustulata, you would complete your work of kindnes

P.S. — If you should visit the Epipactis again, would you
gather a few of the lower flowers which have been opened
for some time and have begun to wither a little, and observe
whether pollen is well cleared out of anther-case. I have
been struck with surprise that in nearly all the lower flowers
sent by you, though much of the pollen has been removed,
yet a good deal of pollen is left wasted within the anthers.
I observed something of this kind in Cepkalanthera grandi-
flora. Hut I fear that you will think me an intolerable bore.

To A. G. More. Letter 596

I ii v.n. August 5th, i860.

I am infinitely obliged for your most clearly stated obser-
vations on the bee-orchis. It is now perfectly clear that
something removes the pollen-ma-se> far more with you than
in this neighbourhood. But I am utterly puzzled about the
foot-stalk being so often cut through. I should suspect snails.
I yesterday found thirty-nine (lowers, and of them only one
pollen-mass in three flowers had been removed, and as th
were extremely much-withered flowers I am not quite stir
the truth of this. The wind again is a new element of doubt.
Your observations will aid me extremely in coming to some
conclusion.1 I hope in a day or two to receive some day-
moths, on the pr s of which I am assured the pollen-
masses of the bee-orchis still adhere.'-' . . .

elasticity of the labellum was first observed by Mr. More i hx* first edition,
p. 99). The description <>t tin- flower given in the above letter to Mr.
More i> not quite clear ; the reader is referred to the Fertilisation of
Orchids, loc. cit.

1 Mr. More's observations on the percentage of flowers in which the
pollinia were absent are quoted in Fertilis Ed. 1.. p.

3 He was doomed to disappointment. On July 17th. 1861, he wrote
to .Mr. More: — "I found the other day a lot of be< ys with the

glands of the pollinia all in their pouches. All facts point elearly to
eternal self-fertilisation in this species; yet 1 cannot swallow the bitter
pill. Have you looked at any this yeai i

266

BOTANY

[Chap. X

Letter 596 I wrote yesterday to thank you for the Epipactis. For the
chance of your liking to look at what I have found : take
a recently opened flower, drag gently up the stigmatic surface
almost any object (the side of a hooked needle), and you will
find the cap of the hemispherical rostellum comes off with
a touch, and being viscid on under-surface, clings to needle,
and as pollen-masses are already attached to the back of
rostellum, the needle drags out much pollen. But to do this,
the curiously projecting and fleshy summits of anther-cases
must at some time be pushed back slightly. Now when an
insect's head gets into the flower, when the flap of the labellum
has closed by its elasticity, the insect would naturally creep
out by the back-side of the flower. And mark when the
insect flies to another flower with the pollen-masses adhering
to it, if the flap of labellum did not easily open and allow free
ingress to the insect, it would surely rub off the pollen on the
upper petals, and so not leave it on stigma. It is to know
whether I have rightly interpreted the structure of this whole
flower that I am so curious to see how insects act. Small
insects, I daresay, would crawl in and out and do nothing.
I hope that I shall not have wearied you with these details.

If you would like to see a pretty and curious little sight,
look to Orchis pyramidalis, and you will see that the sticky
glands are congenitally united into a saddle-shaped organ.
Remove this under microscope by pincers applied to foot-stalk
of pollen-mass, and look quickly at the spontaneous movement
of the saddle-shaped organs and see how beautifully adapted
to seize proboscis of moth.

Letter 597 To J. D. Hooker.

Dec. 4th [i860].

Many thanks about Apocynum and Meyen.

The latter I want about some strange movements in cells
of Drosera, which Meyen * alone seems to have observed. It
is very curious, but Trecul disbelieves that Drosera really
clasps flies ! I should very much wish to talk over Drosera
with you. I did chloroform it, and the leaves which were
already expanded did not recover thirty seconds of exposure
for three days. I used the expression weight for the bit of

No observations of Meyen are mentioned in Insectivorous Plants,

1843— 1862] Dl A 267

hair which caused movement and weighed rvhrrs of a grain ; Letter 597

but I do not believe it is weight,1 and what it is, I cannot

after many experiments conjecture. The movement in this

case does not depend on the chemical nature of substance.

Latterly I have tried experiments on single glands, and a

microscopical atom of raw meat causes such rapid movement

that I could see it move like hand of clock. In this case

it is the nature of the object. It is wonderful the rapidit;

the absorption : in ten seconds weak solution of carbonate of

ammonia changes not the colour, but the state of contents

within the glands. In two minutes thirty seconds juice of

meat has been absorbed by gland and passed from cell to cell

all down the pedicel (or hair) of the gland, and caused the

sap to pass from the cells on the upper side of the pedicel

to the lower side, and this causes the curvature of the pedicel.

I shall work away next summer when Drosera opens again,

for I am much interested in subject. After the glandular

hairs have curved, the oddest changes take place— viz., a

segregation of the homogeneous pink fluid and necessary

slow movements in the thicker matter. By Jove, I sometim

think Drosera is a disguised animal! You know that I alwa\

so like telling you what I do, that you must forgive me

scribbling on my beloved Drosera. Farewell. I am so very

glad that you are going to reform your ways ; I am sure that

you would have injured your health seriously. There is poor

Dana has done actualU nothing — cannot even write a letter —

for a year, and it is hoped that in another year he may quite

recover.

After this homily, good night, my dear friend. Good
heavens, I ought not to scold you, but thank you, for writing
so long and interesting a letter.

1 The doubt here expressed as to whether the result is due to a< tual
weight is interesting in connection with Pfeffer's remarkal :ry

that a smooth object in 1 ontact with the gland produces no if the

plant i> protected from all vibration ; on an ordinary table the slight
shaking which reaches the plant is sufficient to make the body resting
on the gland tremble, and thus produce a series of varying pressures —
under these circumstances the gland is irritated, and the tentacle moves.
See Pfeffer, Untersuchungen aus d. hot. Institut :u 73 . Vol. I.,

1885, p. 483 ; also Insectivorous Plants, Ed. II.. p. 22.

268 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 598 To E. Cresy.

Down, Dec. 12th [i860?].
After writing out the greater part of my paper on Drosera,
I thought of so many points to try, and I wished to re-test
the basis of one large set of experiments, namely, to feel still
more sure than I am, that a drop of plain water never produces
any effect, that I have resolved to publish nothing this year.
For I found in the record of my daily experiments one sus-
picious case. I must wait till next summer. It will be difficult
to try any solid substances containing nitrogen, such as ivory ;
for two quite distinct causes excite the movement, namely,
mechanical irritation and presence of nitrogen. When a solid
substance is placed on leaf it becomes clasped, but is released
sooner than when a nitrogenous solid is clasped ; yet it is
difficult (except with raw meat and flies) to be sure of the
result, owing to differences in vigour of different plants. The
last experiments which I tried before my plants became too
languid are very curious, and were tried by putting micro-
scopical atoms on the gland itself of single hairs ; and it is
perfectly evident that an atom of human hair, Tq^q^ of a grain
(as ascertained by weighing a length of hair) in weight, causes
conspicuous movement. I do not believe (for atoms of cotton
thread acted) it is the chemical nature ; and some reasons
make me doubt whether it is actual weight ; it is not the
shadow ; and I am at present, after many experiments, con-
founded to know what the cause is. That these atoms did
really act and alter the state of the contents ,of all the cells
in the glandular hair, which moved, was perfectly clear. But
I hope next summer to make out a good deal more . . .

Letter 599 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, May 14th [1861].

I have been putting off writing from day to day, as I did
not wish to trouble you, till my wish for a little news will not
let me rest . . .

I have no news to tell you, for I have had no interesting
letters for some time, and have not seen a soul. I have been
going through the Cottage Gardener of last year, on account
chiefly of Beaton's 1 articles ; he strikes me as a clever but

1 Donald Beaton (1802-63). Biographical notices in the Journal oj
Horticulture and the Cottage Gardener, XIII., p. 153, and Journ. Hort.,
1863, pp. 349 and 415, are referred to in Britten & Boulger's Biographical

i843— 1862] ORCHID 209

d — d cock-sure man (as Lord Melbourne said), and I have Letter
some doubts whether to be much trusted. I suspect he
never recorded his experiment at the time with care. He
lias made me indignant by the way he speaks of Gartner,
evidently knowing nothing of his work. I mean to try and
pump him in the Cottage Gardener, and shall perhaps defi
Gartner, lie alludes to me occasionally, and 1 cannot tell
with what spirit. He speaks of " this Mr. Darwin" in 1
place as if 1 were a very noxious animal.

Let me have a line about poor Henslow pretty soon.

In a letter of May iSth, 1861, Darwin wrote again : —

By the way, thanks about Beaton. I have now read more
of his writings, and one answer to me in Cottage Gardener.
I can plainly see that he is not to be truste I. He does not
well know his own subject of crossing.

To J. D. Hooker.1 Letter 600

2, Hesketh Crescent, Torquay [1S61 ].

. . . The beauty of the adaptation of parts seems to me
unparalleled. I should think or guess [that] waxy pollen was
most differentiated. In Cypripediunt, which seems least modi-
fied, and a much exterminated group, the grains are single.
In all others, as far as I have seen, they are in packets of four ;
and these packets cohere into many wedge-formed masses in
Orchis, into eight, four, and finally two. It seems curious that
a flower should exist which could, at most, fertilise only two
other flowers, seeing how abundant pollen generally is ; this
fact I look at as explaining the perfection of the contrivance
by which the pollen, so important from its fewness, is carried

Index of Botanists, 1893. Dr. Masters tells us that Beaton had a
"first-rate reputation as a practical gardener, and \ emed for his

shrewdness and humour." He was a regular contributor to the (.'
Gardener, and wrote various articles on cross breeding, etc., in 1S61. One
of these was in reply to a letter published in the Cotta
May 14th, 1861, p. 112, in which Darwin asked for information as to the
Composite and the hollyhock being crossed by insect visitors. In
the number for June 8th, [861, p. 211, Darwin wrote on the variability of
the central flower of the carrot and the peloria of the central flower in
Pelargonium. An extract from a letter by Darwin on .;
Cottage Gardener, May 28th, 1861, p. 151, is given in note 5, Letter 590.
1 Part of this letter has been published in Life and Letters, III., p. 265.

270 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 600 from flower to flower. By the way, CeplialantJiera has single
pollen-grains, but this seems to be a case of degradation, for
the rostellum is utterly aborted. Oddly, the columns of pollen
are here kept in place by very early penetration of pollen-
tubes into the edge of the stigma ; nevertheless, it receives
more pollen by insect agency. EpitJiecia \Dichczd\ has done
me one good little turn. I often speculated how the caudicle
of Orchis had been formed.1 I had noticed slight clouds in
the substance half way down ; I have now dissected them out,
and I find they are pollen-grains fairly embedded and useless.
If you suppose the pollen-grains to abort in the lower half of
the pollinia of Epipactis, but the parallel elastic threads to
remain and cohere, you have the caudicle of Orchis, and can
understand the few embedded and functionless pollen-grains.
I must not look at any more exotic orchids : hearty thanks
for your offer. But if you would make one single observation
for me on Cypripedium, I should be glad. Asa Gray writes to
me that the outside of the pollen-masses is sticky in this genus ;
I find that the whole mass consists of pollen-grains immersed
in a sticky brownish thick fluid. You could tell by a mere
lens and penknife. If it is, as I find it, pollen could not get
on the stigma without insect aid. Cypripedium. confounds me
much. I conjecture that drops of nectar are secreted by the
surface of the labellum beneath the anthers and in front of
the stigma, and that the shield over the anthers and the form
of labellum is to compel insects to insert their proboscis all
round both organs.2 It would be troublesome for you to look
at this, as it is always bothersome to catch the nectar secreting,
and the cup of the labellum gets filled with water by gardener's
watering.

I have examined Listera ovata, cordata, and Neottia nidus
avis: the pollen is uniform; I suspect you must have seen
some observation founded on a mistake from the penetration
and hardening of sticky fluid from the rostellum, which does
penetrate the pollen a little.

It is mere virtue which makes me not wish to examine
more orchids ; for I like it far better than writing about
varieties of cocks and hens and ducks. Nevertheless, I have

1 The gradation here suggested is thoroughly worked out in the
Fertilisation of Orchids, Ed. I., p. 323, Ed. II., p. 257.

2 This view was afterwards given up.

1843-1862] ORCHIDS -,"'

just been looking at Lindley's list in the Vi 600

and I cannot resist one or two of his great division of
Arethu hich includes Vanilla. And as 1 know so well

the Ophreae, I should like (God forgive me) anyone of the
Satyriadae, Disidae and ( 1 ae.

I fear my long lucubrations will have weai u, but it

has amused me to write, so forgive me.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 601

Part of the following letter is published in the Life and Letters, the
remainder, with the omission of part bearing on the Glen Roy problem,
is now given as an example of the varied botanical assistance Darwin
received from Sir Joseph Hooker. For the part relating to Verbascum
see the Variation of Animals and Plants, Ed. II., 1875, ^'°1- U-, P- 83.
The point is that the white and yellow flowered plants which occur in two
species of / 'erbascum are undoubted varieties, yet " the sterility which
results from the crossing of the differently coloured varieties of the same
species is fully as great as that which occurs in many cases when distinct
species are crossed."

The sterility of the long-styled form (B) of Li nu in grandiflorum, with
its own pollen is described in Forms of Flowers, Ed. II., p. 87 : his con-
clusions on the short-styled form (A) differ from those in the present letter.

Sept. 28th [1S61].

I am going to beg for help, and I will explain why I
want it.

You offer Cypripedium ; I should be very glad of a speci-
men, and of any good-sized Yandex, or indeed any orchids,
for this reason : I never thought of publishing separately, and
therefore did not keep specimens in spirits, and now I should
be very glad of a few woodcuts to illustrate my tew remarks
on exotic orchids. If you can send me any, send them by
post in a tin canister on middle of day of Saturday, Oct 5th,
for Sowerby will be here.

Secondly : Have you any white and yellow varieties
Verbascum which you could give me, or propagate for me,
or lend me for a year ? I have resolved to try Gartner's
wonderful and repeated .statement, that pollen of white and
yellow varieties, whether used on the varieties or on distinct
species, has different potency. 1 d^ not think any experiment
can be more important on the origin of species ; for if h<
correct we certainly have what Huxley calls new physiological
species arising. 1 should require several species of Verbascum

272 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 601 besides the white and yellow varieties of the same species.
It will be tiresome work, but if I can anyhow get the plants,
it shall be tried.

Thirdly : Can you give me seeds of any Rubiaceae of the
sub-order Cinchoneae, as Sfiermacoce, Diodia, Mitchella, Olden-
landia ? Asa Gray says they present two forms like Primula.
I am sure that this subject is well worth working out. I have
just almost proved a very curious case in Linum grandiflorum
which presents two forms, A and B. Pollen of A is per-
fectly fertile on stigma of A. But pollen of B is absolutely
barren on its own stigma ; you might as well put so much
flour on it. It astounded me to see the stigmas of B purple
with its own pollen ; and then put a few grains of similar-
looking pollen of A on them, and the gcrmen immediately
and always swelled ; those not thus treated never swelling.

Fourthly : Can you give me any very hairy Saxifraga (for
their functions) [i.e. the functions of the hairs] ?

I send you a resume- of my requests, to save you trouble.
Nor would I ask for so much aid if I did not think all these
points well worth trying to investigate.

My dear old friend, a letter from you always does me a
world of good. And, the Lord have mercy on me, what a
return I make.

Letter 602 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, Oct. 4th [1861].

Will you have the kindness to read the enclosed, and look
at the diagram. Six words will answer my question. It is
not an important point, but there is to me an irresistible
charm in trying to make out homologies.1 You know the
membranous cup or clinandrum, in many orchids, behind the
stigma and rostellum : it is formed of a membrane which unites
the filament of the normal dorsal anther with the edges of
the pistil. The clinandrum is largely developed in Ma/axis,
and is of considerable importance in retaining the pollinia,
which as soon as the flower opens are quite loose.

The appearance and similarity of the tissues, etc., at once

1 In 1S80 he wrote to Mr. Bentham : " It was very kind of you to
write to me about the Orchideae, for it has pleased me to an extreme
degree that I could have been of the least use to you about the nature of
the parts." — Life and Letters, III., p. 264.

i843 — is- HOMOLOGI1 273

gives suspicion that the lateral membranes of the clinandrum Letter 602
are the two other and rudimentary anthers, which in Orchis
and Cephalantherai etc., exist as mere papillae, here developed

and utilise.!.

Now for my question. Exactly in the middle of the
filament of the normal anther, and exactly in the middle of
the lateral membrane of the clinandrum, and running up to
the same height, are quite similar bundles of spiral . - ;

ending upwards almost suddenly. Now is not this structure
a good argument that I interpret the homologies of the sides
of clinandrum rightly?1

I find that the great Bauer2 does not draw very correctly !
And, good 1 leavens, what a jumble he makes on functions.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 603

Down, Oct. 22nd [1861].

Acropera is a beast, — stigma does not open, everything
seems contrived that it shall not be anyhow fertilised. There
is something very odd about it, which could only be made
out by incessant watching on several individual plant-.

I never saw the very curious flower of Carina ; I should
say the pollen was deposited where it is to prevent inevitable
self-fertilisation. You have no time to try the smallest
experiment, else it would be worth while to put pollen on
some stigmas (supposing that it does not seed freely with
you). Anyhow, insects would probably carry pollen from
flower to flower, for Kurr states the tube formed by pistil,
stamen and " nectarblatt " secretes (I presume internally)
much nectar. Thanks for sending me the curious flower.

Now I want much some wisdom ; though I must write
at considerable length, your answer may be very brief.

1 Though Robert Brown made use of the spiral vessels of orchids, yet
according to Eichler, Bliithendiagramme^ 1S75, Vol. I., p. 184, Darwin
was the first to make substantial additions to the conclusions deducible
from the course of the vessels in relation to the problem of the morphology
of these plants. Eichler gives Darwin's ilia- ram side by side with thai
Van Tieghem without attempting to decide between the differences in
detail by which they are characterised.

3 F. Bauer, whom Pritzel calls "der grosste Pflanzenmaler." The
reference is to his Illustrations of I Orchidaceous Plan \ tos and

Prefatory Remarks by John l.indlcy, London, 1830-38, Folio. See
Fertilisation of ' OrcAtds, Ed. ll., p. 82.

VOL. II. 18

274

BOTANY

[Chap. X

Letter 603 In R. Brown's admirable paper in the Linnean Transacts}
he suggests (and Lindley cautiously agrees) that the flower of
orchids consists of five whorls, the inner whorl of the two
whorls of anthers being all rudimentary, and when the labellum
presents ridges, two or three of the anthers of both whorls [are]
combined with it. In the ovarium there are six bundles of

/y/^-y'-y

ft

, T

.1

/-}<. ■■-<.- <^C"^ —

t. A

7 ,-

Fig. 8. — Floral Diagram of an Orchid.

The " missing bundle " could not be found in some species.

vessels : R. Brown judged by transverse sections. It occurred
to me, after what you said, to trace the vessels longitudinally,
and I have succeeded well. Look at my diagram [fig. 8]
(which please return, for I am transported with admiration at
it), which shows the vessels which I have traced, one bundle
to each of fifteen theoretical organs, and no more. You
will see the result is nothing new, but it seems to confirm

1 Vol. XVI., p. 685.

i843->S62] HOM<>: 0G1 275

strongly R. Brown, for I have succeeded (perha] . but Letter 603

he does not say so) in tracing the vessels belonging to each

organ in front of each other to the same bundle in the

ovarium: thus the vessels going to the Lower .1, to the

side of the labellum, and to one stigma when there are two)

all distinctly branch from one ovarian bundle. So in other

cases, but I have not completely traced (only seen; that goin

to the rostellum. But here comes my only point of novelty :

in all orchids as yet looked at even one with so simple a

labellum as Gytnnadenia and Malaxis the vessels on the tv,

sides of the labellum are derived from the bundle which goes

to the lower sepal, as in the diagram. This leads me to

conclude that the labellum is always a compound organ.

Now I want to know whether it is conceivable that the

vessels coming from one main bundle should penetrate an

organ (the labellum) which receives its vessels from another

main bundle? Does it not imply that all that part of the

labellum which is supplied by vessels coming from a lateral

bundle must be part of a primordially distinct organ, however

closely the two may have become united ? It is curious

in Gytnnadenia to trace the middle anterior bundle in the

ovarium : when it comes to the orifice of the nectary it turns

and runs right down it, then comes up the opposite side and

runs to the apex of the labellum, whence each side of the

nectan- is supplied by vessels from the bundles, coming from

the lower sepals. Hence even the thin nectan- is essentially,

1 infer, tripartite ; hence its tendency to bifurcation at its top.

This view of the labellum always consisting of three organs

(I believe four when thick, as in Morti at base; seems to

me to explain its great size and tripartite form, compared

with the other petals. Certainly, if I may trust the vessels,

the simple labellum of GymnacU 1 nsists of three ori;

soldered together. Forgive me for writing at such length;

a very brief answer will suffice. I am desperately interested

in the subject : the destiny of the whole human race is as

nothing to the course of vessels of orchids. . . .

What plant has the most complex single stigma and
pistil? The most complex I, in my ignorance, can think
of is in Iris. I want to know whether anything beats in
modification the rostellum of Catasetum. To-morrow I mean
to be at Catasetum. Hurrah! What species is it? It

276 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 603 wonderfully different from that which Veitch sent me, which
was C. saccatum.

According to the vessels, an orchid flower consists of three
sepals and two petals free ; and of a compound organ (its
labellum), consisting of one petal and of two (or three)
modified anthers ; and of a second compound body con-
sisting of three pistils, one normal anther, and two modified
anthers often forming the sides of the clinandrum.

Letter 604 To John Lindley.

It was in the autumn of 1861 that Darwin made up his mind to publish
his Orchid work as a book, rather than as a paper in the Linnean Society's
Journal} The following letter shows that the new arrangement served
as an incitement to fresh work.

Down, Oct. 25th [1861?]

Mr. James Veitch has been most generous. I did not
know that you had spoken to him. If you see him pray say
I am truly grateful ; I dare not write to a live Bishop or a
Lady, but if I knew the address of " Rucker " ? and might use
your name as introduction, I might write. I am half mad on
the subject. Hooker has sent me many exotics, but I stopped
him, for I thought I should make a fool of myself; but since
I have determined to publish I much regret it.

Letter 605 T° J' D" H°Oker-

The following letter is of interest because it relates to one of the two chief
difficulties Darwin met with in working out the morphology of the orchid
flower. In the orchid book2 he wrote, " This anomaly [in Habenarid\ is
so far of importance, as it throws some doubt on the view which I have
taken of the labellum being always an organ compounded of one petal
and two petaloid stamens." That is to say, it leaves it open for a critic to
assert that the vessels which enter the sides of the labellum are lateral
vessels of the petal and do not necessarily represent petaloid stamens.
In the sequel he gives a satisfactory answer to the supposed objector.

Down, Nov. 10th, [1861].

For the love of God help me. I believe all my work
(about a fortnight) is useless. Look at this accursed diagram
(fig. 9) of the butterfly-orchis [Habenaria], which I examined
after writing to you yesterday, when I thought all my work

1 See Life and Letters, III., p. 266.
s Ed. I., p. 303.

,843— iS62] H0M0L0G1

done. Some of the ducts of the upper sepal ' and upper petal Letter 605
run to the wrong bundles on the column. I have seen no
such ca

•

;. 9. — Habenaria chlorantha of bundles).

The three upper curved outlines, two of which passing through the words " upper
sepal," " upper petal, r sepal," were in red in the original ; for explanation

see text.

This case apparently shows that not the least reliance can
be placed on the course of ducts. 1 am sure of my fa< ts.

There i- great adhesion and extreme displacement < f 1
where the organs spring from the top of the ovarium.
Gray says duels are very early develop* d, and it s to me

1 These would be described by modern morphologists as lov
not upper, sepals, etc. Darwin was aware that he used these terms
incorrectly.

278 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 605 wonderful that they should pursue this course. It may be
said that the lateral ducts in the labellum running into the
antero-lateral ovarian bundle is no argument that the labellum
consists of three organs blended together.

In desperation (and from the curious way the base of
upper petals are soldered at basal edges) I fancied the real
form of upper sepal, upper petal and lower sepal might be as
represented by red lines, and that there had been an incredible
amount of splitting of sepals and petals and subsequent
fusion.

This seems a monstrous notion, but I have just looked at
Bauer's drawing of allied Bonatea, and there is a degree of
lobing of petals and sepals which would account for anything.
Now could you spare me a dry flower out of your
Herbarium of Bonatea speciosa} that I might soak and look
for ducts. If I cannot explain the case of Habenaria all my
work is smashed. I was a fool ever to touch orchids.

Letter 606 To J- D- Hooker.

Down, Nov. 17th [1861].,

What two very interesting and useful letters you have
sent me. You rather astound me with respect to value of
grounds of generalisation in the morphology of plants. It
reminds me that years ago I sent you a grass to name, and
your answer was, " It is certainly Festuca (so-and-so), but it
agrees as badly with the description as most plants do." I
have often laughed over this answer of a great botanist. . . .
Lindley, from whom I asked for an orchid with a simple
labellum, has most kindly sent me a lot of what he marks
" rare " and " rarissima " of peloric orchids, etc., but as they
are dried I know not whether they will be of use. He has
been most kind, and has suggested my writing to Lady
D. Nevill, who has responded in a wonderfully kind manner,
and has sent a lot of treasures. But I must stop ; otherwise,
by Jove, I shall be transformed into a botanist I wish I
had been one ; this morphology is surprisingly interesting.

1 See Fertilisation of Orchids, Ed. I., p. 304 (note), where the re-
semblances between the anomalous vessels of Bonatea and Habenaria
are described. On Nov. 14th, 1861, he wrote to Sir Joseph: "You are a
true friend in need. I can hardly bear to let the Bonatea soak long
enough."

i843-'862] HOMOLO 279

Looking to your note, I may add that certainly the fifter • 606

alternating bundles of spiral v< !-

lil in some ca re present in many- orchids. The

inner whorl of anther duct oftenest ab 1 mi. I

keep clear of ..'/ stasia? though I h many a longin

look at it in B tucr.

I hope I may be well enough t <x\

Thursday, but I have been very seedy lately. I see th
a paper at the Royal on the same night, which will m< 1
concern you, on fossil plants of B that I suppose I

shall not have you ; but you must read my paper when
published, as I shall very much like to hear what you think.
It seems to me a large field fur experiment. I shall make
use of my Orchid little volume in illustrating modification
of species doctrine, but I keep very, very doubtful whether
I am not doing a foolish action in publishing. How I wish
you would kce: our old intention and write a bo »k on

plants.1

To G. Bentham. Letter 607

Down, Nov. 26th [1S61].

Our notes have crossed on the road. I know it is an
honour to have a paper in the Transactions, and I am much
obliged to you for proposing it, but I should greatly prefer to
publish in the Journal. Nor does this apply exclusively
to myself, for in old days at the Geological Society I a'.
protested against an abstract appearing when the paper itself
might appear. I abominate also the waste o\' time (and it
would take me a day) in making an abstract. If the referee
on my paper should recommend it to appear in the Tra
actions, will you 1' ind as to lay my earne>t request bet"

the Council that it may be permitted to appear in the

1 Apostasia has two fertile anthers like placed

by Kn^ler and Prantl in the Apo-tasiea? or Apostasiinar, amony the
Orchideae, by others in a distinct but closely allied group.

1 "On the Two Forms, or Dimorphic Condition, in the Species of the
Genus Primula^ Linn. Soc. /. urn., [81 2. lie did read the paper, but
it cost him the next day in bed. s, III., p. 299.

3 Oswald Heer, "The Fossil Flora of Bovey Tra<-< Trans.

R. S -, p. 1039.

* Possibly a book similar to that described in Letter 696.

280 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 607 You must be very busy with your change of residence ;
but when you are settled and have some leisure, perhaps you
will be so kind as to give me some cases of dimorphism, like
that of Primula. Should you object to my adding them to
those given me by A. Gray ? By the way, I heard from
A. Gray this morning, and he gives me two very curious
cases in Boraginese.

Letter 608 To John Lindley.

In the following fragment occurs the earliest mention of Darwin's
work on the three sexual forms of Catasetum trident ation. Sir R.
Schomburgk ' described Catasetum tridentatum, Monacanthus viridis
and Myanthus barbatus occurring on a single plant, but it remained for
Darwin to make out that they are the male, female and hermaphrodite
forms of a single species.2

With regard to the species of Acropera {Gongora) 3 he was wrong in
his surmise. The apparent sterility seems to be explicable by Hilde-
brand's 4 discovery that in some orchids the ovules are not developed
until pollinisation has occurred.5

Down, Dec. 15th [1861].

I am so nearly ready for press that I will not ask for
anything more ; unless, indeed, you stumbled on Mormodes
in flower. As I am writing I will just mention that I am
convinced from the rudimentary state of the ovules, and from
the state of the stigma, that the whole plant of Acropera luteola
(and I believe A. Loddigesii} is male. Have you ever seen any
form from the same countries which could be the females ?
Of course no answer is expected unless you have ever observed
anything to bear on this. I may add [judging from the] state
of the ovules and of the pollen [that] : —

Catasetum tridentatum is male (and never seeds, according
to Schomburgk, whom you have accidentally misquoted in
the Vegetable Kingdom). Monacanthus viridis is female.
Myanthus barbatus is the hermaphrodite form of same
species.

1 Trans. Linn, Soc, XVII., p. 522.

2 Fertilisation of Orchids, Ed. 1., p. 236 ; Ed. II., p. 196.

3 Acropera Loddigesii '— Gongora galeata : A. luteola=G. fusca {Index
Ke wen sis).

1 Bot. Zeitung, 1863 and 1865.

5 Fertilisation of Orchids, Ed. II., p. 172. See Letter 633.

.sr,2] < I \ I R A PLANTARl

TO J. 1). Hooker. I 'Her 609

Down, Dec. iSih [1861].

Thanks for your note I have no1 written for a long time,
for I always fancy, busy as you arc, that my letters must
a bore; though I like writing, and always enjoy your notes.
I can sympathise with you about fear of scarlet fever : to the
day of my death I shall never forget all the sickening i
about the othei children, after our poor little baby died of it.
The Genera Plant arum must be a tremendous work, and no
doubt very valuable (such a book, odd as it may appear,
would be very useful even to me), but I cannot help being
rather sorry at the length of time it must take, because I
cannot enter on and understand your work. Will you not
be puzzled when you come to the orchids ? It seems to me
orchids alone would be work for a man's lifetime; 1 cannot
somehow feel satisfied with Lindley's classification; the
Malaxeae and Epidendreae ' seem to me very artificially sepa-
rated. Not that I have seen enough to form an opinion worth
anything.

Your African plant - seems to be a vegetable OmitJiorJiyji-
ckus, and indeed much more than that. The more I read
about plants the more I get to feel that all phanerogams seem
comparable with one class, as lepidoptera, rather than with
one kingdom, as the whole insect

Thanks for your comforting sentence about the accursed
ducts (accursed though they be, I should like nothing better
than to work at them in the allied orders, if I had time1. 1
shall be ready for press in three or four weeks, and have
got all my woodcuts drawn. I tear much that publishing
separately will prove a foolish job, but I do not care much,

1 Pritzer (in the PflanzenfamiUen) places Epidendrum in the Lseliin
Cattleyeae, Malaxis'va tin- Liparidinse. He suae.-* that Bentham united
the Malaxideae and Epidendreae.

3 See Sir \. D. Hooker "On Welwitschia, a new genus of Gnetaceae."
Linn. Soc. Trans., XXIV., 1862 3.

3 He wrote to Hooker {Dec. 281)1. 1861) : "I wrote carelessly about
the value of phanerogams ; what 1 was thinking of was that the sub-groups
seemed to blend so much more one into another than with most classes
of animals. I suspect Crustacea would show more difference in the
extreme forms than phanerogams, but, as you say, it is wild speculation.
Yet it is very strange what difficulty botanists seem to find in group
the families together into masses."

282 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 609 and the work has greatly amused me. The Catasetum has
not flowered yet !

In writing to Lindley about an orchid which he sent me,
I told him a little about Acropera, and in answer he suggests
that Gongora may be its female. He seems dreadfully busy,
and I feel that I have more right to kill you than to kill him ;
so can you send me one or at most two dried flowers of
Gongora! if you know the habitat of Acropera luteola, a
Gongora from the same country would be the best, but
any true Gongora would do ; if its pollen should prove as
rudimentary as that of Monacanthus relatively to Catasetum,
1 think I could easily perceive it even in dried specimens
when well soaked.

I have picked a little out of Lecoq, but it is awful tedious
hunting.

Bates is getting on with his natural history travels in one
volume.1 I have read the first chapter in MS., and I think it
will be an excellent book and very well written ; he argues, in
a good and new way to me, that tropical climate has very
little direct relation to the gorgeous colouring of insects
(though of course he admits the tropics have a far greater
number of beautiful insects) by taking all the few genera
common to Britain and Amazonia, and he finds that the
species proper to the latter are not at all more beautiful. I
wonder how this is in species of the same restricted genera
of plants.

If you can remember it, thank Bentham for getting my
Primula paper printed so quickly. I do enjoy getting a
subject off one's hands completely.

I have now got dimorphism in structure in eight natural
orders just like Primula. Asa Gray sent me dried flowers of
a capital case in Amsinkia spectabilis, one of the Boragineae.
I suppose you do not chance to have the plant alive at Kew.

Letter 610 T° A' G" More-

Down, June 7th, 1S62.

If you are well and have leisure, will you kindly give me
one bit of information : Does Ophrys aracJinites occur in the
Isle of Wight ? or do the intermediate forms, which are said

1 H. W. Bates, the Naturalist on the Amazons, 1863. See Vol. I.,
Letters 123, 148, also Life and Letters, Vol. II., p. 381.

i843— 186-I OPHRYS A v I » IIAN N'AKIA

to connect abroad this species and the bee-orchis, ever there Letter 610

occur?

Some facts have led me to suspect that it might just be
pos il>!<-, though improbable in the highest d , that tin-

bee [orchis] might be the self-fertilising form of O. arachnites,
which requires inse< ts' aid, something [in the same way] as
have self-fertilising flowers of the violet and others requii
insects. I know the case is widely different, as the bee is borne
on a separate plant and is incomparably commoner. This
would remove the great anomaly of the bee being a perpetual
self-fertiliser. Certain Malpighiaceae for years produce only
one of the two forms. What has .set my head going on this i-
receiving to-day a bee having one alone of the best marked
characters of 0. arachnites} Pray forgive me troubling you.

To G. Bentham. Letter 61 1

Down, June 22nd [1S62?].

Here is a piece of presumption ! I must think that you
are mistaken in ranking Hab\enarid\ chlorantha 2 as a variety
of //. bifolia ; the pollen-masses and stigma differ more than
in most of the best species of Orchis. When I fir>t examined
them I remember telling Hooker that moths would, I felt
sure, fertilise them in a different manner ; and I have just
had proof of this in a moth sent me with the pollinia (which
can be easily recognised) of //. chlorantha attached to its
proboscis, instead of to the sides of its face, as in //. bifolia.

Forgive me scribbling this way ; but when a man gets
on his hobby-horse he always is run away witii. Anyhow,
nothing here requires any answer.

To J. D. Hooker. 1 Uer 6l,

Down, [Sept. 14th ; 1862].
Your letter is a mine of wealth, but first I must scold you :
I cannot abide to hear you abuse yourself, even in joke, and

1 ( ipJirys arachnites is probably more nearly allied to c '. aranifera than
to 0. apifera. For a case somewhat analogous to that suggested see the
description of 0. scolopax in Fertilisation of Orchids ; Ed. u.. p. 5-.

1 In Hooker's Students' Flora, 1884, p. 395, //• chlorantha is given
as a subspecies of H. bifolia. Sir J. 1>. 1 looker adds that they are
"according to Darwin, distinct, and require different species oi moths to
fertilise them. Thej vary in the position and distances oi their anther-
cells, but intermediates occur." See i ertilisation of On ...•-. Ed, 11., p. "3-

284 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 612 call yourself a stupid dog. You, in fact, thus abuse me,
because for long years I have looked up to you as the man
whose opinion I have valued more on any scientific subject
than any one else in the world. I continually marvel at what
you know, and at what you do. I have been looking at the
Genera} and of course cannot judge at all of its real value,
but I can judge of the amount of condensed fatts under each
family and genus.

I am glad you know my feeling of not being able to judge
about one's own work ; but I suspect that you have been
overworking. I should think you could not give too much
time to Wellwitchia2 (I spell it different every time I write
it) ; at least I am sure in the animal kingdom monographs
cannot be too long on the osculant groups.

Hereafter I shall be excessively glad to read a paper about
Aldrovanda? and am very much obliged for reference. It is
pretty to see how the caught flies support Drosera ; nothing
else can live.

Thanks about plants with two kinds of anthers. I
presume (if an included flower was a Cassia)4" that Cassia is
like lupines, but with some stamens still more rudimentary.
If I hear I will return the three Melastomads ; I do not
want them, and, indeed, have cuttings. I am very low about
them, and have wasted enormous labour over them, and
cannot yet get a glimpse of the meaning of the parts. I
wish I knew any botanical collector to whom I could apply
for seeds in their native land of any Heterocentron or
Monochcvtum ; I have raised plenty of seedlings from your
plants, but I find in other cases that from a homomorphic
union one generally gets solely the parent form. Do you
chance to know of any botanical collector in Mexico or Peru?
I must not now indulge myself with looking after vessels and
homologies. Some future time I will indulge myself. By
the way, some time I want to talk over the alternation of
organs in flowers with you, for I think I must have quite
misunderstood you that it was not explicable.

1 Genera Plantarum, by Bentham and Hooker, Vol. I., Part I., 1862.

2 " On Welwitschia" Linn. Soc. Trans. [1862], XXIV., 1863.

3 See Insectivorous P/an/s, p. 321.

4 Todd has described a species of Cassia with an arrangement of
stamens like the Melastomads. See p. 292.

1843-1862] CLe\ 285

1 found out the Verbascum case by pure accident, having Letter 612
transplanted one for experiment, and finding it to my
astonishment utterly sterile. I formerly thought with you
about rarity of natural hybrids, but I am beginning to change:
viz., oxlips (not quite proven), Verbascum^ Cistus [not quite
proven 1, .ly/dops triticoides (beautifully shown by Godn
Weddell's and your orchids,1 and 1 daresay many others
recorded. Your letters are one of my greatest pleasures in
life, but I earnestly beg you never to write unless you feel
somewhat inclined, for I know how hard you work. As I
work only in the morning it is different with me, and is only
a pleasant relaxation. You will never know how much I
owe to you for your constant kindness and encouragement.

To John Lubbock (Lord Avebury). Letter 613

Cliff Cottage, Bournemouth, Hants, Sept. 2nd [1S62].

Hearty thanks for your note. I am so glad that your
tour answered so splendidly. My poor patients - got here
yesterday, and are doing well, and we have a second house for
the well ones. I write now in great haste to beg you to look
(though I know how busy you are, but I cannot think of any
other naturalist who would be careful) at any field of common
red clover (if such a field is near you) and watch the hive-
bees : probably (if not too late) you will see some sucking at
the mouth of the little flowers and some few sucking at the
base of the flowers, at holes bitten through the corollas. All
that you will see is that the bees put their heads deep into
the [flower] head and rout about. Now, if you sec this, do for
Heaven's sake catch me some of each and put in spirits and
keep them separate. I am almost certain that they belong
to two castes, with long and short proboscids. This is so
curious a point that it seems worth making out. I cannot
hear of a clover field near here.

1 For Verbascum see Animals ami I'. .- . Ed. u., Vol. I., p. 356 ; for
Cistus, Ibid., Ed. u.. VoL I., p. 356, Vol. II., p. i-.: : for .-i'.^ilops, I
Ed. II., Vol. I., p. 330, note.

1 Mrs. Darwin and one of her sons, both recovering from scarlet
fever.

286

Letter 614

BOTANY

[Chap. X

To John Lubbock (Lord Avebury).

Cliff Cottage, Bournemouth, Wednesday, Sept. 3rd [1862].

I beg a million pardons. Abuse me to any degree, but for-
give me : it is all an illusion 1 (but almost excusable) about the
bees. I do so hope that you have not wasted any time from my
stupid blunder. I hate myself, I hate clover, and I hate bees.

Fig. 10. — Diagram of Cruciferous Flower.
Letter 615 To J. D. Hooker.

Cliff Cottage, Bournemouth, Sept. nth, 1862.

You once told me that Cruciferous flowers were anomalous
in alternation of parts, and had given rise to some theory of
de^doublement.

1 H. Miiller, Fertilisation of Flowers, p. 186, describes hive-bees visiting
Trifolium pratense for the sake of the pollen. Darwin may perhaps have
supposed that these were the variety of bees whose proboscis was long
enough to reach the nectar. In Cross and Self Fertilisation, p. 361, Darwin
describes hive-bees apparently searching for a secretion on the calyx. In the
same passage in Cross and Self Fertilisation he quotes Miiller as stating
that hive-bees obtain nectar from red clover by breaking apart the petals.
This seems to us a misinterpretation of the Befruchtung der Blumen, p. 224.

1843—1862]

CRUCIl EROUS FLOW]

■*7

Having nothing on earth to do here, I have dissected all the Letter 615
spiral vessels in a flower, and instead of burning my uns

10 and 1 1], I send them to you, you miserable man. Hut
mind, I do not want you to send me a discussion, but just
some time to say whether my notions arc rubbish, and then
burn the diagrams. It seems to me that all parts alternate
beautifully by fours, on the hypothesis that two short stamens
of outer whorl are aborted ; ' and this view is perhaps sup-
ported by their being so few, only two sub-bundles in the two

>**

k-i

i;

Fig. 11.— Dissection of Cruciferous Flower,
Laid flat open, showing by dotted lines the course of spiral vessels in all the organs;
sepals and petals shown on one side alone, with the stamens on one side above
with course of vessels indicated, but not prolonged. Near side of pistil with
one spiral vessel cut away.

1 The view given by Darwin is (according to Eichler) that previous y
held by Knuth. Wydler, Chatin, and others. Eichler himself belieA es
that the flower is dimerous, the four longer stamens being produced
by the doubling or splitting of the upper (/.<•. antero-posteiior^ pair of
stamens. If this view is correct, and there are good reasons for it,
it throws much suspicion on the evidence afforded by the course of
vessels, for there is no trace of the common origin of the longer
stamens in the diagram (fig. u\ Again, if Eichler is right, the four
vessels shown in the section of the ovary are misleading Darwin
afterwards gave a doubtful explanation of this, and concluded that the
ovary is dimerous. See Letter 616.

288 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 615 lateral main bundles, where I imagine two short stamens have
aborted, but I suppose there is some valid objection against
this notion. The course of the side vessels in the sepals is
curious, just like my difficulty in Habenaria} I am surprised
at the four vessels in the ovarium. Can this indicate four
confluent pistils ? anyhow, they are in the right alternating
position. The nectary within the base of the shorter stamens
seems to cause the end sepals apparently, but not really, to
arise beneath the lateral sepals.

I think you will understand my diagrams in five minutes,
so forgive me for bothering you. My writing this to you
reminds me of a letter which I received yesterday from
Claparede, who helped the French translatress2 of the Origin,
and he tells me he had difficulty in preventing her (who never
looked at a bee's cell) from altering my whole description,
because she affirmed that an hexagonal prism must have an
hexagonal base ! Almost everywhere in the Origin, when
I express great doubt, she appends a note explaining the
difficulty, or saying that there is none whatever ! ! 3 It is
really curious to know what conceited people there are in the
world (people, for instance, after looking at one Cruciferous
flower, explain their homologies).

This is a nice, but most barren country, and I can find
nothing to look at. Even the brooks and ponds produce
nothing. The country is like Patagonia. My wife is almost
well, thank God, and Leonard is wonderfully improved. . . .
Good God, what an illness scarlet fever is ! The doctor feared
rheumatic fever for my wife, but she does not know her risk.
It is now all over.

Letter 616 To J. D. Hooker.

Cliff Cottage, Bournemouth, Thursday Evening [Sept. 18th, 1862].

Thanks for your pleasant note, which told me much news,
and upon the whole good, of yourselves. You will be awfully
busy for a time, but I write now to say that if you think it
really worth while to send me a few Dielytra, or other Fumari-
aceous plant (which I have already tried in vain to find here)
in a little tin box, I will try and trace the vessels ; but please

1 See Letter 605.

2 The late Mile. Royer.

3 See Life and Letters, II., p. 387

,843— 1862] UCIFEROUS FLOW] 2>

observc, I do not know that I shall have time, for I have just Letter 616
become wonderfully interested in experimenting on Drosera

with poisons, etc. [f you a rid any Fumariaceous plant, send

if you can, also two or three single balsams. After writing

to \ on, I looked at vessels of ovary of a sweet-pea, and from

this and other cases I believe that in the ovary the midrib

vessel alone gives homologies, and that

the vessels on the edge of the carpel leaf

often run into the wrong bundle, just like

those on the sides of the sepals. Hence

I [suppose] in Crucifcrs that the ovarium *D

consists of two pistils; a A [fig. 12] being

the midrib vessels, and B 15 being those

formed of the vessels on edges of the

two carpels, run together, and going to

wron<j bundles. I came to this conclusion

before receiving your letter.

I wonder why .Asa Gray will not believe in the quaternary
arrangement ; I had fancied that you saw some great diffi-
culty in the case, and that made me think that my notion
must be wrong.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 617

Down, Sept. 27th [1862].

Masdevallia turns out nothing wonderful;1 I was merely
stupid about it ; I am not the less obliged for its loan, for if
1 had lived till 100 years old I should have been uneasy about
it. It shall be returned the first day I send to Bromley. I
have steamed the other plants, and made the sensitive plant
very sensitive, and shall soon try some experiments on it.
But after all it will only be amusement. Nevertheless, if not
causing too much trouble, 1 should be very glad of a few-
young plants of this and Hedysarum* in summer, for this
kind of work takes no time and amuses me much, \\a\c
you seeds of Oxalis sensttiva, which I see mentioned in books?
By the way, what a fault it is in Henslow's Botany that he
gives hardly any references ; he alludes to great series of

1 This may refer to the homologies of the parts. He was unable
to understand the mechanism of the flower.— Fertilisation
Ed. 11., p. 130.

* Hedysorum or Destttt rynms, the telegraph-plant.

VOL. II. 19

290 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 617 experiments on absorption of poison by roots, but where to
find them I cannot guess. Possibly the all-knowing Oliver
may know. I can plainly see that the glands of Drosera, from
rapid power (almost instantaneous) of absorption and power of
movement, give enormous advantage for such experiments.
And some day I will enjoy myself with a good set to work ;
but it will be a great advantage if I can get some preliminary
notion on other sensitive plants and on roots.

Oliver said he would speak about some seeds of LytJirum
hyssopifolium being preserved for me. By the way, I am
rather disgusted to find I cannot publish this year on Ly thrum
salicaria ; I must make 1 26 additional crosses. All that I
expected is true, but I have plain indication of much higher
complexity. There are three pistils of different structure and
functional power, and I strongly suspect altogether five kinds
of pollen * all different in this one species !

By any chance have you at Kew any odd varieties of
the common potato ? I want to grow a few plants of every
variety, to compare flowers, leaves, fruit, etc., as I have done
with peas, etc.2

Letter 6l8 J. D. Hooker to C. Darwin.

The following is part of Letter 144, Vol. I., p. 209. It refers to reviews
of Fertilisation of Orchids in the Gardeners^ Chronicle, 1862, pp. 789, 863,
910, and in the Natural History Review, Oct., 1862, p. 371.

Nov. 7th, 1862.
Dear old Darwin,

I assure you it was not my fault ! I worried Lindley over
and over again to notice your orchid book in the Chronicle*
by the very broadest hints man could give. At last he said,
" really I cannot, you must do it for me," and so I did —
volontiers. Lindley felt that he ought to have done it himself,
and my main effort was to write it "a la Lindley," and in this
alone I have succeeded — that people all think it is exactly
Lindley's style ! ! ! which diverts me vastly. The fact is,
between ourselves, I fear that poor L. is breaking up — he

1 See Forms of Flowers, Ed. II., p. 138.

3 Animals and Plants, Ed. It., Vol. I., p. 346. Compare also the
similar facts with regard to cabbages, loc. cit., p. 342. Some of the
original specimens are in the Botanical Museum at Cambridge.

3 See Life and Letters, III., p. 273.

i843— 1862] POLLEN OF WHEAT

said that he could not fix his mind on your book. He works Letu
himself beyond his mental or physical po

And now, my dear Darwin, I may as well make a clean
breast of it, and tell you that I wrote the Nat. Hist. Rt

notice too — to me a very difficult task, and one I fancied I
failed in, comparatively. Of this you are no judge, and can
be none ; you told me to tell Oliver it pleased you, and so I
am con lent a:id happy.

To \Y. E. Darwin.1 Letter 619

Down, 4th [about 1862

I have been looking at the fertilisation of wheat, and I
think possibly you might find something curious. I observed
in almost every one of the pollen-grains, which had become
empty and adhered to (I suppose the viscid) branching hairs
of the stigma, that the pollen-tube was always (?) emitted on
opposite side of grain to that in contact with the branch of
the stigma. This seems very odd. The branches of the
stigma are very thin, formed apparently of three rows of cells
of hardly greater diameter than pollen-tube. I am astonished
that the tubes should be able to penetrate the walls. The
specimens examined (not carefully by me) had pollen only
during few hours on stigma ; and the mere suspicion has
crossed me that the pollen-tubes crawl down these branches
to the base and then penetrate the stigmatic tissue.2 The
palea.- open for a short period for stigma to be dusted, and then
close again, and such travelling down would take place under
protection. High powers and good adjustment are necessary.
Ears expel anthers when kept in water in room ; but the
paleae apparently do not open and expose stigma ; but the
stigma could easily be artificially impregnated.

If I were you I would keep memoranda of points worth
attending to.

1 Mr. Darwin's eldest son.

3 See Strasburger's Neue Untersuchungen iiber dm Befrucktun
gang bei den Phanerogamen% 1884. In Ahpecuru. ribes

the pollen as adhering to the end of a projection from the stigma where
it germinates ; the tube crawls along or spirally round this projection
until it reaches the angle where the stigmatic branch is ^iven off; here it
makes an entrance and travels in the middle lamella between two cells.

292 BOTANY [Chap. X

II. Melastomace^e, 1862— i 88 i.

The following series of letters (pp. 293-302) refers to the Melasto-
maceae and certain other flowers of analogous form. In 1862 Darwin
attempted to explain the existence of two very different sets of stamens
in these plants as a case of dimorphism, somewhat analogous to the state
of things in Primula. In this view he was probably wrong, but this
does not diminish the interest of the crossing experiments described in
the letters. The persistence of his interest in this part of the subject is
shown in the following passage from his Preface to the English transla-
tion of H. Miiller's Befruchtung der Blumen ; the passage is dated Feb.,
1882, but was not published until the following year.

" There exist also some few plants the flowers of which include two
sets of stamens, differing in the shape of the anthers and in the colour
of the pollen ; and at present no one knows whether this difference
has any functional significance, and this is a point which ought to be
determined."

It is not obvious why he spoke of the problem as if no light had been
thrown on it, since in 1881 Fritz Miiller had privately (see Letter 629)
offered an explanation x which Darwin was strongly inclined to accept.
Fritz Midler's theory with regard to the Melastomads and a number
of analogous cases in other genera are discussed in H. Midler's article
in Kosmos? where the literature is given. F. Miiller's theory is that
in Heeria the yellow anthers serve merely as a means of attracting
pollen-collecting bees, while the longer stamens with purple or crimson
anthers supply pollen for fertilising purposes. If Miiller is right the
pollen from the yellow anthers would not normally reach the stigma.
The increased vigour observed in the seedlings from the yellow anthers
would seem to resemble the good effect of a cross between different

1 H. M idler published {Nature, Aug. 4th, 1881) a letter from his
brother Fritz giving the theory in question for Heeria. Todd {American
Naturalist, April 1882), described a similar state of things in Solatium
rostratU77i and in Cassia : and H. O. Forbes {Nature, Aug. 1882, p. 386)
has done the same for Melastoma. In Rhexia virginica Mr. W. H.
Leggett {Bulletin Torrey Bot. Club, New York, VIII., 1881, p. 102)
describes the curious structure of the anther, which consists of two
inflated portions and a tubular part connecting the two. By pressing
with a blunt instrument on one of the ends, the pollen is forced out in a
jet through a fine pore in the other inflated end. Mr. Leggett has seen
bees treading on the anthers, but could not get near enough to see the
pollen expelled. In the same journal, Vol. IX., p. 11, Mr. Bailey
describes how in Heterocentron roseum, "upon pressing the bellows-like
anther with a blunt pencil, the pollen was ejected to a full inch in distance."
On Lagerstrmnia as comparable with the Melastomads see Letter 689.

s Kosmos, XIII., 1883, p. 241.

1862— i88i] MELASTOMAI^ 293

individuals of the same species as worked out in Cross utitl Self Fertili-
sation^ for it is difficult to believe that the pollen of the purple anthei
become, b) adaptation, less effective than that of the yellow anthers. In
the letters here given there is some contradiction between the statements
as to the position of the two sets of stamens in relation to the sep.
According to Eichler [Bliithei mme, II.. p nger stamens

may be either epipetalous or episepalous in this family.

The work on the Melastomads is of such intrinsic importance that
we have thought it right to give the correspondence in considerable
detail ; we have done so in spite of the fact that Darwin arrived at no
definite conclusion, and in spite of an element of confusion and unsatis-
factoriness in the series of letters. This applies also to Letter 629. written
after Darwin had learned Fritz Midler's theory, which is obscured by
some errors or slips of the pen.

To G. Bentham. Letter 620

Down, Feb. 3rd [1862?]

As you so kindly helped me before on dimorphism, will
you forgive me begging for a little further information, if in
your power to give it? The case is that of the Melastomads
with eight stamens, on which i have been experimenting.
I am perplexed by opposed statements: Lindley saws the
stamens which face the petals are sterile; Wallich says in
Oxyspora paniculata that the stamens which face the sepals
are destitute of pollen ; I find plenty of apparently good
pollen in both sets of stamens in //< n \Heeria\

Monochcetuntt and Centradenia. Can you throw any light on
this? But there is another point on which I am more
anxious for information. Please look at the enclosed miser-
able diagram. I find that the pollen of the yellow petal-
facing stamens produce more than twice as much seed
as the pollen of the purple sepal-facing stamens. This
is exactly opposed to Lindley's statement — viz., that the
petal-facing stamens are sterile. But I cannot at present
believe that the case has any relation to abortion ; it is
hardly possible to believe that the longer and very curious
stamens, which face the sepals in this H ttron, are

tending to be rudimentary, though their pollen applied to
their own flowers produces so much less seed. It is con-
formable with what we see in Primula that the [purple]
sepal-facing anthers, which in the plant seen by me stood
quite close on each side of the stigma, should have been
rendered less fitted to fertilise the stigma than the stamens on

294 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 620 the opposite side of the flower. Hence the suspicion has
crossed me that if many plants of the Heterocentron roseum
were examined, half would be found with the pistil nearly-
upright, instead of being rectangularly bent down, as shown
in the diagram ; * or, if the position of pistil is fixed, that in
half the plants the petal-facing stamens would bend down, and
in the other half of the plants the sepal-facing stamens would
bend down as in the diagram. I suspect the former case, as in
Centradenia I find the pistil nearly straight. Can you tell me?2
Can the name Heterocentron have any reference to such diver-
sity ? Would it be asking too great a favour to ask you to
look at dried specimens of Heterocentron roseum (which would
be best), or of Monochcetum, or any eight-stamened Melasto-
mad, of which you have specimens from several localities (as
this would ensure specimens having been taken from distinct
plants), and observe whether the pistil bends differently or
stamens differently in different plants ? You will at once
see that, if such were the fact, it would be a new form of
dimorphism, and would open up a large field of inquiry with
respect to the potency of the pollen in all plants which have
two sets of stamens — viz., longer and shorter. Can you for-
give me for troubling you at such unreasonable length ? But
it is such waste of time to experiment without some guiding
light. I do not know whether you have attended particularly
to Melastoma ; if you have not, perhaps Hooker or Oliver
may have done so. I should be very grateful for any infor-
mation, as it will guide future experiments.

P.S. — Do you happen to know, when there are only four
stamens, whether it is the petal or sepal-facers which are
preserved ? and whether in the four-stamened forms the pistil
is rectangularly bent or is straight ?

Letter 621 To Asa Gray.

Down, Feb. 16th [1862?].

I have been trying a few experiments on Melastomads ;
and they seem to indicate that the pollen of the two curious

1 According to Willis, Flowering Plants and Ferns, 1897, Vol. II.,
p. 252, the style in Monochcetum, " at first bent downwards, moves slowly
up till horizontal."

1 No reply by Mr. Bentham to this or the following queries has been
found.

iS6a -i88i] MELAST0MA1

sets of anthers {i.e. the petal-facers and the sepal-facei ■■■ Letter 621

very different powers ; and it does not seem that the differ-
ence is connected with any tendency to abortion in tin-
set. Now I think I can understand the structure of the
flower and means of fertilisation, if there be two forms, — one
with tin- pistil bent rectangularly out of the flower, and the
other with it nearly straight.

Our hot-house and green-house plants have probably all
descended by cuttings from a single plant of each species ; so
I can make out nothing from them. I applied in vain to
Bentham and Hooker ; but Oliver picked out some sentences
from Naudin, which seem to indicate differences in the position
of the pistil.

I see that Rhexia grows in Massachusetts ; and I suppose
has two different sets of stamens. Now, if in your power,
would you observe the position of the pistil in different plants,
in lately opened (lowers of the same age? (I specify this
because in Monochcetum I find great changes of position in
the pistils and stamens, as flower gets old). Supposing that
my prophecy should turn out right, please observe whether in
both forms the pas into the flower is not [on] the upper

side of the pistil, owing to the basal part of the pistil lying
close to the ring of filaments on the under side of the flower.
Also I should like to know the colour of the two sets of
anthers. This would take you only a few minutes, and is the
only way 1 see that I can find out whether these plants are
dimorphic in this peculiar way — i.e., only in the position of
the pistil ' and in its relation to the two kinds of pollen. I
am anxious about this, because if it should prove so, it will
show that all plants with longer and shorter or otherwise
different anthers will have to be examined for dimorphism.

To Asa Gray. ^

March 15th [1S62].

... I wrote some little time age about Rhexia ; since then
I have been carefully watching and experimenting on an ither
genus, Monochcetum ; and 1 find that the pistil is first bent

1 In Exacum ami in Saintpaulia the down- are dimorphic in this
sense : the style projects to either the right or the left side of the corolla,
from which it follows that a right-handed flower would fertilise a left-
handed one, and i .-. See Willis. Flowering
1S97, Vol. I., p. 7$.

296 EOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 622 rectangularly (as in the sketch sent), and then in a few days
becomes straight : the stamens also move. If there be not
two forms of Rhexia, will you compare the position of the
part in young and old flowers ? I have a suspicion (perhaps
it will be proved wrong when the seed-capsules are ripe) that
one set of anthers are adapted to the pistil in early state, and
the other set for it in its later state. If bees visit the Rhexia,
for Heaven's sake watch exactly how the anther and stigma
strike them, both in old and young flowers, and give me a
sketch.

Again I say, do not hate me.

Letter 623 To J. D. Hooker.

Leith Hill Place, Dorking, Thursday, 15th [May 1862].

You stated at the Linnean Society that different sets of
seedling Cinchona l grew at very different rate, and from my
Primula case you attributed it probably to two sorts of pollen.
I confess I thought you rash, but I now believe you were
quite right. I find the yellow and crimson anthers of the
same flower in the Melastomatous Heterocentron roseum have
different powers ; the yellow producing on the same plant
thrice as many seeds as the crimson anthers. I got my
neighbour's most skilful gardener to sow both kinds of seeds,
and yesterday he came to me and said it is a most extra-
ordinary thing that though both lots have been treated
exactly alike, one lot all remain dwarfs and the other lot are
all rising high up. The dwarfs were produced by the pollen
of the crimson anthers. In Monochcctum ensiferum the facts
are more complex and still more strange ; as the age and
position of the pistils comes into play, in relation to the two
kinds of pollen. These facts seem to me so curious that
I do not scruple to ask you to see whether you can lend me
any Melastomad just before flowering, with a not very small
flower, and which will endure for a short time a greenhouse or
sitting-room ; when fertilised and watered I could send it to
Mr. Turnbull's to a cool stove to mature seed. I fully believe
the case is worth investigation.

P.S.— You will not have time at present to read my orchid
book; I never before felt half so doubtful about anything

1 Cinchona is apparently heterostyled : see Forms of Flowers,
Ed. II., p. 134-

1862-1881] MELASTOMADS 297

which I published. When you read it, do not fear " punishing " Letter 623
me if I deserve it.

Adios. I am come here to rest, which I much want.

Whenever you have occasion to write, pray tell me
whether you have Rhododendron Bo :!iii from Bhootan, with
a smallish yellow flower, and pistil bent the wrong way ; if so,
1 would ask Oliver to look for nectary.for it is an abominable
error of Nature that must be corrected. I could hardly
believe my eyes when 1 saw the pistil.

To Asa Gray. L«tter 624

Jan. 19th [1863].
I have been at those confounded Melastomads again ;
throwing good money {i.e. time) after bad. Do you remember
telling me you could see no nectar in your Rhexia ? well, I
can find none in MonockcBtuml and Bates tells me that the
flowers arc in the most marked manner neglected by bees
and lepidoptera in Amazonia. Now the curious projections
or horns to the stamens of Monochcetum are full of fluid, and
the suspicion occurs to me that diptera or small hymenoptera
may puncture these horns like they puncture (proved since
mv orchid book was published) the dry nectaries of true
Orchis. I forget whether Rhexia is common ; but I very
much wish you would next summer watch on a warm <
a group of flowers, and see whether they are visited by small
insects, and what they do.

To I. A. Henry. Letter 625

Down, Jan. 20th [1863].
. . . You most kindly permit me to mention any point
on which I want information. If you are so inclined, I am
curious to know from systematic experiments whether Mr.
D. Beaton's statement that the pollen of two shortest anther-
of scarlet . ini x produce dwarf plants, in comparison

with plants produced from the same mother-plant by the
pollen of longer stamens from the same flower. It would aid
me much in some laborious experiments on Mi. lastomads. I
confess I feel a little doubtful ; at least, I feel pretty nearly

1 See Animals and Plants, Ed. 11.. Vol. II., p, 150, for a brief account

of Darwin's experiments on this genus. Also loc. ../.. p. 338 note).
for a suggested experiment.

298 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 625 sure that I know the meaning of short stamens in most
plants. This summer (for another object) I crossed Queen of
Scarlet Pelargonium with pollen of long and short stamens
of multiflora alba, and it so turns out that plants from short
stamens are the tallest ; but I believe this to have been mere
chance. My few crosses in Pelargonium were made to get
seed from the central peloric or regular flower (I have got
one from peloric flower by pollen of peloric), and this leads
me to suggest that it would be very interesting to test
fertility of peloric flowers in three ways, — own peloric pollen
on peloric stigma, common pollen on peloric stigma, peloric
pollen on common stigma of same species. My object is to
discover whether with change of structure of flower there is
any change in fertility of pollen or of female organs. This
might also be tested by trying peloric and common pollen
on stigma of a distinct species, and conversely. I believe
there is a peloric and common variety of Tropceolum, and a
peloric or upright and common variation of some species of
Gloxinia, and the medial peloric flowers of Pelargotiium,
and probably others unknown to me.

Letter 626 To I. A. Henry.

Hartfield, May 2nd [1863].

In scarlet dwarf Pelargonium, you will find occasionally
an additional and abnormal stamen on opposite and lower
side of flower. Now the pollen of this one occasional short
stamen, I think, very likely would produce dwarf plants. If
you experiment on Pelargonium I would suggest your looking
out for this single stamen.

I observed fluctuations in length of pistil in Phloxes, but
thought it was mere variability.

If you could raise a bed of seedling Phloxes of any
species except P. Drummondii, it would be highly desirable
to see if two forms are presented, and I should be very
grateful for information and flowers for inspection. I cannot
remember, but I know that I had some reason to look after
Phloxes.1

I do not know whether you have used microscopes much

1 See Forms of Flowers, Ed. 11., p. 119, where the conjecture is
hazarded that Phlox subulata shows traces of a former heterostyled
condition.

1862— 1 8 M I ■: I - A S T 0 M A D S V9

yet. H adds immensely to interest of all such work as ours, Letter 626
and is indeed indi ipensable for much work. Experi
however, has fully convinced me that the use of the com-
pound without the simple mil 1 absolutely injuriou
to pr< of N[atural] History (excepting, of course, with
Infusoria). I hav< et, found no exception to the rule,
that when a man has told me he work- with the compound
alone his work is valueles

To Asa Gray. tter 627

March 20th [1S63].
I wrote to him [Dr. H. Criiger, of Trinidad] to ask him to
observe what the insects did in the flowers of Melastomacese :
he says not proper season yet, but that on one species a small
bee seemed busy about the horn-like appendages to the anthers.
It will be too good luck if my study of the ft in the

greenhouse has led me to right interpretation of th
appendages.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 628

Down, N 1S71].

If you had come here on Sunday I should have asked you
whether you could give me seed or seedlings of any Melasto-
mad which would tlower soon to experiment on ! 1 wrote
also to J. Scott to ask if he c ive me seed.

Several years ago I raised a lot of seedlings of a Melasto-
mad greenhouse bush (Mon s or some such nan

from stigmas fertilised separately by the two kinds of pollen,
and the seedlings differed remarkably in size, and whilst
young, in appearance ; and I never knew what to think of the
case 1 so you must not use it), and have always wished to try
again, but they are troublesome beasts to fertilise.

On the other hand I could detect no difference in the
product from the two coloured anthers of Clarkia? If you
want to know further particulars of my experiments on
chutuDi (?) and Clarkia, I will hunt for my notes. You ask
about difference in pollen in the same species. All dimorphic
and trimorphic plants present such difference in function and
in size. Lythrum and the trimorphic Oxalis are the most

1 Monochatium.

■ Clarkia has eight stamens divided into two groups which dirier in
the colour of the anthers.

300 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 628 wonderful cases. The pollen of the closed imperfect cleisto-
gamic flowers differ in the transparency of the integument,
and I think in size. The latter point I could ascertain from
my notes. The pollen or female organs must differ in almost
every individual in some manner ; otherwise the pollen of
varieties and even distinct individuals of same varieties would
not be so prepotent over the individual plant's own pollen.
Here follows a case of individual differences in function of
pollen or ovules or both. Some few individuals of Reseda
odorata and R. lutea cannot be fertilised, or only very rarely,
by pollen of the same plant, but can by pollen of any other
individual. I chanced to have two plants of R. odorata in this
state ; so I crossed them and raised five seedlings, all of which
were self sterile and all perfectly fertile with pollen of any
other individual mignonette. So I made a self sterile race !
I do not know whether these are the kinds of facts which
you require.

Think whether you can help me to seed or better seedlings
(not cuttings) of any Melastomad.

Letter 629 To F. Mliller.

Down, March 20th, 1881.

I have received the seeds and your most interesting letter
of Feb. 7th. The seeds shall be sown, and I shall like to
see the plants sleeping ; but I doubt whether I shall make
any more detailed observations on this subject, as, now that I
feel very old, I require the stimulus of some novelty to make
me work. This stimulus you have amply given me in your
remarkable view of the meaning of the two-coloured stamens
in many flowers. I was so much struck with this fact with
Lythrum, that I began experimenting on some Melastomacese,
which have two sets of extremely differently coloured anthers.
After reading your letter I turned to my notes (made 20
years ago ! ) to see whether they would support or contradict
your suggestion. I cannot tell yet, but I have come across
one very remarkable result, that seedlings from the crimson
anthers were not ^thsof the size of seedlings from the yellow
anthers of the same flowers. Fewer good seeds were produced
by the crimson pollen. I concluded that the shorter1 stamens

1 " Shorter stamens " seems to be a slip of the pen for " longer," —
unless the observations were made on some genus in which the structure
is unusual.

i862— i88i] mi: la stoma: 301

were aborting, and that the pollen was not good. The mature Letter 629
pollen is incoherent, and mu>t be [word illegible] ;t :he

visiting insect's body. I remembered this, and I find it said
in my earl) notes that bees would never visit the flowers for

pollen. This made me afterwards write to the late Dr. Criiger
in the West Indies, and he observed for me the flowers, and
saw bees pressing the anthers with their mandibles from the
base upwards, and this forced a worm-like thread of pollen
from the terminal pore, and this pollen the bees collected with
their hind legs. So that the Melastomads are not opposed to
your views.

I am now working on the habits of worms, and it tires me
much to change my subject ; so I will lay on one side your
letter and my notes, until I have a week's leisure, and will
then see whether my facts bear on your views. I will then
send a letter to Nature or to the Linn. Soc, with the extract
of your letter (and this ought to appear in any case), with
my own observations, if they appear worth publishing. The
subject had gone out of my mind, but I now remember
thinking that the imperfect action of the crimson stamens
might throw light on hybridism. If this pollen is developed,
according to your view, for the sake of attracting insects, it
might act imperfectly, as well as if the stamens were becoming
rudimentary.1 I do not know whether I have made myself
intelligible.

To W. Thiselton-Dyer. Letter 630

Down, March 21st [1SS1J.

I have had a letter from Fritz Muller suggesting a novel
and very curious explanation of certain plants producing two
sets of anthers of different colour. This has set me on fire to
renew the laborious experiments which I made on this subject,
now 20 years ago. Now, will you be so kind as to turn in
your much worked and much holding head, whether you can
think of any plants cially annuals, producing 2 such sets

of anthers. I believe that this is the case with ia

eUgans, and I have just written to Thompson for seeds. The
Lythraceae must be excluded, as these are heterostvled.

1 As far as it is possible to understand the earlier letters it seems that
the pollen of the shorter stamens, which are adapted for attracting insects,
is the most effective.

302 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 630 I have got seeds from Dr. King of some Melastomacese,
and will write to Veitch to see if I can get the Melastomaceous
genera Monochcetum and Heterocentron or some such name,
on which I before experimented. Now, if you can aid me,
I know that you will ; but if you cannot, do not write and
trouble yourself.

III.— Correspondence with John Scott, 1862— 1871.

",If he had leisure he would make a wonderful observer,
to my judgment ; I have come across no one like him." —
Letter to J. D. Hooker, May 29th [1863].

The following group of letters to John Scott, of whom some account
is given in Vol. I. (pp. 217 et seq.) deal chiefly with experimental work in
the fertilisation of flowers. In addition to their scientific importance,
several of the letters are of special interest as illustrating the encourage-
ment and friendly assistance which Darwin gave to his correspondent.
After obtaining a post in the Calcutta Botanic Gardens, Scott continued
to work and to correspond with Darwin, but his work was hardly on a
level with the promise of his earlier years. According to the Journal
of Botany, he was attacked by an affection of the spleen at Darjeeling,
where he had been sent to report on the coffee disease. He returned
to Edinburgh in the spring of 1880, and died in the June of that year.

Letter 631 John Scott l to C. Darwin.

Edinburgh Botanic Gardens, Nov. nth, 1862.

I take the liberty of addressing you for the purpose of
directing your attention to an error in one of your ingenious
explanations of the structural adaptations of the Orchidaceae
in your late work. This occurs in the genus Acropera, two
species of which you assume to be unisexual, and so far as
known represented by male individuals only. Theoretically
you have no doubt assigned good grounds for this view ;
nevertheless, experimental observations that I am now making
have already convinced me of its fallacy. And I thus hur-
riedly, and as you may think prematurely, direct your
attention to it, before I have seen the final result of my
own experiment, that you might have the longer time for
reconsidering the structure of this genus for another edition
of your interesting book, if indeed it be not already called

1 For biographical note see Vol. I., pp. 217, 218.

i862- 1871] fOHN Si OTT 303

for. I am furthermore induced to communicate the results of La
my yet imperfei t 1 \ peri merits in the belief that the actuat
principle of your late work is the elicitation of truth, and that
you will gladly avail yoursi it" of this even at the sacrifice of
much ingenious theoretical argumentation.

Since- I have had an opportunity of p rusing your work
on orchid fertilisation, my attention has been particularly
directed to the curiously constructed floral organs of
Acropera. I unfortunately have as yet had only a few
flowers for experimental enquiry, otherwise my remarks
might have been clearer and more satisfact* >ry. Such as they
are, however, I respectfully lay [them] before you, with a full
assurance of their veracity, and I sincerely trust that as such
you will receive them.

Your observations seem to have been chiefly directed to
the A. luteola} mine to the A. Loddigesti, which, however, as
you remark, is in a very similar constructural condition with
the former ; having the same narrow stigmatic chamber,
abnormally developed placenta, etc. In regard to the former
point — contraction of stigmatic chamber — I may remark that
it does not appear to be absolutely necessary that the pollen-
masses penetrate this chamber for effecting fecundation.
Thus a raceme was produced upon a plant of A. Loddi&
in the Botanic Gardens here lately ; upon this I left only six-
flowers. These I attempted to fertilise, but with two only of
the six have I been successful : I succeeded in forcing a single
pollen-mass into the stigmatic chamber of one of the latter,
but I failed to do this on the other ; how ewer, by inserting
a portion of a pedicel with a pollinium attached, I caused the
latter to adhere, with a gentle press, to the mouth of the
stigmatic chamber. Both of tru s I have: already re-

marked, arc nevertheless fertilised ; one of them I have cut
off for examination, and its condition I will presently
describe ; the other is still upon the plant, and promis
fair to attain maturity. In regard to the other four flowers,
I may remark that though similarly fertilised — part having
pollinia inserted, others merely attached — the)- all withered
and dropped off without the least swelling of the ovary. Can
it be, then, that this is really an [andro-moncecious] species? —
part of the flowers male, others truly hermaphrodite.

In making longitudinal sections of the fertile arv

304 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 631 before mentioned, I found the basal portion entirely destitute
of ovules, their place being substituted by transparent cellular
ramification of the placentae. As I traced the placentae
upwards, the ovules appeared, becoming gradually more
abundant towards its apex. A transverse section near the
apex of the ovary, however, still exhibited a more than
ordinary placental development — i.e. [congenitally ?] con-
sidered— each end giving off two branches, which meet each
other in the centre of the ovary, the ovules being irregularly
and sparingly disposed upon their surfaces.

In regard to the mere question of fertilisation, then, I am
perfectly satisfied, but there are other points which require
further elucidation. Among these I may particularly refer to
the contracted stigmatic chamber, and the slight viscidity of
its disk. The latter, however, may be a consequence of un-
congenial conditions — as you do not mention particularly its
examination by any author in its natural habitat. If such be
the case, the contracted stigmatic chamber will offer no real
difficulty, should the viscous exudations be only sufficient to
render the mouth adhesive. For, as I have already shown,
the pollen-tubes may be emitted in this condition, and effect
fecundation without being in actual contact with the stigmatic
surface, as occurs pretty regularly in the fertilisation of the
Stapelias, for example. But, indeed, your own discovery of
the independent germinative capabilities of the pollen-grains
of certain Orchidaceae is sufficiently illustrative of this.

I may also refer to the peculiar abnormal condition that
many at least of the ovaries present in a comparative exami-
nation of the placentae, and of which I beg to suggest the
following explanation, though it is as yet founded on limited
observations. In examining certain young ovaries of A.
Loddigesii, I found some of them filled with the transparent
membranous fringes of more or less distinctly cellular matter,
which, from your description of the ovaries of luteola, appears
to differ simply in the greater development in the former
species. Again, in others I found small mammillary bodies,
which appeared to be true ovules, though I could not perfectly
satisfy myself as to the existence of the micropyle or nucleus.
I unfortunately neglected to apply any chemical test. The
fact, however, that in certain of the examined ovaries few or
none of the latter bodies occurred— the placenta alone being

1862-1871J JOHN SCOTT 305

developed in an irregular membranous form, taken in con- Letter 631
junction with the results of my experiments — before alluded
to — on their fertilisation, leads me to infer that two sexual
conditions are presented by the flow. this plant. In

short, that man}- of the ovaries are now normally abort:
though Nature occasionally makes futile irts for their
perfect development, in the production of ovuloid bodies;
these then I regard as the male flowers. The others that are
still capable of fertilisation, and likewise possessing male

ins, are hermaphrodite, and must, I think, from the results
of your comparative examinations, present a somewhat
different condition ; as it can scarcely be supposed that ovules
in the condition you describe could ever be fertilised.

This is at least the most plausible explanation I can offer
for the different results in my experiments on the fertilisation
of apparently similar morphologically constructed flowers ;
others may, however, occur to you. Here there is not, as in
the Catasetum, any external change visible in the respective
unisexual and bisexual flowers. And yet it would appear
from your researches that the ovules of Acropera are in a
more highly atrophied condition than occurs in Catasetum,
though, as you likewise remark, M. Neumann has never suc-
ceeded in fertilising C. tridentatum. If there be not, then, an
arrangement of the reproductive structures, such as I have
indicated, how can the different results in M. Neumann's
experiments and mine be accounted for ? However, as you
have examined many flowers of both A. luteola and Lod
such a difference in the ovulary or placental structures could
scarcely have escaped your observation. But, be this a> it
may, the — to me at least — demonstrated fact still remains,
that certain flowers of A. Loddigesii are capable of fertilisation,
and that, though there are good grounds for supposing that
important physiological changes are going on in the sexual
phenomena of this species, there is no evidence whatever
for supposing that external morphological changes have so
masked certain individuals as to prevent their recognition.

1 would now, sir, in conclusion beg you to excuse me for
this infringement upon your valuable time, as I have been
induced to write you in the belief that you have had negative
results from other experimenters, before you ventured to
propose your theoretical explanation, and consequently that
VOL. II. 20

306 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 631 you have been unknowingly led into error. I will continue,
as opportunities present themselves, to examine the many
peculiarities you have pointed out in this as well as others of
the Orchid family ; and at present I am looking forward with
anxiety for the maturation of the ovary of A. Loddigesii, which
will bear testimony to the veracity of the remarks I have
ventured to lay before you.

Letter 632 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, 1 8th [Nov. 1862 J.
Strange to say, I have only one little bother for you
to-day, and that is to let me know about what month flowers
appear in Acropera Loddigesii and luteola ; for I want extremely
to beg a few more flowers, and if I knew the time I would keep
a memorandum to remind you. Why I want these flowers is
(and I am much alarmed) that Mr. J. Scott, of Bot. Garden
of Edinburgh ("do you know anything of him ?) has written
me a very long and clever letter, in which he confirms most
of my observations ; but tells me that with much difficulty
he managed to get pollen into orifice, or as far as mouth of
orifice, of six flowers of A. Loddigesii (the ovarium of which I
did not examine), and two pods set ; one he gathered, and
saw a very few ovules, as he thinks, on the large and mostly
rudimentary placenta. I shall be most curious to hear
whether the other pod produces a good lot of seed. He
says he regrets that he did not test the ovules with chemical
agents : does he mean tincture of iodine ? He suggests that
in a state of nature the viscid matter may come to the very
surface of stigmatic chamber, and so pollen-masses need not
be inserted. This is possible, but I should think improbable.
Altogether the case is very odd, and I am very uneasy,
for I cannot hope that A. Loddigesii is hermaphrodite and
A. luteola the male of the same species. Whenever I can
get Acropera would be a very good time for me to look at
Vanda in spirits, which you so kindly preserved for me.

Letter 633 To J. Scott.

The following is Darwin's reply to the above letter from Scott. In
the first edition of Fertilisation of Orchids (p. 209) he assumed that the
sexes in Acropera, as in Catasetum, were separate. In the second edition
(p. 172) he writes : " I was, however, soon convinced of my error by
Mr. Scott, who succeeded in artificially fertilising the flowers with their

1862 1S71] rOHN TT 307

own pollen. A remarkable discovery by Hildebrand,1 namely, that in

main- on bids the ovules are not developed unless the stigma is pene-
trated by the pollen-tubes . . . expla state of the ovarium in
A > /•<■>■>. as observed by me." In regard to this subject see Letter 608,
p. 280.

12th, 1
I thank you most sincerely for your kindness in writing Lettei
to mc-, and for [your] very interesting letti r. Your fact has
surprised me greatly, and has alarmed me not a little, for if 1
am in error about Acropera I ma}- be in error about Catasetum.
Yet when I call to mind the state of the placentae in A. luteola,
I am astonished that they should produce ovules. You will
see in my book that I state that I did not look at the
ovarium of A. Loddigesii. Would you have the kindness to
send me word which end of the ovarium is meant by apex
(that nearest the flower ?), for I must try and get this species
from Kew and look at its ovarium. I shall be extremely
curious to hear whether the fruit, which is now maturing,
produces a large number of good and plump seed ; perhaps
you may have seen the ripe capsules of other Vandeae, and
may be able to form some conjecture what it ought to
produce. In the young, unfertilised ovaria of many Vandeae
there seemed an infinitude of ovules. In desperation it
occurs to me as just possible, as almost everything in nature
goes by gradation, that a properly male flower might occa-
sionally produce a few seeds, in the same manner as female
plants sometimes produce a little pollen. All your remarks
seem to mc excellent and very interesting, and I again thank
you for your kindness in writing to mc. I am pleased to
observe that my description of the structure of Acropera
seems to agree pretty well with what you have observed.
Docs it not strike you as very difficult to understand how
insects remove the pollinia and carry them to the stigmas ?
Your suggestion that the mouth of the stigmatic cavity may
become charged with viscid matter and thus secure the
pollinia, and that the pollen-tubes may then protrude, seems
very ingenious and new to me; but it would be v<
anomalous in orchids, i.e. as far as I have seen. Xo doubt,
however, though 1 tried my best, I shall be proved wrong in
many points. Botany is a new subject to me. With respect

1 Bot. Zeitung) [863 and 1865.

308 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 633 to the protrusion of pollen-tubes , you might like to hear (if
you do not already know the fact) that, as I saw this summer,
in the little imperfect flowers of Viola and Oxalis, which never
open, the pollen-tubes always come out of the pollen-grain,
whilst still in the anthers, and direct themselves in a beautiful
manner to the stigma seated at some little distance. I hope
that you will continue your very interesting observations.

Letter 634 To J. Scott.

Down, Nov. 19th [1862].

I am much obliged for your letter, which is full of
interesting matter. I shall be very glad to look at the
capsule of the Acropera1 when ripe, and pray present my
thanks to Mr. McNab. I should like to keep it till I could
get a capsule of some other member of the Vandese for com-
parison, but ultimately all the seeds shall be returned, in case
you would like to write any notice on the subject. It was,
as I said,2 only " in desperation " that I suggested that the
flower might be a male and occasionally capable of producing
a few seeds. I had forgotten Gartners remark ; in fact, I
know only odds and ends of Botany, and you know far more.
One point makes the above view more probable in Acropera
than in other cases, viz. the presence of rudimentary placenta?
or testae, for I cannot hear that these have been observed in
the male plants. They do not occur in male Lychnis dioica,
but next spring I will look to male holly flowers. I fully
admit the difficulty of similarity of stigmatic chamber in the
two Acroperas. As far as I remember, the blunt end of
pollen-mass would not easily even stick in the orifice of the
chamber. Your view may be correct about abundance of
viscid matter, but seems rather improbable. Your facts about
female flowers occurring where males alone ought to occur is
new to me ; if I do not hear that you object, I will quote the
Zea case 3 on your authority in what I am now writing on

1 See Letter 608 (Lindley, Dec. 15th, 1861). Also Fertilisation of
Orchids, Ed. II., p. 172, for an account of the observations on Acropera
which were corrected by Scott.

2 Letter 633.

3 See Animals and Plants, Ed. II., Vol. I., p. 339: " Mr. Scott has
lately observed the rarer case of female flowers on a true male panicle,
and likewise hermaphrodite flowers." Scott's paper on the subject is in
Trans. Bot. Soc. Edinburgh, Vol. VIII. See Letter 151, Vol. I.

1862-1871] JOHN SCOTT 309

the varieties of the maize. I am glad to hear that you are Letter 634
now working on the most curious subject of parthei
I formerly fancied that I observed female Lychnis

ded without pollen. 1 send by this post a paper on
Primula} which may interest you. I am working on the
subject, and if yon should ever observe any analogous case I
should be glad to hear. 1 have added another very clever
pamphlet by Prof. Asa Gray. Have you a copy of my
Orchis book? If you have not, and would like one, I should
be pleased to send one. I plainly sec that you have the true
spirit of an experimentalist and good observer. Therefore,
I ask whether you have ewer made any trials on relative
fertility of varieties of plants like those I quote from Gartner
on the varieties of Verbascum). I much want information on
this head, and on those marvellous cases (as some Lobelias
and Crinum passiflord) in which a plant can be more easily
fertilised by the pollen of another species than by its own
good pollen. I am compelled to write in haste. With many
thanks for your kindness.

To J. Scott. Letter 635

Down, 20th [1S62?].
What a magnificent capsule, and good Heavens, what a
number of seeds ! I never before opened pods of larger
orchids. It did not signify a few seed being lost, as it would
be hopeless to estimate number in comparison with other
species. If you sow any, had you not better sow a good
many ? so I enclose small packet. I have looked at the
seeds; I never saw in the British orchids nearly s<> many
empty testae ; but this goes for nothing, as unnatural con-
ditions would account for it. I suspect, however, from the
variable size and transparency, that a good many of the
seeds when dry (and I have put the capsule on my chimney-
piece) will shrivel up. So I will wait a month or two till I
get the capsule of some large Vandeae for comparison. It is
more likely that 1 have made some dreadful blunder about
Acropera than that it should be male yet not a perfect
male. May there be some sexual relation between A.
Loddigesii and luteola ; they seem very close ? I should
very much like to examine the capsule of the unimpregnated

1 Linn. Soc. Journal^ 1802.

3*0 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 635 flower of A. Loddigesii. I have got both species from Kew,
but whether we shall have skill to flower them I know not.
One conjectures that it is imperfect male ; I still should
incline to think it would produce by seed both sexes. But
you are right about Primula (and a very acute thought it
was) : the long-styled P. sinensis, homomorphically 1 fertilised
with own-form pollen, has produced during two successive
homomorphic generations only long-styled plants. The
short-styled the same, i.e. produced short-styled for two
generations with the exception of a single plant. I cannot
say about cowslips yet. I should like to hear your case of
the Primula : is it certainly propagated by seed ?

Letter 636 To J. Scott.

Down, Dec. 3rd, [1862?].

What a capital observer you are ! and how well you have
worked the primulas. All your facts are new to me. It is
likely that I overrate the interest of the subject ; but it seems
to me that you ought to publish a paper on the subject. It
would, however, greatly add to the value if you were to cover up
any of the forms having pistil and anther of the same height,
and prove that they were fully self-fertile. The occurrence of
dimorphic and non-dimorphic species in the same genus is
quite the same as I find in Linum? Have any of the forms of
Primula, which are non-dimorphic, been propagated for some
little time by seed in garden ? I suppose not. I ask because
I find in P. sinensis a third rather fluctuating form, apparently
due to culture, with stigma and anthers of same height. I
have been working successive generations homomorphically of
this Primula, and think I am getting curious results ; I shall
probably publish next autumn ; and if you do not (but I
hope you will) publish yourself previously, I should be glad
to quote in abstract some of your facts. But I repeat that I
hope you will yourself publish. Hottonia is dimorphic, with
pollen of very different sizes in the two forms. I think you
are mistaken about Siphocampylus, but I feel rather doubtful

1 In Forms of Flowers, Ed. II., p. 216, a summary of the transmission
of forms in the "homomorphic" unions of P. sinensis is given. Darwin
afterwards used " illegitimate " for homomorphic, and " legitimate " for
"heteromorphic " {Forms of Flowers, Ed. I., p. 24).

2 Darwin finished his paper on Li?ium in Dec. 1862, and it was
published in the Linn. Soc. Journal in 1863.

1862-1871] JOHN SCOTT 311

in saying this to so good an Lobelia the closed Letter 636

pistil grows rapidly, and pushes out the pollen, and then the
stigma expands, and the flower in function is monoecious ;
from appearance 1 believe this is the case with your plant.
I hope it is so, for this plant can hardly require a cross, bei
in function monoecious; so that dimorphism in such a «
would be a heavy blow to understanding its nature or good
in all other cases. I see few periodicals: when ha\
published on C/ivia? I suppose that you did not actually
count the seeds in the hybrids in comparison with those of
the parent-forms ; but this is almost necessary after Gartner's
observations. 1 very much hope you will make a good series
of comparative trials on the same plant of Tacsonia} I have
raised 700—800 seedlings from cowslips, artificially fertilised
with care ; and they presented not a hair's-breadth approach
to oxlips. I have now seed in pots of cowslip fertilised by
pollen of primrose, and I hope they will grow ; I have also
got fine seedlings from seed of wild oxlips ; so I hope to
make out the case. You speak of difficulties on Natural Selec-
tion : there are indeed plenty ; if ever you have spare time
(which is not likely, as I am sure you must be a hard worker)
I should be very glad to hear difficulties from one who has
observed so much as you have. The majority of criticisms
on the Origin are, in my opinion, not worth the paper they
are printed on. Sir C. Lyell is coming out with what, I
expect, will prove really good remarks.1' Pray do not think
me intrusive ; but if you would like to have any book I have
published, such as my Journal of Researches or the Origin^ I
should esteem it a compliment to be allowed to send it. Will
you permit me to suggest one experiment, which 1 should
much like to see tried, and which I now wish the more from an
extraordinary observation by Asa Gray3 (in number just out

1 See Scott in Linn. Soc. Journal, VIII.

* Lyell's A/ifi(j uity of A fan was published in the spring of 1863. In
the Life and I.tttos, Vol. III., pp. 8, ii, Darwin's correspondence show
his deep disappointment at what he thought LyelPs half-heartedness in
regard to evolution. See Letter 164, p. 239, Vol. I.

3 In Gymnadenia iridentata, according to Asa Gray, the anther opens
in the bud. and the pollen being somewhat coherent falls on the stigma
and on the rostellum, which latter is penetrated by the pollen-tubes. .
Htisation of Orchids, Ed. 11.. p. 68. Asa Gray's papers are in Amer
Journal of Science, Vol. XXXIV., 1862, and XXXVI., 1S63.

312 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 636 of Silliman's N. American Journal) on Gymnadenia tridentata ;
namely, to split the labellum of a Cattleya, or of some allied
orchis, remove caudicle from pollen-mass (so that no loose
grains are about) and put it carefully into the large tongue-
like rostellum, and see if pollen-tubes will penetrate, or better,
see if capsule will swell. Similar pollen-masses ought to be put
on true stigmas of two or three other flowers of same plants
for comparison. It is to discover whether rostellum yet
retains some of its primordial function of being penetrated by
pollen-tubes. You will be sorry that you ever entered into
correspondence with me. But do not answer till at leisure,
and as briefly as you like. My handwriting, I know, is dread-
fully bad. Excuse this scribbling paper, as I can write faster
on it, and I have a rather large correspondence to keep up.

Letter 637 To J. Scott.

Down, Jan. 21st, 1863.

I thank you for your very interesting letter ; I must
answer as briefly as I can, for I have a heap of other letters
to answer. I strongly advise you to follow up and publish
your observations on the pollen-tubes of orchids ; they promise
to be very interesting. If you could prove what I only con-
jectured (from state of utriculi in rostellum and in stigma of
Catasetum and Acroperd) that the utriculi somehow induce,
or are correlated with, penetration of pollen-tubes you will
make an important physiological discovery. I will mention,
as worth your attention (and what I have anxiously wished
to observe, if time had permitted, and still hope to do) — viz.,
the state of tissues or cells of stigma in an utterly sterile
hybrid, in comparison with the same in fertile parent species ;
to test these cells, immerse stigmas for 48 hours in spirits of
wine. I should expect in hybrids that the cells would not
show coagulated contents. It would be an interesting dis-
covery to show difference in female organs of hybrids and
pure species. Anyhow, it is worth trial, and I recommend
you to make it, and publish if you do. The pollen-tubes
directing themselves to stigma is also very curious, though
not quite so new, but well worth investigation when you
get Cattleya, etc., in flower. I say not so new, for remember
small flowers of Viola and Oxalis ; or better, see Biblio-
graphy in Natural History Review, No. VIII., page 419

1862-1871] JOHN SCOTT 313

(October, 1862) for quotation from M. Baillon on pollen- Letter 637

tubes finding way from anthers to stigma in Helianthemum.

I should doubt gum getting solid from [/.<•. becau

continued secretion. Why not sprinkle fresh plaster of

Paris and make impenetrable crust?1 You might modify

experiment by making little hole in one lower corner, and

see if tubes find it out. See in my future paper on Linum

pollen and stigma recognising each other. If you will tell

me that pollen smells the stigma I will try and believe you ;

but I will not believe the Frenchman (I forget who; who

says that stigma of / 'anilla actually attracts mechanically,

by some unknown force, the solid pollen-masses to it ! Read

Asa Gray in 2nd Review of my Orchis book on pollen of

Gymnadenia penetrating rostellum. I can, if you like, lend

you these Reviews ; but they must be returned. R. Brown,

I remember, says pollen-tubes separate from grains before the

lower ends of tubes reach ovules. I saw, and was interested

by, abstract of your Drosera 2 paper ; we have been at very

much the same work.

To J. Scott. Letter 638

Down, Feb. 16th [1863].

Absence from home has prevented me from answering
you sooner. I should think that the capsule of Acropera had
better be left till it shows some signs of opening, as our object
is to judge whether the seeds are good ; but I should prefer
trusting to your better judgment. I am interested about the
Gongora, which 1 hope hereafter to try myself, as I have just
built a small hot-hou

Asa Gray's observations on the rostellum of Gymnadenia
are very imperfect, yet worth looking at. Your case of
Imatophyllum 3 is most interesting ; even if the sport does
not flower it will be worth my giving. I did not und« rstand,

1 The suggestion that the stigma should be covered with a crust of
plaster of Paris, pierced by a hole to allow the pollen-tubes to enter,
bears a resemblance to Miyoshi's experiments with germinating pollen
and fungal spores. See Pringsheinis Jahrbucher, 1 895 : I J94.

* A short note on the irritability of Drosera in the Trans. B
Edin., Vol. VII.

3 A sucker of Imatophyllum minatum threw up a shoot in which the
leaves wore " two-ranked instead of four-ranked.'' and showed other
differences from the normal. — Animals and Plants, Ed. II., Vol. I., p. 411.

314 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 638 or I had forgotten, that a single frond on a fern will vary ; I
now see that the case does come under bud-variation, and
must be given by me. I had thought of it only as proof
[of] inheritance in cryptogams ; I am much obliged for your
correction, and will consult again your paper and Mr. Bridge-
man's.1 I enclose varieties of maize from Asa Gray. Pray
do not thank me for trusting you ; the thanks ought to go
the other way. I felt a conviction after your first letter that
you were a real lover of Natural History.

If you can advance good evidence showing that bisexual
plants are more variable than unisexual, it will be interesting.
I shall be very glad to read the discussion which you are
preparing. I admit as fully as any one can do that cross-
impregnation is the great check to endless variability ; but I
am not sure that I understand your view. I do not believe
that the structure of Primula has any necessary relation to a
tendency to a dioecious structure, but seeing the difference in
the fertility of the two forms, I felt bound unwillingly to
admit that they might be a step towards diceciousness ; I
allude to this subject in my Linum paper.2 Thanks for your
answers to my other queries. I forgot to say that I was at
Kew the other day, and I find that they can give me capsules
of several Vandeae.

Letter 639 To J. Scott.

Down, March 24th [1863].
Your letter, as every one you have written, has greatly
interested me. If you can show that certain individual Passi-
floras, under certain known or unknown conditions of life,,have
stigmas capable of fertilisation by pollen from another species,
or from another individual of its own species, yet not by its
own individual pollen (its own individual pollen being proved
to be good by its action on some other species), you will add
a case of great interest to me ; and which in my opinion
would be quite worth your publication.3 I always imagined

1 The facts are given in Animals and Plants, Ed. 11., Vol. I., p. 408.

2 Linn. Soc. Journal, 1863.

3 Cases nearly similar to those observed by Scott were recorded by
Gartner and Kolreuter, but in these instances only certain individuals
were self- impotent. In Animals and Plants, Ed. II., Vol. II., p. H4j

1862— 1871] JOHN SCOTT 315

that iuch recorded cases must be due to unnatural conditions Letter 639
of life ; and think I said so in the ( Origin? I am not sure tl. I
I understand your result, [nor] whether it means what I have
above obscurely expressed. If you can prove the above, do

publish ; but if you will not publish I earnestly beg you to let
me have the facts in detail ; but you ought to publish, for I
may not use the facts for years. I have been much interested
by what you say on the rostellum exciting pollen to protrude
tubes ; but are you sure that the rostellum does excite them ?
Would not tubes protrude if placed on parts of column or
base of petals, etc., near to the stigma ? Please look at the
Cotta, dener* (or Journal of Horticulture) to be published

to-morrow week for letter of mine, in which I venture to
quote you, and in which you will see a curious fact about
unopened orchid flowers setting seed in West Indies. Dr.
Crliger attributes protrusion of tubes to ants carrying stig-
matic secretion to pollen 3 ; but this is mere hypothesis.
Remember, pollen-tubes protrude within anther in Neottia
nidus-avis. I did think it possible or probable that perfect
fertilisation might have been effected through rostellum.
What a curious case your Gongora must be : could you spare
me one of the largest capsules? I want to estimate the
number of seed, and try my hand if I can make them grow.

where the phenomenon is fully discussed, Scott's observations {Trans. B
Soc. E</i/i„ 1863) are given as the earliest, except for one case recorded
by Lecoq (F/condation, 1862). Interesting work was afterwards done
by Hildebrand and Fritz Miiller, as illustrated in many of the letters
addressed to the latter.

' See 1 f Species, Ed. 1.. p. 251. for Herbert's observations on

self-impotence in Hippeastrum. In spite of the uniformness of the
results obtained in many successive years, Darwin inferred that the
plants must have been in an "unnatural state."

■Journal of Horticulture and ( dener, March 31st, 1S63.

A short note describing Outer's discovery of self-fertilisation in (
Epidendrum, etc., and referring to the work of " an excellent observer,
Mr. J. Scott.'' Darwin adds that he is convinced that he has underrated
the power of tropical orchids occasionally to produce seeds without the
aid of insects.

^ s In Criiger's paper {Litm 'our;:., VIII., 1865 ; read March 3rd

1864) he speaks of the pollen-masses in situ being acted on by the
stigmatic secretion, but no mention is made of th< y of ants. He

describes the pollen-tubes descending " from the [pollen] masses still
in situ down into the ovarian canal."

316 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 639 This, however, is a foolish attempt, for Dr. Hooker, who was
here a day or two ago, says they cannot at Calcutta, and yet
imported species have seeded and have naturally spread on
to the adjoining trees ! Dr. Crliger thinks I am wrong about
Catasetum : but I cannot understand his letter. He admits
there are three forms in two species ; and he speaks as if the
sexes were separate in some and that others were hermaphro-
dites * ; but I cannot understand what he means. He has
seen lots of great humble-bees buzzing about the flowers with
the pollinia sticking to their backs ! Happy man ! ! I have
the promise, but not yet surety, of some curious results
with my homomorphic seedling cowslips : these have not
followed the rule of Chinese Primula ; homomorphic seed-
lings from short-styled parent have presented both forms,
which disgusts me.

You will see that I am better ; but still I greatly fear that
I must have a compulsory holiday. With sincere thanks and
hearty admiration at your powers of observation. . . .

My poor P. scotica looks very sick which you so kindly
sent me.2

Letter 640

To J. Scott.

April 1 2th [1863].
I really hardly know how to thank you enough for your
very interesting letter. I shall certainly use all the facts
which you have given me (in a condensed form) on the
sterility of orchids in the work which I am now slowly
preparing for publication. But why do you not publish these
facts 3 in a separate little paper ? They seem to me well
worth it, and you really ought to get your name known. I
could equally well use them in my book. I earnestly hope
that you will experiment on Passiflora, and let me give your
results. Dr. A. Gray's observations were made loosely ; he
said in a letter he would attend this summer further to the
case, which clearly surprised him much. I will say nothing
about the rostellum, stigmatic utriculi, fertility of Acropera

1 Criiger {Linn. Soc. Journal, VIII., p. 127) says that the apparently
hermaphrodite form is always sterile in Trinidad. Darwin modified his
account in the second edition of the orchid book.

2 Sent by Scott, Jan. 6th, 1863.

3 See Letter 642, note 1, p. 319, for reference to Scott's paper.

i86>-iS7iJ JOHN SCOTT 3J7

and Catase turn, for I am completely bewildered: it will rest Letter 640
with you to settle these points by y< ur excellent observations
and experiments. I must own 1 never could help doubt.
Dr. Hooker's case of the poppy. You may like to hear what
1 have seen this morning: I found1 a primrose plant with
flowers having three pistils, which when pulled asunder,
without any tearing, allowed pollen to be placed on ovules.
1 his 1 did with three tlowers — pollen-tubes did not protrude
after several days. But this day, the sixteenth (N.B. —
primulas seem naturally slowly fertilised), I found many
tubes protruded, and, what is very odd, they certainly seemed
to have penetrated the coats of the ovules, but in no one
instance the foramen of the ovule ! ! I mention this because
it directly bears on your explanation of Dr. Criiger's case.s
I believe that your explanation is right ; I should never have
thought of it ; yet this was stupid of me, for I remember
thinking that the almost closed imperfect tlowers of Viola
and Oralis were related to the protrusion of the pollen-tubes.
My case of the Aceras3 with the aborted labellum squeezed
against stigma supports your view. Dr. Criiger's notion
about the ants was a simple conjecture. About cryptogamic

1 See Letter 658.

3 Criiger's case here referred to is doubtless the cleistogamic fertilisa-
tion of Epidendrum, etc. Scott discusses the question of self-fertilisation
at great length in a letter to Darwin dated April, and obviously written
in 1S63. In Epidendrum he observed a viscid matter extending from
the stigmatic chamber to the anther : pollen-tubes had protruded from the
anther not only where it was in contact with the viscid matter, but also
from the central part, and these spread " over the anterior surface of the
rostellum downward into the stigma." Criiger believed the viscid matter
reaching the anther was a necessary condition for the germination of the
pollen-grains. Scott points out that the viscid matter is produced in
large quantity only after the pollen grains have penetrated the stigma.
and that it is, in fact, a consequence, not a preliminary to fertilisation.
He finally explains Criiger's case thus: "The greater humidity and
equability of temperature consequent on such conditions [i.e. on the
tlowers being closed] is. I believe, the probable cause of these abnormally
conditioned tlowers so frequently fertilising themselves." Scott also calls
attention to the danger of being deceived by fungal hyphse in observa-
tions on germination of pollen.

3 See Fertilisation of Orchids^ Ed. II., p. :51s : the pollen germinated
within the anther of a monstrous flower.

318 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 641 filaments, remember Dr. C. says that the unopened flowers
habitually set fruit. I think that you will change your views
on the imperfect flowers of Viola and Oxalis. . . .

Le«er 642 To J. Scott.

May 2nd [1863].

I have left home for a fortnight to see if I can, with little
hope, improve my health. The parcel of orchid pods, which
you have so kindly sent me, has followed me. I am sure
you will forgive the liberty which I take in returning you the
postage stamps. I never heard of such a scheme as that you
were compelled to practise to fertilise the Gongora x ! It is
a most curious problem what plan Nature follows in this
genus and Acropera? Some day I will try and estimate
how many seeds there are in Gongora. I suppose and hope
you have kept notes on all your observations on orchids, for,
with my broken health and many other subjects, I do not
know whether I shall ever have time to publish again ;
though I have a large collection of notes and facts ready.
I think you show your wisdom in not wishing to publish too
soon ; a young author who publishes every trifle gets, some-
times unjustly, to be disregarded. I do not pretend to be
much of a judge ; but I can conscientiously say that I have
never written one word to you on the merit of your letters that
I do not fully believe in. Please remember that I should very
much wish for a copy of your paper on sterility of individual

1 See Fertilisation of Orchids, Ed. II., p. 169. "Mr. Scott tried
repeatedly, but in vain, to force the pollen-masses into the stigma of
Gongora atro-purfturea and truncata ; but he readily fertilised them by
cutting off the clinandrum and placing pollen-masses on the now exposed
stigma."

2 In the Fertilisation of Orchids, Ed. II., p. 169, Darwin speculates
as to the possible fertilisation of Acropera by an insect with pollen-
masses adhering to the extremity of its abdomen. It would appear that
this guess (which does not occur in the first edition) was made before
he heard of Criiger's observation on the allied genus Gongora, which is
visited by a bee with a long tongue, which projects, when not in use,
beyond and above the tip of the abdomen. Criiger believes that this
tongue is the pollinating agent. Criiger's account is in the Journal of
the Linn. Soc, VIII., 1865, p. 130.

1862 — 1871] JOHN SCOTT 31

orchids ' and on Drosera? Thanks f«»r [note] about Campanul • 642

perfoliate*, I have asked Asa Gray for seeds, to whom I have

mentioned your observations on rostellum, and a.-^ked him to
look closer to the case of Gymnadenia, 1 ,et me hear about the
sporting Imatophyllum if it flowers. Perhaps I have blundered
about Primula] but certainly not about mere protrusion of
pollen-tubes. 1 have been idly watching bees of severa ra

and diptera fertilising O. tnorio at this place, and it is a very
pretty sight. I have confirmed in several ways the entire truth
of my statement that there is no vestige of nectar in the spur ;
but the insects perforate the inner coat. This seems to me a
curious little fact, which none of my reviewers have nuticcd.

To J. D. Hooker.

Down, May 23rd [1863].

You can confer a real service on a good man, John Scott, Lelter 643
the writer of the enclosed letter, by reading it and giving me
your opinion. I assure [you] John Scott is a truly remarkable
man. The part struck out is merely that he is not comfort-
able under Mr. McNab, and this part must be considered as
private. Now the question is, what think you of the offer? Is
expense of living high at Darjeeling ? May I say it is healthy ?
Will he find the opportunity for experimental observations,
which are a passion with him ? It seems to me rather low pay.
Will you advise me for him ? I shall say that as far as ex-
periments in hand at the Botanical Garden in Edinburgh are
concerned, it would be a pity to hesitate to accept the offer.

J. Scott is head of the propagating department. I know
you will not grudge aiding by your advice a good man. I
shall tell him that I have not the slightest power to aid him
in an>- way for the appointment. I should think voyage out
and home ought to be paid for ?

1 " On the Individual Sterility and Cross- Impregnation of Certain
Species of Oncidium." [ Read June 2nd, [864.] Linn. Soc. Journal, VI 1 1 .,
1865. This paper gives a full account of the self-sterility of .in

in cases where the pollen was efficient in fertilising other individuals of
the same species and of distinct species. Some of the facts were given
in Scott's paper, "Experiments on the Fertilisation of Orchids in the
Royal Botanic Garden of Edinburgh," published in the Proc. Bot. > .
Edinb.y 1863. It is probably to the hitter paper that Darwin refers.

3 Trans. Bot. Soc. Edinburgh, Vol. VII.

3 See Fertilisation of Orchids, Ed. 11., p. 68.

320 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 644 To John Scott.

Down, May 25th, 1863.

Now for a few words on science. I do not think I could
be mistaken about the stigma of Bolbophyllum l ; I had the
plant alive from Kew, and watched many flowers. That is a
most remarkable observation on foreign pollen emitting tubes,
but not causing orifice to close 2 ; it would have been interest-
ing to have observed how close an alliance of form would
have acted on the orifice of the stigma. It will probably be
so many years, if ever, [before] I work up my observations on
Drosera, that I will not trouble you to send your paper, for I
could not now find time to read it. If you have spare copy
of your Orchid paper, please send it, but do not get a copy of
the journal, for I can get one, and you must often want to
buy books. Let me know when it is published. I have been
glad to hear about Mercurialis, but I will not accept your
offer of seed on account of time, time, time, and weak health.
For the same reason I must give up Primula mollis. What a
wonderful, indefatigable worker you are ! You seem to have
made a famous lot of interesting experiments. D. Beaton
once wrote that no man could cross any species of Primula.
You have apparently proved the contrary with a vengeance.
Your numerous experiments seem very well selected, and you
will exhaust the subject. Now when you have completed
your work you should draw up a paper, well worth publishing,
and give a list of all the dimorphic and non-dimorphic forms.
I can give you, on the authority of Prof. Treviranus in Bot.
Zeitung, case of P. longiflora non-dimorphic. I am surprised
at your cowslips in this state. Is it a common yellow cow-
slip ? I have seen oxlips (which from some experiments I
now look at as certainly natural hybrids) in same state. If
you think the Botanical Society of Edinburgh would not do

1 Bolbophyllum is remarkable for the closure of the stigmatic cavity
which comes on after the flower has been open a little while, instead
of after fertilisation, as in other genera. Darwin connects the fact with
the " exposed condition of the whole flower." — Fertilisation of Orchids,
Ed. 11., p. 137.

2 See Scott, Bot. Soc. Edin., 1863, p. 546, note. He applied pollinia
from Cypripedium and Asclepias to flowers of Trichopilia tortilis ; and
though the pollen germinated, the stigmatic chamber remained open,
yet it invariably closes eighteen hours after the application of its
own pollen.

1862—187 1] JOHN SCOTT 321

justice and publish your paper, send it to me to be com- Utter
municatcd to the Linnean Society, I will delay my paper
on successive dimorphic generations in Primula l till yours
appears, so as in no way to interfere with your paper. Pos-
sibly my results may be hardly worth publishing, but I think
they will ; the seedlings from two successive homomorphic
generations seem excessively sterile. I will keep this letter
till I hear from Dr. Hooker. I shall be very glad if you
try Passi flora. Your experiments on Primula seem so well
chosen that whatever the result is they will be of value. But
always remember that not one naturalist out of a dozen cares
for really philosophical experiments.

To J. Scott. Letter 645

Down, May 31st [1863].
I am unwell, and must write briefly. I am very much
obliged for the Courant} The facts will be of highest
use to me. I feel convinced that your paper will have
permanent value. Your case seems excellently and carefully
worked out. 1 agree that the alteration of title was un-
fortunate, but, after all, title does not signify very much. So
few have attended to such points that I do not expect any
criticism ; but if so, I should think you had much better
reply, but I could if you wished it much. I quite understand
about the cases being individual sterility ; so Gartner states
it was with him. Would it be worth while to send a corrected
copy of the Courant to the Gardeners' Chronicle}7' I did not
know that you had tried Lobelia fulgens : can you give me
any particulars on the number of plants and kinds used, etc.,
that I may quote, as in a few days I shall be writing on this
whole subject ? No one will ever convince me that it is not
a very important subject to philosophical naturalists. The

1 Published in the/ourn. Linn S . X . 1869 [1868].
The Edinburgh Evening Courant used to publish notices of the
papers read at the Botanical Society of Edinburgh. The paper referred
to here was Scott- on "//.

\n account of Scott's work appeared in the Gat
June 13th, 1863, which is, at least partly, a reprint of the Co:, nee

it contains the awkward sentence criticised by Darwin and referred to
below. The title is " On the Fertilisation of Orchids." which was no
doubt considered unfortunate as not suggesting the subject of the paper,
and as being the same as that of Darwin's book.

VOL. II. 2 I

322 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 645 Hibiscus seems a very curious case, and I agree with your
remarks. You say that you are glad of criticisms (by the
way avoid " former and latter," the reader is always forced to
go back to look). I think you would have made the case
more striking if you had first showed that the pollen of
Oncidium sphacelation was good ; secondly, that the ovule was
capable of fertilisation ; and lastly, shown that the plant was
impotent with its own pollen. " Impotence of organs capable
of elimination " — capable here strictly refers to organs ; you
mean to impotence. To eliminate impotence is a curious
expression ; it is removing a non-existent quality. But style
is a trifle compared with facts, and you are capable of writing
well. I find it a good rule to imagine that I want to explain
the case in as few and simple words as possible to one who
knows nothing of the subject.1 I am tired. In my opinion
you are an excellent observer.

Letter 646 To J- Scott

Down, June 6th, 1863.

I fear that you think that I have done more than I have
with respect to Dr. Hooker. I did not feel that I had any
right to ask him to remember you for a colonial appointment :
all that I have done is to speak most highly of your scientific
merits. Of course this may hereafter fructify. I really think
you cannot go on better, for educational purposes, than you
are now doing, — observing, thinking, and some reading beat,
in my opinion, all systematic education. Do not despair
about your style ; your letters are excellently written, your
scientific style is a little too ambitious. I never study style ;
all that I do is to try to get the subject as clear as I can
in my own head, and express it in the commonest language
which occurs to me. But I generally have to think a good
deal before the simplest arrangement and words occur to me.
Even with most of our best English writers, writing is slow
work ; it is a great evil, but there is no help for it. I am sure
you have no cause to despair. I hope and suppose your
sending a paper to the Linnean Society will not offend your
Edinburgh friends ; you might truly say that you sent the
paper to me, and that (if it turns out so) I thought it worth
communicating to the Linnean Society. I shall feel grea,t

1 See Letter 151, Vol. I., p. 220.

1862— 1871] JOHN SCOTT 323

interest in studying all your facts on Primula, when they arc Letter
worked out and the seed counted. Size of capsules is often
very deceptive. I am astonished how you can find time to
make so many experiments. If you like to send me your
paper tolerably well written, I would look it over and suggest
any criticisms ; but then this would cause you extra copyi
Knnember, however, that Lord Brougham habitually wrote
everything important three times over. The cases of the
Prima Li which lose by variation their dimorphic characters
seem to me very interesting. I find that the mid-styled (by
variation) P. sinensis is more fertile with own pollen, even,
than a heteromorphic union ! If you have time it will be
very good to experiment on Linum Lewisii. I wrote formerly
to Asa Gray begging for seed. If you have time, I think
experiments on any peloric flowers would be useful. I shall
be sorry (and I am certain it is a mistake on the part of the
Society) if your orchid paper is not printed in extenso. I am
now at work compiling all such cases, and shall give a very
full abstract of all your observations. I hope to add in
autumn some from you on Passifiora. I would suggest to
you the advantage, at present, of being very sparing in intro-
ducing theory in your papers (I formerly erred much in
Geology in that way) : let theory guide you, ss but

till your reputation is well established be sparing in publish-
ing theory. It makes persons doubt your observations. How
rarely R. Brown ever indulged in theory: too seldom perhaps !
Do not work too hard, and do not be discouraged because
your work is not appreciated by the majority.

To J. Scott. Letter 647

July 2nd [1S63?]

Many thanks for capsules. I would give table k4~ the
Auricula? especially owing to enclosed extract, which you
can quote. Your facts about varying fertility of the primulas
will be appreciated by but very few botanists ; but I feel sure
that the day will come when they will be valued. By no
means modif 1 v< n in the slight* si degree any result. Accu-
racy is the soul of Natural History. It is hard to become
accurate ; he who modifies a hair's breadth will never be

1 In Scott's paper (Linn. 5 J urn. VIII. many experiments on the
Auricula are recorded.

324 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 647 accurate. It is a golden rule, which I try to follow, to put
every fact which is opposed to one's preconceived opinion in
the strongest light. Absolute accuracy is the hardest merit
to attain, and the highest merit. Any deviation is ruin.
Sincere thanks for all your laborious trials on Passiflora. I
am very busy, and have got two of my sons ill — I very much
fear with scarlet fever ; if so, no more work for me for some
days or weeks. I feel greatly interested about your Primula
cases. I think it much better to count seed than to weigh.
I wish I had never weighed ; counting is more accurate,
though so troublesome.

Letter 648 To J. Scott.

Down, 25th [1863?]

From what you say I looked again at Bot. Zeitung}
Treviranus speaks of P. longi flora as short-styled, but this
is evidently a slip of the pen, for further on, I see, he says
the stigma always projects beyond anthers. Your experi-
ments on coloured primroses will be most valuable if proved
true.2 I will advise to best of my power when I see MS.
If evidence is not good I would recommend you, for your
reputation's sake, to try them again. It is not likely that
you will be anticipated, and it is a great thing to fully
establish what in future time will be considered an important
discovery (or rediscovery, for no one has noticed Gartner's
facts). I will procure coloured primroses for next spring,
but you may rely I will not publish before you. Do not
work too hard to injure your health. I made some crosses
between primrose and cowslip, and I send the results, which
you may use if you like. But remember that I am not
quite certain that I well castrated the short-styled primrose ;
I believe any castration would be superfluous, as I find all
[these] plants sterile when insects are excluded. Be sure and
save seed of the crossed differently coloured primroses or

1 " Ueber Dichogamie," Bot. Zeit., Jan. 1863.

2 The reference seems to be to Scott's observation that the variety
rubra of the primrose was sterile when crossed with pollen from the
common primrose. Darwin's caution to Scott was in some measure
justified, for in his experiments on seedlings raised by self-fertilisation
of the Edinburgh plants, he failed to confirm Scott's result. See Forms
0/ Flowers, Ed. II., p. 225. Scott's facts are in the Journal Linn. Soc,
VIII., p. 97 (read Feb. 4th, 1864).

i862 -1871] JO 1 1 N SCOTT 325

cowslips which produced least seed, to test th< fertility of the Letter 61S
quasi-hybrid seedlings. Gartner found the common primn
and cowslip very difficult to cross, but he knew nothing on
dimorphism. I am sorry about delay [of] your orchid pa]
I should be glad of ab tra< 1 oi youi 1 ew observatioi ielf-

sterility in orchids, as I should probably use the new facts.
There will be an important paper in September in Annals
and Magazine of Natural History, on ovules of orchids being
formed months after application of pollen, by 1 >r. F. 1 lildebrand
of Bonn.1

To J. Scott. Letler 649

Down, Nov. 7th [1S63].

Every day that I could do anything, I have read a few
pages of your paper,- and have now finished it, and return it
registered. It has interested me deeply, and is, I am sui
an excellent memoir. It is well arranged, and in most parts
well written. In the proof sheets you can correct a little
with advantage. I have suggested a few alterations in
pencil for your consideration, and have put in here and there
a slip of paper. There will be no occasion to rewrite the
paper — only, if you agree with me, to alter a few pages.
When finished, return it to me, and I will with the highest
satisfaction communicate it to the Linnean Society. I should
be proud to be the author of the paper. I shall not have
caused much delay, as the first meeting of the Society was
on November 5th. When your Primula paper is finished, if
you are so inclined, I should like to hear briefly about your
Verbascum and Passi flora experiments. I tried Veraascum,
and have got the pods, but do not know when I shall be able
to see to the results. This subject might make another paper
for you. I may add that Acrqpera luteola was fertilised by
me, and had produced two fine pods. I congratulate you on
your excellent paper.

P.S. — In the summary to Primula paper can you con-
jecture what is the typical or parental form, i.e. equal, 1<
or short styled ?

1 Ann. Mag. \ '. Hist., XII.. [863, p. 169. The paper was after-
wards published in the Bot. Zeitung, 1863.

2 This refers to the MS. of - paper on the Primula. nn.
Soc. Joion., VIII. [Feb. 4th, [864] 1865.

326 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 650 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, [Jan. 24th, 1864].

Darwin's interest in Scott's Primula work is shown by the following
extracts from a letter to Hooker of Jan. 24th, 1864, written, therefore,
before the paper was read, and also by the subsequent correspondence
with Hooker and Asa Gray. The first part of this letter illustrates
Darwin's condition during a period of especially bad health.

As I do nothing all day I often get fidgety, and I now
fancy that Charlie or some of your family [are] ill. When you
have time let me have a short note to say how you all are.
I have had some fearful sickness ; but what a strange
mechanism one's body is ; yesterday, suddenly, I had a slight
attack of rheumatism in my back, and I instantly became
almost well, and so wonderfully strong that I walked to the
hot-houses, which must be more than a hundred yards I
have sent Scott's paper to the Linnean Society ; I feel sure
it is really valuable, but I fear few will care about it. Re-
member my urgent wish to be able to send the poor fellow a
word of praise from any one, I have had work to get him
to allow me to send the paper to the Linnean Society, even
after it was written out.

Letter 651 To J. Scott.

Down, Feb. 9th, 1864.

Scott's paper on Primulacese was read at the Linnean Society on
Feb. 4th, 1864.

The President, Mr. Bentham, I presume, was so much
struck by your paper that he sent me a message to know
whether you would like to be elected an associate. As only
one is elected annually, this is a decided honour. The
enclosed list shows what respectable men are associates. I
enclose the rules of admission. I feel sure that the rule
that if no communication is received within three years the
associate is considered to have voluntarily withdrawn, is by
no means rigorously adhered to. Therefore, I advise you
to accept ; but of course the choice is quite free. You will
see there is no payment. You had better write to me on
this subject, as Dr. Hooker or I will propose you.

i862— 1871] JOHN SCOTT 327

J, I ) 1 looker. Letter 652

pt. 13th, 1S64.

I hav< been greatly interested by Scott's paper. I
probably overrate it from caring for the subject, but it
certainly seems to me one of the very most remarkable
memoirs on such subjects which I have ever read. From the
subject being complex, and the style in parts obscure, I
suppose very few will read it. 1 think it ought to be noticed
in the Natural History Review^ otherwise the more remark-
able facts will never be known. Try and persuade Oliver to
do it ; with the summary it would not be troublesome. I
would offer, but I have sworn to myself I will do nothing
till my volume on Variation under Domestication is complete.
I know you will not have time to read Scott, and therefore I
will just point out the new and, as they seem to me, important
points.

Firstly, the red cowslip, losing its dimorphic structure and
changing so extraordinarily in its great production of seed
with its own pollen, especially being nearly sterile when ferti-
lised by, or fertilising, the common cowslip. The analogous
facts with red and white primrose. Secondly, the utter dis-
similarity of action of the pollen of long- and snort-styled
form of one species in crossing with a distinct species. And
many other points. Will you suggest to Oliver to review this
paper? if he does so, and if it would be of any service to
him, I would (as 1 have attended so much to these subjects)
just indicate, with pages, leading and new points. I could
send him, if he wishes, a separate and spare copy marked
with pencil.

To Asa Gray. Letter 653

Sept. 13th [186
In September, 1864, Darwin wrote to Asa Gray describing Scott's
work on the Primulaceae as : —

A pap< r which has interested me greatly by a gardener,

John Scott ; it seems to me a most remarkable production,
though written rather obscurely in parts, but worth the
labour of studying. I have just bethought me that for the
chance of your noticing it in the Journal^ I will point
the new and very remarkable facts. I have paid the poor
fellow's passage out to India, where I hope he will succeed,

328 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 653 as he is a most laborious and able man, with the manners
almost of a gentleman.

The following is an abstract of the paper which was enclosed in the
letter to Asa Gray.

Pp. 106-8. Red cowslip by variation has become non-
dimorphic, and with this change of structure has become
much more productive of seed than even the heteromorphic
union of the common cowslip. Pp. 91-2, similar case with
Auricula ; on the other hand a non-dimorphic variety of P.
farinosa (p. 115) is less fertile. These changes, or variations,
in the generative system seem to me very remarkable. But
far more remarkable is the fact that the red cowslip
(pp. 106-8) is very sterile when fertilising, or fertilised by
the common cowslip. Here we have a new " physiological
species." Analogous facts given (p. 98) on the crossing of
red and white primroses with common primroses. It is very
curious that the two forms of the same species (pp. 93, 94,
95, and 117) hybridise with extremely different degrees of
facility with distinct species.

He shows (p. 94) that sometimes a cross with a quite
distinct species yields more seed than a homomorphic union
with own pollen. He shows (p. in) that of the two homo-
morphic unions possible with each dimorphic species the
short-styled (as I stated) is the most sterile, and that my
explanation is probably true. There is a good summary to
the paper.

Letter 654 To J. D. Hooker.

The following letters to Hooker, April 1st, April 5th and May 22nd,
refer to Darwin's scheme of employing Scott as an assistant at Down,
and to Scott's appointment to the Botanic Garden at Calcutta.

Down, April 1st, 1864.

I shall not at present allude to your very interesting
letter (which as yet has been read to me only twice !), for
I am full of a project which I much want you to consider.

You will have seen Scott's note. He tells me he has no
plans for the future. Thinking over all his letters, I believe
he is a truly remarkable man. He is willing to follow
suggestions, but has much originality in varying his ex-
periments. I believe years may pass before another man'
appears fitted to investigate certain difficult and tedious

-1871] JOHN TT 32<j

points — viz. relative fertility of varieties of plants, including Letter 654
peloric and other monsters (already Scott has done ex-
cellent work on this head ; and, secondly, whether a plant's
own pollen is le-s effective than that of another individual.
Now, if Scott i> moderate in his wishes, I would pay him for
a year or two to work and publish on these or other such
subjects which might ari-e. But I dare not have him h<
for it would quite o\ rk me. There would not be plants

sufficient for his work, and it would probably be an injur}' to
himself, as it would put him out of the way of getting a good
situation. Now, I believe you have gardeners at Kew who
work and learn there without pay. What do you think of
having Scott there for a year or two to work and experiment ?
I can see enormous difficulties. In the first place you will
not perhaps think the points indicated so highly important as
I do. Secondly, he would require ground in some out-of-the-
way place where the plants could be covered by a net, which
would be unsightly. On the other hand, I presume you would
like a series of memoirs published on work done at Kew,
which I am fully convinced would have permanent value. It
would, of course I conceive, be absolutely necessary that Scott
should be under the regular orders of the superintendent.
The only way I can fancy that it could be done would be to
explain to the superintendent that I temporarily supported
Scott solely for the sake of science, and appeal to his kind-
ness to assist him. If you approved of having him (which I
can see is improbable), and you simply ordered the super-
intendent to assist him, I believe everything would go to
loggerheads. As for Scott himself, it would be of course
an advantage to him to stud)- the cultivation at Kew. You
would get to know him, and if he really is a good man you
could perhaps be able to recommend him to some situation
at home or abroad. Pray turn this [oxer] in your mind. I
have no idea whether Scott would like I hut I can

see that he has a burning zeal for science. He told me that
his parents were in better circumstances, and that he chose a
gardener's life solely as the best way of following science. I
may just add that in his last letter he gives me the resull
of many experiments on different individuals of the s..
species of orchid, showing the most remarkable diversity in
their sexual condition. It seems to me a grievous loss that

330 BOTANY [Chap. X

Letter 654 such a man should have all his work cut short. Please
remember that I know nothing of him excepting from his
letters : these show remarkable talent, astonishing persever-
ance, much modesty, and what I admire, determined difference
from me on many points.

What will Sir William say ?

Letter 655 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, April 5th [1864].

I see mv scheme for Scott has invincible difficulties, and
I am very much obliged to you for explaining them at such
length. If ever I get decently well, and Scott is free and
willing, I will have him here for a couple of years to work
out several problems, which otherwise would never be done.
I cannot see what will become of the poor fellow. I enclose
a little pamphlet from him, which I suppose is not of much
scientific value, but is surprising as the work of a gardener.
If you have time do just glance over it. I never heard
anything so extraordinary as what you say about poisoning
plants, etc.

. . . The post has just come in. Your interest about
Scott is extraordinarily kind, and I thank you cordially. It
seems absurd to say so, but I suspect that X is prejudiced
against Scott because he partially supports my views.1

You must not trust my former letter about Clematis. I
worked on too old a plant, and blundered. I have now
gone over the work again. It is really curious that the
stiff peduncles are acted upon by a bit of thread weighing
•062 of a grain.

Clematis glandulosa was a valuable present to me. My
gardener showed it to me and said, " This is what they call a
Clematis" evidently disbelieving it. So I put a little twig to
the peduncle, and the next day my gardener said, "You see
it is a Clematis, for it feels." That's the way we make out
plants at Down.

My dear old friend, God bless you !

1 In a letter to Scott (dated June nth) Darwin warns him to keep
his views "pretty quiet," and quotes Hooker's opinion that " if it is
known that you agree at all with my views on species it is enough to
make you unpopular in Edinburgh."

1862-1871] JOHN SCOTT 331

To J. I). Hooker. tter 656

[May 2211.I. 1864].

What a good kind heart you have got You cannot tell
how your letter has pi me. 1 will write I tt and

ask him if he chooses to go out and ri>k < ngagement If he
will not he must want all energy. He says himself he wants
stoicism, and is too sensitive. I hope he may not want
courage. I feel sure he is a remarkable man, with much good
in him, but no doubt many errors and blemishes. I can
vouch for his high intellect (in my judgment he i- the best
observer I ever came across; ; for his modesty, at least in
correspondence ; and there is something high-minded in his

rmination not to receive money from me. I shall ask
him whether he can get a good character for probity and
sobriety, and whether he can get aid from his relations for
his voyage out. I will help, and, if necessary, pay the whole
voyage, and give him enough to support him for some
weeks at Calcutta. I will write when I hear from him. God
bless you ; you, who are so overworked, are most generous to
take so much trouble about a man you have had nothing to
do with.

Scott had left the Botanic Gardens at Edinburgh in March 1S64,
chagrined at what, justly or unjustly, he considered discouragement and
slight. The Indian offer was most gladly and gratefully accepted.

T° y Scutt- Letter 657

Down, N \ . 1st, 1871.

1 >r. I looker has forwarded to me your letter as tlv best and
simplest plan of explaining affairs. I am sine rieved

to hear of the pecuniary trouble which you have undergone.
but now fortunately passed. 1 assure you that I have never
entertained any feelings in regard to you which y u ,-uppose.
Please to remember that 1 distinctly stated that 1 did not
consider the sum which I advanced as a loan, but as a grift ;
and surely there is nothing discreditable to you, under the
circumstances, in receiving a gift from a rich man, as I am.
Therefore I earnestly beg you to banish the whole subject
from your mind, and begin laying up something 1" r yourself
in the future. I really cannot break my •..
payment. Pray do not rob me of my small share in the

332 BOTA.NY [Chap. X

Letter 657 credit of aiding to put the right man in the right place.
You have done good work, and I am sure will do more ; so
let us never mention the subject again.

I am, after many interruptions, at work again on my
essay on Expression, which was written out once many
months ago. I have found your remarks the best of all
which have been sent me, and so 1 state.

CHAPTER XI.

BOTANY

(Continued)

I. Miscellaneous. — II. Correspondence with Frits Miillcr. —

III. Miscellaneous. letter 6S8

I. Miscellaneous, 1863— 1866

To D. Oliver.

Down [April, 1863 .
The following letter illustrates the truth of Sir W. Thiselton- Dyer's
remark that Darwin was never "afraid of his facts."1 The entrance
of pollen-tubes into the nucellus by the chalaza, instead of through
the micropyle, was first fully demonstrated by Treub in his paper " Sur
les Casuarinees et leur place dans le Systeme naturel," published in the
Ann. Jard. Bot. Buitenzorg, X., 1891. Two years later Miss Benson
gave an account of a similar phenomenon in certain Amentiferae
{Trans. Linn. Sac., 1888-94, p. 409). This chalazogamic method of
fertilisation has since been recognised in other flowering plants, but not,
so far as we are aware, in the genus Primula.

It is a shame to trouble [you], but will you tell me whether
the ovule of Primula is " anatropal," nearly as figured by
Gray, p. 123, Lessons in Botany, or rather more tending to
" amphitropal " ? I never locked at such a point before. Why
I am curious to know is because I put pollen into the ovarium
of monstrous primroses, and now, after sixteen days, and not
before (the length of time agrees with slowness of natural
impregnation , I find abundance of pollen-tubes emitted,
which cling firmly to the ovules, and, I think I may con-
fidently state, penetrate the ovule. Hut here is an odd
thing : they never once enter at what I suppose to be) the
"orifice," but generally at the chalaza .... Do you
know how pollen-tubes go naturally in Primula} Do they

1 Charles Dan Nature Series 1, 18S2, p. 43.

334 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 658 run down walls of ovarium, and then turn up the placenta,
and so debouch near the " orifices " of the ovules ?

If you thought it worth while to examine ovules, I would
see if there are more monstrous flowers, and put pollen
into the ovarium, and send you the flowers in fourteen
or fifteen days afterwards. But it is rather troublesome. I
would not do it unless you cared to examine the ovules.
Like a foolish and idle man, I have wasted a whole morning
over them. . . .

In two ovules there was an odd appearance, as if the
outer coat of ovule at the chalaza end (if I understand the
ovule) had naturally opened or withered where most of the
pollen-tubes seemed to penetrate, which made me at first
think this was a widely open foramen. I wonder whether
the ovules could be thus fertilised ?

Letter 659 To D. Oliver.

Down [April, 1863].
Many thanks about the Primula. I see that I was pretty
right about the ovules. I have been thinking" that the apparent
opening at the chalaza end must have been withering or
perhaps gnawing by some very minute insects, as the ovarium
is open at the upper end. If I have time I will have another
look at pollen-tubes, as, from what you say, they ought to find
their way to the micropyle. But ovules to me are far more
troublesome to dissect than animal tissue ; they are so soft,
and muddy the water.

Letter 660 To Maxwell Masters.

Down, April 6th [1863].
I have been very glad to read your paper on Peloria.1
For the mere chance of the following case being new I send
it. A plant which I purchased as Corydalis tuberosa has, as
you know, one nectary — short, white, and without nectar ; the
pistil is bowed towards the true nectary ; and the hood formed
by the inner petals slips off towards the opposite side (all
adaptations to insect agency, like many other pretty ones
in this family). Now on my plants there are several flowers
(the fertility of which I will observe) with both nectaries equal

1 " On the Existence of Two Forms of Peloria." Natural History
Review, April, 1863, p. 258.

1863— 1866] PELORIA 335

and purple and secreting nectar ; the pistil is straight, and Letter 660
the hood slips off eith< r way. In short, these flowers have ti
exact structure of Dielytra and Adlum a. S< eing this, I must
look at the case as one of reversion ; though it is one of the
spreading of irregularity to two sid

As columbine [Aquilegia\ has all petals, etc., irregular, and
as monkshood \Aconiturn\ has two petals irregular, may not
the case given by Seringe, and referred to [by] you,1 by you be
looked at as reversion to the columbine state? Would it be
too bold to suppose that some ancient Linaria, or allied form,
and some ancient Viola, had all petals spur-shaped, and that
all cases of " irregular peloria "- in these genera are reversions
to such imaginary ancient form ?

It seems to me, in my ignorance, that it would be advan-
tageous to consider the two forms of Peloria ; ccurring
in the very same species as probably due to the same general
law— viz., one as reversion to very early state, and the other
as reversion to a later state when all the petals were irregu-
larly formed. This seems at least to me a priori a more
probable view than to look at one form of Peloria as due to
reversion and the other as something distinct.3

What do you think of this notion ?

To P. H. Gosse.1 Letter 66l

The following was written in reply to Mr. Gosse's letter of May 30th
asking for a solution of his difficulties in fertilising Stanhopea. It is
reprinted by the kind permission of Mr. Edmund Gosse from his delight-
ful book, the Life of Philip Henry Gosse, London, 1890, p. 299.

1 " Seringe describes and figures a flower [of Acorn/urn] wherein
all the sepals were helmet-shaped," and the petals similarly affected.
Maxwell Masters, op. tit., p. 260.

3 '"Regular or Congenital Peloria ' would include those flowers
which, contrary to their usual habit, retain throughout the whole of their
growth their primordial regularity of form and equality of proportion.
1 Irregular or Acquired Peloria.' on the other hand, would include those
flowers in which the irregularity of growth that ordinarily charactei
some portions of the corolla is manifested in all of them.'- Maxwell
Masters, toe. tit.

3 See Maxwell Masters, Vegetable T< , 1S69, p. 235 ; Vat

of Animals and Plants, Ed. 11.. Vol. II.. p. 33.

' Philip Henry Gosse J8) was an example of that almost extinct

type— a naturalist with a wide knowledge gained at first hand from
nature as a whole. This width of culture was combined with a severe.

336 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 66 1 Down, June 2nd, 1863.

It would give me real pleasure to resolve your doubts, but
I cannot. I can give only suspicions and my grounds for
them. I should think the non-viscidity of the stigmatic
hollow was due to the plant not living under its natural
conditions. Please see what I have said on Acropera. An
excellent observer, Mr. J. Scott, of the Botanical Gardens,
Edinburgh, finds all that I say accurate, but nothing daunted,
he with the knife enlarged the orifice and forced in pollen-
masses ; or he simply stuck them into the contracted orifice
without coming into contact with the stigmatic surface, which
is hardly at all viscid, when, lo and behold, pollen-tubes were
emitted and fine seed capsules obtained. This was effected
with Acropera Loddigesii ; but I have no doubt that I have
blundered badly about A. luteola. I mention all this because,
as Mr. Scott remarks, as the plant is in our hot-houses, it is
quite incredible it ever could be fertilised in its native land.
The whole case is an utter enigma to me. Probably you are
aware that there are cases (and it is one of the oddest facts
in Physiology) of plants which, under culture, have their
sexual functions in so strange a condition, that though their
pollen and ovules are in a sound state and can fertilise and be
fertilised by distinct but allied species, they cannot fertilise
themselves. Now, Mr. Scott has found this the case with
certain orchids, which again shows sexual disturbance. He
had read a paper at the Botanical Society of Edinburgh, and

and narrow religious creed, and though, as Edmund Gosse points out
(p. 336), there was in his father's case no reconcilement of science and
religion, since his " impressions of nature " had to give way absolutely to
his " convictions of religion," yet he was not debarred by his views from
a friendly intercourse with Darwin. He did much to spread a love of
Natural History, more especially by his seaside books, and by his intro-
duction of the aquarium — the popularity of which (as Mr. Edmund Gosse
shows) is reflected in the pages of Punch, especially in John Leech's
illustrations. Kingsley said of him (quoted by Edmund Gosse, p. 344),
" Since White's History of Selborne few or no writers on Natural History,
save Mr. Gosse and poor Mr. Edward Forbes, have had the power of
bringing out the human side of science, and giving to seemingly dry
disquisitions . . . that living and personal interest, to bestow which is
generally the special function of the poet." Among his books are the
Naturalist's Sojourn in Jamaica, 185 1 ; A Naturalist's Rambles on the
Devonshire Coast, 1853 ; Omphalos, 1857 ; A Year at the Shore, 1865.
He was also author of a long series of papers in scientific journals.

1863— 1860] ORCIIII 337

I daresay an abstract which I hive seen will appear in tl. r 661

Gardeners' Chronicle ; but blunders have crept in in copyin
and parts are barely intelligible. J low insects act with your
Stanhopea I will not pretend to conjecture. In many cases
I believe the acutest man could not conjecture without seein
the insect at work. I could name common English plants
in this predicament. But the musk-orchis [Herntiniunt
monorckis] is a case in point. Since publishing, my son and
myself have watched the plant and seen the pollinia removed,
and where do you think they invariably adhere in dozens of
specimens? — always to the joint of the femur with the tro-
chanter of the first pair of legs, and nowhere else. When one
sees such adaptation as this, it would be hopeless to conjecture
on the Stanliopca till we know what insect visits it. I have
fully proved that my strong suspicion was correct that with
many of our English orchids no nectar is excreted, but that
insects penetrate the tissues for it. So I expect it must be
with many foreign species. I forgot to say that if you find
that you cannot fertilise any of your exotics, take pollen from
some allied form, and it is quite probable that will succeed.
Will you have the kindness to look occasionally at your bee-
Opluys near Torquay, and see whether pollinia arc ever
removed? It is my greatest puzzle. Please read what I have
said on it, and on 0. arachnites. 1 have since proved th.it the
account of the latter is correct. I wish 1 could have eiven
you better information.

P.S. — If the flowers of the Stanhopea are not too old,
remove pollen-masses from their pedicels, and stick them
with a little liquid pure gum to the stigmatic cavity. After
the case of the Ao/-pc-ra, no one can dare positively say that
they would not act.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 662

Down, Saturday, 5th [Dec. 1S63].

I am very glad that this will reach you at Kew. You will
then get rest, and I do hope some lull in anxiety and fn
Nothing is so dreadful in this life as fear ; it still sickens me
when I cannot help remembering some of the many illness -
our children have endured. My father, who was a sceptical
man, was convinced that he had distinctly traced several c.
of scarlet fever to handling letters from convalesce!
VOL. II. 22

33§ BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 662 The vases x did come from my sister Susan. She is
recovering, and was much pleased to hear that you liked
them ; I have now sent one of your notes to her, in which
you speak of them as " enchanting," etc. I have had a
bad spell — vomiting, every day for eleven days, and some
days many times after every meal. It is astonishing the
degree to which I keep up some strength. Dr. Brinton was
here two days ago, and says he sees no reason [why] I may
not recover my former degree of health. I should like to live
to do a little more work, and often I feel sure I shall, and
then again I feel that my tether is run out.

Your Hastings note, my dear old fellow, was a Copley
Medal 2 to me and more than a Copley Medal : not but what
I know well that you overrate what I have been able to do.
Now that I am disabled, I feel more than ever what a pleasure
observing and making out little difficulties is. By the way,
here is a very little fact which may interest you. A partridge
foot is described in Proc. Zoolog. Soc? with a huge ball of
earth attached to it as hard as rock. Bird killed in i860.
Leg has been sent me, and I find it diseased, and no doubt
the exudation caused earth to accumulate ; now already
thirty-two plants have come up from this ball of earth.

By Jove ! I must write no more. Good-bye, my best of
friends.

There is an Italian edition of the Origin preparing. This
makes the fifth foreign edition — i.e. in five foreign countries.
Owen will not be right in telling Longmans that the book
would be utterly forgotten in ten years. Hurrah !

Letter 663 To D- 01iver-

Down, Feb. 17th [1864].

Many thanks for the Epacrids, which I have kept, as they
will interest me when able to look through the microscope.

Dr. Criiger has sent me the enclosed paper, with power to
do what I think fit with it. He would evidently prefer it
to appear in the Nat. Hist. Review. Please read it, and

1 Probably Wedgwood ware.

2 The proposal to give the medal to Darwin failed in 1863, but his
friends were successful in 1864 : see Life and Letters, III., p. 28.

3 Proc. Zool. Soc, 1863, p. 127, by Prof. Newton, who sent the foot to
Darwin : see Origin, Ed. VI., p. 328.

1863-1866] ORCHIDS 3-

let me hive your decision pretty soon. Some Germanisms Letter 663
must be corn cted ; whether woodcuts arc necessary I have not
been able to pay attention enough to decide. If you refi.
plea send it to the Linnean Society1 as communicated by
me. The paper has int< d me extremely, and 1 shall

have no peace till I have a good boast. The are

separate in Catasetutn, which is a wonderful relief to me.
as I have had two or three letters saying that the male
C. tridentatum% seeds. It is prettyele.tr tome that two or
three forms are confounded under this name. Observe how
curiously nearly perfect the pollen of the female is, according
to Criiger, — certainly more perfect than the pollen from the
Guyana species described by me. 1 was right in the manner
in which the pollen adheres to the hairy back of the humble-
bee,3 and hence the force of the ejection of the pollina. I am
still more pleased that I was right about insects gnawing the
fleshy labcllum. This is important, as it explains all the
astounding projections on the labellum of Oncidiuvi,
PhaLoiopsis, etc.

Excuse all my boasting. It is the best medicine for my
stomach. Tell me whether you mean to take up orchids
Hooker said you were thinking of doing. Do you know
Co-ryanthcs, with its wonderful basket of water ? See what
Criiger says about it. It beats everything in orchids.1

To J. D. Hooker.

J Letter 66.|

Down [Sept. 13th, 1^64].

Thanks for your note of the 5th. You think much and
greatly too much of me and my doings ; but this is pleasant,
for you have represented for many years the whole great
public to me.

I have read with interest Bentham's address on hybridism.

1 H. Cruger's "A Few Notes on the Fecundation of Orchids, etc. "
[Read March, [864.] Linn. Soc.fourn., VIII., 1864-5, P- 1-~-

8 See footnote p. 280 on the sexual relation between the three forms
known as Catasetutn tridentatum, Monacanth . and Myantkus

barbatus. For further details see Darwin, Linn. Soc. /ourn., VI., 1
p. 151, and Fertilisation of Orchids ', Ed. II.. p. 196.

3 This view was given in Fertilisation of Orchids, Ed. I., [862, p. 230.

1 For Coryanthes see Fertilisation of < . Ed. [I., p. 173.

34-0 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 664 I am glad that he is cautious about Naudin's view,1 for I
cannot think that it will hold. The tendency of hybrids to
revert to either parent is part of a wider law (which I am
fully convinced that I can show experimentally), namely, that
crossing races as well as species tends to bring back characters
which existed in progenitors hundreds and thousands of
generations ago. Why this should be so, God knows. But
Naudin's view throws no light, that I can see, on this re-
version of long-lost characters. I wish the Ray Society
would translate Gartner's Bastarderzeugung2 ; it contains
more valuable matter than all other writers put together,
and would do great service if better known.

1 C. Naudin's " Nouvelles Recherches sur l'Hybridite dans les

Vegetaux." The complete paper, with coloured plates, was presented to

the Academy in 1861, and published in full in the Nouvelles Archives du

Museum dHist. Nat., Vol. I., 1865, p. 25. The second part only appeared

in the Ann. Sci. Nat., XIX., 1863. Mr. Bentham's address dealing with

hybridism is in Proc. Linn. Soc, VIII., 1864, p. ix. A review of Naudin

is given in the Natural History Review, 1864, p. 50. Naudin's paper is

of much interest, as containing a mechanical theory of reproduction of

the same general character as that of pangenesis. In the Variation of

Animals and Plants, Ed. II., Vol. II., p. 395, Darwin states that in his

treatment of hybridism in terms of gemmules he is practically following

Naudin's treatment of the same theme in terms of "essences." Naudin,

however, does not clearly distinguish between hybrid and pure gemmules,

and makes the assumption that the hybrid or mixed essences tend

constantly to dissociate into pure parental essences, and thus lead to

reversion. It is to this view that Darwin refers when he says that

Naudin's view throws no light on the reversion to long-lost characters.

His own attempt at explaining this fact occurs in Variation under

Domest., II., Ed. II., p. 595. Mr. Bateson {Mendel s Principle of Heredity,

Cambridge, 1902, p. 38) says: "Naudin clearly enuntiated what we

shall henceforth know as the Mendelian conception of the dissociation

of characters of cross-breds in the formation of the germ-cells, though

apparently he never developed this conception." It is remarkable that,

as far as we know, Darwin never in any way came across Mendel's work.

One of Darwin's correspondents, however, the late Mr. T. Laxton, of

Stamford, was close on the trail of Mendelian principle. Mr. Bateson

writes {op. cit., p. 181) : " Had he [Laxton] with his other gifts combined

that penetration which detects a great principle hidden in the thin mist

of ' exceptions,' we should have been able to claim for him that honour

which must ever be Mendel's in the history of discovery."

2 Versuche iiber die Bastarderzeugung im Pflanzenreich : Stuttgart,
1849.

1863—1866] CLIMBING PLANTS 341

I 1 T. 1 1. I luxley. 1 ttei I

Mr. Huxley had doubted the accuracy of observations on I im

published in the Fertilisation of 1 Orchids. In what formed the postscript
to tlie following letter, Darwin wrote: "I have had mure Catasetun
all right, you audacious 'caviller.'"

TO, (Jet. 31st [1862].

hi .1 little book, just published, called the Th >s

(a theological hash of old abuse of me), Owen gives tu the
author a new resume" of his brain doctrine; and I thought
you would like to hear of this. He ends with a delightful
sentence. " No science affords more scope or easier ground
for the caviller and controversialist ; and these do good by
preventing scholars from giving more force to generalisations
than the master propounding them does, or meant his readers
or hearers to give."

You will blush with pleasure to hear that you are of some
use to the master.

To. J. D. Hooker. Letter 666

[Feb., 1864?]

1 shall write again. I write now merely to ask, if you
have Naravelia* (the Clauatis-Wke plant told me by Oliver),
to try and propagate me a plant at once. Have you Clematis
cirrhosa ? It will amuse me to tell you why Clematis interests
me, and why I should so very much like to have Naravelia.
The leaves of Clematishave no spontaneous movement, nor have
the inUrnodes ; but when by growth the peduncles of leaves
are brought into contact with any object, they bend and catch
hold. The slightest stimulus suffices, even a bit of cotton
thread a few inches long; but. the stimulus must be applied
during six or twelve hours, and when the peduncles once
bend, though the touching object be removed, the}- never get
straight again. Now mark the difference in another leaf-
climber — viz., Tropaolum : here the- young intcrnodes revolve
day and night, and the peduncles of the leaves are thus
brought into contact with an object, and the slightest
momentary touch causes them to bend in any direction and
catch the object, but as the axis revolves they must be often
dragged away without catching, and then the peduncles

1 Ranunculaci

342 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 666 straighten themselves again, and are again ready to catch.
So that the nervous system of Clematis feels only a prolonged
touch — that of Tropceolum a momentary touch : the peduncles
of the latter recover their original position, but Clematis, as
it comes into contact by growth with fixed objects, has no
occasion to recover its position, and cannot do so. You did
send me Flagellaria, but most unfortunately young plants do
not have tendrils, and I fear my plant will not get them for
another year, and this I much regret, as these leaf-tendrils
seem very curious, and in Gloriosa I could not make out the
action, but I have now a young plant of Gloriosa growing up
(as yet with simple leaves) which I hope to make out. Thank
Oliver for decisive answer about tendrils of vines. It is very
strange that tendrils formed of modified leaves and branches
should agree in all their four highly remarkable properties.
I can show a beautiful gradation by which leaves produce
tendrils, but how the axis passes into a tendril utterly puzzles
me. I would give a guinea if vine-tendrils could be found
to be leaves.

It is an interesting fact that Darwin's work on climbing plants was
well advanced before he discovered the existence of the works of Palm,
Mohl, and Dutrochet on this subject. On March 22nd, 1864, he wrote
to Hooker : — " You quite overrate my tendril work, and there is no
occasion to plague myself about priority." In June he speaks of having
read " two German books, and all, I believe, that has been written on
climbers, and it has stirred me up to find that I have a good deal of new
matter."

Letter 667 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, June 2nd [1864].

You once offered me a Combretum} I having C. pur-
pureum, out of modesty like an ass refused. Can you now
send me a plant? I have a sudden access of furor about
climbers. Do you grow Adlumia cirr/iosa? Your seed did
not germinate with me. Could you have a seedling dug up
and potted? I want it fearfully, for it is a leaf-climber, and
therefore sacred.

I have some hopes of getting Adlumia, for I used to grow
the plant, and seedlings have often come up, and we are now

1 The two forms of shoot in C. argenteam are described in Climbing
Plants, p. 41.

i863— 1866] CLIMBING PLANTS 343

potting all minute reddish-coloured weeds.1 I have jus net 667

a plant with sensitive axis, quite a new ; and tell OH1

I now do not caic at all how many tendrils he makes axial,
which at one time was a cruel torture to me.

To J. D. Hooker. Lelter 668

Down, Nov. 3rd [1864].
Many thanks for your splendid long letter. Hut first for
business. Please look carefully at the enclosed specimen
Dicentra tkalictriformis* and throw away. When the plant
was young I concluded certainly that the tendrils were axial,
or modified branches, which Mohl 3 says is the case with some
Fumariacc You looked at them here and agreed. Hut

now the plant is old, what I thought was a branch with two
leaves and ending in a tendril looks like a gigantic leaf with
two compound leaflets, and the terminal part converted into
a tendril. For I see buds in the fork between supposed
branch and main stem. Pray look carefully — you know I am
profoundly ignorant — and save me from a horrid mistake.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter ^

The following is interesting, as containing a foreshadowing of the
chemotaxis of antherozoids which was shown to exist by Pfeffer in 1881 :
see Untersuchungen aus dem botanischen Institut zu Tu Vol. I.,

p. 363. There are several papers by H. J. Carter on the reproduction
of the lower organisms in the Annals and Magazine < \ \tural History
between 1855 and 1865.

Down, Sunday, 22nd, and Saturday. 2Sth [October, 1865].
I have been wading through the Annals and Ma V.

I list, for last ten years, and have been interested by several
papers, chiefly, however, translations; but none have inter-
ested me more than Carter's on lower vegetables, infusoria,
and protozoa. Is he as good a workman as he appears?

' We believe that the Ad .Inch came up year by year in flower

boxes in the Down verandah grew from seed supplied by Asa Gray.

3 Dicentra tlialictrifolia, a Himalayan species of Fumariacese, with
leaf-tendrils.

3 Ueber den Pan it ml das Winder, der .7 ••>/.

Eine gekrbnte Preisi 4to, Tubingen, 1827. At p. 43 Mohl describes

the tips of the branches of Fumaria \Corydalis\ da is being

developed into tendrils, as well as the leaves. For this reason Darwin
placed the plant anion- the tendril-bearers rather than among the true
leaf-climbers : see Climbing Plants, Ed. II., 1S75, p. 121.

344 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 669 if so he would deserve a Royal medal. I know it is not new ;
but how wonderful his account of the spermatozoa of some
dioecious alga or conferva, swimming and finding the minute
micropyle in a distinct plant, and forcing its way in ! Why,
these zoospores must possess some sort of organ of sense to
guide their locomotive powers to the small micropyle ; and
does not this necessarily imply something like a nervous
system, in the same way as complemental male cirripedes
have organs of sense and locomotion, and nothing else but
a sack of spermatozoa ?

Letter 670 To F. Hildebrand.

May 1 6th, 1866.

Since writing to you before, I have read your admirable
memoir on Salvia} and it has interested me almost as much
as when I first investigated the structure of orchids. Your
paper illustrates several points in my Origin of Species \ espe-
cially the transition of organs. Knowing only two or three
species in the genus, I had often marvelled how one cell of the
anther could have been transformed into the moveable plate
or spoon ; and how well you show the gradations. But I am
surprised that you did not more strongly insist on this point.

I shall be still more surprised if you do not ultimately
come to the same belief with me, as shown by so many
beautiful contrivances, — that all plants require, from some
unknown cause, to be occasionally fertilised by pollen from
a distinct individual.

II. — Correspondence with Fritz Muller,

1865— 1 881.

The letters from Darwin to Muller are given as a separate group,
instead of in chronological sequence with the other botanical letters, as
better illustrating the uninterrupted friendship and scientific comradeship
of the two naturalists. A short biographical note on Fritz Muller is given
in Vol. I., p. 382.

Letter 671 To F. Muller.

Down, Oct. 17th [1865].

I received about a fortnight ago your second letter on
climbing plants, dated August 31st. It has greatly in-
terested me, and it corrects and fills up a great hiatus in
1 Pringsheim's Jahrbiicher, Vol. IV., 1866.

Fritz Muller

1865— 1881] F. Ml l.I.EK 345

my paper. As I thought you could not object, I am having letter 671
your letter copied, and will send the paper to the Linnean
Society.1 I have slightly modified the arrangement of some
parts and altered only a few words, as you write as good
English as an Englishman. 1 do not quite understand your
account of the arrangement of the leaves of Strycluios, and I
think you use the word " bractea? " differently to what English
authors do ; therefore I will get Dr. Hooker to look over your
paper.

I cannot, of course, say whether the Linnean Society will
publish your paper ; but I am sure it ought to do so. As the
Society is rather poor, I fear that it will give only a few
woodcuts from your truly admirable sketches.

To F. Mliller. Letter 672

In Darwin's book on Climbing Plants, 1875,* he wrote (p. 205) : " The
conclusion is forced on our minds that the capacity of revolving, on
which most climbing plants depend, is inherent, though undeveloped,
in almost every plant in the vegetable Kingdom ,; — a conclusion which
was verified in the Power of Movement in Plants. The present letter is
interesting in referring to Fritz M idler's observations on the "revolving
nutation," or circumnutationof . •///(»; / macropkylla and Linum 7-

mum, the latter fact having been discovered by F. Mailer's daughter
Rosa. This was probably the earliest observation on the circumnutation
of a non-climbing plant, and Muller, in a paper dated 1868, and published
in Vol. V. of the JenaiscAe Zeitschrift, p. 133, calls attention to its import-
ance in relation to the evolution of the habit of climbing. The present
letter was probably written in 1865, since it refers to Mailer's paper read
before the Linnean Soc. on Dec. 7th, 1865. If so, the facts on circum-
nutation must have been communicated to Darwin some years before
their publication in the Jenaische Zeitschrift.

Down, Dec. 9th [1S65].

I have received your interesting letter of October 10th,
with its new facts on branch-tendrils. If the Linnean Society
publishes your paper," as I am sure it ought to do, I will
append a note with some of these new facts.

I forwarded immediately your MS. to Prof I Max

1 "Notes on some of the Climbing Plants near Desterro" [1S65],
Linn. Soc./ourn., IX., 1867.

s First given as a paper before the Linnean Society, and published in
the Linn. Soc. Joum.. Vol. IX.

3 Ibid., 1867, p. 344.

346 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 672 Schultze, but I did not read it, for German handwriting
utterly puzzles me, and I am so weak, I am capable of
no exertion. I took the liberty, however, of asking him to
send me a copy, if separate ones are printed, and I reminded
him about the Sponge paper.

You will have received before this my book on orchids,
and I wish I had known that you would have preferred the
English edition. Should the German edition fail to reach
you, I will send an English one. That is a curious obser-
vation of your daughter about the movement of the apex of
the stem of Linum} and would, I think, be worth following
out. I suspect many plants move a little, following the sun ;
but all do not, for I have watched some pretty carefully.

I can give you no zoological news, for I live the life of
the most secluded hermit.

I occasionally hear from Ernest Hackel, who seems as
determined as you are to work out the subject of the change
of species. You will have seen his curious paper on certain
medusae reproducing themselves by seminal generation at two
periods of growth.

On April 3rd, 1868, Darwin wrote to F. Miiller : "Your diagram of the
movements of the flower-peduncle of the Alisma is extremely curious.
I suppose the movement is of no service to the plant, but shows how
easily the species might be converted into a climber. Does it bend
through irritability when rubbed ? "

Letter 673 To F. Miiller.

Down, Sept. 25th [1866].

I have just received your letter of August 2nd, and am, as
usual, astonished at the number of interesting points which
you observe. It is quite curious how, by coincidence, you
have been observing the same subjects that have lately
interested me.

Your case of the Notylia 2 is quite new to me ; but it
seems analogous with that of Acropera, about the sexes of
which I blundered greatly in my book. I have got an

1 F. Miiller, Jenaische Zeitschrift, Bd. V., p. 137. Here, also, are
described the movements of Alisina.

2 See F. Miiller, Bot. Zeitung, 1868, p. 630; Fert. of Orchids,
Ed. 11., p. 171.

i865 -1SS1] F. M I ' 1 . 1 . 347

Acropera now in flower, and have no doubt that >ome insect, Letter 673
with a tuft of hairs on its tail, removes by the tuft, the pollini
and inserts the little viscid cap and the long pedicel into the
narrow stigmatic cavity, and leaves it there with the pollen-
masses in close contact with, but not inserted into, the -tig-
matic cavity. I find I can thus fertilise the flowers, and so
I can with Stanhopea, and I suspect that this is the case with
your Notylia. Rut I have lately had an orchis in flower —
viz. Aciiieta, which I could not anyhow fertilise. Dr. Hilde-
brand lately wrote a paper1 showing that with some orchids
the ovules are not mature and are not fertilised until months
after the pollen-tubes have penetrated the column, and you
have independently observed the same fact, which I never
suspected in the case of -/ ropera. The column of such
orchids must act almost like the spermatheca of insect
Your orchis with two leaf-like stigmas is new to me ; but
I feel guilty at your wasting your valuable time in making
such beautiful drawings for my amusement.

Your observations on those plants being sterile which grow
separately, or flower earlier than others, are very interesting
to me : they would be worth experimenting on with other
individuals. I shall give in my next book several cases of
individual plants being sterile with their own pollen. I have
actually got on my list EscliscJiol:zia - for fertilising with its
own pollen, though I did not suspect it would prove sterile,
and I will try next summer. My object is to compare the
rate of growth of plants raised from seed fertilised by pollen
from the same flower and by pollen from a distinct plant, and
1 think from what I have seen I shall arrive at interesting
results. Dr. Hildebrand 3 has lately described a curious case
of Corydalis cava which is quite sti rile with its own pollen,
but fertile with pollen of any other individual plant of tl
species. What I meant in my paper on Linunt about plants
being dimorphic in function alone, was that they should be
divided into two equal bodies functionally but not structurally
different. I have been much interested by what you -ay on
seeds which adhere to the valves being rendered conspicuous.

1 Bot. Zeitung, 1863, 1

s See Animals and P .1 Ed. 11.. p. 118.

3 Internal. Hort. C< 1 London. 1S66, quoted in Variation of

Animals and Plants, Ed. 11.. Vol. II., p. 113.

348 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 673 You will see in the new edition of the Origin 1 why I have
alluded to the beauty and bright colours of fruit ; after writing
this it troubled me that I remembered to have seen brilliantly
coloured seed, and your view occurred to me. There is a
species of peony in which the inside of the pod is crimson and
the seeds dark purple. I had asked a friend to send me some
of these seeds, to see if they were covered with anything which
could prove attractive to birds. I received some seeds the
day after receiving your letter, and I must own that the fleshy
covering is so thin that I can hardly believe it would lead
birds to devour them ; and so it was in an analogous case
with Passiflora gracilis. How is this in the cases mentioned
by you ? The whole case seems to me rather a striking one.

I wish I had heard of Mikania being a leaf-climber before
your paper2 was printed, for we thus get a good gradation
from M. scandens to Mutisia, with its little modified, leaf-like
tendrils.

I am glad to hear that you can confirm (but render still
more wonderful) Hackel's most interesting case of Linope.
Huxley told me that he thought the case would somehow be
explained away.

Leue, 674 T° F' MUller'

Down [Received Jan. 24th, 1867].

I have so much to thank you for that I hardly know how
to begin. I have received the bulbils of Oxalis, and your
most interesting letter of October 1st. I planted half the
bulbs, and will plant the other half in the spring. The case
seems to me very curious, and until trying some experiments
in crossing I can form no conjecture what the abortion of the
stamens in so irregular a manner can signify. But I fear
from what you say the plant will prove sterile, like so many
others which increase largely by buds of various kinds.
Since I asked you about Oxalis, Dr. Hildcbrand has pub-
lished a paper showing that a great number of species are

1 Origin of Species, Ed. I v., 1866, p. 238. A discussion on the origin
of beauty, including the bright colours of flowers and fruits.

- See Climbing Plants (3rd thousand, 1882), p. 116. Mikania and
Mutisia both belong to the Compositae. Mikania scandens is a twining
plant : it is another species which, by its leaf-climbing habit, supplies
a transition to the tendril-climber Mutisia. F. Midler's paper is in
Linn. Soc. Journ. IX., p. 344.

,865— i88i] !■. MlI.LF.K 349

trimorphic, like Lythrum, but he has tried hardly any Letter 674
experiments.1

I am particularly obliged for the information and
specimens of Cordial1 and shall be most grateful for seed.
I have not heard of any dimorphic species in this family.
Hardly anything in your letter interested me so much
your account and drawing of the valves of the pod of one
of the Mimosea; with the really beautiful seeds. I will send
some of these seeds to Kew to be planted. But these
seeds seem to mc to offer a very ^reat difficulty. They do
not seem hard enough to resist the triturating power of the
gizzard of a gallinaceous bird, though they might resist
that of some other birds ; for the skin is as hard as ivory.
I presume that these seeds cannot be covered with any
attractive pulp ? I soaked one of the seeds for ten hours in
warm water, which became only very slightly mucilaginous.
I think I will try whether they will pass through a fowl un-
injured.3 I hope you will observe whether any bird devours
them ; and could you get any young man to shoot some and
observe whether the seeds are found low down in the intes-
tines ? It would be well worth while to plant such seeds
with undigested seeds for comparison. An opponent of ours
might make a capital case against us by saying that here
beautiful pods and seeds have been formed not for the good
of the plant, but for the good of birds alone. These seeds
would make a beautiful bracelet for one of my daughters, if
1 had enough. 1 may just mention that Euonymus europcetis
is a case in point : the seeds are coated by a thin orange

1 Hildebrand's work, published in the Monatsb. d. Akad. d. Wiss.
Berlin, 1866, was chiefly on herbarium specimens. His experimental
work was published in the />'<»/. Zeitung, 1871.

* Cordiaceas : probably dimorphic.

3 The seeds proved to be those of Adenanthera pen The

solution of the difficulty is given in the following extract from a letter
to Midler, March 2nd, 1867 : " I wrote to India on the subject, and I hear
from Mr. J. Scott that parrots are eager for the seeds, and, wonderful as
the fact is, can split them open with their beaks ; they first collect a large
number in their beaks, and then settle themselves to split them, and in
doing so drop many ; thus 1 have no doubt they are disseminated, on
the same principle that the acorns of our oaks are most widely dissemi-
nated." Possibly a similar explanation may hold good for the brightly
coloured seeds of Abrtis prccatorius.

350 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 674 layer, which I find is sufficient to cause them to be devoured
by birds.

I have received your paper on Martha \Posoqneria *] ; it
is as wonderful as the most wonderful orchis ; Ernst Hackel
brought me the paper and stayed a day with me. I have
seldom seen a more pleasant, cordial, and frank man. He
is now in Madeira, where he is going to work chiefly on
the Medusae. His great work is now published, and I have
a copy ; but the german is so difficult I can make out but
little of it, and 1 fear it is too large a work to be translated.
Your fact about the number of seeds in the capsule of the
Maxillaria'2, came just at the right time, as I wished to give
one or two such facts. Does this orchid produce many
capsules ? I cannot answer your question about the aerial
roots of Catasetum. I hope you have received the new
edition of the Origin. Your paper on climbing plants3 is
printed, and I expect in a day or two to receive the spare
copies, and I will send off three copies as before stated, and
will retain some in case you should wish me to send them
to any one in Europe, and will transmit the remainder to
yourself.

Letter 675 To F. Miiller.

Down [received Feb. 24th, 1867].

Your letter of Nov. 2nd contained an extraordinary
amount of interesting matter. What a number of dimorphic
plants South Brazil produces : you observed in one day as
many or more dimorphic genera than all the botanists in
Europe have ever observed. When my present book is
finished I shall write a final paper upon these plants, so that
I am extremely glad to hear of your observations and to see
the dried flowers ; nevertheless, I should regret much if I
prevented you from publishing on the subject. Plumbago^
is quite new to me, though I had suspected it. It is curious
how dimorphism prevails by groups throughout the world,
showing, as I suppose, that it is an ancient character ; thus

1 Bot. Zeitung, 1866.

2 See Animals and Plants, Ed. II., Vol. II., p. 115.

3 Linn. Soc. Journal, IX., 1867, p. 344.

4 Plumbago has not been shown to be dimorphic.

i865— i88i] F. MULL 351

Hedyotis1 is dimorphic in India ; the two other genera in the Letter 675
same sub-family with / 'illarsia are dimorphic in Europe and
Ceylon; a sub-genus of Erythroxylon* is dimorphic in Ceylon,
and Oxalis with you and at the Cape of Good Hope. If
you can find a dimorphi< ■ ills it will be a new point, f
all known >pecies are trimorphic or monomorphic. The case
of Convolvulus will be new, if proved. I am doubtful about
Gesneria, and have been often myself deceived by varying
length of pistil. A difference in the size of the pollen-grains
would be conclusive evidence ; but in some cases experiments
by fertilisation can alone decide the point. As yet I know
of no case of dimorphism in flowers which are very irregular ;
such flowers being apparently always sufficiently visited and
crossed by insects.

To F. M tiller. Letter 676

Down, April 22nd [1867].
I am very sorry your papers on climbing plants never
reached you. They must be lost, but I put the stamps on
myself and I am sure they were right. I despatched on the
20th all the remaining copies, except one for myself. Your
letter of March 4th contained much interesting matter, but I
have to say this of all your letters. I am particularly glad
to hear that Oncidium flexuosum* is endemic, for I alway
thought that the cases of self-sterility with orchids in hot-
houses might have been caused by their unnatural conditions.
I am glad, also, to hear of the other analogous cases, all of
which I will give briefly in my book that is now printing.
The lessened number of good seeds in the self-fertilising
Epidendrums is to a certain extent a new case. You suggest

1 h was sent to Darwin by F. Miiller ; it seems possible, there-

fore, that Hedyotis was written by mistake for some other Rubiaceous
plant, perhaps Oldenlandia, which John Scott sent him from India.

1 No doubt Sethia.

3 Neither Convolvulus nor Gesneria have been shown to be dimorphic.

4 Set Animals and Plants, Ed. 11., Vol. II., p. 114. Observations on
Oncidium -were made by John Scott, and in Brazil by F. Miiller, who
"fertilised above one hundred flowers of the above-mentioned Oncidium

JZexuosum, which is there endemic, with its own pollen, and with that

taken from distinct plants : all the former were sterile, whilst those

fertilised by pollen from any other plant of the same species were
fertile."

352 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 676 tne comparison of the growth of plants produced from self-
fertilised and crossed seeds. I began this work last autumn,
and the result, in some cases, has been very striking ; but only,
as far as I can yet judge, with exotic plants which do not get
freely crossed by insects in this country. In some of these
cases it is really a wonderful physiological fact to see the
difference of growth in the plants produced from self-fertilised
and crossed seeds, both produced by the same parent-plant ;
the pollen which has been used for the cross having been
taken from a distinct plant that grew in the same flower-pot.
Many thanks for the dimorphic Rubiaceous plant. Three of
your Plumbagos have germinated, but not as yet any of
the Lobelias. Have you ever thought of publishing a work
which might contain miscellaneous observations on all branches
of Natural History, with a short description of the country
and of any excursions which you might take ? I feel certain
that you might make a very valuable and interesting book,
for every one of your letters is so full of good observations.
Such books, for instance Bates' Travels on the Amazons, are
very popular in England. I will give your obliging offer
about Brazilian plants to Dr. Hooker, who was to have come
here to-day, but has failed. He is an excellent good fellow,
as well as naturalist. He has lately published a pamphlet,1
which I think you would like to read ; and I will try and
get a copy and send you.

t » **, To F- Muller.

Letter 677

The following refers to the curious case of Eschscholtzia described in

Cross and Self-Fertilisation, pp. 343-4. The offspring of English plants

after growing for two generations in Brazil became self-sterile, while the

offspring of Brazilian plants became partly self-fertile in England.

Jan. 30th [1868].
. . . The flowers of Eschscholtzia when crossed with pollen
from a distinct plant produced 91 per cent, of capsules ; when
self-fertilised the flowers produced only 66 per cent, of capsules.
An equal number of crossed and self-fertilised capsules con-
tained seed by weight in the proportion of 100 to 71.

1 Sir J. D. Hooker's lecture on Insular Floras, given before the British
Association in August, 1866, is doubtless referred to. It appeared in the
Gardeners' Chronicle, and was published as a pamphlet in January, 1867.
This fact helps to fix the date of the present letter.

issi] F. MtJLLER 353

Nevertheless, the self-fertilised flowers produced an abundance Letter 677
of seed. I enclose a few crossed seeds in hopes that you will
raise a plant, cover it with a net, and observe whether it is
self-fertile; at the same time allowing several uncovered
plants to produce capsules, for the sterility formerly observed
by you seems to me very curious.

To F. M idler. Letter 678

Down, Nov. 28th [1S6SJ.

You end your letter of September 9th by saying that it
is a very dull one ; indeed, you make a very great mistake,
for it abounds with interesting facts and thoughts. Your
account of the tameness of the birds which apparently have
wandered from the interior, is very curious. But I mu>t
begin on another subject : there has been a great and very
vexatious, but unavoidable delay in the publication of your
book.1 Prof. Huxley agrees with me that Mr. Dallas is
by far the best translator, but he is much overworked and
had not quite finished the translation about a fortnight ago.
He has charge of the Museum at York, and is now trying to
get the situation of Assistant Secretary at the Geological
Society ; and all the canvassing, etc., and his removal, if he
gets the place, will, I fear, cause more than a month's delay in
the completion of the translation ; and this I very much regret.

I am particularly glad to hear that you intend to repeat
my experiments on illegitimate offspring, for no one's observa-
tions can be trusted until repeated. You will find the work
very troublesome, owing to the death of plants and accidents
of all kinds. Some dimorphic plant will probably prove too
sterile for you to raise offspring ; and others too fertile for
much sterility to be expected in their offspring. Primula is
bad on account of the difficulty of deciding which seeds may
be considered as good. I have earnestly wished that some
one would repeat these experiments, but I feared that years
would elapse before any one would take the trouble. 1 re-
ceived your paper on Bigngnia - in Bot. Zeit., and it interested

1 Facts and Arguments for Darwin, 1869, a translation by the late
Mr. Dallas of F. Muller's Fur Darwin, 1S04 : see VoL I., Letter 22-.

* See Variation of Animals and Plants, Ed. 11.. VoL II.. p. 1 17- Fritz
Muller's paper, " Befruchtungsversuche an Cipo alho (Bignon
Botamsche Zc'itun^ Sept. 25th, 1S0S, p. 625, contains an interesting

VOL. II. ^3

3$4 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 678 me much. I am convinced that if you can prove that a plant
growing in a distant place under different conditions is more
effective in fertilisation than one growing close by, you will
make a great step in the essence of sexual reproduction.

Prof. Asa Gray and Dr. Hooker have been staying here,
and, oddly enough, they knew nothing of your paper on
Martha} though the former was aware of the curious move-
ments of the stamens, but so little understood the structure
of the plant that he thought it was probably a dimorphic
species. Accordingly, I showed them your drawings and
gave them a little lecture, and they were perfectly charmed
with your account. Hildebrand 2 has repeated his experi-
ments on potatoes, and so have I, but this summer with no
result.

Letter 679 To F. M tiller.

Down, March 14th [1869].

I received some time ago a very interesting letter from
you with many facts about Oxalis, and about the non-seeding
and spreading of one species. I may mention that our
common O. acetosella varies much in length of pistils and
stamens, so that I at first thought it was certainly dimorphic,
but proved it by experiment not to be so. Boiseria 3 has after
all seeded well with me when crossed by opposite form, but
very sparingly when self-fertilised. Your case of Faraviea 4

foreshadowing of the generalisation arrived at in Cross and Self-Fertilisa-
tion. Muller wrote : " Are the three which grow near each other
seedlings from the same mother-plant or perhaps from seeds of the same
capsule ? Or have they, from growing in the same place and under the
same conditions, become so like each other that the pollen of one has
hardly any more effect on the others than their own pollen ? Or, on the
contrary, were the plants originally one— i.e., are they suckers from a
single stock, which have gained a slight degree of mutual fertility in the
course of an independent life ? Or, lastly, is the result ' ein neckische
Zufall.' " (The above is a free translation of Midler's words.)

1 F. Muller has described (Bot. Zeitung, 1866, p. 129) the explosive
mechanism by which the pollen is distributed in Martha (Posoquetia)
fragrans. He also gives an account of the remarkable arrangement for
ensuring cross-fertilisation. See Forms of Flowers, Ed. II., p. 131.

3 See Letter 206, Vol. I.

3 This perhaps refers to Boissiera {Ladizabala).

4 See Forms of Flowers, Ed. II., p. 129. Faramea is placed among
the dimorphic species.

1865 1881] F. M U I.I I 355

astonishes mo. Arc you Mire there is no mistake? The Letter 679
difference in size of flower and wonderful difference in
and structure of pollen-grains naturally make me rather
sceptical. I never fail to admire and to be surprised at the
number of points to which you attend. I go on slowly at
my next book, and though I never am idle, I make but slow
progress ; for I am often interrupted by being unwell, and my
subject of sexual selection has grown into a very large one.
1 have also had to correct a new edition of my Origin} and
this has taken me six weeks, for science progress) > at railroad
speed. I cannot tell you how rejoiced I am that your book
is at last out ; for whether it sells largely or not, I am certain
it will produce a great effect on all capable judges, though
these arc few in number.

P.S. — I have just received your letter of Jan. 12th. I
am greatly interested by what you say mi Eschscholtzia ; 1
wish your plants had succeeded better. It seems pretty clear
that the species is much more self-sterile under the climate of
Brazil than here, and this seems to me an important result.2
1 have no spare seeds at present, but will send for some from
the nurseryman, which, though not so good for our purpose,
will be worth trying. I can send some of my own in the
autumn. You could simply cover up separately two or three
single plants, and see if they will seed without aid, — mine did
abundantly. Very many thanks for seeds of Oralis : how 1
wish I had more strength and time to carry on these experi-
ments, but when I write in the morning, 1 have hardly heart
to do anything in the afternoon. Your grass is most wonder-
ful. You ought to send account to the Bot. Zeitung. Could
you not ascertain whether the barbs are sensitive, and how-
soon they become spiral in the bud ? Your bird is, I have n>.>
doubt, the Molothrus mentioned in my Journal of Travels^
p. 52, as representing a North American species, both with
cuckoo-like habits. 1 know that seeds from same spike
transmitted to a certain extent their proper qualities ; but
as far as I know, no one has hitherto shown how far this
holds good, and the fact is very interesting. The experiment
would be well worth trying with flowers bearing different
numbers of petals. Your explanation agrees beautifully with

1 The 5th edition,
^ee Letter 677.

356 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 679 the hypothesis of pangenesis, and delights me. If you try
other cases, do draw up a paper on the subject of inheritance
of separate flowers for the Bot. Zeitang or some journal.
Most men, as far as my experience goes, are too ready to
publish, but you seem to enjoy making most interesting
observations and discoveries, and are sadly too slow in
publishing.

Letter 680 To F. Miiller.

Barmouth, July 18th, 1869.

I received your last letter shortly before leaving home for
this place. Owing to this cause and to having been more
unwell than usual I have been very dilatory in writing to you.
When I last heard, about six or eight weeks ago, from Mr.
Murray, one hundred copies of your book 1 had been sold, and
I daresay five hundred may now be sold. This will quite
repay me, if not all the money ; for I am sure that your book
will have got into the hands of a good many men capable of
understanding it : indeed, I know that it has. But it is too
deep for the general public. I sent you two or three reviews —
one of which, in the Athenceum? was unfavourable ; but this
journal has abused me, and all who think with me, for many
years. 1 enclose two more notices, not that they are worth
sending : some other brief notices have appeared. The case
of the Abutilon 3 sterile with some individuals is remarkable :
I believe that I had one plant of Reseda odorata which was
fertile with own pollen, but all that I have tried since were
sterile except with pollen from some other individual. I
planted the seeds of the Abutilon, but I fear that they were
crushed in the letter. Your Escltscholtzia plants were growing
well when I left home, to which place we shall return by the
end of this month, and I will observe whether they are self-
sterile. I sent your curious account of the monstrous Begonia
to the Linnean Society/ and I suppose it will be published
in the. Journal. I sent the extract about grafted orange trees

1 Facts and Arguments for Dartoin, 1869 : see Vol. I., Letter 227.
3 Athenaeum, 1869, p. 431.

3 " Bestaubungsversuche an Abutilon-Arten." Jenaische Zeitschr., VII.,
1873, p. 22.

4 " On the Modification of the Stamens in a Species of Begonia."
Journ. Linn. Soc, XI., 1871, p. 472.

1865-1881] I Mt II 357

to the Gardeners' Chronicle^ where it appeared. I hive lately Letter
drawn up some notes for a French translation "f my Orchis
book: I took out your letters to make an abstract of your
numerous discussions, but I found 1 had not strength or time
t<> do so, and this caused inc great regret I have [in the
French edition] alluded to your work, which will also be
published in English,1 as you will see in my paper, and which
I will send you.

P.S. — By an odd chance, since I wrote the beginning of
this letter, I have received one from Dr. Hooker, who has
been reading Fur Darwin : he finds that he has not know-
ledge enough for the first part ; but says that Chapters X.
and XI. "strike me as remarkably good." He is also par-
ticularly struck with one of your highly suggestive remarks
in the note to p. l 19. Assuredly all who read your book will
greatly profit by it, and I rejoice that it has appeared in
English.

To F. MUller. Letter 681

Down, Dec. 1st [1869].

I am much obliged for your letter of October 1 8th, with
the curious account of Abutilony and for the seeds. A friend
of mine, Mr. Farrer, has lately been studying the fertilisation
of Passiflora* and concluded from the curiously crooked
passage into the nectary that it could not be fertilised by hum-
ming-birds ; but that Tacsonia was thus fertilised. Therefore
I sent him the passage from your letter, and I enclose a copy
of his answer. If you are inclined to gratify him by making
a few observations on this subject I shall be much obliged,
and will send them on to him. I enclose a copy of my rough
notes on your Eschscholtsia, as you might like to see them.
Somebody has sent me from Germany two papers by you,
one with a most curious account of Alisnta,3 and the other on
crustaceans. Your observations on the branchiae and heart
have interested me extremely.

Alex. Agassiz has just paid me a visit with his wife. He

1 "Notes on the Fertilisation of Orchids." Ann. J/;. \ '. //is/.,
1869, Vol. IV., p. 141. The paper gives an English version of the notes
prepared for the French edition of the Orchid book.

1 See Letters 701 and 704.

■ vSee Letter 672,

358 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 681 has been in England two or three months, and is now going
to tour over the Continent to see all the zoologists. We liked
him very much. He is a great admirer of yours, and he tells
me that your correspondence and book first made him believe
in evolution. This must have been a great blow to his father,
who, as he tells me, is very well, and so vigorous that he can
work twice as long as he (the son) can.

Dr. Meyer has sent me his translation of Wallace's Malay
Archipelago, which is a valuable work ; and as I have no use
for the translation, I will this day forward it to you by post,
but, to save postage, via England.

Letter 682 To F. Miiller.

Down, May 12th [1870].

I thank you for your two letters of December 15th and
March 29th, both abounding with curious facts. I have been
particularly glad to hear in your last about the EscJiscJioltzia j1
for I am now rearing crossed and self-fertilised plants, in
antagonism to each other, from your semi-sterile plants, so
that I may compare this comparative growth with that of the
offspring of English fertile plants. I have forwarded your
postcript about Passiflora, with the seeds, to Mr. Farrer, who
I am sure will be greatly obliged to you ; the turning up of
the pendant flower plainly indicates some adaptation. When
1 next go to London I will take up the specimens of butter-
flies, and show them to Mr. Butler, of the British Museum,
who is a learned lepidopterist and interested on the subject.
This reminds me to ask you whether you received my letter
[asking] about the ticking butterfly, described at p. 33 of my
Journal of Researches ;2 viz., whether the sound is in any way
sexual ? Perhaps the species does not inhabit your island.

The case described in your last letter of the trimorphic
monocotyledon Poulcderiaz is grand. I wonder whether I
shall ever have time to recur to this subject ; I hope I may,
for I have a good deal of unpublished material.

1 See Letter 677.

3 Papilio feronia, a Brazilian species capable of making " a clicking
noise, similar to that produced by a toothed wheel passing under a
spring catch."— Journal, 1879, p. 34.

3 This case interested Darwin as the only instance of heterostylism
in Monocotyledons. See Forms of Flowers, Ed. II., p. 183. F. Midler's
paper is in the Jenaische Zcitschrift, 1871.

i i mi i vi ullef 35

Thank you for telling me about the first-formed flower Lettei
having additional petals, stamens, carpels, etc., for it i

ible means of transition of form ; it seems also connected
with the fact on which I have insisted of peloric flowers being
o often terminal. As pelorism1 is strongly inherited and
[ I ] have just got a curious case of this in a leguminous plant
from India), would it not be worth while to fertilise somi
your early flowers having additional organs with pollen from
a similar flower, and see whether you could not make a race
thus characterised ? Some of your Abutilons have germinated,
but I have been very unfortunate with most of your seed.

You will remember having given me in a former letter
,in account of a very curious popular belief in regard to the
subsequent progeny of asses, which have borne mules, and
now 1 have another ca.se almost exactly like that of Lord
Morton's marc, in which it is said the shape of the hoots in
the subsequent progeny are affected. (Pangenesis will turn
out true some day !) 2

A few months ago I received an interesting letter and
paper from your brother, who has taken up a new and good
line of investigation, viz., the adaptation in insects for tl
fertilisation of tlowcrs.

The only scientific man I have seen for several months
is Kollikcr, who came here with Giinther, and whom I liked
extremely.

I am working away very hard at my book on man and on
sexual selection, but I do not suppose I shall go to press till
late in the autumn.

To F. Muller. Letter 683

Down, Jan. 1st. 1 S74.

No doubt 1 owe to your kindness two pamphlets' received
a few days ago, which have interested me in an extraordinary

1 See Letters 588, 589. Also Variation under Domestication^ Ed. II.,
Vol. I., pp. 388-9

* See Animals and Plants^ Ed. 11., Vol. I., p. 435. For recent work
on telegony see Ewart's " Experimental Investigations on Telegony," Phil.
Trans. R. Soc, 1899. A -ood account o( the subject is given in the
Quarterly Revu . 1, p. 404. See also Letter 275. Vol. I.

:i This refers to F. Mailer's " Bestaubungsversuche an Abutilon-
Arten " in (he/enaiscAe Zeitschr., Vol. VII., which are thus referred to by
Darwin {Cross <uta' Self Pert., pp. 305-6) : " Fritz Muller has shown by his

360 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 683 degree. It is quite new to me what you show about the
effects of relationship in hybrids — that is to say, as far as
direct proof is concerned. I felt hardly any doubt on the
subject, from the fact of hybrids becoming more fertile when
grown in number in nursery gardens,1 exactly the reverse of
what occurred with Gartner. The paper on Termites is even
still more interesting, and the analogy with cleistogene flowers
is wonderful.2 The manner in which you refer to my chapter
on crossing is one of the most elegant compliments which I
have ever received.

I have directed to be sent to you Belt's Nicaragua, which
seems to me the best Natural History book of travels ever
published. Pray look to what he says about the leaf-carrying
ant storing the leaves up in a minced state to generate
mycelium, on which he supposes that the larvae feed. Now,
could you open the stomachs of these ants and examine
the contents, so as to prove or disprove this remarkable
hypothesis?3

Letter 684 To F. Miiller.

Down, May 9th, 1877.

I have been particularly glad to receive your letter of
March 25th on Pontederia, for I am now printing a small
book on heterostyled plants, and on some allied subjects.
I feel sure you will not object to my giving a short account
of the flowers of the new species which you have sent me.
I am the more anxious to do so as a writer in the United

valuable experiments on hybrid Abutilons, that the union of brothers
and sisters, parents and children, and of other near relations is highly
injurious to the fertility of the offspring." The Termite paper is in the
same volume (viz., VII.) of the Jenaische Zeitschr.

1 When many hybrids are grown together the pollination by near
relatives is minimised.

2 On the back of his copy of Midler's paper Darwin wrote : "There
exist imperfectly developed male and female Termites, with wings much
shorter than those of queen and king, which serve to continue the species
if a fully developed king and queen do not after swarming (which no
doubt is for an occasional cross) enter [the] nest. Curiously like cleisto-
gamic flowers."

3 The hypothesis has been completely confirmed by the researches
of Moller, a nephew of F. Midler's : see his Brasilische Pilzblumcn
(Bo/an. Mittkeilgn. aus den Tropc?i, hrsg. von A. F. W. Schimper,
Heft 7).

1865 — iSSiJ I Mil. LI I.

States has described a species, and ns to d"iibt whether Lett©
it is heterostyled, for he thinks the diffi rence in the length of
the pistil depends merely on its growth! In my new book
I shall use all the information and specimens which you have
sent me with respect to the heterostyled plants, and your
published notice.

One chapter will be devoted to cleistogamic species, and
I will just notice your new grass case. My son Francis
desires me to thank you much for your kindness with respect
to the plants which bury their seeds.

I never fail to feel astonished, when I receive one of your
letters, at the number of new facts you arc continually observ-
ing. With respect to the great supposed subterranean animal,
may not the belief have arisen from the natives havin
seen large skeletons embedded in cliffs? I remember finding
on the banks of the Parana a skeleton of a Mastodon, and the
Gauchos concluded that it was a burrowing animal like the
Bizcacha.'

I o F. Muller. Le„er ■

Down, May 14th [1877].

I wrote to you a few days ago to thank you about Ponte-
deria, and now I am going to ask you to add one more to the
many kindnesses which you have done for me. I have made
many observations on the waxy secretion on leaves which
throw ^\1 water (r.^'., cabbage, Tropceolutn), and 1 am now
going to continue my observations. Docs any sensitive
species of Mimosa grow in your neighbourhood? If so, will
you observe whether the leaflets keep shut during long con-
tinued warm rain. I find that the leaflets open if the}' arc
continuously syringed with water at a temperature of about
19 C, but if the water is at a temperature of 33 — }> C, they
keep shut for more than two hours, and probably longer. If
the plant is continuously shaken so as to imitate wind the

1 On the supposed existence in Patagonia oi' a itic land-sloth,

see Natural Science, XIII., 1878. p. 28S, where Ameghino's discovery
of the skin of Neomylodon listed was practically first made known, sin
his privately published pamphlet was not generally seen. The animal
was afterwards identified with a Glossotkerium^ closely allied to Owen's
G\ Darwini, which has been named Glossotherium listed ox Grypotherium
domestcium. For a good account of the discoveries see Smith Woodward
in Natural Science, XV., 1899, p. 351, where the literature is given.

362 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 685 leaflets soon open. How is this with the native plants during
a windy day ? I find that some other plants — for instance,
Desmodium and Cassia — when syringed with water, place their
leaves so that the drops fall quickly off; the position assumed
differing somewhat from that in the so-called sleep. Would
you be so kind as to observe whether any [other] plants place
their leaves during rain so as to shoot off the water ; and if
there are any such I should be very glad of a leaf or two to
ascertain whether they are coated with a waxy secretion.1

There is another and very different subject, about which I
intend to write, and should be very glad of a little information.
Are earthworms {Lumbricus) common in S. Brazil,2 and do
they throw up on the surface of the ground numerous castings
or vermicular masses such as we so commonly see in Europe?
Are such castings found in the forests beneath the dead
withered leaves? I am sure I can trust to your kindness to
forgive me for asking you so many questions.

To F. Miiller.

Letter 686 Down> july 24th> l87g

Many thanks for the five kinds of seeds ; all have germi-
nated, and the Cassia seedlings have interested me much, and I
daresay that I shall find something curious in the other plants.
Nor have I alone profited, for Sir J. Hooker, who was here on
Sunday, was very glad of some of the seeds for Kew. I am
particularly obliged for the information about the earthworms.
1 suppose the soil in your forests is very loose, for in ground
which has lately been dug in England the worms do not come
to the surface, but deposit their castings in the midst of the
loose soil.

I have some grand plants (and I formerly sent seeds to
Kew) of the cleistogamic grass, but they show no signs of
producing flowers of any kind as yet. Your case of the
panicle with open flowers being sterile is parallel to that of
Leersia oiyzoides. I have always fancied that cross-fertilisation
would perhaps make such panicles fertile.3

1 See Letters 737-41.

3 F. Midler's reply is given in Vegetable Mould, p. 122.

3 The meaning of this sentence is somewhat obscure. Darwin
apparently implies that the perfect flowers, borne on the panicles which
occasionally emerge from the sheath, might be fertile if pollinated from
another individual. See Forms of Flowers, p. 334,

i86_s F MULLE1

I am worl ing awaj a hard as 1 can at all the multifarious i.citcr 686
kinds of movements of plants, and am trying to reduce
tru in to some simple inks, but wh< ther I shall succeed I do
not know.

I have sent the curious lepidopteron case to Mr. Meldola.

F. Miiller to C. Darv\ in. i , ... ,

In Noveml" r, [880, on re< i ipt of an account of a flood in Brazil from
which Fritz Miillei had barely escaped with his life {Life and I \
III., 242); Darwin immediately wrote to Hermann Miiller licgging to
be allowed to help in making good any loss in books or scientific instru-
ments that his brother had sustained. It is this offer ol help that is
referred to in the first paragraph of the following letter : Darwin repents
the offer in letter 690.

Blumenau, Sa Catharina, Brazil, Jan. 9th, 1881.

I do not know how to express [to] you my deep heartfelt
gratitude for the generous offer which you made to my
brother on hearing of the late dreadful flood of the Itajahy.
From you, dear sir, 1 should have accepted assistance without
hesitation if I had been in need of it ; but fortunately, though
we had to leave our house for more than a week, and on
returning found it badly damaged, my losses have not been
very great.

1 must thank you also for your wonderful book on the
movements of plants, which arrived here on New Year's Day.
I think nobody else will have been delighted more than I
was with the results which you have arrived at by so many
admirably conducted experiments and observations; since 1
observed the spontaneous revolving movement of Alisina I
had seen similar movements in so many and so different
plants that I felt much inclined to consider spontaneous
revolving movement or circumnutation as common to all
plants and the movements of climbing plants as a special
modification ^l that general phenomenon. .And this you
have now convincingly, nay, superabundantly, proved to be
the case.

I was much struck with the fact that with you Maranta
did not sleep for two nights after having its leaves violently
shaken by wind, for here we have very cold nights only after
storms from the west or south-west, and it would be very
strange if the leaves of our numerous species of Marantacege

364 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 687 should be prevented by these storms to assume their usual
nocturnal position, just when nocturnal radiation was most to
be feared. It is rather strange, also, that Pkaseolus vulgaris
should not sleep during the early part of the summer, when
the leaves are most likely to be injured during cold nights.
On the contrary, it would not do any harm to many sub-
tropical plants, that their leaves must be well illuminated
during the day in order that they may assume at night a
vertical position ; for, in our climate at least, cold nights are
always preceded by sunny days.

Of nearly allied plants sleeping very differently I can give
you some more instances. In the genus Olyra (at least, in
the one species observed by me) the leaves bend down verti-
cally at night ; now, in Endlicher's Genera plantarum this
genus immediately precedes StrepJiium, the leaves of which
you saw rising vertically.

In one of two species of PJiyllantJius, growing as weeds
near my house, the leaves of the erect branches bend upwards
at night, while in the second species, with horizontal branches,
they sleep like those of PJiyllantJius Niruri or of Cassia. In
this second species the tips of the branches also are curled
downwards at night, by which movement the youngest leaves
are yet better protected. From their vertical nyctitropic
position the leaves of this PJiyllantJius might return to
horizontally, traversing 900, in two ways, either to their own
or to the opposite side of the branch ; on the latter way no
rotation would be required, while on the former each leaf must
rotate on its own axis in order that its upper surface may be
turned upwards. Thus the way to the wrong side appears to
be even less troublesome. And indeed, in some rare cases I
have seen three, four or even almost all the leaves of one side
of a branch horizontally expanded on the opposite side, with
their upper surfaces closely appressed to the lower surfaces of
the leaves of that side.

This PJiyllantJius agrees with Cassia not only in its manner
of sleeping, but also by its leaves being paraheliotropic.1 Like
those of some Cassice its leaves take an almost perfectly
vertical position, when at noon, on a summer day, the sun is

1 Paraheliotropism is the movement by which some leaves temporarily
direct their edges to the source of light. See Movements of Plants,
p. 445-

, 1S81] F. M i l.i 365

nearly in the zenith; but I doubt whether this parahelio- Lette - -
tropisra will be observable in E d. To-day, though con-

tinuing to be fully exposed to the sun, at 3 p.m. the leaves
had aliead\- returned to a nearly horizontal position. As soon
as there arc ripe seeds I will send you some; of our other
species of Phyllantkus I enclose a few seeds in this letter.

In several species of Hedychium the lateral halves of the
leaves when exposed to bright sunshine, bend downwards
that the lateral margins meet. It is curious that a hybrid
Hedychium in my garden shows scarcely any trace of this
paraheliotropism, while both the parent species are very
parahcliotropic.

Might not the inequality of the cotyledons of Citrus and
of Pachira be attributed to the pressure, which the several
embryos enclosed in the same seed exert upon each other?
I do not know Pachira aquatica, but [in] a species, of which 1
have a tree in my garden, all the seeds are polyembryonic,
and so were almost all the seeds of Citrus which 1 examined.
With Coffea arabica also seeds including two embryos are
not very rare ; but I have not yet observed whether in this
case the cotyledons be inequal.

I repeated to-day Duval-Jouve's measurements ' on Bryo-
phyllum calycinum ; but mine did not agree with his ; they
are as follows : —

Distances between the tips of the upper pair of lea^

January yili.

iSSi

3 A

.M.

1 1

>.M.

6

I'M.

First plant

54 mm

• 43

mm.

• 36

mm.

2nd „

.

.

I]

.

■ 25

..

• 23

••

3rd „

.

. 2S

))

• 27

>>

t —
-/

••

4th „

• 51

"

. 46

M

• 39

n

5th ,.

. 6i

•■

•

• 52

..

• -45

•■

-»->1

193

170

"

To

F.

M

tiller.

I.

Down, Feb. 23rd, 1881.

Your letter has interested me greatly, as have so many
during many past years. 1 thought that you would not

1 Power of Movement in Plants, p. 237. F. Mutter's measurements
show, however, that there i-- a tendeni y in the leaves to be men' highly
inclined at night than in the middle of the day, and so tar they ,;.
with Duval-Jouve's results.

366 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 688 object to my publishing in Nature x some of the more striking
facts about the movements of plants, with a few remarks
added to show the bearing of the facts. The case of the
Phyllanthus,2 which turns up its leaves on the wrong side,
is most extraordinary and ought to be further investigated.
Do the leaflets sleep on the following night in the usual
manner ? Do the same leaflets on successive nights move
in the same strange manner ? I was particularly glad to
hear of the strongly marked cases of paraheliotropism. I
shall look out with much interest for the publication about
the figs.3 The creatures which you sketch are marvellous,
and I should not have guessed that they were hymenoptera.
Thirty or forty years ago I read all that I could find about
caprification, and was utterly puzzled. I suggested to
Dr. Criiger in Trinidad to investigate the wild figs, in
relation to their cross-fertilisation, and just before he died
he wrote that he had arrived at some very curious results,
but he never published, as I believe, on the subject.

I am extremely glad that the inundation did not so
greatly injure your scientific property, though it would have
been a real pleasure to me to have been allowed to have
replaced your scientific apparatus.4 I do not believe that
there is any one in the world who admires your zeal in
science and wonderful powers of observation more than I
do. I venture to say this, as I feel myself a very old man,
who probably will not last much longer.

P.S. — With respect to PJiyllantJias, I think that it would be
a good experiment to cut off most of the leaflets on one side of
the petiole, as soon as they are asleep and vertically dependent ;
when the pressure is thus removed, the opposite leaflets will
perhaps bend beyond their vertically dependent position ; if
not, the main petiole might be a little twisted so that the
upper surfaces of the dependent and now unprotected leaflets
should face obliquely the sky when the morning comes. In
this case diaheliotropism would perhaps conquer the ordinary
movements of the leaves when they awake, and [assume] their
diurnal horizontal position. As the leaflets are alternate, and

1 Nature, March 3rd, 1881, p. 409.
8 See Letter 687.

3 F. Miiller published on Caprification in Kosmos, 1882.

4 See Letter 687.

1S65-1881] F. Mi 1.1 3'

as the upper surface will be somewhat exposed to the dawi
light, it is perhaps diaheliotropism which explains your extra-
ordinary case.

To F. Muller. I etter 689

11, April i2th, i

1 have delayed answering your last letter of Feb. J?th,
as I was just sending to the printers the MS. of a very little
book "ii the habits of earthworms, of which I will of con

scud you a copy when published. I have been very much
interested by your new facts on paraheliotropism, as I think
that they justify my giving a name to this kind of movement,

about which 1 long doubted. I have this morning drawn up
an account of your observations, which I will send in a few
da\s to Nature} I have thought that you would nut object
to my giving precedence to paraheliotropism, which has been
so little noticed. I will send you a copy of Nature when
published. I am glad that I was not in too great a hurry
in publishing about Lagers traemia? I have procured some
plants of Melastomaceae, but I fear that they will not flower
for two years, and 1 may be in my grave before I can repeat
my trials. As far as I can imperfectly judge from my
observations, the difference in colour of the anthers in this
family depends ^w one set of anthers being partially aborted.
I wrote to K.cw to get plants with differently coloured
anthers, but I learnt very little, as describers of dried plants
do not attend to such points. I have, however, sowed seeds

1 Nature, 1SS1, p. 603. Curious facts are given on the movements
of Cassia, Phyllanthus sp., Desmodium sp. 1 ■ takes up a sunlight

position unlike its own characteristic night-position, but resembling rather
that of Hamatoxylon (see Power of Movement, fig 153, p. 369). t'ne
species of Phyllanthus takes up in sunshine the nyctitropic attitude
of another species. And the same sort of relation occurs in the genus
Bauhinia.

3 Lagerstramia was doubtfully placed anion- the hi led plants

{Forms of Flowers, p. 167). F. Midler's observations showed that a
totally different interpretation u( the two sizes (,| stamen is possible.
Namely, that one set serves merely to attract pollen-collecting bees, who
in the act of visiting the flowers transfer the pollen of the longer stamens
to other flowers. A case of this sort in Heeria, a Melastomad, w
described by Muller (Nature, Aug. 4th, 1881, p. 308'. and the view was
applied to the cases of Lagerstroemia and Heti it a later date

{Nature, 1883, p. 364). See Letters 620-30.

368 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 689 of two kinds, suggested to me as probable. I have, therefore,
been extremely glad to receive the seeds of Heteranthera
reniformis. As far as I can make out it is an aquatic plant ;
and whether I shall succeed in getting it to flower is doubt-
ful. Will you be so kind as to send me a postcard telling
me in what kind of station it grows. In the course of next
autumn or winter, I think that I shall put together my notes
(if they seem worth publishing) on the use or meaning of
" bloom," 1 or the waxy secretion which makes some leaves
glaucous. I think that I told you that my experiments had
led me to suspect that the movement of the leaves of Mimosa,
Desmodium and Cassia, when shaken and syringed, was to
shoot off the drops of water. If you are caught in heavy
rain, I should be very much obliged if you would keep this
notion in your mind, and look to the position of such leaves.
You have such wonderful powers of observation that your
opinion would be more valued by me than that of any other
man. I have among my notes one letter from you on the
subject, but I forget its purport. I hope, also, that you may
be led to follow up your very ingenious and novel view on
the two-coloured anthers or pollen, and observe which kind
is most gathered by bees.

Letter 690 To F. Muller.

[Patterdale], June 21st, 1881.
I should be much obliged if you could without much
trouble send me seeds of any heterostyled herbaceous plants
{i.e. a species which would flower soon), as it would be easy
work for me to raise some illegitimate seedlings to test their
degree of infertility. The plant ought not to have very small
flowers. I hope that you received the copies of Nature,2
with extracts from your interesting letters, and 1 was glad
to see a notice in Kosmos on Phyllanthus? I am writing this

1 See Letters 736-40.

8 Nature, March 3rd, 1881, Vol. XXIII., p. 409, contains a letter from
C. Darwin on " Movements of Plants," with extracts from Fritz Miiller's
letter. Another letter, " On the Movements of Leaves," was published in
Nature, April 28th, 1881, p. 603, with notes on leaf-movements sent to
Darwin by Muller.

3 " Verirrte Blatter," by Fritz Muller {Kosmos, Vol. V, p. 141, 18,81).
In this article an account is given of a species of Phyllanthus, a weed
in Miiller's garden. See Letter 687.

1865-1881] F. MULL! 3'

note away from my home, but before I left I had tl 690

tion of seeing PhyllantJius sleeping. Someofthe seeds which
you so kindly scut uic would not germinate, or had not then
, minuted. I receivi da l< tter yesterday from 1 n. Breitenbach,
and he tells me that you lost many of your b , the

desolating flood from which you suffered. Forgive me, but
why should you not order, through your brother Hermann,
books, etc., to the amount of £\oo, and I would send a
cheque to him as soon as I heard the exact amount? This
would be no inconvenience to me ; on the contrary, it
would be an honour and lasting pleasure to me to have
aided you in your invaluable scientific work to this small
and trifling extent.1

To F. M idler. ., .,

The following extract from a letter to F. Miiller shows what was
the nature of Darwin's interest in the effect of carbonate of ammonia on

roots, etc. He was, we think, wrong in adhering to the belief that the
movements oi aggregated masses are of an amoeboid nature. The
masses change shape, just as clouds do under the moul ling action of the
wind. In the plant cell the moulding agent is the flowing protoplasm
but the masses themselves are passive.

Sept. 10th, 1 ss 1 .

Perhaps you may remember that I described in In-
sectivorous Plants a really curious phenomenon, which I call
the aggregation of the protoplasm in the cells of the tentacles.
None of the great German botanists will admit that the
moving masses arc composed of protoplasm, though it is
astonishing to me that anyone could watch the movement
and doubt its nature. But these doubts have led me I
observe analogous f.icts, and I hope to succeed in proving
my case.

To F. Miiller. . tl

Let 1 1

13th, 1

I received a few days ago a small box (registered) con-
taining dried flower-heads with brown seeds somewhat sculp-
tured t>n the sides. There was v\^ name, and I should be
much obliged if some time you would tell me what these
seeds are. I have planted them.

I sent you some time ago my little book on earthworms,

1 See Letter 687, also Life an .II I., p. 242.

VOL. II. 24

370 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 692 which, though of no importance, has been largely read in
England. I have little or nothing to tell you about myself.
I have for a couple of months been observing the effects of
carbonate of ammonia on chlorophyll and on the roots of
certain plants,1 but the subject is too difficult for me, and I
cannot understand the meaning of some strange facts which I
have observed. The mere recording new facts is but dull work.
Professor Wiesner has published a book,2 giving a different
explanation to almost every fact which I have given in my Power
of Movement in Plants. I am glad to say that he admits that
almost all my statements are true. I am convinced that many
of his interpretations of the facts are wrong, and I am glad to
hear that Professor Pfeffer is of the same opinion ; but I believe
that he is right and I wrong on some points. I have not the
courage to retry all my experiments, but I hope to get my son
Francis to try some fresh ones to test Wiesner's explanations.
But I do not know why I have troubled you with all this.

Letter 693 To F. Muller.

[4, Bryanston St.], Dec. 19th, 1881.

1 hope that you may find time to go on with your experi-
ments on such plants as Lagerstrcemia, mentioned in your
letter cf October 29th, for I believe you will arrive at new
and curious results, more especially if you can raise two sets
of seedlings from the two kinds of pollen.

Many thanks for the facts about the effect of rain and mud
in relation to the waxy secretion. I have observed many
instances of the lower side being protected better than the
upper side, in the case, as I believe, of bushes and trees, so
that the advantage in low-growing plants is probably only an
incidental one.3 As I am writing away from my home, I

1 Published under the title " The Action of Carbonate of Ammonia on
the Roots of Certain Plants and on Chlorophyll Bodies," Linn. Soc.Journ.,
XIX., 1882, pp. 239-61, 262-84.

2 See Letter 763.

3 The meaning is here obscure : it appears to us that the significance
of bloom on the lower surface of the leaves of both trees and herbs
depends on the frequency with which all or a majority of the stomata
are on the lower surface — where they are better protected from wet (even
without the help of bloom) than on the exposed upper surface. On the
correlation between bloom and stomata, see Francis Darwin Linn., Soc.
Journ., XXII., p. 99.

1868— 1881] M ISC KL1. A N E «H 37I

have been unwilling to try more than one leaf <>f the Passiflora, Letter 693
and this came out of the water quite dry on the lower surface
and quite wet on the upper. I have not yet begun to put my
notes together on this subject, and do not at all know whether
I shall be able to make much of it. The oddest little fact
which I have observed i-- thai with Trifolium resupinatum,
one halt of the leaf (I think the right-hand side, when the leaf
is viewed from the apex is protected by waxy secretion, and
not the other half; ' so that when the leaf is dipped into water,
exactly half the leaf comes out dry and half wet. What the
meaning of this can be I cannot even conjecture. I read last
night your very interesting article in Kostnos on Crotalaria,
and so was very glad to see the dried leaves sent by you : it
seems to me a very curious case. I rather doubt whether it
will apply to Lupinus, for, unless my memory deceives me, all
the leaves of the same plant sometimes behaved in the same
manner ; but I will try and get some of the same seeds of
the Lupinus, and sow them in the spring. Old age, however,
is telling on me, and it troubles me to have more than one
subject at a time on hand.

In a letter to F. Miiller (Sept. 10, 1881) occurs a sentence which
may appropriately close this series : " I often feel rather ashamed of
myself for asking for so many things from you, and for taking up so
much of your valuable time, but I can assure you that I feel grateful."

ill. Miscellaneous, 1868— 1881.

To G. Bentham.

Down, April 22nd, 1S6S. Letter 6q*

I have been extremely much pleased by your letter, and
I take it as a very great compliment that you should have
written to me at such length. ... 1 am not at all surprised
that you cannot digest pangenesis : it is enough to give any
one an indigestion ; but to my mind the idea has been an
immense relief, as I could not endure to keep so many large
classes of facts all floating loose in my mind without some thread
of connection to tie them together in a tantdble method.

o o

'In the above passage "leaf" should be "leaflet": for a figure of
Trifolium resupinatum see Letter 740

372 BOTANY [Chai\ XI

Letter 694 With respect to the men who have recently written on the
crossing of plants, I can at present remember only Hildebrand,
Fritz Miiller, Delpino, and G. Hcnslow ; but I think there are
others. I feel sure that Hildebrand is a very good observer,
for I have read all his papers, and during the last twenty
years I have made unpublished observations on many of the
plants which he describes. [Most of the criticisms which I
sometimes meet with in French works against the frequency
of crossing I am certain are the result of mere ignorance.
I have never hitherto found the rule to fail that when an
author describes the structure of a flower as specially
adapted for self-fertilisation, it is really adapted for crossing.
The Fumariacese offer a good instance of this, and Treviranus
threw this order in my teeth ; but in Corydalis Hildebrand
shows how utterly false the idea of self-fertilisation is. This
author's paper on Salvia l is really worth reading, and I have
observed some species, and know that he is accurate].2
Judging from a long review in the Bot. Zeitung? and from
what I know of some of the plants, I believe Delpino's article
especially on the Apocynea;, is excellent ; but I cannot read
Italian. Perhaps you would like just to glanceat such pamphlets
as I can lay my hands on, and therefore I will send them, as
if you do not care to see them you can return them at once ;
and this will cause you less trouble than writing to say you do
not care to see them. With respect to Primula, the one point
about which I feel positive is that the Bardfield 4 and common
oxlips are fundamentally distinct plants, and that the com-
mon oxlip is a sterile hybrid. I have never heard of the
common oxlip being found in great abundance anywhere,
and some amount of difference in number might depend on
so small a circumstance as the presence of some moth which
habitually sucked the primrose and cowslip. To return to the
subject of crossing : I am experimenting on a very large
scale on the difference in power and growth between plants

1 Hildebrand, Pringsheini 's Jahrbucher, IV.

1 The passage within [ ] was published in the Life and Letters, III.,
p. 279.

3 Hildebrand's paper in the Bot. Zeitung 1867, refers to Delpino's
work on the Asclepiads, Apocynens and other Orders.

4 For a general account of the Bardfield oxlip {Primula elatior) see
Miller Christy, Linn. Soc.Journ., Vol. XXXIII., p. 172, 1897.

i868— 1881] CROSS FERTILISATION 373

raised from self-fertilised and crossed seeds, and it is noLetta
exaggeration to say that the difference in growth and vigour
is sometimes truly wonderful. Lyell, Huxley, and Hooker
have se< n some of my plants, and been astonished ; and I
should much like to show them to you. I always supposed
until lately that no evil effects would be visible until after
several generations of self-fertilisation, but now 1 see that one
generation sometimes suffices, and the existence oi dimorphic
plants and all the wonderful contrivances of orchids are quite
intelligible to me.

To T. H. Farrer (Lord Farrer). Letta 695

Down, June 5th, 1-

I must write a line to cry peccavi. 1 have seen the
action in Opkrys x exactly as you describe, and am thoroughly
ashamed of my inaccuracy. I find that the pollinia do not
move If kept in a very damp atmosphere under a glass ; so
that it is just possible, though very improbable, that I may
have observed them during a very damp day.

I am not much surprised that I overlooked the movement
in Habenaria? as it takes so long.

1 am glad you have seen .Listera ; it requires to be seen
to believe in the co-ordination in the position of the parts, the
irritability, and the chemical nature of the viscid fluid. This
reminds me that I carefully described to Huxley the shooting
out of the pollinia in Catasetum> and received for an answer,
" Do you really think that I can believe all that ! " ;<

To J. D. Hooker. L^ter 696

I (ow n, 1 ' '. 2nd, r

It is a splendid st heme, and if you make only a beginning

on a Flora, which shall serve as an index to all papers on

curious points in the life-history of plants, you will do an

inestimable good service. Quite recently I was asked by a

1 See Fertilisation of Orchids t Ed. 11., p. 4'', where Lord Farrer's
observations on the movement of the pollinia in Ophrys muscifera are
given.

- This refers to Peristylus 1 sometimes known as Habenaria

viridis. Lord Farrer's observations are given in Fertilisation oj e rchids,
Ed. 11 , p. 63.

3 See Letter 665.

374 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 696 man how he could find out what was known on various
biological points in our plants, and I answered that I knew
of no such book, and that he might ask half a dozen botanists
before one would chance to remember what had been pub-
lished on this or that point. Not long ago another man, who
had been experimenting on the quasi-bulbs on the leaves of
Cardamine, wrote to me to complain that he could not find
out what was known on the subject. It is almost certain
that some early or even advanced students, if they found in
their Flora a line or two on various curious points, with
references for further investigation, would be led to make
further observations. For instance, a reference to the viscid
threads emitted by the seeds of Compositae, to the apparatus
(if it has been described) by which Oxalis spurts out its
seeds, to the sensitiveness of the young leaves of Oxalis
acetosella with reference to O. sensitiva. Under Lathy rus
nissolia it would [be] better to refer to my hypothetical
explanation of the grass-like leaves a than to nothing. Under
a twining plant you might say that the upper part of the
shoot steadily revolves with or against the sun, and so, when
it strikes against any object it turns to the right or left, as
the case may be. If, again, references were given to the
parasitism of Euphrasia, etc., how likely it would be that
some young man would go on with the investigation ; and
so with endless other facts. I am quite enthusiastic about
your idea ; it is a grand idea to make a Flora a guide for-
knowledge already acquired and to be acquired. I have
amused myself by speculating what an enormous number
of subjects ought to be introduced into a Eutopian 2 Flora,
on the quickness of the germination of the seeds, on their
means of dispersal ; on the fertilisation of the flower, and
on a score of other points, about almost all of which we are
profoundly ignorant. I am glad to read what you say about
Bentham, for my inner consciousness tells me that he has
run too many forms together. Should you care to see an
elaborate German pamphlet by Hermann Muller3 on the

1 No doubt the view given in Climbing Plants, p. 201, that L. nissolia
has been evolved from a form like L. aphaca.

2 A mis-spelling of Utopian.

3 Verhand. d. Nat. Ver. f. Pr. Rh. u. Wesfal, Jahrg. XXV.: see
Fertilisation of Orchids, Ed. II., pp. 74, 102.

1808-iS -i | UTOPIAN FLORA 375

gradation and distinction of the forms of Epipactis and of j.,-ttcr 696
Platantheral It maybe absurd in me to t, but I think

you would find curious facts and references in I ■
enormous book, in Vaucher's 8 four volumes, in Hildebrand's
Geschlechter Verthetlung* and perhaps in Fournier's De la
Fe*condation.A I wish you .ill success in your gigantic under-
taking; but what a pity you did not think of it ten y<

so as to have accumulated references on all sorts ol
subjects. Depend upon it, you will have started a new era
in the floras of various countries. 1 < an well believe th.it
Mrs. Hooker will be of the greatest possible use to you in
lightening your labours and arranging your materials.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 697

Down, Dec. 5th, 1S68.
. . . Now 1 want to bc^ for assistance for the new edition
of Origin. Nageli6 justly urges that plants offer many
morphological differences, which from being of no service
cannot have been selected, and which he accounts for by
an innate principle of progressive development. I find old

1 Giographie Botanique, 9 vols., 1S54-5S.

' Plantes d'Europe, 4 vols., 1841.

3 Geschleckter-Vertheilung bei den Pflanzeny 1 vol., Leipzig, r8<

* l)i la Ficondation dans les PJtan/rogames, par Eugene Fournier:
thesis published in Paris in 1863. The facts noted in Darwin's c<
are the explosive stamens of Parietaria, the submerged flowers of
Alistna containing air, the manner of fertilisation ol . etc.

5 Nageli's " Enstehung und Begriflf der Naturhistorischen Art." An
address delivered at the public session of the Royal A< ademy of Sciences
of Munich, March 28th, [865 ; published by the Academy. Darwin's
copy is the 2nd edition ; it bears signs, in the pencilled notes on the
margins, of having been read with interest. Much of it was trans-
lated for him by a German lady, whose version lies with the original
among his pamphlets. At p. 27 Nageli writes : " It is remarkable that
the useful adaptations which Darwin brings forward in the case ol
animals, and which may be discovered in numbers among plants, are
exclusively of a physiological kind, that they always show the formation
or transformation of an organ to a special function. I do no: know
among plants a morphological modification which can be explained
on utilitarian principles." Opposite this pa sage Darwin has written
"a very good objection": but Nageli's sentence seems to us to be of
the nature of a truism, for it is clear that any structure whose evolution
can be believed to have come about by Natural Si :i must have a

function, and the case falls into the physiological cat< gory. The various

370 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 697 notes about this difficulty ; but I have hitherto slurred it
over. Nageli gives as instances the alternate and spiral
arrangement of leaves, and the arrangement of the cells in
the tissues. Would you not consider as a morphological
difference the trimerous, tetramerous, etc., divisions of flowers,
the ovules being erect or suspended, their attachment being
parietal or placental, and even the shape of the seed when
of no service to the plant.

Now, I have thought, and want to show, that such differ-
ences follow in some unexplained manner from the growth
or development of plants which have passed through a long
series of adaptive changes. Anyhow, I want to show that
these differences do not support the idea of progressive devel-
opment. Cassini states that the ovaria on the circumference
and centre of Compos, flowers differ in essential characters,
and so do the seeds in sculpture. The seeds of Umbellifera?
in the same relative positions are ccelospermous and ortho-
spermous. There is a case given by Augt. St. Hilaire of an
erect and suspended ovule in the same ovarium, but perhaps
this hardly bears on the point. The summit flower, in Adoxa
and rue differ from the lower flowers. What is the difference in
flowers of the rue ? how is the ovarium, especially in the rue ?
As Augt. St. Hilaire insists on the locularity of the ovarium
varying on the same plant in some of the Rutacese, such differ-
ences do not speak, as it seems to me, in favour of progressive
development. Will you turn the subject in your mind, and
tell me any more facts. Difference in structure in flowers in
different parts of the same plant seems best to show that they
are the result of growth or position or amount of nutriment.
I have got your photograph 1 over my chimneypiece, and

meanings given to the term morphological makes another difficulty.
Nageli cannot use it in the sense of " structural"— in which sense
it is often applied, since that would mean that no plant structures have
a utilitarian origin. The essence of morphology (in the better and more
precise sense) is descent ; thus we say that a pollen-grain is morpho-
logically a microspore. And this very example serves to show the
falseness of Nageli's view, since a pollen-grain is an adaptation to aerial
as opposed to aquatic fertilisation. In the 5th edition of the Origin,
1869, p. 1 1 1, Darwin discusses Nageli's essay, confining himself to the
simpler statement that there are many structural characters in plants, to
which we cannot assign uses. See Vol. I., Letter 207.
1 A photograph by Mrs. Cameron.

1868 i i MOE I'll' >LOG \ 377

like it much ; but you lo 1. down so sharp on me that 1 i

shall never be bold enough to wriggle myself out of any
contradiction.

( >w<-n pitches into me and Lyell in grand style in the last
chapter of vol. 3 of Anat. <>/ Vertebrates. He is a cool

hind. He puts words from me in inverted commas and
alter them.1

1*0 j. 1 >. Hooker. I etter 698

1 1 wn, Dec. 29th, 1868.

Your letter is quite invaluable, for Nageli's essay2 is -
clever that it will, and indeed 1 know it has produced at

( ffect ; so that I shall devote three or four pages to an answer.
1 have been particularly .struck by your statements about
erect and suspended ovules. You have given me heart, and
I will fight my battle better than I should otherwise have

1 The passage referred to seems to be in Owen's Anatomy of
Vertebrate III., pp. 798, 799, note. "I deeply regretted, therefore, to
see in a ' Historical Sketch1 of the Progress of Enquiry into the origin
of species, prefixed to the fourth edition of that work (1866), that
Mr. Darwin, after affirming inaccurately and without evidence, that 1
admitted Natural Selection to have done something toward that end,
to wit, the 'origin of species,' proceeds to remark : ' It is surprising that
this admission should not have been made earlier, as Prof. Owen now
believes that he promulgated the theory of Natural Selection in a
pa sage read before the Zoological Society in February, 1S50, {Tran
Vol. IV., p. i The first of the two passages quoted by Owen from

the fourth edition of the Origin runs: "Yet he [Prof. Owen] at the
same time admits that Natural Selection may [our italics] have done
something towards this end." In the sixth edition of the Origin, p. xviii.,
Darwin, after referring to a correspondence in the London Revie,
between the Editor of that Journal and Owen, goes on : "It appeared
manifest to the editor, as well as to myself, that Prof. Owen chained
to have promulgated the theory of Natural Selection before I had
done so ; . . . but as far as it is possible to understand certain recently
published passages {Ibid. [Anat, of Vert.], Vol III., p. 798), I have
either partly or wholly again fallen into error. It is consolatory to
me that others find Prof. Owen's controversial writings as difficult to
understand and to reconcile with each other, as I do. As far as the
mere enunciation oi the principle of Natural Selection is concerned, it
is quite immaterial whether or no Prof. Owen preceded me. for both
of us, as shown in this historical sketch, were long ago preceded by
Dr. Wells and Mr. Matthews.'

■ See preceding Letter.

378 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 698 done. I think I cannot resist throwing the contrivances in
orchids into his teeth. You say nothing about the flowers
of the rue.1 Ask your colleagues whether they know any-
thing about the structure of the flower and ovarium in the
uppermost flower. But don't answer on purpose.

I have gone through my long Index of Gardeners
CJiro7iicle, which was made solely for my own use, and am
greatly disappointed to find, as I fear, hardly anything which
will be of use to you.2 I send such as I have for the chance
of their being of use.

Letter 699 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, Jan. 16th [1869].

Your two notes and remarks are of the utmost value, and
I am greatly obliged to you for your criticism on the term.
" Morphological " seems quite just, but I do not see how I can
avoid using it. I found, after writing to you, in Vaucher 3
about the rue, but from what you say I will speak more
cautiously. It is the Spanish Chesnut that varies in diver-
gence. Seeds named Viola nana were sent me from Calcutta
by Scott. I must refer to the plants as an " Indian species,"4
for though they have produced hundreds of closed flowers,
they have not borne one perfect flower. You ask whether I
want illustrations " of ovules differing in position in different
flowers on the same plant." If you know of such cases, I
should certainly much like to hear them. Again you speak
of the angle of leaf-divergence varying and the variations
being transmitted. Was the latter point put in in a hurry to
round the sentence, or do you really know of cases ?

Whilst looking for notes on the variability of the divisions
of the ovarium, position of the ovules, aestivation, etc., I
found remarks written fifteen or twenty years ago, showing
that I then supposed that characters which were nearly
uniform throughout whole groups must be of high vital
importance to the plants themselves ; consequently I was
greatly puzzled how, with organisms having very different

1 For Rata see Origin, Ed. v., p. 154.

2 For Hooker's projected biological book, see Letter 696.

3 Plant es tt Europe, Vol. I., p. 559, 184 1.

4 The cleistogamic flowers of Viola are used in the discussion on
Nageli's views. See Origin, Ed. v., p. 153.

1 868— 1881] MORPHOLO

habits of life, this uniformity could have been acquired throu h Letter 699
Natural Selection. Now, 1 am much inclined to believe, in
accordance with the view given towards the close of my
MS., that the near approach to uniformity in such struc-
tures depends on their not being of vital importance,
and therefore not being acted on by Natural Selection.1
If you have reflected on this point, what do you think of it ?
I hope that you approved of the argument deduced from tl
modifications in the small closed flowers.

It is only about two years since last edition of Origin, ami
I am fairly disgusted to find how much I have to modify,
and how much I ought to add ; but I have determined not
to add much. Fleeming Jenkins has given me much trouble,
but has been of more real use to me than any other essay
or review.*

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 700

Down [Jan. 22nd, 1869].
your litter is quite splenditious. I am greatly tempted,
but shall, I hope, refrain from using some of your remarks in
my chapter on Classification. It is very true what you say
about unimportant characters being so important systematic-
ally ; yet it is hardly paradoxical bearing in mind that the
natural system is genetic, and that we have to discover the
genealogies anyhow. Hence such parts as organs of genera-
tion are so useful for classification though not concerned
with the manner of life. Hence use for same purpose of
rudimentary organs, etc. You cannot think what a relief
it is that you do not object to this view, for it removes parti)
a heavy burden from my shoulders. If I lived twent) more
years and was able to work, how I should have to modify the
Origin, and how much the views on all points will have to be
modified ! Well, it is a beginning, and that is something. . . .

To T. II. Farrer (Lord Farrer). Letter 701

1 1 >\ a, Aug. 11 tli. 1S00.
Your view seems most ingenious and probable ; but
ascertain in a good many cases that the nectar is actu til)'

1 This view is given in the 6V; . , Ed. vi., p. 372.

- On Fleeming Jenkins' review, .\ . British Review, June, 1867, see

Life and Letters, III., p. 107.

380 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 701 within the staminal tube.1 One can see that if there is to be
a split in the tube, the law of symmetry would lead it to
be double, and so free one stamen. Your view, if confirmed,
would be extremely well worth publication before the Linnean
Society. It is to me delightful to see what appears a mere
morphological character found to be of use. It pleases me
the more as Carl Nageli has lately been pitching into me
on this head. Hooker, with whom I discussed the subject,
maintained that uses would be found for lots more structures,
and cheered me by throwing my own orchids into my teeth.2

All that you say about changed position of the peduncle
in bud, in flower, and in seed,3 is quite new to me, and reminds
me of analogous cases with tendrils. This is well worth
working out, and I dare say the brush of the stigma.

With respect to the hairs or filaments (about which I once
spoke) within different parts of flowers, I have a splendid
Tacsonia with perfectly pendent flowers, and there is only
a microscopical vestige of the corona of coloured filaments ;
whilst in most common passion-flowers the flowers stand
upright, and there is the splendid corona which apparently
would catch pollen.4

On the lower side of corolla of foxglove there are some
fine hairs, but these seem of not the least use5 — a mere
purposeless exaggeration of down on outside — as I conclude
after watching the bees at work, and afterwards covering
up some plants ; for the protected flowers rarely set any seed,
so that the hairy lower part of corolla does not come into

1 It seems that Darwin did not know that the staminal tube in the
diadelphous Leguminosre serves as a nectar-holder, and this is surprising,
as Sprengel was aware of the fact.

2 See Letters 697-700.

3 See Vochting, Bewegung der Bliithen und Frtichte, 1882; also
Kerner, Pflanzenleben, Vol. I., p. 494, Vol. II., p. 121.

4 Sprengel (Entdeckte Gehcimiiiss, p. 164) imagined that the crown
of the Passion-flower served as a nectar-guide and as a platform for
insects, while other rings of filaments served to keep rain from the nectar.
F. M idler, quoted in H. Muller {Fertilisation, p. 268), looks at the crowns
of hairs, ridges in some species, etc., as gratings serving to imprison
flies which attract the fertilising humming-birds. There is, we believe, no
evidence that the corona catches pollen. See Letter 704, note 3.

6 It has been suggested that the hairs serve as a ladder for humble
bees ; also that they serve to keep out " unbidden guests."

i86S- issi] DRO ' »M1 VI.I ' 381

contact with stigma, as some Frenchman says occurs with Letter 701
some other plants, as Viola odorata and I think />.

1 heartily wish I could accept your kind invitation, f<>r
I am not by nature a savage, but it is impossible. Forgive
my dreadful handwriting, none of my womenkind arc about
to act as amanuensis.

To William C. Tait. Letter 702

Mr. Tait, to whom the following letter is addressed, was resident
in Portugal. His kindness in sending plants of Drosophyllum lusitanicum
is acknowledged in Insectivorous Plants.

Down, March 12th, 1869.

I have received your two letters of March 2nd and 5th,
and I really do not know how to thank you enough for your
extraordinary kindness and energy. I am glad to hear that
the inhabitants notice the power of the Drosophyllum to catch
(lies,1 for this is the subject of my studies. I have observed
during several years the manner in which this is effected, and
the results produced in several species of Drosera, and in the
wonderful American Dioncea, the leaves of which catch insects
just like a steel rat-trap. Hence I was most anxious to learn
how the Drosophyllum would act, so that the Director of the
Royal Gardens at Kew wrote some years ago to Portugal
to obtain specimens for me, but quite failed. So you sec
what a favour you have conferred on me. With Drosera
it is nothing less than marvellous how minute a fraction
of a grain of any nitrogenised matter the plant can detect;
and how differently it behaves when matter, not containing
nitrogen, of the same consistence, whether fluid or solid,
is applied to the glands. It is also exquisitely sensitive to
a weight of even the TinW °f a grain. From what I can see
of the glands on Drosophyllum I suspect that I shall find only
the commencement, or nascent state of the wonderful capa-
cities of the Drosera, and this will be eminently interesting
to me. My MS. on this subject has been nearly ready f 1
publication during some years, but when I shall have strength
and time to publish I know not.

And now to turn to other points in your letter. I am
quite ignorant of ferns, and cannot name your specimen.
The variability of ferns passes all bounds. With respect to

1 The natives are said to hang up plants of Drosophyllum in their
cottages to act as fly-papers {Insectiv. Plants, p. 3321

382 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 702 your Laugher Pigeons, if the same with the two sub-breeds
which I kept, I feel sure from the structure of the skeleton,
etc., that it is a descendant of C. livia. In regard to
beauty, I do not feel the difficulty which you and some
others experience. In the last edition of my Origin1 I
have discussed the question, but necessarily very briefly. A
new and I hope amended edition of the Origin is now
passing through the press, and will be published in a month
or two, and it will give me great pleasure to send you a
copy. Is there any place in London where parcels are
received for you, or shall I send it by post? With reference
to dogs' tails, no doubt you are aware that a rudimentary
stump is regularly inherited by certain breeds of sheep-dogs,
and by Manx cats. You speak of a change in the position
of the axis of the earth : this is a subject quite beyond me,
but I believe the astronomers reject the idea. Nevertheless,
I have long suspected that some periodical astronomical or
cosmical cause must be the agent of the incessant oscillations
of level in the earth's crust. About a month ago I suggested
this to a man well capable of judging, but he could not con-
ceive any such agency ; he promised, however, to keep it in
mind. I wish I had time and strength to write to you more
fully. I had intended to send this letter off at once, but on
reflection will keep it till I receive the plants.

Letter 703 T° H- MUller-2

Down, March 14th, 1870.

I think you have set yourself a new, very interesting, and
difficult line of research. As far as I know, no one has care-

1 Fourth Edit, p. 238.

2 Hermann Miiller (1829-83) began his education in the village school
of Muhlberg, and afterwards studied in Halle and Berlin. From an
early age he was a keen naturalist, and began his scientific work as a
collector in the field. In 1855 he became Science teacher at Lippstadt,
where he continued to work during the last twenty-eight years of his life.
Midler's greatest contribution to Botany, Die Befruchtung der B lumen
durch Insekten, was the outcome of Charles Darwin's book on the
Fertilisation of Orchids. He was a frequent contributor to Kosrnos on
subjects bearing on the origin of species, the laws of variation, and
kindred problems ; like his brother, Fritz, Hermann Miiller was a zealous
supporter of evolutionary views, and contributed in no small degree to the
spread of the new teaching. (" Prof. Dr. Hermann Miiller von Lippstadt :
Ein Gedenkblatt," by Ernst Krause, Kosrnos, Vol. VII., p. 393, 1883.)

i868-in PASSION-] I "\\ I I 383

fully observed the structure of 11 in relation to flower-,1 letter 703

although so many have now attended to the converse relation.
As I imagine few or no insects arc adapted to suck the nectar
or gather the pollen of any single family of plants, such
striking adaptations can hardly, 1 presume, be expected in
insec ts as in flowers.

To T. H. Farrer (Lord Farrer). !cr 7°4

Down, May 2Xth, 1870

I suppose I must have known that the stamens recovered
their former position in Berberis? for I formerly tried experi-
ments with anaesthetics, but I had forgotten the facts, and I
quite agree with you that it is a sound argument that the
movement is not for self-fertilisation. The X. American
barberries (Mahonia) offer a good proof to what an extent
natural crossing goes on in this genus ; for it is now almost
impossible in this country to procure a true specimen of the
two or three forms originally introduced.

1 hope the seeds of Passiflora will germinate, for the
turning up of the pendent flower must be full of meaning.3
1 am so glad that you arc able to occupy yourself a little
with flowers: I am sure it is most wise in you, for your own
sake and children's sakes.

Some little time ago Delpino wrote to me praising the

1 See Letter 462, also H. Miiller, Fertilisation of Flowers, Eng.
Trans., p. 30, on "The insects which visit flowers." In Mallei's book
references are given to several of his papers on this subject.

3 See Farrer, Nature, II., 1870, p. 164. Lord Farrer was before 11.
Miiller in making out the mechanism of the barberry.

8 Darwin had (May I2th, 1S70) sent to Farrer an extract from .1 letter
from F. Miiller, containing a description of a Passiflora vi>ited by
humming-birds, in which the long flower-stalk curls up so that " the
flower itself is upright." Another species visited by bees is described
as having "dependent flowers." In a letter, June 29th, Mr. Farrer

had su^ested that P, princeps, which he described as having sub-erect
flowers, is fitted for humming-birds' visits. In another letter, Oct. 13th,
1869, he says that Tacsonia, which has pendent flowers and no corona,
is not fertilised by insects in English glass-houses, and may be adapted
for humming-birds. See Life and Letters, III., p. 279, for Farrer's remarks
on Tacsonia and Passiflora ; also H. Midler's Fertilisation oj -s,

p. 268, for what little is known on the subject ; also Letter 701 in the
present volume.

384 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 704 Swedish book ] on the fertilisation of plants ; as my son
George can read a little Swedish, I should like to have ;it
back for a time, just to hear a little what it is about, if you
would be so kind as to return it by book-post.

I am going steadily on with my experiments on the
comparative growth of crossed and self-fertilised plants, and
am now coming to some very curious anomalies and some
interesting results. I forget whether I showed you any of
them when you were here for a few hours. You ought to
see them, as they explain at a glance why Nature has taken
such extraordinary pains to ensure frequent crosses between
distinct individuals.

If in the course of the summer you should feel any in-
clination to come here for a day or two, I hope that you will
propose to do so, for we should be delighted to see you. . . .

Letter 705 T° AsE Gm^

Down. Dec. 7th, 1870.

I have been very glad to receive your letter this morning.
I have for some time been wishing to write to you, but have
been half worked to death in correcting my uncouth English
for my new book.2 I have been glad to hear of your cases
appearing like incipient dimorphism. I believe that they are
due to mere variability, and have no significance. I found a
good instance in Nolana prostrata, and experimented on it,
but the forms did not differ in fertility. So it was with
Amsinckia, of which you told me. I have long thought that
such variations afforded the basis for the development of
dimorphism. I was not aware of such cases in Phlox, but
have often admired the arrangement of the anthers, causing
them to be all raked by an inserted proboscis. I am glad
also to hear of your curious case of variability in ovules, etc.

I said that I had been wishing to write to you, and this was
about your Drosera, which after many fluctuations between life
and death, at last made a shoot which I could observe. The
case is rather interesting ; but I must first remind you that
the filament of Dion(va% is not sensitive to very light prolonged

1 Severin Axell, Om anordningarna for de Fa?ierogama Vaxternas
Befruktning, Stockholm, 1869.

2 Descent of Man. >

3 In another connection the following reference to Dioncea is of some
interest : " I am sure I never heard of Curtis's observations on

i86S i C. V. 1 [LEY 3S5

pressure, or to nitrogenous matter, but is exquisitively sensitive Letter 705
to the slightest touch. In our D> , ra the filaments arc not sen-
sitive to a slight touch, but arc sensitive to prolonged pressure
from the smallest object of any nature ; they arc also sensitive
to solid or fluid nitrogenous matter. Now in your Drosera*
the filaments are not sensitive to a rough touch or to any
pressure from non-nitrogenous matter, but arc sensitive to
solid or fluid nitrogenous matter. Is it not curious that there
should be such diversified sensitiveness in allied plants?

I received a very obliging letter from Mr. Morgan, but did
not sec him, as I think he said he was going to start at once
for the Continent. I am sorry to hear rather a poor account
of Mrs. Gray, to whom my wife and I both beg to be very
kindly remembered.

To C. V. Riley.- Letter ?o6

I town, June 1st [1S71].
I received some little time ago your report on noxious
insects,3 and have now read the whole with the grcate-t

Diona-a, nor have I met with anything more than general statements
about tins plant or about Nepenthes catching insects." (From a letter to
Sir J. D. Hooker, July 12th, i860.)

1 Drosera filiformis : see Insectivorous Plants, p. 281. The above
account does not entirely agree with Darwin's published statement. The
filaments moved when bits of cork or cinder were placed on them ; they did
not, however, respond to repeated touches with a needle, thus behaving
differently from D. rotundifolia. It should be remembered that the last-
named species is somewhat variable in reacting to repeated touches.

• Charles Valentine Riley (1843-95) was oorn >n England : at the age
of seventeen he ran away from home and settled in Illinois, where at tirst
he supported himself as a labourer; but he soon took to science, and
his first contributions to Entomology appeared in 1863. He became
entomological editor of the Prairie Farmer (Chicago), and came
under the influence of B. I). Walsh. In i8(>8 Riley became State
Entomologist of Missouri, and in 1878 Entomologist to the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, a post he resigned in 1894 owing to ill-
health ; his death was the result of a bicycle accident. In Rilej
opinion his most important work was the series entitled Annua! Report
on the \ nous, Beneficial, and other Insects of t lie Stale of Missouri
(Jefferson City), beginning; in 1869. These reports were greatly admired
by Mr. Darwin, and his copies of them, especially of Nos. 3 and 4, show
signs of careful reading. (Taken principally from the Proceedings of the
Entomological Society of Wash , Vol. III., 1893-6^.293.')

3 Third Annual Report on t . Beneficial^ and other Insects

VOL. II. 25

386 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 706 interest. There are a vast number of facts and generalisa-
tions of value to me, and I am struck with admiration at your
powers of observation.

The discussion on mimetic insects seems to me particularly
good and original. Pray accept my cordial thanks for the
instruction and interest which I have received.

What a loss to Natural Science our poor mutual friend
Walsh 1 has been ; it is a loss ever to be deplored. . . .

Your country is far ahead of ours in some respects ; our
Parliament would think any man mad who should propose to
appoint a State Entomologist.

Letter To C. V. Riley.

We have found it convenient to place the two letters to Riley together,
rather than separate them chronologically.

Down, Sept. 28th, 1881.
I must write half a dozen lines to say how much interested
I have been by your " Further Notes " on Pronuba? which you
were so kind as to send me. I had read the various criti-
cisms, and though I did not know what answer could be
made, yet I felt full confidence in your result, and now I see
that I was right. . . . If you make any further observation on
Pronuba it would, I think, be well worth while for you to
observe whether the moth can or does occasionally bring
pollen from one plant to the stigma of a distinct one,3 for I
have shown that the cross-fertilisation of the flowers on the
same plant does very little good ; and, if I am not mistaken,
you believe that Pronuba gathers pollen from the same flower
which she fertilises.

What interesting and beautiful observations you have made
on the metamorphoses of the grasshopper-destroying insects.

of the State of Missouri (Jefferson City, Mo.). The mimetic case occurs
at p. 67 ; the 1875 pupae of Pterophorus periscelidactylus, the " Grapevine
Plume," have pupa; either green or reddish brown, the former variety
being found on the leaves, the latter on the brown stems of the vine.

1 For a biographical note on Mr. Walsh, see Letter 175A, Vol. I.,
pp. 248-49.

2 Proc. Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci., 1880.

3 Riley discovered the remarkable fact that the Yucca moth {Pronuba
yuccasella) lays its eggs in the ovary of Yucca flowers, which it has
previously pollinated, thus making sure of a supply of ovules for the
larvae.

i^os-jSSi] DISPERSAL OF SE1

To F. I lildebrand. 1 • i 707

n, Feb. 9th [1872].

Owing to other occupations I was able to read only
yesterday your paper on the dispersal of the seeds of Com-
posite.1 Some of the facts which you mention are extremely
interesting.

I write now to suggest as worthy of your examination the
curious adhesive' filaments of mucus emitted by the achenia
of many Compositae, of which no doubt you arc aware. My
attention was first called to the subject by the achenia of an
Australian Pumilio {P. argyrokpis\ which I briefly described
in the Gard. Chronicle, iS6i,p. 5. As the threads of mucus
dry and contract they draw the seeds up into a vertical
position on the ground. It subsequently occurred to me that
if these seeds were to fall on the wet hairs of any quadruped
the)- would adhere firmly, and might be carried to any
distance. I was informed that Decaisne has written a paper
on these adhesive threads. What is the meaning of the
mucus so copiously emitted from the moistened seeds of
Iberis, and of at least some species of Linuml Does the
mucus serve as a protection against their being devoured, or
as a means of attachment.-' I have been prevented reading
your paper sooner by attempting to read Dr. Askenasy
pamphlet,3 but the German is too difficult for me to make it
all out. lie seems to follow Nageli completely. I cannot but
think that both much underrate the utility of various parts of
plants ; and that they greatly underrate the unknown laws of
correlated growth, which leads to all sorts of modifications,
when some one structure or the whole plant is modified for
some particular object.

1 " Ueber die Yerbreitungsmittel der Compositenfruclr. Bot.

Zeitungy 1872. p. 1.

1 Various theories have been suggested. e.g., that the slime by
anchoring the seed to the soil facilitates the entrance of the radicle
into the soil : the slime has also been supposed to act as a temporarv
water-store. See Klebs in Pfeffer's Untersuchungen cats .. t. Ins/,

zu Tiibingen, I., p. 581.

3 E. Askenasv. Beitrage rur Kritik der Darwirischen Lehre. Leip^i-j.
1872

388 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 708 To T. H. Fairer (Lord Farrer).

The following letter refers to a series of excellent observations on the
fertilisation of Leguminosae, made by Lord Farrer in the autumn of 1869,
in ignorance of Delpino's work on the subject. The result was published
in Nature, Oct. 10th and 17th, 1872, and is full of interesting suggestions.
The discovery of the mechanism in Coronilla mentioned in a note was
one of the cases in which Lord Farrer was forestalled.

Down [1872].

I declare I am almost as sorry as if I had been myself fore-
stalled— indeed, more so, for I am used to it. It is, however, a
paramount, though bothersome duty in every naturalist to try
and make out all that has been done by others on the subject.
By all means publish next summer your confirmation and a
summary of Delpino's observations, with any new ones of
your own. Especially attend about the nectary exterior to
the staminal tube.1 This will in every way be far better than
writing to Delpino. It would not be at all presumptuous in
you to criticise Delpino. I am glad you think him so clever ;
for so it struck me.

Look at hind legs yourself of some humble and hive-bees ;
in former take a very big individual (if any can be found) for
these are the females, the males being smaller, and they have
no pollen-collecting apparatus. I do not remember where it
is figured — probably in Kirby & Spence — but actual inspection
better. . . .

Please do not return any of my books until all are finished,
and do not hurry.

I feel certain you will make fine discoveries.

Letter 709 To T. H. Farrer (Lord Farrer).

Sevenoaks, Oct. 13th, 1872.
I must send you a line to say how extremely good your
article appears to me to be. It is even better than I thought,
and I remember thinking it very good. I am particularly
glad of the excellent summary of evidence about the common
pea, as it will do for me hereafter to quote ; nocturnal insects
will not do. I suspect that the aboriginal parent had bluish
flowers. I have seen several times bees visiting common and

1 This refers to a species of Coronilla in which Lord Farrer made the
remarkable discovery that the nectar is secreted on the outside of the
calyx. See Nature, July 2nd, 1874, p. 169 ; also Letter 715.

i868 — iSSil II A R V ESI [NG \ N I

sweet peas, and yet vari< ties, purposely grown ■ togetl er, i i 709

hardly ever intercross. 1 his is a point which for years ha

half driven me mad, ami 1 have disi it in my Var.oj

Animals and Plants under Dom} I now suspect (and I wish
1 had strength to experimentise next spring) that from
changed climate both species arc prematurely fertilised, and
therefore hardly ever cross. When artificially crossed by
removal of own pollen in bud, the offspring are very vigorous.

Farewell. — I wish I could compel you to go on worki:
at fertilisation instead of so insignificant a subject as the
commerce of the country !

You pay me a very pretty compliment at the beginning
of your paper.

To J. D. Hooker. Letiei

The following letters to Sir J. I). Hooker and the hue Mr. Moggridge
refer to Moggridge's observation that seeds stored in the nest of the ant
Atta at Mentone do not germinate, though they are certainly not death
Moggridge's observations are given in his book, Harvesting Ants and
Trap-Door Spiders, 1873, which is full of interesting details. The book is
moreover remarkable in having resuscitated our knowledge of the existence
of the seed-storing habit. Mr. Moggridge point- out that the ancients
were familiar with the facts, and quotes the well-known fable of the ant
and the grasshopper, which La Fontaine borrowed from .Esop. Mr.
Moggridge (p. 5) goes on: "So long as Europe was taught Natural
History by southern writers the belief prevailed ; but no sooner did the
tide begin to turn, and the current of information to flood from north to
south, than the story became discredited."

In Moggridge's "supplement" on the same subject, published in 1874,
the author gives an account of his experiments made at Darwin's sugges-
tion, and concludes (p. 174) that " the vapour of formic acid is incapable

1 In the second edition (1875) of the Variation of Animals and Plants,

Vol. I., p. 348, Darwin added, with respect to the rarity of spontaneous
crosses in Pisum : " I have reason to believe that this is due to their
>tiymas being prematurely fertilised in this country by pollen from the
same flower." This explanation is, we think, almost certainly applicable
to Lathyrus odoratus, though in Darwin's latest publication on the
subject he gives reasons to the contrary. See Cross and Self-Ft
titisation, p. 156, where the problem is left unsolved. Compare Letter
714 to Delpino, p. 391. In Life and letters, III., p. 261, the absence
of cross-fertilisation is explained as due to want of perfect adaptation
between the pea and our native insects. This is Hermann M tiller's
view: see his Fertilisation of Flowers, p. 214. See Letter 583, p. 250,
note 1 .

390 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 710 of rendering the seeds dormant after the manner of the ants," and that
indeed " its influence is always injurious to the seeds, even when present
only in excessively minute quantities." Though unable to explain the
method employed, he was convinced " that the non-germination of the
seeds is due to some direct influence voluntarily exercised by the ants,
and not merely to the conditions found in the nest" (p. 172). See Vol. I.,
Letter 251.

Down, Feb. 21st [1873].

You have given trie exactly the information which I
wanted.

Geniuses jump. I have just procured formic acid to try
whether its vapour or minute drops will delay germination of
fresh seeds ; trying others at same time for comparison. But
I shall not be able to try them till middle of April, as my
despotic wife insists on taking a house in London for a month
from the middle of March.

I am glad to hear of tbe Primer ; 1 it is not at all, I think,
a folly. Do you know Asa Gray's child book on the functions
of plants, or some such title ? It is very good in giving an
interest to the subject.

By the way, can you lend me the January number of the
London Journal of Botany for an article on insect-agency in
fertilisation ?

Letter 711 To J. Traherne Moggridge.

Down, Aug. 27th, 1873.

I thank you for your very interesting letter, and I honour
you for your laborious and careful experiments. No one
knows till he tries how many unexpected obstacles arise in
subjecting plants to experiments.

I can think of no suggestions to make ; but I may just
mention that I had intended to try the effects of touching the
dampened seeds with the minutest drop of formic acid at the
end of a sharp glass rod, so as to imitate the possible action
of the sting of the ant. I heartily hope that you may be
rewarded by coming to some definite result ; but I fail five
times out of six in my own experiments. I have lately been
trying some with poor success, and suppose that I have
done too much, for I have been completely knocked up for
some days.

1 Botany (Macmillan's Science Primers).

iS68-t88i] HARVESTING A NTs 5,1

To J. Traherne Moggridge. Utter 712

I town, March 10th, 1S74

I am very sorry to hear that the vapour experiments have
failed; but nothing could be better, as it seems to me, than
your plan of enclosing a number of the ants with the •
The incidental results on the power of different vapours in
killing seeds and stopping germination appear very curi.
and as far as I know are quite new.

P.S. — I never before heard of seeds not germinating
except during a certain season ' ; it will be a very strange
fact if you can prove this.

To H. Miiller. ,cr

I lown, May 30th, 1S73.
I am much obliged for your letter received this morning.
I write now chiefly t" give myself the pleasure of telling you
how cordially I admire the last part of your book,2 which I
have finished. The whole discussion seems to me quite
excellent, and it has pleased me not a little to find that in
the rough MS. of my last chapter3 I have arrived on many
points at nearly the same conclusions that you have done,
though we have reached them by different routes.

To F. Delpino.

Down, June 25th [1873]. Letter 7'*

I thank you sincerely for your letter. I am very glad to
hear about Lathyrus odoratus, for here in England the vars.
never cross,4 and yet are sometimes visited by bees. Pisum
sativum I have also many times seen visited by Botnbus,
I believe the cause of the man}- vars. not crossing is th
under our climate the flowers are self-fertilised at an early

1 Certain seeds pass through a resting period before germination.
See Pfeffer's Pflamenphysiologie, Ed. 1.. Vol. II., p. in.

1 " Die Befruchtung der Blumen durch Insekten " : Leipz ;. An

English translation was published in 1883 by Prof. D'Arcy Thompson.
The "Prefatory Notice " to this work (Feb. 6th, [882) is almost the last
of Mr. Darwin's writings. See Life and p. 281.

3 The Effects of Cross and Self-Fertilisation it n;
London, 1876.

4 In Cross and Self-Fertilisation, p. 156, Darwin quotes the informa-
tion received from Delpino and referred to in the present letter- namely,
that it is the fixed opinion of the Italian gardeners that the varieties do
intercross. See Letter 709.

392 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 714 period, before the corolla is fully expanded. I shall examine
this point with L. odoratus. I have read H. Midler's book,
and it seems to me very good. Your criticism had not
occurred to me, but is, I think, just — viz. that it is much
more important to know what insects habitually visit any
flower than the various kinds which occasionally visit it.
Have you seen A. Kerner's book ScJiutzmittel des Pollens,
1873, Innsbruck.1 It is very interesting, but he does not
seem to know anything about the work of other authors.

I have Bentham's paper in my house, but have not yet
had time to read a word of it. He is a man with very sound
judgment, and fully admits the principle of evolution.

I have lately had occasion to look over again your dis-
cussion on anemophilous plants,2 and I have again felt much
admiration at your work.

In the beginning of August, 1873, Darwin paid the first of several
visits to Lord Farrer's house at Abinger. When sending copies of
Darwin's letters for the Life and Letters, Lord Farrer was good enough
to add explanatory notes and recollections, from which we quote the
following sketch.

" Above my house are some low hills, standing up in the
valley, below the chalk range on the one hand and the more
distant range of Leith Hill on the other, with pretty views of
the valley towards Dorking in one direction and Guildford
in the other. They are composed of the less fertile Green-
sand strata, and are covered with fern, broom, gorse, and
heath. Here it was a particular pleasure of his to wander,
and his tall figure, with his broad-brimmed Panama hat and
long stick like an alpenstock, sauntering solitary and slow
over our favourite walks, is one of the pleasantest of the
many pleasant associations I have with the place."

To T. H. Farrer (Lord Farrer).
Letter 715 v 7

The following note by Lord Farrer explains the main point of the

letter, which, however, refers to the " bloom " problem as well as to

Coronilla : —

" I thought I had found out what puzzled us in Coronilla varia : in

most of the Papilionaceae, when the tenth stamen is free, there is nectar

1 Afterwards translated by Dr. Ogle as Flowers and their Unbidden
Guests, with a prefatory letter by Charles Darwin, 1878.
3 Atti del la Soc. Italiana di Scienze Nat., Vol. XI II,

1 88 1] l ORONILLA yjT,

in the staminal tube, and the opening caused by the free stamen enables
the bee to n-a<:h the nectar, and in so doing the bee fertilises the plai
In i tria, and in several othei species of Corom'/la, there is no

nectar in the staminal tube or in the tub'.- of the corolla. But there are
peculiar glands with nectar on the outside of the calyx, and peculiar
openings in the tube of the corolla through which the proboscis of the
bee, whilst entering the flower in the usual way and dusting itself with
pollen, can reach these glands, thus fertilising the plant in getting the
nectar. On writing this to Mr. Darwin, I received the following
i haracteristic note.

The first postscript relates to the rough ground behind my house,
over which he was fond of strolling. It had been ploughed up and then
allowed to go back, and the interest was to watch how the numerous
species of weeds of cultivation which followed the plough gradually gave
way in the struggle for existence to the well-known and much less varied
flora of an English common.''

Bassett, Southampton, Aug. 14th, i"

You arc the man to conquer a C < nilla} I have been Letter 715
looking at the half-dried flowers, and am prepared t<> swear
that you have solved the mystery. The difference in the >ize
of the cells on the calyx under the vexillum right down to
the common peduncle is conspicuous. The flour still adhered
to this side ; I see little bractc<e or stipules apparently with
glandular ends at the base of the calyces. Do these secrete ?
It seems to me a beautiful case. When 1 saw the odd shape
of the base of the vexillum, I concluded that it must have
some meaning, but little dreamt what that was. Now there
remains only the one serious point — viz. the separation of the
one stamen. I daresay that you are right in that nectar was
originally secreted within the staminal tube ; but why has not
the one stamen long since cohered ? The great difference in
structure for fertilisation within the same genus s makes one
believe that all such points are very variable. With respect
to the non-coherence of the one stamen, d<> examine some
flower-buds at a very early age ; for parts which arc largely
developed are often developed U> an unusual degree ;it a very
early age, and it seems to me quite possible that the base of
the vexillum (to which the single stamen adhered) might thus
be developed, and thus keep it separate for a time from the

1 In a former letter to Lord Farrer, Darwin wrote : " Here is a maxim
for you, ' It is disgraceful to be beaten by a Ct r milla

1 Coronilla emerus is of the ordinary papilionaceous type.

394 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 715 other stamens. The cohering stamens to the right and left
of the single one seem to me to be pushed out a little laterally.
When you have finished your observations, you really ought
to send an account with a diagram to Nature, recalling your
generalisation about the diadelphous structure, and now ex-
plaining" the exception of CoroniUa}

Do add a remark how almost every detail of structure has
a meaning where a flower is well examined.

Your observations pleased me so much that I could not
sit still for half an hour.

Please to thank Mr. Payne 2 for his remarks, which are of
value to me, with reference to Mimosa. I am very much in
doubt whether opening the sashes can act by favouring the
evaporation of the drops ; may not the movement of the leaves
shake off the drops, or change their places? If Mr. Payne
remembers any plant which is easily injured by drops, I wish
he would put a drop or two on a leaf on a bright day, and cover
the plant with a clean bell-glass, and do the same for another
plant, but without a bell-glass over it, and observe the effects.

Thank you much for wishing to see us again at Abinger,
and it is very doubtful whether it will be CoroniUa, Mr. Payne,
the new garden, the children, E. [Lady Farrer], or yourself
which will give me the most pleasure to see again.

P.S. 1. — It will be curious to note in how many years the
rough ground becomes quite uniform in its flora.

P.S. 2. — One may feel sure that periodically nectar was
secreted within the flower and then secreted by the calyx, as
in some species of Iris and orchids. This latter being taken
advantage of in CoroniUa would allow of the secretion within
the flower ceasing, and as this change was going on in the two
secretions, all the parts of the flower would become modified
and correlated.

Letter 716 To J. Burdon Sanderson.

Down, Tuesday, Sept. 9th [1873].
Sir J. Burdon Sanderson showed that in Dioncea movement is accom-
panied by electric disturbances closely analogous to those occurring in
muscle (see Nature, 1874, pp. 105, 127; Proc. R. Soc, XXL, and Phil.
Trans., Vol. CLXXIIL, 1883, where the results are finally discussed).

1 The observations were published in Nature, Vol. X., 1874, p. 169.
Lord Farrer's gardener.

1868- 1881] DION 1 \ 395

I will send up early to-morrow two plants [of / /] Letter 716

with five goodish leaves, which you will know by their being
tied to sticks. Please remember that the slightest touch,
even by a hair, of the three filaments on each lobe makes
the leaf close, and it will not open for twenty-four hours.
You had better put \ in. of water into the saucers of the pots.
The plants have been kept too cool in order to retard them.
You had better keep them rather warm {i.e. temperature of
warm greenhouse) for a day, and in a good light.

I am extremely glad you have undertaken this subject.
If you get a positive result, I should think you ought to
publish it separately, and I could quote it ; or I should be
most glad to introduce any note by you into my account.

I hive no idea whether it is troublesome to try with the
thermo-electric pile any change of temperature when the leaf
closes. I could detect none with a common thermometer.
But if there is any change of temperature I should expect it
would occur some eight to twelve or twenty-four hours after
the leaf has been given a big smashed fly, and when it is
copiously secreting its acid digestive fluid.

1 forgot to say that, as far as I can make out, the inferior
surface of the leaf is always in a state of tension, and that the
contraction is confined to the upper surface ; so that when
this contraction ceases or suddenly fails (as by immersion in
boiling water) the leaf opens again, or more widely than is
natural to it.

Whenever you have quite finished, I will send for the
plants in their basket. My son Frank is staying at 6, Queen
Anne Street, and comes home on Saturday afternoon, but you
will not have finished by that time.

P.S. I have repeated my experiment on digestion in Drosera
with complete success. By giving leaves a very little weak
hydrochloric acid, I can make them digest albumen — i.e.
white of egg — quicker than they can do naturally. I most
heartily thank you for all your kindness. 1 have been
pretty bad Lately, and must work very little.

To J. Burdon Sanderson. Letter 717

Sept. 1 1 1873].
How very kind it was of you to telegraph to me. I am
quite delighted that you have got a decided result. Is it not

396 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 717 a very remarkable fact? It seems so to me, in my ignorance.
I wish I could remember more distinctly what I formerly read
of Du Bois Raymond's results. My poor memory never serves
me for more than a vague guide. I really think you ought to
try Drosera. In a weak solution of phosphate of ammonia
(viz. 1 gr. to 20 oz. of water) it will contract in about five
minutes, and even more quickly in pure warm water ; but
then water, I suppose, would prevent your trial. I forget, but
I think it contracts pretty quickly {i.e. in an hour or two)
with a large drop of a rather stronger solution of the
phosphate, or with an atom of raw meat on the disc of
the leaf.

Letter 718 To J. D. Hooker.

Oct. 31st, 1873.

Now I want to tell you, for my own pleasure, about the
movements of Desmodium.

(1) When the plant goes to sleep, the terminal leaflets
hang vertically down, but the petioles move up towards the
axis, so that the dependent leaves are all crowded round it.
The little leaflets never go to sleep, and this seems to me
very odd ; they are at their games of play as late as 1 1 o'clock
at night and probably later.1

(2) If the plant is shaken or syringed with tepid water,
the terminal leaflets move down through about an angle of
45°, and the petioles likewise move about n° downwards ; so
that they move in an opposite direction to what they do when
they go to sleep. Cold water or air produces the same effect
as does shaking. The little leaflets are not in the least affected
by the plant being shaken or syringed. I have no doubt,
from various facts, that the downward movement of the
terminal leaflets and petioles from shaking and syringing is
to save them from injury from warm rain.

(3) The axis, the main petiole, and the terminal leaflets
are all, when the temperature is high, in constant movement,
just like that of climbing plants. This movement seems to

1 Stahl (Botanische Zeifung, 1897, p. 97) has suggested that the
movements of the dwarf leaflets in Desmodium serve to shake the large
terminal leaflets, and thus increase transpiration. According to Stahl's
view their movement would be more useful at night than by day, because
stagnation of the transpiration -current is more likely to occur at night.

i86S 1881J DESMODIUM 397

be of no service, any more than the 11 mt movement Letta 71s

of amoeboid bodies. The movem< nt of the terminal leaf
though insensible to the eye, is exactly the same as that of
the little lateral leaflets viz. from side t<> ide, up and down,
anil half round their own axes. The only difference is that
the little leaflets move to a much greater extent, and perhaps
more rapidly ; and they are excited into movement by warm
water, which is not the case with the terminal leaflet. Wie-
the little lcallets, which arc rudimentary in size and have lost
their sleep-movements ami their movements from b< ing
shaken, should not only have retained, but have their spon-
taneous movements exaggerated, I cannot conceive. It is
hardly credible that it is a case of compensation. All this
makes me very anxious to examine some plant (if possible
one of the Leguminosae) with cither the terminal or lateral
leaflets greatly reduced in size, in comparison with the other
leaflets on the same leaf. Can you or any of your colleagues
think of any such plant? It is indirectly on this account that
I so much want the seeds of Lathyrus nissolia.

I hear from Frank that you think that the absence of both
lateral leaflets, or of one alone, is due to their having dropped
off; I thought so at first, and examined extremely young
leaves from the tips of the shoots, and some of them pre-
sented the same characters. Some appearances make me
think that they abort by becoming confluent with the main
petiole.

1 hear also that you doubt about the little leaflets ever
standing not opposite to each other: pray look at the en-
closed old leaf which has been for a time in spirits, and can
you call the little leaflets opposite? I have seen man)- such
cases on both my plants, though few so well marked.

To J. D. Hooker. 1 eUei -,,,

Down, Oct. 23rd [1873].

How good you have been about the plants ; but indeed I
did not intend you to write about Drosopliyllum, though 1
shall be very glad to have a specimen. Experiments on other
plants lead to fresh experiments. Neptunia is evidently a
hopeless case. I shall be very glad of the other plants
whenever they are ready. I constantly fear that I shall
become to you a giant of bores.

398 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 719 I am delighted to hear that you are at work on Nepentlies,
and I hope that you will have good luck. It is good news
that the fluid is acid ; you ought to collect a good lot and
have the acid analysed. I hope that the work x will give you
as much pleasure as analogous work has me. I do not think
any discovery gave me more pleasure than proving a true act
of digestion in Drosera.

Letter 720 To J. D. Hooker.

Down, Nov. 24th, 1873.

I have been greatly interested by Mimosa albida, on which
I have been working hard. Whilst your memory is pretty
fresh, I want to ask a question. When this plant was most
sensitive, and you irritated it, did the opposite leaflets shut
up quite close, as occurs during sleep, when even a lancet
could not be inserted between the leaflets ? I can never
cause the leaflets to come into contact, and some reasons
make me doubt whether they ever do so except during sleep ;
and this makes me wish much to hear from you. I grieve to
say that the plant looks more unhealthy, even, than it was at
Kew. I have nursed it like the tenderest infant ; but I was
forced to cut off one leaf to try the bloom, and one was
broken by the manner of packing. I have never syringed
(with tepid water) more than one leaf per day ; but if it dies,
I shall feel like a murderer. I am pretty well convinced that
I shall make out my case of movements as a protection
against rain lodging on the leaves. As far as I have as yet
made out, M. albida is a splendid case.

I have had no time to examine more than one species
of Eucalyptus. The seedlings of Lathy rus nissolia are very
interesting to me ; and there is something wonderful about
them, unless seeds of two distinct leguminous species have
got somehow mingled together.

Letter 721 To W. Thiselton-Dyer.

Down, Dec. 4th, 1873.
As Hooker is so busy, I should be very much obliged if
you could give me the name of the enclosed poor specimen of

1 Hooker's work on Nepenthes is referred to in Insectivorous Plants,
p. 97 : see also his address at the Belfast meeting of the British
Association, 1874.

1868— iS8i] M. I I PING I' I. A NTS 390

Cassia. I want much to know its name, as its- power of move- Lettei 721
ment, when it goes to sleep, is very remarkable. Linnaeu
find, was aware of this. It twists each separate leaflet almost
completely round,1 so that the lower surface faces the sky, at
the same time depressing them all. The terminal leaflets are-
pointed towards the base of the leaf. The whole leaf is ..
raised up about 12°. When I saw that it possessed such
complex powers of movement, 1 thought it would utilise its
power to protect the leaflets from rain. Accordingly I syringed
the plant for two minutes, and it was really beautiful to see
how each leaflet on the younger leaves twisted its short sub-
petiole, so that the blade was immediately directed at an
angle between 4 5 and 90 to the horizon. I could not resist
the pleasure of just telling you why I want to know the name
of the Cassia. I should add that it is a greenhouse plant. I
suppose that there will not be any better flowers till next
summer or autumn.

To T. Belt. letter 722

Belt's account, discussed in this letter, is probably that published in
his Naturalist in Nicaragua (1874), where he describes "the relation
between the presence of honey-secreting glands on plants, and the pro-
tection to the latter secured by the attendance of ants attracted by the
honey." {Op. at., pp. 222 ct seq.)

Thursday [1S74?].

Your account of the ants and their relations seems to me

to possess extraordinary interest. I do not doubt that the

excretion of sweet fluid by the glands is in your cases of great

advantage to the plants by means of the ants, but I cannot

avoid believing that primordially it is a simple excretion, as

occasionally occurs from the surface of the leaves of lime

trees. It is quite possible that the primordial excretion may

have been beneficially increased to serve the plant. In the

common laurel [Primus laurocerasus\ of our gardens the

hive-bees visit incessantly the -lands of the young leaves, on

their under sides ; and I should altogether doubt whether

their visits or the occasional visits of ants was of any service

to the laurel. The stipules of the common vetch secrete

largely during sunshine, and hive-bees collect the sweet fluid.

So 1 think it is with the common bean.

1 See Power of Movement in Plants. Fig. 1 ;.|. p. 370.

400 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 722 I am writing this away from home, and I have come away
to get some rest, having been a good deal overworked. I shall
read your book with great interest when published, but will
not trouble you to send the MS., as I really have no spare
strength or time. I believe that your book, judging by the
chapter sent, will be extremely valuable.

Letter 723 To J. D. Hooker.

The following letter refers to Darwin's prediction as to the manner in
which HedychiiDn (ZinziberaceaO is fertilised. Sir J. D. Hooker seems
to have made inquiries in India in consequence of which Darwin received
specimens of the moth which there visits the flower, unfortunately so
much broken as to be useless (see Life and Letters, III., p. 284).

Down, March 25th [1874].

I am glad to hear about the HedycJiium, and how soon
you have got an answer ! I hope that the wings of the
Sphinx will hereafter prove to be bedaubed with pollen, for
the case will then prove a fine bit of prophecy from the
structure of a flower to special and new means of fertilisation.

By the way, I suppose you have noticed what a grand
appearance the plant makes when the green capsules open,
and display the orange and crimson seeds and interior, so as
to attract birds, like the pale buff flowers to attract dusk-
flying lepidoptera. I presume you do not want seeds of
this plant, as I have plenty from artificial fertilisation.

In Nature, June 22nd, 1876, p. 173, Hermann Midler communicated
F. Midler's observation on the fertilisation of a bright-red-flowered
species of Hedychium, which is visited by Callidryas, chiefly the males
of C. PJiilca. The pollen is carried by the tips of the butterfly's wing,
to which it is temporarily fixed by the slimy layer produced by the
degeneration of the anther-wall.

Letter 724 To W- Thiselton-Dyer.

Down, June 4th [1874].
I am greatly obliged to you about the Opiuitia, and shall
be glad if you can remember Catalpa. I wish some facts on
the action of water,1 because I have been so surprised at a

1 See Pfeffer, Untersuchungen Bot. Inst, zu Tubingen, Bd. I., 1885,
p. 518. Pfeffer shows that in some cases — Drosera, for instance — water
produces movement only when it contains fine particles in suspension.
According to Pfeffer the stamens of Berberis, and the stigma of Mimulus,
are both stimulated by gelatine, the action of which is, generally speaking,
equivalent to that of water.

i868-i88i] PINGUICULA

stream not acting on Dtoncea and Drosera Watei d < not Letter 7x4

act on the stamens of Berberis, but it docs on the stigma of
Mimulus. It causes the flowers of the bedding-out Mesem-
bryanthemum and Prosera to close, hut it has not this effect
on Gazania and the daisy, so I can make out no rule.

I hope you are going on with Nepenthes ; and if^so, you
will perhaps like to hear that I have just found out that
Pinguicula can digest albumen, gelatine, etc. If a bit of gl
or wood is placed on a leaf, the secretion is not incn
but if an insect or animal-matter is thus placed, the secretion
is greatly increased and becomes feebly acid, which was not
the case before. I have been astonished and much disturl
by finding that cabbage seeds excite a copious secretion, and
am now endeavouring to discover what this mean-;.1 Probably
in a few days' time I shall have to beg a little information
from you, so I will write no more now.

l'.S. I heard from Asa Gray a week ago, ind he tells me
a beautiful fact : not only docs the lid of Sarracenia secrete
a sweet fluid, but there is a line or trail of sweet exudation
down to the ground so as to tempt insects up.2

To W. Thiselton-Dyer. ' "« 7*5

n, June 23rd, i

I wrote to you about a week ago, thanking you for in-
formation on cabbage seeds, asking you the name of Luzula
or Carcx, and on some other points ; and I hope before very
long to receive an answer. You must now, if you can, for-
give me for being very troublesome, for I am in that state in
which I would sacrifice friend or foe. I have ascertained that
bits of certain leaves, for instance spinach, excite much
secretion in Pinguicula, and that the glands absorb matter
from the leaves. Now this morning I have received a lot
of leaves from my future daughter-in-law in North Wales,
having a surprising number of captured insects on them, a
good many leaves, and two seed-capsules. She informs me
that the little leaves had excited secretion ; and my son and

1 Clearly it had not occurred to Darwin tli.it seed> may supply nitro-
genous food as well as insects : see //.• . p. 390.

' A dried specimen of Sarracenia, stuffed with cotton wool, was
sometimes brought from his study In- Mr. Darwin, and made the sul
of a little lecture to visitors of natural history tastes.

VOL. II. 26

402 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 725 I have ascertained this morning that the protoplasm in the
glands beneath the little leaves has undoubtedly undergone
aggregation. Therefore, absurd as it may sound, I am pre-
pared to affirm that Pinguecula is not only insectivorous, but
graminivorous, and granivorous ! Now I want to beg you to
look under the simple microscope at the enclosed leaves and
seeds, and, if you possibly can, tell me their genera. The
little narrow leaves l are remarkable ; they are fleshy, with
the edges much curled from the axis of the plant, and bear
a few long glandular hairs ; these grow in little tufts. These
are the commonest in Pinguicula, and seem to afford most
nutritious matter. A second leaf is like a miniature sycamore.
With respect to the seeds, I suppose that one is a Carex ; the
other looks like that of Rumex, but is enclosed in a globular
capsule. The Pinguicula grew on marshy, low, mountainous
land.

I hope you will think this subject sufficiently interesting
to make you willing to aid me as far as you can. Anyhow,
forgive me for being so very troublesome.

T , „ , To J. D. Hooker.

Letter 726 J

Down, Aug. 30th [1S74].

I am particularly obliged for your address.2 It strikes
me as quite excellent, and has interested me in the highest
degree. Nor is this due to my having worked at the subject,
for I feel sure that I should have been just as much struck,
perhaps more so, if I had known nothing about it. You
could not, in my opinion, have put the case better. There
are several lights (besides the facts) in your essay new to
me, and you have greatly honoured me. I heartily con-
gratulate you on so splendid a piece of work. There is a
misprint at p. 7, Mitschke for Nitschke. There is a partial
error at p. 8, where you say that Drosera is nearly indifferent
to inorganic substances. This is much too strong, though
they do act less efficiently than organic with soluble
nitrogenous matter ; but the chief difference is in the widely
different period of subsequent re-expansion. Thirdly, I did
not suggest to Sanderson his electrical experiments, though,
no doubt, my remarks led to his thinking of them.

1 Those of Erica tetralix.

2 Presidential address (Biological Section) at the Belfast meeting of
the British Association, 1874.

i868— iSSi | UTRICULARIA 4°3

Now for your letter: you arc very generous about Diotuea, letter 726
but some of my experiments will require cutting off leaves,
and therefore injuring plants. I could not write to Lady
Dorothy [Nevill]. Rollisson says that they expect soon a
lot from America. If Dionoea is not despatched, have marked
on address, "to be forwarded by foot- messenger."

Mrs. Barber's paper1 is very curious, and ought to be
published ; but when you come here (and remember you
offered to come) we will consult where to send it. Let m
hear when you recommence on Ceplnilotus or Sarracenia, as
1 think I am now on right track about Utricularia, after
wasting several weeks in fruitless trials and observations.
The negative work takes five times more time than the
positive.

To J. D. Hooker. Letter 727

Down, Sept. 18th [1874].

I have had a splendid day's work, and must tell you
about it.

Lady Dorothy sent me a young plant of I T[tricularia]
montana* which I fancy is the species you told me of. The
roots or rhizomes (for I know not which they are ; I can see
no scales or internodes or absorbent hairs) bear scores of
bladders from ,',, to ,,',0 of an inch in diameter ; and I traced
these roots to the depth of \\ in. in the peat and sand. The
bladders are like glass, and have the same essential structure
as those of our species, with the exception that many exterior
parts arc aborted. Internally the structure is perfect, as is
the minute valvular opening into the bladder, which is filled
with water. I then felt sure that they captured subterranean
insects, and after a time 1 found two with decayed remnants,
with clear proof that something had been absorbed, which had
generated protoplasm. When you are here I shall be very
curious to know whether they are roots or rhizomes.

Besides the bladders there are great tuber-like swellings
on the rhizomes ; one was an inch in length and half
in breadth. I suppose these must have been described. 1

1 Mrs. Barber's paper on the pupa of Papilio Nireus assuming
different tints corresponding to the objects to which it \\:is attached,
was communicated by Mr. Darwin to the Trans. Entonu . .- ., 1874.

* See Life and Letters, III., p. 327, and Insectivorous Plants, p. 431.

404 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 727 strongly suspect that they serve as reservoirs for water.1 But
I shall experimentise on this head. A thin slice is a beautiful
object, and looks like coarsely reticulated glass.

If you have an old plant which could be turned out of its
pot (and can spare the time), it would be a great gain to me
if you would tear off a bit of the roots near the bottom, and
shake them well in water, and see whether they bear these
minute glass-like bladders. I should also much like to know
whether old plants bear the solid bladder-like bodies near the
upper surface of the pot. These bodies are evidently enlarge-
ments of the roots or rhizomes. You must forgive this long
letter, and make allowance for my delight at finding this new
sub-group of insect-catchers. Sir E. Tennent speaks of an
aquatic species of Utricularia in Ceylon, which has bladders
on its roots, and rises annually to the surface, as he says, by
this means.2

We shall be delighted to see you here on the 26th ; if you
will let us know your train we will send to meet you. You
will have to work like a slave while you are here.

Letter 728 To J. Jenner Weir.

In 1870 Mr. jenner Weir wrote to Darwin: "My brother has but
two kinds of laburnum, viz., Cytisus purpureus, very erect, and Cytisus
alpinus, very pendulous. He has several stocks of the latter grafted
with the purple one ; and this year, the grafts being two years old, I saw
in one, fairly above the stock, about four inches, a raceme of purely
yellow flowers with the usual dark markings, and above them a bunch
of purely purple flowers ; the branches of the graft in no way showed an
intermediate character, but had the usual rigid growth of purpureus."

Early in July 1875, when Darwin was correcting a new edition of
Variation under Domestication, he again corresponded with Mr. Weir
on the subject.

Down, July 8th [1875].

I thank you cordially. The case interests me in a higher
degree than anything which I have heard for a very long
time. Is it your brother Harrison W., whom I know? I
should like to hear where the garden is. There is one other
very important point which I am most anxious to hear — viz.,

1 The existence of water-stores is quite in accordance with the
epiphytic habit of the plant.

1 Utricularia siellaris. Emerson Tennent's Ceylon, Vol. I., p. 124,
1859.

i868 — 18K1] CYTISUS A DA MI 405

the nature of the leaves at the base of the yellow racemes, for Letter 728

s arc always there produced with the yellow laburnums,
and I suppose so in the case of C. purpureus. As the tri
produced yellow racemes several times, do you think you
could ask your brother to cut off and send me by post in a
box a small branch of the purple stock1 with the pods or
leaves of the yellow sport? 1 his would be an immense
favour, tor then I would cut the point of junction Ion
tudinally and examine slice under the microscope, to be
able to state no trace of bud of yellow kind having been
inserted. I do not suspect anything of the kind, but it is
sure to be said that your brother's gardener, either by accident
or fraud, inserted a bud. Under this point of view it would
be very good to gather from your brother how man)- times the
yellow sport has appeared. The case appears to me so very
important as to be worth any trouble. Very many thanks for
all assistance so kindly given.

I will of course send a copy of new edition of Variation
under Domestication when published in the autumn.

To J. Jenner Weir. Letter 729

On July 9th Mr. Weir wrote to say that a branch of the Cytisus had
been despatched to Down. The present letter was doubtless written
after Darwin had examined the specimen. In Variation under Domesti-
cation, Ed. 11., Vol. I., p. 417, note, he gives for a case recorded in
the Gardeners' Chronicle in 1857 the explanation here offered (viz. that
the graft was not C. purpureus but C. Adami), and adds, " I have ascer-
tained that this occurred in another instance." This second instance is
doubtless Mr. Weir's.

Down, July 10th, 1S75.

I do not know how to thank you enough ; pray give also
my thanks and kind remembrances to your brother. I am
sure you will forgive my expressing my doubts freely, as 1
well know that you desire the truth more than anything else.
I cannot avoid the belief that some nurseryman has sold
C[ytisus\ Adami to your brother in place of the tine C. pur-
pureus. The latter is a little bush only 3 feet high (Loudon),
and when I read your account.it seemed to me a physical
impossibility that a sporting branch of C. alpinus could grow
to any size and be supported on the extremely delicate

1 "The purple stock" here means the supposed C. purpureus, on
w hi, h a yellow-flowered branch was borne.

406 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 729 branches of C. purpureus. If I understand rightly your letter,
you consider the tuft of small shoots on one side of the
sporting C. alpinus from Weirleigh as C. purpureus ; but these
shoots are certainly those of C. Adami. I earnestly beg you
to look at the specimens enclosed. The branch of the true
C. purpureus is the largest which I could find. If C. Adami
was sold to your brother as C. purpureus, everything is ex-
plained ; for then the gardener has grafted C. Adami on
C. alpinus, and the former has sported in the usual manner ;
but has not sported into C. purpureas, only into C. alpinus.
C. Adami does not sport less frequently into C. purpureus
than into C. alpinus. Are the purple flowers borne on mode-
rately long racemes? If so, the plant is certainly C. Ada7ni,
for the true C. purpureus bears flowers close to the branches.
I am very sorry to be so troublesome, but I am very anxious
to hear again from you.

C. purpureus bears " flowers axillary, solitary, stalked."
P.S. — I think you said that the purple [tree] at Weirleigh
does not seed, whereas the C. purpureas seeds freely, as you
may see in enclosed. C. Adami never produces seeds or pods.

Letter 730 To E. Hackel.

The following extract refers to Darwin's book on Cross and Self-
Fertilisation.

Nov. 13th, 1875.

I am now busy in drawing up an account of ten years'
experiments in the growth and fertility of plants raised from
crossed and self-fertilised flowers. It is really wonderful what
an effect pollen from a distinct seedling plant, which has been
exposed to different conditions of life, has on the offspring in
comparison with pollen from the same flower or from a
distinct individual, but which has been long subjected to the
same conditions. The subject bears on the very principle of
life, which seems almost to require changes in the conditions.

Letter 731 To G. J. Romanes.

The following extract from a letter to Romanes refers to Francis
Darwin's paper, "Experiments on the Nutrition of Drosera rotundifolia."
Linn. Soc. Journ. [1878], published 1880, p. 17.

August 9th [1876].
The second point which delights me, seeing that half a
score of botanists throughout Europe have published that the

1868-1881] DROSERA 407

digestion of meat by plants is of no use to them (a mere Letter 731
pathological phenomenon, as one man says !), is that Frank ha
been feeding under exactly similar conditions a large number
of plants of Drosera, and the effect is wonderful. On the fv<\
side the leaves are much larger, differently coloured, and moi
numerous ; flower-stalks taller and more numerous, and 1
believe far more seed capsules, -but these not yet counted.
It is particularly interesting that the leaves fed on meat
contain very many more starch granules (no doubt owing to
more protoplasm being first formed) ; so that sections stained
with iodine, of fed and unfed leaves, are to the naked eye of
very different colours.

There, I have boasted to my heart's content ; and do you
do the same, and tell me what you have been doing.

To J. D. Hooker. Lettei

I (own, 1 let 251I1 [is:6J.

If you can put the following request into any one's hands
pray do so ; but if not, ignore my request, as I know how bus)
you are.

I want any and all plants of Hoya examined to see if any
imperfect flowers like the one enclosed can be found, and if so
to send them to me, per post, damp. Hut I especially want
them as young as possible.

They arc very curious. I have examined some sent me
from Abinger,1 but they were a month or two too old, and
every trace of pollen and anthers had disappeared or had
never been developed. Vet a very fine pod with apparently
good seed - had been formed by one such flower.

To G. J. Romanes Letter 7^3

11st loth [1S77].

When 1 went yesterday I had not received to-day's

Nature, and 1 thought that your lecture ' was finished. This
final part is one of the grandest essays which I ever read.

1 Lord Farrer's house.

* The seeds did not germinate ; see the account tA Hoya carnosa in
Forms of Flowers^ p. 331.

3 Published in the Life of Romanes, p.

4 Abstract of a lecture on "Evolution of Nerves and Nervo-System
delivered at the Royal Institution, Ma) 25th, 1 \ ifure, July l
Aug. 2nd, Auy. 9th, [877.

4°^ BOTANY [Chap. Xl

Letter 733 It was very foolish of me to demur to your lines of con-
veyance like the threads in muslin,1 knowing how you have
considered the subject : but still I must confess I cannot feel
quite easy. Everyone, I suppose, thinks on what he has
himself seen, and with Drosera, a bit of meat put on any one
gland on its disc causes all the surrounding tentacles to bend
to this point, and here there can hardly be differentiated lines
of conveyance. It seems to me that the tentacles probably
bend to that point wherever a molecular wave strikes them,
which passes through the cellular tissue with equal ease in all
directions in this particular case.2 But what a fine case that
of the A 2i re Ha is ! 3

Letter 734 To W. Thiselton-Dyer.

6, Queen Anne Street [Dec. 1876].

Tell Hooker I feel greatly aggrieved by him : I went to
the Royal Society to see him for once in the chair of the
Royal, to admire his dignity and enjoy it, and lo and behold,
he was not there. My outing gave me much satisfaction, and
I was particularly glad to see Mr. Bentham, and to see him
looking so wonderfully well and young. I saw lots of people,
and it has not done me a penny's worth of harm, though I
could not get to sleep till nearly four o'clock.

Letter 735 To D. Oliver.

Down, Oct. 13th [1876?].

You must be a clair-voyant or something of that kind to
have sent me such useful plants. Twenty-five years ago I
described in my father's garden two forms of Linwn flavum
(thinking it a case of mere variation) ; from that day to this
I have several times looked, but never saw the second form
till it arrived from Kew. Virtue is never its own reward : I
took paper this summer to write to you to ask you to send
me flowers, [so] that I might beg plants of this Linum, if you
had the other form, and refrained, from not wishing to trouble
you. But I am now sorry I did, for I have hardly any doubt

1 Nature, Aug. 2nd, p. 271.

3 Speaking generally, the transmission takes place more readily in
the longitudinal direction than across the leaf: see Insectivorous Plants,
P- 239-

3 Aurelia aur/ta, one of the medusae. Nature, pp. 269-71.

-I

that L.fiavur>>. : n that I have seer., l-

because o: ^s.1

The followin. to Darwin's work on u bloom*

• on which he did r. to comp irches : —

One of his ear .bject was addressed m Aug

Joseph Hooke

n from yoo, and if you do not yourself k-
some of the wise men of K

many plants protected t
^e com:
so ma
if encased
common pea. or a raspber I find several leaves are thus

.
On this latter point L
: am now be ad about drops of

drops
of
drops act as burning

a man. I should very mnch
. to hear fa I remember when I . hothouse orchids

I was . r.ot to wet their k^ a then thought on

the s

:
printed

-

i

O: I to 1 ■-".•.:. I -: t been for

I ss, we should have 1 s it is

have made out

lent) the b s oerta

prevent- L-shore plants |

vents - dt iter, and,

from ; ter resting

1 Li est, be :he plant bf . _ rown fro

- also arg
-
be rais

1 I III-, p. ;

3 L

* PubllS

410 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 736 is as yet the most doubtful and the most interesting point
in relation to the movements of plants.

Modern research, especially that of Stahl on transpiration {Bot.
Zeitung, 1897, p. 71) has shown that the question is more complex than
it appeared in 1877. Stahl's point of view is that moisture remaining on a
leaf checks the transpiration-current ; and by thus diminishing the flow
of mineral nutriment interferes with the process of assimilation. Stahl's
idea is doubtless applicable to the whole problem of bloom on leaves.
For other references to bloom see Letters 685, 689 (p. 368), 693.

To J. D. Hooker.

Letter 737 Down, Aug. 19th, 1873.

The next time you walk round the garden ask Mr. Smith,1
or any of your best men, what they think about injury from
watering during sunshine. One of your men — viz., Mr. Payne,
at Abinger, who seems very acute — declares that you may
water safely any plant out of doors in sunshine, and that you
may do the same for plants under glass if the sashes are
opened. This seems to me very odd, but he seems positive
on the point, and acts on it in raising splendid grapes.
Another good gardener maintains that it is only cold water
dripping often on the same point of a leaf that ever injures
it. I am utterly perplexed, but interested on the point.
Give me what you learn when you come to Down.

I should like to hear what plants are believed to be most
injured by being watered in sunshine, so that I might get such.

I expect that I shall be utterly beaten, as on so many
other points ; but I intend to make a few experiments and
observations. I have already convinced myself that drops
of water do not act as burning lenses.

•r>

To J. D. Hooker.
Letter 738 Dec. aoth [1873]-

I find that it is no use going on with my experiments
on the evil effects of water on bloom-divested leaves. Either
I erred in the early autumn or summer in some incompre-
hensible manner, or, as I suspect to be the case, water is only
injurious to leaves when there is a good supply of actinic
rays. I cannot believe that I am all in the wrong about the
movements of the leaves to shoot off water.

1 Probably John Smith (1 798-1 888), for some years Curator, Royal
Gardens, Kew.

1868— i88i] BLOOM 4' '

The upshot of all this is that I want to keep all the plants Letta
from Kew until the spring or early summer, as it is mere

\vast<- i «f time going on at present.

To W. Thiselton-Dyer. i

I town, July 22ml [ 1S77 Js

Many thanks for seeds of the Malva and information
about Averrhoa, which I perceived was sensitive, as A. caram-
bola is said to be; and about Mimosa sensitiva. The 1<
wood \H<Bmatoxylon\ has interested me much. The wax is
very easily removed, especially from the older leaves, and
I found after squirting on the leaves with water at 95 , all the
older leaves became coated, after forty-eight hours, in an
astonishing manner with a black Uredo, so that they looked as
if sprinkled with soot and water. But not one of the younger
leaves was affected. '1 his has set me to work to sec whether
the " bloom " is not a protection against parasites. As soon ..
I have ascertained a little more about the case (and general ly
I am quite wrong at first) I will ask whether 1 could have
a very small plant, which should never be syringed with
water above 6o°, and then I suspect the leaves would not be
spotted, as were the older ones on the plant, when it arrived
from Kew, but nothing like what they were after my squirting.

In an old note of yours (which I have just found) you say
that you have a sensitive Schrankia : could this be lent me ?

I have had lent me a young Coral-tree {Erythrind), which is
very sickly, yet shows odd sleep movements. I suppose I could
buy one, but Hooker told me first to ask you for anythin

Lastly, have you any seaside plants with bloom ? 1 find
that drops of sea-water corrode sea-kale if bloom is removed ;
also the var. littorum of Triticum repens. I By the way, my
plants of the latter, grown in pots here, are now throwing up
long flexible green blades, and it is very odd to 1 the

same culm, the rigid grey bloom-covered blades and the green
flexible ones.) Cabbages, ill-luck to them, do not seem to be
hurt by salt water. Hooker formerly told me that Sah
kali, a var. of Salicomia, one species of Suceda, EupJu rbia
pcplis, Lathy rus maritimus, Eryngium maritimum, were all
glaucous and seaside plants. It is very improbable that you
have any of these or of foreigners with the same attributes.

God forgive me : I hope that 1 have not bored you greatly.

412 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 739 By all the rules of right the leaves of the logwood ought
to move (as if partially going to sleep) when syringed with
tepid water. The leaves of my little plant do not move at all,
and it occurs to me as possible, though very improbable, that
it would be different with a larger plant with perhaps larger
leaves. Would you some day get a gardener to syringe
violently, with water kept in a hothouse, a branch on one of
your largest logwood plants and observe [whether ?] leaves
move together towards the apex of leaf?

By the way, what astonishing nonsense Mr. Andrew
Murray has been writing about leaves and carbonic acid !
I like to see a man behaving consistently. . . .

What a lot I have scribbled to you !

Letter 740

To W. Thiselton-Dyer.

[Aug., 1877. J
There is no end to my requests. Can you spare me a
good plant (or even two) of Oxalis sensitiva ? The one which
I have (formerly from Kew) has been so maltreated that I
dare not trust my results any longer.

Please give the enclosed to Mr. Lynch.1 The spontaneous
movements of the Averrhoa are very curious.

You sent me seeds of Trifolium resupinahnn, and I have
raised plants, and some former observa-
tions which I did not dare to trust have
proved accurate. It is a very little fact,
but curious. The half of the lateral
leaflets (marked by a cross) on the
lower side have no bloom and are wetted,
whereas the other half has bloom and
is not wetted, so that the two sides look
different to the naked eye. The cells
Fig. 13.— Leaf of Trifolium of the epidermis appear of a different
resupinatum (from a shape and size on the two sides of the

drawing by Miss Pertz). ^ rp- ■ -,

When we have drawings and measurements of cells made,

1 Mr. Lynch, now Curator of the Cambridge Botanic Garden, was at
this time in the R. Bot. Garden, Kew. Mr. Lynch described the move-
ments of Averrhoa bilimbi in the Linn. Soc. Journ., Vol. XVI., p. 231.
See also The Power of Movement in P/an/s, p. 330.

i868— 1SS1] BLOOM .13

and arc sure of our facts, I shall ask you whether you know Letta 740
of any case of the same leaf differing histologically on the two

sides, for Hooker always says you arc a wonderful man
knowing what has been made out.

The biological meaning of the curious stru< ture of the leaves of
Trifolium resupinatum remains a riddle. The stomata and (speal
from memory) die trichomes differ on the two halves of the lateral
leaflets.

To L. Errera. Letter 741

Professor L. Errer.i, of Brussels wrote, as a student, to Darwin, asking
permission to send the MS. of an essay by his friend S. Gevaert and
himself on cross and self-fertilisation, and which was afterwards published
in the Bull. Soc. Bot. Belg., XVII., 1878. The terms xenogamy, geitono-
gamy, and autogamy were first suggested by Kerner in 1876; their
definition will be found at p. 9 of Ogle's translation of Kerner's Flowers
and their Unbidden Guests, 1878. In xenogamy the pollen comes from
another plant ; in geitonogamy from anothcryV^r.v.r on the same flint ;
in autogamy from the andicecium of the fertilised flower. Allogamy
embraces xenogamy and geitonogamy.

Down, Oct. 4th. 1S77.

I have now read your MS. The whole has interested me
greatly, and is very clearly written. I wish that I had used
some such terms as autogamy, xenogamy, etc. ... I entirely
agree with you on the a priori probability of geitonogamy
being more advantageous than autogamy ; and I cannot
remember having ever expressed a belief that autogamy,
as a general rule, was better than geitonogamy ; but the
cases recorded by me seem too strong not to make me
suspect that there was some unknown advantage in auto-
gamy. In one place1 I insert the caution "if this be really
the case," which you quote. I shall be v< ryglad to be proved
to be altogether in error on this point.

Accept my thanks for pointing out the bad erratum at

1 See Cross and Self-Fertilisation, pp. 352, 386. The phrase referred
to occurs in both passages ; that on p. 386 is as follows : " We have also
seen reason to suspect that self-fertilisation is in some peculiar manner
beneficial to certain plants ; but if this be really the case, the benefit thus
derived is far more than counterbalanced by a cross with a fresh stock or
with a slightly different variety." Errera and Gevaert conclude (pp. 79-S0)
that the balance of the available evidence is in favour of the belief that
geitonogamy is intermediate, in effectiveness, between autogamy and
xenogamy.

414 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 741 p. 301. I hope that you will experimentise on inconspicuous
flowers * ; if I were not too old and too much occupied I
would do so myself.

Finally let me thank you for the kind manner in which
you refer to my work, and with cordial good wishes for your
success. . . .

Letter 742 To W. Thiselton-Dyer.

Down, Oct. 9th, 1877.

One line to thank you much about Mertensia. The former
plant has begun to make new leaves, to my great surprise, so
that I shall be now well supplied. We have worked so well
with the Averrhoa that unless the second species arrives in a
very good state it would be superfluous to send it. I am
heartily glad that you and Mrs. Dyer are going to have a
holiday. I will look at you as a dead man for the next
month, and nothing shall tempt me to trouble you. But
before you enter your grave aid me if you can. I want
seeds of three or four plants (not Leguminosae or Cruciferae)
which produce large cotyledons. I know not in the least
what plants have large cotyledons. Why I want to know
is as follows : The cotyledons of Cassia go to sleep, and are
sensitive to a touch ; but what has surprised me much is that
they are in constant movement up and down. So it is with
the cotyledons of the cabbage, and therefore I am very curious
to ascertain how far this is general.

Letter 743 To W. Thiselton-Dyer.

Down, Oct. nth [1877].

The fine lot of seeds arrived yesterday, and are all sown,
and will be most useful. If you remember, pray thank Mr.
Lynch for his aid. I had not thought of beech or sycamore,
but they are now sown.

Perhaps you may like to see a rough copy of the tracing
of movements of one of the cotyledons of red cabbage, and
you can throw it into the fire. A line joining the two coty-
ledons stood facing a north-east window, and the day was

1 See Miss Bateson, Annals of Botany, 1888, p. 255, "On the Cross-
Fertilisation oflnconspicuous Flowers:" Miss Bateson showed that Scnccio
vulgaris clearly profits by cross-fertilisation ; Stellaria media and Cap-
sella bursa-pastoris less certainly.

,868 — 1SS1 1 MOVEMENTS OF PLAN! | I -

uniformly cloudy. A bristle was gummed to one cotyledon, letter 743
and beyond it a triangular bit of card was fixed, and in

front a vertical glass. A dot was made in the glass ev
quarter or half hour at the point where the end of the bristle

and the apex of card coincided, and the dots were joined
by straight lines. The observations were from 10 am. to
8.45 p.m. During this time the enclosed figure was de-
scribed ; but between .| p.m. and 5.38 p.m. the coty-
ledon moved so that the prolonged line was beyond the
limits of the glass, and the course is here shown by an
imaginary dotted line. The cotyledon of Primula sinensis
moved in closely analogous manner, as do those of a Cassia.
Hence I expect to find such movements very general with
cotyledons, and I am inclined to look at them as the founda-
tion for all the other adaptive movements of leaves. They
certainly are of the so-called sleep of plants.

I hope I have not bothered you. Do not answer. I am
all on fire at the work.

I have had a short and very prosperous note from Asa
Gray,1 who says Hooker is very prosperous, and both are
tremendously hard at work.

To H. M tiller. Letter 744

Down, Jan. ist [1S7S?].

I must write two or three lines to thank you cordially for
your very handsome ami very interesting review of my last
book2 in fCosmos, which I have this minute finished. It is
wonderful how you have picked out everything important in
it. I am especially glad that you have called attention to the
parallelism bctwen illegitimate offspring of heterostyled plants
and hybrids. Your previous article in Kosmos* seemed to
me very important, but for some unknown reason the german
was very difficult, and I was sadly overworked at the time, - 1
that I could not understand a good deal of it. But I have
put it on one side, and when I have to prepare a new edition
of my book I must make it out. It seems that you attribute

1 " Hooker is coming o\'er, and we are going in summer to the Rocky
Mountains together, according to an old promise of mine." Asa Gray to
G. F. Wright, May 24th, 1877 (Letters of Asa Gray, II.. p. 6'

' Forms of Fiozcct.^ 1S77. II. M tiller's article is in a II.. p. 2S6.

3 Kosmos, II., pp. 11, 128. See Forms of Fl . Ed. u., p. 308.

416 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 744 such cases as that of the dioecious Rhamnus and your own
of Valeriana to the existence of two forms with larger and
smaller flowers. I cannot follow the steps by which such
plants have been rendered dioecious, but when I read your
article with more care I hope I shall understand.1 If you have
succeeded in explaining this class of cases I shall heartily
rejoice, for they utterly perplexed me, and I could not con-
jecture what their meaning was. It is a grievous evil to have
no faculty for new languages.

With the most sincere respect and hearty good wishes to
you and all your family for the new year

P.S. — What interesting papers your wonderful brother has
lately been writing !

Letter 745 To W. Thiselton-Dyer.

This letter refers to the purchase of instruments for the Jodrell
Laboratory in the Royal Gardens, Kew. "The Royal Commission on
Scientific Instruction and the Advancement of Science, commonly spoken
of as the Devonshire Commission, in its Fourth Report (1874), p. 10,
expressed the opinion that 'it is highly desirable that opportunities for
the pursuit of investigations in Physiological Botany should be afforded
at Kew to those persons who may be inclined to follow that branch of
science.' Effect was given to this recommendation by the liberality of
the late T. J. Phillips-Jodrell, M.A., who built and equipped the small
laboratory, which has since borne his name, at his own expense. It was
completed and immediately brought into use in 1876." The above is
taken from the Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information, R. Botanic
Gardens, Kew, 1901, p. 102, which also gives a list of work carried out in
the laboratory between 1876 and 1900.

Down, March 14th, 1878.

I have a very strong opinion that it would be the greatest
possible pity if the Physiological] Lab., now that it has been
built, were not supplied with as many good instruments as
your funds can possibly afford. It is quite possible that some
of them may become antiquated before they are much or
even at all used. But this does not seem to me any argument
at all against getting them, for the Laboratory cannot be

1 See Forms of Flowers, Ed. 11., pp. 9 and 304. H. Midler's view is
briefly that conspicuous and less conspicuous varieties occurred, and that
the former were habitually visited first by insects ; thus the less con-
spicuous form would play the part of females and their pollen would tend
to become superfluous. See H. Miiller in Kosmos, II.

■ - 1 88 1 3 JODRELL LAI rOR\ 4 1 ,~

used until well provided ; and the mere fact of the instruments Letter 745
bein ready may suggest to some one to use them. You at
Kew, as guardians and promoters of botanical science, will
then have done all in your power, and if your Lab. is i,
used the disgrace will lie at the I f the public But until

bitter experience proves the contrary I will never believe tl.
we are so backward. I should think the German laboratory
would be very good guides as t<- what to get ; but Timiriazeff
of Moscow, who travelled over Europe to see all Bot. Labs.,
ami who seemed so good a fellow, would, I should think, give
the best list of the most indispensable instruments. Lately I
thought of getting Frank or Horace to go to Cambridge for
the use of the heliostat there; but our observations turned
out of less importance than I thought ; yet if there had been
one at Kew we should probably have used it, and might have
found out something curious. It is impossible for me I
predict whether or not we should ever want this or that
instrument, for we are guided in our work by what turns up.
Thus 1 am now observing something about geotropism, and
I hail no idea a few weeks ago that this would have been
necessary. In a short time we might earnestly wish for a
centrifugal apparatus or a heliostat. In all such cases it
would make a great difference if a man knew that he could
a particular instrument without great loss of time. 1
have now given my opinion, which is very decided, whether
right or wrong, and Frank quite a with me. You can,

of course, show this letter to 1 looker.

To F. Ludwig. Letter 746

ii. May 29th, I !

I think you sincerely for the trouble which you have-
taken in sending me so long and interesting a lett ether
with the specimens. Gradations are always very valuable,
and you have been remarkably successful in discovering the
stages by which the Piantago* has become gyno-dicecious.
Your view of its origin, from being proterogynous, seems to
me very probable, especially as the females are . illy the

■.-flowering plants. If you can prove the reverse case with

1 See F. Ludv. Isch./.tLGt Bd. I. II.. 1879. Pro-

fessor Ludwiy's observations are quoted in the preface to Forms of
Flowers^ Ed. 11., p. i\.

VOL. II.

418 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 746 Thymus your view will manifestly be rendered still more
probable. I have never felt satisfied with H. Muller's view,1
though he is so careful and admirable an observer. It is
more than seventeen years since I attended to Plantago, and
when nothing had been published on the subject, and in
consequence I omitted to attend to several points ; and now,
after so long an interval, I cannot pretend to say to which of
your forms the English one belongs ; I well remember that
the anther of the females contained a good deal [of] pollen,
though not one sound grain.

P.S. — Delpino is Professor of Botany in Genoa, Italy 2 ; I
have always found him a most obliging correspondent.

Letter 747 To W. Thiselton-Dyer.

Down, Aug. 24th [1878].

Many thanks for seeds of Trifolium resupinatum, which
are invaluable to us. I enclose seeds of a Cassia, from Fritz
Muller, and they are well worth your cultivation ; for he says
they come from a unique, large and beautiful tree in the
interior, and though looking out for years, he has never seen
another specimen. One of the most splendid, largest and
rarest butterflies in S. Brazil, he has never seen except near
this one tree, and he has just discovered that its caterpillars
feed on its leaves.

I have just been looking at fine young pods beneath the
ground of Aracliis} I suppose that the pods are not with-
drawn when ripe from the ground ; but should this be the case
kindly inform me ; if I do not hear I shall understand that
[the] pods ripen and are left permanently beneath the ground.

If you ever come across heliotropic or apheliotropic aerial
roots on a plant not valuable (but which should be returned),
I should like to observe them. Bignonia capreolata, with its
strongly apheliotropic tendrils (which I had from Kew), is now
interesting me greatly. Veitch tells me it is not on sale in
any London nursery, as I applied to him for some additional
plants. So much for business.

I have received from the Geographical Soc. your lecture,*

1 See Forms of Flowers, Ed. II., p. 308. Also letter 744.

2 Now at Naples.

3 Arachis hypo^cea, cultivated for its "ground nuts."

4 " On Plant Distribution as a field for Geographical Research."
Geoe;r. Soc. Proc, XXII., 1878, p. 412.

I86S iSSi] II. M ULLER -4 l

and read it with great interest But it ought not merely to Letta
be read; it requires study. [*he <>lc criticism which 1 have
to make is that parts are too much 1 >ndensed : but, good
Lord, how rare a fault is this! You do not quote Saporta,
1 think ; and some of his work on the Tertiary plants would
have been useful to you. In a former note you spoke con-
temptuously of your lecture: all 1 can say is that I never
heard any one speak more unjustly and shamefully of
another than you have done of yourself!

To H. A I idler. L<m<--r ;

I (own, - pt. j >th, isjS.

I am working away on some points in vegetable physiology-
but though the>- interest me and my son, yet they have none
of the fascination which the fertilisation of flowers possesses.
Nothing in my life has ever interested me more than the
fertilisation of such plants as Primula and Lythrutn^ or again
Anacamptis* or Listera.

To H. Mullcr. Letter J

I town, Feb. 1 2th [ 1S79].

I have just heard that some misfortune has befallen you,
and that you have been treated shamefully.2 1 grieve deeply
to hear this, and as soon as you can find a few minutes to
spare, I earnestly beg you to let me hear what has happened.

To A. Stephen Wilson. Letter 750

The following letters refer to two forms of wheat cultivated in Russia
under the names Kubanka and Saxonka, which had been sent to
Mr. Darwin by Dr. Asher from Samara, and were placed in the hands
of Mr. Wilson that he might test the belief prevalent in Russia that
Kubanka "grown repeatedly on inferior soil,'' assumes " the form of

1 Orchis pyramidal is.

* Hermann Muller was accused by the Ultramontane party
Introducing into his school-teaching crude hypotheses ("unreife Hypo-
thesen"), which were assumed to have a harmful influence upon the
religious sentiments oi his pupils. Attempts were made to bring about
Midler's dismissal, but the active hostility of his opponents, which he
met in a dignified spirit, proved futile. ("Prof. Dr. Hermann Muller
von Lippstadt. Ein Gedenkblatt," von Ernst Krause. Kosmos, VII.,
p. 393, 1883.)

420 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Saxonka." Mr. Wilson's paper of 1880 gives the results of his inquiry.
He concludes (basing his views partly on analogous cases and partly on
his study of the Russian wheats) that the supposed transformation is
explicable in chief part by the greater fertility of the Saxonka wheat
leading to extermination of the other form. According to Mr. Wilson,
therefore, the Saxonka survivors are incorrectly assumed to be the
result of the conversion of one form into the other.

Letter 750 Down, April 24th, 1878.

I send you herewith some specimens which may perhaps
interest you, as you have so carefully studied the varieties of
wheat. Anyhow, they are of no use to me, as I have neither
knowledge nor time sufficient. They were sent me by the
Governor of the Province of Samara, in Russia, at the request
of Dr. Asher (son of the great Berlin publisher) who farmed
for some years in the province. The specimen marked
Kubanka is a very valuable kind, but which keeps true only
when cultivated in fresh steppe-land in Samara, and in
Saratoff. After two years it degenerates into the variety
Saxonica, or its synonym GJiirca. The latter alone is im-
ported into this country. Dr. Asher says that it is universally
known, and he has himself witnessed the fact, that if grain
of the Kubanka is sown in the same steppe-land for more
than two years it changes into Saxonica. He has seen a
field with parts still Kubanka and the remainder Saxonica.
On this account the Government, in letting steppe-land,
contracts that after two years wheat must not be sown until
an interval of eight years. The ears of the two kinds appear
different, as you will see, but the chief difference is in the
quality of the grains. Dr. Asher has witnessed sales of
equal weights of Kubanka and Saxo?iica grain, and the price
of the former was to that of the latter as 7 to 4. The
peasants say that the change commences in the terminal
grain of the ear. The most remarkable point, as Dr. Asher
positively asserts, is that there are no intermediate varieties ;
but that a grain produces a plant yielding either true
Kubanka or true Saxonica. He thinks that it would be
interesting to sow here both kinds in good and bad wheat
soil and observe the result. Should you think it worth while
to make any such trial, and should you require further in-
formation, Dr. Asher, whose address I enclose, will be happy
to give any in his power.

1868-1881] RUSS1 \ \ V. HEAT .).'!

I • i \. Steph< n Wil ;on. Letter 7si

l . set, Southampton, Apiil 291!] [ 1 ■ ,

Your kind note and specimens have been forwarded to
mc here, where I am staying at my son's house foi a fortnight's
complete rest, which I required from rather too hard work.
For this reason I will not now examine the seeds, but will
wait till returning home, when, with my son Francis' aid, I
will look to them.

I always felt, though without any good reason, rather
sceptical about Prof. Buckman's experiment, and I afterwards
heard that a most wicked and cruel trick had been played
mi him by some of the agricultural students at Cirencester,
who had sown seeds unknown to him in his experimental
beds. Whether he ever knew this I did not hear.

I am exceedingly glad that you are willing to look into
the Russian wheat case. It may turn out a mare's nest, but
I have often incidentally observed curious farts when making
what I call "a fool's experiment."

To A. Stephen Wilson. Letter

Down, March 5th, 1

I have just returned home after an absence of a week,
ami your letter was not forwarded tome; I mention this t'>
account for my apparent discourtesy in not having sooner
thanked you. You have worked out the subject with admir-
able care and clearness, and your drawings arc beautiful. I
suspected that there was some error in the Russian belief,
but I did not think of the explanation which you have
almost proved to be the true one. It is an extremely inter-
esting instance of a more fertile variety beating out a le
fertile one, and, in this case, one much more valuable to man.
With respect to publication, I am at a loss to advise you, for
I live a secluded life and do not see many periodicals, or hear
what is done at the various societies. It seems to me th.it
your paper should be published in some agricultural journal ;
for it is not simply scientific, and would therefore not be
published by the Linnean or Royal Societies.

Would the Royal Agricultural Society be a luting place ?
Unfortunately I am not a member, and could not myself
present it. Unless you think of some better journal, there

422 BOTANY [ChAP. XI

Letter 752 is the Agricultural Gazette : I have occasionally suggested

. 1 /- •'00

articles for publication to the editor (though personally un-
known to me) which he has always accepted.

Permit me again to thank you for the thorough manner
in which you have worked out this case ; to kill an error is
as good a service as, and sometimes even better than, the
establishing a new truth or fact.

Letter 753 To A. Stephen Wilson.

Down, Feb. 13th, 1880.

It was very kind of you to send me the two numbers of
the Gardeners' Chronicle * with your two articles, which I have
read with much interest. You have quite convinced me,
whatever Mr. Asher may say to the contrary. I want to
ask you a question, on the bare chance of your being able
to answer it, but if you cannot, please do not take the
trouble to write. The lateral branches of the silver fir
often grow out into knobs through the action of a fungus,
JEcidium ; and from these knobs shoots grow 2 vertically
instead of horizontally, like all the other twigs on the same
branch. Now the roots of Cruci ferae and probably other
plants are said to become knobbed through the action of
a fungus 3 : now, do these knobs give rise to rootlets ? and, if
so, do they grow in a new or abnormal direction ?

Letter 754 To W. Thiselton-Dyer.

Down, June i8th, 1879.

The plants arrived last night in first-rate order, and it was
very very good of you to take so much trouble as to hunt
them up yourself. They seem exactly what I wanted, and
if I fail it will not be for want of perfect materials. But a
confounded painter (I beg his pardon) comes here to-night,
and for the next two days I shall be half dead with sitting to
him ; but after then I will begin to work at the plants and
see what I can do, and very curious I am about the results.

I have to thank you for two very interesting letters. I am

1 Gardeners' C/irom'cte, 1879, P- 652 ; 1880, pp. 108, 173.

2 The well-known " Witches-Brooms," or " Hexen-Besen," produced
by the fungus /Ecidium etati?atm.

3 The parasite is probably Plasmodiophora : in this case no abnormal
rootlets have been observed, as far as we know.

i . [US DARW1 N 4_'3

delighted tu hear, and with surprise, that you care about old U
Erasmus D. God only knows what I .shall make of his life —
it is such new kind of work to me.1

Thanks for ca^c of sleeping Crotalaria — new to me. I
quite agree to ever}- word you say about Ball's lecture2 — it
is, as you say, like Sir \V. Thomson's meteorite.3 It is really
a pity; it is enough to make Geographical Distribution
ridiculous in the eyes of the world. Frank will be interested
about the Auriculas1; I never attended to this plant, for
the powder did [not] seem to me like true "bloom." '1 his
subject, however, for the present only, has gone to the dogs
with me.

I am sorry to hear of such a struggle for existence at Kew ;
but I have oft* n wondered how it is that yi u are all not
killed outright.

I can most fully sympathise with you in your admiration
of your little girl. There is nothing so charming in this
world, and we all in this house humbly adore our grandchild,
and think his little pimple of a nose quite beautiful.

To G. Bentham. Letter

Down, Feb. 16th. iSSo.
I have had real pleasure in signing Dyer's certificate.'' It
was very kind in you to write to me about the Orchideae, for
it has pleased me to an extreme degree that I could have
been of the least use to you about the nature of the parts.
They are wonderful creatures, these orchids, and I sometimes
think with a glow of pleasure, when I remember making out
some little point in their method of fertilisati< With

respect to terms, no doubt you will be able to improve them

1 Erasmus Darwin. By Ernst Krause. Translated from the German
by W. S. Dallas: with a preliminary notice by Charles Darwin.
London, 1879. See Life and j . III., pp. 218 20.

1 "On the Origin o\ the Flora of the European Alp-.
Proc.t Vol. L, 1879, p. 564. See Letter 395, Vol. II.

■ In 1871 Lord Kelvin (Presidential Address Brit. Assoc.) suggested
that meteorites, "the moss-yrown fragments from the ruins of another
world,'" might have introduced life to our planet.

4 See Francis Darwin, on the relation between "bloom*' on leaves
and the distribution of the stomata. Linn. Sac. ft urn., Vol. XXII., p. 114.

•s As a candidate for the Royal Society.

6 Published in Life and Letters, III., p. 288.

424 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 755 greatly, for I knew nothing about the terms as used in other
groups of plants. Could you not invent some quite new term
for gland, implying viscidity ? or append some word to gland.
I used for cirripedes " cement gland."

Your present work must be frightfully difficult. I looked
at a few dried flowers, and could make neither heads nor
tails of them ; and I well remember wondering what you
would do with them when you came to the group in the
Genera Plantarum. I heartily wish you safe through your
work, . . .

Letter 756 To F. M. Balfour.1

Down, Sept. 4th, 1880.

I hope that you will not think me a great bore, but I have
this minute finished reading your address at the British Asso-
ciation 2 ; and it has interested me so much that I cannot resist
thanking you heartily for the pleasure derived from it, not to
mention the honour which you have done me. The recent
progress of embryology is indeed splendid. I have been very
stupid not to have hitherto read your book,3 but I have had
of late no spare time ; I have now ordered it, and your
address will make it the more interesting to read, though I
fear that my want of knowledge will make parts unintelligible
to me. In my recent work on plants I have been astonished
to find to how many very different stimuli the same small
part — viz., the tip of the radicle — is sensitive, and has the
power of transmitting some influence to the adjoining part
of the radicle, exciting it to bend to or from the source of
irritation according to the needs of the plant4 ; and all this
takes place without any nervous system ! I think that such
facts should be kept in mind when speculating on the genesis
of the nervous system. I always feel a malicious pleasure
when a priori conclusions are knocked on the head : and
therefore I felt somewhat like a devil when I read your

1 Professor of Animal Morphology at Cambridge. He was born
185 1, and was killed, with his guide, on the Aiguille Blanche, near
Courmayeur, in July 1882. See Life and Letters, III., p. 250.

2 Presidential address delivered by Prof. F. M. Balfour before the
Biological Section at the Brit. Assoc, meeting at Swansea (1880).

3 A Treatise on Comparative Embryology, 2 vols. London, 1880.

4 See Letter 757, p. 426.

i868-i88i] GALLS W5

remarks on Herbert Spencer.1 . . . Our recent visit to < am- Lettei
bridge was a brilliant success to us all, and will ever be
remembered by me with much pleasure.

T( i James Pag I Letter 757

During the closing years of his life, Darwin began to experimentise
on the possibility of producing galls artificially. A letter to Sir J. D.
Hooker (Nov. y.\. 1S80) shows the interest which he felt in the
question : —

" 1 was delighted with Paget's essay5; I hear that he has occasionally
attended to this subject from his youth. ... I am very glad he h
called attention to galls : this has always seemed to me a profoundly
interesting subject ; and if I had been younger would take it up."

His interest in this subject was connected with his ever-present wish
to learn something of the causes of variation, lie imagined to himsclt
wonderful galls caused to appear on the ovaries of plants, and by tin
means he thought it possible that the seed might be influenced, and thus
new varieties arise.3 lie made a considerable number of experiments by
injecting various reagents into the tissues of leaves, and with some slight
indications of success.4

The following letter to the late Sir James Paget refers to the same
subject.

Down, Nov. 14th, 1

I am very much obliged for your essay, which has inter-
ested me greatly. What indomitable activity you have ! It
is a surprising thought that the diseases of plants should
illustrate human pathology. I have the German Encyclopedia,
and a few weeks ago told my son Francis that the article on

1 Prof. Balfour discussed Mr. Herbert Spencer's views on the genesis
of the nervous system, and expressed the opinion that his hypothesis
was not borne out by recent discoveries. "The discover)- that ner\>
have been developed from processes of epithelial cells gives a very
different conception of their genesis to that of Herbert Spencer, which
makes them originate from the passage of nervous impulses through a
track of mingled colloids. . . .;' (/or. cit.y p. 644.)

5 An address on "Elemental Pathology," delivered before the British
Medical Association, August 1S80, and published in the Journal of the
Association.

3 There would have been great difficulties about this line of research,
for when the sexual organs of plants are deformed by parasites in the
way he hoped to effect by poisons) sterility almost always results. See
Molliard's "Les C6 idies Florales," Ann. Set. Nat., 1895, Vol. I., p. 1

4 The above passage is reprinted, with alterations, from Life tint/
Letters, III., p. 346.

426 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 757 the diseases of plants would be well worth his study ; but I did
not know that it was written by Dr. Frank,1 for whom I
entertain a high respect as a first-rate observer and experi-
mentiser, though for some unknown reason he has been a
good deal snubbed in Germany. I can give you one good
case of regrowth in plants, recently often observed by me,
though only externally, as I do not know enough of his-
tology to follow out details. It is the tip of the radicle of
a germinating common bean. The case is remarkable in
some respects, for the tip is sensitive to various stimuli, and
transmits an order, causing the upper part of the radicle to
bend. When the tip (for a length of about 1 mm.) is cut
transversely off, the radicle is not acted on by gravitation or
other irritants, such as contact, etc., etc., but a new tip is re-
generated in from two to four days, and then the radicle is
again acted on by gravitation, and will bend to the centre of
the earth. The tip of the radicle is a kind of brain to the
whole growing part of the radicle ! 2

My observation will be published in about a week's time,
and I would have sent you the book, but I do not suppose
that there is anything else in the book which would interest
you. I am delighted that you have drawn attention to galls.

1 Albert Bernhard Frank (1839- 1900) began his botanical career as
Curator of the University Herbarium, Leipzig, where he afterwards
became Privatdocent and finally " Ausserordentlicher Professor." In
1881 Frank was appointed Professor of Plant-Physiology in the Land-
wirthschaftliche Hochschule, Berlin. In 1899 he was appointed to the
Imperial Gesundheits-Amt in Berlin, and raised to the rank of
Regierungsrath. Frank is chiefly known for his work on " The Assimi-
lation of Free Nitrogen, etc.," and for his work on "The Diseases of
Plants" (Die Krankhciten der Pflanzen, 1880). It was his brilliant
researches on growth-curvature (Beitrage zur Pflatizen-physiologie, 1868,
and Die Naiiirlichcn wagerechte Richtung von PJlanzen-theilen, 1870)
which excited Darwin's admiration.

2 We are indebted to Mr. Archer- Hind for the translation of the
following passage from Plato ( Timceus, 90A) : " The reason is every
man's guardian genius (dalfj-wv), and has its habitation in our brain ; it
is this that raises man (who is a plant, not of earth but of heaven) to an
erect posture, suspending the head and root of us from the heavens,
which are the birthplace of our soul, and keeping all the body upright."
On the perceptions of plants, see Nature, Nov. 14th, 1901 — a lecture
delivered at the Glasgow meeting of the British Association by Francis
Darwin. See also Bonitz, Index Aristotelicus, s.v. (pvrov.

,86S — iSSi ] | ! 427

They have always seemed to me profoundly interesting. Letter 757
Man) years ago 1 began (but failed for want of time, strength,

and health, as on infinitely man)- other occasions, to experi-
mentise on plants, by injecting into their tissues some
alkaloids and the poison of wasps, to see if I could make
anything like galls. If I remember rightly, in a few cases
the tissues were thickened and hardened. I began these
experiments because if by different poisons I could have
affected slightly and differently the tissues of the same plant,
I thought there would be no insuperable difficulty in the
fittest poisons being developed by insects so as to produce
galls adapted for them. Every character, as far as I can see,
is apt to vary. Judging from one of your sentences you will
smile at this.

To any one believing in my pangenesis (if such a man
exists) there does not seem to me any extreme difficulty in
understanding why plants have such little power of regenera-
tion l ; for there is reason to think that my imaginary
gemmules have small power of passing from cell to cell.

Forgive me for scribbling at such unreasonable length ;
but you are to blame for having interested me so much.

P.S. — Perhaps you may remember that some two yea'
ago you asked me to lunch with you, and proposed that I
should offer myself again. Whenever I next come to
London, I will do so, and thus have the pleasure of seeing
you.

To W. Thiselton-Dyer. L itei 758

The Power of Movement in Plants was published early in Novembi
1880. Sir W. Thiselton-Dyer, in writing to thank Darwin for a copy
of the book, had Nov. 20th) compared a structure in the seedling
Welwitschia with the "peg" of Curcurbita (see P ement,

p. 102). Dyer wrote : "One peculiar feature in the germinating embryo
is a lateral hypocotyledonary process, which eventually serves as an
absorbent organ, by which the nutriment of the endosperm is conveyed
to the seedling. Such a structure was quite new to me, and Bower and
I were disposed to see in it a representative of the foot in Selagin
when I saw the account of Flahault's 'p Flahault, it should be

1 On regeneration after injury, see Nfassart, Us

Vege'taux, in VoL 57 (1898) of the Afemoirei lished by

the Royal Academy of Belgium. An account oi the re is given
by the author.

428 BOTANY [Chap. X-

explained, was the discoverer of the curious peg in Cucurbita. Proi.
Bower wrote a paper "On the Germination and Histology of the
seedling of Welwitschia mirabilis" in the Quart. Journ. Microscop. Sci.,
XXL, 1881, p. 15.

Down, Nov. 28th [18S0].

Letter 758 Very many thanks for your most kind note, but you think-
too highly of our work — not but what this is very pleasant.

I am deeply interested about Welwitschia. When at work
on the pegs or projections I could not imagine how they were
first developed, before they could have been of mere mechani-
cal use. Now it seems possible that a circle between radicle1
and hypocotyl may be permeable to fluids, and thus have
given rise to projections so as to expose larger surface.
Could you test Welwitschia with permanganate of potassium :
if, like my pegs, the lower surface would be coloured brown
like radicle, and upper surface left white like hypocotyl. If
such an idea as yours, of an absorbing organ, had ever crossed
my mind, I would have tried many hypocotyls in weak
citrate of ammonia, to see if it penetrated on line of junction
more easily than elsewhere. I daresay the projection in
Abronia and Mirabilis may be an absorbent organ. It was
very good fun bothering the seeds of Cucurbita by planting
them edgeways, as would never naturally occur, and then the
peg could not act properly. Many of the Germans are very
contemptuous about making out use of organs ; but they may
sneer the souls out of their bodies, and I for one shall think it
the most interesting part of natural history. Indeed, you are
greatly mistaken if you doubt for one moment on the very
great value of your constant and most kind assistance to us.
I have not seen the pamphlet, and shall be very glad to keep
it. Frank, when he comes home, will be much interested and
pleased with your letter. Pray give my kindest remembrance
to Mrs. Dyer.

This is a very untidy note, but I am very tired with
dissecting worms all day. Read the last chapter of our book,
and then you will know the whole contents.

t » *** To H. Vochting.

Letter 759 °

Down, Dec. i6th, 1880.

Absence from home has prevented me from sooner thank-
ing you for your kind present of your several publications.

i86S -1881] VOCHTING 429

I procured some rime .1 ur Organbildung* etc., but it Letter 759

was too late for me to profit by it for my book, as I •
correcting the press. I read only pari . but my son Francis
read the whole with care and told me much about it, which
greatly interested me. 1 also read your article in the ju>t.
Zeitung. My son began at once experimenting, to test your
views, and this very night will read a paper before the
Linnean Society on the roots of Rubus* and I think that
you will be pleased to find how well his conclusions agree
with yours. Me will of course send you a copy of his paper
when it is printed. I have sent him your letter, which will
please him if he agrees with me ; for your letter has given me
real pleasure, and I did not at all know what the many great
physiologists of German}-, Switzerland, and Holland would
think of it [The Power of Movement, etc.]. 1 was quite
sorry to read Sachs' views about root-forming matter, etc.,
for 1 have an unbounded admiration for Sachs. In this
country we are dreadfully behind in Physiological Botany.

To A. 1 )e Candolle. Letter 760

! town, Jan. 24th, 1SS1.

It was extremely kind of you to write me so long and
valuable a letter, the whole of which deserves careful con-
sideration. I have been particularly pie ised at what you say
about the new terms used, because I have often been annoyed
at the multitude of new terms lately invented in all brancrn
of Biology in Germany; and I doubted much whether I was
not quite as great a sinner as those whom 1 have blamed.
When I read your remarks on the word "purpose" in your
Phytographie% I vowed that 1 would not use it again ; but it is
not easy to cure oneself of a vicious habit. It is also difficult
for any one who trit ^ to make out the use of a structure to
avoid the word purpose. 1 sec that 1 have probably gone
beyond my depth in discussing plurifoliate and unifoliate
leaves; but in such a dse as that of Mimosa albida, where

1 Organbildung im Pflan ~S.

' Francis Darwin, "The Theory of the Growth o\ Cuttings" {/.inn.
Soe. /ourn.f XVIII.). [I take this opportunity of expressing my u
that at p. 417, owing to neglect of part of Vochting's facts, I mad
criticism of his argument which cannot be upheld. — F. D.].

430 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 760 rudiments of additional leaflets are present, we must believe
that they were well developed in the progenitor of the plant.
So again, when the first true leaf differs widely in shape from
the older leaves, and resembles the older leaves in allied
species, is it not the most simple explanation that such leaves
have retained their ancient character, as in the case of the
embryos of so many animals?

Your suggestion of examining the movements of vertical
leaves with an equal number of stomata on both sides, with
reference to the light, seems to me an excellent one, and
I hope that my son Francis may follow it up. But I will not
trouble you with any more remarks about our book. My son
will write to you about the diagram.

Let me add that I shall ever remember with pleasure
your visit here last autumn.

Letter 76i To J. Lubbock (Lord Avebury).

Down, April 16th [1881].

Will you be so kind as to send and lend me the Desmodium
gyrans by the bearer who brings this note.

Shortly after you left I found my notice of the seeds in the
Gardeners' Chronicle} which please return hereafter, as I have
no other copy. I do not think that I made enough about the
great power of absorption of water by the corolla-like calyx
or pappus. It seems to me not unlikely that the pappus of
other Composite may be serviceable to the seeds, whilst
lying on the ground, by absorbing the dew which would be
especially apt to condense on the fine points and filaments
of the pappus. Anyhow, this is a point which might be
easily investigated. Seeds of Tussilago, or groundsel,2 emit
worm-like masses of mucus, and it would be curious to ascer-
tain whether wetting the pappus alone would suffice to cause
such secretion.3

1 " Note on the Achenia of Pumilio argyrolefiis." Gardeners'
Chronicle, 1861, p. 4.

2 It is not clear whether Tussilago or groundsel (Senecio vulgaris) is
meant ; or whether he was not sure which of the two plants becomes
slimy when wetted.

3 See Letter 707.

i868 — 1SS1J HELIOTROPISM 43 x

To G. J. Roma' Lettei

I am extremely glad of your success with the flashin
light1 If plants are .icted on by light, like some of the lower
animals, there is an additional point of interest, as it seems
to me, in your results. Most botanists believe that light cau
a plant to bend to it in as direct a manner as light affects
nitrate of silver. I believe that it merely tells the plant to
which side to bend, and 1 see indications of this belief
prevailing even with Sachs. Now it might be expected that
light would act on a plant in something the same manner as
on the lower animals. As you are at work on this subject,
I will call your attention to another point. Wiesner, of
Vienna (who has lately published a great book- on helio-
tropism) finds that an intermittent light, say of 20 minutes,
produces the same effect as a continuous light of, say 6o m.
So that Van Tieghem, in the first part of his book which has
just appeared, remarks, the light during 40 m. out of the 60 m.
produced no effect. I observed an analogous case described
in my book.3

Wiesner and Van Tieghem seem to think that this is
explained by calling the whole process " induction," borrowing
a term used by some physico-chemists (of whom I believe
Roscoe is one) and implying an agency which does not pro-
duce any effect for some time, and continues its effect for
some time after the cause has ceased. I believe that photo-
graphic paper is an instance. I must ask Leonard 4 whether
an interrupted light acts on it in the same manner as on
a plant. At present I must still believe in my explanation
that it is the contrast between light and darkness which
excites a plant.

I have forgotten my main object in writing— viz., to
that I believe (and have so stated) that seedlings vary much
in their sensitiveness to light ; but I did not prove this, for
there arc many difficulties, whether the time of incipient

1 Romanes' paper on the effect of intermittent liyht on heliotropism
was the Proc. Royal Soc, Vol. LIV., p. 333.

3 YViesner's papers on heliotropism are in the Denkschriften of the
\ 'ienna Academy, Vols. 39 and 43.
Power of Movement, p. 459.

* Mr. Darwin's son.

432 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 762 curvature or the amount of curvature is taken as the criterion.
Moreover they vary according to age, and perhaps from
vigour of growth, and there seems inherent variability, as
Strasburger (whom I quote) found with spores. If the curious
anomaly observed by you is due to varying sensitiveness,
ought not all the seedlings to bend if the flashes were at
longer intervals of time ? According to my notion of contrast
between light and darkness being the stimulus, I should
expect that if flashes were made sufficiently slow it would be
a powerful stimulus, and that you would suddenly arrive
at a period when the result would suddenly become great.
On the other hand, as far as my experience goes, what one
expects rarely happens.

Letter 763 To Julius Wiesner.

Down, Oct. 4th, 1881.

I thank you sincerely for your very kind letter, and for
the present of your new work.1 My son Francis, if he had
been at home, would have likewise sent his thanks. I will
immediately begin to read your book, and when I have
finished it will write again. But I read german so very
slowly that your book will take me a considerable time, for
I cannot read for more than half an hour each day. I have,
also, been working too hard lately, and with very little success,
so that I am going to leave home for a time and try to forget
science.

I quite expect that you will find some gross errors in my
work, for you are a very much more skilful and profound
experimentalist than I am. Although I always am endea-
vouring to be cautious and to mistrust myself, yet I know
well how apt I am to make blunders. Physiology, both
animal and vegetable, is so difficult a subject, that it seems
to me to progress chiefly by the elimination or correction of
ever-recurring mistakes. I hope that you will not have upset
my fundamental notion that various classes of movement

1 Das Bewegungsvermbgen dcr PJIanze, 1881. One of us has given
some account of Wiesner's book in the presidential address to Section D
of the British Association, 1891. Wiesner's divergence from Darwin's
views is far-reaching, and includes the main thesis of the Power oj
Movement. See Life and Letters, III., p. 336, for an interesting letter
to Wiesner.

i868 — 1881I GENERA PLANTARUM 433

result from the modification of a universalis- present 1 ient i.cttei

of circumnutation.

I am very glad that you will again discuss the view of the
tumescence of the cells being the cause of the movement of
parts. I adopted De Vries' views1 as seeming to me the
most probable, but of late I have felt more doubts on this head.

To J. I >. I looker. ter 764

Glenrhydding House, Patterdale, Penrith, June 15th, 1SS1.

It was leal pleasure to me to see once again your well-
known handwriting on the outside of your note. I do not
know how long you have returned from Italy, but I am very
sorry that you are so bothered already with work and visit
I cannot but think that you are too kind and civil to visitoi
and too conscientious about your official work. Uut a man
cannot cure his virtues, any more than his vices, after early
youth ; so you must bear your burthen. It is, however, a
great misfortune for science that you have so very little spare
time for the Genera. I can well believe what an awful job
the palms must be. Even their size must be very incon-
venient. You and Bcntham must hate the monocotyledon^,
for what work the Orchideaj must have been, and Gramineae
and Cyperaceae will be. 1 am rather despondent about
myself, and my troubles are of an exactly opposite nature
to yours, for idleness is downright misery to me, as I find
here, as I cannot forget my discomfort for an hour. I have
not the heart or strength at my age to begin any investiga-
tion lasting years, which is the only thing which I enjoy ;
and I have no little jobs which I can do. So I must look
forward to Down graveyard as the sweetest place on earth.
This place is magnificently beautiful, and I enjoy the scenery,
though weary of it ; and the weather has been very cold and
almost always hazy.

I am so glad that your tour has answered for Lady
Hooker. We return home on the first week of July, and
should be truly glad to aid Lady Hooker in any possible
manner which she will suggest.

I have written to my gardener to send you plants of

1 See Power oj Movement^ p. 2. De Vries' work is published in the
Bit. Zeitun^, 1879, P- ^5°-
VOL. II.

434 BOTANY [Chap. XI

Letter 764 Oxalis corniculata (and seeds if possible). I should think
so common a weed was never asked for before, — and what
a poor return for the hundreds of plants which I have
received from Kew ! I hope that I have not bothered you
by writing so long a note, and I did not intend to do so.

If Asa Gray has returned with you, please give him my
kindest remembrances.

Letter 765 To J. D. Hooker.

Oct. 22nd, 1881.
I am investigating the action of carbonate of ammonia
on chlorophyll,1 which makes me want the plants in my list.
I have incidentally observed one point in EupJwrbia, which
has astonished me — viz. that in the fine fibrous roots of
EupJiorbia, the alternate rows of cells in their roots must
differ physiologically, though not in external appearance, as
their contents after the action of carbonate of ammonia differ
most conspicuously. . . .

Wiesner of Vienna has just published a book 2 vivisecting
me in the most courteous, but awful manner, about the
" Power of Movement in Plants." Thank heaven, he admits
almost all my facts, after re-trying all my experiments ; but
gives widely different interpretation of the facts. I think he
proves me wrong in several cases, but I am convinced that
he is utterly erroneous and fanciful in other explanations.
No man was ever vivisected in so sweet a manner before,
as I am in this book.

1 " The Action of Carbonate of Ammonia on Chlorophyll Bodies."
Linn. Soc. Journ., XIX., p. 262, 1882.

2 See Letter 763, note 1.

CHAPTER XII

VIVISECTION AND MISi ELLANEOUS SUBJECTS

I. Vivisection, 1875 — 1882

To Lord Piayfair. Letter 766

A Bill was introduced to the House of Commons by Messrs. Lyon
Piayfair, Walpole and Ashley, in the spring of 1875, but was withdrawn
on the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the whole
question. Some account of the Anti-Vivisection agitation, the intro-
duction of bills, and the appointment of a Royal Commission is given in
the Life and Letters^ III., p. 201, where the more interesting of Darwin's
letters on the question are published.

Down, May 26th, 1875.
I hope that you will excuse my troubling you once again.
I received some days ago a letter from Prof. Huxley, in
Edinburgh, who says with respect to your Bill : " the pro-
fessors here are all in arms about it, and as the papers have
associated my name with the Bill, I shall have to repudiate it
publicly, unless something can be done. But what in the
world is to be done?"1 Dr. Burdon Sanderson is in nearly
the same frame of mind about it. The newspapers take
different views of the purport of the Bill, but it seems
generally supposed that it would prevent demonstrations on
animals rendered insensible, and this seems to me a mon-
strous provision. It would, moreover, probably defeat the
end desired ; for Dr. B. Sanderson, who demonstrates to
his class on animals rendered insensible, told me that some
of his students had declared to him that unless he had shown
them what he had, they would have experimented on live
animals for themselves. Certainly I do not believe that any
one could thoroughly understand the action of the heart with-
out having seen it in action. I do not doubt that you wish
to aid the progress of Physiology, and at the same time save

1 The letter is published in full in Mr. L. Huxley's interesting chapter
on the vivisection question in his father's Life, I., p. 43S.

435

436 VIVISECTION [Chap. XII

Letter 766 animals from all useless suffering ; and in this case I believe
that you could not do a greater service than to warn the
Home Secretary with respect to the appointment of Royal
Commissioners, that ordinary doctors know little or nothing
about Physiology as a science, and are incompetent to judge
of its high importance and of the probability of its hereafter
conferring great benefits on mankind.

Letter 767 To Lord Playfair.

Down, May 28th.

I must write one line to thank you for your very kind
letter, and to say that, after despatching my last note, it
suddenly occurred to me that I had been rude in calling one
of the provisions of your Bill " monstrous " or " absurd " — I
forget which. But when I wrote the expression it was
addressed to the bigots who, I believed, had forced you to a
compromise. I cannot understand what Dr. B. Sanderson
could have been about not to have objected with respect to the
clause of not demonstrating on animals rendered insensible.
I am extremely sorry that you have had trouble and vexation
on the subject. It is a most disagreeable and difficult one.
I am not personally concerned, as I never tried an experiment
on a living animal, nor am I a physiologist ; but I know
enough to see how ruinous it would be to stop all progress in
so grand a science as Physiology. I commenced the agitation
amongst the physiologists for this reason, and because I have
long felt very keenly on the question of useless vivisection, and
believed, though without any good evidence, that there was
not always, even in this country, care enough taken. Pray
forgive me this note, so much about myself. . . .

Letter 768 To G. J. Romanes.1

Down, June 4th [1876].
Your letter has made me as proud and conceited as ten
peacocks.2 I am inclined to think that writing against the
bigots about vivisection is as hopeless as stemming a torrent
with a reed. Frank, who has just come here, and who
sputters with indignation on the subject, takes an opposite

1 Published in Life of Romanes, p. 61, under 1876-77.

2 This may perhaps refer to Darwin being elected the only honorary
member of the Physiological Society, a fact that was announced in a letter
from Romanes June 1st, 1876, published in the Life of Romanes, p. 50.
Dr. Sharpey was subsequently elected a second honorary member.

1S75-1882] DR. FERRIER 437

line, and perhaps lie is right; anyhow, he had the best of Letter 768
an argument with me on the subject. ... It seems to me
the physiologists are now in the position of a persecute
religious sect, and they must grin and bear the persecution,
however cruel and unjust, as well as they can.

To T. Lauder Brunton. Le«« 769

In November, 1SS1, an absolutely groundless charge was brought by
the Victoria Street Society for the Protection of Animals from Vivi-
section against Dr. Ferrier for an infringement of the Vivisection Act.
The experiment complained of was the removal of the brain of a
monkey and the subsequent testing of the animal's powers of reacting
to certain treatment. The fact that the operation had been performed
six months before the case came into court would alone have been
fatal to the prosecution. Moreover, it was not performed by Dr. Ferrier,
but by another observer, who was licensed under the Act to keep the
monkey alive after the operation, which was performed under anaesthetics.
Thus the prosecution completely broke down, and the case was dismissed.1
The sympathy with Dr. Ferrier in the purely scientific and medical world
w;is very strong, and the British Medical Association undertook the
defence. The prosecution did good in one respect, inasmuch as it led to
the formation of the Science Defence Association, to which reference is
made in some of Mr. Dai wins letters to Sir Lauder Brunton. The
Association still exists, and continues to do good work.

Part of the following letter was published in the British Medical
Journal, Dec. 3rd, 1881.

Down. Nov. 19th, 1881.

I saw in some paper that there would probably be a sub-
scription to pay Dr. Ferrier's legal expenses in the late absurd
and wicked prosecution. As I live so retired I might not
hear of the subscription, and I should regret beyond measure
not to have the pleasure and honour of showing my sym-
pathy [with] and admiration of Dr. Ferrier's re earches. I
know that you are his friend, as I once met him at your
house ; so 1 earnestly beg you to let me hear if there is any
means of subscribing, as I .should much like to be an early
subscribcr. 1 am sure that you will forgive me for troubling
you under these circumstances.

P.S. — 1 finished reading a few days ago the several
physiological and medical papers- which you were so kind
as to send me. 1 was much interested by several of them,

1 From the British Medical Journal, Nov. 19th, 1881. See also
Times, Nov. 18th, 1881.

s Some of Lauder Brunton's publications.

438 VIVISECTION [Chap. XII

Letter 769 especially by that on night-sweating, and almost more by
others on digestion. I have seldom been made to realise
more vividly the wondrous complexity of our whole system.
How any one of us keeps alive for a day is a marvel !

Letter 770 T. Lauder Brunton to C. Darwin.

50, Welbeck Street, London, Nov. 21st, 1881.

I thank you most sincerely for your kind letter and your
offer of assistance to Dr. Ferrier. There is at present no
subscription list, as the British Medical Association have
taken up the case, and ought to pay the expenses. Should
these make such a call upon the funds of the Association as
to interfere with its other objects, the whole or part of the
expenses will be paid by those who have subscribed to a
guarantee fund. To this fund there are already a number
of subscribers, whose names are taken by Profesor Gerald Yeo,
one of the secretaries of the Physiological Society. They
have not subscribed a definite sum, but have simply fixed a
maximum which they will subscribe, if necessary, on the under-
standing that only so much as is required shall be asked from
each subscriber in proportion to his subscription. It is proposed
to send by-and-by a list of the most prominent members of
this guarantee fund to the Tz7nes and other papers, and not only
every scientific man, but every member of the medical profes-
sion, will rejoice to see your name in the list. Dr. Ferrier has
been quite worn out by the worry of this prosecution or, as
it might well be called, persecution, and has gone down to
Shanklin for a couple of days. He returns this afternoon, and
I have sent on your letter to await his arrival, knowing as I
do that it will be to him like cold water to a thirsty soul.

Letter 771 To T. Lauder Brunton.

Down, Nov. 22nd, 1881.

Many thanks for your very kind and interesting letter. . . .

I write now to beg a favour. I do not in the least know

what others have guaranteed in relation to Dr. Ferrier.1

1 In a letter dated Nov. 27th, 1881, Sir Lauder Brunton wrote in reply
to Mr. Darwin's inquiry as to the amount of the subscriptions : " When
I ascertain what they intend to give under the new conditions — viz., that
the subscriptions are not to be applied to Ferrier's defence, but to the
defence of others who may be attacked and to a diffusion of knowledge
regarding the nature and purposes of vivisection, I will let you know. . . ."

1875— 1 882] S< I I M 1 l'l H N< 1 43'J

Would twenty guineas be sufficient? [f not, will you kindly Lett*i 771
take the trouble to have my name put down for thirty or
forty guineas, as you may think best. If, on the other hand,
no one else has guaranteed for as much as twenty guineas,
will you put me down for ten or fifteen guineas, though 1
should like to give twenty best.

Y.ai can understand that I do not wish to be conspicuous
either by too little or too much ; so I beg you to be so very
kind as to act for me. 1 have a multitude of letters which 1
must answer, so excuse haste.

To T. Lauder Brunton. Letter

The following letter was written in reply to Sir T. Lauder Erunton's
suggestion that Mr. Darwin should be proposed as President of the
Science Defence Association.

4. Bryanston Street, Portman Square, Dec. 17th, (881.
I have been thinking a good deal about the suggestion
which you made to me the other day, on the supposition that
you could not get some man like the President of the Collej e
of Physicians to accept the office. My wife is str< ngly
opposed to my accepting the office, ;h she feels sure that the
anxiety thus caused would tell heavily on my health. Hut
there is a much stronger objection suggested to me by one of
my relations — namely, no man ought to allow himself to be
placed at the head (though only nominally so) of an associated
movement, unless he has the means of judging of the acts
performed by the association, after hearing each point dis-
cussed. This occurred to me when you spoke to me, and 1
think that 1 said something to this effect. Anyhow, I have
in several analogous cases acted on this principle.

Take, for instance, any preliminary statement which the
Association may publish. I might feel grave doubts about
the wisdom or justice of some points, and this solely from my
not having heard them discussed. 1 am therefore inclined to
think that it would not be right in me to accept the nominal
Presidency of your Association, and thus have to act blindly.

As far as I can at present see, I fear that I must confine
my assistance to subscribing as large a sum to the Association
as any member gives.

I am sorry to trouble you, but I have thought it best to
tell you at once of the doubts which have arisen in my mind.

440 VIVISECTION [Chap. XII

Letter 773 To Lauder Brunton.

Sir T. Lauder Brunton had written (Feb. 12th) to Mr. Darwin
explaining that two opinions were held as to the constitution of the
proposed Science Defence Association : one that it should consist of
a small number of representative men ; the other that it should, if
possible, embrace every medical practitioner in the country. Sir Lauder
Brunton adds: "I should be very greatly obliged if you would kindly
say what you think of the two schemes."

Down, Feb. 14th, 1882.

I am very much obliged for your information in regard to
the Association, about which I feel a great interest. It seems
to me highly desirable that the Association should include as
many medical and scientific men as possible throughout the
whole country, who could illumine those capable of illumina-
tion on the necessity of physiological research ; but that the
Association should be governed by a council of powerful
men, not too many in number. Such a council, as repre-
senting a large body of medical men, would have more power
in the eyes of vote-hunting politicians than a small body
representing only themselves.

From what I see of country practitioners, I think that
their annual subscription ought to be very small. But would
it not be possible to add to the rules some such statement
as the following one : " That by a donation of £ . . . , or
of any larger sum, from those who feel a deep interest in the
progress of medical science, the donor shall become a life
member." I, for one, would gladly subscribe ^50 or £100.
If such a plan were approved by the leading medical men of
London, two or three thousand pounds might at once be
collected ; and if any such sum could be announced as already
subscribed, when the programme of the Association is put forth,
it would have, as I believe, a considerable influence on the
country, and would attract the attention of country prac-
titioners. The Anti-Corn Law League owed much of its
enormous power to several wealthy men laying down ;£ 1,000 ;
for the subscription of a good sum of money is the best proof
of earnest conviction. You asked for my opinion on the
above points, and I have given it freely, though well aware
that from living so retired a life my judgment cannot be
worth much.

Have you read Mr. Gurney's articles in the Fortnightly and

iss-l I I riON -141

///////?' They seem to me very clever, though obscurely Letter 773
written; and I agree with almost everything he says, exc
with some passages which appear to imply that 11 peri-

ments should bo tried unless some immediate good can be
predicted, and this is ntic mistake contradicted by the

whole history of science.

P.S.— That is a curious fact about babies. I remember
on good authority that very young babies when
moved arc apt to clutch hold of anything, and I thought of
your explanation ; but > "Ur case during sleep is a much more
interesting one. Very man}' thanks for the book, which I
much wanted to see; it shall be sent back to-day, as from
iu, to the Society.

II. Miscellaneous Subjects, 1S67 — 18S2.

To Canon Farrar. I , --

The lecture which forms the subject of this letter was one delivered
by Canon Farrar at the Royal Institution, "On Some Defects in Public
S< hool Education."

Down, March 5th, 1S67.

I am very much obliged for your kind present of your
lecture. We have read it aloud with the greatest interest,
and 1 agree to every word. 1 admire your candour and
wonderful freedom from prejudice; for I feel an inward
conviction that if I had been a great classical scholar 1 should
never have been able to have judged fairly on the >u]
As it is, I am one of the root and branch men, and would
have classics to be learnt by those alone who have sufficient
zeal and the high taste requisite for their appreciation. Y. u
have indeed done a great public service in speaking out •
boldly. Scientific men might rail for ever, and it would only
be said that they railed at what they did not understand. 1
was at school at Shrewsbury under a great scholar, Dr. Butler;
1 learnt absolutely nothing, except by amusing myself by
reading and experimenting in chemistry. Dr. Butler somehow-
found this out, and publicly sneered at me before the whole
school for such gross waste <.A time ; I remember he called me

1 Fortnightly AVr .'.:,■. XXX., p. 778 ; ( nhill Afq& . XLV.,

p. 191. The articles are by the late Edmund Gurney, author 1 1 .
Port 'cr of Sound. 1 SSo.

442 MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS [Chap. XII

Letter 774 a Pococurante,1 which, not understanding, I thought was a
dreadful name. I wish you had shown in your lecture how
science could practically be taught in a great school ; I have
often heard it objected that this could not be done, and I
never knew what to say in answer.

I heartily hope that you may live to see your zeal and
labour produce good fruit.

Letter 775 To Herbert Spencer.

Down, Dec. 9th [1867].
I thank you very sincerely for your kind present of your
First Principles} I earnestly hope that before long I may
have strength to study the work as it ought to be studied, for
I am certain to find or re-find much that is deeply interesting.
In many parts of your Principles of Biology 3 I was fairly
astonished at the prodigality of your original views. Most of
the chapters furnished suggestions for whole volumes of future
researches. As I have heard that you have changed your
residence, I am forced to address this to Messrs. Williams &
Norgate ; and for the same reason I gave some time ago the
same address to Mr. Murray for a copy of my book on variation,
etc., which is now finished, but delayed by the index-maker.

Letter 776 To T. H. Huxley.

This letter refers to a movement set on foot at a meeting held at the
Freemasons' Tavern, on Nov. 16th, 1872, of which an account is given
in the Times of Nov. 23rd, 1872, at which Mark Pattison, Mr. Henry
Sidgwick, Sir Benjamin Brodie, Professors Rolleston, Seeley, Huxley,
etc., were present. The Times says that the meeting was held "by
members of the Universities and others interested in the promotion of
mature study and scientific research in England.'' One of the headings of
the " Programme of Discussion" was "The Abolition of Prize Fellowships."

Sevenoaks, Oct. 22nd [1872].

I have been glad to sign and forward the paper, for I have
very long thought it a sin that the immense funds of the
Universities should be -wasted in Fellowships, except a few
for paying for education. But when I was at Cambridge it
would have been an unjustifiable sneer to have spoken of the
place as one for education, always excepting the men who

1 Told in Life and letters, I., p. 35.

2 " This must have been the second edition." (Note by Mr. Spencer.)

3 See Life and Letters, III., pp. 55, 56.

1867-1882] S< EP1 ICISM 443

went in for honours. You speak of another resolution " i:
the interest of the anti-letter-writi '—hut

this never arrived ! I should like a ty formed so tl.

every one might receive pleasant letters and never answer them.

We return home on Saturday, after three weeks of t;
most astounding dullness, doing nothing and thinking of
nothing. I hope my Brain likes it as for myself, it
dreadful doing nothin

To Lady Derby. Letter

1 ■ v. : , v -unlay [1S74 ? ].

If you had called hereafter I had read the article8 you
would have found a much perplexed man. I cannot disbelieve
Mr. Crooke's statement, nor can I believe in his result. It
has removed some of my difficult)- that the supposed power
is not an anomalv, hut is common in a lesser de to

various persons. It is also a consolation to reflect that
gravity acts at any distance, in some wholly unknown
manner, and so may nerve-force: Nothing is so difficult to
decide as where to draw a just line between scepticism and
credulity. It was a very long time before scientific men
would believe in the fall of aerolites ; and this was chiefly
owing to so much bad evidence, as in the present case, being
mixed up with the good. All sorts of objects were said to
have been seen falling from the sky. I very much hope that
a number of men, such as Professor Stokes, will be induced to
witness Mr. Crooke's experiments.

The two following extracts may be given in further illustration oi
Darwin's guiding principle in weighing evidence. He wrote to Robert
Chambers, April 30th, iSdi : "Thanks also for • out of 1

about rooks and crows ; I wish 1 dared trust it. I see in cutting the pages
[of Chambers' book, Ice and Water\ . . . that yi u fulminate against the
scepticism of scientific men. You would not fulminate quite so much if
you had had so many wild-goose chases after facts stated by men not
trained to scientific accuracy. 1 often vow to myself that 1 will utterly
disregard every statement made by any one who has not shown the

1 Darwin returned to Down from Sevenoaks on Saturday, Oct. 26th,
1872, which fixes the date of the letter.

* Probably Sir W. Crookes' Rest in the i

ualism (reprinted from the Quarterly Journal . London, 1

Other papers by Crookes are in the Proceedings oj
Psychical Reseat

444 MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS [Chap. XII

world he can observe accurately." In a letter to Dr. Dohrn, of Naples,
Jan. 4th, 1870, Darwin wrote : " Forgive me for suggesting one caution ;
as Demosthenes said, ' Action, action, action,' was the soul of eloquence,
so is caution almost the soul of science."

Letter 778 To J. Burdon Sanderson.

Down, July 16th, 1875.
Some little time ago Mr. Simon l sent me the last Report,
and your statements about contagion deeply interested me.
By the way, if you see Mr. Simon, and can remember it,
will you thank him for me ; I was so busy at the time that
I did not write. Having been in correspondence with Paget
lately on another subject, I mentioned to him an analogy
which has struck me much, now that we know that sheep-
pox is fungoid ; and this analogy pleased him. It is that
of fairy rings, which are believed to spread from a centre,
and when they intersect the intersecting portion dies out, as
the mycelium cannot grow where it has grown during previous
years. So, again, I have never seen a ring within a ring ;
this seems to me a parallel case to a man commonly having
the smallpox only once. I imagine that in both cases the
mycelium must consume all the matter on which it can subsist.

Letter 779 To A. Gapitche.

The following letter was written to the author (under the pseudonym
of Gapitche) of a pamphlet entitled Qicelques ?twts sur FEterniti du Corps
Humaine (Nice, 1880). Mr. Gapitche's idea was that man might, by
perfect adaptation to his surroundings, indefinitely prolong the duration
of life. We owe Mr. Darwin's letter to the kindness of Herr Vetter,
editor of the well-known journal Kosmos.

Down, Feb. 24th, 1880.
I suppose that no one can prove that death is inevitable,
but the evidence in favour of this belief is overwhelmingly
strong from the evidence of all other living creatures. I do
not believe that it is by any means invariably true that
the higher organisms always live longer than the lower ones.
Elephants, parrots, ravens, tortoises, and some fish live longer
than man. As evolution depends on a long succession of
generations, which implies death, it seems to me in the
highest degree improbable that man should cease to follow

1 Now Sir John Simon : he was for many years medical officer of the
Privy Council, and in that capacity issued a well-known series of Reports.

i867- 1S82] ANTHONY KI' H 445

the general law of evolution, and this would follow if he were L*uei
to be immortal.

This is all that I can say.

To J. IN.]. per.
Mr. Poppei had written about a proposed flying machine in which
birds were to take a part.

. i 15th, 1881.

I am sorry to say that 1 cannot give you the least aid, as
I have never attended to any mechanical subjects. I should
doubt whether it would be possible to train birds to fly in a
certain direction in a body, though I am aware that they
have been taught some tricks. Their mental powers arc
probably much below those of mammals. It is -aid, and 1
suppose truly, that an eagle will carry a lamb. This shows
that a bird may have great power for a short distance. I
cannot remember your essay with sufficient distinctness to
make any remarks on it. When a man is old and works
hard, one subject drives .mother out of his head.

To T. II. Huxley. Lcttt' '

Worthing, SepL 9th, 1881.
Mr. Anthony Rich left his house at Worthing as a legacy to
Mr. Huxley. See Huxley's Life and Letters, II., pp. 286, 287.

W'c have been paying Mr. Rich ' a little visit, and he has
often spoken of you, and I think he enjoyed much your and
Mrs. Huxley's visit here. But my object in writing now is
to tell you something, which I am very doubtful whether it
is worth while for you to hear, because it is uncertain. My
brother Erasmus has left me half his fortune, which is very
considerable. Therefore, I thought myself bound to tell
Mr. Rich of this, stating the large amount, as far as the
executors as yet know it roughly. I then added that my

1 Anthony Rich (1804? 1S91). Educated at Caius College, Cambruk
of which he was afterwards an Honorary Fellow. Author of Illustrate
Companion to the Latin Dictionary and Greek Lexicon, 1S49, sa'd to be
a useful book on classical antiquities. Mr. Darwin made his acquaintance

in a curious way — namely, by Mr. Rich writing to inform him that he
intended to leave him his fortune, in token of his admiration for his
work. Mr. Rich was the survivor, but left his property to Mr. Darwin's
children, with the exception of his house at Worthing, bequeathed to
Mr. Huxley.

446 MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS [Chap. XII

Letter 781 wife and self thought that, under these new circumstances, he
was most fully justified in altering his will and leaving his
property in some other way. I begged him to take a week
to consider what I had told him, and then by letter to inform
me of the result. But he would not, however, hardly allow
me to finish what I had to say, and expressed a firm deter-
mination not to alter his will, adding that I had five sons to
provide for. After a short pause he implied (but unfortunately
he here became very confused and forgot a word, which on
subsequent reflection I think was probably " reversionary ")
— he implied that there was a chance, whether good or bad I
know not, of his becoming possessed of some other property,
and he finished by saying distinctly, " I will bequeath this
to Huxley." What the amount may be (I fear not large),
and what the chance may be, God only knows ; and one
cannot cross-examine a man about his will. He did not bind
me to secrecy, so I think I am justified in telling you what
passed, but whether it is wise on my part to send so vague a
story, I am not at all sure ; but as a general rule it is best to
tell everything. As I know that you hate writing letters, do
not trouble yourself to answer this.

P.S. — On further reflection I should like to hear that you
receive this note safely. I have used up all my black-edged
paper.

Letter 782 To Anthony Rich.

Down, Feb. 4th, 1882.
It is always a pleasure to me to receive a letter from you.
I am very sorry to hear that you have been more troubled
than usual with your old complaint. Any one who looked
at you would think that you had passed through life with few
evils, and yet you have had an unusual amount of suffering.
As a turnkey remarked in one of Dickens' novels, " Life is a
rum thing." * As for myself, I have been better than usual
until about a fortnight ago, when I had a cough, and this
pulled me down and made me miserable to a strange degree ;
but my dear old wife insisted on my taking quinine, and,

1 This we take to be an incorrect version of Mr. Raker's remark (in
reference to Tom Martin, the Butcher), " What a rum thing Time is,
ain't it, Neddy?" {Pickwick, Chap. XLII.). A careful student finds that'
women are also apostrophised as "rum": see the remarks of the dirty-
faced man {Pickwick, Chap. XIV.).

1867—1882] ANTHONY RICH \J

though 1 have very little fuith in medicine, this, I think, has Letter ;8a
done me much good. Well, we arc both so old that we must
expect some troubles : I shall be seventy-three on Feb. 12th.
1 have been glad to hear about the pine-L . u are

the first man wli<> lias confirmed my account that they are
drawn in by the base, with .1 very few exceptions. With
respect to youi Wandsworth case, I think that if I had heard
of it before publishing, I would have said nothing about the
ledges;1 for the Grisedale case,3 mentioned in my book and
observed whilst I was correcting the proof-sheets, made me
feel rather doubtful. Yet the Corniche case1 shows that
worms at least aid in making the ledges. Nevertheless, I
wish I had said nothing about the confounded ledges. The
success of this worm book has been almost laughable. I
have, however, been plagued with an endless stream of letters
on the subject ; most of them very foolish and enthusiastic,
but some containing good facts, which I have used in cor-
recting yesterday the "sixth Thousand."

Your friend George's work about the viscous state of the
earth and tides and the moon has lately been attracting much
attention,5 and all the great judges think highly of the work.
He intends to try for the Plumian Professorship of Mathe-
matics and Natural Philosophy at Cambridge, which is a good
and honourable post of about £800 a year. I think that he
will get itfi when Challis is dead, and he is very near his end.
lie has all the great men — Sir W. Thomson, Adams, Stokes,
etc. — on his side. He has lately been chief examiner for the
Mathematical Tripos, which was tremendous work; and the
day before yesterday he started for Southampton for a fr

1 The Formation of Vegetable Mould thi the Action of Worms,

18S1, p. 71.

1 " Ledges of Earth on Steep Hill-sides p. 278).

1 "The steep, grass-covered sides of a mountainous valley in W< »t-
morland, called (irisedale, were marked in many places with innumerable,
almost horizontal, little ledges. . . . Their formation was in no way
connected with the action of worms (and their absence is an inexplicable
fact) . . . {ibid., p. 282).

4 Ibid., p. 281.

* Published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society,
1879, 1S80, 1 88 1.

6 He was elected Plumian Professor of Astronomy and Experimental
Philosophy in 1S83.

448 MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS [Chap. XII

Letter 782 weeks' tour to Jamaica for complete rest, to see the Blue
Mountains, and escape the rigour of the early spring. I
believe that George will some day be a great scientific swell.
The War Office has just offered Leonard a post in the
Government Survey at Southampton, and very civilly told
him to go down and inspect the place, and accept or not as
he liked. So he went down, but has decided that it would
not be worth his while to accept, as it would entail his giving
up his expedition (on which he had been ordered) to Queens-
land, in Australia, to observe the Transit of Venus.1 Dear
old William 2 at Southampton has not been very well, but
is now better. He has had too much work — a willing horse
is always overworked — and all the arrangements for receiving
the British Association there this summer have been thrown
on his shoulders.

But, good Heavens ! what a deal I have written about
my sons. I have had some hard work this autumn with
the microscope ; but this is over, and I have only to write
out the papers for the Linnean Society.3 We have had a
good many visitors ; but none who would have interested
you, except perhaps Mrs. Ritchie, the daughter of Thackeray,
who is a most amusing and pleasant person. I have not seen
Huxley for some time, but my wife heard this morning from
Mrs. Huxley, who wrote from her bed, with a bad account of
herself and several of her children ; but none, I hope, are at
all dangerously ill. Farewell, my kind, good friend.

Many thanks about the picture, which if I survive you,
and this I do not expect, shall be hung in my study as a
perpetual memento of you.

The concluding chapter of the Life and Letters gives some account
of the gradual failure in health which was perceptible in the last year of
Mr. Darwin's life. He died on April 19th, 1882, in his 74th year.

1 Major Leonard Darwin, late R.E., served in several scientific expe-
ditions, including the Transits of Venus of 1874 and 1882.

2 Mr. Darwin's eldest son.

3 (i) " The Action of Carbonate of Ammonia on the Roots of Certain
Plants." [Read March 16th, 1882.] Journ. Linn. Soe., Vol. XIX.,
1882, p. 239. (ii) " The Action of Carbonate of Ammonia on Chlorophyll-
bodies." [Read March 6th, 1882.] Ibid., p. 262.

THE END.

INDEX

[ f he German a, 0, 0 are treateil as a, o, u, not a» ac, oe, ue.]

rant genera, Darwin's work

nil, i. 5>2 -.1, 86

Abich, on Vesuvius, ii. 13 1

Abinger, excavations of Roman villa [
at, ii. 213 ; plants from, ii. 407

ABinger Hall, Darwin visits, i. 360;
''• 392> 391 ! Lord Farcer's recol-
lections of Darwin at, ii. 392

Abiogenesis, Huxley3 on Bio-

genesis and, i. 322, 323
rtion, Romanes on, i. 352

Abrolhos, plants from the, i. 9, 410

Abromia, ii. 42S.

Abrns precatotiuSy dispersal of seeds,

iL 349
Abstract, Darwin's dislike of writing

papers in, ii. 279
Abstract, the name applied by Darwin

to the Origin, i. 447
Abutilon, F. Muller's experiments on,

ii- 35°. 357, 359. 360
Abyssinia, flora of, i. 447, 465, 477;

ii. 5, 25
Academy, Darwin's opinion of the, i.

317
Acanthacece, i. 108
Acceleration of development, Copi

Hyatt oil retardation and, i. 33S-4S ;

reference in the Origin to, i. 340
Accumulation, of deposits in relation to

earth-movements, ii. 122; of specific

differences, i. 171 ; of sterility, i.

292, 293, 297, 299; of varieties, i.

207, 290, 20;, 294
Accuracy, diffi ult to attain, ii. 324 ;

the soul oi Nat. History, ii. 323

Acer as, fertilisation of, ii. 263, 265;

monstrous 81 iwer, ii. 31 7
Acincta, Darwin unable to fertilise, ii.

347
Aconitum, peloria and reversion, ii.

335
Acropera, atrophy of ovules, ii. 304,

305, 30S : Darwin's mistake over, ii.

306, 307, 3,19, 346, 347 ; fertilisation
of, ii. 273, ¥>h 3°4, 307. 3 12. 3l6.
318, 336, 337 ; relation to 1

ii. 282 : J. Scott's work on, ii. 31

VOL. II.

w, abnormal structure

of ovary, ii. 304 ; I (arwin's account
of (lower, ii. 280, 307 ; anil:
fertilisation, ii. 305, 306, 33G ;
relation to A. luteola, ii. 309; J.
ervations, 302-6; two
sexual conditions of, ii. 305 : A.
lutcola, Darwin's observations on,
ii. 303; fertilisation of, ii. 325, 3
flowers of, ii. 280, 2^2, 305 ; structure
of ovary, ii. 304, 307

Adaptation, Darwin's difficulty in un-
derstanding, i. 213 ; hybrids and, i.
292; not the governing law in Geo-
graphical Distribution, i. 406 ; more
clearly seen in animals than plants,
i. 152 ; Natural Selection and, i.
161 ; in orchids, i. 156 ; resemblances
due to, i. 306 ; in Woodpecker, i.
156.

Adenanthera pavomna, seed-disp
by Parrots, ii. 3

iterranean genus
in the Cameroons, ii. 6

Adlumia, i. IOO ; ii. 335, 342,

Adoxa, difference in flowers ot same
plant, ii. 376

Aecidium elatinum, Witches'-Broom
fungus, ii. 422

is Sanctae-heUna, i. 4
. hybrids, ii

Affaiblissement, A. St. Hilt on, i.

415

A 1 a. connection wil 1 n, 11. 15 :
connection with India, ii. 10; con-
tinent of Lemuria and. ii. 15 ;
sidered bj Murchison oldest conti-
nent, ii. 37 ; 1 equatorial
•. ii 26

Africi East), ( st, ii.

Africa (South), plants of, 1. 163 : re-
lation of floras of Western Europe

. i. 379

Africa (West), botanical relation to
Java, i. 412, 415

Alex., / •' tf of the

Blake, ii. 14" ; his belief in evolution

450

INDEX

the result of F. Miiller's writings, ii.
358 ; account of Florida Coral-reefs,
ii. 147 ; letters to, ii. 147, 197, 198 ;
visits Down, ii. 357, 358
Agassiz, L., biographical note on, ii.
175; attack on Origin, i. 159;
Darwin's criticism of book on Brazil,
i. 305 ; Darwin's opinion of, i. 104,
264, 459 ; views on creation of
species, i. 262; on geographical dis-
tribution, i. 309 ; Methods of Study
by, i. 258 : misstatement of Darwin's
views, i. 258 ; Walsh on, i. 258 ;
Etudes S7ir les Glaciers, i. 476 ; ii.

148 ; Darwin on glacier work of,
ii. 148, 159 ; on glaciers in Ceara
Mts., ii, 161 ; glacier-ice-lake theory
of Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, ii.
151, 172, 175, 181, 187; on glacier
moraines, ii. 148 ; on rock-cavities
formed by glacier-cascades, ii. 148,

149 ; on Darwin's theory, ii. 160 ;
on Geology of the Amazons, ii. 159,
160; doubts recent upheaval of
Patagonia, ii. 164 ; mentioned, i. 68,
422 ; ii. 358

Age of the world, i. 164 ; ii. 7,211,212
Aggressive plants, introduction of, ii.

23

Agricultural Society, experiments on

potatoes, i. 373
Airy, H. letter to, ii. 107, 108.
Albemarle Island, Darwin's coll. of

plants from, i. 402 ; volcanoes of, ii.

127
Aldrovanda, ii. 284
Alerse (" Alerce "), occurrence in

Chiloe, i. 400
Algce, movement of male-cells to

female organ, ii. 344
Alisma, F. Miiller's observations on, ii.

357, 363 ; submerged flowers of, ii.

375
Ahsma macropkyllt, circumnutation of,

ii. 345, 346
Allbutt, Prof. Clifiord, on sperm-
cells, ii. 76
Allen, Grant, review by Romanes of

his Physiological Aesthetics, i. 368
Allen, J. A., on colours of birds, i 357 ;

on mammals and birds of Florida,

i. 384
Allogamy, use of term, ii. 413
Almond, seedling peaches resembling,

i. 279
Alopecurus pratensis, fertilisation of,

ii. 291
Alpine floras, Arctic and, i. 409 ; of

Azores, Canaries and Madeira, i.

407 ; absence of, in southern islands,

i. 410 ; Ball on origin of flora, ii.
423 ; Darwin's work on, i. 95 ;
of United States, i. 433, 443 ; exist-
ence prior to Glacial period, ii. 22 ;
Ice-action in New Zealand, and, ii.
154 ; Ball on origin of, ii. 20, 21

Alpine insects, i. 262

Alpine plants, i. 47, 63 ; change due to
transplanting, i. 197 ; slight change
in isolated forms, i. 456 ; as evidence
of continental land at close of Glacial
period, i. 461

Alps, Australian, i. 95 ; Murchison on
structure of, ii. 229 ; submergence, i.
90 ; Tynd all's book on, i. 252

Alternate generations, in Hydrozoa, i.
262

Amazonia, Insects of, ii. 282

Amazons, L. Agassiz on glacial phe-
nomena in valley of, i. 476 ; L.
Agassiz on geology of, ii. 159, 160;
Bates on lepidoptera of, i. 258, 464 ;
sedimentation off mouth of, ii. 146

Amber, extinct plants preserved in, i.
409

Amblyopsis, a blind cave-fish, effect of
conditions on, i. 143

Ameghino, Prof., discovery of ATeomy-
lodon Listai, ii. 361

America (North), are European birds
blown to 1 i. 486 ; Falconer on ele-
phants, i. 205-7 ; fauna and flora of
Japan and, i. 170, 423, 434, 442, 459 ;
flora of, i. 423, 42S-30 ; mammalian
fauna, i. 227, 228 ; introduction of
European weeds, i. 450; subsidence
during Glacial period, i. 467 ; western
European plants and flora of, i. 423 ;
contrast during Tertiary period be-
tween South and, ii. 16 ; former
greater distinction between fauna of
South and, ii. 18 ; glaciation of South
and, ii. 162 ; Rogers on coal-fields,
ii. 217

America (South), Bollaert's Antiquities
of, i. 227 ; Araucarian fossil wood
from, i. 453 ; Carabi of, i. 200 ; ele-
vation of coast, i. 419 ; fauna of,
i. 227-8 ; floras of Australia and, i.
405, 406 ; geology of, i. 55 ; Darwin's
Geological Observations on, ii. 144 ;
deposition of sediment on coast, ii.
123 ; European plants in, i. 446 ;
frequency of earthquakes, ii. 114;
D. Forbes on geology of, ii. 141 ;
W. Jameson on geology of, ii. 141 ;
d'Orbigny on, ii. 117 ; volcanic erup-
tions, ii. 113; Wallace opposed to
continent uniting N. Zealand, Aus-
tralia and, ii. 14.

I N I

451

American War, i. 203. 214
Ammoniaj Darwin's work on ■

roots of carbonate of, ii. 369, 370
Ammonites, degeneration of, i
ii, i. 341 ; of S. An

22, 26
Amrinckia, ii. 384
Atnsinckia spe< tabilis, dimi « phism

282
Anacamptis ( = 0>r/. <iida/is),

fertilisation of, ii. 419
Anacharis ( = £/oc/t\i I

spread of, i. 115, 140
Analogy, difference between horn

and, i. 104
Anamorphism, Huxley on, i. 73
AnaHftra, illustrating difficulty in no-
menclature, i. 69
Anatomy of Vertebraia, Owen's attack

on Darwin and Lyell in, ii. 377
Ah, ient Sea Margins, by R. Chambers,

ii. 172
Anderson- Henry, I., biographical note,

i. 280 ; letter to, i. 280 ; ir 297-9
Andes, Darwin on geology of. i. 15,

iS, 19; high-road for European plants,

ii. 20 ; comparatively recent origin,

ii. 145
Anemophilous plants, Delpino's work

on, ii. 392
Angiosperms, origin of, ii. 20, 21, 239,

240

cecum sesquipedale, Duke of Argyll

on, i. 281-2
Animal Intelligence, Romanes on, ii.

48,51
Animals, difference between plants and.

i. 197 ; resemblance to plants, i.
Annuals, adapted to short seasons, i.

492 ; Hildebrand on percentages of,

i-493
Anoplothnnim, occurrence in Eocene

of S. America, i. 314, 315

Ansted, D.T., biographical note, i. 175;
letter to, i. 175

Antarctic continent. Darwin on 1
ence of Tertiary, ii. 13: hypothetical,
ii. 26

Antarctic Flora, Sir J. I>. Hooker's,
i. 93, 425, 426 ; ii. 223, 242

Antarctic floras, i. 05, 95, 405, 410 :
Darwin at work on, i. 427

Antarctic islands, plants of, i. 490

Antarctic Land. i. Il6, 491

Anti-Jacobin, qui/, on Erasmus Dar-
win in, i. 175

Antiquity of Man, Sir Charles Lyell's,
i. 185, 186, 193, 241, 243: cautious
views on species, i. 241 ; ii. 32 :
Darwin's criticism of, i. 103 ;

-:J9
Antirrhinum :ig

-, i.

197 ; Forel1 9 ii. 1 1,

Mo 1 Harvesl ng . i. 337 ;

ii.

on neuter, ii. 3.16 ;
plant-culture, ii. 360.
kus, living in 1 ■
i. 262
Apes, compari [ards ad>

in intellect betw< and, i. 334 ;

of anthropoid, i
Aphides, absence of wings in vr

i. 103
Aphis, Huxley on, i. 102

'asia, m f flowers, ii.

279

lachian chain, R< a cleavage

ii. 201

. Owen on, i. 17S ; v
i- i .
Aquilegia, Hooker and Thomson on,
i. 5S6 ; variation in, i. 219; pel
and reversion, ii. 335

ii. \\ 8
Arachnidse, i. 19
.-/;•.!.- abundant in Secondary

period, i. 453
Araucarian wood, fossil in S. America,

'• 2

A n!: r, i- 234

Archer-Hind, R. D., translation of
sage from Plato by, ii. 420

Archetype, Owen's b
( Iwen's term. i.

d'Archiac's B & la

. ii. 125 ; candidate for R.
list. ii. 229

Arctic animals, protective coloui . i
391 ; ii

Arctic climate, '. ii. 22

;;.c expeditions, Darwin on, i. 58

Arctic floras, i. 95 ; relation between
pine and, i. .1 ion betn

arctic and, i. 405; Hookei !
on, i. [55, 2 ■ ■ : I '..: '•■■

admiral; »nof 11 i er's I
migration of, i. 440

Arctic regions, few plants common to
Europe and N. America not ranging
to, i. 430; ! 33 :

northern limit of vegetation formerly
lower, i. 443 : 10 ; ice piled

up in, ii. 16 '.ence of

plants in, ii. 2

452

INDEX

Argus pheasant, colour, i. 330; ii. 87;

unadorned head, ii. 14, 15
Argyll, Duke of, attack on Romanes in

Nature, i. 395; rejoinder by Romanes

in Nature, i. 395 ; Hooker on, i. 302 ;

Letter to, i. 377, 378; Reign of Law

by, i. 277, 28 1
Aristolochia, i. 94 ; fertilisation of, ii.

262
Aristotle, reference to, ii. 426
Ark, Fitz-Roy on extinction of Mastodon

owing to construction of, i. 129
Armadillo, i. 12
Army, measurement of soldiers of

U.S.A., ii. 35
Artemia, Schmankewitsch's experi-
ments on, i. 391
Ascension Island, plants of, i. 401, 414;

earth-movements, ii. 127 ; volcanic

rocks, ii. 205
Ascidians, budding of, i. 362
Asclepiadere, fertilisation of, ii. 262
Ash, comparison of peat and coal, ii. 219
Asher, Dr., sends Russian wheat to

Darwin, ii. 419-22
Ashley, ii. 435
Ashley Heath, Mackintosh on boulders

of, ii. 168
Askenasy, E., on Darwinism, ii. 3S7
Aspicarpa, i. 142
Ass, hybrids between mare and, i. 320 ;

»■ 359 .

Astenas, i. 1 16

Astragalus hypoglotlis, range of, i. 431

Astronomical causes, crust-movements
due to, ii. 140, 141

Asturian plants in Ireland, i. 54

Atavism, use of term by Duchesne, i.
217 ; Kollmann on, i. 363

Athenaeum Club, Huxley's election, i.
90

Atkenmum, correspondence on Darwin's
statements on rate of increase of ele-
phants, i. 336 ; Darwin's opinion of,
i. 186, 304; ii. 356 ; abuse of Darwin,
ii. 356'

Atlantic islands, peculiar genera and
their origin, i. 494 ; ii. 1

Atlantis, America and, i. 485 ; Canary I.
and, i. 428 ; Darwin's disbelief in,
i. 480; Heer's map, i. 461 ; Wollas-
ton's, i. 167

Atolls, Darwin's wish for investigation
by boring of coral, ii. 198 ; Darwin
on Murray's theory, ii. 197, 198 ; Dar-
win's work on, ii. 226

Atomogenesis, term suggested as sub-
stitute for pangenesis, i. 281

Aliiplex, buried seeds found in sandpit
near Melrose, ii. 244-6

Attica, Gaudry on fossil animals, ii. 235

Auckland Island, flora, i. 404

Audubon, J. J., on antics of birds during
courtship, ii. 68 ; Ornithological Bio-
graphy, ii. 68

Aurelia, Romanes on, ii. 408

Auricula, dimorphism of, ii. 328 ; ex-
periments on, ii. 323 ; ii. 423

Austen, Godwin, on changes of level
on English coast, i. 482

Australia, caves of, i. 132 ; character of
fauna, i. 117 ; flora of, i. 125 ; Hooker
on flora, ii. 9 ; relation of flora to S.
America, i. 405, 406 ; relation of flora
to S. Africa, i. 447, 448 ; European
plants in, i. 446; local plants in S.W.,
i. 446, 447 ; naturalised plants, i. 451 ;
plants on mountains, i. 404 ; fossil
plants, ii. 26 ; dichogamy of trees in,
i. 445 ; as illustrating rate and pro-
gress of evolution, i. 173 ; Mastodon
from, i. 211, 228 ; products of, com-
pared with those of Asia, i. 1 14 ;
submergence, i. 448

Australian savages and Natural Selec-
tion, ii. 33

Australian species, occurrence in Malay
Archipelago and Philippines, i. 446

Autobiographical recollections, Charles
Darwin's, i. 1-5

Autobiography, extract from Darwin's,
i. 30

Autogamy, Kerner's term, ii. 413

Automatism, Huxley's Essay, i. 398

Avebury, Lord, i. 159, 178, 184; ad-
dress at Brit. Assoc, meeting at York
(1881), i. 394: ii. 169; on the Finns
and Kjokken modelings, i. 470 ;
letters to, i. 204, 205, 232, 233, 330,
332 ; ii. 169, 170, 256, 285, 286, 430 ;
on the Origin, i. 119; Prehistoric
Times, i. 263 ; on the Progress of
Science, i. 394 ; on Seedlings, i. 148 ;
story of Darwin told by, i. 38 ; Dar-
win regrets his entrance into politics,
ii. 156, 157 ; on Ramsay's lake-
theory, ii. 170

Averrhoa, Darwin's work on, ii. 411,
412, 414

Axell, Severin, book on fertilisation of
plants, ii. 384

Axon, W. E., letter from Darwin to
Mrs. E. Talbot published by, ii. 54

Aye Aye, Owen on the, i. 242, 243

Azara, ii. 63

Azores, organic relation with America,
i. 427 ; birds, i. 484 ; ii. 3 ; European
birds as chance wanderers to, ii. 3 ;
erratic blocks, i. 427, 486, 487 ; flora,
i. 41 r, 483, 486, 489 ; ii. 3 ; European

INDEX

453

plants in, i 419 : M in, i.

54; relation to Madeira a

i. 427 ; Watson <>n the, i. .;
chids from, ii. 24 ; n

B \iuks, habit of clutching objects, ii. 44
Babington, Prof. Charles C., at the

Hiitish Association (Manchester,

1 86 1), i. 195 ; British Flora, i. 99;

1 >.ir\\ in sends seeds of .
ii. 245
Baden-Powell, Prof., L 174-5
Baer, ii. 27
Bagehot, W., article in I'ortir..

Review on Physics and Politics, 1.

298 ; ii. 46, 47
Bahia Blanca, collection of plants

from, i. 13
Bailey, on Belt ocentron roseum, ii. 292
Baillon, on pollen-tubes of I/e/ian-

themum, ii. 313
Baker's Flora of the Mauritius and

Seychelles, i. 10
Balancement, G. St. Hilaire's law

'■ 57

Balanida-, Darwin s work on, i. 254
ihus, i|uestions of nomenclature,
i. 68-70

Balfour, F. M., note on, ii. 424; letter
to, ii. 424 : mentioned, ii. 41

Ball, J., on origin of Alpine flora, ii.
20-22, 42 ;

Ball, P., The Effects of Use and Dis-
use, i. 87

Balsaminacea?. genera of, i. S3

Hanks' Cove, volcano of, ii. 127

Barber, C, on graft-hybiids of sugar-
cane, i. 389

Barber. Mrs., on Papilio nireus, ii. 403

Barberry, abundance in N. America,
i. 431 ; .lispersal of seeds by birds,
i. 431 ; Lord Farrer and II. Midler
on floral mechanism, ii. 383 ; move-
ment of stamens ii.

Barbs : see Pigeons

Bardfield Oxhp (Primula eJaiior), i.
25^ ; ii- 37a

barnacles, Darwin s work on, i- 38, 61,
64,65,94; 11.125, 229 ; metamorph

in, 1. 332 ; F. M dler on, i. 312 :
nomenclature, i. 6S-70 ; of Secondary
Period, i. 97 : advance in, ii. 234 ;
complemental males compared with
plant.-, ii. 344
P.uneoud, on irregular flowers, i. 9S
" Baronne Prevost," Rivers on the 1

i. 279
Barrande, J., biographical not

candidature for R. medal, i. Si ; can-
didate for R. Society foreign lis-t, ii.

rk of, ii. 229
plant distribution in

An.

••11 En:

64 ; Travih in S. Afn

w, Sir )., ( :i with 1

:is. i, 58

eeds from a,
ii. .
Bartlett, A. 1' . ii. 49 ; letters to, ii
101, 102 : note on, ii. 57
on, on trees of N. America, i. 42 ;
Basalt, association with granite, ii. :
14; ration of trachyte and,

ii. 125

H. Christy on the, i. 470 ;
Hooker on Finns and, i. 467

Bat, natural selection and increase in

of wings, i.
bates. H. \\\, biographical note, L I
A Natural, , i. 214,

243 ; ii. 282, 352 ; Darwin's opinion
of his work, i. 1S1-3. 214, 243; ii.

2, 352 : cu insect fauna of Am
Valley, i. 177, 181 ; 011 lepido]
of Amazons, i. 258 ; letter from
Hooker to, i. 197; letters to, i. 176,
177, 1S1-3, 196, 197, 200, 201, 214,
215, 240. 241, 404, 465; letter
Hooker from, i 109 ; Darwin revj
paper by, i. 232; on fl iwei of Mono-
chatum, ii. 297 ; on in hili,

ii. 159 ; supplies Darwin with facts
lection, ii. 68
Miss A., - fertilise

in inconspicuous flowers, ii. 414
Bateson, W., on breeding lepidoptcra
in confinement, ii. 96; Men
/''-. , ii. 340

Kollmann on rudimentary
digits, i. 363

: . : . Lrawings by. ii. 273. 27 8
Sauhinia, sleep-n
ii. 367

American raised, ii. 1
[.M.S . circumsl
win • ■ 1 >.iin in's views

on 5] ;• ~ : 1 il

and voyage of, i. 2. m of, i.

2S ; J-27

beans, holes bitten by bees in flow
ii. 255; extra-floral nectaries oi, ii.

399
Bear, comparison with whale, i. 179;
modification of, i. r

n, D., bii grapl . ii. 26S,

: Darwin on work of, ii :
269 : on 2 j

454

INDEX

Beatson, on land birds in S. Helena,
i. 484

Beaufort, i. 247

Beaufort, Capt , asks Darwin for infor-
mation as,to collecting, i. 409

Beaumont, Elie de, biographical note,
ii. 128 ; on lines of elevation, i. 84 ;
on elevation in Cordilleras, ii. 221,
224 ; elevation-crater theory, ii. 124 ;
Darwin's disbelief in views and work
of, ii. 116, 128, 130; on lava and
dykes, ii. 129; Lyell's refutation of
his theory, ii. 137 ; measurement of
natural inclination of lava-streams,
ii. 116

Beauty, criticism by J. M or ley of Dar-
win's phraseology in regard to, i.
324, 325 ; discussion on, i. 144, 145;
ii. 382 ; lepidoptera and display of, i.
357; Wallace on, ii. 74; Darwin's
discussion on origin, ii. 382 ; in female
animals, ii. 74, 77 ; in plumage of
male and female birds, ii. 73, 74 ; of
seeds and fruits, ii. 348 ; Shaw on,
ii. 56 ; standards of, ii. 33-6

Bedford, flint implements found near,
ii. 190

Beech, in Chonos I., i. 400 ; in T.
del Fuego and Chili, i. 401 ; Miquel
on distribution, ii. 8

Bee-Ophrys (Ophrys apifera) : see Bee-
Orchis

Bee-Orchis, Darwin's experiments on
crossing, ii. 250 ; fertilisation, ii.
261-3, 337 5 self-fertilisation, ii. 283 ;
intermediate forms between Ophrys
arachnites and, ii. 283

Bees, combs, i. 121-4, 153 ; ii. 96, 288;
Haughton on cells of, i. 245 ; and
instinct, i. 105 ; referred to in De-
scent of Man, i. 329 ; New Zealand
clover and, i. 475, 493 ; ii. 255-6 ;
acquisition of power of building cells,
ii. 96 ; Darwin's observations on, ii.
97; agents in fertilisation of papilio-
naceous flowers, ii. 255, 256; as pollen
collectors, ii. 367 ; difference between
sexes, ii. 97 ; H. Midler on, ii. 96 ;
and parthenogenesis, ii. 42 ; regular
lines of flight at Down, ii. 97

Beet, graft-hybrids, i. 359

Beete-jukes, alluded to in De la
Beche's presidential address, i. 65

Beetles, bivalves distributed by, ii.
28, 29 ; Forel's work on. ii. 19 ; nest-
inhabiting, ii. 11, 12; stag-, ii. 90;
stridulating organs, ii. 83

Befruchtung der B lumen, II. Midler's,
the outcome of Darwin's Fertilisa-
tion of Orchids, ii. 382

Begonia, monstrous flowers, i. 142,
198 ; ii. 356 ; B. frigida, Hooker
on, i. 219

Begoniacese, genera of, i. 83

Behring Straits, spreading of plants
from, i. 449, 450

Belize, coral reefs near, ii. 194

Bell, i. 88 ; on Owen's Edinburgh Re-
view article, i. 185

Bell. Sir C, Anatomy of Expression,
ii. 98

Belt, T., on conspicuously coloured
animals distasteful to birds, i. 357 ;
letter to, ii. 399 ; The Naturalist in
Nicaragua, i. 357

Ben Nevis, Ice-barrier under, ii. 193

Benson, Miss, on Chalazogamy in
Amentifene, ii. 333

Bentham, G., biographical note, i. 448,
449 ; mentioned, i. 87, 101, 203 ;
ii. 253, 282, 408 ; address to Linnean
Society, i 298, 299, 316, 317, 349 ; ii.
339> 340 5 Darwin's criticism on ad-
dress, i. 378-81 ; letters to, i. 379-81,
448-51 ; ii. 279, 280, 283, 293, 294,
371-73, 423, 424 ; extract from letter
to, ii. 272 ; views on species and on
Origin, i., 134, 184. 185, 243, 392;
on fertilisation mechanism in Good-
eniaceae, ii. 258 ; on hybridism, ii.
339, 340 ; runs too many forms to-
gether, ii. 374 ; on Scott's Primula
paper, ii. 326

Berber is, Pfeffer on stamens, ii. 40x3

Berkeley, M. J., biographical note,
i. 309 ; address by, i. 309 ; exper-
iments on saltwater and seed-dis-
persal, i, 417, 419; letter to, i. 309,
310; mentioned, i. 40, 101 ; notice
of Darwin's work by, i. 310

Bermudas, American plants in, i. 489 ;
coral-reefs, ii. 194

Berzelius, on flints, i. 35

Bhootan, Rhododendron Boothii from,
ii. 297

Bible, chronology of, ii. 31

Biffen, R., potato grafts, i. 280

Bignonia, ii. 8^ ; F. Midler's paper on,
"• 353 ! B' capreolata, tendrils of,
ii. 418

Binney, E. W., biographical note,
i. 151 ; on marshes of Coal period,
i. 151 ; ii. 217-20; on coal and coal
plants 217-20

Biogenesis, Huxley's address on abio-
genesis and, i. 322, 323

Biology, Huxley's Course of Practical
lustration in, i. 362

Biology of plants, Hooker's scheme for
a Flora, with notes on, ii. 373-4

I M i I X

•nts,
i. 2* :sl,

- ; i i . i 1"

Mad- ira, i. 488 ; I on

American, i , a of,

i. 261 ; ii. I

nparison with mammals, i. 1
as isolated i. 229. 234 •,

Madeira, i 488; modification in, i.
162 ; An Irew Mm ray on W
theory of nests, i. 304; Walla
t!i. 1. 2S3, 304 ; ii. 72-4 ;

agents in dispersal of land-mollu
ii. 13 ; antics during courtship, ii.
68 ; courtesy towards own im
ii. 56 ; expression oi fear by erer
of feathers, ii. 103 ; means of produc-
ing music, ii. S2 ; spurs on fen
ii. 62 ; pairing, ii. 05, 66, 70 ;
polygamy, ii. 65 : propi rtion
sexes, ii. 67 ; sexual selection and
colour, ii. 6l, 63, 68,
traded by singii Ifinch, ii. 81;

lameness in Brazilian species, ii. 353;
occurrence of unpaired, ii. 66, 70;
Weir's observations on, ii. 83
Bird of paradise, ii. 63, 89 ; and 1

gamy, ii. 69
Birmingham, British Assoc, meeting

(1849), i. 66
Bivalves, means of di

water, ii. 28, 29
Bizcacha, Inn rowing animal of I

gonia, ii. 361
Blackbiid, variation in tufted, i. 262
Blair, Rev. R II., observations on the

blind, ii. 109
Blal. . on Elephants in Gee

i. 227
Blanford, II. !'., on an Indo-oceanic

continent, ii. 15
Blanford, W. T., obituary notici

umayr by, i. 375
Blind, expression of those born. ii. 109
Blomefield, I.. : seejenyns, 1 .
Bloom, Darwin's work on, i. 360: ii.
2. 368, 392, 398409-1.3. 423 :
F. Darwin on connection between
stomata and, ii. 37" 1 -
win, I rain on, ii. ■

on leaf of Trx
ii. 371 ; prote< ion again I |
ii. 411 ; on s 411

Blow-fly, Lowne on the, ii
Blyth, E., biographical note, i. 62,
63; reference to letter from, i. 155:
visits Down, i. ?oo : on Gallina
ii. 80
Blytt, A., biographical note, ii. 11;
essay on immigration o( Norwegian

11,17: ii. 1 1

207

'i-

'35
ier, on | Spain, i. 4

354
Bolbopkyl!:t ., Darwi

ii. 320

■ ia, geology of, i. 27 : ii. 141,
Bollaert's Antiquities of S. Ann

Bembus, diversity in generative organs,

i. 251 ; Psithyrus in ne- -62 ;

pollen-collecting apparatus of male,

ii. 97
Bombycilla, protectivi 1 . ii. 87

1. ii. 66, 70
Bonaparte, L.. on Bas jue and Finnish

language, i. 467
Bonat . ii. 91 ;

structure of flower, ii
Bonney's Edition of Darwin's (

Reej , ii. 197 ; Charles L.
. ii. 118
Bonnier, G. , on alpine plants, i. 47
Boragineae, dimorphism in, ii. 200
Borneo, New Zealand and Australian

plants in, i. 490 : temperate plai;'

lowlands, i. 491 : possible region

remains of early man, ii

i urbon, i. 407

Bosquet, cirr urograph sent by

Darwin to, i. 75 ; gives Darwin note

on fossil ChtkatnaluSf i.
Botanical collections (national), con-
11 at Kew, i.
■list. Darwin as, i. 234.400; ii.

278, 3°7- 30S

iy, ii. 242-434 : philosophical
it in study of, i 430
Boulders, transpc

166-8 (see also Erratic
Darwin h, ii. 168 : in

Gl< n Roy, ii. 17-1 ; on Moel Trj
ii. 166. :

7
nemouth, Darn in's viMt 1
•
ii. 279
Bowc r, Prof. F. O.,

427. --'N

Lett's experiments on,
ii. 57 : colours discrimini i. 57

man, W.. 1
98, supplies Darwin with :

on Expression, ii. 98,
Brachiopods, Morse on, i. 350 ; Silurian
i. no

456

INDEX

Brackish- water plants, i. 116

Bradshaw, H., translation of Hebrew
letter by, i. 365

Brain, Owen on, i. 238 ; evolution in
man, ii. 39, 40 ; Wallace on Natural
Selection and Evolution of, ii. 39

Branchipus, Schmankewitsch's experi-
ments on, i. 391

Branta, mentioned in reference to
nomenclature of Barnacles, i. 69

Brassica sinapistrum, germination at
Down of old seeds, ii. 245

Braun, A., convert to Darwin's views,

i- 259

Bravais, on lines of old sea-level in
Finmark, ii. 176, 183

Brazil, L. Agassiz's book on, i. 305 ;
Agassiz on glacial phenomena in, i.
476 ; F. Midler's residence in, i. 382;
plants on mountains of, i. 478 ; basalt
in association with granite, ii. 125;
Darwin on origin of lakes in, ii. 155;
dimorphism of plants in S., ii. 350

Bree, Dr., on Celts, i. 174; misrepre-
sents Darwin, i. 174.

Breeders, views on Selection held by, i.

193

Breeding, chapter in Origin on, i. 130

Brehm, 011 birds, i. 173, 174

Breitenbach, Dr., ii. 369

Brewster, Sir D., on Glen Roy, ii. 176

Bridgeman, ii. 314

Brinton, Dr., attends Darwin, ii. 338

British Association meetings, Belfast
(1874), ii. 398, 402 : Birmingham
(1849), i. 66 ; Cambridge (1862), ii.
155; Ipswich (185 1 ), i. 66; Leeds
(1858), i. 178; Liverpool (1870), i.
322; Manchester (1861), i. 194;
Norwich (1868), i. 309; Nottingham
(1866), i. 480 ; Oxford (1847), ii. 218,
247, 248; Oxford (i860), i. 156, 158,
160; Southampton (1846), i. 55,
ii. 175; Swansea (1880), ii. 424;
York (1881), ii. 24; Addresses —
Berkeley, i. 309 ; Fawcett, i. 194,
195 ; Hooker, i. 297, 299, 302, 304,
309 ; ii. 398 , 402 ; Hooker on Insular
Floras, i. 480 (see also Hooker, Sir
J. D.) ; Huxley on Abiogenesis, i.
322, 323 ; Lord Kelvin, i. 329, 330 ;
Wallace on Birds' Nests, i. 283

British Association, Committee for in-
vestigation of Coral Atoll by boring,
ii. 198, 199

British Medical Association, undertakes
defence of Dr. Ferrier, ii. 437, 438

British Museum, disposal of Botanical
Collections, i. 109-13

Brodie, Sir Benjamin, ii. 442

Brongniart, Ad., on Sigillaria, ii- 220

Bronn, H. G., Letter to, i. 172-4 ; on
German translation of Origin, i. 139 ;
reference in his transl. of Origin to
tails of mice as difficulty opposed to
Natural Selection, i. 358 ; on Natural
Selection, i. 387 ; Entwickelung, ii.
234 ; Morphologische Sludien, ii. 232 ;
Naturgcschichte der drei Reiche, ii.
223

Brougham, Lord, on Structure of Bees'
cells, i. 123 ; habit of writing every-
thing important three times, ii. 323

Brown, H. T., and F. Escombe, on
vitality of seeds, ii. 245 ; on influence
of varying amounts of C02 on plants,
ii. 21

Brown, R., accompanies Flinders on
Australian voyage, i. 444 ; meets
Darwin, i. 408 ; dilatoriness over
King's collection, i. 39 ; illness, i. 109 ;
on course of vessels in orchid flowers,
ii. 273-5 i mentioned, ii. 156 ; on
pollen-tubes, ii. 313 ; seldom indulged
in theory, ii. 323

Brulle, G. A., biographical note, i.
257 ; reference to work by, i. 97, 98 ;
his pupils' eagerness to hear Darwin's
views, i. 257

Brunonia, Hamilton on fertilisation
mechanism, ii. 258

Brunton, Sir T. Lauder, letters to, ii.
437, 441 ; letter to Darwin from, ii.

438

Brydges and Anderson, collection of
S. American plants, i. 400

Bryophyllum ealycinum, Duval-Jouve
and F. Muller on movements of
leaves, ii. 365

Bryozoa, specimens found during
voyage of Beagle, i. 16.

Buch, von. on craters of Albemarle I.,
ii. 127 ; Darwin's disbelief in his
views, ii. 116; mentioned, ii. 200;
Travels in Norway, ii. 201

Buckland, W., biographical note, ii.
150, 151 ; on Glen Roy, ii. 172, 175,
187 ; mentioned, ii. 149

Buckle, Darwin reads book by, ii. 156

Buckley, Miss, ii. 238

Buckman, on N. American plants, i. 451

Buckman, Prof., experiments at Ciren-
cester, ii. 421

Bud, propagation by, i. 280, 296 ;
Hooker's use of term, i. 197 ; fertili-
sation in, ii. 254, 255

Bud -variation, i. 213, 220, 275-7 ; ii. 314

Buenos- Ay res, fossils sent by Darwin
from, i. 17

Bull-dog, as example of Design, i. 282

I \ I I I X

64 ; attracted by German singing-
bird, ii. 74 i Weir on pi
Bunbury, Sii ('- I I1'., bi< .

note, ii. 22

i. 132 ; views on Evolution, i. 317 ;
on \

of Brazil, i. 476, 47s i ":i p'anl
Madeira, i. 480; illness, ii. 221;
mentioned, ii. 224

Bunsen, Copley medal awarded to, ii.
231 ; mentioned, ii. -

Burbidge, F. W., on Ma/axis, i. 474

Burleigh, I ord, i. 135

Burnett, ii. 119

Busk, <;, \isit to the Continent with
coner.i. 253; on caves of Gibraltar,
ii. 105

Butler, A. G., identification of butter-
flies, ii. 358

Butler, Dr., Darwin at Shrewsbury
School under, i. 4 ; ii. 441, 442 ; men-
tioned, i. 6

Butterflies, attracted by colours, i.
348; and mimicry, i. 266; tam<
of, i. 348 ; colour and sexual s<
tion, ii. 56, 67, 68, 94 ; description by
Darwin of ticking, ii- 358

Butterfly-orchis, ii. 276 (see also /
liar ia)

Cabbage, Darwin's work on, i. .m s ;
effect of salt water on, ii. 411 ; Pin-
guicula and seeds of, ii. 401 ; si
movements of cotyledons, ii. 414 ;
waxy secretion on leaves, ii. 361, 409

Caddis-flies, 1'. Mailer on abortion of
hairs on legs of, i. 382

Ceenonympha, breeding in confinement,
ii. 96

1, on Torbitt's potato experiments,

>• 373. 374
Calcutta, J. Scott's position in Botanic

( i.uden, i. 217
Callidryas philea, and Hedjn hium.\\. 400
Cailithriz Sciureu . wrinkling ot

during screaming, ii. 102

iris, in A» re s. i.

Cambrian, piles of unconformable strata
below, i. 39S

Cambridge, Darwin and Henslow, i.
151. 109; Honorary LL.D. given to
Darwin, i. 371--; mentioned, i. 18;
Darwin's recollecti i. 1 ; i

Owen's address, i. 17S. 211 : Philo-
sophical Soc meeting, i. 140, 150;
Darwin visits, ii. 425 ; specimens
Darwin's plants in Botanical Museum,
ii. 290

1 I

210, 21 1 ; in N. America, ii

Cam m, ii.

257, 260 ;

1, ii. 319
Campanulace ng in, ii. 250

Campl ell I land, I

• '• ii1
Canada, Sir William I
i. 209

ries, fertility of hybrids, ii. 71 ;
plumage, ii. 81 ; wi!

ii- 75

Canary Islands, flora, i. 407 ; Humboldt
on, i. 494 ; insect- of, i. 167 ; Ma<;
formerly connected with, i. .:
lation to Azores and Madeira, i. :
483; d'Urville on, i. 409 ; African
affinity of eastern, ii. 1 ; elevatio
ii. 136; von Buch on. ii. 27 ; lain.
American trees wa
of. ii. 3

Candolle, A. L. P. P. de, biographical
note, i. 233 ; on influence of cliiii
i. 3S0 ; on Cupulifei | : <>n ex-

-tinction of plants in cub. md,

i. 42 i : , i 444 :

lef. 348, 3&

ii. 429, 430; on in I plants,

i. 434 : on naturalised plants and
variation, i. 424 ; review by A
of, i- 242 ; on relation ol ami-

lies to range ol . i 424 |

social plants, i. 424 ; n , i.

93, 105.

lolle, C. de, on latent life in se
ii. 24;

strini, on proportion of sexes in
. 70

Canna, fertilisation of, ii -
. ! i
i. 27. 117. [I

pared with that of, i. .; ., i.

415, 447 : ii 24 ; varial - of,

i. 41 ; Darwin's
lions on metan

.\n element in flora, ii.
Meyer '. ii.

Tres M uth-

ern limit, i. 20

1 ■'. Miiller in • on,

ii 366

•

D of, ii. 414

ibus, origin of, i- 200; in Chili, ii.
159 ; A. Murray on, ii. 3

458

INDEX

Carbon dioxide, percentage in atmos-
phere, ii. 20, 21

Carboniferous period, glacial action, i.
173 ; subsidence during, ii. 136

Cardamin e,quasi-bi\]b$, on leaves, ii. 374

Cardnelis elegans, length of beak, ii. 66-7

Carex, ii. 401, 402

Carices, of Greenland, i. 470

Carlisle, Sir A., on Megatherium, ii. 219

Carlyle, Mrs., remark on Owen, i. 309

Carmichael, on Tristan d'Acunha, i 401

Carmichalia, ii. 255

Carnarvonshire, Darwin on glaciers of,
ii. 151, 190

Caroline Islands, want of knowledge on
flora, i. 458

Carpenter, Dr., on influence of blood in
crossing, i. 319, 320

Carrier-pigeon (see Pigeon), preference
for certain colours in pairing, ii. 71

Carrot, flowers of, i. 355

Carruthers, W., on potato experiments,

i- 373
Carter, H. J., on reproduction of lower

animals and foreshadowing of Cheino-

taxis, ii. 343, 344

Carus, V., letters to, i. 272 ; ii. 145, 146 ;

translator of Origin, etc., i. 335 ;

ii. 145

Casarea, a snake peculiar to Round
Island, ii. 10

Case, C, Darwin at school of, i. 3, 4

Cassia, Darwin's experiments on, ii.
414-15, 418 ; sleep-movements of
leaves, ii. 362, 364, 367, 368, 399 ; two
kinds of stamens, ii. 284 ; Todd on
flowers of, ii. 292

Cassini, observations on pollen, ii. 254 ;
on ovaries of Composite, ii. 376

Cassiope hypnoides, i. 433

Castes, Galton on, ii. 43

Catalpa, ii. 400

Catasetum, fertilisation of, ii. 282, 312,
316 ; Huxley's scepticism as to me-
chanism of, ii. 341, 373; morphology
of flower.ii. 275, 276, 305 ; aerial roots,
ii. 350; sexual forms of, ii. 305,316,
339 > C. saccatum, flower of, ii. 276 ;
C. tridentatum, three sexual forms,
ii. 280

Caterpillars, colour and protection, ii.
60, 69, 71, 91, 92; experiments by
Weir, i. 357

Cats, Belgian society to encourage
homing of, i. 385 ; habits of, ii. no

Cattell, on crossing sweet peas, ii. 257

Cattleya, Darwin suggests experiments
on, ii. 312 ; self-fertilisation, ii. 315

Caucasus, wingless insects of, i. 262

Caucjuenes, baths of, i. 19

Cave-fish, reference in the Origin to
blind, i. 143

Cave-rat, i. 169

Caves, animals in Australian, i. 132, 133

Cavia, specimens collected by Darwin,
i. 10, 11

Ceara Mountains, L. Agassiz on gla-
ciers of, ii. 160

Cebus, expression when astonished, ii.
98

Cecidomyia, ancestor of, i. 261

Cedars, Hooker on, ii. 8

Celebes, geographical distribution in,
i. 267; ii 15

Cellaria, i. 16

Celosia, experiment on, i. 219

Celts, Bree on, i. 174

Centipedes, luminosity of, i. 307

Cenlradenia, two sets of stamens in, ii.
293 ; position of pistil, ii. 294

Cephalanthera, flower, . ii. 273 ; single
pollen-grains, ii. 270 ; C. grandijlora,
fertilisation mechanism, ii. 265

Cephalopods, Hyatt on embryology of,
i. 338 ; Hyatt on fossil, i. 338

Cephalotus, ii. 403

Cervus campestris, of La Plata, i. 144

Cetacea, Lyell on, i. 272

Ceylon, Malayan types in, i. 489 ;
plants, i. 145, 260 ; former connection
with Africa, ii. 15 ; dimorphic plants
of, ii. 351

Chaffinch, courtship of, ii. 70

Chalazal fertilisation, Miss Benson on,
ii- 333 > foreshadowed by Darwin, ii.
333 5 Tl"eub on, ii. 333

Chalk, occurrence of Angiosperms in,
ii, 239 ; as oceanic deposit, ii. 146

Challenger (H.M.S.), reports reviewed
by Huxley, i. 388 ; account of sedi-
mentation in, ii. 146

Challis, Prof., ii. 447

Chambers, R, biographical note, ii.
177 ; announced as author of Vestiges
of Creation, i. 48 ; on derivation of
marine from land and fresh-water or-
ganisms, i. 49 ; Darwin visits, i. 186 ;
on Glen Roy, ii. 172, 177, 187 ; on
land-glaciation of Scotland, ii. 187 ;
letters to, ii. 177-80, 443; letter to
Milne-Home from, ii. 177 ; on scep-
ticism of scientific men, ii. 443 ; men-
tioned, ii. 228

Chance, use of term, i. 395

Chandler, S. E. (see Farmer, J. B.),

ii. 21
Changed conditions, Schmankewitsch's

experiments on effect of, i. 391
Charles Island, Darwin's plants from,
i. 402

! N I

Charlock, germination oi old

245
C hatbam 1 land, Darw

nts from, i. 402 ; 1 n, i.

475
Checks, use of artificial, ii. 50

motaxis, foreshadowed l>y Cuter,

ii. 343

Chtasognathus Grantii, i. 17

Childhood, Charles Darwin's, i, 1 ^

Children, Darwin on, i. 202 ; e.v
ment on emotions of, i. 21 7 ; colour-
sense, ii. 47 ; coloured compared
with white, ii. 55 ; com pa 1
between those of educated and un-
educated parents, ii. 55 ;
ii. 10S ; developmei . ii. 5 ; ;

intelligence of monkeys and, ii. 49

Chili, elevatioi . iS ; ii. 135,

144 ; gi >f, i. 21, 27 ; plants

common to New Zealand and, i.
426 ; Carabus of, ii. 159 ; Darwin on
earthquakes and terraces in, ii. 113,
114, 119

Chillingham cattle, Darwin and Hind-
marsh on, i. [87,188

Chiloe, description of, i. 17; fori
i. 42 ; geology, i. 22. 23, 476 ; plants
on mountains, i. 400 ; boulders, ii.
149

( hina, expedition to, i. 155

Chinese, explanation of affinities with
Mexicans, i. 407

Chips from a German Worksh
Midler's, ii. 45

Chlocon dimidiatum, Lord Aveburyon,
i. 232, 331

Chlorite, segregation of, ii. 204 205

Chlorophyll, Darwin's work on action
of carbonate of ammonia on, ii. ,

Chonos Islands, Darwin's coll
plants from, i. 40, 400; Dan.
account of, i. 20 ; geology of, ii. -
potato, i. 25

«. bristy, 1 1., i. 471 1

Christy, Miller, on oxlip, ii. 372

Chrysospleniutn Hum, i. 431

Chthamaius, in the chalk,

Cicada, experiments on eggs, ii. S9 ;
Mailer on rivalry of, ii. 02 ; \A
on, ii. 89 : C. sept
account of, ii. 89

Cinchona, Hooker on different rat<
growth in seedlings, ii. 296

Circumnutation, F. Midler's
tions on, ii. 345, 363

Cirripedes : see barnacles

Cistus, hybridism of, ii. 2S5

Citrus, unequal cotyledons, ii. 365 :
polyembryonic seeds, ii.

i. 259 ; and Mdlle. Royer, ii.
■
ell in, ii.

335
1 , Sir Jai phical 1.

ii. 1 E Roy, ii. [84

Clarke, \V. B., // Favourite,

ii. 2
Clarkia, two kinds of stamens, ii. 299 ;
C.i 301

on, i.
Cuvier on, i- 284 : Dana on mamma-
lian, i. 236; Darwin on, i. 140; ii.
Darwin and Huxley on,
i. 1 "4. 'logy and, i.

rgans in,

ii- 379

hism of, ii, 209
and foliation, ii. 199-210 ;
rwin on his work on, ii. 200-1 ; his-
of work on. ii. 199 ; parallelism
foliation and, ii. 204, 20S ; relation
to stratification, ii. 200, 202, 206,
20S ; relation to rock-curves, ii. 208 ;
Rogers on, ii. 201 ; - •. ick on,

ii. 200 ; uniformity of foliation and,
ii. 203 ; result of chemical action
ii. 202 ; metamorphic schists, ii. 207 ;
lines of inci] 1 ing form pi

ii. 202 : Tyndall or. - ob-

ii. 200
Cleistogamic flowers, fertilisation, ii.
3 1 : and

Viola, ii. 308 ; pollen of, ii. 300,30s ;
comparison with Termites, ii. 360

, Darwin' on,

ii, 330 : D.uw : liments on,

irritability, ii. 341, j

I iown
by power of feeling, it. 330

. specific differed i 74

in A res, i. 484 ;
remnant of Tertiary Flora, 1
iithus, ii. 255
Clift, W.

lia, i. 133 ; Owen assistant

i-59

Clin; - : ii. 140,

Is7 i :. 42 ; el

on spe< J57 j mi-

i change in,
). 453 ; k ribution

structure of plants, i. loi
ii. 251; extinct mammals as evi-
dence ot change in, i. 457 : and
sexual different 57 ; varia-

1 on former,
ii. 157 ; mild ii. 22

460

INDEX'

Climbing Plants, Darwin's work on,
i. 259 ; ii. 341-3, 348 ; circumnuta-
tion of, ii". 345, 363, 374; F.
Muller's work on, ii. 345, 350

Clivia, Scott's work on, ii. 311

Clodd's memoir of Bates, i. 197

Close species, absence of intermediate
forms between, i. 367, 368 ; definition
of, i. 420 : Asa Gray on, i. 421 ; in
warm temperate lands of N. and S.
hemispheres, i. 439 ; relation to flora
of N. America, i. 421

Clover, i. 449 ; relation between bees
and, i. 493 ; ii. 255, 256, 285, 286

Club, dinner at Linnean, i. 185 ;
Philosophical, i. 131, 135 _

Coal, Darwin on origin of, i. 63, 64 ;
ii. 217-20 ; Lesquereux on the flora
of, i. 260 ; marine marshes and
plants of, i. 151 ; ii. 217, 218; ash
of, ii. 219

Coal period, higher percentage of C02
during, ii. 20, 21

Coast-lines, parallelism with lines of
volcanoes, ii. 142

Cobbe, Miss, article in Theological
Review on Descent of Man, i. 329

Cockburn Island, boulders from, i. 407

Cochin hen, experiments on, i. 224

Coelogyne, fertilisation mechanism, ii.
258

Coffea arabica, seeds with two em-
bryos, ii. 365

Cohn, F., notice in Corhhitt of his
botanical work, i. 216

Coldstream, Dr., i. 409

Colenso, on Maori races of New Zea-
land, i. 313

Coleoptera, apterous form of Madeira,
ii. 67 ; colonisation of ants' nests by,
ii. 11

Colias edusa, wings of, ii. 67

Collecting, Darwin's early taste for,

i- 3
Collier, Hon. J., Art primer by, i. 398,

399; letter to, i. 398. 399; portrait

of Darwin by, i. 399

Collingwood, Dr., on mimetic forms, i.

183, 197

Colonies, Barrande's, i. 83
Colonisation, conditions of, i. 379
Coloration. Walsh on unity of, i. 261
Colour, butterflies attracted by, i, 348 ;
mimicry in butterflies by means of,
i. 266; ii. 68, 86; of dioecious
flowers, i. 354, 355 , and fertilisation
of flowers, i. 138 ; in grouse, and
Natural Selection, i. 143 ; in bitds,
ii. 57, 58, 60, 6i, 67, 68, 71-5, 78,
79, 85 ; in male birds, not simply due

to Natural Selection, ii. 72-5, 78 ;
Dawin's work on, ii. 60, 61 ; Darwin
differs from Wallace in views on, ii.
84 ; evolution of, ii. 59 ; experiments
on birds, ii. 58, 59 ; Hackel on lower
animals and, ii. 62 ; Krause on, ii.
47 ; Magnus on. ii. 47 ; protection
and, ii. 85 ; relation to sex, ii. 86 ;
in seeds and fruits, ii. 348 ; and
Sexual Selection, ii. 57-9, 72-8, 86-8,
96 ; sense of, in children, ii. 47 ;
Wallace on, ii. 72-4, 84, 92, 93

Columba aenas, habits of, i. 167 ; C.
Hvia, descent of pigeons from, i.
168 ; ii. 382

Combretum, ii. 342

Combs, bees', i. 180 (see also Bees).

Comparative anatomy, Huxley's book
on, i. 246

Compensation, belief of botanists in. i.

56
Compiler, Darwin's opinion of a, i. 95,

444
Compositse, Harvey on, i. 163 ; Masters'
reference to, i. 147; monstrosities in,
i. 148 : morphological characters, i.
273 ? "• 374) 3/6 ; Schleiden on, i.
77 ; Darwin on crossing, ii. 254 ;
fertilisation mechanism, ii. 258;
Hildebrand on dispersal of seeds,
ii. 387 ; viscid threads of seeds, ii.

374

Comte, i. 192 ; Huxley on, i. 313, 382

Concepcion Island, geology of, i. 22,
23 ; Darwin's account of earthquake,
ii. 114

Conchodcrma, in reference to nomen-
clature, i. 69

Concretions, origin of, ii. 206

Conditions of life, effect on animals and
plants, i. 198, 299, 406 ; effect on
elephants, i. 207 ; effect on repro-
ductive system, i. 218 ; hybrids and.
i. 290, 292 ; importance in maintain-
ing number of species, i. 297 ; species
and changes in, i. 293 ; and sterility,
i. 137 ; variability depends more on
nature of organisms than on, i. 377 !

Conferva? and sexuality, i. 190

Coniferce, abundant in humid temperate
regions, i. 492

Connecting links, i. 82, 83 ; Gaudry
on, ii. 236

Conscience, Morley on Darwin's treat-
ment of, i. 327, 328

Conspectus crustaccoriim, Dana's, ii. 228

Constancy, in abnormally developed
organs, i. 353

Contemporaneity, Darwin on, ii. 232,

2jj

I \ I

461

l tinental elevation, volcanic erup-

■ns and, ii. 113, 1
menial extension, Darwii
234, 427 : ii. 135 ; evidence in fa
of, i. 475 ; Hool < 1 on, i. 9
485-7; I- yell on, i. 90, 91, .;.

i means of distribution, i. 461 ;
New Zealand and, i. 418
Continental forms insular, i.

481

Continents, inhabitants of islands and, i.

241,242 ; n ts of ,i. 90-3, 463 ;

Wallace on sinking imaginary, ii. 12

Controversy, Darwin's hatred and

avoidance of, i. 396 ; ii. 119
Convallaria majalis, in Virginia, i. 433
volvulus, supposed dimorphism of,

"• .351

Cooling of crust, disagreement among
physicists as to rate, ii. 5, 7

Cope, E. D.. biographical note, i. 33^ :
style of, i. J44; and Hyatt, the*

of. i- 33*

!. 1 ►arwin and the, i. 247,
258 : ii. 3 {8 : 1 alconer, and Darwin's.
i. 252-7 ; Lindley considered for
the, i. MS: awarded to Lyell, i. So,
113: ii. 231 : awarded to Bunsen, ii.
1 ; Darwin describes letter from
I looker as a, ii. 33S

Coquimbo, Darwin visits, i. 25 : up-
raised shells, i. 3S4

a] islands, and subsidence, i. 134 :
ii. 195 ; plants of. i. 4S3

Coral reefs, Darwin's wurk on. i. 254 :
ii. 193-S : Bonney's edition of
Darwin's book on. ii. 147 : A. Agassiz
on. ii. 147; Dana on. ii. 226,227:
fossil, ii. 194, 197: Murray on. ii.
197, 198 ; conditions of life of polyps,
ii. 195 ; solution by CO, of. ii. 19S
subsidence of, ii. 195

Coral tree, ii. 411 (see Erythrina)

Corallines, nature of. i. 16

Cordiace.w dimorphism in, ii. 349

Cordilleras, i. 18, 20, 21, 25 2 ciers

of, i. 476 : ii. 153. 162 ; high-roa.
plants, i. 405 : plants of, i
birds of, ii. 159 ; comparison between
(den Roy and terraces of. ii. 152 ;
Darwin on earth-movements of. ii.
124, 141 ; Forbes on, ii. 144 :
marine lava-streams, ii. 136 ; volcanic
activity and elevation, ii. 135. 221-
222

Coronilla, Lord Farrer on. ii. ;ss
392-394: <-'• emerus, ii. 393; C.
vane, ii. 392, 393

Coryanthes, "beats everything in or-
chids." ii. 339

. tiildel 1

: fertilisation of, ii. 3
: . • lity

tendrils
259 ; ii. i •
sil .; >n in lloral sb

335
Colic Her, Darwin offers rev.

tcinth grafts, i. 276

1 lotyledons, 1 1

ii. 414-5
1 : alance, V. m divergent

variation anil. i. 286
Cowslips, Prin and, i. 252. 296,

420; ii. 324: Darwin's e.xperm.

on artificial fertilisation, ii. 311;

homomorphic seedlings, ii. 3:

of 1 d. 327,

Craig Dhu, shelves of, ii. 193
Crater--, in I ialapagos Island, i:. .

denudation, Lyell on, ii. I

137; of elevation, ii. Il6; Darwin

on, ii. 124

lord, J., i. S9
Creation, acts of, i. 154. 173. 312:

doctrine of, i. 172 : of sj

i. 163; Owen on, i. 17S: Rom

on individual, i. 370
Creation-by-variation, doclrine of, i.

'35

■ ■raham s, ii. 171

Cresy. E., i. ^5 '• lett( • ''•

268
Cretaceous flora, Heel on Arctic, ii.

239
Crick. W. D.. letter to, ii. 2

turn, crossing ex| eriments on, i.

219 ; C passiflora, fertility of, ii. 309

Crocker, \\ . work on hollyhocks, i.

: ii. 201
Croll. J., biographical note, ii. 161 ;
win on his theory, ii. 158, 211 ;
on icel grinding agents, ii.

161 : 1 . it. 101-4. 21 1. 212

Lyell on his theory, ii. lj>8; on sub-
aerial denudation, ii. 212: on time,
ii. 211
Crookes. !-ir W., on s;
-
book on, i. 3 .

ition, Darwin's experi-
ments on self- and, ii. 352. :v

:. 406 : check ; ina-

bility, it. 314 : Darwin states thai
a rule il iwers describe .ted

to self-fertilisation are really ada]

, ii 372 : of incor-
ii. 414 ; all plants require occasional,
ii. 34J ; small . en con-

fined 10 same plant, ii. 3

462

INDEX

Crosses, fertility and sterility of, i. 166

Crossing, agreement between Darwin's
and breeders' views, i. 222 ; counter-
balance of, i. 286 ; Darwin's views
on,i. 94, 95, effects of, i. 128, 212,
213, 287, 288-94 ; experiments on, i.
Si, 52, 94, 101, 147, 168, 212, 219,
223, 224, 280, 335 ; ii. 253-5;
Hooker's views, i. 94 ; in animals
and plants, i. 230,231 ; ii. 249, 250 ;
influence of blood in, i. 319,320;
intermediate character of results, i.
362 ; Natural Selection and dis-
inclination towards, i. 295 ; offspring
of, i. 290 ; of primroses and cowslips,
i. 252 ; ii. 325 ; and sterility, i. 2S9 ;
Westphalian pig and English boar, i.
320 ; botanists' work on, ii. 372 ;
importance of, ii. 253 ; pains taken
by Nature to ensure, ii. 384 ; in
Pisum, ii. 389 ; in Primula, ii. 325,
372 ; in individuals of same species,
ii. 257 ; F. Muller compliments
Darwin on his chapter on, ii. 360 ;
and separate sexes in trees, ii. 250

Crotalaria, ii. 371, 423

Crotahts, i. 12

Cruciferoe, action of fungus on roots, ii.
422

Cruciferous flower, morphology, ii.
286-9

Crliger, Dr., on cleistogamic fertilisa-
tion of Epidcndrum, ii. 317 ; death
of, ii. 262 ; on fertilisation of figs, ii.
366 ; on pollinia of Acropera, ii. 318 ;
on Melastomaceoe, ii. 301 ; on fertili-
sation of orchids, ii. 315, 338, 339

Crustacea, comparison of classification
of mammals and, i. 236 ; Darwin on,
ii. 228 ; F. Muller on, ii. 357 ; sex
in, ii. 82

Crying, action of children in, ii. 108 ;
physiology of, ii. 98, 99 ; wrinkling
of eyes in, ii. 40

Crystal Palace, Darvvin'svisit to, i. 78,81

Crystals, separation in lava-magmas, ii.

125

Citcurbtta, i. 387 ; seeds and seedlings

of, ii. 427, 428
Cucurbitacere, Dr. Wight on, i. 101
Cudham Wood, i. 34, 36
Culiivated plants, Darwin's work on,

i. 472
Cultivation and self-sterility, ii. 336
Cuming, on Galapagos Islands, i. 52
Cupuliferae, A. de Candolle on, i. 233
Curculionids?, i. 82 ; Schoenherr's cata-
logue, i. 82
Currents, as means of dispersal, i. 52, 53,
90, 93- 241

Cuvier, on camels' teeth, i. 211 ; on
classification, i. 21 1 ; mentioned, i. 16

Cybele, H. C. Watson's, i. 100

Cycadacese, supposed power to with-
stand excess of C02, ii. 21

Cyclas cornea, ii. 29

Cyclops (H.M.S.), dredging by,* ii.
232

Cynips, dimorphism in, i. 262 ; Walsh
on, i. 250, 258

Cypripedium, fertilisation mechanism,
i. 469 ; ii. 269, 270 ; C. hirsntis-
simian, i. 469

Cyrena, range and variability, i. 96

Cytisus Adavii, Darwin on, ii. 405,
406 ; note on, ii. 248 ; C. alpinus,
ii. 404-6; C. laburnum, graft-hybrids
between C. purpureus and, ii. 248 ;
J. J. Weir on, ii. 404-6

Cyttarogenesis, suggested substitute for
pangenesis, i. 281

Dallas, W. S., translator of F. Midler's
Fur Darwin, ii. 353

Dampieia, Hamilton on fertilisation
mechanism, ii. 258

Dana, J.D., biographical note, i. 236 ;
Darwin's opinion of, i. 81 ; health, i.
460 ; ii. 267 ; letters to, i. 159, 160 ; ii.
227, 228 ; mentioned, i. 75, 91, 135,
258, 260 ; on classification of mam-
malia, i. 236; Darwin's criticism of, ii.
225, 226 ; on Kilauea, ii. 134; Lyell on
his claims for R. Soc. foreign list, ii.
230 ; volume on geology in Wilkes'
Reports, ii. 225, 228

Dareste, C, letter to, i. 318

Darwin, Annie, i. 414

Darwin, B., observations on, as a child,
ii. 49

Darwin, Caroline, Charles Darwin's
early recollections of. i. 1 ; letter to,
i. 7, 8

Darwin, Catherine, i. 2, 3 ; death, i.
477 ; letter to, i. 31-3

Darwin, Charles, boyhood, i. 1-5 ; ii.
441, 442; went to Mr. Case's school,
i. 3, 4 ; went to Shrewsbury School,
i. 4; abused as an atheist, i. 258;
Collier's picture of, i. 399 ; complains
of little time for reading, i. 304;
contribution to Henslow's biography,
i. 188 ; Copley medal awarded to, i.
252-6 ; engagement to Miss Emma
Wedgwood, i. 28 ; Falconer's list of
scientific labours of, i. 254 ; first
meeting with Hooker, i. 39 ; ii. 157 ;
friendship with Huxley, i. 72 ; on
Gray's work on distribution, i. 434 ;
growth of his evolutionary views,

1 N 1

463

i. 37 ; health, i. 240, 247, 250, j;
456,477 ; ii. 157. 326, $38 ; hi
decree at I i. 371, 37- '. in-

timacy with Honker, i. Vs. 39;Judd's
llections of, i. 376; Lamarck and,
i. 125 ; letters to A
388, 389 ; ii. 2S, 368 ; marriage, i. 29 ;
friendship with F. MUller, i. 3
prefatory note to Meldola's transla-
tion of Weismann, i. 397: n
lections of Cambridge, i. 310; re-
lation between J. St. 'I and, i. 217 ;
review on Bates, i 232: attends
meeting of Royal Society, i. 257 : ii.
408; slowness in giving up old be-
liefs, i. 234: tendency to restrict
interest to Natural History, i. 216;
and the l\ '.\ , i. 203 : visits Lon-
don, i. 435,437 : ii. 5,219, 232, 408;
Wallace and. ii. 40, 61, 8S. 92, 93 :
and Weismann, i. 381 ; working
hours, i. 158; book on S. American
Geology, ii. 118 ; pleasure in angling.
ii. 215 ; on making blunders, ii. ioi :
slightknowledgeofBotany, ii. 307,308;
visits Cambridge, ii. 236 ; love of
children, ii. 423 ; on cleavage and
foliation, ii. 199-200, 201 ; on origin
of coal, ii. 217, 218; hi> theory of Coral
reefs supported by Funafuti boring,
ii. 199; large correspondence, ii. 312;
on danger of trusting in science to
principle of exclusion, ii. 173; death
of his child from scarlet fever, ii.
281 ; on difficulty of writing good
English, ii. 110; feels need of stimu-
lus in work, ii. 300 ; subscribes to
Dr. Ferrier's defence, ii. 437-40 ;
on flaws in his reasoning, ii. 20S ;
follows golden rule of putting adverse
facts in strongest light, ii. 324 ;
Geological Inst 'ruction* , ii. 22S ; geo-
logical work on Lochaber, ii. 17.:.
187, iSS, 192, 193 : visit to Glen R
ii. 1S6; bad handwriting, ii. 312:
idleness a misery, ii. 433, 443 ; on
immortality and death, ii. 44.1. 445 :
on lavas, ii. 125 ; letter to 5
on Glen Roy, ii. 181 ; indebted)
to Lyell, ii. 1 17 ; on 1 yell a
geologist, ii. 118; on LyeU's
Visit to the U.S.A.. ii. 225 ; worl
Man and Sexual Selection, ii. 3
on mountain-chains, ii. 12! : offer of
help to F. Mllller, ii. 303 ; never
afraid of his facts, ii. 333 ; an honorary
member of the Physiological Society,
ii. 436 ; pleasure in discussing Geo-
logy with Lyell. ii. 173: reads paper
belore Linn. Society, ii. 193; \

ii. 445.
of aiding fell
ii. 240 ; 1

• 1 . 442:
visit

an artist, ii. 422 ; on speculation, ii.
133; style in writing, ii. \2i: gi

imonial in
candidature for botanical Chair in
Edinburgh, ii. 247 : tl
in tl L 341 ; \

to . ii. 392, 412 ; visil

Patterdale, ii. 433 ; on vitality

Is, ii. 243-6 : on volcanic phe-
nomena, ii. 113. 114, 121 ; on Welsh
glaciers, ii. 190; work on action of
carbonate of ammonia on plants, ii.

434, 438

in, Mrs. CI

vn, i. j ! to, i. 29, 30 ;

passage from Darwin's autobiography

. i. 30 ; m ntioned, ii. 1 17. 150,

188 ; illness, ii. 2S5

Darwin, Emma : see Mrs. Charles

Darwin.
Darwin, Erasmus A., i. 4. 5. 8, 33*.
252 ; death of, i. 395 ; letters to, i.
247, 24S ; mentioned, ii. 445 ; visit
ii. IO
Darwin, Dr. Erasmus, Charles Dar.
preliminary notice to Krause's me-
moir of, ii. 423 ; Charles Darwin and
ilutionary views of, i. \2\
Darwin, Francis, i. 302, 365 ; ii. 361,

395- 397, 417, 421, 425- 4.>o
bloom and stomata, i. 369 ; ii. "
(.2 5 : on / . i. 369 ; on Hux-

ley's speech at Cambridge, i. 371. 372 ;
on the Knight-Darwin law, i. 51 ; ii.
250 ; on lobing of leaves, i 387 ; ex-
periments on nutrition, i. 369 : experi-
ments on plant-movements, ii. 370 ;
lecture at Glasgow (Brit Ass
1901) on perceptions of plants, ii.
420 j sugg 1 Romai

riments on intelligence, ii. 49 :
vivisection, ii.
work, ii. 429; on Wiesnei
ii. 432

313, 315 : ii. (
2 12. z ;
i. 287 ; criticism of Wallace, i.

lected Plumian 1
at Cambridge, ii. 447 ; I ex-

periments with magnetic needles
insects, i. ; .

heredity, ii. 41. icle in C

tc: on origin of lan-

guage, ii. 45

Henrietta (Mrs. Litchfield),

464

INDEX

i. 178; ii. 2, 4, 251; criticism of
Huxley, i. 216, 238
Darwin, Horace, remark as a boy on
Natural Selection, i. 204, 205 ; men-
tioned, ii. 417
Darwin, Leonard, ii. 100, 288, 431,448
Darwin, Robert W., i. 55 ; letter to,

«• 57

Darwin, Susan, alluded to in early re-
collections of Charles Darwin, i. 3 ;
illness, i. 477 ; sends Wedgwood
ware to Hooker, ii. 338

Darwin, W. E. , i. 359 ; on fertilisation
of Epipactis palust?-is, ii. 264 ; letter
to, ii. 291

Da>"win and after Darwin, Romanes',

i- 352

Datwimana, Asa Gray's, i. 166, 169 ;
extract from Huxley's, i. 367

"DarwinscheTheorie," Wagner's book,
i. 311

Darwinism, Wallace's, i. 288, 291, 299

Darwinismus, at the Brit. Assoc, meet-
ing at Norwich (1868). i. 297, 299

Daubeny, C. G. B., Prof., biographical
note, ii. 248 ; invites Darwin to
attend Brit. Assoc, at Oxford, ii.
248 ; mentioned, ii. 243

David, Prof. Edgeworth, and the
Funafuti boring, ii. 1 99

Dawn of life, oldest fossils do not
mark the, i. 398

Dawson, Sir William, antagonism to
Darwinism, i. 466, 468 ; criticism of
Origin by, i. 210, 468; criticism of
Hooker's arctic paper, i. 466, 467,
470, 471 ; Hooker on, i. 209 ; note
on, i. 209

Dayman, Capt., on soundings, ii. 232

De la Beche, Sir H., biographical note
i. 65

Death, Darwin on immortality and, ii.

444, 445.
Decaisne, ii. 387

Decapods, Zoea stage of, i. 342, 345, 347
Dedication of Ilackel's Generelle Mor-
phologic to Darwin, i. 278
Dedoublement, theory of, ii. 286
Deep-sea soundings, Huxley's work

on, ii. 232
Degeneratton, in ammonites, i. 343, 344;
of culinary plants, i. 222 ; and para-
sitism, i. 164
Degradation, i. 114, 115, 343
Deification of Natural Selection, i. 154,

192
Deinosaurns, and free-will, i. 1 55
Delbceufs, La Psychologie, etc., ii. 48
Delpino, F., on Asclepiadeae and Apo-
cyneae, ii. 372 ; on crossing, ii. 372 ;

on dichogamy, ii. 257 ; on fertilisa-
tion mechanism, ii. 257-9, 388 ; letter
to, ii. 391-2 ; praises Axell's book,
ii. 384 ; mentioned, ii. 388, 418
Demosthenes, quoted by Darwin, ii.

444

Denudation, Dana on, ii. 227 ; Dar-
win on marine, ii. 211 ; comparison
of subaerial and marine, ii. 226 ;
Ramsay and Jukes overestimate
subaerial. ii. 156

Deodar, Hooker on the, ii. 8

Deposition and denudation as measure
of time, ii. 23

Derby, Lady, letter to, ii. 443-4

Descent, Falconer on intermediate
forms, i. 211 ; from single pair, i.
378 ; Owen's belief in doctrine of, i.
202, 203, 304; resemblance due to,
i. 306

Descent of Man, ii. 30-112

Descent of Man, reference in, to effect
of climate on species, i. 357 ; re-
viewed by John Morley, i. 324-9 ;
transmission of characters dealt with
in, i. 351 ; Darwin's work on, i. 323 ;
ii. 384 ; Sir W. Turner supplies facts
for, ii. 37 ; Wallace on, ii. 92

Descent with modification, Wallace
on, i. 384

Desert animals, and protective colour-
ing, ii. 87

Design, Darwin on, i. 395 ; examples
of, i. 282 ; Lord Kelvin on, i. 330

Deslongchamps, L., on fertilisation of
closed flowers, i. 95

Desmodiutn gyrans, Darwin's experi-
ments on, ii. 289, 362, 396, 397, 430 ;
leaf movements, ii. 367, 368

Development, acceleration and retarda-
tion in, i. 338-48; floral, i. 98 ; import-
ance of, in classification, i. 284 ; rate
of, i. 173 ; sudden changes during, i.
166

Devonshire Commission, report on
physiological investigation at Kew,
ii. 416

Devonshire, flora of, i. 461

Dewar, Prof., and Sir Wm. Thiselton-
Dyer, on vitality of seeds in liquid
hydrogen, ii. 245

Diaheliotropism, F. Midler's observa-
tions, ii. 366, 367

Dialogue, title of paper by Asa Gray,
i. 169

Diatomacese, beauty of, i. 144 ; conju-
gation in, i. 103, 144

Dicentra thalictriformis, morphology of
tendrils, ii. 343

Dichoea, fertilisation mechanism, ii. 270

1 N !

Dichogamy, i 94 ; Dclpinoon. ii. 257 ;
ignorance of botanists of, prior to pub-
lication of Fertilisation of On'..
ii. 254

1>k1<, Sir T. Lauder, Survey of Glen
Roy by, ii. 175

Dickens, quotation from, ii. 446

I >i( 1 ;i in, l ii ,, ii

on, W. K , i. 6

tyledons, Heer on old< 1 known,
ii. 2 ^Q : sudden appearance, ii. 239

Didelphys, i. 86

Digestion, beneficial effect on plants,
ii. 407

Dillwyn, paper in Gardeners' Chronicle,
ii. 24S

Diluvium, tails of, ii. [49

Dimorphism, in Cynips, i. 249, 250:
Darwin on, i. 222, 224, 229, 267,274,
29S ; difficult to explain, i. 356 ; and
mimicry, i. 265 ; in parasitic plants,
i. 262 ; Wallace on, i. 265 ; Walsh
on, i. 259 ; Weismann on Sexual, i.
356 ; in Cicadas, ii. 90 ; flowers
illustrating, ii. 280, 282, 299, 347-52;
Darwin knows no case in very
irregular flowers, ii. 351 ; in Melasto-
maceae, ii. 292, 293 ; in Linutn, ii.
320 ; in eight Natural Orders, ii.
282 ; in Primula, ii. 320, 321, 323,
327, 328 ; apparent cases due to mere
variability, ii. 3S4 ; explanation of,

»• 373

Dingo, i. 167

Diodia, ii. 272

Diceciousness, origin of, ii. 416

Dioiura, experiments on, i. 349 ; ii.
381, 384, 401, 403 : response
stimuli, ii. 51, 394. 395; Curtis'
servation- on, it 384

Difsacus, F. Darwin on, i. 369

Dipterocarpus, survival during glacial
period, i. 473

Direct action, i. 181,212, 213 235,
ii. 235 : arguments against, i.
306 : Darwin led to believe more in,
i. 214 ; Darwin's desire not to under-
estimate, i. 19S : Darwin's under-
estimates, i. 235, 300; facts proving,
i. 350. 389 ; Falconer on, i. 2
and hybridity, i. 319 : importance
i. 391-2; of pollen, i 2>o: variation
and, i. 300

Direction, sense of, in animals, i. 3S5

Disease. Dobell on Germs an
of, i. 235

Dispersal (see also Distribution), of
seeds, i. 40, 416-19, 436, 440, 444,
445 ; of shells, i. 52

Distribution. Forbes on, i. 52, 53, 95.

VOL. II.

1 land and sea in I
tim<

436 ; i'.i

>m

plant-, ii. on,

i. I l.S : ii. 17-2' 1 ; 1

ii. II, 17

. I »ai win on, i >f, i.

87 : I ■ in, i. 203

Divergence, Hooker on, i. 134 ; |

ciple of, i. 99, 101, 109, 153,
Diversification, Darwin's

the good of, i. 199
Dobell. 1 I.. letter to, i. 234-5

. i. 127, 128, 138, 167, 168; descent

of, i. 387 ; experiment in painting, ii.

72 : Expression, ii. 101 ; habits, ii. 102;

rudimentary tail inherited in certain

sheep-, ii. 382
Dohrn. Dr.. visits Darwin, i. ],2'-,:

serves in Franco-Prussian war, ii. 92 ;

extract from letter to, ii. 444
Dolomit Riffe, Darwin on Mojsiso\

i. 374; ii. 197
Domestic animals, crossing in. i. 2

rwin's work on. i. 493; ii. 37;
- tegast on, i. 324; variability

i. 137, 182, 191 ; treatment in Varia-

tion of Animals and Plants, i. 16S
Domestication, effects of, i. 131, 134.

137. 192, 2^2: and loss of sterility,

Domeyko. on Chili, ii. 144

Dominant forms, i. 165, 207

Don, D., on variation, i. 102 ; men-
tioned, i. 403

Donders, F. C, on action of eyelids, ii.
100; letters to, 100. 101, 104, 105,
108, 109

Dorkings, power of flight, ii. 54

., description of house and coun-
try, i. 31 6; Darwin's satisfaction
with his house, ii. 244 ; instance
vitality of led from. ii.

245 ; method of determining plants
at. ii. 330 ; Darwin ot
ii. 165 ; observations on regular !.
of Right of bees at. ii. 97

Down (lanugo), on human body, ii. 39

Dropnn.:

1'. Darwin's experiments, i.
9; "a disguised animal." ii. 2 J
Darwin's ol servations on, ii 200, .

■. 320,381, 384, 3 396,

401, 406-S ; Darwin's pleasure on
proving digestion in. ii. 3
inorganic substance on, u | eri-

ments on absorption oi poison, ii.
290: Pfeffer on, ii. 400; J.Scott's

SO

466

INDEX

paper on, ii. 313, 319; response to
stimuli, ii. 51 ; D. filiformis, experi-
ments on, ii. 385 ; D. rolimdi folia,
experiments on, ii. 385, 406, 407

Drosophyllum, vernation of, i. 316 ;
Darwin's work on, ii. 397 ; Droso-
phyllum lusitankwn, sent by Tait to
Darwin, ii. 381 ; used in Portugal
to hang up as fly-paper, ii. 381

Druidical mounds, seeds from, ii. 244

Drummond, T., on fertilisation in Les-
chenaultiafortnosa, ii. 259

Duchesne, on atavism, i. 217

Ducks, period of hatching, i. 155;
skeletons, i. 87 ; hybrids between
fowls and, ii. 223

Dufrenoy, geological work of, ii. 126

Duncan, Rev. J., encourages J. Scott's
love for plants, i. 217

Dung, plants germinated from locust-,
ii. 4

Dutrochet, on climbing plants, ii. 342

Duval-Jouve, on leaf-movement in
Bryophyllum, ii. 365

Dyer : see Thiselton-Dyer

Dyliscus, as means of dispersal of bi-
valves, ii. 28, 29

Ears, loss of voluntary movement, ii.
107 ; in man and monkeys, ii. 53 >
rudimentary muscles, ii. 38 ; Wallis's
work on, ii. 53

Earth, au.e of the, ii. 7

Earth-movements, ii. 113-47; cause of,
ii. 382 ; in England, ii. 167; relation
to sedimentation, ii. 122 ; subordinate
part played by heat in, ii. 133

Earthquakes, coincidence of shocks in
S. America and elsewhere, ii. 114,
115; connection with elevation, ii.
167, 221 ; connection with state of
weather, ii. 114 ; Darwin on, ii. 113,
136 ; in England, ii. 167 ; frequency
of, ii. 114 ; Hopkins on, ii. 133 ; in
Scotland, ii. 115

Earthworms, Darwin's book on, ii. 367;
geological action of, ii. 212-17 >
influence of sea- water on, ii. 215 ;
F. M tiller gives Darwin facts on, ii.
362 ; Typhlops and true, i. 114, 115

Echidna, anomalous character of, i. 86

Edentata, migration into N. America,
ii. 18

Edgeworth, mentioned, i. 184

Edinburgh, Darwin's student-days in, i.
5 8 ; Hooker's candidature for Chair
of Botany, i. 409 ; ii. 247

Edinburgh Review, article on LyelPs
Antiquity of Man, i. 243 ; reference
to Huxley's R. Institution Lectures,

i. 147 ; Owen's article, i. 145, 146,
149, 185, 196

Education, effect of, ii. 54, 55 ; influence
on children of parents', ii. 54

Edwardsia, seeds possibly floated from
Chili to New Zealand, i. 475 ; in
Sandwich Is. and India, i. 426 ; ii.
256

Egerton, Sir P. de M., note on, i. 88

Eggs, creation of species as, i. 163, 173 ;
means of dispersal of molluscan, i. 441

Ehrenberg, Ascension I. plants sent to,
i. 414 ; on rock-building by infusoria,
i. 164 ; Darwin's wish that he should
examine underclays, ii. 219

Eichler, A. W., on morphology of
cruciferous flower, ii. 287 ; on course
of vessels as guide to floral mor-
phology, ii. 273 ; reference to his
Bliithendiagramme, ii. 293

Eildon Hills, need of examination of,
ii. 192

Elateridse, luminous thorax of, i. 307

Elective affinity, i. 161

Electric organs of fishes, the result of
external conditions, i. 306, 307

Electricity, and plant-movements, ii.

394. 395
Elements 0] Geology, Wallace's review

of Lyell's, ii. 39

Elephants, i. 129 ; Falconer's work on,
i. 168. 169, 205, 226, 227 ; rate of in-
crease of, i. 336 ; and variation, i. 207 ;
found in gravel at Down, ii. 165 ;
manner of carrying tail, ii. 101, 102 ;
shedding tears, ii. 99

Elephas Cohtnibi, Falconer on, i. 205 ;
Owen's conduct in regard to Fal-
coner's work on, i. 227, 228, 232 ; E.
primigenius, as index of climate,
i. 457 ; woolly covering of, i. 208 ;
E. texianus, Owen and nomenclature
of, i. 227

Elevation, in Chili, i. 18-21, 419 ; lines
of, i. 84 ; New Zealand and, i. 92 ;
continental extension, subsidence
and, i. 427 ; connection with earth-
quakes, ii. 167 ; equable nature of
movements of subsidence and, ii. 189 ;
evidence in Scandinavia and Pampas
of equable, ii. 173; Hopkins on, ii.
133 ; large areas simultaneously
affected by, ii. 138 ; d'Orbigny on
sudden, ii. 119; rate of, ii. 139;
Rogers on parallelism of cleavage
and axes of, ii. 204 ; sedimentary
deposits exceptionally preserved
during, ii. 122 ; subsidence and, ii.
123, 136, 147 ; vulcanicity and, ii.
135. *37

1 N I

467

Elodea uina,:' 1 ican

immigrant i. 1 15. 149

; tail fi athers

1 Sexual Selection, ii. 64

Embryology, argument for, i. 145 ;

succession ol changes in animal-, i.

jji ; Darwin's explanation of, i. 140;

Bowers, i. 98 ; of /: . . , i .
Balfour's work on comparative, ii.

424

I mbryonic stag< ration of, i.

Endlicher's Gen ra Plantarum, ii. 364
Imann, on variability of introduced
plants in N. America, i. 431

. former union with Continent,
i. 41.S : men of science of Continent
and, ii. 156

Entada scandens, dispersal . i. 93

Entomologists, evolutionary vii ws of,
i. 176

Entstehung und Begriff der natur-
historischen Art, Nageli's Essay, i.
272; ii. 206, 207; Darwin on, ii.
375. 376

Environment, and colour protection, ii.
87-8

1 in S. America,
i. 315 : monkeys, i. 200 ; mamm
co-existence with recent shells, ii. 222

Eozoon, illustrating difficulty of dis-
tinguishing organic and inorganic
bodies, ii. 171

Ephemera dimidiatum, Lord Avebury
on, i. 331

Epidendrea:, closely related to Mala
ii. 281

Epidendrum, Criiger on fertilisation of,
ii. 31 7 : self-fertilisation of, ii. 315, 351
. i '< Candolle's term. i. 234
. fertilisation mechanism, ii.
263-6 ; F. Midler on, ii. 375 ; pollinia
of, ii. 270; E. palustris, fertilisation
mechanism, ii. 204

Epithecia, fertilisation mechanism, ii.
270

Equatorial refrigeration, i. 177

.->. Marsh's work on, i. 377 ; geo-
graphical distribution, ii. 63; in N.
and S. America, ii. 18

Erica retrafix, Darwin on, ii. 402

ron canadense, successful immi-
grant from America, i. 1 1 ^

Uiitu cicutarium, introduced from
Spain to America, i. 432: range in
1 .S.A., i. 432

Erratic blocks, in A m -. i. 1. ; 4S0,
487 ; in S. America, ii. iy>; Darwin
on transport, ii. 153; of Jura, ii. [48,
149 ; Mackintosh on, ii. 16S ; on Mod
Try fan, ii. 166, 167

1
tilisation, ii, ; 1 ,

of, with

., ii.
"
mini, MacArthur on, ii. 255 ; of
New S Wales, ii. 254 ; sleep m
its of, ii. 411

SS ; dimorphism
of sub-genus of, ii. 351
Eschschol fertility,

ii. 352, 356, 35S

■ its on self-sterility, ii. 347 ; F.
Mull periments in crossing, ii.

355.
iricht, on lanugo on human eml

»• 53
Escombe, 1., on vitality of seeds, ii.

245 ; a n II T., ii. 2t

Ks [uimaux, Natural Selection and, ii. 33
vs ami Reviews, attitude of laymen

towards, i. 186
Eternity, Gapitche on, ii.
Etheridge, R., President of Geological

Soc. (1880-bi), ii. 169
Etna, Sir Charles I rk on, i.

125 ; ii. 137 ; map of, ii. 131
Eucalyptus, species setting seed, i-445 ;

mentioned, ii. 398
Euonymus eut dispersal 1

"■ 349. 350

\orbia, Darwin on roots of, ii. 434 ;
E. peplis, bloom on, ii. 411
Euphrasia, parasitism of, ii. 374
Europe, movement of, ii. 13S, 140
Eurybia argof. musk-tree of Tas-

mania, an arborescent Composite, i.

•63

rgreen vegetation, connection with
humid and 1 quable climati , i. 493

lution, i. 37-399; Darwin's 1
views, i. 37 1

by 1 Ivan a i, 340 : Huxl

lectures on, i. 129-31 ; of mental
nails, i. 351 : i Miill ribu-

.'.
2 . 273 : ii. 206, 207,
37Si 176; Pi

i. 375 ; Romanes' lecture on, i. |
Saporta's belief in. i. 302 ; unkn
law of, i. 20S ; mis,

ii. 239 ; of colour, ii. 59 ; and d<
ii. 444, 445 : 1 In i, ii. 239 :

Hi language, ii. 45 : 1.; ell
ii. - also Lyell) : Turner on

man and, ii. 105 ; Wallace on, ii.
31. 93

468

INDEX

Ewart, Prof. C, on Telegony, ii. 359

Exacum, dimorphism of, ii. 295

Experiments, botanical, i. 218, 219 ;
ii. 154 ; Tegetmeier's on pigeons, i.
223-6 ; time expended on, i. 201

Expression, queries on, i. 287 ; ii. 98-
112; Bell on anatomy of, ii. 98 ;
Darwin at work on, ii. 332

Expression of the Emotions, Wallace's
review, ii. no

External conditions, Natural Selection
and, i. 300. See also Direct Action

Extinction, behaviour of species verging
towards, i. 344 ; contingencies con-
cerned in, i. 117; Hooker on, i.
167 ; races of man and, i. 168 ; Pro-
boscidea verging towards, i. 207 ;
St. Helena and examples of, i. 167

Eyebrows, use of, i. 356

Eyes, behaviour during meditation, ii.
104 ; contraction in blind people of
muscles of, ii. 109 ; children's habit
of rubbing with knuckles, ii. 108 ;
gorged with blood during screaming,
ii. 98-100 ; contraction of iris, ii.
104, 105 ; wrinkling of children's,
ii. 40

Fabre, J. H., letters to, i. 385, 386

Facts and Arguments for Darwin,
translation of F. Midler's Fiir Dar-
win, i. 264, 312 ; delay in publica-
tion, ii. 353 ; sale, ii. 356 ; un-
favourable review in Athenceum, ii.
356

Fairy rings, Darwin compares with
fungoid diseases in man and animals,
ii. 445

Falconer, Hugh, biographical note, i.
252, 253 ; article in Nat. Hist. Review.
i. 206, 207, 232; Darwin's Copley
medal and, i. 247 ; Darwin's criti-
cism of his elephant work, i. 207 ;
Darwin's regard for, i. 206, 253 ;
Forbes attacked by, i. 414 ; his
opinion of Forbes, 412 ; goes to
India, i. 414 ; Hooker's regard for,
i. 253 ; letter to Darwin, i. 205-6 ;
letter to Sharpey, i. 252-6 ; letters
to, i, 206- 1 1, 227-9, 244, 256-8,
454, 455 ; letter to Athenceum, i.
239-40 ; Lyell and, 239-41, 473 ;
on Mastodon andium, i. 227 ; on
J\Iastodon of Australia, i. 228 ; on
elephants, i. 168, 205 ; Owen and,
210, i. 226, 227 ; on phyllotaxis, i.
208 ; on Pfagiaulax, i. 210; speech
at Cambridge, i. 211 ; Memoirs,
ii. 9

Falkland Islands. Darwin visits, i. 15,

19 ; Polyborus sp. in, i. 408 ; brightly
coloured female hawk, ii. 60 ; effect
of subsidence, ii. 195 ; streams of
stones, i. 169

Fanciers, use made of Selection by, i.
194

Fantails : see Pigeons

Faraday, i. 90 ; memorial to, i. 315

Faramea, dimorphism, ii. 335, 354

Farmer, Prof. J. B., and S. E. Chandler,
on influence of excess of CO.; on ana-
tomy of plants, ii. 21

Faroe Islands, Polygala vulgaris of,
i. 102

Farrar, , Canon, lecture on defects in
Public School Education, ii. 441, 442 ;
letter to, ii. 441-2 ;

Farrer, Lady, ii. 394

Farrer, Lord, biographical note, i. 393,
394 ; interest in Torbitt's potato
experiment,!. 373 ; letters to, i. 393"5»
ii. 212, 213, 373, 379-81, 383, 384,
388, 392-4, 409 ; on earthworms, ii.
213; observations on fertilisation of
Passi flora, ii. 357, 358 ; recollections
of Darwin, ii. 392 ; seeds sent to,

"• 9*i 358

Fawcett, H., biographical note, i. 189 ;

defends Darwin's arguments, i. 196 ;

letter to, i. 194-6 ; letter to Darwin,

i. 189-90
Fear, expression of, ii. 103
Felis, range, i. 402, 403
Fellowships, discussion on abolition of

Prize-, ii. 442
Felspar, segregation of, ii. 204, 205
Female?, modification for protection,

ii. 85
Fenland, Past and Present, by Miller

and Skertchley, ii. 241
Fergusson on Darwinism, i. 297
Fernando Po, plants of, i. 465, 477 ; ii.

5. 25

Ferns, Scott on spores, i. 219 ; Darwin's
ignorance of, ii. 381 ; variability
" passes all bounds," ii. 381

Ferrier, Dr., groundless charge brought
against, for infringement of Vivi-
section Act, ii. 437-9

Fertilisation, articles in Gardeners'
Chronicle, i. 100 ; of flowers, ii. 257-
266, 283-6, 302-28 ; H. Midler's work
on, i. 383; ii. 383; and sterility, i. 224;
Darwin fascinated by study of, ii. 419 ;
different mechanisms in same genus,
ii- 393 5 travelling of reproductive
cells in, ii. 76

Fertilisation of orchids, Darwin's work
on, i. 281, 2S2 ; paper by Darwin in
Gardener? Chronicle on, i. 154

IN !

Fertilisation of Orchx

■ iew, ii. 313 ; 1 i iew,

ii. 290, 291 ; iK

in, ii. 306, 307 ; 1 1.

M tiller's Befru htun ten,

the outcome

lity, Natural Selection and, i. 295 ;

and sterility, i. 1 1 \ . 295 :

Primula, ii. 310 ; Scott on variel

anil relative, ii.
. ii. 278
F. M tiller on fertilisation of,

ii 366
Finmark, Bravais on sea-beaches of,

ii. 176, [83
Fir (Silver), Witches' brooms of. ii. 422
First . les, Spencer's, ii. 442

Fish, Pictet and Humbert on 1

ii. 160
Fiske. J., letter to. i, 333-4

are-eruptions, ii. -
Fitton, reference to his work, ii. 231
FitzRoy, Capt., and the Beagle voyage,

i. 8. ii; writes preface to account of

the voyage, i. 39 ; Darwin nearh

jected by, i. 194 ; letter to Times,

i. 129
Flagellars, as a climber, ii. 342
Flahault, on the peg in Cucurbita, ii.

427. 42
Fleeming Jenkin, review of Origin by :

see Jenkin
Flinders, M., voyage to Terra Aust

by, i. 444
Flint implements found near Bedford,

ii. 190
Flint . lance and derivation of, at

Down, i. 34, 35 ; ii. 165 ; Darwin on

their upright position in gravel, ii.

165-6

ing ice, Darwin on agency of, ii.

16S ; J. Geikie underestimates its

importance, ii. 170; transporting

power of. ii. 14S-9, 1
Flora, Darwin's idea oi an I I pian, ii.

374 ; Hooker's scheme for a, ii. 279,

373-5 ; Hooker's work on Tasma-

nian, i. 199

Hooker's, i- 46, 67,

404, 405. 410, 426
a fossilis arcl\ . Heer's, ii. 239
Floras: N. American, i. 170, 429-35 :

Arctic, i. 155 ; British, i. 99 ; Colonial.

i. 260; European, i. 170; French, i.

100; Greenland, L 155: Holland, i.

100; India, i. 86; Japan, i. I

New Zealand, i. 95, 100 ; distribution

°fi i- 53i 54 : of islands, i. 241, 4047 :

local, i. 105, 107 ; tabulation of, i.

99-100, 107

, ii.
197 : '
Flourens, e.y
no

1 1., I • ttei
251 ; on m. I the os coccyx, ii.

37

ering p!

thern Continent, ii.
sudden appearance of, ii. 20. i\.

Flowers, at i

work on forms of, i. 369 ;
i. 142 ; morphological character
273; ii i; regular and irregu-

lar, i. ;iilisation in in-

conspicuous, ii. 414 ; ignorance
botanists on mechanism o(, ii. 2

Dr.
Ogle's translation of Kei
mittel ii. 392, 413

Flying machine, Darwin per's

proposed, ii. 445

Folding of strata, ii. 145

•.ion and cle ii. 199-210;

reference by A. Darker to work on,
ii. 199

Foliation, aqueous deposition and, ii.
207, 209 ; Darwin considers his ob-
servations on cle ing
of confidence than those on, ii. 200 ;

win on, ii. 200, 204 ; parallel]
with cleavage, ii. 2
lation to rock-curvature, ii. 208

Food, as determining number of sp>.

5.
minifera, ii. 2

ii. 201, 202 : on
dilleras, ii. 144 ; on el .n Chili,

ii. 139; on niti * >da lnrds in

S. America, ii. 141
Forbes, E., !
on •-, i. 41 1 : on Cham-

bers as author of the
on continental ex-
continental : ; 1 >ar-
" . 95 ; article
on distribution, i. 51 ; ii. -.
continuity of land, n plant-

; J, 461 :
ductory lecture 1

bu:. .ten-

Hera, i. :
lecture by, i.
Darwin from, i. 52-5 ; on M
car in-
land, i. 411: Polarity theoi
84 j . ii. 230 ; on Br

shells, i. 100 ; too speculative, i. 412 ;
on subsidence, i. 5 wn,

470

INDEX

i. 65 ; mentioned, i. 414; ii. 119;
royal medal awarded to, ii. 131 ;
essay on connection between dis-
tribution of existing fauna and flora
of the British Isles and geological
changes, i. 51, 409 ; ii. 223

Forbes, H. O., on Melasloma, ii. 292

Force and Matter, Huxley on, i. 155

Forel, Aug., on ants and beetles, ii. 17,
19; author of Les Fourmis de la
S:/isse, ii. 11 ; letter to, ii. 11, 12

Forfarshire, Lyell on glaciers of, ii, 181

Forms 0/ Flowers. De Candolle's criticism
of Darwin's, i. 369 ; homomorphic
and heteromorphic unions described
in, ii. 310

Forsyth-Major, zoological expedition
to Madagascar, i. 454

Fortnightly Review, Huxley's article
on Positivism, i. 313 ; Romanes on
Evolution, i. 370, 371

Fossil Cephalopods, Hyatt on, i. 338

Fossil corals, ii. 194, 197

Fossil plants, small proportion of, i.
135 ; of Australia, ii. 26 ; sudden
appearance of Angiosperms indicated
by, ii. 20, 21

Fossil seeds, supposed verification of,
ii. 244

Fossils as evidence of variability, i. 42

Fournier, E., De la Fecundation dans
les Phanerogames, ii. 375

Fowls, difference in sexes, ii. 88 ;
spurred female, ii. 62

Fox, tails of, used by Esquimaux as
respirators, 1. 359

Fox, Rev. W. Darwin, ii. 132

Foxglove, u;e of hairs in flower, ii. 380

France, edition of Origin in, i. 200 ;
opinion favourable to Darwin's views
in, i. 259 ; birth-rate, ii. 50

Franco-Prussian war, opinion in Eng-
land, i. 324 ; ii. 92 ; Science re-
tarded by, ii. 92

Frank, A. B. , biographical note, ii.
426 ; Darwin's admiration for his
work, ii. 426

Franklin, Sir J., search expedition, i.

58
Fraser, G., letter to, ii. 94-5
Frasers Magazine, article by Hopkins,

i- 1 53i 159; article by Galton on

twins, i. 361 ; Huxley on review in,

i. 156
Freemasons' Tavern, meeting held at

(1872), ii. 442
Freewill, a preordained necessity, i. 192
Freke, Dr., paper by, i. 175
Freshwater, Bee-orchis at, ii. 263
Freshwater fauna, ocean faunas com-

pared with, i. 233 ; poverty of, i.

233 ; preservation of, i. 143
Friendly Islands, rats regarded as

game, ii. 154
Fringillidas, colour and sexual selection,

ii. 71
Frogs, article on spawn of, i. 284 ; F.

Muller on, i. 382 ; salt water and

spawn of, i. 418 ; frozen in glaciers,

ii. 16
Fruits, bright colours of, ii. 348
Fucus, variation in, i. 102
Fuegia, plants of, i. 405-8, 426 (see also

Tierra del Fuego)
Fumaria (Corydalis) claviculata, Mohl

on tendrils, ii. 343
Fumariacese, cross- and self-fertilisation,

ii. 372 ; morphology of tendrils, ii.

343
Funafuti, Darwin's theory supported

by results of boring in coral island

of, ii. 199
Fungoid diseases, Darwin on, ii. 444
Fungus, effect on roots and shoots, ii.

422
Fur Darwin, F. Midler's, i. 263 (see

Faets and Arguments for Darwin) ;

Darwin quotes, ii. 263 ; Hooker's

opinion of, ii. 357 ; publication of,

ii. 92
Furze, seeds and seedlings, i. 148

Galapagos Islands, visited during the
Beagle voyage, i. 26 ; birds of, i.
412 ; character of species of, the be-
ginning of Darwin's evolutionary
views, i. 37, 38, 119 ; distribution of
animals, i. 40, 52 ; distribution of
plants, i. 40 ; flora of, i. 401, 402 ;
Hooker on plants of, i. 426 ; ii. 9 ;
insects, ii. 122; craters, ii. 126-9;
fissure eruptions in, ii. 227 ; restricted
fauna, ii. 19 ; Sandwich Islands
and, ii. 227 ; subsidence in the, ii. 195

Galashiels, terraces near, ii. 187

Galaxias, distribution of, ii. 16

Gallinaceae, Blvth on, ii. So ; colour of,
ii. 71, 86

Galls, artificial production of, i. 250 ;
ii. 425-7 ; Cynips and, i. 250 ; hy-
brids and, i. 261 ; Walsh on willow-,
i. 261

Gallus bankiva, ii. 85, 88 ; colour of
wings, ii. 68 ; colour and environ-
ment, ii. 87 ; wings of, ii. 80

Galton, F., experiments on transfusion
of blood, i. 319. 362 ; letters to, i.
360-62; ii. 41, 43, 44, 108, 214,
215 ; letter to Darwin from, i. 129 ;
on twins, i. 361 ; on variation, i. 199

IN ;

on heredity, ii.4.5 : on human faculty
and its development, ii. 1
prayer, ii. I08 ; 1

.1th certificates for marriag

Game-cock and Sexual Selection, ii. 58

Gamlingay, lilies-of-the-valley at,

Ganoid ashes, preservation in fresh
water, i. 143. 4S1 : ii. 8

Gapitche, A., letter to, ii. 444"5

Gardener? Chroni , Dai •■■ 1 1
<>n fertilisation i. 100; D
opinion of, i. [86; Darwin's experi-
ment on immersion uf seeds in salt
water, i. 417. 419 ; article on Orchid-,
i. 154 ; Harvey on Darwin, i. 141 :
Rivers' article-, i. 279: Wallac
nests, i. 28} : Darwin's index, ii.
378

Gardner, 1 I . . . in the In! a
Brazil, i. 478

ier, on Aquilegia, i. 86; experi-
ments on crossing and variation, 1
86, IOI, 1 . 2 18, 221, 287, 28S,
450; ii. 271, 309, 325, 360; on
Primula, ii. 325 ; on / '< . ii.

271, 309; Darwin's high opinion of
his . . .1. 340 : Bea-

ton's criticism of, ii. 269: on .-ell-
fertilisation in Bowers, ii. 314 : men-
tioned, ii. 255. 30S. 311, 324

Gaskell, G. A., Letter to, ii. 49,

Gatke, on Heligoland as an Orm
logi> 1 vafory, i.

Gaudry, A, Gtologie ttique, ii.

235; Utter to, ii. 235.6: note on,
ii. 235 ; on Pikermi fossils, ii. 236
. on lizards, i. 21

Catania, ii. 401

Gegenbauer, as convert to Darwinism,
i. 257 ; views on regeneration, i. 363

Geikie, Sir A., on age of the Earth, ii.
163 ; edition of H.
the Forth, ii. 140 : memoir ol
A. C. Ramsay, ii. 170

Geikie, Prof. J., Fee Age, ii. 240:
intercrossing of erratics, ii. 1
Letters to. ii. 105 o : /
Europe, ii. 167 . I sidential ad-
dress, Edinburgh Brit. Assoc, no
ing (1892), ii. 167

Geitonogamy, Kernel rm, ii.

Gemmation and dimorphism, 1
Gemmules, in reproductive organs, i.

362 ; and bud- variation, i
Genealogy and classification. 1
Genera, aberrant, i. 82-4 ; rang

large and small, i. 424, 433 ; van.

of, i. 47. 9S. 379 ; Wallace on origin

of, i. 384

■
;

than careful 'ion, ii. 252 ; un-

■•in on

■

I •
. 1 ; I . A. rwin

on. i. 53. 54, 11-.: 1 >arvi
opinion of value of, i. 57; Darv.
interest in, ii. 7 ; E. I in, i. 51,

53, 84 : Huxley on birds and. i. 303 ;
d work by Hooker on, i.
323 : relation of ' 'ant

nient in, i. 423; Humboldt the
founder of, ii. 26

.'
licisni of Wallac

19

Meal Dist
A. Murray's, i
Geographical regi n. ii.

immittee on the Parallel

Geo'.

Geo', , Darwin's manual

of, ii. 22

rwin's, i i ii- 144 • Darwin

on his. ii. 22
Geological record, imperfection of the.
i. 135, 140. 151. 1 7<.

the, i.

jy-

S

1 i.uwin. i. 2;; : I '
1 [o k« r's a rtific ite, i. 414 ; 1

rwin attends Council
ting, ii.

g -1 Survey, found
invi del Ron.

d Time, article ii A

254

11 y views of, i.

'37.

I . ii. 1 1 3 24 1 :

im, i.
chapter in •

piv.

tk in. ii. 1-

lian

J ; -41

Geotr in on, \.

German, Darwin's slight know

'• , . . .

German) . m, 1.

472

INDEX

257 ; opinion on the Origin in, i.
196, 229, 259 ; Englishmen rejoice
over victory of, ii. 92

Germination of seeds, Darwin's experi-
ments on effect of salt water, i. 416

Germs and Vestiges of Disease, Dobell's,

L 23S
Gesneria, Darwin on dimorphism of. ii.

351 .

Gestation of hounds, i. 154

Gibraltar, elevation and subsidence of,

i. 48
Gilbert, Sir J. H., letter to, ii. 216-
17 ; on nitrogen in worms' castings,
ii. 216 ; and Sir. J. Lawes, Rotham-
sted experiments, ii. 216
Glacial period, absence of phanerogams
near polar regions in N. America
during, i. 443 ; Bates on, i. 464 ;
climatic changes since, i. 457 ; ii.
191 ; conditions during, i. 116; con-
tinental changes since, i. 453 ; Dar-
win's views on geographical changes
as cause of, i. 463 ; destruction of
organisms during, i. 260 ; destruction
of Spanish plants in Ireland, i. 461 ;
distribution of organisms affected by,
i- I73> 443. 447;. duration of, i. 92,
201 ; effect on animals and plants, i.
54, 200, 205, 472 ; ii. 13, 22 ; and
elephants, i. 205, 207 ; S.E. England
dry land during, i. 482 ; Green-
land depopulated during, i. 466, 468 ;
introduction of Old World forms into
New World subsequent to, i. 456 ;
migration during, i. 177, 201, 452,
461 ; mundane character of, i. 428,
460-65, 477 ; subsidence of Alps
during, i. 90 ; ii. 191 ; Croll on, ii.
158, 162, 163 ; existence of Alpine
plants before, ii. 22 ; Hooker on, ii.
157, 15S ; Glen Roy and, ii. 190,
193 ; Lyell on, ii. 158 ; extinction of
mammals during, ii. 13; Wallace on,
ii. 22, 25 ; movement of Europe
since and during, ii. 138, 139
Glaciers, Agassiz on, i. 104, 476 ; Lyell
on, i. 104 ; Tyndall's book on, i.
167 ; as agents in the formation of
lakes, ii. 154, 155 ; Darwin on
structure of, ii. 148 ; Hooker on
Yorkshire, ii. 156 ; Moseley on motion
of, ii. 163 ; physics of, ii. 210 ; Paral-
lel Roads of Glen Roy formed by, ii.
172, 173 ; rock-cavities formed by
cascades in, ii. 148, 149 ; in S.
America, ii. 164, 165 ; in Wales, ii.
150, 151, 190
Gladstone, Herbert Spencer on criti-
cisms by. i. 351

Glass, Dr., on grafting sugar-canes, i.

390
Glen Collarig, absence of terminal
moraines, ii. 186 ; terraces in, ii. 178,
182
Glen Glaster, absence of terminal
moraines, ii. 186 ; barriers of detritus,
ii. 178; Milne on, ii. 181, 182;
shelves of, ii. 185

Glen Gluoy, shelves of, ii. 183, 187

Glen Roy, Parallel Roads of, ii. 171-
93 ; L. Agassiz on, ii. 151 ; Darwin
on, ii. 149, 174-6; Darwin's mistake
over, ii. 156, 188, 192, 193; Darwin
on ice-lake theory of Agassiz and
Buckland, ii. 180, 181, 184-6, 190,
192 ; glacier theory of, ii. 149, 173,
175, 182, 185 ; history of work on,
ii. 171, 172 ; Hooker on, ii. 152 ;
marine theory of, ii. 150, 173 ;
Milne-Home's paper on, ii. 177 ;
investigated by Geological Survey,
ii. 174-6 ; coincidence of shelves with
watersheds, ii. 174, 179, 184, 185;
measurement of terraces, ii. 183

Glen Spean, ii. 183, 192, 193

Glen Turret, MacCulloch on, ii. 179

Gloriosa, Darwin's experiments on
leaf-tendrils, ii. 342

Glossotherium Listai, ii. 361

Gloxinia, peloric forms of, i. 219 ; ii.
298

Gnaphalinm, i. 47

Gneiss, Darwin on, ii. 206

God, Darwin on existence of personal,
ii. 171, 237

Godron, on Aegilops, ii. 285

Godron's Flora of France i. 100, 421

Goethe, Darwin's reference to, i. 317;
Owen on, i. 246

Goldfinch, difference in beaks of male
and female, ii. 66, 67

Gongora, ii. 315 ; and Acropera, ii.

282 ; Darwin on, ,ii. 313, 318 ; G.

fusca (see Acropera luteola), ii. 280 ;

G. galeata (see A. Loddigesii), ii.

280

Gondwana Land, ii. 15, 16

Goodenia, i. 413 ; Hamilton on fertili-
sation of, ii. 258

Goodeniacese, ii. 257-61

Gordon, General, Huxley on Darwin
and, i. 71

Gosse, E., Life of P. H. Gosse by, ii.

335
Gosse, P. II., biographical note, ii.

335-6 ; letter to, ii. 335-7

Gould, on sex in nightingales, ii. 70

Gower Street, Darwin's house in, i. 30

Gradation in plants, i. 259

I N I . I

473

Graft-hybrids, experiments on, i. 280;
of Cytisus, ii. 404-6 ; Hildebrand
i. 285 : ol potati , i. 286, 359
-

Grafting, I lai w ulty

of, i. 29 \ ; in ii\ 1 inth I nibs, i. 276

Graham's Creed i. 393,

394: ii- 17"
Graminese, Darwin on crossing, ii.
Granite, explanation of association

basalt, ii. 125, 145
Grasses, range of genera, i. 403;

cleistogamous, ii. 302 ; fertilisation

i)f, ii. 291; F. Mtlller on Brazilian,

"\355

dratiolet, on behaviour c>l eyes in n
ii. 104

Gravity, comparison between variation
and laws of, i. 194

Gray, Prof. Asa, biographical do)
455, 456 ; articles by, i. 161, 166,
169, 170; as advocate of Darwin's
views, i. 157, 150 ; Darwin's opinion
of, i. 169, 170; on Hooker's Ant-
arctic pa] er, i. 466, 468 ; on 1
genera - i. 99; letters to 1

win from, i. 214, 245, 421-2, 428-
33, 442-4 ; ii. I0O ; letters to, i.

126, 127, 152-3, 202-3, 242, 419,
422-5, 430, 431, 433-5, 455-7,
459-60: 11.252-5, 294-7, 299, 327,

, {84 ; «'ii Darwin's views, i. 126,

127, 160: plants of the Northern
States, i. 432 ; on variation, i. 190-2:
book for children by, ii. 390 : on
crossing, ii. 254: visits Down, ii.
354 ; on dimorphism, ii. 2S0 : on
Ag.i-si/, ii. 100: extract from letter
to G. F. Wright from. ii. 415; on
fertilisation of Cypripedium, ii 270 ;
on Gymnadenia tridentata, ii. 311,
319* on Habeitaria,, ii. 277: on
Passiflora, ii. 316 : on relative rai

ol I . States and European
ii. 252 ; on Sarraeenia, ii. 401 ; men-
tioned, ii. j>-j, 289, 409, 434

1 '.ray, Mrs., ii. 3S5

(Iray, J. E . biographical note. i. S4 ;
and British Museum, i. S4

Greatest Happiness principle, i. ^27.
328

(-■rebes, as seed-eaters, i. no

Greenland, absence of Arctic Legumi-
nosa>, i. 469 ; connection with N 1
way, i. 471 ; flora oi, i. 1 ; 5
466, 469, 470 ; introduction of plants
by currents, i. 468 : as line ol com-
munication of alpine plants, i. 443 :
migration of European birds to, i.
4*7

. \V. R. , I 1 anvin on his /

Life, ii. 41. 42, 4 1 : lettei to, ii.

5ii G., on A tra ■

"• 33
Grinnell expediti the

59

»9, 100, 260
ebach, A. W., .. 249
ssulariacese, i. S3
Grouse, Natural Selection and col
of, i. 143 : Owen describes
unci creation, i. 17.S
Grypotherium ini, i. 1 1 ; G.

dotnesticum, ii. 361

s on, i. 181
Gulf-we< in on, i. 54, 50

Cully, Dr., i.

Giinther, Dr., visit to Down, ii. 359
Gurney, E., articles in Fortm
and Comhili. ii. 440, 441 : Pn
Sound, ii. 51

nadenia, course of vessels in flower
of, ii. 275 ; Asa Gray on, ii.
312, 319; penetration by polle
roslellum, ii. 313
Gynodicecism in I . ii. 417

1I.\ AST, Sir Julius von. note on. ii.

I 54 ; on glacial , ii. 154
Habenai es, ii. 24

also Peristylus viridis); cours
vessels in fl iwer, ii. 28? : I rd ] arrer
on, ii. 373 ; morphology of floi
ii. 276-S ; H . flowers, \\. 1

a subspecies-; //.

II chloram idered by Bent-
ham a var. of H.

structure of ovary, ii. 277
Hackel, 1.., convert to Darwin'
i. 2

Die Kalkschwamme, i 335 : .
in '
let;

406 : on pangenesi . i. 364 ;
ed trans] ition of his book, i. 2
. views o!
many, i. 3

substitul lecularh)

pangenesis, i. 304: visits Down, i.
278 ; 150; on absence of col
protection in lower animals, ii. 02 :
on change o( species, ii. 346 J
Linope, ii. 348 : on medusae, ii. 350
. experiments on,
ii. 411 : sleep-movements, ii.
Fabrc's paper on. i.
a, Darwin's description 0

. woody nature of, i. 163

474

INDEX

Hallett, on varieties of wheat, i. 314
Hamilton, on fertilisation of Dampiera,

ii. 258
Hamilton, Sir W. on Law of Parsimony,

i. 370
Hancock, A., on British shells, i. 100 ;

and Royal medal, i. 80, 88, 113
Hanley, Dr., Darwin's visit to, i. 6.
Harker, A., note on Darwin's work on

cleavage and foliation, ii. 199
Hartman, Dr., on Cicada septendccim,

ii. 90
Harvesting Ants and Trap-door Spiders,

Moggridge's, i. 337 ; ii- 3$9
Harvey, W. H., biographical note, i.

141 ; criticism of Origin, i. 141, 160-

66 ; Darwin's opinion of his book, i.

96; letter to, i. 160-66; mentioned,

i. 152 ; on variation in Fuais, i.

102
Haughton, S., on Bees' cells, i. 245 ;

on depth of ocean, i. 91 ; note on,

i. 153; review by, i. 153 ; mentioned

ii-5

Hawaiian Islands, Hillebrand s Flora,

i. 459 ; plants, ii. 9

Hawks and owls as agents in seed-
dispersal, i. 440 ; bright colours in
female, ii. 60

Head, expression in movement of, ii.
in

Hearne, on black bear, i. 179

Heat, action on rocks, ii. 132, 133

Heathcote, Miss, ii. 237

Heaths, as examples of boreal plants in
Azores, i. 483 ; and climate, ii. 251

Heberden, Dr., mentioned, i. 49

Hector, i. 467

Hedgehog, movements of spines, ii.

IOS
Hedychium, Darwin's prediction as to

fertilisation of, ii. 400 ; parahelio-

tropism, ii. 365
Hedyotis, dimoiphism of, ii. 351
Hedysarum, Darwin's experiments on,

ii. 249, 289 (see Desmodium gyrans)
Heer, O., biographical note, ii. 239;

on continental extension, i. 234, 462 ;

on plants of Madeira, i. 143 ; on

origin of species from monstrosities,

i. 242 ; Darwin sends photograph to,

ii. 240 ; Flo7-afossilis arctica, ii. 239 ;

letter to, ii. 239-40
Heeria, ii, 292, 293 (see also Hetero-

centron) ; F. Muller on, ii. 367
Heifers, and sterility, i. 226
Helianthemum, Baillon's observations

on pollen, ii. 313
Heligoland, birds alight on sea near. i.

285

Heliotropism, experiments on, ii. 431,
432 ; of roots, ii. 418

Hemsley, W. B., mentioned, i. 63

Hennessey, ii. 5

Henry, I. A. (see Anderson- Henry) ;
letter to, ii. 297-9

Henslow, Prof. J. S., life of, i. 188 ;
Darwin's affection for, i. 448 ; Dar-
win's Cambridge recollections of, i.
310 ; death of, i. 188, 189 ; letters
to, i. 8-27, 61, 62, 66, 67, 149-5 1>
174, 175, 419, 420; ii. 245. 246;
mentioned, i. 99, 100, 185 ; ii. 244,
248, 269, 289 ; on Mus messorius, i.
359; visits Down, i. 113; Darwin
on his parish work, ii. 246 ; work on
crossing, ii. 372

Henslow, Miss, mentioned, i. 65

Herbaceous orders, in relation to trees,
i. 162, 163

Herbert, Dean, on heaths of S. Africa,
i. 41 ; on Polygala, i. 102 ; on Cytisus
Adami, ii. 248 ; on self-sterility of
Hippeastrum, ii. 315 ; mentioned, i.
414 ; ii. 218

Hereditary Genius, Francis Galton's,
ii. 41, 43

Hereditary Improvement, Francis Gal-
ton on, ii. 43

Heredity, Darwin's criticism of Galton's
theory, i. 360-62

Hermaphroditism, in trees, i. 445 ;
Weir on'Lepidoptera and, i. 396 ; and
nature of generative organs,i i. 250

Herminiitm monorchis, ii. 337

Heron, Sir R.. on peacocks and colour,
ii. 58

Herons, as fruit-feeders, i. 116

Herschel, Sir J. F. W., edits Manual
of Scientific Enquiry, i. 64 ; on
Natural Selection, i. 330 ; on the
Origin, i. 190-92 ; Physical Geo-
graphy, i. 190, 191 ; on providential
laws, i. 192 ; on heating of rocks,
ii. 133 ; on importance of generalising,
ii. 252 ; on study of languages, ii. 229 ;
versjis Lyell on volcanic islands,
ii. 141, 142 ; mentioned, ii. 5

//eteranthaa, two kinds of stamens,
ii. 367 ; H. reniformis. ii. 368

Heteroccntron, experiments on. ii. 302 ;
seeds of, ii. 284 ; two kinds of sta-
mens, ii. 293, 296 ; H roseum, fertili-
sation mechanism of, ii. 292, 294

Heterogeny, Owen on, i. 242

Ileteromorphic, use of term, ii. 310

Heterosmilax, de Candolle on, i. 369

Heterostylism, ii. 296, 298, 360, 367 ;
Darwin's experiments on, ii. 368 ; ex-
ample in monocotyledons of, ii 358

! \ i ) i •: x

475

in, on pheasani hybrids, ii

mentioned, ii. 72
// bt /.' . ii.
Hicks, II.. on pre-Cambrian 1

ii. 169
Hi 1, ium, Amei ican , i. 444 ;

N igeli on, i lity of, i. 425

Highnes and, i. 76, 77. 1 1 \.

II v I \2, [65, 41 J

I [ilaire, A. Si St. I lilaire

I [ildebrand, I ., article in Botam

Zeitung, i. 285 ; experiments on direct

■lien. i. 286 ; Die J ,
turner der ! . i. 492 ; letter to,

i. 285 ; ii. J7 ; crossing v

by, ii. 372; on Delpino's work, ii. 257 ;
on dispers il ol se< ds, ii. {^j ; self-
stertility in 1 is cava, ii. 347 ;

Geschlechter- 1 'ertheilung Jan-

', ii. 375 : on orchids, ii. 347"; on
ovules formed after pollination, ii.
307, 325 ; experiment on |
ii. 354 ; (Hi ; : men-

tioned, ii. 315

Hilgendorf, i. 344. 358; contro
with Sandberger, i. 347

Hillebrand's, Flora ox the Hawaiian
Islands, i. 459

Himalayan Journals, dedicated by
Hooker to Darwin, i. 70

Himalayan Hants, Illustrations of,
i. 77

Himalaya, British plants in, i. 102;
commingling of temperate and tin-
pica! plants, i. 472; tortoise of,
i. 170 ; ice-action in, ii. 152, 153;
mixed character of the vegetation.
ii. 6

Hinde, Dr., examination t<[ Funafuti
coral-reef cores by, ii. 1991

Hindmarsh, L., letter to, i. 1S7-S

Hippeastrutn, Herbert on self-sterility
ol, ii. 315

Hippopotamus, fossil in Madagascar,
»■ 454

Historic spirit, J. Morley's criticism
of Darwin's lack of, i. 32

Hitcham, collection oi \ " ean plants
made near. i. 41c). 420

Hobhouse, Sir A., Darwin meets, ii. 49

Hochberg, K.. letter to, ii. 50-51

Hofmann, A. \V., receives royal do
i. 79

Holland, evolutionary opinions in.
i. 196 : flora of, i. 100

Holland, Sir 1 1., on pangenesis, i. 301 ;
mentioned, i. 461 ; on influence of
mind on circulation, ii. 106

Holly, effective work of insects in
fertilisation of, ii. 255

I [ollyhi ■

in' : .'50

1 [olmsdale, i

I louie : s- e Milne I Ioine

Homing

I with, i.

y, analogy and, i. 104, .

1- in tlov.

ii. 273. 284, 2S9

I Fj.ii . use of term, ii. 310

eysuckle, oak-leaved variety, i. 330

iker, Mrs., i. 414 ; 11.209,210,433;

i 1 ». II ioker, ii. 375
ker, Sir J. D.. addresses at Brit.
A 302, 308, 309 ;

ii. 24, 25, 402 ; on Arctic pF
i. 465-7 ; Australia]
botanical appointment, i. 55 ; <

ferred upon, i. 316 ; on coal
plants and conditions of growth,
i. 151 ; criticism on Lyell's w
i. 472 ; on Darwin's MS. on geo-
iphical distribution, i. 435 ; Dar-
win's admiration for letteis of, i. 47S ;
Darwin assisted in his work by,
i. 200. .137 ; I i.iruin on good gained
by " squabbles " with, i. 479 ; Darwin
on success of, i. 67 : enjoyment
correspondence with Darwin, i.
expedition to Syria, i. 166 :
from letter to, 1. 66 : Falconer and,
i. 253 : first meeting with Darwin,
i. 39 ; ii. 157 ; on Insular Fl< .
i. 4S5. 492 ; ii. 160. iy. 352 ; inl
ductor ly to Flora of Tasmania,

i. 446 ; lecture at Royal Institution,
i. 89 : to, i. 139-140, 1 52,

184-6, 188, 189, 197-200, 21 1

222, 2J 239-42.

252,259-6l,280,28l,28

302-5, 30S, 309, 3I3-I8, 321-3,

• 330. 332. 404-19. -

42c 435-9, .140-4.. 444-8, 451-4
459, 401-0. 470-76,479-84,487,
491-94 : ii, 2-6, 7-11. - 22, 24-8,
31, 32, 151 7. 190,209, 210. 217-
230, 231, 234, 2 51,

;-6l, 266-79, -S| 90, 296, -
I, 300, 306, 319, 326-y, 337-44,
373 9. 389. 39 400, 402-4,

407, 409-11, 425. 433. )34 ; lettei
Darwin from, i. 7071, 134, 1 55,
209, 210, 437-40- 4"6, 467, 469,
470, 4S4-92 : ii. 1. . - 10, 291 ;
on new colonial Bora, i. 479: on
New Zealand flora, i. 100 ; on
Natural Selection, 172: on natural
plants, i. 451 : on the Origin, i.
119. 120; and Owen. i. 149: on

476

INDEX

pangenesis, i. 301 ; on plants of Fer-
nando Po and Abyssinia, i. 477; ii- 5 >
on preservation of tropical plants
during cool period, i. 479 ; and re-
views, i. 152 ; royal medal awarded
to, i. 79; and J. Scott, i. 217;
ii. 322, 330, 331 ; on species, i. 437 ;
on Torbitt's potato experiments,
i- 373 > on use °f terms centripetal
and centrifugal, i. 128 ; on varia-
tion in large and small genera, i. 379 ;
on Welwitschia, i. 213 ; on Cameroon
plants, ii. 6 ; Darwin on his address
at Belfast (1874), ii. 402 ; Darwin
writes testimonial for, ii. 247 ; Darwin
values scientific opinion of, ii. 284 ;
Darwin receives encouragement from,
ii. 285 ; Darwin's pleasure at visits
from, ii. 4 ; on Glacial period,
ii. 157 ; on Glacial deposits in India,
ii. 152 ; on glaciers in Yorkshire,
ii. 156 ; notice in Gardeners' Chroni-
cle on, ii. 152; photograph by Mrs.
Cameron, ii. 376, 377 ; Primer of
Botany by, ii. 390; review of Darwin's
Fertilisation of Orchids, ii. 290, 291 ;
scheme for Flora, ii. 375 ; represents
" whole great public " to Darwin,
ii. 339 ; use of structure in plants,
ii. 380; visits Down, ii. 89, 120,
354 ; opinion of Fiir Darwin, ii, 357 ;
mentioned, i. 148; ii. 317, 321, 326,
362, 373, 408, 411, 4I5-4I7
Hooker, Sir W. J., biographical note,
ii. 242 ; Herbarium at Kew belonging
to, i. 110 ; ii. 242 ; letters to, ii. 242,
243, 247; mentioned, i. 79, 421 ;

ii. 33°

Hopkins, W., biographical note, ii.

138 ; article in Frasers Magazine, i.
153, 159; on elevation and earth-
quakes, ii. 133 ; on mountain-build-
ing, ii. 121, 138 ; researches in
physical geology, ii. 136, 201 ; men-
tioned, i. 156 ; ii. 230

Horner, L., biographical note, ii. 1 15 ;
letters to, i. 132 ; ii. 30, 31, 1 15-17,
174-7, 220-22, 224 ; memoirs of, i.
53; ii. 31, 115, 175 ; address to
Geological Society, ii. 30 ; on coal,
ii. 217 ; on Darwin's Geological Obser-
vations, ii. 220, 224 ; visits Down,
ii. 175 ; mentioned, i. 84

Horner, Mrs. L., ii. 117, 175, 224

Horse, ancestry, i. 147 ; ii. 18 ; Arab-
Turk and English race-, i. 221 ;
hybrids between Quagga and, i. 319,
320 ; in N. and S. America, ii. 1 8 ;
equality of sexes in race-, ii. 42

Horsfall, W.. letter to, i. 398

Hottonia, dimorphism of, ii. 310

Hounds, gestation of, i. 154, 155

Howard, L. O., i. 249

Hoya carnosa, Darwin's work on, ii. 407

Humble-bees, as agents of fertilisation
of orchids, ii. 339

Humboldt, Bates' description of tropi-
cal forests compared with that by, i.
243 ; conversation with, i. 42 ; on
heath regions, i. 51 ; on migration
and double creation, i. 407 ; Personal
Narrative, i. 263 ; on violet of
Teneriffe, i. 494 ; Darwin's opinion
of, ii. 26 ; on elevation and vol.
canic activity, ii. 114; mentioned,
ii. 206

Humboldt and Webb, on Zones on
Teneriffe, i. 492

Hume. Darwin on Huxley's Life of,

i. 381
Humming-birds, agents of fertilisation,

»• 357- 383

Hunger, expression by sheldrakes of,
ii. 103

Husbands, resemblance between wives
and, i. 320

Hutton, F. W., letter to, i. 183, 184 ;
review of Origin, i. 183, 184, 193

Hutton, James, author of Theory of
the Earth, ii. 149

Huxley, L., reference to his Life of
T. H. Huxley, i. 371 ; ii. 435 ; in-
formation given by, i. 226

Huxley, Prof T. H.. biographical note,
i. 71, 72 ; article in Annals and
Magazine in reply to Falconer, i. 89 ;
on Aphis, i. 102 ; on automatism, i.
398 ; catalogue of collections in
Museum of Practical Geology, i. 104 ;
comparative anatomy by, i. 246 ; on
Comte, i. 313 ; on Cuvier's classifica-
tion, i. 284 ; Darwin's value of his
opinion, i. 287 ; election to the
Athenaeum, i. 89, 90 ; friendship
with Darwin, i. 71, 72 ; on growth
of Darwin's views, i. 37, 38 ; lectures
at the R. Institution, i. 139, 140, 147;
lectures on evolution by, i. 129-31 ;
lectures to working men, i. 215, 216,
220, 225, 226, 229-31, 247 ; legacy
and gift to, i. 72 ; letters to, i. 72-5,
80-2. 97, 98, 102-5, 1 10-13, I24, I25>
I29-31. !35-9- 145-7. 156-9. 166, 167,
177, 178, 215-17, 225, 226, 229-32,
237-9, 242, 243, 246, 247, 274, 277,
281, 283, 284, 287, 362, 371, 372,
381-3, 386-8, 460-1 ; ii. 40, 232-4,
341, 442, 443, 445, 446; Life of
Hume, i. 381, 382; Mans Place in
Nature, i. 204, 237 ; marriage, i. 82 ;

A 7 7

misrepresented by Owen, i. ii^:
founds

157; obituarj of Darwin, i

38 ; on the Origin ■
on Owen's archetype book, 1. 2
president of the British Asso
ing at Liverp >1 1S70), i. 322 ; on
■stlcy, i. 30S ; quoted by Lord
Kelvin as an unbeliever in spontane-
generation, i. 329; reviews by,
i. 2S0, 313, 333; review of I
of Creation by, i. 75 ; on
bine's address, i. 255. 256 ; on
saltus i. 19S ; prefatory note
Hackel's / in Science and

Tea 383 : a I Ire > to 1

logical Society (1869', ii. 7 ; on
classification of man, ii. 36 : on con-
temporaneity, ii. 233 ; on Catasetum
ii. 341 ; on deep-sea soundings, ii.
232 ; legacy from A. Rich, ii. 445,
446 ; on Lyell's Pi
on use of term physiological species,
ii. 271 ; on vivisection, ii. 435 :
and H. N. Martin, Elementary
Biology by, i. 362 ; mentioned, i.
453; ii. 348, $53, 373;

Huxley, Mrs. 1. 11., queries on ex-
pression sent by Darwin to, i. 2,^7 :
observations on child crying, ii. 40 ;
mentioned, i. 17S, 216

Hyacinth, experiment on bulbs, i. 276

Hyatt, A., biographical note, i. 33S ;
and Hilgendorf. i. 35S ; letters to, 1.
13$. 339. 341-4. 346-S, 393 ; liters
to Darwin from. i. 339-41, 344-6;
on tetrabranchiata, i.

Hyatt and Cope, theories of, i. 338-4S

Hybridism, chapter in Origin on, i.
130, 131, 274 : Bentham's address
on, ii. 339, 340 ; treatment by Dar-
win in Variation of Animah
Plants, ii. 340

Hybrids, and adaptation, i. 292 ; Dar-
win's views on, i. 94. 222 : evidence
in favour of pangenesis from. i. 2S0 :
experiments on, i. 224 ; ii. 301. 360;
fertility of, i. 12S. 290; intermediate
character of, i. 362 ; primrose and
cowslip, i. 296; article in Quart
Review on, i. 364 : sterility of, i. 230.
231. 2S7-9, 291-3. 295-9 : Max
Wichura on. i. 261 ; ii. 157; Bronn
on, ii. 223 ; F. Muller's work on, ii.
360 ; and heterostyled plants, ii. 415 ;
rarity ol natural, ii. 285 j J. Scott's
work on, ii. 311. 312; tendency to
reversion, ii. 340

:, sexuality of, i. 190

Hydropathy, Darwin and, i. 102. 126

a, altern ;
i. .

1, affiniti 101 : H.

96
//)/ <n, a social

in U.S.A., 1

206

mucus in seeds of, ii.

Ice, as agent in dispersal of I
i. 64 ; agent in dispersal of plan'
54-1 16, 438 ; Forbes <>n tran
i. 461 ; agent in lake-f . ii.

154, 155 ; cleavage in, ii. 202
of, a new factor in . ii. 149

Ice-action, ii. 148-03 ; on land and
ii. 190

Icebergs, as factor in explaining Euro-
pean plants in

on action of. ii. 161, . : win

on, ii. 153 ; evidence in S. Am
of, ii. 164, 165 ; Hopkins on action
of, ii. 154

Ice-cap, of Arctic region-;, ii. 163

Iceland, importance of records of
canic phenomena in, ii. 115

Ignorance. Darwin on immensity of
man's, i, 394

Ilkley. Darwin's visit to, i. 454

Illegitimate offspring, need for repe-
tition of Darwin's experiments on
plants', ii. 353

/ma: . ii. 319

Immortality, Darwin on, ii 445

Immutability of -
Falconer dii
Darwin on, ii. 2

Imperfection of the Geological Rec
see Geological Record

Impotence in plants, i. 303 ; ii.
315 : see also S erility

India, British rule in. i. 67 . >f. i.

86 ; Hooker in, i. 62-5 ; varietii
domestic animals in, i. 67 ; H i .
Blanford on, ii. 15 ; Darwin on
origin of lakes in, ii. 155 ; evidence
of colder climate in, ii. 152.
J. Scott accepts post in, ii. .

Infants, Mrs i . rail
ment of mind in. ii. ; •
on ears of, i:

Infusoria, possible occurrence in under-
clays o( coal. ii. 219

I n^li-. Sir R.. Darwin at breakfast
party, i. 79

Inheritance, atavism and. i. 217 : con-
servative tendency of long, i. 3
Hacker on, i. 335 ; hypothesis on, i.
285 ; Jager on. i. 371 : and Natural

478

INDEX

Selection, i. 127 ; ii. 86 ; power of,
i. 306 ; J. C. Prichard on, i. 45 ;
and variability, i. 353 ; Darwin on,
ii. 84, 85 ; Galton on, ii. 43

Insanity, concealment of, ii. 43

Insect Life, Howard's, i. 249

Insectivorous plants, Darwin's work
on, i. 355 ; ii. 240, 369, 381, 401

Insects, alpine, i. 262 ; Lord Avebury
on, i. 204, 232, 233, 331 ; Bates on,
i. 200 ; fossil, i. 307 ; ii. 27, 82, 83 ;
luminous, i. 306, 307 ; of Madeira,
i. 483 ; F. Mtiller on metamorphosis
of, i. 312 ; Sharp's book on, i. 196 ;
study of habits more valuable than
description of new species, i. 337 ;
wingless, i. 262 ; Wollaston on, i.
167 ; antiquity of stridulating organs
in, ii. 82, 83 ; colour and Sexual
Selection, ii. 96 ; H. Midler's work
on adaptation to fertilisation of
flowers, ii. 359, 383 ; metamorphosis
of, ii. 386 ; music as attraction to, ii.
68 ; observation on fertilisation of
flowers by, ii. 392 ; Ramsay on, ii.
122 ; Riley's work on, ii. 385, 386 ;
tropical climate and colours of, ii.
282

Instinct, Darwin and, i. 472 ; in nest-
making, ii. 80 ; selection of varying,
ii. 48.

Insular floras, i. 404, 405, 410, 411,
480-94; ii. 2, 3, 9-1 1 ; Hooker's
lecture on, i. 302, 480 ; ii. 9, 160,

235. 352

Insular forms, i. 172 ; in Galapagos,
Canaries and Madeira, i. 412 ; beaten
ntal forms, i. 481

Intelligei .leaning of, ii. 214 ;

Romanes on Animal, ii. 48, 51 ; in
worms, ii. 213-5

Intercrossing, in pigeons, i. 212, 213;
Darwin on effects of, i. 384 ; and
sterility, i. 290

Interglacial periods, Darwin on evi-
dence for, ii. 167, 168

intermediate forms, i. 135, 422 ; Bates'
paper on, i. 177 ; S. American types
as, i. 12 ; crossing and frequent
absence of, i. 367, 36S ; extinction
of, i. 266 ; Falconer on existence of,
i. 207, 211, 227 ; as fossils, i. 374;
Asa Gray on, i. 429 ; Plagiaulax as
evidence of, i. 210; Wollaston on
rarity in insects, i. 430

Introduced plants, Sonckus in New
Zealand as example of, i. 102 ; in
N. America and Australia, i. 434,
451 ; variability of, i. 430, 431 ; Dar-
win on, ii. 23

Introductory Essay to Tasmanian Flora,
Hooker's, i. 446, 458

Ipswich, British Assoc, meeting (1851),
i. 66

Iquique, nitrate of soda beds at, ii. 141

Ireland, Spanish plants in, i. 53, 54,
461

Iris, flowers of, ii. 275, 381 ; nectar
secretion of, ii. 394

Islands, comparison between species
of rising and sinking, i. 458 ; fauna
of, i. 242 ; introduction of plants,
i. 241, 452, 4S3. 487; products of,
i. 134 ; plants with irregular flowers
on, i. 494 ; ii. 2 ; subsidence of coral,
i. 134 ; ii. 195, 196 ; survival of
ancient forms in, i. 481 ; volcanic,
i. 134 ; comparison of age of con-
tinents and., ii. 231 ; former greater
extension of, ii. 19

Island Life, Darwin's criticism of
Wallace's, ii. 22-6

Isle of Wight, occurrence of Bee-orchis
in, ii. 263

Isnardia palustris, range of, i. 431

Isolation, Bentham underestimates im-
portance of, i. 380 ; Darwin's opinion
°f> i- 379 ; importance of, i. 268, 344 ;
Wagner exaggerates importance of,
i. 311 ; Weismann on effects of,

ii- 95
Itajahy, F. Midler's narrow escape from

flood of, ii. 363
Italy, flora of, i. 51
Ivy, difference in growth of flowering

and creeping branches, ii. 80

Jaeger, G., letter to, i. 355 ; on
pangenesis and inheritance, i. 371

James', Sir H., discussion in Athenaum
on change of climate, ii. 140; map of
the world, ii. 235

James Island, i. 52 ; Darwin's plants
from, i. 402

Jameson, i. 79

jamieson, W., on S. America, ii. 141 ;
Darwin converted to glacial theory of
Glen Roy after publication of paper
by, ii. 172, 188-193

Janet, on Natural Selection, i. 267,
269, 271

Japan, American types in, i. 489 ;
flora of, i. 491 ; ii. 7 ; Gray's work
on plants of, i. 442, 459 ; progress of,
i. 384

Java, botanical relation to Africa,
i. 412, 415 ; Alpine plants of, ii. 9 ;
Wallace on, ii. 14

Jays, Crows and, i. 171 ; repeated pair-
ing of, ii. 74

[ N D E X

[effrej Gwj d, b< II eni bj I larwin

i. 29
lenkin, Fleeming, review by, 1

JI3 5 »■ 379
Jew for nal ir) in the,

11. 76
Jenyns, Rev, I , biographi

1. 49 ; letters to, i. 49, 50. 55 ;
mention 189

Jodrell Laboratory, Darwin's in
in, ii. 416, 417 ; note on, ii. 416

Jordanhill, Smith of, on Gibraltar, i. 48

Journal oj Rest \rchcs, Dai win's, i. 50,
408 ; ii. 224

Judd, Truf. J. W., letter to, i. 375;
recollections of Darwin, i. 376 ; on
Darwin's Volcanic Islands, ii. 1
Darwin in praise of work of, ii. 2

Jukes, on imperfection of the 1
logical I ■ >rd, i. 151 ; on changes of
climate, ii. 140; on formation of
river-valleys, ii. 211 ; over estim
sub-aerial denudation, ii. 156

Jumps, variation by, i. 166

/uncus, range of, i. 403 ; J. bufonius,
variation of, i. 102; germination
of seed from mud carried by w
cock, ii. 4, 5

Jura, Darwin on erratic blocks of,
ii. 148. 149, 174

Jussieu, A. de, i. 77

Rank's, i; K.. Arctic Explorations, use

of foxtails by Esquimaux referred to
in. i. 359

Kelvin, Lord, Address at the British
Association Meeting at Kdinburgh
(1871), i. 329; on geological time,
i. 313, 314 ; ii. 163, 164 ; on ag<
the earth, ii. 7 ; on origin of plant-life
from meteorites, ii. 423

Kemp, W , sends seeds to Darwin, ii.
243 ; on vitality of seeds, ii. 244.

Kensington, proposed removal of Brit.
Museum (Bloomsbury) collections to.
i. 112, 113

Kerguelen cabbage, Chambers ■
Hooker on the, i. 48

Kerguelen Island, coal-beds of, ii. 26 ;
relation of flora to that of \:w<
i. 408 ; similarity between plan:
S. America and of, i. 401 ; importance
of collecting fossil plants on. ii. 240 ;
moth from, ii. 67 ; sea-shells of, i. 40 ;
volcanic mountain on, ii. 2

Kerner, A. von Marilaun, on Tk
tisus, i. 317; PflanstenUbtn, ii,
Schutzmittc! rfes Pollens, ii. 392 :
on xenogamy and autogamy, ii. 413 :
mentioned, ii. 249

Kei , ii. 169

rraham, 1. 12

at, i. 1 10, 1 1 1 ; r.iri' |

i. 4 I larwin urden, ii.

314 ; J

ii. 310, 320. win

rell.

Laboratory at, ii. 41 struggle

existence at, ii 423 : suggestion

that I Scott should work in

ii.
Kilauea, lava in crater of, ii. 1
Kilfinnin, shelves in valley of, ii. 173,

174. 179, 186, !
Kilima Nj iro, plant- of, ii. 6

, Capt., col! ■( plants by,

i. •• nture"

ana " B . . 400

King, Sir George, reminiscences of J.
tt, i. 21 ; 2l8 ; Darwin recei
. ii. 302
King. Dr. R., biographical note, i.

Arctic expedition, i. 57, ;X
Kingfisher, ii. So ; sexual difference in,

ii. 60
Kingsley, C. quoted in the Origin, i.

174; story of a heathen Khan.

reference to E. Forbes and P. H.

1 iosse, ii. 336
Kini Balu, vegetation of, i.490
Kirby and Spence. ii. 388
Kiel's, on use of mucus in seeds, ii. 387
t, A., on crossing, i. 51 ; hybrid

ex] ~ . 275

Knight's Law, ii. 250
Knight-Darwin Law, 1-'. Darwin on,

i. SI ; ii. 250
Knuth, on morphology of cruciferous

flower, ii. 2
Koch Gcrmanua, i :: 1

ker, i. 75, 139 : ii. 106 ; \

i ' iwn, ii. 359
Kollmann, Dr.. on atavism, i. ;
Kolreuter, on A • . on

hybrids, i. 287 . 223 ; observa-

tions on pollen, ii self-

fertilisation, ii. 314; on varieties

to 230

/Cosmos, F. Mailer's article on Crololaria,

ii. 371 : F. Muller's papei on /
in. ii. ]
Krause, E., letter to, ii. 47-S: memoir

o( Erasmus Darwin, ii. 423 ; memoir

of II. Midler, ii. 3S2. 419
Kroyer, 1

form of Russian wheat, i.

419-42
Kurr, on flowers of Can.'.-a, ii. 273

480

INDEX

La Plata, H.M.S. Beaglfs visit to,
i. 13 ; Cervus of, i. 144 ; Mylodon
of, i. 243 ; plants of, i. 182, 452 :
extinct animals from, ii. 233 ; slates
and schists of, ii. 208

Labellum, nature of, ii. 275

Labiatae, large genera of, i. 107, 108.

Laboratory, Darwin on the instru-
ments for botanical, ii. 417 ; found-
ing of Jodrell, ii. 416, 417

Laburnum, i. 93 ; peloric flowers of,
i. 148 ; Darwin on hybrid, ii. 248
(see also Cytisus)

Ladizabala, crossing experiments on,

»• 354

Lager str a mi a, F. Midler on, ii. 367,

370
Lakes, Darwin on Ramsay's theory of,
ii. 154, 155 ; as agents in forming
Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, ii. 172-4;
of Friesland, ii. 191 ; Geological
action of, ii. 188, 189 ; Ramsay
on, ii. 154
Lamarck, Darwin on views of, i. 41, 43 ;
difference between views of Darwin
and, i. 153 ; Hist. Zoolog.^pi, i, 125 ;
Hopkins on Darwin and, i. 153 ;
Packard's book on, i. 342 ; quotation
from, i. 216
Lamellicorns, F. Midler on sexes in,

ii. 63 ; stridulating organs of, ii. 83
Lamont, J., letters to, i. 143, 144, 179 ;

note on, i. 143
Lampyridse, luminous organs of i. 307
Land, fauna of sea compared with
that of, i, 233 ; changes in level of
sea the cause of those on, ii. 167
Land-birds, resting on the sea, i. 285
Land-shells, dispersal of, i. 441 ; ii. 5,
13, 28, 29 ; of glacial period, i. 92;
modification of, i. 201
Land-surfaces, preservation for long

periods, ii 156
Landois, reference to paper by. ii. 83
Language, observations bearing on
origin of, ii. 45, 55 ; Sir J. Ilerschcl
on study of, ii. 229
Lankester, E. Ray, letter to, i. 336 ;
ii. 215 ; drawing of earthworm used
in Darwin's book, ii. 215
Lankester, E. (Senior), speech at Man-
chester Brit. Assoc, meeting (1861),
on Darwin's theory, i. 195
Lantana, in Ceylon, i. 145
Lanugo, on human foetus, ii. 39
Lapland, richness of flora, i. 466
Latania Lodigesii, peculiar to Round

Island, ii. 10
Latent characters, tendency to appear
temporarily in youth, i. 473

Lathyrus aphaca, ii. 374 ; L. grandi-
florus, fertilisation of ii. 255 ; L.
nissolia, evolution of, ii. 374 ; ex-
planation of grass-like leaves, ii. 374 ;
Darwin on, ii. 397, 398 ; L. mariti-
mus, bloom on, ii. 41 1 ; L. odoratus,
fertilization of, ii. 389, 391, 392 ;
intercrossing of varieties, ii. 391
Lauder-Dick, Sir Thomas, on Parallel

Roads of Glen Roy, ii. 172
Laurel, extra-floral nectaries of, ii. 399
Lava, Darwin and Scrope on separation
of constituent minerals of, ii. 125 ;
Elie de Beaumont's measurements
of inclination of, ii. 116; fluidity of,
ii. 134 ; junction between dykes and,
ii. 128-31 ; and metamorphic schists,
ii. 202 ; Scrope on basaltic and
trachytic, ii. 125 ; subsidence due to
outpouring of, ii. 144
Law, of balancement, i. 57 ; of growth,
i. 145, 343 ; of higgledy-piggledy,
i. 331 ; of perfectibility by Nageli,
i. 311 ; of sterility, i. 288 ; of suc-
cession, i 133 ; of variation, i. 193
Lawes, Sir J. B. and Sir J. H. Gilbert,

Rothamsted experiments, ii. 216
Laxton, T., close on the trail of

Mendelian principle, ii. 340
Lay Sermons, Huxley's, i. 280
Leaves, movements of, ii. 430 ; used
by worms in plugging burrows,
ii. 213
Lebanon, glacial action on, i. 460, 478 ;
plants of, i. 465 ; Hooker on Cedars
of, ii. 8
Lecky, Rt. Hon. W. E. H., Darwin's
interest in book by, i. 263 ; quoted
in Descent of Man, i. 328
Lecoq, Geographic Botanique, ii. 375 ;
on self-sterility, ii. 315 ; mentioned,
ii. 282
Lectures, Darwin on Edinburgh Uni-
versity, i. 7, 8 (see also Hooker
and Huxley) ; Max Midler's, on
Science of Language, ii. 45
Ledebour, allusion to book by, i., 99,

100, 106
Leeds, address by Owen at (1858),

i. 178
Leersia oryzoides, cleistogamic flowers

of, i. 262 ; ii. 362
Leggett, W. H., on Rhexia virginica,

ii. 292
Legitimate unions, heteromorphic or,

ii. 310
Leguminosce, absence in Greenland,
i. 469, 470 ; absent in New Zealand,
i. 418 ; anomalous genera in, i. 87 ;
crossing in, i. 52 ; ii. 253, 254 ;

i E X

scarcity in humid temperate regions,
i. 491 ; seeds of, i. 148, 442, 470 ;
example of inherited pelorism in, ii.
359; Lord I'arrci" /ions on

fertilisation of, ii. 3S8 ; nectar-hol
in flowers, ii, 3S0 ; reason
absence of ii. 256
Leibnitz, rejection of theory of gravity
by, i. 305

itinent of, ii. 15
lidae, Darwin's work on, i. 254
e also Barnacles) ; fossil, i. 97.
;.f, nomenclature of, i. 68-70
: ii. 219
Lepidoptera, - -lection in, i.

ii. 66 ; breeding in confinement,
ii. 96 ; 1- . W.ller on mimicry in,
ii. 91 ; protection afforded by wi
ii. 67 ; want of colour-perception,
ii. 06 ; Weir on apterous, ii. 64
Lepidosiretty reason tor preservation of,

i- 143

l.eptotcs, ii. 82

Leschenaultia, fertilisation mechanism,

ii. 257, 258 ; sel ("-fertilisation of, ii.

258, 259 ; L. biloba, fertilisation

mechanism of, ii. 260 ; L. fonnosa,

fertilisation mechanism of, ii. 25S.

261
Lesquereux, L., biographical note, i.

260 ; convert to evolution, i. 260 ; on

Coal floras, i. 260
Leuckart, convert to Darwin's views, i.

257

Lewes, (.. II., letter to, i., 306-8.

Lewy, Naphtali, letter to Darwin
from, i. 365, 366.

Lias, cephalopods from the, i. 340

Life, Bastian's book on the beginnings
of. i. 321 ; mystery of i. 302; origin
of, i. 140, 164, 173, 41S; ii. 171 ;
principle of i. 273 ; bearing of vitality
of seels on problem of, ii. 245.

Light, action on plants of flashing, ii.

M
, I tarwin visits, i. 26
Limulus, ii.

Ltnaria, peloria as reversions, ii.
ley, J., biographical note, ii.
1 [ook( 1 of, i. S8 : and K

Medal, i. SS ; ii. 231 : V
Kingdom by, i. 83; on Acropera
and Gongora, ii. 2S2 : Darwin on
his classification of orchids, ii. 2S1 :
letters to. ii. 2 (.3, 2 ; ;. 2 ; on

Melastomacese, ii. 203 ; on ore'

ii. 274, 27S ; Hooker reviews Dar-
win's Orchid book in style of, ii.
290 ; mentioned, i. 83 ; ii. 230, 290,
291

VOL. II.

■ •nee of, i. I

Silurian species, i. 116
Link, on Alpine and Arctic ;

466
•' i. 45

Linnean Society, Bcntham's .

i. ^r>. ' >9. 3'6, 317,

Collier's picture oi Darwin in

of, i. 390 ; Dai win's papei on j

i. 223. 22S ; Darwin

give his views on species before, i.
: Wallace's paper on the Mala}

papilionidse, i. 265
Linnet, a migratory bird, ii. 70
Linope, E. Hackel on, ii.
Linum, Darwin's work on, i. 221. 2

228 ; ii. 314, 317 ; dimorphism of, ii.

310 ; interaction of pollen and stigma,

ii. 313 ; mucus in seeds of, ii. .
Linum flavum, i. 22S ; ii. 40S ; /..
indifiorum, two forms of, ii. 271,

272 ; L. Lewi sit, experiments on,

ii. 323 ; L. trigynum, i. 22S ; L.

usitatissimum, circumnutation of, ii.

.345, 346
Lister, Lord, on spines of Hedgehog,

ii. 106
Listcra, fertilisation of ii. 265, 373,

419 ; L. cordata, fertilisation of, ii.

270 : /,. vvata, fertilisation of, ii. 270
Litchfield, Mrs. (see Darwin. I Ienri<

i. 17S, ii. 2, 4, 251 ; criticism of

Huxley, i. 210. .
Littoral shells, glacial period and, i. 92.
Liverpool, Brit. Assoc, meeting at

(1870), i. 322
Livingstone, D. , on the distribution of

thorny plants, i. 308
Lobelia, Darwin's experiments on, ii.

352 ; fertilisation mechanism of, ii.

202 ;i r : fertility of, ii. 309 ; /.

, S 's experiments on, ii.

Lochaber, Parallel Roads of, ii. 17

(see also Glen

ice-action, ii. 1 )
Lochs, Lagg in, ic -action in. ii. 1

: R j . I >ai win disbel

: - f ii.

170 : n in, ii. isj.

- account
ii. [78
Locust grass, germination of, i
Locusts, blow . ii. 4 ; plants

from dung of, ii. 4

, ii. 41 1,
4] 2

London clay, suj miination of

seeds from. ii. 245

31

482

INDEX

London Review, Darwin's opinion of,

i. 1 86 ; correspondence between

Owen and editor in reference to

Origin, ii. 377
Longchamps, L. de, on crossing in

Graminese, ii. 254
Longevity, Darwin on animals' and

man's, ii. 444
Lonsdale, W., biographical note, ii.

150 ; mentioned, ii. 121, 150
Lopezia, fertilisation of, ii. 375
Lophura viellottii, colour of, ii. 87
Loss, nature of, ii. 168, 169
Love, evidence of existence low in

scale, ii. 51
Loven, S. L., translation of paper on

Cirripedes, ii. 125 ; mentioned, i.

75
Lowe, R. T., on Madeira, 1. 100, 485
Lowell, Prof., on custom in Italy of

shaking head in affirmation, ii. m
Lowland plants, ascending mountains,

i. 63
Lowne, B. T. , on anatomy of blowfly,

ii. 94
Lowness and highness, i. 76, 77, 115,

116, 165, 190
Lubbock, Lady, i. 204 ; ii. 256
Lubbock, Sir J., see Lord Avebury
Lucas, Dr. P., on tendency to vary

independent of conditions, i. 198
Ludwig, F., letter to, ii. 417, 418
Lumbriais, ii. 362 (see also Earth-
worms)
Luminosity in animals, i. 306, 307 ;

result of external conditions, i. 306
Lupinus, Darwin's experiments on, ii.

371

Luzula, ii. 401

Lychnis dioica, structure of flower, ii.
308 ; sets seed without pollen, ii.

3°9 ...

Lycopodium, variation in, i. 41

Lyell, Sir Charles, biographical note,
ii. 117, 118; A?itiquity of Man, i.
471 ; ii. 32, 36 ; on Barrande, i. 83 ;
cautious attitude towards Origin of
Species, i. 187, 196, 239, 241, 243 ;
ii. 31 1 ; cautious judgment of, i. 456 ;
on Cetacea, i. 272 ; Copley medal
awarded to, i. 80, 113, 114, 445 ; ii.
231 ; on continental extension, i. 93,
426, 427 ; controversy with Owen, i.
238, 239, Darwin's pleasure in read-
ing his Geology, i. 15, 16 ; on distribu-
tion, i. 51 ; Falconer and, i. 239-41,
473 ; German opinion of, i. 323 ;
on immutability, i. 43 ; interest in
celts, i. 454 ; letters to, i. 28, 29,
97, 125, 127-9, 132-4, 136, 137,

140-43, 151, 154-6. 167-72, 190-94.
203, 236, 243, 271, 272, 284, 285,
299. 300, 336, 337. 427. 428, 461,
476-9; ii. 4, 5, 30, 1 1 7-3 1. 133-42,
144, 145, 148-51, 153. J54> I57-6I,
164, 165, 173, 174, 181-96, 204-9,222-
6, 228-9, 237, 238, 244, 245 ; letters
to Darwin from, i. 31, 90-92; ii.
229,230; map of Tertiary geography
by, i. 48 ; on mutability, i. 96 ; on
pangenesis, i. 301 ; Principles of
Geology, i. 305 ; on Ramsay's theory
of lakes, i. 252 ; urges Darwin to pub-
lish his views with those of Wallace,
i. 119, 120 ; visits Down, i. 50 65 ;
ii. 163 ; work in France, i. 185 ;
address to Geological Society, ii.
228 ; attacked by Owen in his
Anatomy of Vertebrata, ii. 377 ;
criticism of Murchison, ii. 229 ; on
craters of denudation, ii. 125 ;
Darwin's indebtedness to, ii. 117 ;
death of, ii. 240 ; death of his father,
ii. 131 ; gives up opposition to
Evolution, ii. 39, 118; on glaciers of
Forfarshire, ii. 181 ; on glacial period
in S. hemisphere, ii. 163 ; versus
Herchel on volcanic islands, ii. 141
on iceberg action, ii. 178; me-
morial in Westminster Abbey, ii.
238, 239 ; on Parallel Roads of Glen
Roy, ii. 172 ; as founder of school of
Geology, ii. 117 ; second visit to the
United States, ii. 225 ; trip to Wales,
ii. 194; mentioned, i. 27, 185, 209;
ii. 242, 373
Lyell, Lady, letter to, i. 84-5 ; ii. 125-6,
187, 188 ; translation of paper for
Darwin, ii. 125, 128; visits Down,
i. 50, 65 ; mentioned, i. 28-30 ; ii.
182
Lynch, R. I., ii. 412, 414
Lythracese, dimorphism in, i. 219
Lythrum, cross-fertilisation of i. 222 ;
Darwin's work on, i. 494 ; ii. 32,
419 ; trimorphism of, ii. 299, 349 ;
L. hyssopifolium, range of, i., 431 ;
ii. 290 ; L. salicaria, dimorphism of,
i. 219 ; Darwin's work on. ii. 290

Macacas, Owen on, i. 206 ; M.

Silenus, mane as a protection, ii. 91
Macalister, Prof. A., ii. 39
Macarthur, Sir W., on Erythrina, ii

254. 255
Macaw, beauty of plumage, i. 325
McClennan, on primitive man, i. 315
MacCulloch, on Glen Turret, ii. 179;

on metamorphic rocks, ii. 206 ; on

Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, ii. 172

INI) i : X

483

M'Donnell, Darwin on work of, i. 178

Macgillivray, reference to his Histot
British Bit , 1

pugnax, polygamy of, ii. 69

Mackintosh, D., biographical note, ii.
167 ; on boulders of Ashley II
ii. 168 ; letters to, ii. 166, 167, 170,
171 ; on Moel Tryfan, ii. 166; on
sources of erratic blocks in. England,
ii. 168

McNab, Prof., J. Scott and, i. 217 ;
ii. 319 ; mentioned, ii. 308

Macrauchenia, skull of, i. 460

Madagascar, existence of insects capa-
ble of fertilising . /win, i. 252 ;
fossil Hippopotamus of, i. 454 ; Owen
on fauna of, i. 242, 243; plants of,
i. 489 ; ii. 25, 27 ; former extension
cf, ii. 19 ; as a geographical region,
ii. 13 ; / '■ \'a of, ii. 25

Madeira, birds of, i. 484, 4SS ; British
plants compared with those of,
i. 492 ; Canary Islands formerly
connected with, \ 480; flora of. i. 92,
[43, 407, 410, 480. 482, 4S5 ; in-
sects of, i. 167, 483, 485 ; ii. 11, 67 ;
land-extension, of, i. 427 , ii. 135 ;
land-shells of, i. 92, 483 ; Lowe on,
i. 100 ; Tertiary plants of, i. 445, 482 :
elevation of, ii. 136

Maer, the home of the Wedgwoods,
i. 28, 29

Magellan Straits, H.M.S. Beagle in,
i. 16, 17

Magnus, review by Krause of his work
on colour, ii. 47

Magpies, pairing of, ii. 65. 74

Mahon, Lord, compliment to Darwin,
ii. 229

Mahonia, natural crossing of, ii. 383

Maillet, evolutionary views of, i. 2

Maize, hybrids of, i. 2S5; ii. 314: see
also Zea

Malaxese, and Epidendrese, ii. 2S1

course of vessels in flower,
ii. 275 ; fertilisation of, ii 272

Mala phytic 1

1111m, i. 474

Malay archipelago, Darwin on Wal-
lace's book on, i. 271 ; ii. 142-4 ;
translation by Meyer of Wallace's
book, ii. 358

Malay region, glacial epoch and the,
i. 116; Wallace on butterflies and
pigeons of, i. 263, 265 ; ii

Malpighiacese, degraded flowers of,
i. 77: Erythroxylon included in,
i. 83 ; ii. 28

Malta, Forbes on geology of. i. 41 1

Malthus, Darwin derives help from

ling, i. 118; Haughton <■■
. 153 ; misunderstood, i. 271
I ' '

Mammae, as rudimentary organs in
n, ii. 3S

Mammals, alteration in skulls of, i.
343; Australian cave-, i. 132, 133;
birds compared with, i. 168 ; Dai
claa a, i. 236 ; distribul

i. 439, 461 ; las indices of climatic
changes, i. 457 ; as proof of union
between England and Continent
since Glacial period, i. 482 ; Water-
house's Natural History of, i. .:
Glacial period and extinction of, ii.
13 ; origin and migration, ii. 14

Mammoth (Hog), i. 207

Mammoth, Darwin's eagerness to col-
lect bones of, i. 15; Falconer on the,
i. 205

Man, ii. 30-112; antiquity of (see
Antiquity of Man, and Lyell, SirC);
and apes, i. 237, 334 ; brain of,
i- 337 5 criticism of Lyell's chapter
on, i. 272 ; Huxley's book on, i. 216,
237, 238. 242, 274 ; McClennan on
primitive, i. 315 ; and Natural Selec-
tion, i. 277 ; origin of, i. 238, 239 :
races of. i. 16S, 2S4 ; selection by
Nature contrasted with selection by,
i. 268 ; slow progress of, i. 260, 261 :
Darwin on Wallace's paper on,
ii. ^ ; descent of, ii. 30-55 ; ears of,
ii. 53, 107 ; geological age of. ii. 36,
37 ; and geological classification,
ii. 220 ; hairiness of, ii. 39 ; intro-
duction of, ii. 220, 221 ; rank in
classification, ii. 33, 36 ; Turner on
evolution of, ii. 105 ; Wallace on
evolution of, ii. 31, 34-9

Mankind, descent from single pair, i.
377. 378: early history of, 1. 2
progress of, ii. 30

Mantell, Owen's attack on, i, 65

Man* ientific /•

i. 59, 60, 64 ; ii.

Manx cats, ii

. sleep-movements of, ii.
564

Marble, MacCulloch on metamorphism
of, ii. 206

Marianne Islands, subsidence of, ii.
195, 226 ; want of knowledge ot

Mari

by S and, i. 392

Mav. ait, C. L., on Cicada, ii. S9

Marquesas Islands, subsidence of, i:
Marr, J. EL, on the rocks of Bohemia,
i. 81 ; mentioned, ii. 241

484

INDEX

Marriage, Darwin on, i. 375 '■> Galton's
proposal to issue health-certificates
for, ii. 5°

Marshall. W., on Elorfea, i. 149

Marsupialia, compared with placentata,
i. 415 ; Darwin on nature of, i. 86 ;
evidence of antiquity, i. 117; abund-
ance in Secondary period, i. 453

Martens, see Martins, also see Errata

Martha ( = Posoqueria), F. Midler's
paper on, ii. 350, 354

Martin, H. N., Darwin's opinion of
Elementary Biology by Huxley and,
i. 362

Martins, experiments on immersion of
seeds in sea by, ii. 5

Maruia cotula of N. America, i, 432

Masdevallia, Darwin's work on, ii. 289

Massart, on regeneration after injury,
ii. 427

Masters, M., letters to, 1. 147, 148 ; 11.
25°-7) 334, 335 ; lecture at R. Insti-
tution, ii. 257 ; Vegetable Teratology,
ii. 256

Mastodon, Australian, i. 211 ; extinc-
tion of, i. 129; Falconer on, i. 168,
227, 228 ; in Timor, i. 228 ; ii. 16 ;
migration into S. America, ii. 18 ;
skeleton found by Darwin, ii. 361 ;
M. andium, Falconer on intermediate
character of, i. 227

Materialism of the Present Day, Janet's,
i. 267

Matteucci on electric fishes, i. 307

Matthew, P., on forest trees in Scot-
land, i. 187 ; quoted by Darwin as
having enunciated principle of
Natural Selection before Origin, i.
187 ; ii. 377

Maurienne, note on earthquake in
province of, ii. 114

Mauritius, ii. 24 ; craters of, ii. 124,
127 ; elevation of, ii. 116 ; extinction
of snakes of, ii. 10 ; oceanic character
of, ii. 15

Maury's map, as illustrating continen-
tal extension, i. 427

Maxillaria, ii. 350

Maypu River, Darwin visits, i. 18

Mays, J. A., publishes lectures by
Huxley, i. 229

Medals, (Copley), Darwin, i. 247, 248,
252-6, 25S ; Lyell, i. 80, 113, 114 ;
(Royal), i. 79-81, 88, 113 ; ii. 230,
231 ; (Wollaston), Darwin, i. 255

Medical Department of Army, statistics
from Director-General of, ii. 33

Meditation, expression of eyes in, ii.
104

Mediterranean Islands, flora of, i. 410

Medusae, i. 13 ; Romanes' work on, i.

359- 364, 368

Meehan, T., letter to, i. 354, 355

Megalonyx, i. 11

Megatherium, i. n, 12, 457; ii. 233;
Darwin collects bones of, i. 17, 19 ;
Sir A. Carlisle on, ii. 219

Melastoma, Darwin on, i. 222 ; ii. 294

Melastomacese, ii. 292-302 ; Darwin
on, i. 229 ; ii. 284, 297, 367 ; crossing
in, ii. 300 ; two kinds of stamens in,
ii. 294, 295

Meldola, Prof. R., address to Entomo-
logical Soc, i. 175 ; letters to, i.
350, 381, 397 ; translation of Weis-
mann's Studies in Descent by, i. 350,
397 ; on Weismann and Darwin, i.
3S1 ; mentioned, i. 378; ii. 363

Melipona, i. 121, 123, 153

Meloe, Lord Avebury on, i. 233 ; ii. 12

Melrose, seeds from sandpit near, ii. 244

Memorial to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, i. HO

Mendel, G., W. Bateson on his Prin-
ciples of Heredity, ii. 340 ; Darwin
ignorant of work of, ii. 340 ; Laxton
and, ii. 340

Mendoza, Darwin visits, i. 20, 25

Mental Evolution in Animals, Ro-
manes', ii. 51

Mentha, of N. America, i. 444 ; M.
borealis, variety in N. America, i. 429

Menura superba, colour and nests of, ii.
60

Menzies and Cumming, visit Galapagos
Islands, i. 401

Merctirialis, ii. 320

Mertensia, Darwin's experiments on.
ii. 414

Mesctnbryanthemum, ii. 401

Mesotherium, Falconer on. i. 240

Metamorphic schists, ii. 203, 207

Metamorphism, Darwin on, ii. 203, 205,
209 ; heat and, ii. 132 ; Sorby on, ii.
210

Metamorphosis, Lord Avebury on in-
sects and, i. 232, 331 ; F. Muller on,
i. 264, 312 ; Quatrefages on, i. 246

Meteorites, Lord Kelvin suggests their
agency in introduction of plants, ii.
423

Methods of Study, Agassiz' book on, i.
258

Mexicans, explanation of natural
affinities of Chinese and, i. 467

Meyen, on insectivorous plants, ii. 266

Meyer, Dr., translator of Wallace's
Malay Archipelago, ii. 358

Meyer and Doege, on plants of Cape of
Good Hope, ii. 251

[ N D 1 X

.. in foliated rocks, ii. 204. 205
a-slate, clay-slate and, ii. 205
Mice, ears of, 1. j 58, 359 ; ex]

by Tait on, i. 358
Microscope, Darwin on convenient
form of, i- 60, 61 ; indispensable in
work >>n Bowers, ii. 298, 299 ; use of
compound without simple, injurious
to progress of Natural History, ii.

Migration of animals and plants, i. 201,

405 ; Darwin on plant-, i. 407 ; of

elephants, i. 207 ; Glacial period and.

i. 177. 201, 454, 462

in tropics, i. 439; ii. 23 ; ol birds

ii. 70
Mikania, a leaf-climber, ii. 34S ; M.

scandens, gradation between Mutisia

and, ii. 34S
Mill. J. S., on Darwin's reasoning, i.

1 9; on greatest happiness principle,

i. 327. 32S
Miller, Hugh, First 1m ns of

England and its People, ii. 188
Miller, S. H., Fenland Past and

Present by Skertchley and, ii. 241
Miller, Trof. W. 11.. biographical note,

i. 121 ; letters to3 i. 121-4
Million years, Darwin on meaning of a,

ii. 211
Milne-Edwards, Darwin's cirripede

work and, i. 74. 75, 98 : Darwin's

opinion of. i. 136 ; on retrograde

development, i. 76
Milne-Home, D., biographical note, ii.

113 ; believes in connection between
e of weather and earthquakes, ii.

114; on Glen Roy, ii. 172, 178, [80,

182-6; letters to, ii. 1 13- 1 5, 1S0,

181 ; letter from R. Chambers to, ii.

177 ; on oscillation of sea, ii. 1S6
Milton, quotation from. i. 12
Mimicry, i. 183, 196, 197 ; Hates on,

i. 258 ; and dimorphism, i. 265 ;

Vomcella as an example of, i. 196;

Wallace on, i. 265, 266 ; and colour.

ii. 78, 87 : F. Muller on Lepidoptci.i

and, ii. 91
Mimosa, i. 445 ; Darwin's experiments

on, ii. 2S9, 361, 36S ; M. all

Darwin on, ii. 398, 429, 430 M.

sensitiva, ii. 41 1
Mimosese, F. Midler's account of

of, ii 349
Mimu'iis. Pfeffer on movement of

Stigma, ii. 400
Mind, development of, ii. 51. 52, 54 :

evolution of, ii. 33 ; influence on

on nutrition, ii 106, 107
Miocene land, i. 54-6

Miquel.F.A. W.,

i. 100 ; on distribution of the be
ii. 8 ; on flora of Japan, ii. 7 ; m
tioned, ii. 1

Mirabilis, >

Mirbel, G. F. B. de, i. 7;

Miscellaneous letters, botanical, ii.

242, 333^ 371 ; • -'• >'• 217-41

llaneous subjects, letters on, ii.

441-8
Mis.si- ippi, l.yell on pampas and de-

the. ii. [24
Mitchella, ii. 272
Mivart, Si. George, biographical note,

i. 332 ; false reasoning of, i. 334 ;

Genesis of Species, i. 332
Modification, Darwin's disbelief in sud-
den, i. 335 ; explanation of, i. 173 ;

of insects, i. 331 ; of jays and cr

i. 171 ; of land and freshwater

faunas, i. 233 ; selection and, i. 161 ;

of species, i. 182 ; Walsh on specific,

i. 250
Moel Tryfan, Darwin on shells on, ii.

167. 190 ; Mackintosh on shells on,

ii. 166
Moggridge, J. T., letters to, i. 337,

338 ; ii. 390, 391 ; note on, i. 337 ;

experiments on ants and seeds, ii.

389-91
Mold, von, on climbing plants, ii. 342,

343

isovics, E. von, letters to, i. 374,
375 ; ii. 197 ; work on Paleontology
and Evolution, i. 375
Molecular movement in foliated rocks,

ii. 206, 207
Molli llische Pil •.. ii. 360

Molliard, on Les Cecidies florales, ii. 425
Mollusca, distribution by birds, i. 284,
285 ; Huxley on, i. 73 ; mean
dispersal of, i. 441 ; ii. 5. 13. 28, 29 ;
Morse on protective colours of, ii.
95 ; Wallace on distribution of, ii. 14
vurrence in Brazil, ii. 355
Monacanthus viridis, female form of

um, ii. 2S0
Monkeys, i. 115; ii. 40: distribution
of birds affected by, i. 265 ; range
of, i. 403; ears of, ii. 53; mane as
protection, ii. 91 ; wrinkling of
dm. aming, ii.

Htm, absence o\ nectar in. ii.

; (lowers

of, ii. 293-6, 299 : neglected by

bees, ii. 297 ; seeds of, ii. 2S4 ; M.

kinds of stamens.

ii. 296

Monocotyledons, range of, i. 144 :

heterostylism in, ii. 358

486

INDEX

Monotremes, birds compared with, i.
1 68 ; as remnant of ancient fauna, i.

Monotropa uniflora, in New Granada,

i. 442 ; in Himalayas, i. 442 ; in

separate areas in U.S.A., i. 433
Monotypic genera, variation of, i. 106
Monstrosities, Harvey on, i. 141, 142 ;

Masters' work on, i, 148 ; no sharp

distinction between slight variations

and, i. 147, 318 ; origin of species

from, i. 242 ; variations and, i. 223,

350
Monte Video, Darwin visits, i. 8-1 1 ;

Darwin on cleavage at, ii. 203
Moon, effect on earthquakes, ii. 115
Moraines, glacial, ii. 148
Moral sense, J. Morley on Darwin's

treatment of, i. 327
Morality, foundation of, i. 328
More, A. G., biographical note, ii. 263 ;

letters to, ii. 263-6, 282, 283
Morgan, ii. 385
Morley, J., letters to, i. 324-9
Mormodes, ii. 280 ; labelium of, ii. 275 ;

M. ignea, flower of, i. 200.
Morphological, Hooker's criticism of

term, ii. 378 ; sense in which used by

Nageli, ii. 375, 376^
Morphology, Darwin's explanation of,

i. 140 ; Kollmann on batrachian, i.

363 ; of plants, i. 273 ; ii. 275, 278
Morse, E. S., letters to, i. 350, 383,

384 ; ii. 95 ; on shell-mounds of

Omori, i. 383
Morton, Lord, his mare, i. 320, 364 ; ii.

359

Moscow, opinion on Darwin's work
from, i. 196

Moseley, Canon H., on glacier-motion,
ii. 163

Moseley, Prof. H. N., biographical
note, i. 365 ; letter to, i. 365 ; pro-
posal to examine Kerguelen Coal
beds, ii. 26.

Moss-rose, sudden variation in, i. 275,
276

Mostyn, Lord, horse and quagga
belonging to, i. 319

Moths, hermaphroditism in hybrid,
'• 396> 397 ; survival of distinct races,
i. 201 ; colours of, ii. 67, 68 ; and
Sexual Selection, ii. 94

Mould, Daiwin's opinion of his paper
on, ii. 146

Mountain-building, ii. 145; Rogers on,
ii. 201

Mountain-chains. Darwin on, ii. 121 ;
and earthquakes, ii. 136, 137 ; and
elevation, ii. 137; false views of

geologists on, ii. 201 ; Hopkins on,
ii. 121 ; volcanic rocks in, ii. 145

Movement, of land-areas, i. 91, 92 ; ii.
140 ; of plants, Darwin on, ii. 249,
363, 410, 432, 433 ; F. Mtiller on,
"• 363, 366, 367 ; Wiesner on
Darwin's book on, ii. 370

Mucus of seeds, significance of, ii. 387.

Mukkul, Pass of, ii. 179, 184, 185.

Mules, meaning of stripes of, i. 320;
J. J. Weir's observations on, i. 396,

397

Mtiller, Ferd., on advance of European
plants in Australia, i. 451

Mtiller, Fritz, biographical note, i.
382 ; book by, i. 263 ; convert to
Darwin's views, i. 259 ; Darwin's
opinion of his book, i. 312 ; friend-
ship with Darwin, i. 382 ; Hooker on,
i. 313; letters to i. 264, 312, 382,
383; ii. 63, 82, 83, 91, 92, 98,
261-3, 3°o> 301, 344-63» 365-71;
on Lord Morton's mare, i. 320 ;
on mutual specialisation of insects
and plants, i. 282 ; on prawns, i.
264 ; reference to letter from, i. 286 ;
on sponges, i. 264 ; on Cassia and
caterpillars in S. Brazil, ii. 418 ; on
climbing plants, ii. 262 ; on crossing
plants, ii. 372 ; Darwin offers to
make good loss by flood, ii. 369 ;
Darwin's admiration of, ii. 82, 366 ;
on Darwin's work on lepidoptera, ii.
96 ; Darwin urges him to write
Natural History book, ii. 352; explana-
tion of two kinds of stamens in flowers,
ii. 367 ; on fertilisation mechan-
isms, ii. 258 ; letter to Darwin from,
ii. 363-65 ; narrow escape from flood,
ii- 363, 366 ; article in Kosmos on
Phyllantlms, ii. 368 ; on Melasto-
maceas, ii. 292 ; on orchids, ii. 347 ;
on stripes and spots in animals, ii.
63 ; on Termites, ii. 360 ; disinclined
to publish, ii. 356 ; mentioned, i.
278; ii. 315, 380, 416

Mtiller, H. , biographical note, ii. 382 ;
extract from letter to, i. 382 ;
Darwin's admiration for his book,
ii. 391; on fertilisation of flowers, i.
383; h'. 359, 389; on clover and
bees, ii. 286 ; on Epipactis and
Platanthera, ii. 375 ; extract from
Darwin's preface to his Befruchtmig
der Blumen, ii. 292 ; letters to, ii.
96, 97, 382, 383, 391, 415 416, 419;
on Melastoma, ii. 292 ; persecuted
by Ultramontane party, ii. 419;
review in Kosmos of Forms of Flowers,
ii. 415 ; mentioned, ii. 363, 369, 400

[ N D E X

487

Mliller, Prof. M the

Science of Langua e, i. 468, .;.
letter to, ii.

Mtlller, ! 1 circum-

QUI

Muiimi) w i eat, i. 1 s>

Mundane cold peril twin on

supposed, 1. 95, 438, 463. 464
Mundane , distribution of, i.

402, 403
Munro, Col., on Bermuda, i. 489
Munro, on eyes of parrots, ii. 104, 105
Murchison, Sir R. [., apotheosis of, i.

323; Darwin's conversations with i.

140; ii. 150, 151; letter to, i. 109,

no; address to Geological

ii. 37 : 01 structure ol Alp , ii. 229 ;

I.m IPs critici ni of, ii. 229
Murder, ex| ression of man arrested for,

ii. 102,
Murdoch, G. B., 1 . ii 93-4

Murray, A., address to Botanical

v ciety of Edinburgh, i. 138 ;

criticism of Wallace's theory of nests,

i. 304 ; Darwin criticised by, i. 176;

ii. 30 : Darwin's criticism of woi

ii. 3, 12, 155, 156 : on geological

distribution of mammals, ii. 3, J

155, ; on leaves and CO., ii. 412 ;

review of Origin by, ii. 30 ;

mentioned, ii. 4, 7
Murray, Sir J., Darwin on his theory of

coral reefs, ii. 197, 198
Murray, J., Darwin's agreement with.

i. 214, 215 ; Journal of Researches

published by, i. 50 ; MS. of 0> 1
at to. i. 118 ; sale of Origin, i. 123 ;

publication of Fiir Darwin, ii. 92
Afus, range of, i. 403
Musca vomitorx .. 1 wne on, ii. 94
Muscles, contraction in evacuation and

in labour pains, ii. 99 in man and

apes, ii. }8
Museum (British), i. 109 : inquiry

disposal of .Natural History Collec-
tions by Trustees of, i. 112
Music, biuls and p oduction of, ii. 82 ;

insects, and ii. r . . .1 igin of I

for, ii. 51
Musk-duck, hatchii g of eggs, i. 155
Musk-orchids, pollinia of, ii. 337
Musk ox, a^ index of climate, i.

found in gravel al Down, ii. 165
Mussels, seize hold of fishing hooks, ii.

29
Mutability of species, i. 42, 43 ; Lyell

on i. 96
Mutation, use of term, i. 50
Mutisia, a tendril-climber, compared

with Mikania, ii. 348

-

i. 444

as fossil in the Andes, i. 26

ill, C. W. von, bit .graphical

. . . rwin on

>rk, i. . say on Natural

ection, i. 312; on Hie factum i. 348 ;

naturhi n Art i. 286 ; ii.

375-7 ; Weismann on work of, i.
311 ; on arrangement of leaves, ii.
376; criticism of I 'arwin, ii. 380 ; on
innate principle of development, ii.
375 ; on physiological natuic of useful
adaptations in plants, ii. 375, 387
Napier, Rt. Hon. J. R

Assoc. (1861) on Darwin's work, i.

Naraveha, ii. 341

Narborough, Sir J., description ofW.

coast of S. America by, i. 17
Nascent organs, rudimentary and, i. 162;

v. ing ol vx as, i. 171

Natural classification, i. 104, .

306
Natural Conditions of L

Semper's, i. 391, 392
Natural History, Darwin's taste for,
i. 4, 85, 216 ; Darwin's contribu-
tions to, i. 254, 255 ; accuracy the
soul of, ii. 323: Darwin urges F.
Her to write book on, ii. 352
Natural History Collections, inquiry
as to disposal by British Museum
Trustees of, i. log 1 ;
Natural History Review, Lord Ave-
bury on Walsh's paper on dimor-
phism, i. 250; Bentham in the,
i. 184: Darwin's opinion of, i. 177,
304 ; Darwin re\ s in, i. 2 32 :

Falconer in the, i. 206, 207, 2.
■ ; founding f, 177, ;

ley and. i. 107. 177, 4C0
\ ural Inherita -. i. 199

Natural ] rt 51 rvi -'.itule for

ural Selection, i. 161, 171

A. S. VV idward on

A 1 in, ii. 3

Natural Selection, i. 150 : ai

tion of varieties by, i. 204 ; and

ptation in orchi Mien

on [84 ; An-

. . urn in relal
on, i. 175 ; applied to politics,
and artificial, i. 128 J ;

belief in, i. 199 ; 1

488

INDEX

141, 143 ; comparison with architec-
ture, i. 154 ; with force and matter,
i. 155 ; with laws of gravity, i. 154,
305 ; conservative influence of, i. 353 ;
Cope's and Hyatt's views on, i. 342,
343 ; Darwin accused of making too
much of a Deus of, i. 213 ; Darwin's
anxiety not to overestimate effect of,
i. 198 ; Darwin lays stress on im-
portance of, i. 140, 208, 211-13,
387 ; Darwin on use of term, i. 126,
270, 271 ; deification of, i. 154; and
direct action, i. 214, 306, 307 ;
Eocene or Secondary organisms
would be beaten in competition with
recent on theory of, i. 114 ; and ex-
ternal conditions, i. 300 ; Falconer
on, i. 208 ; and fertility, i. 295, 368 ;
Asa Gray on, i. 126, 242 ; Harvey
misunderstands Darwin's meaning,
i. 160 ; Haughton partially admits,
i. 153 ; Hooker thinks Darwin
probably rides too hard his hobby of,
i. 135 ; Hooker on supposed falling
oft in belief in, i. 304; Hooker and
Bates believe in, i. 199 ; Huxley's
belief in, i. 386 ; Huxley gives in
a lecture inadequate idea of, i. 139 ;
Hyatt and Cope on, i. 342, 343 ;
importance of, i. 161, 208, 305 ;
Lamont on, i. 143, 179; Lyell on,
i. 172, 336 ; and monstrosities, i. 147 ;
Nageli's Essay on, i. 312 ; no limit
to perfeccion of co-adaptations pro-
duced by, i. 145 ; non-acceptance of,
i. 305 : objections to, i. 269; "plants
are splendid for making one believe
in," i. 387 ; possibility of race of bears
being rendered aquatic through i. 392;
with the principle of divergence the
keystone of Origin, i. 109 ; pro-
duction of thorns through, i. 308 ;
tends to progression of organisation,
i. 164 ; providential arrangement
and superfluity of, i. 191 ; struggle
between reversion, variability and,
i- 353 5 Scott on, i. 221, 239 ; slow-
ness of action, i. 384 ; and sterility,
i. 287-9, 294> 296, 299 '■> success
of i. 305 ; tails of mice a difficulty as
regards, i. 358 ; Sir W. Thomson's
misconception of, i. 38S, 389 ; uses
of, i. 356; value of, i. 211-13 ; and
variation, i, 193, 291 ; variation of
species sufficient for selection and
accumulation of new specific charac-
ters by, i. 171 ; and useful characters,
i- '73> I9J> 192 5 Wallace on, i. 118,
267-70 ; ii. 31, 36, 39 ; Watson on,
i. 286 ; applied to man and brutes,

ii. 34 ; Australian savages and,
ii. 33 ; beauty and, ii. 77, 78 ;
Darwin on action of, ii. 379 ;
Darwin's historical sketch in Origin
of, ii. 377; difficulties of, ii. 311 ;
Donders nearly preceded Darwin in
views on, ii. 104 ; evolution of man
from point of view of, ii. 31 ; Owen's
attitude towards, ii. 377 ; primo-
geniture destructive of, ii. 34 ; Sexual
Selection less powerful than, ii. 88 ;
Wallace attributes theory entirely
to Darwin, ii, 31, 36 ; Wallace on
brain and ii. 39

Naturalisation, of European plants,
i. 454 ; of plants in India, i. 115 ;
of plants in islands, i. 452

Naturalised plants, Bentham on, i. 448 ;
comparison of variability of indi-
genous and, i. 429 ; De Candolle on,
i. 444 ; variability of, i. 424, 429 ;
fewness of American species of, in
Britain, i. 450.

Natura/ist in Nicaragua, Belt's, i. 357 ;
ii. 399 ; Belt's account of honey-
glands of plants in, ii. 399.

Naturalist on the Amazons, Bates', i.
197 ; Darwin's opinion of, i. 240, 241

Naturalists, views on species held by,
i. 175, 182 ; few care for philo-
sophical experiments, ii. 321

Nature, Wallace on personification of,
i. 269 ; use of term, ii. 44.

" Nature not lying," principle of,
"• 253

Nature, Darwin's opinion of, i. 317 ;
letters or notes from Darwin in,i. 352,
362, 377. 382, 383, 388, 389 5 ii- 368 ;
Galton in, i. 362 ; F. Muller in, i.
382 ; ii. 366, 367, 368 ; Thiselton-
Dyer in, i. 378

Naudin, C, i. 134, 187 ; on hybridism,
ii. 340 ; on MelastomaceEe, ii. 295

Nauplius stages, i. 347

Arauti/us, of Silurian age. i. 1 16

Necrophorus, Darwin's observations on,
ii. 63

Nectar, in leguminous flowers, ii. 380 ;
Lord Farrer on secretion of, in
Coronilla, ii. 388, 393, 394

Nectaries, Belt on extra- floral, ii. 399

Nectarines and peaches, i. 275 ; Rivers
on production from seed, i. 279 ;
variation in, i. 276

Negative geological evidence, Darwin
and Lyell on, i. 97

Negro, resemblance between ex-
pression of Cebits and, ii. 98

Nelumbium, as example of transport,
i. 116

.

• ■■ - ■• u- 3*5

. I

q, ii. 401
:iiua, ii.

1 ii. 424,
>5 ; inn ii. 106

ts, Wallace's tl
ii. 60-' lion

to, ii. 59; instinct in making, ii. 75
turn, ii. 305
Neumayr, M., bioj 1 nute.i. 375 ;

ay >'M descent theo >. i. 375 :
ii. 2 . . i. 374 ;

• ii- 231
Nevill, Lady 403

New Z

op| continental 1 n of,

i. 41S : British plants in, i. 102;
clover never settled before i
duction of bees, i. 493 ; ii 2
comparison betv lania

and, i. 410 ; elevation of mountains
in, i. 92 ; flora of, i. 40, 95, IOO, 404,
406, 491 ; flora of Australia and,
i. 445 ; tlora of Kaoul Island and,
i. 430 ; Hooker on . i. 426,

489, 491 ; ii. 9 ; Darwin's opinion
of Hooker's Flora, i. 434 ; former
connection of islands, i. 490 ; former
extension of, i. 474; ii. 19, 154;
naturalised plants, i. 491 ; peopling
of mountains by plants, i. 490 ; .
portion of annuals, i. 492 ; sp<
of plants common to America, Chili
and, i. 426; stocked from Antarctic
land. i. 491 ; colonising of, ii. 16 ;
glacial action in, ii. 154, 162 ; moun-
tain-rat of, ii. 154 ; trees of, ii. 250-53
Newton, Prof. A., note on Strickland
by, i. 67 : d n of pari 1

nt in dispersal of seeds, ii. 33S
Newton's law of gravity, i. 140

win on Lyell's work on,
ii. 150.

ling.de, Gould on the. ii. 70
es, observations on child:

"■

naprostratOy Darwin's experiments
, ii. 3S4
Nomenclature, discussion on, i. 67-O,

45

\ British Revu w, !

Jenkin's review in, i. 2^2 ; Tail

i 315

on, Trot. C. F., visits Di

. »• 3C'9
Norway, \ on Buch's .ravels in. ii. 201 :

Blytt vn ii.. ra of, ii. 11
Norwich, Berkelc Iress at Brit.

i. 309 ;
-'97, 299, 304
i .-, 2 ; !
ing (1866) at, i. 4S0 : 1.

I . Midler on, ii. 346,
. i. 116
Nuni irwin's recollection of trip

. 66
Nutrition, influence of mind on, ii. 106,
107

itropic movements, ii. 364 :
SI inents

is in,
ii. 252 : hai .liga-

tion, ii. 2^2 : . ii. I 10

Observai. e trusted witl

tition, ii.

Oceanic islai. nee in floras and

means of stocking, i.

between continents and, ii. 147 ;

former extension of. ii. 135 . -

on. ii. 146 ; volcanic nature of, ii.

146
Oceans, age and depth of, i. 91 : perma-
nence of, ii. 146. 147 ; as sinking

areas, ii. 157
Ogle, W. , on the sense of smell, ii. 102 ;

letter to, ii. 102. 103 ; translation of

book by Kerner. ii.

y, refer* his nomenclature

scheme, i. 6S
Oken, on Lepas, i. 69 ; i .;. i.

246
Old character :'. ii. 147

. i. 105.

rs, i. 69

•.in in.':
information, i. 409 : ii. 341,

409 : menti

-

ements of. ii.

ell-mounds

r. £ 319,

and -

ii. 351 : 1
fern'

:

i-mechanism, ii.
337 3

: habitat, ii. 2^2 : {

490

INDEX

ii. 283 ; 0. mono, fertilisation of, ii.
319 ; 0. muscifera, Lord Farrer's
observations on, ii. 373 ; 0. scolopax,
ii. 283

Opossums, i. 115

Oppel, service to geology, i. 374 ;
mentioned, i. 340

Opuntia, Henslow describes new
species from Galapagos, i. 402 ■

Orang-utang. Rolleston on brain of. i.
185 ; Wallace on, i. 263

Orange trees, grafting of, ii. 356

d'Orbigny, on geology of S. America,
ii. 222 ; theory of formation of
Pampas mud, ii. 119; Voyage dans
FAmerique miridionale, ii. 117;
mentioned, i. 27, 75

Orchids, adaptation in, i. 156 ; Darwin's
work on, i. 154, 190, 198, 200, 202 ;
ii. 191, 423 ; Darwin's view that
seedlings are parasitic on Crypto-
gams, i. 474 ; Falconer's estimate of
Darwin's work on, i. 255 ; few species
in humid temperate regions, i. 491 ;
flourish in cool temperate regions, i.
479 ; illustrate diversity of means to
same end, i. 203 ; monstrous, i. 192 ;
quoted as argument against species
arising from monstrosities, i. 242 ;
utilility and, i. 239 ; fertilisation
mechanisms of, ii. 262-6, 272-6, 337-9;
Brazilian, ii. 262 ; Darwin decides to
publish his work in book-form, ii.
276 ; Darwin sends copy of his book
to F. Miiller, ii. 346 ; Darwin under-
rates power of producing seeds
without insects, ii. 315 ; French
translation of Darwin's book, ii. 357 ;
germinative power of pollen, ii. 304 ;
Hildebrand's paper on, ii. 347 ;
nectar not excreted in some English,
ii. 337 ; and nectar secretion, ii. 394 ;
formation of ovule after pollination,
ii. 325 ; Scott points out error in
Darwin's work, ii. 302-4 ; Scott
on pollen-tubes of, ii. 312 ; Scott on
self-sterility, ii. 325, 336 ; self-
fertilisation in, ii. 262 ; setting of seed
in unopened flower, ii. 315 ; sterility
of, ii. 316 ; course of vessels in flowers,
ii. 273-9 ; wonderful contrivances
intelligible, ii. 273

Orchis, flowers of, ii. 273 ; nectaries of,
ii. 297 ; pollinia of, ii. 269, 270

Orchis ( Bee) (see also Ophrys apiferd),
Darwin's experiments on, ii. 250,
263, 265 ; O. pyramidalis, fertilisation
mechanism, ii. 266 ; 0. ustu/ata, ii.
265

Order of Nature, i. 161

Ordination, i. 193, 194
Organ mountains, Darwin on plants of,
i. 476, 478 ; glacial action on, i.

476
Organisms, simultaneous change in, ii.

233 ; amount of change in fresh water

and marine, ii. 233
Organs, transition of, ii. 344 ; use of ii.

428
Origin of the Fittest, Cope's, i. 341
Origin of Genera, Cope's work on, i.

341

Origin of life, i. 140

Origin of Species, acceptance of doctrine
of Evolution due to the, i. 304 ;
Darwin's belief in the permanence
of the framework of the, i. 209 ;
Darwin's opinion of his book, i. 450 ;
Dawson's review of, i. 468 ; direct
action underestimated in the i. 300 ;
editions of the, i. 177, 200, 263, 264,
304, 312, 332, 334, 335 ; ii. 262,
263, 338, 355 ; errors in, i. 338,
339 ; Falconer's estimate of, i. 255 ;
Huxley's Cambridge speech, and
reference to the, i. 371 ; Huxley's
lecture on coming of age of, i. 386,
3S7 ; Huxley's review of, i. 2S0 ;
Lesquereux's articles in Silliman
against the, i. 260 ; publication of
the Abstract of, i. 118-20; publi-
cation by Murray of, i. 452 ; sale of
the, i. 123; Seemann on the, i. 476 ;
translation of, i. 201, 202, 272, 335 ;
ii. 338 ; Wallace's criticism of, i. 269 ;
Walsh on the, i. 249 ; Darwin on
necessity for modifications in the,
ii- 379 > review by Fleeming Jenkin,
ii. 379 ; review by A. Murray, ii. 30 ;
Owen's criticism of Darwin's His-
torical Sketch in 4th edition of,
ii. 377; Owen's review of, i. 145-7,
149; study of natural history revo-
tionised by the, ii. 36 ; valueless
criticism on, ii. 311

Origin of species, Darwin's early views
on, i. 37, 38, 367 ; Darwin's views on,
i. 119, 120 ; Falconer antagonistic to
Darwin's views on. i. 455 ; Oxford
discussion (Brit, Assoc. 1S60) on the,
i. 157-8 ; spread of Darwin's views
in America, i. 157-9

Origin of species and genera, Wallace
in the Nineteenth Century on, i. 384

Original work, time taken up by, at
expense of reading, i. 475

Ormerod's Index to the Geological
Society's Journal, ii. 144

Ornithorhynchus, aberrant nature of,
i. 86 ; preservation of, i. 143

[ N D i; X

Orthoptera, auditory organs of, ii.

Ilariae, alum. lance in the ocean, i. 9

Oscillataria, i. 54

Oscillation of land, Darwin's views on,

ii. 140
Os coccyx, as rudimentary organ, ii.

37
Ostrea, i. 22

l rich, modification of wings, i. 162
( lutliers, plants as, ii. 8
Outlines of Costm ophy, Fiske's,

»■ 333
Ovary, abnormal structure in orchid,

ii. 304

Owen, Sir Richard, biographical note,
i. 59 ; address at Leeds ( Hrit. Assoc,
1858) by, i. 17S; admission of
descent of species, i. 304 ; articles
by, i. 145, 146, 149, 152, 236, 237,
242, 246; on a badger of Pliocene age,
i. 244 ; on the brain, i. 238 ; ii. 341 ;
Mrs. Carlyle's impression of, i. 309;
and Hooker, i. 149 ; conduct towards
Huxley, i. 153 ; Darwin abused by,
i. 202 ; on Darwin and Maillet,
i. 280 ; and Darwinism, i. 226 ; on
ephemeral influence of the Origin,
i. 200 ; ii. 33S ; Falconer and, i.
210, 232; Huxley on, i. 136, 178;
on Huxley's election to the Athe-
naeum, i. 90 ; ignores Darwin's work,
i. 133 ; influence of. i. 201 ; isolation
among scientific men, i. 226, 227 ;
lecture on birds by, i. 203 ; letters
to, i. 59-61 ; letter to the AtAenaum,
i. 23S ; Life of, i. 226 ; on lowness
of animals, i. 413 ; on At
i. 206 ; on mammals of Old World,
i. 132, 133; on morphology of
vertebrata, i. 415 ; review in the
tarterly of the Origin, i. 145-7,
149 ; Paleontology by, i. 227 ; on
partbenogensis, i. 102 ; review in the
Edinburgh Review by, i. 196 ; on
simple and multiple organs, i. 415 ;
on use and disuse, i. 203 ; and Bishop
Wilberforce's review, i. 156: visits
Down, i. 65 ; attack on Darwin in his
Anatomy of Vertebrate^ ii. 377 ; atti-
tude towards Natural Selection, ii.
377 ; mentioned, i. 303 ; ii. 36, 156

Owls and hawks, as agents in seed-dis-
persal, i. 440

Oxa/is, bulbils of, ii. 34S ; cleistogamic
flowers of, ii. 30S, 317, 31S ; dimor-
phism of, ii. 351 ; pollen-tubes of, ii.
312 ; seeds of, ii. 355, 374; trimor-
phism of, ii. 299, 348. 349 ; 0.
acetosclla, sensitive leaves of, ii. 374;
variation in length of pistil and

mens, ii. 354 ; ( -
win's work

0. corniculata, variation of, i. 1
ii. 434
Oxford, meeting of the Bi c. at

(1847), i. 156-8, 160, 17S ; ii. 218.
247; Tuckwell's reminiscences of, i.

'57
( txlips, i. 252 ; Darwin's experimei
cowslips, primroses, and, ii. 311 ;
Darwin on hybrid character of, ii.
-s5> i"2 ; scarcity of, ii. 372

paniculata, Wallich on,
ii. 293

Pachira. inequality of cotyledons, ii.
365 ; P. .-. ii. 365

Pacific Ocean, Darwin wishes Hooker
to investigate floras of, i. 459 ; is!
of the, i. 134 ; coral reels of. ii. 194

Packard's Lamarck the Founder of
Evolution, ii. 342

Paget, Sir J., on regeneration, i.
363 ; address on elemental patho-
logy, ii. 425 ; illness of, ii. 106 : on
influence of mind on nutrition, ii.
106 ; Lectures on Surgical Patho-
logy, ii. 106 ; letters to, i. 425-7 :
mentioned, ii. 444

Pairing, in birds, ii. 74 ; vigour of ;
and effect on time of, ii. 7 2

Paleolithic flints, in gravels near
Southampton, ii. 166

Paleontology, rapid progress of, ii. 13
ozoic period, ii. 121

Paley, idea of interference of Creator
in construction of each species du<_
i. 154

Pall Ma//, article on "Dr. Hooker on
Religion and Science " in, i. 308, 309;
letter to editor of. i. 324

Pallas, Darwin's conviction of truth of
doctrine of, i. 274 ; doctrine of, i.
on hybrids and fertility, i.
.). Malayan climbing, i.

Palm, I. 11., work on climbing 1.
by, ii
na, crater of, ii. 127

Pampas, geology of the, i. 27, 220: form-
ation o(, ii. 119 : Lyell n Mississippi
beds and, ii. 124 : D'Orbignv's th
of formation of, ii. 119; thistle of the,
ii. 23

enesis, adverse opinion on, i.
Bentham on, i. 290 ; ii. 371 : Berkeley
on, i. 310 : bud-propagation and,
i. 2 1 1 larwin on, i. 3

Darwin's • to term, i.

2M : difference between Gal:

492

INDEX

theory of heredity and, i. 360 ; evi-
dence from hybridisation in favour
of, i. 280 ; Hooker on, i. 301 ; Hux-
ley's views on, i. 287 ; Jager on,
i. 37i;Lyellon, i. 301 ; and molecular
hypothesis of Hackel, i. 364 ; Ran-
yard on, i. 302 ; Romanes on, i. 363 ;
self-fertilisation and, i. 303 ; Wallace
on, i. 300-302 ; ii. 71 ; the idea a
relief to Darwin as connecting facts.
ii. 371 ; F. Midler and, ii. 82, 356 ;
bearing on regeneration, ii. 427 ;
"will turn out true someday," ii.
359 ; mentioned, i. 296, 357

Panmixia, i. 352

Panniculus carnosus in man, ii. 39

Papilio Memnon, Wallace on, i. 266 ;
P. nireus, Mrs. Barber on, ii. 403 ;
P. pammon, Wallace on, i. 266

Papilionaceous flowers, absence in New
Zealand, ii. 255 ; and hermaphrodi-
tism, ii. 253

Papilionidae, Wallace on Malayan,
i. 265

Paraheliotropism, Midler's observa-
tions on, ii. 366 ; in P/tyHanthus,
ii. 364, 365

Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, ii. 171-93
(see Glen Roy)

Parana, Darwin finds Mastodon at,
ii. 361

Pararge, breeding in confinement, ii. 96

Parasites, and degeneration, i. 164 ;
extermination of game by, i. 165 ;
bloom as protection against, ii. 411 ;
and galls, ii. 425-7

Parietaria, explosive stamens of. ii. 375

PaiTOts, as agents in seed-dispersal,

"".349

Parsimony, Hamilton's law of, i. 370

Parthenogenesis, Darwin on, i. 103 ;
Owen's Huntcrian lecture on, i. 102 ;
in Primula, i. 221 ; J. Scott's work
on, ii, 309

Partridges, as agents of seed dispersal,
i. 436 ; rudimentary spurs on legs of,
ii. 64

Pants azruleus, protective colouring,
of, ii. 85

Passifora, i. 2 19 ; bloom experiments
on, ii. 371 ; Lord Farrer's work on,
ii> 357> 383 ; position of flowers
of, ii. 383 ; Midler assists Lord
Fairer in work on, ii. 358 ; Scott's
work on, ii. 314, 316, 323, 325;
self-sterility of, ii. 314 ; Sprengel on,
ii. 380 ; visited by humming-birds,
ii. 383 ; P. gracilis, dispersal of seeds,
ii. 348 ; P. princeps, adapted to hum-
ming birds, ii. 383

Patagonia, i. II, 19, 22; ii. 288 ; L.

Agassiz on elevation of, ii. 164 ; Dar-
win on geology of, ii. 119,121; gigantic
land-sloth of, ii. 361 ; Admiral Suli-
van on, ii. 234

Pathology, Paget's lectures on, ii. 106,
425

Pattison, Mark, ii. 442

Pavo nigripennis, ii. 70

Payne, on effect of rain on plants, ii.
409, 410 ; observations by, ii. 394

Peaches, bud-variation in, i. 276 ; raised
from seed, i. 279

Peacock, evolution and Sexual Selec-
tion of, ii. 58 ; experiments on cutting
tail of male, ii.1 65 ; muscles of tail
of, ii. 106

Pearson, H. H. W., on the botany of
Ceylon patanas, i. 145

Peas, course of vessels in ovary of
sweet-, ii. 289 ; crossing in, ii. 250,
257 ; fertilisation of, ii. 388, 389 ;
waxy secretion in, i. 409

Pecten, i. 26 ; P. latissimus, i. 54

Pelargonium, peloric, i. 148, 219 5 ii.
298 ; Beaton on, ii. 297 ; Darwin's
experiments on, ii. 297, 298 ; flowers
of, ii. 256, 298 ; P. multiflora alba,
Darwin's experiments on crossing, ii.
298

Pelobius, Darwin on, ii. 63

Peloria, i. 148, 219 ; effect of pollen
on regular flowers, i. 219; Darwin
suggests experiments on, ii. 323 ;
Masters on, ii. 334, 335 ; in Pelar-
gonium, ii. 298 ; inheritance of, ii. 359

Pcneus, F. Midler on, i. 264

Pentateuch, N. Lewy on, i. 365

Periodicals, Darwin's opinion of scien-
tific, i. 317 ; foreign compared with
English, i. 55

Peripatus, Moseley's work on, i. 365

Peristylus viridis, Lord Farrer's obser-
vations on, ii. 373

Permanence of ocean basins, ii. 146, 147

Permian period, glacial action during,
i. 173; ii. 154; freshwater beds in
India, ii. 15, 16

Personal Narrative, Humboldt's, i. 263

Peru, anarchy in, i. 25, 27 ; Darwin on
terraces in, ii. 119; D. Forbes on
geology of, ii, 141, 144

Peuquenes Pass, Darwin visits, i. 21

Pfeffer, Prof., on chemotaxis, ii. 343 ;
considers Wiesner wrong in some
of his interpretations, ii. 370 ; on
Drosera, ii. 267, 400 ; Periodische
Bcwegungen, ii. 249

Tfitzer, on classification of orchids, ii.
281

EX

ii. no
Phs. ;39

Phanerogams, comparison with one

class of animals rather than

one kingdom,

-53
Pha. sleep-rr.

of,
Pheasan:

ii. 7 1 -. . 69 ;

hy: : ween fowls and,

pr olouring, iL 87

Phillips, J., defines spec

Phfflips-Jodrdl, T. t of

Jodrell Laboratory ii. 4.16

Philosophical Club. i. 151
Philosophical experirr. ml-

• care for, iL
Philosophising, mear

195

, Darwin's obser
of, ii. 3S4 : hete
P.Drui
ii -
.
Kosmta on,

ments of, .-) ; P. .

sleep- mover.
Pkryma, de Candolle on,

occurrence in N. America, i. 433

jner on,
108

conditions, effect of, i.
i . 2 ' :■

19

of earth 5 -

Phy ;rant All<

Physiological germs, i. 300. 301

*9?

.nn,

:ological units, Herbert Sper. :
301

uological variations, i. 291
-
sot: 274

of, ii. 432 : Darwin's wa ow-

ledge oi, ii. 109 ; E work on

pi' „'.and be:

in veg d jw-

ledge of or ctors of,

and vi-.
Phytophagic varie :

Phy. 165

166
Pict-j ^ of

Leb 160

96;

1

Pigeons, breeding of, L 13^, 194;

' " •
on cro- s
bearing o'
production

I
an

work c r
265 ; Dar :

65 : .

-
: :. 180; (Ro:

: " : :

I
sang of, L 320

-

on,

5

.
P.

4.60

.

5 J

: :o
19

forms c

Dmpared

between high

ence b«

39x

fossii, L 135, 143 {77;

i. 143

on fc
:served as

i :
N..

494

INDEX

i. 308; wide range as compared with
animals, i. 423 ; Darwin's interest in
movements of, ii. 249 ; Darwin on
physiology of, ii. 52 ; disease in, ii.
425 ; effect of stimuli on, ii. 51, 424,
426

Plas Edwards, i. 4

Plasmodiophora, action on cruciferous
roots, ii. 422

Platanthera, H. Muller on, ii. 375

Plato, comparison between plants and
man in his Timceus, ii. 426

Platysma myoides, contraction during
terror, ii. 108 ; Darwin's error con-
cerning, ii. 107

Playfair, Lord, i. 315 ; ii. 198, 435,

436
Pleistocene Antarctic land, plants de-
rived from, i. 491
Pliocene, Falconer on mammal from

the, i. 244
Plovers, protective colouring of, ii. 87
Plumage, immature and adult, ii. 81
Plumbago, Darwin's experiments on, ii.

352 ; said to be dimorphic, ii 350
Podostemacese, fertilisation of, ii. 255
Poisons, natives of Australia injured by
vegetable, i. 469 ; absorption by roots
of, ii. 290 ; effect of injection into
plants, ii. 427
Polar bear, modification of, i. 162, 179
Polar ice-cap, Darwin on the, ii. 163,

167
P„olarity, E. Forbes' theory of, i. 77, 84,

128, 305
Pollen, direct action of, i. 285 ; ex-
periments on, i. 219 ; time of maturity
in Eucalyptus and Mimosa, i. 445 ;
mechanism for distribution in Martha,
ii. 354 ; Miyoshi's experiments on
tubes of, ii. 312, 313
Polyanthus, crossing in, i. 219
Polyborus Nova Zelandice, in Falkland

Islands, i. 408
Polydactylism, and inheritance, i. 251
Polyembryony, in Coffea and Fachira,

"■ 365
Polygala, i. 36 ; P. vulgaris, variation

of, i. 102

Polygamy, in birds, ii. 65, 69 ; in

Machetes, ii. 69
Polygonum, germination of seeds found

in sandpit, ii. 246
Polymorphism, i. 56, 414 ; Darwin

and Hooker on, i. 412 ; Wallace on,

i. 266
Polytypic genera, variation of, i. 106
Pontederia, heterostylism of, ii. 358-60
Pontodrilus, Lankester on, ii. 215
Poplar, Heer on fossil species, ii. 239

Popper, J., letter to, ii. 445

Poppig, on civilisation and savagery, ii.

46
Poppy (corn-), indigenous in Sicily, i.

450
Porpoises, Flower on, ii. 8 ; freshwater,

ii. 8 ; Murray on, ii. 8

Portillo Pass. i. 20

Porto-Santo, land-snails of, i. 446 ;
plants of, i. 92

Positivism, Huxley's article in Fort-
nightly Review on, i. 313

Posoqueria, F. Midler's paper on, ii.

35°. 354

Potatoes, crossing experiments, i. 280 ;
cultivated and wild, i. 25 ; disease
of, i. 165 ; experiments suggested, i.
222 ; graft-hybrids, i. 285, 286, 359 ;
sterility and variability in, i. 285 ;
Torbitt's experiments on, i. 372-4 ;
Traill's experiments, i. 280; varieties
of. i. 219 ; Darwin's work on varieties
of, ii. 290 ; Hildebrand's experi-
ments on, ii. 354

Poulton, Prof, on Prichard as an evo-
lutionist, i. 43-6 ; Charles Darwin
and the Theory of Natural Selection,
i. 28

Poultry, skulls of, i. 180 ; Tegetmeier's
book on, i. 322 ; experiments on
colour and sexual selection, ii. 58

Powell, Prof. Baden, i. 174, 175

Power of Movement in Plants, Darwin's
account of capacity of revolving in
plants, in his book, ii. 345 ; Conti-
ental opinion of, ii. 429 ; Wiesner's
criticism of, ii. 431, 432

Prawns, F. Muller on metamorphosis
of, i. 264

Prayer, Galton's article on, ii. 108

Pre-Cambrian rocks, Hicks on, ii. 169

Predominant forms, i. 165

Prehistoric Europe, J. Geikie's, ii. 165,
167

Prehistoric Times, Lord Avebury's,
i. 263

Preordination i. 192 ; speculation as to,
i. 321

Prepotency of pollen, i. 298

Prescott, reference to work by, ii. 120

Preservation, suggested as an alterna-
tive term for Natural Selection, i. 161

Pressure, effect on liquefaction by heat,
ii. 132

Preston, S. Tolver, letter to, ii. 52

Prestwich, Prof. J., letter to, ii. 193 ;
on Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, ii.
172 ; on superficial deposits of S.
England, ii. 237, 238 ; work on Ter-
tiaries, ii. 230 ; mentioned, i. 239

I n i ' i :•:

Prevost, C, as candidate for R. S''
Foreign List, ii. 229 ; mentioned, ii.
1 So

Price, J., extract from letter from Dar-
win to, i. 372

Prichard, J. C . biographical note, i. 43 ;
on immutability, i. 43-6; quotations
from his Physi tory oj Man-

kind, i. 43-5

tlcy, "Green matter" of, i. 140;
Huxley's essay on, i. 398

Primogeniture, antagonistic to Natural
Selection, ii. 34

Primrose (see also Primula), Darwin's
experiments on cowslip and. i. 252,
420; ii. 311, 324; dimorphism of,
ii. 327, 328; J. Scott on, ii. 324

Primula, i. 296 ; Darwin's work on,
i. 211, 218, 219, 221, 298; ii. 279,
282, 309, 319 ; difficulty of ex;
menting with, ii. 353 : dimorphism
of, ii. 2S0, 310, 314; dimorphism
lost by variation, ii. 323 ; entrance
of pollen-tubes at chalaza, ii. 333, 3 {4 ;
varying fertility of, ii. 323 ; fert:
tion of, ii. 419; homomorphic unions
and, ii. 328 ; ovules of, ii. 333, 334 ;
J. Scott's work on, ii. 310, 321,
323-5 ; stamens of, ii. 293 ; P. elatior,
i. 252 ; ii. 372 ; P. longifiora, non-
dimorphism of, ii. 320 ; Treviranus
on, ii. 324 ; P. mollis, ii. 320 ; P.
seotiea, i. 221 ; ii. 316 ; P. sinensis,
i. 221 ; fertility of, ii. 323 ; legitimate
and illegitimate unions, ii. 310 ; move-
ment of cotyledons, ii. 415

Principle of divergence, i. 153

Principles of Biolqgy, Spencer's, ii. 442

Principles of Geology, Lyell's, i. 240,
272> 3°5 ; ii- 222; Darwin on,
i. 272; ii. 117, 222; Wallace's re-
view of, ii. 39

Pringiea antiscorbutica (Kerguelen
cabbage), i. 4S

Priority, Falconer and Owen on, i. 227

Proboscidean group, extinction of, i. 207

Progress, in forms of life and organisa-
tion, i. 142, 164

Progression, tendency in organisms to-
wards, i. 286

Progressive development, i. 344 : ii. 376

Pronuba, the Yucca moth, Riley on,
ii. 386

Proteacese, i. S6, 10S ; former extension
of, i. r

Protean genera, list o( X. American,
i- 444

Protection, colour in butterflies and,
i. 266 ; thorns as, i. 30S : Wallace
on, i. 305 ; colour and, ii. S5-7, S9 ;

■ur of birds and, '.our

aterpillars and, ii. 71 ;
shells ami, ii.

on Sexual v and, ii. -

lution of colour and, ii. 59 ; mim
and, ii. 87 ; monkeys' manes
ii. 91 ; Wallace on colour and, ii.
72-S; Wallace on wings of lepidoptera
and, ii. 67

• resemblance, Wallace on,
ii. 72-v>
Pi (terogyny, in Plantago, ii. 417
Proihero, G. W., i. 17 ;
Protococcus, i. 164
Protozoa, i. 164, 165

■ idential arrangement, i. 191
Primus laur,

taries visited by ants, ii. 399
vrus, i. 262
Psychology, Delbceuf on, ii. 4S:

manes' work on comparative, ii. 49
Ptarmigan, protective colouring of,

ii. 87
Pterophorus periscelidactylus, ii. 3S6
Publishing, over-readiness of most men

in, ii. 356
Pumilio argyrolcpis, Darwin on seeds

of, ii. 3S7, 430
Purbeck, vlax from the. i. 210

Purpose, Darwin on use of term, ii. 429
a, fertilisation mechanism in, i.
'152

QUAGGA, hybrid between horse and,

i. 319
Quails, seed-dispersal by migral

»• 436

Quarterly Journa. -, article

on Darwin and his teaching in,
i. 267 ; review by Wallace of the
Duke of Argyll's Reign af 1
i. 281

.'. Mivart's articl
5 ; ; ; Bishop Wi
Origin in, i. 156: article on
horses, and hybrids, i. 304 ; ii. . '

Quartz, segregation in foliate
ii. 20^, 206

Qua;: J. 1 . A. de,

phical note, i. 1S6 : letters to, i. 136,
1 I . 187, 201, 2 : trans-

lation o( paper by, i. 245 : on pro-
portion of sexes in Bomiyx, ii,

Quenstedt, work on the Lias by. i. 340

Queries on expression, i. 2

RAB1 ;. iM : skeletons of,

i. 1S1 : ii. 210 : Darwin's w 1

ii. 57
Race, nature s regard for. ii. 44

496

INDEX

Racehorse, selection by man, i. 380 ;
Wallace on fleetness of, i. 283 ;
equality of sexes in, ii. 42

Races of man, i. 168 ; causes of differ-
ence in, ii. 33 ; Wallace on, ii. 34-6

Rafflesia, parasites allied to, i. 262

Rain, effect on leaves, ii. 370, 409 ;
movements of leaves as means of
shooting off, ii. 368

Ramsay, Sir A. C, on origin of lakes,
i. 252; ii. 170, 211; Geological
Society hesitates to publish his paper
on Lakes, ii. 155 ; on ice-action,
ii. 153-5, 170 : on insects in tropics,
ii. 122 ; memoir by Geikie of, ii.
170; on denudation and earth-
movements, ii. 120-22 ; overestimates
subaerial denudation, ii. 156 ; on
Parallel Roads of Glen Roy, ii. 191 ;
on Permian glaciers, ii. 154 ; pro-
posal that he should investigate glacial
deposits in S. America, ii. 161 ;
mentioned, i. 65, 137, 151, 231 ;

Range, De Candoile on large families
and their, i. 444 ; coleoptera and
restricted, i. 200, 201 ; of genera,
i. 402, 403 ; of shells, i. 96 ; size of
genera in relation to species and their,
i. 435 ; of species, i. 46, 117

Ranunculaceje, evidence of highness in,

i- 413
Ranunculus auricomus, i. 36
Ranyard, A. C, letter to JValure on

pangenesis,

;o2

Raoul Island, Hooker on, i. 436
Raphael's Madonna, referred to by

Darwin, i. 330
Raspberry, germination of seeds from

a barrow, ii. 243, 246 ; waxy secre-
tion of, ii. 409
Rattlesnake, Wright on uses of rattle

of, i. 356
Raven, said to pair for whole life, ii. 65
Ray Society, work of, i. 94
Raymond, Du Bois, work on plants,

ii. 396
Reade, T. M., letters to, ii. 146, 147,

211, 212 ; on age of the world, ii. 211
Reader, sold to the Anthropological

Society, i. 263
Reading, Darwin complains of lack of

time for, i. 304 ; little time given by

scientific workers to, i. 475
Reciprocal crosses, half-sterility of, i.

295
Rede Lecture, by Phillips (1S60), ii. 31
Reduction, cessation of selection as
cause of, i. 352 ; organs of flight and,
i. 171 ; wings of ostrich and, i. 162

References, Darwin on importance of

giving, ii. 17; Wallace on, ii. 19
Regeneration, i. 235 ; power of, i. 251 ;
ii. 427 ; reference in Variation of
Animals and Plants to, i. 363
Reign of Law, The Duke of Argyll's,
i. 277, 281, 283; reviewed by
Wallace, i. 182
Reindeer, of Spitzbergen, i. 144 ; horns

of, ii. 78
Religion and science, i. 308, 309
Representative species, i. 177 ; ii. 27,
28 ; in floras of Japan and N.
America, i. 459, 460 ; in Galapagos
Islands, i. 402
Reproduction, difference in amount of
energy expended by male and female
in, ii. 93
Reproductive organs, St.-Hilaire's view
of affaiblissement and development
of i. 413 ; in relation to theoretical
questions, i. 218
Research, Huxley and, i. 15S ; justifi-
cation of, i. 61
Reseda lutea, sterile with own pollen,
ii. 300 ; R. odorata, experiment on
cross- and self-fertilisation, ii. 300, 356
Resemblance, mimetic, i. 196, 197
Resignation, expression in, ii. 103
Restiacese, former extension of, i. 380
Restricted distribution, i. 446
Retardation, Cope on, i. 341
Retrogression, i. 142, 165
Reversion, i. 103, 120, 199 ; in am-
monites, i. 341 ; Darwin on, i. 473 ;
and degeneration of characters, i.
344 ; factors causing, i. 357 ; hybrid-
ism and, i. 397 ; ii. 340 ; Lord
Morton's mare and, i. 364 ; stripes
of mules due to, i. 320 ; struggle
between Natural Selection and, i.
353 ; and crossing, ii. 75 ; peloria
and, ii. 335
Review of the Descent of Man, by J.

Morley, i. 324-9.
Reviews, Darwin on an author writing
his own, i. 158; on the Origin of
Species, by Asa Gray, i. 140, 166,
170; Haughton, i. 153 ; Hopkins, i.
153 ; Hutton, i. 183 ; Huxley, i. 140,
280 ; F. Jenkin, i. 282 ; Owen, i.
145-7, 149 ; Wilberforce, i. 156
Rhamnus, ii. 416

Rhexia, flowers of, ii. 295-7 ; R. vir-
ginica, W. H. Leggett on anthers,
ii. 292
Rhinoceros, i. 129
Rhinochctus, ii. 17

Rhizocephala, retrograde development
in, i. 212

• E X

Rhododendron Boo/An, ii. 297

liny in confinen

ii. 96

Rhynckeea, colour of, ii. 60

Rich, A. note on, ii. 445 ; legacy to
Huxley, ii. 445, 440 ; o, ii.

446-8; leaves his fortune to Darwin,
ii. 445, 446

Rich, Mr-., mentioned, ii. 125

Richardson, R., on tablet to 1
memorate Darwin's lodgings at 11,
nun Street, Edit burgh, i. 6

Richardson, Darwin on merits of, ii. 230

Rigaud, on formation of coal, ii. 219

Rile)-, C. Y. biographical note on, ii.
385 ; letters to, ii. men-

tioned, i. 248, 357

Rio Janeiro, i. S, 9, 15, 19 ; absence of
erratic boulders near, i. 470 : Ag
on drift-formation near, ii. 161

Rio Xegro, i. 10

Rio Plata, i. 8

Ritchie, Mis., visit to Down, ii. 448

Rivers, T . letters to, i. 275-7, 279.

Robin, attracted by colour of 7
ii. 67

Robiuia, insect visitors of, ii. 253

Rocks, bending when heated, ii. 132,
133; condition in interior of earth,
ii. 134 ; fluidity of, ii. 206, 207 ;
metamorphism of, ii. 132 (see also
Metamorphism)

Rocky Mountains, wingless insects of
the, i. 262

Rogers, W. 15. and II. D., on clea\
ii. 201 ; on coalfields of N. America,
ii. 217 ; on parallelism of axis-
planes of elevation and clca\
ii. 201, 204

Rolleston, G., biographical note, ii.46;
address in Nature by, i. 323 ; on the
orang-utang, i. 185 ; adhesion to
Darwin's views, ii. 46 ; letter to, ii.
47; letter to Darwin from, ii. 46;
mentioned, ii. 75, 442

Rollisson, ii. 403

Roman villa at Abinger, ii. 213

Romanes, G. J., note on, i. 352 :
Darwin on controversy between Duke
of Argyll and, i. 396 ; on graft-
hybrids, i. 2!>o ; letters to, i. ^54, 359,
360, 363-5, 367, 368, 370,
3S9-90, 395, 396 ; ii. 4S, 49, 51, 52,
213, 214,400-8, 431, 432, 436, 437 :
letter to Darwin from, i. 352-4 :
letter to Nature in reply to the Duke
of Argyll, i. 395, 396; on physio-
logical selection, i. 22^, 299 ; review
of Roux's book. i. 395, 396 ; on
heliotropism, ii. 431 ; lecture on

VOL. II.

animal intelligence 48. 49 ;

let . ii.

407 . ii.

49 : . id I. titers of ii. ., !

mini imals, ii.

. -

5, \. American -] ecies, i.

ii, i. 275 ; raising :.
seed, i. 279 : lance ot

rose to Scotch, i. 279 ; varie
of i. 100

.r J., i. 65
. i. 79
Round Island, fauna and flora of, ii. 10
.'s Struggle of Parts in

»'«"i i- 395. 396
.1 Commission on Vivisection, ii.

135- 436
Royal Institution, lectures at, i. S2, S9,
129-31, 386. 387
..1 medals, i. 79. 80, Si. 88 ; ii. 131,

■'

J Society, council meeting of, i.

80.
Royer, Mdlle.,translatressof the 0.

i. 202 ; ii. 28S
Royle, J. F., biographical note, i. 67;

letters to, i. 67 ; mentioned, ii. 243
Rubiacece, dimorphism in, ii. 351, 352 ;

fertilisation in, ii. 261
Rubu . X. American species, i. 444 ;

variation in. i. 100; F. Darwin

roots of, ii. 429

'/, comparis

variability of X. American and

Eui :cies, i. 425

Rucker. ii. 276
Rudimentary organs, i. 352 ; in fi

i. 251 ; nascent and. i. 102 : variation
. 353 : in man, ii. 37-9 ; use in

classification, ii.
Rudinger, Dr.. on regeneration, i. 363
Rue, flowers of. ii. 3:
Ruffs, polygamy of, ii. 69
Rumex, germination of old seed

j. 246 : ii. 402
Russia, forms of wheat cultivated in,

ii. 419-22
Rutacese, A. St.-Hilaire on differ

in ovary of same plants of. ii.

Sabine, General, biographical note,

i. 257 - -iety. i.

2;;. 256 : award o( Copley •

Darwin during ;

recognition by Government, i. 315;

mentioned, i. 88 : ii. 153
Sabrina, elevation of, ii. 1 14
Sag;, '.'a. i. 86

32

493

INDEX

St. Dabeoc's heath, in Azores, i. 483
St. Helena, Darwin suggests possibility
of finding lost plants in earth from,
i. 494 ; ii. 1 ; extinction in, i. 167 ;
Hooker on flora of, i. 489 ; land-
birds of, i. 484 ; plants of, i. 40, 286 ;
ii. 23 ; trees of, i. 163 ; Darwin on
craters of, ii. 124 ; geology of, ii. 11 ;
subsidence in, ii. 121 ; White on
hemiptera of, ii. 20
St.-Hilaire, A. F. C. P. de, on affai-
blissement, i. 415 ; erect and sus-
pended ovules in same ovary, ii. 376 ;
Lemons de Botaniqnc, i. 413 ; Life of,

i- 57

St.-Hilaire, J. G., on monstrosities, i.
318 ; author of Life of A. F. C. P. de
St.-Hilaire, i. 57
St. Jago, i. 9 ; Darwin on craters of, ii.
124, 126, 129-31 ; elevation of, ii. 116
St. Paul's rocks, plants of, i. 408 ; geo-
logical structure, ii. 146
Saintpaulia, dimorphic flowers, ii. 295
St. Ventanao, conglomerates of, ii. 189
Salicacere, i. 83
Salt 'cor nia, bloom on, ii. 411
Salix, i. 47 ; varieties of, i. 100
Salsola Kali, bloom on, ii. 411
Salt water, effect on plants, ii. 5, 210, 41 1
Salter, on vitality of seeds after immer-
sion in the sea, i. 436, 437
Saltus, Darwin*s views on, i. 198
Salvages, flora of the, i. 494
Salvia, Hildebrand's paper on, ii. 344,

372
Samara, Russian wheat sent to Darwin

from, ii. 419-20
Samoyedes, power of finding their way

in fog, i. 385
Sandberger, controversy with Hilgen-

dorf, i. 347
Sanderson, Sir J. B., electrical experi-
ments on plants, ii. 402 ; letters to,

ii. 394-6, 444 ; on vivisection, ii. 435,

436 _
Sandwich Islands, i. 117; absence of

Alpine floras, i. 410 ; flora of, i. 459 ;

Geranium of, i. 163 ; Dana on valleys

and craters, ii. 226, 227 ; Galapagos

and, ii. 227
Sanicula, occurrence of species in

Azores, i. 484 ; ii. 3 ; range of, i.

484, 485
Santa Cruz, i. 15, 16
Santorin, crater of, ii. 127 ; linear vent

in, ii. 131 ; Lyell's account of, ii. 126
Saporta, Marquis de, biographical note,

i. 376; letters to, i. 376, 377, 392;

on rapid development of higher

plants, ii. 21

Sargassum, i. 54, 56 ; Forbes on, i. 412

Sarracenia, ii. 401, 403

Savages, civilisation of, ii. 46, 47 ;
comparison between animals and, ii.
40 ; decrease of, ii. 47 ; selection
among, ii. 33, 35

Saxifrages, destruction in Ireland of
Spanish, i. 461 ; formation of hairs
in, ii. 272

Saxonika, form of Russian wheat, ii.
419-22

Sccevola, i. 152 ; fertilisation mechanism
of, ii. 257-9; S.microcarpa, fertilisa-
tion mechanism of, ii. 259, 261

Scalesia, i. 52

Scandinavia, Hooker on potency of
flora, i. 468 ; Blytt on distribution
of plants of, ii. 17 ; elevation of, ii.

1.39
Scarlet fever, Darwin's dread of, ii. 281
Scenery of Scotland, Sir A. Geikie's, ii.

171. .

Scepticism, Darwin on, ii. 443

Schimper, review by Hooker of Paleon-
tologie Ve'getale by, i. 317

Schlagintweit, i. 99

Schleiden, i. 76 ; convert to Darwin's
views, i. 259

Schmankewitsch, experiments on Ar-
temia by, i. 391

Schobl, J., on ears of mice, i. 358, 359

Schoenherr, C. J., i. 82, 83

Schomburgk, Sir R., on Catasetum,
Monacanthus, and Myantkus, ii. 280

School, Darwin at Mr. Case's, i. 3, 4 ;
of Mines, i. 281

Schrankia, a sensitive species of, ii. 411

Schultze, Max, ii. 345, 346

Science, and superstition, i. 370 ; pro-
gresses at railroad speed, ii. 355

Science Defence Association, Darwin
asked to be president of, ii. 439, 440

Scientific men, attributes of, i. 98 ;
domestic ties and work of, i. 202 ;
article in Reader on, ii. 156

Scientific periodicals, Darwin's opinion
of, i. 317

Scotland, forest trees of, i. 187 ; com-
parison between flora of T. del
Fuego and that of, ii. 242 ; elevation
of, ii. 189 ; frequency of earthquakes
in, ii. 115 ; land-glaciation of, ii. 191;
tails of diluvium in, ii. 149

Scotsman, Forbes' lecture published in,
i. 78 ; Darwin's letter on the Parallel
Roads of Glen Roy in the, ii. 181. 187

Scott, D. H. , obituary notice of Nageli
by, i. 273

Scott, J., biographical note, i. 217-18;
correspondence with, ii. 302-32 ;

I N !

criticism on th< by, i. 239 ;

lettei ■ to, i. 239 ; 11. 302-32 :

' iction, n a red

cowslip, i. 252; confirms D
work, also points oul en 12-6 ;

Darwin lly, ii. 327,

331 ; Darwin's opin ii. 302,

331 ; Darwi

to, ii. 3' 1 : I »arwin - ker

about Indian appointment for, ii. 319 ;
Darwin', proposal that he hould
work at Down as his a-sistant, ii.
329, $]o ; Dai that he

should work at Kew, ii. 329; on
dispersal oi seed of Adenanthera by
; on fertilisation of
i. '302-10, 312, 316, 318,

5, 33r> 33' 1Vcr and

experimentalist, ii. 309 ; a lover of
Natural History, ii. 314; observa-
tion I seeds, i
on Oncidium flexuosum, ii. 351 ;
letter to Darwin from, ii. 302
offered associateship of Linnean
Society, ii. 326; on Imatophyllum,
ii. 313 ; on self-sterility in Passiflora,
ii. 314 ; on Primula, ii. 325 ; on
sexes in Zea, ii. 30S ; mentioned, ii.

299, 378

Scrope, P., on volcanic rocUs, ii. 125

Scrophularinese, i. 10S, 163

Scudder, on fossil insects, ii. 82

a underestimates power of, ii.
226 ; changes in level of land due to
those of, ii. 167 ; marks kit on land
by action of, ii. 176

Seakale, bloom on, ii. 41 1

'ore plants, use of bloom op. ii.
409, 411

Sea-sickness, Darwin sutlers from, i.
10, 247

with the Sea Horses, f .amont's,
i. 179

Secondary period, abundance of Arau-
carias and Marsupials during, i. 453 :
equality of elevation in British rocks
ot, ii. 1 1 ■■ : :s prior to, ii. 27

Sections of earth's crust, need for
accurate, ii. 133

Sedgwick, Prof. A., extract from letter
to Owen from, i. 146 ; letter to
Darwin from, i. 136 ; ii. 236, 237 ;
on the Vest\ reation> i. 48, 49;

and the Philosophical Society's m
Lag at Cambridge, i. 149 : and the
Spectator, i. 149 ; Darwin's visit to,
ii. 236, 237 ; feelings towards 1 >arwin,
ii. 236, 237 ; on the structure of large
mineral masses, ii. 200, 202 ; pro-
poses Forbes for Royal medal, ii.

131 win

from, 1. 130; suggested as c.

.1. ii. 231 ; .ed,

i. 91. 125. 124, 133, 3X0; ii. 231

Sedgwick, A., address at the lit/
Assoc. (1899), i. 214

nentary strata, conversion into
schiits, ii. 206

Sedimentation, connection with el<
tion and Subsidence, ii. 123, 1
147 ; near coast-lines, ii. 146
flings, sensitiveness to light, ii. 431

Seeds, collected by girls in Prof. 11
low's parish, i. 419, 420; dispel
of, i. 144, 416, 419, 1 ii. 4, 5,

24, 25, 33S, 349, 387 : effect of
immersion on, i. 148, 416, 417, 419,
436, 437. 4S3 ; ii- 5 ; of furze, i. 1
A. a Gray on Darwin's salt-water
experiments, i. 422 ; germina'
after 2l£ hours in owl's stomach, i.
440 ; moss-roses raised from. i. 276,
279 ; peaches from, i. 279; variation
in, i. 213 ; bright colours of fr
and, ii. 347,

in samples of earth, ii. 247 ; dormant
state of, ii. 245, 246 ; germination
from pond mud, ii. 251 ; Hildebrand
on dispersal of, ii. 3S7 ; mucus
emitted by, ii. 430 ; stored by ants,
ii. 389-91 ; supposed vivification of
fossil, ii. 244 ; vitality of, ii. 243-7,

251

Seeley, Prof, ii. 442

Seemann, on commingling of temperate
and tropical plants in mountains of
\. i. 473 ; on thi ■.' in

G rmi . . i. 476 ; mentioned, ii. 9

Segregation of minerals in foliated
rocks, ii. 204, 205

foot of, compared with
organ in Welwitschia seedling, ii.
427, 42S

Selection, a misleading term. i. .
artificial, i. 120. 128, [64, 2
36S : as means ^i impr
i. 193 ; importance of, i. 152 ; in-
fluence of speedy, i. 354 : ul
pigeon-fanciers, i. 1

sua! Selection) ; sterility and, 1.
■ ; unconscious, i. 31 1 : and varia-
tion, i. 134 ; voluntary, i. 300: and
inheritance, ii.

fertilisation, abundance of seeds
from, ii. 353 ; Darwin's experiments
on cross- and, ii. 384, 413 ; evil re-
sults of, ii. 373 j con 1 on between
seeds from cross- and, ii. 352 ; in
Goodeniacese, ii. 25S ; in Orchids,
ii. 262

5°°

INDEX

Self-interest, Preston on, ii. 52

Self-sterility, in Eschscholtzia, ii. 352 ;
in plants, ii. 336, 347 ; connection
with unnatural conditions, ii. 351

Selliera, Hamilton on fertilisation-
mechanism, ii. 351

Semper, K., biographical note, i. 391 ;
letter to, i. 391-2

Senecio, i. 47, 163 ; 6". vulgaris, profits
by cross-fertilisation, ii. 414

Sensitive plants, Darwin's work on,
i. 417 ; ii, 289, 361

Sensitiveness, diversified kinds in allied
plants, ii. 385

Separate creations, i. 163, 173 ; Darwin
on, i. 377, 378

Sequoia, i. 92

Seringe, on Aconitum flowers, ii. 335

Sertularia, i. 16

Sethia, dimorphism of, ii. 351

Settegast, H., letter to, i. 324

Severn, Darwin on floods of, ii. 169

Seward, A. C, Fossil Plants as Tests
of Climate, ii. 21

Sexes, colour, and difference in. ii. 88 ;
proportion at birth, ii. 41 ; proportion
in animals, ii. 42, 67

Sexual likeness, secondary, i. 351

Sexual organs, as collectors of genera-
tive elements, i. 359 ; appendages in
insects complemental to, ii. 94

Sexual reproduction. Galton on, i. 361 ;
bearing of F. Midler's work on
essence of, ii. 354

Sexual Selection, i. 316 ; ii. 56-97 ;
Bates on, i. 182, 183 ; Darwin on,
i. 183, 303, 327 ; article in Kosmos
on, ii. 371 ; colour and, ii. 57-9 ;
68, 72-4, 86, 87, 96 ; man and, ii.
33> 35> 59 5 in moths and butterflies,
ii. 94 ; subordinate to Natural Selec-
tion, ii. 88 ; Wallace on colour and,
ii. 72-4 ; Wallace on difficulties of,
ii. 62, 93

Sexuality, Bentham on, i. 349 ; in lower
forms, i. 360 ; origin of, i. 190

Shanghai, tooth of Mastodon from, i.
211

Sharp, David, on Bombus, i. 262; on
Vohicella, i. 196 ; Insects, ii. 12, 89

Sharpe, Daniel, biographical note, ii.
131 ; on elevation, i. 90 ; Darwin
meets, ii. 131 ; letters to, ii. 199-204;
on cleavage and foliation, ii. 131, 199,
203, 204

Sharpey, W., i. 88; letter from
Falconer to, i. 252-6 ; honorary
member of Physiological Society,
ii. 436

Shaw, J., letter to, ii. 56

Sheep, varieties of, i. 127

Sheldrake, dancing on sand to make
sea-worms come out, ii. 103

Shells, Forbes and Hancock on British,
i. 100 ; distorted by cleavage, ii. 204 ;
means of dispersal, ii. 28, 29 ; pro-
tective colour of, ii. 95

Sherborn, C. D., Catalogue of Mam-
malia by A.'S. Woodward and, i. 206

Shetland, comparison between flora of
T. del Fuego and that of, ii. 242

Shrewsbury, i. 13, 28 ; school, i. 4

Siberia, Rhinoceros and steppes of
central, i. 457

Sicily, elephants of, i. 206 ; flora of,

L Si

Sidgwick, Prof. H., ii. 442

Siebold, von, i. 75

Sigittaria, an aquatic plant, ii. 217, 220

Silene, Gartner's crossing-experiments

on, i. 450
Silurian, comparison between recent

organisms and, i. 115 ; life of, i. 142 ;

Lingula from the, i. 164 ; corals, ii.

194, 197 ; volcanic strata, ii. 136
Simon, Sir J., reports by, ii. 444
Simple forms, existence of, i. 151 ;

survival of, i. 142
Simpson, Sir J., on regeneration in

womb, i. 363
Siphocampylus, i. 221 ; ii. 310
Silaris, Lord Avebury on Meloe and,

i. 232 ; ii. 12
Siwalik hills, i. 168
Skertchley, S. B. ]., on palaeolithic

flints in boulder-clay of E. Anglia,

ii. 241 ; letter to, ii. 240, 241
Skin, influence of mind on eruptions of,

ii. 107
Slate, cleavage of schists and, ii. 203
Slave-ants, account in the Origin of,

i. 197
Sleep, plants' so-called, ii. 362
Sleep-movements, in plants, ii. 363,

364, 367. 397-9. 4ii; of cotyledons,

ii. 414, 415
Slime of seeds, ii. 387
Sloths, i. 115

Smell, Ogle's work on sense of, ii. 102
Smerinl/ius populi-ocellatus, Weir on

hybrid, i. 396
Smilaceae, reference to genera of, i. 83
Smilax, De Candolle on flower of, i.

369
Smith, Goldwin, i. 309
Smith, J., note on, ii. 410
Snails of Porto Santo, i. 446
Snipe, protective colour of, ii. 87
Snow, red, i. 24 ; geological action of

frozen, ii. 169

INDEX

501

Snowdon, elevation in recent times,
i. 418

Social instincts, actions as result of,
ii. 52

Social plants, De Candolle on, i. 424;
in the U S.A.. i. 43'-

Sociology, H. Spencer's 1. 351

Soda, niti Is, i. 27

Soil, in relation to plant distribution,
i. 380

Solanacese, i. 10S

Solatium, rostratum, Todd on stamens
of, ii. 292

fen, bird-creature from, i. 2

Sollas, Prof., director of the Funafuti
boring expedition, ii. 199 ; account of
the boring operations by, ii. 199

Sonchus, introduced into New Zealand,
i. 102

Song, importance in animal kingdom,
ii. 82

Sophocles, Frof., on expression of
affirmation by Turks, ii. m

Sorby, on metamorphism, ii. 210

Sound, and music, ii. 51

Southampton, Brit. Assoc, meeting
(■1846), ii. 175; Darwin on gravel
deposits at, ii. 165, 169, 237 ;
Darwin's visits to, ii. 237, 421

Spanish chesnut, variation in leaf
divergence, ii. 378

Spanish plants in Ireland, i. 54, 461;
in La Plata, i. 452

Spawn, dispersal of frogs', i. 2S4

Spean, terraces in valley of, ii. 149, 171,
179, 188-90

Special ordination, i. 321

Specialisation, i. 210

Species, antiquity of plant-, i. 443 ; be-
lie! in evolution of. i. 304 ; changing
into one another, i. 184 ; creation
of, i. 173; Darwin recognises diffi-
culties in and objections to his views
on, i. 455; definition of, i. 127 ;
-criptive work influenced by
Darwin's views on, i. 453; facts
from Hooker bearing on, i. 63;
food as important factor in keeping
up number of, i. 297 ; frequency of,
i. 117 ; Asa Gray on, i. 242, 422 ;
[looker on, i. 422; intermediate
forms absent in close, i. 307,
little tendency during migration to
form new, i. 441 ; modification of,
i. 1S2 : and monstrosities, i. 242 ;
mutability of, i. 42, 43, 90 ; ii. 45 ;
Nageli's views on, i. 273 ; origin of.
i. 294 (see Origin of Species) ; per-
manence of, i. 96, 97 ; Frichard on
meaning of term, i. 435: range of,

i. 46 ; • live, i. 177

. of, i. 1C3 ; S] of,

1. .] 1 1 ; erility F. i i, i.

> 7. I
time necessary to change, i. 380;
time of creation of new, i 2
variation of, 41-7, 170, 2 ace

origin of, i. 384 • Ish on modi-
fication of, i. 250 ; Weismann on,
i. 311 ; ii. 95, 96; Ciaudry on affilia-
tion of, ii. 236; Hackel on change
of, ii. 346 ; isolation of, ii. 95 ; value
of careful discrimination of, ii. 252

■aiiimulablc. Free's book
on, i. 17 \
Specific character, Falconer on persist-
ence of, i. 206
Speculation, Darwin on, ii. 133
Spencer, H., Darwin on the advantage
of his expression "survival of the
fittest," i. 270; letter to, i. 351, 352 :
ii. 442 ; on electric organs, i. 307 ;
on genesis of nervous system,
ii. 424, 425 ; on survival of the
fittest, i. 268 ; Romanes on his
theory of nerve-genesis, i. 368 ;
Wallace's admiration for, i. 301 ;
Darwin on his work, ii. 235 ; extract
from letter to, ii. 249 ; mentioned, i.

295. 300. 3d : ii- 4^, 52
Spermacoce, ii. 272

,, terraces of. ii. 189
Sphagnum, parasitism of orchids on,

i. 474
Spiders, mental powers of, i.

Moggridge on, i. 337, 338

u, ii. 265 ; fertilisation of,

ii. .
Spiritualism. Darwin on, ii. 443
Spitzbergen, Lamont's book on, i. 179 ;

reindeer of, i. 144
nges, Clark on classification

i. 335 : Hackel's work on, i. 3 -

F. Muller on, i. 264 ; ii. 340
Spontaneous generation, i. 321 : Dar-
win's disbelief in, i. 273 ; Huxley's

disbelief in, i. 329
Sports, i. 213, 275, 276
Sprengel, C C, i. 446 ; ii. 254

Passion-flowers, ii. 380

•beetle, forms of, ii, 90
Stahl, Prof., on ii. 396;

on transpiration, ii. 410
Stainton, ii. 67
Stanhope, Lord, i. 96

.-, fertilisation of, ii. 335-7.347
...\ fertilisation of, ii.
Starling, paired three times in one

day, ii. 74
State-entomologist, appointment of in

502

INDEX

America, not likely to occur in Eng-
land, ii. 386

Statistics, of births and deaths, i. 5° 5
Asa Gray's N. American plant-,
i. 432-4

Steinheim, Lias rocks of, i. 347

Stellaria media, cross-fertilisation of,
ii. 414

Stephens, Miss Catherine, i. 6

Sterile, use of term, i. 48, 411

Sterility, accumulation through Natural
Selection, i. 297, 298 ; arguments re-
lating to, i. 293 ; artificial production
of, i. 223 ; between allied species
aided by Natural Selection, i. 288 ;
connection with sexual differentiation,
i. 223 ; and crossing, i. 230, 231, 295 ;
domestication and loss of, i. 274,
387 ; experiments on, i. 224, 226 ;
of hybrids, i. 287-93, 295-9; in
human beings, i. 224, 225 ; Huxley
on, i. 225, 230, 231 ; increase of
races and, i. 294 ; laws governing,
i. 288 ; Natural Selection and, i. 2S9,
296 ; in pigeons, i. 222 ; in plants,
ii. 347, 348 (see also self-sterility) ;
reciprocal crosses and unequal, i.
293> 294 5 selection and, i. 288 ;
variations in amount of, i. 291 ; varie-
ties and, i. 294

Stirling, and Huxley, i. 316

Stokes, Sir G., ii. 443

Strasburger, on fertilisation of grasses,
ii. 291

Stratification, and cleavage, ii. 200, 202,
208

Strephium, vertical position of leaves,
ii. 364

Strezlecki, i. 89

Strickland, H., letters to, i. 67-70 ; on
zoological nomenclature, i. 67-9

Stripes, loss and significance of, ii. 63

Structural dissimilarity, and sterility

1 295

Structure, external conditions in relation

to, i. 306
Struggle for existence, i. 165, 192, 268 ;

and crossing, i. 288 ; factors concerned

in, i. 326 ; and hybrids, i. 290-92 ; J.

Scott on, i. 239
Strychnos, F. Miiller on, ii. 345
Student, Darwin as an Edinburgh, i.

Studer, B., on cleavage and foliation,

ii. 200, 201
Studien zur Desccndenz-Theorie, Weis-

mann's, i. 356
Studies in the Theory of Descent, Mel-

dola's translation of Weismann's

book, i. 350

Study of Sociology, II. Spencer's, i. 351

Stur, ID., ii. 141

Style, Darwin on, i. 220; ii. 2, 322 ;
Darwin on Huxley's, i. 237 ; effect
of controversy on, ii. 155

Suivda, bloom on, ii. 411

Submergence, i. 90, 91

Subsidence, evidence of, i. 56, 209,
467 ; coral reefs and, ii. 227 ; and
elevation, ii. 123, 136, 13S, 147 ;
equable nature of, ii. 189 ; large areas
simultaneously affected by, ii. 138 ;
in oceans, ii. 105, 198 ; and sedimen-
tation, ii. 228 ; and volcanic action,
ii. 144

Subterranean animal, existence in Pata-
gonia of supposed, ii. 361

Subularia, fertilisation of, i. 416 : ii.

255
Succession of types, i. 132, 133
Sudden appearance of organisms, due

to absence of fossils in pre-Cambrian

rocks, i. 398
Sudden jumps, modification by, i. 147,

166 ; Darwin's disbelief in, i. 335
Suess, i, 244 ; Antlitz der Erde, ii. 167
Suffolk Crag, comparison with recent

strata, ii. 233
Sugar-cane, Barber on hybrids of,

i. 389 ; new varieties of, i. 390
Sulivan, Admiral, on Patagonia, ii.234
■Superficial deposits, geological nature

of, ii. 168
Supernumerary members, i. 251 ; am-
putation followed by regeneration of,

i-363
" Survival of the fittest," Darwin on

use of the expression, i. 270, 271 ;

Wallace on the expression, i. 268,

269 ; sharpness of thorns the result of,

i. 308 ; colour of birds and, ii. 62
Swainson, i. 305 ; on wide range of

genera, i. 403
Switzerland, Tyndall on valleys of,

ii. 191
Sydney, i. 27
Symonds, W. S., biographical note,

i. 1 70 ; on imperfection of geological

record, i. 170

Tacsoxia, Darwin on flowers of, ii.

380 ; fertilisation by humming-birds,

"• 357> 3S3 ' Scott's work on, ii. 311
Tahiti, coral reefs of, ii. 141, 196 ;

Darwin on, ii. 155, 225, 227
Tails of diluvium, in Scotland, ii. 149
Tait, Prof. P. G., article in North

British Review, i. 316 ; on age of

world, ii. 212
Tait, L., letters to, i. 358, 359, 363

I N !

Tail, \Y. C, letter to, ii. 3 S 1 , 38a
rudimentary tails ii =
cat-, ii. (82 ; ends D osophyllum to
i iw in, ii.
Talbot, Mr,. 1. , letter to, ii. \
Ion, Moquii . tnts dc \

toL 1 ;. 414

Tankerville, Lord, i.
:

ind,i. 410; Hook
!, i. 163
I 1. \V.. / 1 ft tif/J Corresj,

ii. 120
Tears, aiul muscular contraction, ii.

1 1
Tee . ! 1 moraines in

valley <

ince ren
to Darwin by, i. 180, 1S1 ; letfei
i. 180, i8l, 223, 322 ; ii. 57-9
Telegraph-plant, ii. 289 (see also

■nodi urn)
" Telliamed " (de Maillet), evolutionary

views of, i. 280
Tendrils, morphology of, ii. 341-3
Teneriffe, flora of, i. 410 ; ii. 9 ; violet
of Peak of, i. 494 ; Webb and
Humboldt on zones of, i. 492
Tennent, Sir J. E., on elephants' tears,

ii. 99 ; on Utrieularia, ii 404
Tentacles, aggregation of protoplasm

in cells of plant-, ii. 369
Teodoresco, on effect of excess of COa

on vegetation, ii. 21
Teratology, Masters on vegetable, i.

14S ; Moquin Tandon on, i. 413
Terebratula, i. 22 ; ii. 231

aites, compared with cleistogamic
flowers, ii. 360 ; V. Midler's j
on, ii. 360

ices, Darwin on Patagonian, ii. 164
Tertiary, Antarctic continent, Darwin
on existence of, ii. 1 ; from

Shanghai, i. 211; flora in Madi
i. 482
Tertiary period, action of sea and earth-
movement, ii. 120, 121 ; island iloras
of the, i. 241 : Saporta's work on
plants, i. 377: succession of types
during the, i. 132 ; Prestwich's work
on, ii. 230
Testimonials, Darwin on. ii. 238
Tetrabranchiata, Hyatt on the, i. 339
Thayer's Letters 1 Wright,

ii. HI
Theologians, Huxley on, ii. 232
Theological articles, by Asa (..ray. i. 161
Theology, Darwin's opinion on. i. 321
Theorising, observing and, i. 195 ; ii.

The

ring in use of, ii.

Thib

Thierzut

. ii. 414
Thiselton-1 >yei . Sir V

in ii. 409 ; I

win

ii. 423 ; lecture on l

1 , 1 1 arch, ii.

418 419 ; iettc from, i.

378; notes on letter from Darwin to
Bentham, i. 379 ; on partial sub-
mei B ; letters

to, ii. 3OI, 302, 39S-402,408-I9, ..

423, 427, 4.

ii. 212 : .vin, ii. 333

Thiselton-Dj W., and I

war, on immersion of seeds in
liquid hydrogen, ii. 245
'J/1... . i. 431

a, Prof. D'Arcy, prel
note by Darwin to his translation of
11. Mid! ';, ii. 391

Thompson, \\\, natural-historian of
[relan I, i. 68
• mson, Sir W. : see Kelvin, L
Thomson, Sir Wyville, on Natural
Selection, i. 388-9 ; mentioned, ii. 26
Thomson, review of Jordan's Diagnoses

dc \. i. 474

Thorns, forms of, i. 308

. Barriers, theological hash of old
abu : win, ii. 341

Thury on sex. ii.

Thwaites, '■. II. K., • a plants,

i. 260: letters to, i. 144. 145 ; ii. 90,

.. 144, 151 : :
on, ii. 90

1 1 8
Tieghem, Prof, van, on cours
el- in orchid flowers, ii
effect of flashing light on plants, ii.

431
Tierra del Fuego, i. II, 16. 19, 42:

tlora of, i. 400, 401, 410, 424 ; ii.
242, 243 ; comparison with Glen
Ro] , 181, 184, ii

of glaciers in, ii. 150. 105 ; n

Time, and evolutionary changes, i. I
ii. 5, 7 j 313, 314;

ii. 5, 7, 23. 150. 1
million-
measure oi . al, ii. 150; rate
of deposition as measure of, ii. 23 :
Wall lc« I, ... 23

.>, article bj f in. i. 1 35 :

let. tzRoy in. i. 120

504

INDEX

Timiriazeff, Prof, ii. 417

Timor, Mastodon from, i. 228 ; ii. 16

Toad, power of Indian species to resist

sea-water, ii. 16
Tobacco, Kolreuter on varieties of, i.

230
Todd, on Solatium rostralum, ii. 292
Toledoth Adam, title of book on evolu-
tion by N. Lewy, i. 365, 366
Torbitt, J., experiments on potatoes,

and letter to, i. 372-4
Torquay, Darwin's visit to, i. 195
Tortoises, conversion of turtles into

land-, i. 170
Tortugas, A. Agassiz on reefs of, ii. 197
Toryism, defence of, i. 351
Toucans, colour of beaks in breeding

season, ii. 83
Trachyte, separation of basalt and, ii. 125
Tragopan, ii. 75

Traill, experiments on grafting, i. 280
Transfusion experiments, by Galton, i.

362
Translations of Darwin's books, i. 139,

172, 174; ii. 145, 146
Transplanting, effect on Alpine plants,

i. 197
Transport, occasional means of, i. 480,

483, 487
Travels, Bates' book of, i. 196, 197,

215 ; Humboldt's, i. 263 ; Wallace's,

i. 263
Travers, H. H., on Chatham Islands,

i; 475
Trecul, on Drosera, ii. 266

Trees, herbaceous orders and, i. 162,
163 ; occurrence in islands, i. 162,
163 ; older forms more likely to
develop into, i. 481 ; Asa Gray on,
ii. 254 ; conditions in New Zealand
favourable to development of, ii.
250, 251 ; crossing in, ii. 252, 253 ;
separate sexes in, ii. 250, 252, 253

Treub, M., on Chalazogamy, ii. 333

Treviranus, Prof., ii. 320, 372 ; on
Primula longiflora, ii. 324

Trifolium rcsupinatum, ii. 418 ; Dar-
win's observations on bloom on
leaflets, ii. 371, 412, 413

Trigonocephalus, i. 12

Trilobites, change of genera and species
of, i. 398

Trimen, on painting butterflies, ii. 72

Trimorphism, in plants, ii. 299

Trinidad, Catasetum of, ii. 316; Criiger
on caprification in, ii. 366

Tripha-na pronuba, robin attracted by
colour of, ii. 67

Tristan d'Acunha, i. 93; Carmichael on,
i. 401 ; vegetation of, i. 425, 426

Triticum repens var. littorum, bloom-
experiments on, ii. 411

Trollope, A., quotation by Darwin from,
i. 37o

Tropceolum, Darwin's experiments on,
ii. 341, 342; peloric variety of, ii.
298 ; waxy secretion on leaves, ii.

36i

Tropical climate, in relation to colour-
ing of insects, ii. 282

Tropical plants, possible existence
during cooler period, i. 437, 438,
462, 463, 478, 479 ; ii. 6, 23 ; retreat
of, i. 440

Tropics, climatic changes in, i. 458 ;
description of forests in, i. 9, 10,
243 ; similarity of orders in, i. 260

Tubocytisus, Kemer on, i. 317

Tuckwell, on the Oxford British
Association meeting (i860), i. 157

Tucotuco, i. 169

Tuke, D. H., on influence of mind on
body, ii. 109 ; letter to ii. 109

Tulips, i, 197

Turkey, colour of wings, and courtship,
ii. 68; muscles of tail of, ii. 106

Turner, Sir W., Darwin receives as-
sistance from, ii. 38 ; on Darwin's
methods in correspondence, ii. 105 ;
letters to, ii. 37-9, 105-7

Turratella, i. 22

Turtles, conversion into land-tortoises,
i. 170

Tussilago, Darwin on seeds of groundsel
and, ii. 430

Twins, Galton's article on, i. 361

Tylor, article in Journal of the R.
Institution^, i. 316 ; on Early His-
tory of Mankind, i. 263

Tyndall, lack of caution, i. 471 ; lecture
by, i. 323 ; on the Alps, i. 252 ;
review in the Athenaum of, i. 167 ;
on valleys due to glaciers, i. 471 ;
ii. 191 ; work of, i. 329 ; dogmatism
of, ii. 155; on glaciers, ii. 210; on
Sorby's work on cleavage, ii. 210;
mentioned, ii. 102

Typhlops, i. 114, 115

Typical forms, difficult to select, i. 429;
vagueness of phrase, i. 403

Typotherium, Falconer on, i. 240

Tyrol, Mojsisovics on the Dolomites of
the, ii. 197

Umbelliferae, morphological charac-
ters of, i. 273 ; difference in seeds
from the same flower, ii. 376

Undulation of light, comparison be-
tween Darwin's views and the theory
of, i. 184

INI

505

Ungulates, development in N. America
during Tertiary period, ii. 18

United States, flora of, i. 432, 433;
spread of Darwin's view- in, i. 157,

159
I nity of coloration, Walsh on, 1. 261
Uredo, <>n Heematoxylon, ii. 411
Ursus arctos, Lamont on, i. 179 ; U.

maritimus, Lamont on, i. 179
Urticacese, i 106
Uruguay, i, 1 ;

.die, on Canary Islands, i. 409
Use and disuse, i. 199 ; in plants, i. 389
Uses, Natural Selection ami, i. 355. 356

lallata, i. 20, 22
Utilitarianism, Darwin on. i. 328
Utility and inheritance, i. 239

;, Darwin's idea of, ii. 374
Utricularia, Darwin's work on. ii. 403,

404 ; U. stcllaris, Sir E. Tcnnent

on, ii. 404

VaGINULUS, Darwin finds new species
of, i. 15

Valeriana^ two forms of. ii. 416

Valleys, action of ice in formation of,
ii. 154. 155 ; Dana on Australian, ii.
227 ; Darwin on origin of, ii. 211

Valparaiso, i. 17

Van Diemen's Land, i. 41 ; flora of, in
relation to New Zealand, i. 405

Vanda, ii. 306

Vandeae, structure of ovary, ii. 307

Vanessa, two sexual forms of, i. 356 ;
breeding in confinement, ii. 96;
colour of, ii. 67

Vanilla, ii. 271, 313

Variability, i. 148, 161 ; backward
tendency of, i. 353 : Bentham on,
i. 379 ; causes of, i. 155, 19S, .
289; De Candolle on, i. 2;;. 23 ;
dependent more on nature ol organ-
ism than on environment, i 377 :
Huxley and Sl.>u on, i. 220; im-
iiance of subject of cause of, i.
592 : Natural Selection and, i. I
in oaks, i. 234 : greater in bisexual
than in unisexual plants, ii. 314 ; of
ferns "passes all bounds," ii. 3S1 :
greater in male than female, ii. 94 ;
in ovaries of (lowers, ii. 37S : ten-
dency of genera at different periods
towards, ii. 231

Variation, i. 41-6, 96, IOO, 105-7,
171, 172, 199, 222 ; an innate prin-
ciple, i. 199 ; Hates on, i 181 ; in
blackbirds, i. 262 : causes of, i. 155 :
centrifugal nature of, i. 199 ; checked
by Natural Selection, i. 208 ; climate
and, i. 198 ; Darwin attaches import-

VOL. II.

ance to useless, i, \iz : I '. : win

favourable, i. 271 ;

286 ; and external condit 198,

354 ; in elephants, i. 207 ; i:.

i. 102 ; of large genera, i. 98, 107,

108, 379 ; laws ol, i 13 ; j

typic and polytypic genera, i. 106;
and monsti [47 J5° ; and

Natural Selection, i. 172, 269-71 ;
ordination and, i, 193, 194, 321 ; in
peaches, i. 276 ; in plants, i. 41, 102,
105-8, 275, 425; ii. 157; produ
by crossing, i. 212 ; rate of action
i. 314 ; of small genera, i. 107, 108,
379 ; sterility advantageous to, i. 290 ;
Weismann on, i. 311 ; galls as ^ause
of, ii. .125 ; and loss of dimorphism
in Primula anil Au
Sexual Selection and minute, ii
63 ; transmission to sexes, ii. 86 ;
Verlot on, ii. 157 ; Wallace on, ii.

32, 63

xtion of Animals and Plants n<

: )l. i. 167, 243. 2S5. 363,

364: ii. 3S9 ; C'.mpletion of, i. 277,
278, 283, 359; delay in publication,
i. 286; Lyell on. i. 299, 300; trans-
lation of. i. 304 ; Wallace's opinion
of, i. 288; Darwin at work on, ii..
150. 192. 327. 404. 405

Varieties, accumulation of, i. 161, 191,
337 ; distinction between species and,
i. 177 : fertility of, i. 137 : ii. 309;
in insects, i. 5, 94 ; in large genera,
i. 402 : of molluscs, i. 94 : production
of, i. 47, 212 : species the product of
long series of, i. 377 : use of, i. 126,
127: Wallace on, i. 118; elimina-
tion by crossing, ii. 250 ; z
neglect study of, ii. 210

Vaucher, Plantes

Masters', i. 148 :

ii- 335

itative reproduction, Darwin on,

i. 221
Witch, J., ii. 27. 18

lisation mechanism of,
ii. 2

og and varieties in,
i. 138. 218, 222, - | 231 : ii. s

309 : Sc itt's work on.
ii.
oenace.e, i. 107
Verlot. on variation in flowers, ii

u .:. Antacrtic species of, i. 163
. as guide to morpho-
. .t Sowers, ii. 273-5 :
Vestiges of Creation, i. 48. 40. 85 |
Huxley's review of. 1. 75 ; the On
of St . 1, i. 136

506

INDEX

Vetch, extra-floral nectaries of, ii. 399

Vetter, editor of Kosmos, ii. 444

Viburnum lantanoides, in Japan and
east U.S.A., i. 442

Victoria Street Society for Protection of
Animals against Vivisection, charge
brought against Dr. Ferrierby, ii. 437

Villa Franca, Baron de, on varieties of
sugar-cane, i. 390

Villarsia, ii. 351

Vine, graft-hybrids of, i. 360 ; varieties
°f> i- 359 > morphology of tendrils,
ii. 342

Viola, ancestral form of, ii. 335; cleisto-
gamic flowers of, ii. 308, 317, 318,
378 ; pollen-tubes of, ii. 308, 312 ;
Madagascan, ii. 25 ; Pyrenean, ii. 1,
494 ; on Peak of Teneriffe, i. 494 ;
V. canina, fertilisation of, ii. 260 ;
V. nana, ii. 378 ; V. odorata, floral
biology of, ii. 260, 381

Virchow, Huxley's criticism of, i. 383 ;
publication by Hackel of Darwin's
criticism of, i. 383

Viscum, i. 94

Vitality of seeds, i. 148 ; ii. 243 ; in
salt-water experiments, i. 470

Viti group of islands, effect of subsi-
dence, ii. 195

Vivisection, ii. 434-41

Vdchting, H., Bewegung der Bluthen
und Fruchte, ii. 380 ; letter to,
ii. 428, 429; Crganbildung ini Pflan-
zenreick, ii. 429

Volcanic Geology, Dana's, ii. 227

Volcanic islands, polymorphic species
in, i. 47; Darwin's geological observa-
tions on, ii. 116, 124, 126, 127, 145,
201, 244 ; Darwin's opinion of his
book on, ii. 146 ; Lyell and Herschel
on, ii. 141 ; relation to continents,
ii. 142

Volcanic phenomena, cause of, ii. 140 ;
Darwin on, ii. 121 ; and elevation,
ii. 137 ; as mere accidents in swelling
up of dome of plutonic rocks, ii. 144 ;
and subsidence, ii. 144

Volcanic rocks, i. 15, 18, 20-23. 2^. 27

Volcano, in interior of Asia, ii. 142

Volcanoes, in S. America, ii. 133 ; com-
pared with boilers, ii. 134, 135 ;
maritime position of, ii. 136, 142 ;
of St. Jago, Mauritius, and St.
Helena, ii. 124 ; simultaneous
activity of, ii. 1 13-15, 133, 134; and
subsidence, ii. 144

Volucella, as example of mimicry, i. 196

Vries, H. de, on plant-movements, ii.

433
Vulcanicity, ii. 113-47

Wagner, M., attacks Darwin, i. 229 ;
essay by, i. 311 ; mentioned, i. 262,

391

" Wahl der Lebens-Weise," i. 141

Wahlenberg, on variation of species in
U.S.A., i. 425

Wales, Darwin's visit to, i. 313 ; com-
parison of valleys of Lochaber and,
ii. 188, 190; Darwin on glaciers of,
ii. 151, 178, 190; elevation of land
in Scotland and, ii. 189 ; Murchison
sees no trace of glaciers in, ii. 150 ;
Ramsay on denudation of S., ii.
123

Wallace. A. R., on beauty, i. 282;
criticises the expression, "Natural
Selection," i. 267 ; Darwin on clever-
ness of, i. 304; letters to, i. 118-20,
245. 262, 263, 265-7, 270-71, 281-3,
289, 293-6, 301, 312, 384 ; ii. 12, 18,
32-4, 59-63, 72-4, 76-8, 84-6, 88-90,
no, in, 142, 144 ; letters to Darwin
from, i. 267-70, 288-94, 297-302 ; ii.
9, 13, 14, 18-20, 22-4, 34-7, 86-8, 92,
93 ; on Mastodon from Timor, i. 228 ;
notes by, i. 299 ; ii. 15, 17 ; on pan-
genesis, i. 301. 302 ; ii. 71 ; review
of Bastian's Beginnings of Life, i.
321 ; on sterility, i. 288 ; on success
of Natural Selection, i. 305 ; attri-
butes Natural Selection to Darwin,
ii. 31, 36 ; on colour and birds' nests,
ii. 59-61, 72-4; Darwin's criticism
of his Geographical Distribution of
Animals, ii. 12-14 16-18 ; differs from
Darwin, ii. 40, 85, 86, 88, 92, 93 ;
on evolution uf man, ii. 31, 32, 40 ;
Island Life, ii. 22-4 ; on wings of
lepidoptera, ii. 67 ; review of
Darwin's book on Expression, ii.
1 10 ; review of Lyell's Principles
of Geology, ii. 39 ; on Round Island,
ii. 10 ; same ideas hit on by Darwin
and, ii. 61 ; supplies information to
Darwin on Sexual Selection, ii. 68 ;
on variation, ii. 32 ; at work on
narrative of travels, ii. 36

Wallace, Dr., on sexes in. Bombyx, ii.
66 ; on caterpillars, ii. 69

Wallich, i. 184; on Oxyspora panicu-
lata, ii. 293

Wallis, H. M., on ears, ii. 53; letters
to, ii. S3, 54

Walpole, ii. 435

Walsh, B. D., biographical note, i. 248,
249 ; as entomologist, i. 248, 249 ;
letters to, i. 250, 251, 258, 259, 261,
262 ; ii. 89, 90 ; letter to Darwin
from, i. 249-50 ; death of, ii. 386 ;
and C. V. Riley, ii. 385

DEX

ming, I i koIo-

hen I'/l if 1 5 1

Wa

Wasps, ] building cells, i:.

• <>ii leaves, ii. .jiu
also Rain I

I] on, i. i.j'i
e, i • R., review by I larwin
of his .ilia, i. 448 ;

on skeletons of rabbits, ii. 210 ;
on wide range of genera, i. 403;
mi ntioned, i. 85
Wi rloo, Darwin's recollecti-ms of,

3

\\ . ■■' i"n, i. 55

on, H. C., alluded to, i. 409 ;
on the Azores, i. 407 ; on British
agrarian plants, i. 430 ; on northward
range of plants common to Britain
and America, i. 431 ; objection to
Darwin's views, i. 13s : on Natural
Selection, i. 286 ; mentioned, i. 99,
105 ; ii. 263

Waves, depth of action of, ii. 198

. secretion on leaves, ii. 361, 362
(see also Bloom)

Wealden period, ii. 139

Weale, J. P. M., sends locust dung
from Natal to Darwin, ii. 4

Webb, on tlora of Teneriffe, ii. 1
gwood, Elizabeth, i. 156

Wedgwood, Emma (Mrs. Darwin),
letter to, i. 29, 30

Wedgwood, Hensleigh, i. 2S ; Darwin
visits, ii. 12 ; influenced by I. yell's
book on America, ii. 225 ; on Tyn-
dall, ii. 155

Wed Josiah, letter to, i. 28

Weeds, adaptation to cultivated ground,
i. 450; English versus American, i.
450 : Asa Gray on pertinacity of, i.
450

Weeping, physiology of, ii. 98

Weir. 1 1 . \\ '. . on 1 . 405

Weir, J. J., biographciaJ note. i. 319;
experiments on caterpillars, i. 357,
8 : ii. 71 ; letter- to, i. 319-21.
396. 397 ; ii. 64-72, 74, 75, 70-M.
83, 84, 103, 404-6 : extract from
letter to Darwin from, i. 396; on
birds, ii. 70, 79: invited to Down,
ii. Si ; value of his letters to Darwin,
ii. t>8 : mentioned, i. 309

Weismann, A.. Darwin asked to point
out how far his work follows same
lines as that of, i. 3S 1 ; on dimorphism,
i. 356 ; . i. 344 :

letters to. i. 310, 311, 356-8 : ii.
96 ; Meldola's translation o\ Studies
in Descent^ i. 350 : Studies in 7 ..

; 7 xual

:i, ii. 97

Wells, l

quoted by Darwin .iun-

ciat-

ii. 377
hia, Hooker1 d, i. 213,

467 ; ii 1 .n on, 1

"vegetableO nithorhyn

hia mira dlings of, ii.

-1-7, 428
:ilock, coral lin . ii. 194

W< st Ii of, i. 260 ; 1

reel-, ii. 194 ; elevation and sub-
sidence of. ii. 147 ; orchids of, ii. 315
minster - Lyell

ii. -

. iew
in in, i. 2S0 ; Wallace's
article, i. -

I, J I ■ . hical note, i.

80 ; on range of genera, i. 403 : and

yal medal, i. 80 ; mentioned, i.

"3. 176
Whales, Flower on. ii. S
Wheat, mummy, i. 1 5 1 ; fertilisation

of, ii. 254, 291 ; forms of Russian,

ii. 419-22
Whewell, W . i. 59, 61
Whis ::. ii. 1 19

Whitaker, W., on escarpments, ii. 211
White, V. i;.. lettei t", ii. 20;

hen, Helena, ii. 20

White, Gilbert, i. 55: Dai win 1

an account of Down in the manner

of, i. 33
White, on regeneration, i. 235
Whiteman, R. ('. . let: \ 393

Whitney, on origin of language, ii. 45
\\ ichura, Max, on 1

261 ; on hybridisation, ii. 137
.
in, i 101
Wiesi f. J., disagrees w ith .

win's view s on . ii.

.

ii. 4 !

V. ..iid. A.. ...

i. ;> i. 355

it. Dr., on 1 . i. 101

Wilberforce Bishop, review in the

i. 156
Wildi game, i. 143. 144

Wilkes' i

volume in •
Williams W. < . ;

Willis, J. C, reference to his /
fs ami Ferns, ii. .

508

INDEX

Willows, Walsh on galls of, i. 261 ;
Wichura on hybrid, i. 261

Wilson, A. S., letters to, ii. 419-22 ;
on Russian wheat, ii. 419-22

Wind-fertilised trees and plants, abund-
ant in humid and temperate regions,
i. 492

Wingless birds, transport of, i. 475

Wings of ostrich, i. 162

Wire-bird, of St. Helena, i. 484, 487

Witches' brooms, ii. 422

Wives, resemblance to husbands, i. 320

Wollaston, T. V., biographical note, i.
481 ; catalogue of insects of Canary
Islands, i. 482 ; Darwin and Royal
medal, i. 255 ; in agreement with
Falconer in opposition to Darwin's
views on species, i. 455 5 Insecla
Maderensia, i. 482 ; on rarity of
intermediate varieties in insects, i.
430 ; review on the Origin by, i.
141 ; on varieties, i. 94 ; mentioned,
i. 167, 172, 176

Wolverhampton, abrupt termination of
boulders near, ii. 168

Wood, fossil, i. 23, 24, 26

Wood, T. W., drawings by, ii. 101

Woodcock, germination of seeds carried
by, ii. 4, 5 ; protective colouring of,
ii. 87

Woodd, C. H. L., letter to, ii. 132, 133

Woodpecker, adaptation in, i. 156 ;
and direct action, i. 306 ; form of
tail of, i. 191

Woodward, A. S., on Neomylodon,
ii. 361 ; and C. D. Sherborn, Cata-
logue of British Fossil Vertebrata,
i. 206

Woodward, S. P., biographical note, i.
96 ; letters to, i. 96, 97, 145 ; ii. 231

World, age of the, ii. 7, 163, 211, 212

Worms, Darwin's work on, ii. 212-17,
447 ; destruction by rain of, ii. 214,
215 ; intelligence of, ii. 213, 214

Wrangel's Travels in Siberia, i. 385

Wreck of the Favourite, Clarke's, ii. 2

Wright, C, on bees' cells, i. 124; letters
to. i- 355- 356 5 h- in, 112 ; review
by, i. 332

Wright, G. F., extract from letter from

Asa Gray, to, ii. 415
Wydler, on morphology of cruciferous

flower, ii. 287
Wyman, J., biographical note, i. 169 ;

letter from, i. 169 ; on spontaneous

generation, i. 321 ; mentioned, i. 242

Xenogamy, term suggested by Kerner,
ii. 413

Xenotieura antiquorum, Devonian in-
sect, ii. 82

Xerophytic characters, not confined to
dry-climate plants, ii. 251

Yangma Valley. Hooker's account of

dam in, ii. 152
Yeo, Prof. Gerald, ii. 438
Yew, origin of Irish, i. 52
York, British Assoc, meeting (1881),

ii. 24 (1844), 120; Dallas in charge

of museum, ii. 353
Yorkshire, Hooker on glaciers in, ii.

J56

Yucca, fertilisation by moths, ii. 386

Zacharias, Otto, letter to, i. 38, 367
Zante, colour of Polygala flowers in,

i. 102
Zea, Gartner's work on, i. 218, 230,

231 ; hermaphrodite and female

flowers on a male panicle, ii. 308 ;

varieties received from Asa Gray,

ii. 314
Zeiller, R., " Le Marquis G. de Saporta,

sa Vie . . ., " i. 376
Zinziberacecc, ii. 400
Zittel, Karl A. von. Handbuch der

PalcFontologie, i. 206
Zoea stage, in life-history of decapods,

i. 342, 345, 347
Zoological Gardens, dangerous to sug-
gest subsidising, i. 112
Zoological nomenclature, i. 68, 69
Zoologist, Darwin as, i. 254
Zoonomia, Erasmus Darwin's, i. 125
Zygoma (Burnet-moth), mentioned by

Darwin in his early recollections, i. 5

Printed by Hazell, Watson &■» Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury.

DARaIN", CHARLES *QH

31
More letters... .D2A4

v.2