The Correspondence of Charles Darwin: Volume 20 1872 : Volume 20, 1872 9781107248878, 9781107038448

Citation preview

more information - www.cambridge.org/9781107038448

THE CORRESPONDENCE OF

CHARLES DARWIN Editors

frederick burkhardt† james a. secord janet browne samantha evans shelley innes francis neary alison m. pearn anne secord paul white Associate Editors

anne schlabach burkhardt† rosemary clarkson ruth goldstone muriel palmer elizabeth smith alistair sponsel

This edition of the Correspondence of Charles Darwin is sponsored by the American Council of Learned Societies. Its preparation is made possible by the co-operation of Cambridge University Library and the American Philosophical Society. The Advisory Committee for the edition, appointed by the Management Board, has the following members: Gillian Beer Tim Birkhead Stephen Bourne Daniel Grossman Sandra Herbert Garrett Herman Richard Keynes Simon Keynes Gene Kritsky Support for editing has been received from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the Arts and Humanities Research Council, the British Academy, the British Ecological Society, the Evolution Education Trust, the Isaac Newton Trust, the John Templeton Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the National Science Foundation, the Natural Environment Research Council, the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Royal Society of London, the Stifterverband f¨ur die Deutsche Wissenschaft, and the Wellcome Trust. The National Endowment for the Humanities funding of the work was under grants nos. re-23166-75-513, re-27067-77-1359, re-00082-80-1628, re-20166-82, re-2048085, re-20764-89, re-20913-91, re-21097-93, re-21282-95, rz-20018-97, rz-20393-99, rz-20849-02, and rq-50388-09; the National Science Foundation funding of the work was under grants Nos. soc-75-15840, soc-76-82775, ses-7912492, ses-8517189, sbr-9020874, sbr-9616619, ses-0135528, ses-0646230, and ses-0957520. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the editors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the grantors.

CUL DAR 140.4: 7. By permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library.

THE CORRESPONDENCE OF

CHARLES DARWIN VOLUME 20

1872

cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, S˜ao Paulo, Delhi, Mexico City Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107038448 C Cambridge University Press 2013 

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2013 Citation: Burkhardt, Frederick, et al., eds. 2013. The correspondence of Charles Darwin. Vol. 20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Printed and bound in the United Kingdom by the MPG Books Group A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication data ISBN 978-1-107-03844-8 Hardback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

In Memoriam RICHARD DARWIN KEYNES 1919–2010

The Darwin Correspondence Project gratefully acknowledges the essential support of the following donors: Patrons The Bonita Trust The Evolution Education Trust Golden Family Foundation Jim and Hilary Potter Affiliates Bern Dibner† William T. Golden† Kathleen Smith† Friends Jane Burkhardt Pamela Davis Florence Fearrington and James Needham† Gerald and Sue Friedman John C. Greene Daniel V. Grossman and Elizabeth Scott Andrews Lawrence K. Grossman Shirley Grossman, M.D. Mary S. Hopkins Robert McNeil Michael Mathews Victor Niederhoffer Wendy L. Thompson Daniel J. Wright

CONTENTS List of illustrations

viii

List of letters

ix

Introduction

xvii

Acknowledgments

xxvii

List of provenances

xxxi

Note on editorial policy Darwin/Wedgwood genealogy Abbreviations and symbols THE CORRESPONDENCE Expression supplement

xxxiv xl xlii 1 594

Appendixes I.

Translations

603

II.

Chronology

650

III.

Diplomas presented to Charles Darwin

653

IV.

Presentation lists for Origin 6th ed.

657

Presentation lists for Expression

661

V.

Manuscript alterations and comments

666

Biographical register and index to correspondents

675

Bibliography

769

Notes on manuscript sources

818

Index

821

ILLUSTRATIONS ‘That troubles our monkey again’: cartoon from Fun Lucy Caroline Wedgwood

frontispiece 33

Francis Galton in middle life Grisley giant, 1861, by Carleton Watkins

128 175

Samuel Butler, 1867 The youthful Darwin expounding his theories by William Holbrook Beard

191 290

Acton Smee Ayrton by Faustin ‘Valour in the field’: Punch cartoon

471 532

Flora Rankin

562

CALENDAR LIST OF LETTERS

The following list is in the order of the entries in the Calendar of the correspondence of Charles Darwin. It includes all those letters that are listed in the Calendar for the year 1871, and those that have been redated into 1871. Alongside the Calendar numbers are the corrected dates of each letter. A date or comment printed in italic type indicates that the letter has been omitted from this volume. Letters acquired after the publication of the first edition of the Calendar, in 1985, have been given numbers corresponding to the chronological ordering of the original Calendar listing with the addition of an alphabetical marker. Many of these letters are summarised in a ‘Supplement’ to a new edition of the Calendar (Cambridge University Press, 1994). The markers ‘f ’, ‘g’, and ‘h’ denote letters acquired after the second edition of the Calendar went to press in 1994. 4730. [before 28 Mar 1872] 5338. [before 25 Jan 1872] 5556. [before 22 Aug 1872] 7127. [7 Mar 1872 or later] 7280. 16 July [1870?]. To be published in next supplement. 7345. [15 June 1872?] 7424. [1872–4] 7442a. 15 Jan [1872–4] 7469. [29 Feb 1872] 7729a. 30 Apr [1872] 8049f. 3 [Dec 1872] 8127. [March 1871?] 8128. [after 21 Mar 1872] 8129. [before 2 Dec 1871] 8130. [1872] 8131. [after May 1876] 8132. 2 [1843–82]. To be published in a future supplement. 8133. 26 [Dec 1875?] 8134. [before 2 Dec 1871] 8135f. [1872 or later?] 8135. 17 [Dec 1875?] 8136. 1 Jan 1872 8137. [1 Jan 1872] 8138. 1 Jan 1872 8139. 2 Jan 1872 8139f. 2 Jan [1873 or 1874] 8140. 3 Jan [1872] 8141. 3 Jan 1872

8142. 4 Jan 1872 8143. 4 Jan 1872 8144. 5 Jan [1872] 8145. 5 Jan 1872 8146. 5 Jan 1872 8147. 6 Jan 1872 8148. 6 Jan 1872 8149. 8 Jan [1872] 8150. 8 Jan [1872] 8151. 8 Jan 1872 8152. 8 Jan [1872] 8153. 9 Jan [1872] 8154. 10 Jan 1872 8155. 10 Jan 1872 8156a. 11 Jan [1872] 8156. 11 Jan 1872 8157a. 13 Jan [1872] 8157. 12 Jan 1872 8158. 15 Jan 1872 8159. 15 Jan [1872] 8159f. 15 Jan 1872 8160. 16 Jan 1872 8161a. 16 Jan [1872] 8161. 16 Jan 1872 8162. 17 and 20 Jan 1872 8163. 17 Jan 1872 8164. 17 Jan 1872 8165. 17 Jan [1872–4]

x

List of letters

8166. 19 Jan 1872 8167. 20 Jan 1872 8168. [20 Jan 1872] 8169. 20 Jan [1872] 8170. 21 Jan [1872] 8171. 21 Jan [1872] 8172. 23 Jan [1872] 8173. 23 Jan [1872] 8174. 23 Jan [1872] 8175. 23 Jan 1872 8176. 24 Jan 1872 8177. 24 Jan 1872 8178. 24 Jan 1872 8179. 25 Jan 1872 8180. 25 Jan 1872 8181. 25 Jan [1872] 8182. 25 Jan 1872 8183. 26 Jan [1872] 8184. 27 Jan [1872] 8185. 27 Jan [1873] 8186. 27 Jan [1872] 8187. 27 Jan [1872] 8188. 30 Jan 1872 8189. 30 Jan 1872 8190. 31 Jan [1872] 8190a. Cancel: enclosure to 8191. 8191. 1 Feb 1872 8192. 1 Feb 1872 8193. [1 Feb 1872] 8194. 2 Feb 1872 8195. 2 Feb [1872] 8196. 2 Feb 1872 8197. 3 Feb 1872 8198. 3 Feb [1871]. To be published in next supplement. 8199. 3 Feb 1872 8200. [5 Feb 1872?] 8201. 5 Feb 1872 8201a. 6 Feb [1873] 8202. 8 Feb 1872 8203. [8 Feb 1872] 8204. [after 10 Nov 1876] 8205. 9 Feb [1871] 8206. 9 Feb [1872] 8207. 16 Feb [1874] 8208. 11 Feb [1871] 8209. 12 Feb 1872 8209f. [after 21 Jan 1871?]. To be published in next supplement. 8210. 13 Feb 1872 8211f. [13 Feb – 21 Mar 1872] 8211. [19 Feb 1872] 8212. 14 Feb [1872] 8213. 14 Feb 1872 8213f. [after Aug 1872]

8214. 15 Feb 1872 8215. 16 Feb 1872 8216. [1 Mar 1872] 8216f. 16 Feb [1874] 8217. 17 Feb 1872 8218. 18 Feb 1872 8219. 18 Feb 1872 8220. [3 Mar 1872] 8221. 20 Feb 1872 8222. 23 Feb 1872 8223. 24 Feb [1872] 8224. 24 Feb [1872] 8225. 27 Feb 1872 8226. 28 Feb [1872] 8227. 29 Feb [1872] 8228. 29 Feb 1872 8229. 29 Feb [1872] 8230. [9 Mar 1872 or later] 8231. Mar 1872 8232. 1 Mar 1872 8233. 1 Mar 1872 8234. 3 Mar 1872 8235. 4 Mar [1872] 8236. 4 Mar 1872 8237. 7 Mar 1872 8238. 8 Mar 1872 8239. 9 Mar 1872 8240. 12 Mar 1872 8241. 12 Mar 1872 8241f. 12 Mar 1872 8242. 14 Mar 1872 8243. 15 Mar [1872] 8244. 16 Mar 1872 8245. 18 Mar 1872 8246. 18 Mar 1872 8247. 18 Mar [1872] 8248. [20 Mar 1872] 8249. 22 Mar 1872 8250. 23 Mar [1872–4] 8251. 26 Mar [1873] 8252. 26 Mar 1872 8253. 26 Mar [1871] 8254. 27 Mar 1872 8255. 28 Mar 1872 8256. 28 Mar 1872 8257. 29 Mar 1872 8258. 29 Mar [1872] 8259. 29 Mar 1872 8260. [29 Mar 1872] 8261. 30 Mar 1872 8262. 30 Mar 1872 8263. 31 Mar 1872 8264. 31 Mar 1872 8265. 1 Apr 1872

List of letters 8266f. 1 Apr 1872 8266. 1 Apr 1872 8267. 2 Apr 1872 8268. 3 Apr 1872 8269. 13 Apr 1872. 8270. 3 Apr [1872] 8271. 3 Apr 1872 8272. 3 Apr 1872 8273. 3 Apr 1872 8274. 4 Apr 1872 8275. 5 Apr 1872 8276. 5 Apr 1872 8277. 6 Apr 1872 8278. 8 Apr 1872 8279. 8 Apr 1872 8280. 8 Apr [1872]. 8281. 8 Apr 1872 8282. 8 Apr 1872 8283. 8 Apr [1873] 8283f. 10 Apr 1872 8284. 12 Apr [1872] 8285. 13 Apr 1872 8286. 15 Apr 1872 8287. 15 Apr [1873] 8287f. 15 Apr [1872] 8288. 16 Apr [1872] 8289. 16 Apr [1872] 8290. 17 Apr 1872 8291. [18 Apr 1872] 8292. 19 Apr [1872] 8293. 19 Apr 1872 8294. 19 Apr [1872] 8294f. [19 April 1872] 8295. 20 Apr 1872 8296. 21 Apr [1872] 8297f. [11 or 21] Apr [1872] 8297. 21 Apr 1872 8298. 22 Apr 1872 8299. 23 Apr [1872] 8299f. 23 Apr 1872 8300. 25 Apr 1872 8301. 26 Apr 1872 8302. 29 Apr [1872] 8303. 30 Apr [1872] 8303f. [before 17 November 1871]. To be published in next supplement. 8304. 30 Apr [1873–4] 8305. [before 30 May 1872] 8306. 2 May [1872] 8307. 2 May 1872 8308. 3 May [1872] 8309. 3 May 1872 8310. 3 May 1872 8311. 4 May 1872

xi

8312. [before 5 May 1872] 8313. 5 May 1872 8313a. 6 May [1872] 8314. 10 May [1872] 8315. 10 May 1872 8316. 11 May [1872] 8317. 11 May 1872 8318. 11 May 1872 8319. 11 May [1860—2 or 1872–4?]. To be published in next supplement. 8320. [13 May 1872] 8321. 13 May 1872 8322. 13 May 1872 8323. 13 May 1872 8324. 13 May [1872] 8325. 13 May [1872] 8326. 14 May [1872] 8327. 14 May 1872 8328. 14 May 1872 8329. 14 May 1872 8330. 14 May [1872] 8331. 15 May 1872 8332. 16 May 1872 8333. 16 May 1872 8334. 16 May 1872 8335. 16 May 1872 8336. 17 May 1872 8337. 17 May 1872 8338. 18 May 1872 8339. 19 May [1872] 8340. 20 May 1872 8341. 20 May 1872 8342. 21 May [1872] 8343. 21 May 1872 8344. 21 May 1872 8345. 22 May [1872] 8346. 22 May 1872 8347. 22 May 1872 8348. 23 May 1872 8349. 23 May 1872 8350. 24 May 1872 8351. 24 May 1872 8352. 26 May 1872 8353. 26 May 1872 8354. 27 May [1872] 8355. 27 May 1872 8356. 17 May 1872 8357. 28 May 1872 8358. 28 May 1872 8359. Cancel: same as 8432. 8360. 29 May 1872 8361. 30 May 1872 8361f. 30 May [1872?] 8362. 31 May 1872

xii 8363. 31 May 1872 8364. [before 30 June 1872] 8365. [before 30 June 1872] 8366. 1 June 1872 8367. 3 June [1872] 8368. 4 June 1872 8369. 4 June 1872 8370. 5 June [1872] 8371. 6 June 1872 8371a. 6 June [1872] 8372. 7 June 1872 8373. 7 June 1872 8374. 7 June [1872] 8375. 8 June [1872] 8376. 8 June 1872 8377. 9 June [1872?] 8378. [9?19 June 1872] 8379. [13 June 1872] 8380. 10 June [1872] 8381. 11 June 1872 8382. 11 June 1872 8383. [after 11 June 1872] 8384. 12 June 1872 8385. 14 June [1872] 8386. 15 June 1872. 8387. 15 June 1872 8388. [after 8 June 1872] 8389. 16 June 1872 8390. 16 June 1872 8391. 17 June 1872 8392. 19 June 1872 8393. 20 June 1872 8394. 20 June 1872 8395. 21 June [1872] 8396. 22 [March 1868] 8397. 26 June 1872 8398. 29 July 1872 8399. 30 June [1872?] 8400. 1 July 1872 8401. 2 July 1872 8402. 8 July [1872] 8403. 9 July 1872 8403f. 20 June 1872 8404. 11 July [1879] 8405. 12 July [1872] 8406. 12 July [1872] 8407f. Cancel: same as enclosure to 8403f. 8407. 12 July 1872 8408. 13 July [1872] 8409. 14 July 1872 8410. 14 July [1872] 8411. 14 July 1872 8412. [before 15] July 1872 8413. 16 July [1872]

List of letters 8414. 16 July 1872 8415. 16 July 1872 8416. 17 July 1872 8417. 18 July 1872 8418. 20 July 1872 8419. 20 July [1872] 8420. Cancel: third-party letter. 8421. 20 July 1872 8422. 21 July 1872 8423. 22 July 1872 8424. 23 July 1872 8425. 24 July 1872 8426. 24 July 1872 8427. 25 July 1872 8427f. 26 July [1872] 8428. 27 July 1872 8429. 27 July [1872] 8430. 27 July 1872 8431. 28 July [1872] 8432. 29 July 1872 8433. 29 July 1872 8434. Cancel: draft of part of 8433. 8435. 26 July [1879] 8436. 30 July [1872] 8437. 30 July 1872 8438. 30 July [1872–4] 8439. 31 July 1872 8440. 31 July 1872 8441. 31 July [1872] 8442. 1 Aug [1872] 8443. 1 Aug 1872 8444. 1 Aug 1872 8445. 1 Aug 1872 8446. 3 Aug [1872] 8447. 3 Aug [1872] 8448. 3 Aug [1872] 8449. 4 Aug [1872] 8450. 4 Aug 1872 8451. 4 Aug 1872 8452. 6 Aug 1872 8453. 6 Aug 1872 8454. 4 Aug [1872–4] 8455. 7 Aug [1872] 8456. [before 8 Aug 1872] 8457. 8 Aug [1872] 8458. 8 Aug [1872] 8459. 8 Aug [1872] 8460. 9 Aug 1872 8461. 9 Aug [1872] 8462. 10 Aug [1872] 8463. 10 Aug [1872] 8464. [12?17 Aug 1872] 8465. 11 Aug 1872 8465f. 12 Aug 1872

List of letters 8466. 13 Aug 1872 8467. 13 Aug 1872 8468. [14 Aug 1872] 8469. 14 Aug 1872 8470. 14 Aug 1872 8471. 15 Aug 1872 8472. 15 Aug 1872 8473. 16 Aug 1872 8474. 17 Aug 1872 8475. 17 Aug 1872 8476. [after 12 Aug 1872] 8477. 20 Aug 1872 8478. 20 Aug 1872 8479. 21 Aug 1872 8480. 21 Aug 1872 8481. 21 Aug 1872 8482. 23 Aug 1872 8483. 23 Aug 1872 8484. 23 Aug 1872 8485. 23 Aug [1872] 8486. 24 Aug [1872] 8486a. 24 Aug 1872 8487. 26 Aug 1872 8488. 28 Aug [1872] 8489. 28 Aug 1872 8490. 28 Aug 1872 8490f. 29 Aug 1872 8491. 29 Aug [1872] 8492. 29 Aug 1872 8493. 29 Aug 1872 8494. 30 Aug [1872] 8495. 30 Aug [1872] 8496. 30 Aug 1872 8497. 31 Aug [1872] 8498. 31 Aug 1872 8499. 31 Aug 1872 8500. [13 Aug 1872] 8501. [after 12] Sept 1872 8502. 23 Sept 1872 8503. Sept 1872 8504. [2 Sept 1872] 8505. 2 Sept 1872 8506. 2 Sept 1872 8507. 2 Sept 1872 8508. 3 Sept [1872] 8509. 3 Sept 1872 8510. 4 Sept [1872?] 8511. 4 Sept 1872 8512. 6 Sept [1872] 8513. 6 Sept [1872] 8514. 7 Sept 1872 8515. 9 Sept 1872 8516. 10 Sept 1872 8517. 12 Sept 1872

xiii

8518. 12 Sept 1872 8519. 12 Sept [1872] 8520. 13 Sept 1872 8521. 17 Sept 1872 8522. [c. 7 Aug 1872] 8523. 17 Sept [1872?] 8524. 18 Sept [1873] 8525. 18 Sept [1872] 8526. 18 Sept 1872 8527. 20 Sept 1872 8528. 20 Sept [1872] 8529. 20 [Jan–Feb 1871?]. To be published in next supplement. 8530. 21 Sept 1872 8531. 23 Sept 1872 8532. 24 Sept 1872 8533. 24 Sept [1872] 8534. 25 Sept 1872 8535. 26 Sept 1872 8536. 28 Sept 1872 8537. [after 11 Oct 1872] 8538. [25 Oct 1872] 8539. 2 Oct 1872 8540. 3 Oct 1872 8541. 4 Oct [1872] 8542. 4 Oct [1872] 8543. 4 Dec 1872 8544. 4 Oct 1872 8545. 6 Oct 1872 8546. 6 Oct 1872 8547. 7 Oct 1872 8548. 7 Oct 1872 8549. 9 Oct 1872 8550. 9 Oct [1872] 8551. 10 Oct [1872] 8552. 10 Oct [1872] 8552f. [9 Apr 1873] 8553f. Cancel: copy of 6930. 8553. 10 Oct [1872] 8554. 11 Oct 1872 8555. 11 Oct 1872 8556. 12 Oct 1872 8557. 13 Oct [1872] 8558. 14 Oct [1872] 8559. 15 Oct [1872] 8560. 15 Oct 1872 8561. 16 Oct [1872] 8562. 17 Oct 1872 8563. 17 Oct 1872 8564. 18 Oct 1872 8564a. 18 Oct [1872]. 8565. 19 Oct 1872 8566. 20 Oct [1872] 8567. 22 Oct [1872]

xiv 8568. 22 Oct 1872 8569. 22 Oct [1872] 8570. 22 Oct 1872 8571. 22 Oct 1872 8572. 23 Oct [1872] 8573. 24 Oct [1872] 8574. 24 Oct 1872 8575. 25 Oct 1872 8576. 26 Oct 1872 8577. 25 Oct [1872] 8578. 26 Oct 1872 8578f. 26 Oct 1872 8579. 27 Oct [1872] 8580. 27 Oct [1872] 8581. 27 Oct [1872] 8581a. 27 Oct [1872] 8582. 28 Oct 1872 8583. 29 Oct 1872 8584. 29 Oct 1872 8585. 29 Oct [1872] 8585f. Cancel: same as 8583. 8586. 31 Oct [1872] 8587. 31 Oct 1872 8785f. 31 Oct 1872 8588. [after 21 Dec 1872] 8589. Nov 1872 8590. [1 Nov 1872] 8591. 1 Nov [1872] 8592. 2 [Dec 1872] 8593. 2 Nov [1872] 8594. 3 Nov 1872 8595. 3 Nov [1872] 8596. 4 Nov 1872 8597. 4 Nov 1872 8598. Cancel: enclosure to 8636. 8599. 4 Nov 1872 8600. 5 Nov 1872 8601. 6 Nov [1872] 8602. 6 Nov [1872] 8603. 6 Nov 1872 8604. 6 Nov [1872] 8605. 7 Nov 1872 8606. 7 Nov 1872 8607. 7 Nov 1872 8607a. 7 Nov [1872] 8608. 8 Nov [1872] 8609. 8 Nov 1872 8610. 8 Nov 1872 8611. 8 Nov [1872] 8612. 8 Nov [1872] 8613. 8 Nov [1872–4] 8614. 9 Nov [1872] 8615. 9 Nov 1872 8616. 9 Nov 1872

List of letters 8617. 10 Nov 1872 8618. 11 Nov [1872] 8619. Cancel: enclosure to 8626. 8620. 11 Nov 1872 8621. 11 Nov 1872 8622. 12 Nov [1872] 8623. 13 Nov 1872 8624. 13 Nov 1872 8625. 14 Nov 1872 8626. 15 Nov 1872 8627. 15 Nov 1872 8628. 16 Nov 1872 8629. 16 Nov 1872 8630. 16 Nov 1872 8631. 16 Nov 1872 8632. 17 Nov 1872 8633. 17 Nov 1872 8634. 19 Nov 1872 8635. [after 19 Nov 1872] 8636. 20 Nov [1872] 8637. 20 Nov 1872 8638. 20 Nov [1872] 8639. 21 Nov 1872 8640. 22 Nov 1872 8641. 22 Nov 1872 8642. Cancel: enclosure to 8684 8643. 23 Nov 1872 8644. 23 Nov 1872 8645. 23 Nov 1872 8646. 25 Nov 1872 8647. 25 Nov 1872 8648. 26 Nov 1872 8649. [26 Nov 1872] 8650. 27 Nov 1872 8651. 28 Nov 1872 8652. 28 Nov 1872 8653. 28 Nov [1872] 8654. 29 Nov [1872] 8655. [late] Nov 1872 8656. 2 Dec 1872 8657. 3 Dec 1872 8658. 4 Dec [1872] 8659. 4 Dec 1872 8659f. [after 4 Dec 1872] 8660. 5 Dec [1872] 8660f. 5 Dec 1872 8660g. 5 Dec 1872 8661. 6 Dec 1872 8662. 6 Dec [1872–3] 8663. 7 Dec [1872] 8664. 7 Dec [1872–3] 8665. 8 Dec 1872 8666. 9 Dec [1872] 8667. 9 Dec 1872

List of letters 8667f. 9 Dec 1872 8668. 10 Dec 1872 8669. 10 Dec 1872 8670. 10 Dec 1872 8671. 11 Dec [1872] 8672. 11 Dec 1872 8673. 11 Dec 1872 8674. 12 Dec [1872] 8675. 13 Dec [1872] 8676. 13 Dec 1872 8677. 14 Dec [1872?] 8678. 14 Dec [1872] 8679. 4 Dec 1872 8680. 14 Dec 1872 8680a. 14 Dec [1872] 8681. 16 Dec 1872 8682. [17] Dec [1872] 8683. 17 Dec [1872 or later] 8684. 17 Dec 1872 8685. 15 Nov 1872 8686. 19 Dec 1872 8687. 20 Dec 1872 8688. 20 Dec 1872 8689. 20 Dec 1872 8690. 21 Dec 1872 8691. 22 Dec 1872 8692. 23 Dec 1872 8693. 23 Dec 1872 8694. 24 Dec 1872

8695. 24 Dec 1872 8696. 25 Dec [1872] 8696a. 28 Dec 1872 8697. 30 Dec [1872] 8698. 30 Dec 1872 9793. [after 23 Aug 1872?] 13774. 10 Nov [1872–4] 13795. [after Aug 1872?] 13800. 23 [Feb 1872 – Oct 1874] 13842. 29 [Nov 1872 or later] 13888. [1872 or later] 13889. 19 May [1871–4] EXPRESSION SUPPLEMENT 5332. [8 May 1866 – 29 August 1871] 7041. [1867–72] 7042. [1867–72] 7043. [1867–72?] 7056. [October 1869 or later] 7058. [1867–72] 7059. [1867–72] 7060. [1867–72] 7061. [1867–72] 7062. [1867–72] 7223. 8 June [1867–72] 8135f. [1872 or later?] 13856. [1867–72?]

xv

INTRODUCTION

‘My career’, Darwin wrote towards the end of 1872, ‘is so nearly closed. . . . What little more I can do, shall be chiefly new work’ (letter to Francis Galton, 8 November [1872]), and the tenor of his correspondence throughout the year is one of wistful reminiscence, coupled with a keen eye to the crafting of his legacy. Bracketed by the publication in February of the sixth edition of On the origin of species, intended to be Darwin’s last, and of Expression of the emotions in man and animals in November, the year marked the culmination of a programme of publication that can be traced back to his never-completed ‘big book’, Natural selection, begun in 1856. Coming hard on the heels of The descent of man and selection in relation to sex, published in 1871, these books brought a strong if deceptive sense of a job now done: Darwin intended, he declared to Alfred Russel Wallace, to see whether he could now occupy himself without writing anything more on ‘so difficult a subject, as evolution’ (letter to A. R. Wallace, 27 July [1872]). By the end of the year Darwin was immersed in two of the studies that would characterise his final decade: the powers of movement and digestion in plants, and the role of earthworms in shaping the environment. The former led to a series of books and papers, and the latter formed the subject of Darwin’s last book, The formation of vegetable mould through the action of worms, published in the year before his death. Despite Darwin’s declared intention to take up new work, both represent returns to lines of enquiry begun many years before. In his private life also, Darwin was in a nostalgic frame of mind, picking up the threads with schoolfriends, old friends from student days, and Beagle shipmates. As the year went on, he exchanged reminiscences, and laments about advancing age and poor health, with family friends from childhood, some of whom he had not been in touch with for many years. The year opened with Darwin, helped by his eldest son William, going over the final proofs for the sixth edition of Origin, which he had been revising since June the previous year. He intended the edition to be a popular one that would bring his most persuasive statement of his theories to as wide an audience as possible. ‘I am extremely anxious to spread my views’, he wrote to his publisher, John Murray, on 30 January, shortly after correcting the proofs, and Darwin’s concern for the consolidation of his legacy is palpable throughout the year. He negotiated hard over the selling price, anxious that the volume should be affordable: ‘do you not think 6 s is too dear for a cheap Edit? Would not 5s be better? . . . The public are accustomed to novels for 1s ’, he wrote to Murray on 8 January, but Murray complained that the extensive

xviii

Introduction

changes made between the fifth and sixth editions were costly to incorporate, and despite Darwin’s best efforts, set the final price at 7s. 6d. (letter from R. F. Cooke, 12 February 1872). Always closely involved in every stage of publication of his books, Darwin was keen to ensure that this edition was widely disseminated not only at home but around the world. The state of the French translations of both Descent and Origin was a particular frustration: ‘I naturally desire that my work should circulate in France in as perfect a condition as I can make it’, he wrote to the translator (letter to J. J. Moulinié, 23 September 1872). He recapped the history of the French editions of Origin and expressed his concern that the most recent, the third, was both unreliable and sadly out of date, not even incorporating all the corrections made to the fourth English edition let alone the fifth. Printing of the proofs of Moulinié’s translation of the fifth English edition had been interrupted by the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian war in July 1870, and was now halted so that the further changes made for the sixth edition could be incorporated into the partially complete translation. This complex operation, combined with Moulinié’s increasingly poor health, led to yet further delay, and the new translation remained unpublished at the end of the year (letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 23 November 1872). To persuade his US publisher, Appleton’s, to bring out the new edition in the United States, Darwin arranged with Murray to have it stereotyped. Before the type was broken up, casts were made from which further printings, including the American one, could be much more cheaply produced than if the volume had to be reset. The investment in stereotype reinforced Darwin’s intention to make no further changes to the text: ‘I have had it stereotyped, so that I cannot, thank God, answer any more criticisms’, he wrote to the comparative anatomist St George Jackson Mivart (letter to St G. J. Mivart, 11 January [1872]). The criticisms against which Darwin had taken the greatest trouble to defend himself in the sixth edition were those made by Mivart himself. In a new chapter on ‘miscellaneous objections to the theory of natural selection’, Darwin refuted point by point assertions published by Mivart at the beginning of the previous year in his book Genesis of species; for instance that the theory could not account for the incipient stages of such useful features as the long neck of the giraffe, protective mimicry, or the mouth parts of the baleen whale. Alfred Russel Wallace was one of several correspondents to congratulate him on the persuasiveness of his arguments: ‘I think your answer to Mivart, on initial stages of modification, ample & complete; & the comparison of Whale & duck most beautiful’ (letter from A. R. Wallace, 3 March 1872). Although Mivart was among those who wrote in January to wish Darwin a happy new year, before the month was out a brief but intense exchange of letters saw relations between them irretrievably break down. Mivart’s book had been followed by a highly critical and anonymously published review of Descent. Darwin’s supporters had rallied to his defence, and along with his good wishes Mivart enclosed a copy of an article replying to Thomas Henry Huxley’s scathing review of Genesis of species, and promised to send another that had been written in response to a disparaging paper by

Introduction

xix

the American mathematician and philosopher Chauncey Wright. The republication of Wright’s paper had been arranged by Darwin himself (see Correspondence vol. 19, p. xxiv). By the beginning of the year both men believed not only that they had been misunderstood but that their personal integrity had been impugned: ‘I consider that you have greatly misrepresented my views & conclusions; & I hope I am not quite so bigotted a person as I am made to appear’, complained Darwin (letter to St G. J. Mivart, 5 January 1872). Piqued, Mivart flung back by return of post that he would willingly acknowledge himself at fault if only Darwin would renounce ‘fundamental intellectual errors’ (letter from St G. J. Mivart, 6 January 1872). Darwin likened the affair to the disintegration of his relationship with the palaeontologist Richard Owen: ‘your several articles’, he wrote, ‘have mortified me more than those of any other man, excepting Prof. Owen; & for the same reasons, as I was silly enough to think he felt friendly towards me’ (letter to St G. J. Mivart, 8 January [1872]). Despite Darwin’s request that he drop the correspondence, Mivart wrote again, still hoping for reconciliation, if only ‘in another world’ (letter from St G. J. Mivart, 10 January 1872). Darwin, determined to have the last word in correspondence as well as in print, excused his own reply on the disingenuous grounds that it would have been ungracious in him not to thank Mivart for his letter. He promised to send a copy of the new edition of Origin but asked Mivart not to acknowledge it (letter to St G. J. Mivart, 11 January [1872]). ‘I hate controversy,’ Darwin wrote later in the year, possibly with this episode partly in mind, ‘chiefly perhaps because I do it badly’ (letter to A. R. Wallace, 3 August [1872]). The whole exchange had taken just one week, but the continuing influence of Mivart’s criticisms, in particular on the debate over the role of natural and sexual selection in human evolution, continued to trouble Darwin. ‘At present natural selection is somewhat under a cloud’, he wrote to J. E. Taylor on 13 January, and he complained to the German zoologist Anton Dohrn on 3 February that Mivart’s book had ‘produced a great effect in England’. Dohrn, who was setting up the Zoological Station in Naples, and others sent him reassurances about the level of support for his theories abroad and Darwin, directing operations from the safe retreat of Down House, received these bulletins from the front as eagerly as any general. ‘Your theory is steadily gaining ground among the masses and thinking people of this country’, wrote Mary Treat from the United States; it was even being discussed from the pulpit: ‘Nothing brings out a crowd on Sunday’, she exclaimed, ‘like the announcement that Darwinism is to be the theme. Surely the world moves!’ (letter from Mary Treat, 13 December 1872). Darwin discussed the reception of his theory of sexual selection, about which he felt particular anxiety, with another German zoologist, August Weismann, and was delighted to find that Weismann accepted it at least in part (letter to August Weismann, 5 April 1872). ‘I wanted some encouragement’, he wrote to Hermann Müller in early May, ‘as extremely few naturalists in England seem inclined to believe it’ (letter to Herman Müller, [before 5 May 1872]). Müller had sent him a paper that delighted him by applying the theories of natural and sexual selection to bees (H. Müller 1872), and with his reply Darwin enclosed an account of research

xx

Introduction

he had undertaken several years before, when his children were small, to track the flight paths of bees: ‘I repeatedly stationed five or six of my children, each close to a buzzing place,’ he wrote, ‘and told the one farthest away to shout as soon a bee buzzed there: “here is a bee”, and so on with the other children one after another, the words “here is a bee” were passed on from child to child without interruption, until the bees reached the buzzing place where I myself was standing’ (letter to Hermann Müller, [before 5 May 1872]). By the time Origin was published in February, Darwin was in London, making the first of several long trips away from home during the year which were supposed to be recuperative, but which he found a mixed blessing: ‘I hope my Brain likes it,’ Darwin wrote about one of these holidays; ‘as for myself it is dreadful doing nothing’ (letter to T. H. Huxley, 22 October [1872]). He was far from idle during their five-week stay. In addition to visiting colleagues such as the geologist David Forbes and receiving a visit from the traveller, anthropologist, and outspoken supporter of Darwinism, William Winwood Reade, Darwin was revising his manuscript on the expression of emotion, begun almost exactly one year before and resumed immediately he completed work on the proofs of Origin. Aware that the illustrations for Expression would be important not only in supporting his argument but also in attracting interest in the book, Darwin had spent time and energy the previous year finding photographers, selecting plates, and researching photographic processes. Returning to Down at the end of March, he now devoted several weeks to the hunt for artists who could adequately capture animal expressions for reproduction as woodcuts. Letters exchanged with one artist, Briton Riviere, about drawings of a hostile dog, show Darwin’s attention to detail: ‘the hairs on the neck and shoulders (and not on loins) ought to stand closer (a serried mass) and to be more erect’ (letter to Briton Riviere, 19 May [1872]). Riviere had been suggested to Darwin by a family friend, Eleanor Bonham-Carter, and Darwin’s social network also led to an introduction to the other artist who undertook drawings of dogs, Arthur Dampier May. May was the teenage protégé of the artist and writer Samuel Butler, son of an old Shrewsbury schoolfellow of Darwin’s, and grandson of Darwin’s former headmaster at Shrewsbury school. Butler, whose later championship of Mivart and increasingly personal attacks on Darwin became notorious, had written on 11 May expressing concern that his recently, and anonymously, published book, Erewhon, might offend Darwin with its satirical approach to natural selection. But Darwin was intrigued and amused rather than offended by ‘that clever book’ (letter to J. M. Herbert, 21 November 1872) and invited Butler to dinner the following week together with the sculptor Thomas Woolner. The difficulty of getting suitable illustrations for Expression was evidently discussed, and Butler, at this stage a willing contributor to Darwin’s cause, wrote offering Arthur May’s drawings shortly afterwards (letter from Samuel Butler to Francis Darwin, [before 30 May 1872], and letter from Samuel Butler, 30 May 1872). It was not just the illustrations for Expression that were causing Darwin concern; he was still uncertain about some aspects of the argument. ‘I fear a man is most apt to fall into error’, he wrote to the ophthalmologist Frans Cornelis Donders, ‘exactly

Introduction

xxi

where, from his ignorance, he feels no doubts’ (letter to F. C. Donders, 17 June 1872). Right up to the beginning of June, when he sent the manuscript to the printers, Darwin was still checking facts with expert correspondents, in particular Donders and the ophthalmic surgeon William Bowman, both of whom he consulted on the physiology of the eye. His daughter Henrietta was reviewing the manuscript, and together they wrestled with the incorporation of material such as that on the origins of music provided by her husband, Richard Buckley Litchfield (letter to H. E. Litchfield, 13 May 1872). Delivery to the press brought only temporary respite; Darwin warned Donders to expect more queries once the proofs were back, and on Henrietta’s advice, made substantial changes including the excision of an entire section on the philosophy of language. It had been hard work: ‘I hope I have not killed you,’ he wrote to Henrietta; ‘I know that I am half-killed myself ’ (letter to H. E. Litchfield, 25 July 1872). In the brief lull between sending off the manuscript of Expression in early June and receiving the proof-sheets, Darwin and his family went to stay with his eldest son, William, in Southampton, but his peace was interrupted when a long-simmering dispute involving his close friend Joseph Dalton Hooker came to a head. Hooker, director of the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew, had been engaged in an increasingly bitter stand-off with Acton Smee Ayrton, first commissioner of works, about the limits of Ayrton’s authority in the day-to-day running of the gardens. A series of skirmishes over the power to appoint gardeners and the installation of a new heating system in the glasshouses had escalated to the point where Hooker applied over Ayrton’s head direct to the Liberal prime minster, William Gladstone. Hooker’s cause was taken up by his friends, in particular John Lubbock and John Tyndall, as one battle in the wider struggle to establish the independence of science from bureaucratic interference. Hooker had kept Darwin well informed: ‘The die is cast’, he wrote excitedly on 11 May, when the matter was first raised in Parliament. ‘Good God how I do hope that they will in the House of Lords pitch into that accursed fellow’ was Darwin’s wholeheartedly partisan reply (letter to J. D. Hooker, 14 May 1872). On 13 June, a messenger arrived in Southampton in great haste with a petition for Darwin to sign. Organised by Tyndall, this ‘succinct statement of the case’, which ran to eight pages of small type, was delivered to Gladstone a week later (enclosure to letter from John Lubbock to W. E. Gladstone, 20 June 1872). Darwin was quietly using his influence behind the scenes, taking advantage of his friendship with Lady Derby to relay his views on the dispute to her husband, the leader of the Tory party in the Lords. ‘May all your enemies be cursed, is my pious frame of mind,’ he wrote to Hooker on 14 June. Lubbock called for discussion in the House of Commons on 21 July, and Derby addressed the Lords on 29 July. Although ultimately the affair ended in stalemate, press and public opinion came out on Hooker’s side and Darwin was jubilant, declaring that it was ‘enough to make one turn into an old honest Tory’ (letter to J. D. Hooker, 12 July [1872]). Indignation on behalf of another friend, although in a rather more self-serving context, led Darwin to a second rare public intervention in August. Alfred Russel Wallace had been attacked in print for his pro-Darwin review of Charles Robert

xxii

Introduction

Bree’s An exposition of the fallacies in the hypothesis of Mr. Darwin, and Darwin wrote a cutting letter to Nature in Wallace’s defence (letter to Nature, 3 August [1872]). Although the two men were and remained close friends, differences of opinion between Darwin and Wallace on the relative importance of natural and sexual selection, and in particular on their role in human evolution, continued to widen. Wallace’s favourable review of the physiologist Henry Charlton Bastian’s recent book on the origin of life (H. C. Bastian 1872; Wallace 1872d) left him sceptical but willing to be convinced. ‘How grand is the onward rush of Science,’ he wrote, while still defending his own theory of inheritance against Bastian; ‘it is enough to console us for the many errors which we have committed & for our efforts being overlaid & forgotten in the mass of new facts & new views which are daily turning up’ (letter to A. R. Wallace, 28 August [1872]). Other correspondents were not so accommodating: Anton Dohrn, who had written to report on progress in the establishment of the Naples Zoological Station, was scathing in his assessment of Wallace’s position (letter from Anton Dohrn, 21 August 1872). Dohrn requested for the new library copies of Darwin’s books, which Darwin gladly agreed to donate (letter to Anton Dohrn, 24 August [1872]). Dohrn was by no means the only correspondent to seek Darwin’s help or advice during the year. In addition to encouraging Chauncey Wright to publish on Mivart’s views, Darwin was a sounding board for Wright’s papers on the application of mathematical formulae to a study of phyllotaxy, at the complexity of which he poked gentle fun: ‘I have not been able to understand all the mathematical reasoning;’ he wrote, ‘for irrational angles produce a corresponding effect on my mind’ (letter to Chauncey Wright, 6 April 1872). A competing theory on the origins of leaf arrangement was the subject of several long letters from Hubert Airy, who also sought Darwin’s advice, and Darwin met both men in person for the first time when they visited, separately, during the year. Darwin used his correspondence with Airy to support his son Leonard’s application to join the transit of Venus expedition, asking Airy to relay a message to the organiser, Airy’s own father, Sir George (letter to Hubert Airy, 24 August 1872). In January, Darwin wrote to Mary Treat, encouraging her in the strongest possible terms to publish her work on the effects of nutrition on the sex of butterflies: ‘Your observations & experiments’, he told her, ‘are by far the best, as far as known to me, which have ever been made’ (letter to Mary Treat, 5 January 1872). In June, Lady Derby sought Darwin’s help in securing an invitation for her son, Lord Sackville Cecil, to attend a séance (letter from M. C. Stanley, 4 June 1872). There was increasing curiosity in the press and polite society about the claims of spiritualists, and Darwin, through his cousin Francis Galton, had with some interest been following the career of William Crookes, an investigator of psychic phenomena. Darwin maintained an open mind: ‘It is rather dreadful to think what we may have to believe’, he wrote to Galton on 29 March. Galton described a séance in great detail in a letter of 19 April, and passed on an invitation to Darwin which he, however, declined on the grounds of ill health. Concerns about the progress of Expression through the press were never far away. Although the engravings had at last been satisfactorily commissioned and executed,

Introduction

xxiii

by August Darwin had become embroiled in a three-way correspondence over both translation rights and the photographic plates with his overseas publishers, and with John Murray’s assistant, the excitable Robert Cooke. Darwin, as with Origin, was anxious to encourage foreign editions by keeping down the costs. ‘Is not each country to pay something for the privilege . . . ?’ queried Cooke despairingly, ‘or have you agreed to let them have it for love!!!’ (letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872). It had been decided that the plates would be produced using the new process of heliotyping, a method for mass-producing photographs using printing plates, and sufficient numbers had to be printed not only for the English edition but also to supply the foreign editions. The plates for Expression were one of the first large orders fulfilled by the recently established London Heliotype Company, and miscommunication about the price and the difficulty of estimating the numbers required led to increasingly frantic letters from Cooke: ‘We are in a precious quondary with these Heliotype Plates for yr new work,’ he wrote, having learned that production was threatened by a strike; ‘We have supplied all the foreign markets & have not taken care of ourselves’ (letter from R. F. Cooke, 20 November 1872). By early November, the competition to secure the translation rights, and the keen interest of the booksellers, encouraged an originally cautious John Murray to gamble on the book’s success: ‘The modest way in wch you introduced to me your new work on Expression a little misled me as to its probable reception,’ he wrote the day after the trade sale, ‘I had not made allowance for the immense popularity of its author’. It had, he said, become one of the most attractive dishes in his ‘Literary Banquet’ (letters from John Murray, 6 November [1872] and 9 November 1872). Demand seemed likely to outstrip supply; the initial print run of 5000 was increased to 7000, but although the printers had the text ready, on the eve of publication they were still short by 3000 sets of plates, leading Cooke to suggest that they might need police protection in the face of a disappointed public (letter from R. F. Cooke, 25 November 1872). Among those who tried in vain to find a copy for sale was Frances Power Cobbe, who wrote to thank Darwin for sending her one; she and her companion, Mary Lloyd, were vying to read it first (letter from F. P. Cobbe, [26 November 1872]). ‘Your last work is very much like our Gas, nearly exhausted’, Cooke wrote only two weeks later from a London plunged into temporary darkness by an industrial strike (letter from R. F. Cooke, 6 December 1872). Caught out by the sudden decision for an immediate printing of a further 2000 copies, Darwin had little time to make corrections. The book inspired a large volume of correspondence, with many readers offering anecdotes and observations: a doctor recounted the unconscious contraction of his own muscles when attending women in labour (letter from J. T. Rothrock, 25 November 1872); others described the way their hands blushed (letter from M. I. Snow, 29 [November 1872 or later]), or gave examples of the power of voluntary vomiting (letter from James Dickson, 14 December 1872). An Oxford academic and amateur photographer, who the previous year had published a sequel to his moderately successful children’s book, Alice’s adventures in Wonderland, wrote offering a photograph (see plate p. 562); Darwin thanked Lewis Carroll, and accepted

xxiv

Introduction

the gift, although he doubted he would ever use it (letter to C. L. Dodgson, 10 December 1872). Darwin continued to amass evidence both for and against his conclusions in Expression. He resumed his correspondence with Donders and Bowman on the contraction of orbicular muscles in those born blind, and filed away other letters, but Murray’s confidence proved misplaced; demand for the book rapidly declined and so much stock remained on hand that there was no call for another edition during Darwin’s lifetime. Some of the information from correspondence in this and subsequent years was, however, incorporated in the second edition, produced by Francis Darwin after his father’s death. The year was not entirely devoted to manuscripts and proofs: ‘I have taken up an old subject which formerly interested me,’ Darwin wrote to Asa Gray at the beginning of the year; ‘namely the amount of earth brought to the surface by worms’ (letter to Asa Gray, 15 January 1872). Gray was asked to find correspondents in Canada who might be able to supply comparative observations, and Darwin’s protégé John Scott, now employed as a curator in the Botanic Garden in Calcutta, sent an intriguing packet that proved to contain wormcasts from India. Darwin’s niece Lucy Wedgwood, who had started her observations the previous year, was now asked to try ‘with straight blunt knitting needle’ (letter to L. C. Wedgwood, 5 January [1872]) to establish the angle of the holes, something Darwin admitted was not easy; he himself found stooping over wormholes made his head spin. There was a new name on the list of volunteers: by the beginning of May, Francis Darwin, the Darwins’ third son, had become engaged to Amy Ruck, the sister of an old schoolfriend; he married Amy in 1874. Francis, still a medical student in London, was unable to follow the example of his sister Henrietta, who had married within weeks of her engagement the previous year, and unlike Henrietta’s engagement, this one went almost unremarked in Darwin’s correspondence. Amy’s induction into the family firm was however tacitly recognised by her recruitment into Darwin’s army of observers in the field: by February she was already his ‘geologist in chief for N. Wales’ (letter to Amy Ruck, 24 February [1872]). ‘Now, pray don’t run off on some other track till you have worked out and published about Drosera & Dionæa’, Gray had replied on hearing of the resumption of the worm work (letter from Asa Gray, 2 February 1872). Darwin might have to delegate the investigation of wormholes to others, but experimenting on the mechanisms that allowed sensitive or insectivorous plants to move was something he needed no encouragement to do himself. On 23 August, the day after he finished going over the proofs of Expression, Darwin was back at work on Drosera, resuming a series of experiments begun the previous summer. The essential oils of cloves and caraway, opium, salts of ammonia, chloroform, and other chemicals, ordered from Darwin’s usual chemist, William Baxter, were not in this case for his health, but to test their effects when applied to the leaves of insectivorous plants. Darwin also described pricking the leaf at certain points to induce paralysis, ‘just like dividing the spinal marrow of a Frog’, and wrote teasingly to Gray about the ‘nervous system(!?)’ of Drosera (letter

Introduction

xxv

to Asa Gray, 22 October 1872). By early November, despite an enforced three-week holiday in early October, when excessive use of the microscope led his head to ‘fail’ (letter to W. D. Fox, 29 October [1872]) he had begun writing up his results. ‘All letters are fatigue to me’, Darwin complained in December (letter from Paolo Mantegazza, 23 December 1872, CD note), and he exclaimed to Thomas Huxley that he would like a society formed, ‘so that everyone might receive pleasant letters & never answer them’ (letter to T. H. Huxley, 22 October [1872]). But not all letters were unwelcome, and correspondence allowed Darwin to nurture many friendships, old and new, throughout the year. ‘Dear Mr Darwin, I have nothing to do, so I am going to write to you’, declared one of Darwin’s younger correspondents, Huxley’s seven-year-old son, Henry (letter from Henry Huxley, 17 and 20 January 1872), and an exchange later in the year when the Huxleys moved house demonstrates how close the two families had become. Darwin sent a handsome house-warming present of £100 enclosed in a letter to Henrietta Huxley. He would, he argued, be entitled to give his friends a wedding present, and so, as moving house was ‘nearly as serious & dangerous an affair as marriage’ the gift was justified; he defied even Henrietta’s husband to pick a hole in his logic (letter to H. A. Huxley, 16 October [1872]). Deeply touched, the Huxleys accepted in a letter that rivals Darwin’s own in wit and warmth, and Thomas Huxley proudly signed himself, ‘One of the family’ (letter from H. A. Huxley and T. H. Huxley, 17 October 1872). The publication of Expression afforded Darwin a particularly welcome excuse to rekindle old connections. He recognised that it had broader appeal than his previous works, and his list of presentation copies includes far more names of friends and family members than usual. One such old friend was Sarah Haliburton, née Owen, to whose sister, Fanny, Darwin had been romantically attached as a young man. ‘Although I have had no communication with you or the other members of your family for so long a time,’ he wrote, ‘no scenes in my whole life pass so frequently or so vividly before my mind, as those which relate to happy old days spent at Woodhouse’ (letter to S. H. Haliburton, 1 November [1872]). Haliburton, who still had one of his letters from the Beagle voyage, reminded him of a time when the height of his ambition was to secure a favourable mention in a scientific journal: ‘I think that ambition has been attained, & something more’ she observed (letter from S. H. Haliburton, 3 November [1872]). They reminisced about his passion for hunting beetles, memories of which were also invoked in correspondence with his cousin and fellow beetle-enthusiast from student days, William Darwin Fox. The two had not met for nearly ten years, but ‘old days with you were so vividly recalled by hearing about Panagæus!’ Darwin wrote (letter to W. D. Fox, 16 July [1872]). Darwin sent a copy of Expression to another old Cambridge friend, John Maurice Herbert, who when they were students had given him a microscope: ‘I can hardly call to mind any event in my life which surprised & gratified me more’ (letter to J. M. Herbert, 21 November 1872). Fox and Herbert were applied to for news of other friends from Cambridge days, and Darwin sought out old schoolfriends such as the ornithologist Thomas Campbell Eyton. Admiral Sulivan sent word of their Beagle shipmates,

xxvi

Introduction

complaining that a recent photograph of the former midshipman Philip Gidley King made him feel his age. ‘I’, responded Darwin, ‘feel as old as Methuselah’ (letter to B. J. Sulivan, 24 January 1872), a sentiment he repeated to several correspondents. His own health was slightly better than in the previous year, but he continually worried about his children; two of his sons spent some time on the continent for the sake of their health (see letter to W. D. Fox, 16 July [1872] and n. 3), and when Fox asked Darwin if he was a grandfather, he replied, ‘Henrietta has no child, & I hope never may; for she is extremely delicate’ (letter to W. D. Fox, 16 July [1872]). By December, Darwin and his brother Erasmus were conferring over their wills, and he poured out such a litany of ill health to one correspondent that Emma protested: ‘My wife commands me to say, & I can say with perfect truth that this letter gives a false impression if it implies that I am not a happy man—’ (letter to J. M. Herbert, 21 November 1872). The year brought a number of accolades from Darwin’s scientific colleagues, including the offer of the rectorship of the University of Aberdeen, which Darwin gracefully declined on the habitual grounds of ill health (letter from J. S. Craig, 4 November 1872, and letter to J. S. Craig, 7 November 1872). But recognition was far from unwelcome: expressing his gratitude at his election to foreign membership of the Royal Academy of Science of the Netherlands, Darwin declared the ‘sympathy of his fellow workers’ to be ‘far the highest reward to which any scientific man can look’ (letter to F. C. Donders, 29 April [1872]).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The editors are grateful to the late George Pember Darwin and to William Darwin for permission to publish the Darwin letters and manuscripts. They also thank the Syndics of Cambridge University Library and other owners of manuscript letters who have generously made them available. Work for this edition has been supported by grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the Wellcome Trust. The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Pew Charitable Trusts, and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation provided grants to match NEH funding, and the Mellon Foundation awarded grants to Cambridge University that made it possible to put the entire Darwin correspondence into machine-readable form. Research and editorial work have also been supported by grants from the Arts and Humanities Research Council, the Bonita Trust, the British Academy, the British Ecological Society, the Isaac Newton Trust, the Jephcott Charitable Trust, the John Templeton Foundation, the Natural Environment Research Council, the Royal Society of London, and the Wilkinson Charitable Foundation. The Stifterverband für die Deutsche Wissenschaft provided funds to translate and edit Darwin’s correspondence with German naturalists. Funding sufficient to complete the entire edition has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the Evolution Education Trust, and the Isaac Newton Trust. We are extremely grateful for this unprecedented long-term support. We particularly wish to acknowledge the role of the Evolution Education Trust, without whose imaginative and generous support so distinguished a consortium could not have been established. Cambridge University Library, the American Philosophical Society (APS), Harvard University, and Cornell University have generously made working space and many services available to the editors; the American Council of Learned Societies has provided invaluable administrative and strategic support. Since the project began in 1975, the editors have been fortunate in benefiting from the interest, experience, and practical help of many people, and hope that they have adequately expressed their thanks to them individually as the work proceeded. English Heritage has responded most generously to requests for information and for material from the collections at Down House, Downe. We are particularly grateful to Cathy Power, curator of Down House, and Tori Reeve, former curator. The late Richard Darwin Keynes kindly made available Darwin family material in his possession. The late Ursula Mommens also provided letters and other materials that belonged to her grandfather, Francis Darwin.

xxviii

Acknowledgments

Institutions and individuals all over the world have given indispensable help by making available photocopies or digital images of Darwin correspondence and other manuscripts in their collections. Those who furnished copies of letters for this volume can be found in the List of provenances. The editors are indebted to them, and to the many people who have provided information about the locations of particular letters. The editors make daily use of the incomparable facilities of Cambridge University Library and have benefited greatly from its services and from the help and expertise of its staff, particularly the staff of the Manuscripts Department. We are especially grateful to the University Librarian, Anne Jarvis, and to her predecessors Peter K. Fox and Frederick W. Ratcliffe, and to the Keeper of Manuscripts and Archives, Patrick Zutshi, for their generous support. Other members of the library’s staff who frequently respond to the editors’ requests are: Marjolein Allen, Wendy Aylett, Jim Bloxam, Frank Bowles, Kathleen Cann, Louise Clarke, Colin Clarkson, Jacqueline Cox, Maureen Dann, Alan Farrant, Les Goodey, John Hall, Morag Law, Stephen Lees, David Lowe, Peter Meadows, William Noblett, Adam Perkins, Ed Potten, John Reynolds, Jayne Ringrose, Mark Scudder, Clive Simmonds, Nicholas Smith, Elin Stangeland, Anne Taylor, Ngaio Vince-Dewerse, John Wells, and Jill Whitelock. The fetchers in the Rare Books reading room have also patiently dealt with the editors’ often complex requirements, as have the staff of the Map Room. At the American Philosophical Society Library, a splendid collection of Darwiniana and works in the history of science has been available to the editors since the inception of the project. The editors have benefited from the co-operation of the late Whitfield J. Bell Jr, former secretary of the society, the late Edward Carter II, Robert S. Cox, Roy C. Goodman, and Martin L. Leavitt, all of the APS Library. The editors would like to acknowledge the assistance of Rodney Dennis, Jennie Rathbun, and Susan Halpert of the Houghton Library, Constance Carter of the Science Division of the Library of Congress, and Judith Warnement and Jean Cargill of the Gray Herbarium of Harvard University, who have all been exceptionally helpful in providing material from the collections in their charge. In Britain, the editors have received assistance from Lynda Brooks (librarian), Gina Douglas (former librarian), and Ben Sherwood of the Linnean Society of London; and from Michele Losse and Kiri Ross Jones of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. We would also like to thank Anne Barrett, college archivist at the Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine; and successive librarians and archivists of Christ’s College, Cambridge. We owe a considerable debt to the staff of the American Council of Learned Societies for their help and advice since the Project began. We particularly thank for their generosity and unfailingly warm welcome the president, Pauline Yu; Steven Wheatley; and Kelly Buttermore. Among the others who advise and assist the editors in their work are Nick Gill, Randal Keynes, David Kohn, Gene Kritsky, Carl F. Miller, Jim Moore, Garry J. Tee, John van Wyhe, David West, and Leonard Wilson. The editors are also pleased

Acknowledgments

xxix

to acknowledge the invaluable support of the members of the Project’s Advisory Committee, and the continuing support of the Burkhardt family. Among the many research resources on which we rely, special mention should be made of the Biodiversity Heritage Library (www.biodiversitylibrary.org), the Darwin Manuscripts Project (www.amnh.org), and Darwin Online (darwin-online.org.uk). For help with particular enquiries in volume 20, the editors would like to thank, besides those already mentioned, Denise Anderson, Michael D. Barton, Glenn Branch, John Chainey, Rose Docker, Jane Munro, Sally Pagan, Mai Qaraman, Katalin Stráner, Leonard Wilson, and Fumiko Yoshikawa. We have relied heavily on expert technical assistance both from external consultants and from colleagues in Cambridge University in developing and maintaining our electronic resources, including our typesetting systems, and in making the correspondence available over the World Wide Web. For past help, we particularly thank Simon Buck, Matthew Daws, Robin Fairbairns, and Martin Oldfield. We are also grateful to Iain Burke, Peter Dunn, Ray Horne, Huw Jones, Patricia Killiard, Merina Tuladhar, Tomasz Waldoch, and Grant Young of Cambridge University Library, and to Hal Blackburn, Maarten Bressinck, Anne Clarke, Chris Martin, Oszkar Nagy, John Norman, Dan Sheppard, and Tony Stevenson of the Cambridge University Centre for Applied Research in Educational Technologies (CARET). This volume has been typeset using LaTeX. Gratitude is also expressed to the late C. A. Tripp for providing the editors with an invaluable tool for searching texts. Thanks are also due to all former staff of the Darwin Correspondence Project, including: Sarah Benton, Charlotte Bowman, Heidi Bradshaw, P. Thomas Carroll, Mario Di Gregorio, Rhonda Edwards, Kate Fletcher, Hedy Franks, Joy Harvey, Arne Hessenbruch, Thomas Junker, David Kohn, Jyothi Krishnan-Unni, Sam Kuper, Kathleen Lane, Sarah Lavelle, Anna K. Mayer, William Montgomery, Perry O’Donovan, Stephen V. Pocock, Duncan Porter, Marsha L. Richmond, the late Peter Saunders, Andrew Sclater, Tracey Slotta, the late Sydney Smith, Emma Spary, Nora Carroll Stevenson, Jonathan R. Topham, Tyler Veak, Béatrice Willis, and Sarah Wilmot. Work on this and future volumes has benefited from the work of Kathleen Lane, and our Project colleagues in the UK, Sophie Defrance, Philippa Hardman, and Sally Stafford, and in the US, Myrna Perez, Jenna Tonn, and Rebecca Woods. We are also pleased to welcome Geoff Belknapp, Andy Corrigan, Katie Ericksen, and Megan Formato. We are most grateful to Margot Levy for providing the index to the current volume. Copyright statement We gratefully acknowledge the families and estates of letter authors for permission to include their works in this publication, and particularly the Darwin family for permission to publish the texts of all letters written by Charles Darwin.

xxx

Acknowledgments

We make every reasonable effort to trace the holders of copyright in letters written by persons other than Darwin where copyright permission is required for publication. If you believe you are a rights holder and are concerned that we have published or may publish in the future material for which you have not given permission and which is not covered by a legal exception or exemption, we would be most grateful if you would contact us in writing by post or email. Darwin Correspondence Project Cambridge University Library West Road Cambridge United Kingdom CB3 9DR Email: [email protected]

PROVENANCES The following list gives the locations of the original versions of the letters printed in this volume. The editors are grateful to all the institutions and individuals listed for allowing access to the letters in their care. Access to material in DAR 261 and DAR 263, formerly at Down House, Downe, Kent, England, is courtesy of English Heritage. Académie des sciences–Institut de France, Paris, France ADS Autographs (dealers) G. R. Agassiz ed. 1913 (publication) American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA Archives de la famille de Candolle R. F. Batchelder (dealers) Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, Germany Bibliothèque de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland Bonhams (dealers) Sir John Paget Bowman (private collection) British Library, London, England Bromley Central Library, Local Studies Department, Bromley, Kent, England Dr Sherman M. Bull (private collection) Cambridge University Library, Manuscripts Department, Cambridge, England Christ’s College, Cambridge, England Cleveland Health Sciences Library, Cleveland, Ohio, USA CUL. See Cambridge University Library DAR. See Cambridge University Library A Dodgson family member (private collection) Edinburgh University Library, Edinburgh, Scotland Ernst-Haeckel-Haus, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, Jena, Germany Expression 2d ed. (publication) Famous Notables (dealers) Helene Fick ed. 1897–1908 (publication) Gilman 1899 (publication) Gray Herbarium, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA Harvard University Archives, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA John Hay Library, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA The Huntington Library, San Marino, California, USA Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London, England

xxxii

Provenances

Ipswich Museum, Ipswich, Suffolk, England Karpeles Manuscript Library Museums, Santa Barbara, California, USA Knox College, Seymour Library, Special Collections and Archives, Galesburg, Illinois, USA K¯obunzo, Tokyo, Japan (dealers) Krause ed. 1885–6 (publication) Linnean Society of London, Piccadilly, London, England James Lowe Autographs (dealer) McGill University Library, Rare Books and Special Collections, Montreal, Quebec, Canada Joseph M. Maddalena (dealer) Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland, USA Mitchell Library, State Library of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia Morristown National Historical Park, Morristown, New Jersey, USA Moulinié trans. 1873 (publication) Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington, New Zealand Amy Nagashima (private collection) The Trustees of the National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) The National Library of Sweden, Stockholm, Sweden The Natural History Museum, London, England Nature (publication) Archives of the New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York, USA The New York Public Library, New York, USA Northumberland Collections Service, Woodhorn, Ashington, Northumberland, England Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Oxford, England S. Paget ed. 1901 (publication) Parliamentary Papers 1872 (publication) Barbara and Robert Pincus (private collection) Princeton University Library, Manuscripts Division, Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, Princeton, New Jersey, USA Paul C. Richards (dealers) Hudson Rogue Co. (dealers) Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, England Joseph R. Sakmyster (dealers) A. de Saporta (private collection) Shrewsbury School Library, Shrewsbury, England Barton L. Smith MD (private collection) Smithsonian Institution Libraries, Washington DC, USA Sotheby’s, New York (dealers) Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin, Germany. Sulivan family (private collection) Torquay Museum Society, Torquay Museum, Torquay, Devon, England

Provenances

xxxiii

Transactions of the Hawick Archæological Society (publication) UCL Library Services, Special Collections, London, England Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Bonn, Bonn, Germany University of Aberdeen Library, Aberdeen, Scotland University of Birmingham, Special Collections, Edgbaston, Birmingham, England University of California Los Angeles, Biomedical Library, Los Angeles, California, USA University of London, Senate House Library, London, England University of Otago, Special Collections, Library, Dunedin, New Zealand Department of Rare Books, Special Collections and Preservation, River Campus Libraries, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, USA University of Toronto, Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, Toronto, Canada Waddington Auction (dealers) Wellcome Library, London, England Wienbibliothek im Rathaus, Vienna, Austria John Wilson (dealer) Zentralbibliothek Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland Zoologische Staatssammlung München, Munich, Germany

A NOTE ON EDITORIAL POLICY

The first and chief objective of this edition is to provide complete and authoritative texts of Darwin’s correspondence. For every letter to or from Darwin, the text that is available to the editors is always given in full. The editors have occasionally included letters that are not to or from Darwin if they are relevant to the published correspondence. Volumes of the Correspondence are published in chronological order. Occasional supplements will be published containing letters that have come to light or have been redated since the relevant volumes of the Correspondence appeared. Letters that can only be given a wide date range, in some instances spanning several decades, are printed in the supplement following the volume containing letters at the end of their date range. The first such supplement was in volume 7 and included letters from 1828 to 1857; the second was in volume 13, and included letters from 1822 to 1864; the third was in volume 18, and included letters from 1835 to 1869. Dating of letters and identification of correspondents In so far as it is possible, the letters have been dated, arranged in chronological order, and the recipients or senders identified. Darwin seldom wrote the full date on his letters and, unless the addressee was well known to him, usually wrote only ‘Dear Sir’ or ‘Dear Madam’. After the adoption of adhesive postage stamps in the 1840s, the separate covers that came into use with them were usually not preserved, and thus the dates and the names of many recipients of Darwin’s letters have had to be derived from other evidence. The notes made by Francis Darwin on letters sent to him for his editions of his father’s correspondence have been helpful, as have matching letters in the correspondence, but many dates and recipients have had to be deduced from the subject-matter or references in the letters themselves. Transcription policy Whenever possible, transcriptions have been made from manuscripts. If the manuscript was inaccessible but a photocopy or other facsimile version was available, that version has been used as the source. In many cases, the editors have had recourse to Francis Darwin’s large collection of copies of letters, compiled in the 1880s. Other copies, published letters, or drafts have been transcribed when they provided texts that were otherwise unavailable. The method of transcription employed in this edition is adapted from that described by Fredson Bowers in ‘Transcription of manuscripts: the record of variants’,

Editorial policy

xxxv

Studies in Bibliography 29 (1976): 212–64. This system is based on accepted principles of modern textual editing and has been widely adopted in literary editions. The case for using the principles and techniques of this form of textual editing for historical and non-literary documents, both in manuscript and print, has been forcefully argued by G. Thomas Tanselle in ‘The editing of historical documents’, Studies in Bibliography 31 (1978): 1–56. The editors of the Correspondence followed Dr Tanselle in his conclusion that a ‘scholarly edition of letters or journals should not contain a text which has editorially been corrected, made consistent, or otherwise smoothed out’ (p. 48), but they have not wholly subscribed to the statement made earlier in the article that: ‘In the case of notebooks, diaries, letters and the like, whatever state they are in constitutes their finished form, and the question of whether the writer “intended” something else is irrelevant’ (p. 47). The editors have preserved the spelling, punctuation, and grammar of the original, but they have found it impossible to set aside entirely the question of authorial intent. One obvious reason is that in reading Darwin’s writing, there must necessarily be reliance upon both context and intent. Even when Darwin’s general intent is clear, there are cases in which alternative readings are, or may be, possible, and therefore the transcription decided upon must to some extent be conjectural. Where the editors are uncertain of their transcription, the doubtful text has been enclosed in italic square brackets. A major editorial decision was to adopt the so-called ‘clear-text’ method of transcription, which so far as possible keeps the text free of brackets recording deletions, insertions, and other alterations in the places at which they occur. Darwin’s changes are, however, recorded in the back matter of the volume, under ‘Manuscript alterations and comments’, in notes keyed to the printed text by paragraph and line number. All lines above the first paragraph of the letter (that is, date, address, or salutation) are referred to as paragraph ‘0’. Separate paragraph numbers are used for subscriptions and postscripts. This practice enables the reader who wishes to do so to reconstruct the manuscript versions of Darwin’s autograph letters, while furnishing printed versions that are uninterrupted by editorial interpolations. The Manuscript alterations and comments record all alterations made by Darwin in his letters and any editorial amendments made in transcription, and also where part of a letter has been written by an amanuensis; they do not record alterations made by amanuenses. No attempt has been made to record systematically all alterations to the text of copies of Darwin letters included in the correspondence, but ambiguous passages in copies are noted. The editors believe it would be impracticable to attempt to go further without reliable information about the texts of the original versions of the letters concerned. Letters to Darwin have been transcribed without recording any of the writers’ alterations unless they reflect significant changes in substance or impede the sense; in such cases footnotes bring them to the reader’s attention. Misspellings have been preserved, even when it is clear that they were unintentional: for instance, ‘lawer’ for ‘lawyer’. Such errors often indicate excitement or haste and may exhibit, over a series of letters, a habit of carelessness in writing to a particular correspondent or about a particular subject.

xxxvi

Editorial policy

Capital letters have also been transcribed as they occur except in certain cases, such as ‘m’, ‘k’, and ‘c’, which are frequently written somewhat larger than others as initial letters of words. In these cases an attempt has been made to follow the normal practice of the writers. In some instances that are not misspellings in a strict sense, editorial corrections have been made. In his early manuscripts and letters Darwin consistently wrote ‘bl’ so that it looks like ‘lb’ as in ‘albe’ for ‘able’, ‘talbe’ for ‘table’. Because the form of the letters is so consistent in different words, the editors consider that this is most unlikely to be a misspelling but must be explained simply as a peculiarity of Darwin’s handwriting. Consequently, the affected words have been transcribed as normally spelled and no record of any alteration is given in the textual apparatus. Elsewhere, though, there are misformed letters that the editors have recorded because they do, or could, affect the meaning of the word in which they appear. The main example is the occasional inadvertent crossing of ‘l’. When the editors are satisfied that the intended letter was ‘l’ and not ‘t’, as, for example, in ‘stippers’ or ‘istand’, then ‘l’ has been transcribed, but the actual form of the word in the manuscript has been given in the Manuscript alterations and comments. If the only source for a letter is a copy, the editors have frequently retained corrections made to the text when it is clear that they were based upon comparison with the original. Francis Darwin’s corrections of misreadings by copyists have usually been followed; corrections to the text that appear to be editorial alterations have not been retained. Editorial interpolations in the text are in square brackets. Italic square brackets enclose conjectured readings and descriptions of illegible passages. To avoid confusion, in the few instances in which Darwin himself used square brackets, they have been altered by the editors to parentheses with the change recorded in the Manuscript alterations and comments. In letters to Darwin, square brackets have been changed to parentheses silently. Material that is irrecoverable because the manuscript has been torn or damaged is indicated by angle brackets; any text supplied within them is obviously the responsibility of the editors. Occasionally, the editors are able to supply missing sections of text by using ultraviolet light (where text has been lost owing to damp) or by reference to transcripts or photocopies of manuscript material made before the damage occurred. Words and passages that have been underlined for emphasis are printed in italics in accordance with conventional practice. Where the author of a letter has indicated greater emphasis by underlining a word or passage two or more times, the text is printed in bold type. Paragraphs are often not clearly indicated in the letters. Darwin and others sometimes marked a change of subject by leaving a somewhat larger space than usual between sentences; sometimes Darwin employed a longer dash. In these cases, and when the subject is clearly changed in very long stretches of text, a new paragraph has been started by the editors without comment. The beginnings of letters, valedic-

Editorial policy

xxxvii

tions, and postscripts are also treated as new paragraphs regardless of whether they appear as new paragraphs in the manuscript. Special manuscript devices delimiting sections or paragraphs, for example, blank spaces left between sections of text and lines drawn across the page, are treated as normal paragraph indicators and are not specially marked or recorded unless their omission leaves the text unclear. Occasionally punctuation marking the end of a clause or sentence is not present in the manuscript, but the author has made his or her intention clear by allowing, for example, extra space or a line break to function as punctuation. In such cases, the editors have inserted an extra space following the sentence or clause to set it off from the following text. Additions to a letter that run over into the margins, or are continued at its head or foot, are transcribed at the point in the text at which the editors believe they were intended to be read. The placement of such an addition is only recorded in a footnote if it seems to the editors to have some significance or if the position at which it should be transcribed is unclear. Enclosures are transcribed following the letter. The hand-drawn illustrations and diagrams that occur in some letters are reproduced as faithfully as possible and are usually positioned as they were in the original text. In some cases, however, it has been necessary to reduce the size of a diagram or enhance an outline for clarity; any such alterations are recorded in footnotes. The location of diagrams within a letter is sometimes changed for typesetting reasons. Tables have been reproduced as close to the original format as possible, given typesetting constraints. Some Darwin letters and a few letters to Darwin are known only from entries in the catalogues of book and manuscript dealers or mentions in other published sources. Whatever information these sources provide about the content of such letters has been reproduced without substantial change. Any errors detected are included in footnotes. Format of published letters The format in which the transcriptions are printed in the Correspondence is as follows: 1. Order of letters. The letters are arranged in chronological sequence. A letter that can be dated only approximately is placed at the earliest date on which the editors believe it could have been written. The basis of a date supplied by the editors is given in a footnote unless it is derived from a postmark, watermark, or endorsement that is recorded in the physical description of the letter (see section 4, below). Letters with the same date, or with a range of dates commencing with that date, are printed in the alphabetical order of their senders or recipients unless their contents dictate a clear alternative order. Letters dated only to a year or a range of years precede letters that are dated to a particular month or range of months, and these, in turn, precede those that are dated to a particular day or range of dates commencing with a particular day. 2. Headline. This gives the name of the sender or recipient of the letter and its date. The date is given in a standard form, but those elements not taken directly

xxxviii

Editorial policy

from the letter text are supplied in square brackets. The name of the sender or recipient is enclosed in square brackets only where the editors regard the attribution as doubtful. 3. The letter text. The transcribed text follows as closely as possible the layout of the source, although no attempt is made to produce a type-facsimile of the manuscript: word-spacing and line-division in the running text are not adhered to. Similarly, the typography of printed sources is not replicated. Dates and addresses given by authors are transcribed as they appear, except that if both the date and the address are at the head of the letter they are always printed on separate lines with the address first, regardless of the manuscript order. If no address is given on a letter by Darwin, the editors have supplied one, when able to do so, in square brackets at the head of the letter. Similarly, if Darwin was writing from an address different from the one given on the letter, his actual location is given in square brackets. Addresses on printed stationery are transcribed in italics. Addresses, dates, and valedictions have been run into single lines to save space, but the positions of line-breaks in the original are marked by vertical bars. 4. Physical description. All letters are complete and in the hand of the sender unless otherwise indicated. If a letter was written by an amanuensis, or exists only as a draft or a copy, or is incomplete, or is in some other way unusual, then the editors provide the information needed to complete the description. Postmarks, endorsements, and watermarks are recorded only when they are evidence for the date or address of the letter. 5. Source. The final line provides the provenance of the text. Some sources are given in abbreviated form (for example, DAR 140: 18) but are listed in full in the List of provenances unless the source is a published work. Letters in private collections are also indicated. References to published works are given in author–date or shorttitle form, with full titles and publication details supplied in the Bibliography at the end of the volume. 6. Darwin’s annotations. Darwin frequently made notes in the margins of the letters he received, scored significant passages, and crossed through details that were of no further interest to him. These annotations are transcribed or described following the letter text. They are keyed to the letter text by paragraph and line numbers. Most notes are short, but occasionally they run from a paragraph to several pages, and sometimes they are written on separate sheets appended to the letter. Extended notes relating to a letter are transcribed whenever practicable following the annotations as ‘CD notes’. Quotations from Darwin manuscripts in footnotes and elsewhere, and the text of his annotations and notes on letters, are transcribed in ‘descriptive’ style. In this method the alterations in the text are recorded in brackets at the places where they occur. For example: ‘See Daubeny [‘vol. 1’ del] for *descriptions of volcanoes in [interl] S.A.’ ink means that Darwin originally wrote in ink ‘See Daubeny vol. 1 for S.A.’ and then

Editorial policy

xxxix

deleted ‘vol. 1’ and inserted ‘descriptions of volcanoes in’ after ‘for’. The asterisk before ‘descriptions’ marks the beginning of the interlined phrase, which ends at the bracket. The asterisk is used when the alteration applies to more than the immediately preceding word. The final text can be read simply by skipping the material in brackets. Descriptive style is also used in the Manuscript alterations and comments. Editorial matter Each volume is self-contained, having its own index, bibliography, and biographical register. A chronology of Darwin’s activities covering the period of each volume and translations of foreign-language letters are supplied, and additional appendixes give supplementary material where appropriate to assist the understanding of the correspondence. A cumulative index is planned once the edition is complete. References are supplied for all persons, publications, and subjects mentioned, even though some repetition of material in earlier volumes is involved. If the name of a person mentioned in a letter is incomplete or incorrectly spelled, the full, correct form is given in a footnote. Brief biographies of persons mentioned in the letters, and dates of each correspondent’s letters to and from Darwin in the current volume, are given in the Biographical register and index to correspondents. Where a personal name serves as a company name, it is listed according to the family name but retains its original order: for example, ‘E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung’ is listed under ‘S’, not ‘E’. Short titles are used for references to Darwin’s books and articles and to collections of his letters (e.g., Descent, ‘Parallel roads of Glen Roy’, LL). They are also used for some standard reference works and for works with no identifiable author (e.g., Alum. Cantab., Wellesley index, DNB). For all other works, author–date references are used. References to the Bible are to the authorised King James version unless otherwise stated. Words not in Chambers dictionary are usually defined in the footnotes with a source supplied. The full titles and publication details of all books and papers referred to are given in the Bibliography. References to archival material, for instance that in the Darwin Archive at Cambridge University Library, are not necessarily exhaustive. Darwin and his correspondents writing in English consistently used the term ‘fertilisation’ for the processes that are now distinguished as fertilisation (the fusion of female and male gametes) and pollination (the transfer of pollen from anther to stigma); the first usage known to the editors of a distinct term for pollination in English was in 1873 (letter from A. W. Bennett, 12 July 1873 (Calendar no. 8976)). ‘Fertilisation’ in Darwin’s letters and publications often, but not always, can be regarded as referring to what is now termed pollination. In the footnotes, the editors, where possible, have used the modern terms where these can assist in explaining the details of experimental work. When Darwin or his correspondents are quoted directly, their original usage is never altered. The editors use the abbreviation ‘CD’ for Charles Darwin throughout the footnotes. A list of all abbreviations used by the editors in this volume is given on p. xlii.

ABBREVIATIONS AL ALS DS LS LS(A) Mem pc (S)

autograph letter autograph letter signed document signed letter in hand of amanuensis, signed by sender letter in hand of amanuensis with additions by sender memorandum postcard signed with sender’s name by amanuensis

CD CUL DAR del illeg interl underl

Charles Darwin Cambridge University Library Darwin Archive, Cambridge University Library deleted illegible interlined underlined TRANSCRIPTION CONVENTIONS

[some text] [ some text] [some text]   some text some text

‘some text’ is an editorial insertion ‘some text’ is the conjectured reading of an ambiguous word or passage ‘some text’ is a description of a word or passage that cannot be transcribed, e.g., ‘3 words illeg’ word(s) destroyed ‘some text’ is a suggested reading for a destroyed word or passage ‘some text’ is a description of a destroyed word or passage, e.g., ‘3 lines excised’

The Wedgwood and Darwin Robert Waring Darwin = Susannah Wedgwood 1766–1848 1765–1817 Henry Parker = Marianne 1798–1858 1788–1856 Robert b.1825 Henry 1827–92 Francis 1829–71 Charles b.1831 Mary Susan 1836–93 Susan Elizabeth 1803–66

Caroline Sarah = Josiah III (Jos) 1795–1880 1800–88 Sophy Marianne 1838–9 Katherine Elizabeth Sophy (Sophy) 1842–1911 Margaret Susan 1843–1937 Lucy Caroline 1846–1919

Erasmus Alvey 1804–81

Charles Robert = Emma 1808–96 1809–82 William Erasmus 1839–1914 Charles Langton = Emily Catherine Anne Elizabeth 1841–51 1801–86 (Catherine) 1810–66 Mary Eleanor Sept.–Oct. 1842 Henrietta Emma (Etty) 1843–1927 George Howard 1845–1912 Elizabeth 1847–1926 Francis (Frank) 1848–1925 Leonard 1850–1943 Horace 1851–1928 Charles Waring 1856–8

Families up to 1872 Josiah Wedgwood II = Elizabeth (Bessy) Allen 1764–1846 1769–1843 Sarah Elizabeth (Elizabeth) 1793–1880 Mary Anne 1796–8 Charlotte 1797–1862 = Charles Langton 1801–86 Edmund 1841–75

Frances Mosley = Francis 1808–74 (Frank) Godfrey 1833–1905 1800–88 Amy 1835–1910 Cicely Mary 1837–1917 Clement 1840–89 Lawrence 1844–1913 Constance Rose 1846–1903 Mabel Frances 1852–1930 Frances (Fanny) 1806–32

Henry Allen = Jessie Wedgwood 1804–72 (Harry) Louise Frances 1834–1903 1799–1885 Caroline b.1836 John Darwin 1840–70 Anne Jane 1841–77 Arthur 1843–1900 Rowland 1847–1921 Hensleigh 1803–91

= Frances (Fanny) Mackintosh 1800–89 Frances Julia (Snow) 1833–1913 James Mackintosh (Bro) 1834–64 Ernest Hensleigh 1838–98 Katherine Euphemia (Effie) 1839–1931 Alfred Allen 1842–92 Hope Elizabeth 1844–1934

THE CORRESPONDENCE OF CHARLES DARWIN 1872

From James Paget [1872]1 I am at work on the nervous mimicry of organic disease: I have some hope that, during my work, I may fall on some facts which may be of interest to you, and you may be sure that I shall send them to you.2 Incomplete S. Paget ed. 1901, p. 408 1 2

The year is established by the printed source, which assigns this extract from a letter to 1872. Paget’s lectures on the nervous mimicry of organic disease were published in the Lancet in 1873 ( J. Paget 1873).

From ? [1872–4]1

Page. 4.

98. 158.

160. 160

The Descent of Man 1st. edn. Vol 1. footnote. “Dr Barrago Francesco” for Dr. Francesco Barrago—the Italians being in the habit of putting the family name first. See for example the Visiting Card inclosed— line 20. “appropriate” employed for “correct”. lines 7–8 . . . man . . . would have been but little liable to have had his bodily structure modified . . . —for. “would have been but little liable to have his bodily &c.2 line 23. “Undoubtedly it would have been interesting to have traced” for “to trace”—3 line 27. “neither my ability nor knowledge permit the attempt” for “permits”

Page 160.

line 32 . . . “as soon as the progenitors of man became social . . . the advancement of the intellectual faculties will have been aided” . . . for “would have been”4

2

January 1872 165/. 229. 228.

line 7— “We may therefore conclude that primaeval man at a very remote period would have been influenced” . . . for “was influenced” . . . line 3. “ranked species” as omitted—

186.

line 22. . . “they must decide what forms to rank as species”. . . for “what forms they will rank as species”. . . .  line 5. we have every reason to believe. . . .5

187.

line 26

406.

line 18. “D r Wallace” line 35

413.

? we have reason to believe. . . . 6 “M r Wallace”.7

line 9. “Diadema anomala” for anomalum.8 Vol 2d.

9.

line 29. “anal fin” for “caudal fin” as shewn in the engraving.

34

line 25. “we come to the climax of difference”. for acme. (climax being the ladder by which the acme is approached)— line 15. “The males of many birds are larger than the females and this (increase of size) no doubt is an advantage to them in their battles with their rivals” . . . Would increase of size in the males compared with females be of advantage to the males as between themselves?9 lines 10 & 11. “the love dance and love song of the Black cock is called” . . . 10

43.

45.

DAR 88: 151–2 CD ANNOTATIONS 4.1 4. . . . inclosed— 4.3] crossed ink 5.1 98. . . . “correct”.] crossed blue crayon 6.1 158. . . . believe . . . 14.1] crossed ink 16.1 406. . . . anomalum. 17.1] crossed red crayon 18.1 9. . . . engraving.] crossed ink 18.1 9. . . . approached)— 19.2] crossed ink 20.2 (increase of size)] square brackets in ms 20.2 is an advantage . . . rivals” . . . 20.3] ‘result’ pencil, right margin 1

2 3 4

The date range is established by the fact that these corrections were made in the second edition of Descent, published in 1874, but not in the last printing of the first edition, which appeared in December 1871 (Freeman 1977). All corrections were made essentially as suggested by the letter writer unless otherwise noted. In Descent 2d ed., p. 127, CD changed this text to read, ‘would have been but little liable to bodily modifications’. In Descent 2d ed., p. 128, CD changed this text to read, ‘Undoubtedly it would be interesting to trace’. In Descent 2d ed., p. 129, CD changed this text to read, ‘the principle of imitation, and reason, and experience would have increased, and much modified the intellectual powers in a way, of which we see only traces in the lower animals’.

January 1872 5 6 7

8 9

10

3

In Descent 2d ed., p. 146, CD omitted ‘every’ from this phrase. In Descent 2d ed., p. 148, CD retained the text, ‘we have every reason to believe’. This chapter of Descent was extensively altered in the second edition; however, Dr Wallace and Mr Wallace were correctly titled in both editions (they were Alexander Wallace, MD, and Alfred Russel Wallace). Diadema anomala (now Hypolimnas anomala, the Malayan eggfly) was not mentioned in Descent 2d ed. In Descent 2d ed., p. 362, CD changed this text to read, ‘The males of many birds are larger than the females, and this no doubt is the result of the advantage gained by the larger and stronger males over their rivals during many generations.’ In Descent 2d ed., p. 363, CD changed this text to read, ‘the love-dances and love-songs of the Black-cock are called’.

From W. E. Darwin [1 January 1872]1 Monday My dear Father, I went to Stonehenge yesterday. about 4 43 m. from Salisbury I saw an old ridged & furrowed field (which shepherd at Stonehenge said had been so out of memory) 2 The hill sloped perhaps 7o at top to 10o or 12o 34 way down & then gradually lessened its slope to the valley. The ridges were straight down the slope & faint and seemed to terminate in a common transverse furrow at the bottom of the steepest pitch, & therefore some little way from base of slope. It was so gastly cold I could not stay long, meaning to go again, unless anything else turned up. I unfortunately did not examine carefully enough transverse furrow Beginning at top of slope depth of furrow— 5 70

strides

60

"

down—

4

lower

5

10

4

1 8

inch

deep

"

deep

1 4 1 4

"

" " " 10 5 " " " I do know what the interval is between these two measurements.  18 strides from transverse furrow was 3 12 deep furrow where the other ends 8 strides nearer transverse furrow 4 strides nearer transverse furrow (i.e. 4 strides from it)

 

"

"

3 12

"

"

3 14

"

4

January 1872

This is quite incomplete, and should be measured all again; it wants 2 or 3 persons to do it quickly. at Stonehenge itself little was to be made out. the main outer range of stones with flat ones on the top were all of same level and therefore certainly had not sunk. A pair of large ones with top one fell in 1797; these have made a great indentation in the ground, and have squeezed some of their corners into the ground, but they are undermined by rats or rabbits and are of such gigantic size that nothing could be told as to the work of worms. In several places the outer stones have fallen outwards and broken in two, and these great blocks are all sunk in the grass at various angles. I examined one which may have lain for many centuries as the fracture between the two halves was quite weather worn. By means of my trowel I found that this was sunk at the spot I examined 10 inches into the mould (it was evidently worm mould v. full of worms); the shepherd said the earth had probably been disturbed there, but I could see no signs of it and the turf was smooth all round the block. at almost 8 yards from the point outwards and falling about 10 inches to a foot, I found the depth of the mould above the mixed flint and chalk to be 5 12 inches and at a depth of about 4 inches I found a bit of tobacco pipe. I should think therefore the blocks had long sunk as deep as they could, tho’ by driving my skewer (of 6 inches) down down at bottom of my trowel hole (of 12 inches deep) I did not find the bottom.3 I found I had reached bottom of stone on that side by being able to drive my skewer underneath it at right angles to my trowel hole. The two halves of the stone I think have sunk to the same amount into the soil as they are about the same level above it namely 2 ft; a corresponding stone standing up is about 2ft 10 inches in depth which agrees with this one, but they are not very regular, and the block may easily have sunk on certain points as far as the rubble so as to prevent this block sinking any more on the side I examined. round many of the buried (not round the upright) stones the angle between the turf & stone was filled with turf to the height of 3 to 4 inches

this turf was pretty evidently caused by worms as the castings were coming out between the stone & the upper edge of the turf, and in some cases in the little slope itself. this turf band was not all round the blocks, and as far as I could decide anything, there was no band of turf where the stone went sheer (perpendicular) down. the irregularities in the stone were mostly filled in. As this patch pointed out by the

January 1872

5

shepherd as having been untouched during memory of man I send you particulars on another sheet. I go tomorrow to examine a field which I hear on first rate authority was corn about 50 years ago & has not been touched since. I also hear of a similar field in Beaulieu Park which I hope to go to soon as well as the Abbey armed with an introduction.4 Your affect Son | WED DAR 162: 105 CD ANNOTATIONS 3.1 faint] underl red crayon 3.2 furrow] ‘or sort of ditch’ added after pencil 5.1 furrow] ‘, or sort of ditch.—’ added after pencil 6.1 Beginning . . . slope] ‘Not at bottom of slope.’ added pencil 6.2 depth . . . 5 " 6.6] ‘6 miles from Stonehenge’ added pencil 9.1 at . . . worms. 10.4] ‘if built on chalk no sinking’ added pencil 9.2 not sunk] ‘or all sunk equally’ inserted pencil after ‘sunk’ 11.1 In several . . . angles. 11.2] scored red crayon; ‘several’ and ‘stones’ underl red crayon; ‘this looks like subsidence’ inserted pencil after ‘outwards’ 12.4 the shepherd . . . pipe. 12.8] ‘But why has more mould accumulated close to stone than at distance of 8 yards Did not block indent the mould?’ added pencil 12.3 10 inches] underl red crayon 12.3 into the mould] ‘mould’ underl red crayon 12.4 full of worms] underl red crayon 12.6 8 yards] underl red crayon 12.7 5 21 inches] underl red crayon 12.8 tobacco pipe.] underl red crayon 13.1 I . . . bottom 13.3] ‘Is turf abruptly higher close to stones?’ added pencil; ‘of mould.?— [altered from ‘of what? mould?—’]’ inserted after ‘bottom’ 15.2 filled . . . inches] scored red crayon 15.diagram turf . . . turf] ‘How [ wide] is this little slope?’ below ‘turf ’, left of diagram; ‘How big?’ above ‘stone’; ‘Perhaps from falling, if so only at fallen [ end]’ below ‘stone’; ‘— This seems very curious & perhaps explains my query on p. 4— I do not understand’ above ‘turf ’, right of diagram 15.3 this turf . . . itself. 15.5] scored red crayon 15.7 the irregularities . . . filled in.] scored and underl pencil 16.1 I go . . . introduction. 17.2] crossed pencil Bottom of second page: ‘Jan 1st 1872’ pencil Top of letter: ‘William thinks of no use | Jan 1. 1872’ pencil 1 2 3 4

The date is established by CD’s annotation. Stonehenge is a group of standing stones on Salisbury Plain in Wiltshire. William’s observations of the field are given in Earthworms, p. 296. CD gave William’s observations at Stonehenge in Earthworms, pp. 154–6. William examined the buried pavement at Beaulieu Abbey in Hampshire on 5 January 1872; CD himself visited in 1877 (Earthworms, pp. 193–7).

From J. D. Hooker 1 January 1872

Royal Gardens Kew Jany 1/72.

Dear Darwin I have a confidential communication from Mr Gladstone’s P.S. to the effect that a

6

January 1872

plan is under the consideration of Govt., by which my “position as regards the First Comms of Works would be materially altered”—1 So I hope I see a way out of the wood.— Huxley writes, no better for his Brighton trip & evidently much out of sorts. I am quite sure that this miscellaneous work is very prejudicial to him, mentally & bodily—& I do wish he could be put into some good post that would allow the full exercise of his Scientific & administrative abilities, without taxing them too much. 2 I fancy that you & I are the only men for whose opinion he cares much. The organization of the new Nat. Hist. Museum would be just the thing for him. They should give him £1500 a year for 5 years to do it.— I wonder if he would accept this:— he would not I feel sure take the permanent post of Director. I know of no one else competent for the task.3 They should have sent you 2 Pleromas— keep & flower that you have, & I will let you know when mine are coming into flower. I have 2 of them. 4 Have you not plenty of Hazels in the coppice where you take your exercise? 5 if so may I send a man to take a Score or two of strong suckers? I want to make some Hazel thickets here. I go to Torquay tomorrow for two days.6 Many happy returns of the season to you & yours’— I hope Henrietta is better. 7 Ever yours affec | J D Hooker I have informed Sir H Holland of Mr West’s communication. 8 DAR 103: 101–2 1

2

3

4 5 6 7

William Ewart Gladstone’s secretary was Algernon Edward West. Hooker had been in dispute with the first commissioner of works, Acton Smee Ayrton, since before 1871, over the running of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. On Hooker’s dispute with Ayrton, see Nature, 11 July 1872, pp. 211–16; L. Huxley ed. 1918, 2: 159–77; Macleod 1974; Port 1984; Drayton 2000, pp. 211–20; Endersby 2008, pp. 282– 300; and Correspondence vol. 19. Hooker’s most recent letter to CD mentioning the subject is that of 22 December 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19). Thomas Henry Huxley’s health had failed at the end of 1871 and he had gone to Brighton for a short holiday (L. Huxley ed. 1900, 1: 365). On Huxley’s overworking at this period, see A. Desmond 1994–7, 2: 26–8; he broke down completely in early January 1872. In 1870, a site at South Kensington was confirmed for the building of a new Natural History Museum to contain the natural history collections of the British Museum. Building work did not begin until 1873, and the museum opened in 1881. The first director was William Henry Flower. See Stearn 1981, pp. 3, 46, 67. CD made a brief reference to his experiments on a Pleroma (‘unnamed species from Kew’) in Cross and self fertilisation, p. 364. Pleroma is a genus in the family Melastomataceae. CD took his exercise in the sandwalk, or ‘thinking path’, through a wood planted near Down House in 1846 (see Atkins 1974, pp. 25–8). Hooker’s mother, Maria Hooker, and sister, Elizabeth Evans-Lombe, lived at Torquay (Allan 1967, p. 224). In her diary (DAR 242), Emma Darwin noted that Henrietta Emma Litchfield was ill on 2 and 21 December 1871.

January 1872 8

7

Henry Holland had acted as an intermediary in Hooker’s dispute with Ayrton in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from J. D. Hooker, 20 October 1871).

From J. J. Moulinié 1 January 1872 Geneva January 1 1872 Dear Sir, Excuse me for the long delay between my answer to your kind letter of the beginning of this month and my answer at the end, but the numerous occupations, private (corrections of the Origin & Dessendance) and official, have left me hardly any time to compare the new edition of Origin, of which I have received since the four first accompanying your letter, eleven others, in total 240 pages, to give you my opinion on the manner of introducing them in the printed translation. 1 The most important change between the 5th & 6th edition, is the fact that the VIIth chapter has an another object in the last, than in the VIIth of the preceding; and the VIIIth (Instinct) corresponds to the VIIth of the translation of the 5th Edition; the IXth to the VIIIth , I cannot tell more, not having above the beginning of the IX th chapter.2 As all the chapters of the translation are printed with their titles and summary heads, they must remain so, but will not concord by their ciphers with those of the 6 th , except in the six first; I suppose at least that this will have the result of establishing 15 chapters instead of 14 in the 6th English edition, the number of 14 subsisting in the translation. This will require a preface as clear as possible to attract the reader to the corrections, and great attention in the cases of citations, the difference of number of the English edition, with that of the French, must be given. All this difficulty will be, when all the elements of the supplemental part will be collected, to give them the predominance on the old text, the first by order, and in which no where references to the supplementary can being now inserted. I think a table placed before the Introduction, giving the pages of the text, and those corresponding to the same object in the supplement might be very useful to recall to his mind the moment where he is to recur to it, and give him the means of finding it immediately. 3 The first volume of Descendance will I hope soon be published, it is actually at the 22d sheet on 30 total, calculated by what is done. The second will follow immediately.4 With my respectful compliments to Mrs. Darwin, may the year on the first day of which this letter carries the date, be less unfortunate than the last, 5 and I conclude by a Happy New Year for Mr. Darwin and his family; and hoping this will find you in good health, I remain dear Sir, | your’s most respectfully devoted | J. J. Moulinié DAR 171: 277 1

CD had written to Moulinié, sending four proof-sheets of the sixth edition of Origin, on 5 December 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19). Moulinié was translating Descent and Origin 6th ed. into French (Moulinié

8

2

3 4 5

January 1872 trans. 1872 and 1873). Moulinie had almost finished translating Origin 5th ed. when CD wrote to him that a sixth edition was in preparation (Correspondence vol. 19, letter to J. J. Moulinié, 28 June [1871] and nn. 4 and 5, and letter from J. J. Moulinié, 7 July 1871). CD had inserted a new chapter 7 into Origin 6th ed. to counter the objections of St George Jackson Mivart and others to the theory of natural selection. In the French translation (Moulinié trans. 1873), this chapter was printed at the end of the book, before the glossary and index. Moulinié trans. 1873, pp. 517–24, summarised additions to be made to the first half of the translation to bring it into accord with the sixth edition. Moulinié refers to his translation of Descent (Moulinié trans. 1872). Moulinié alludes to the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 and 1871, and its aftermath (see Wawro 2003).

To J. D. Hooker 2 January 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan 2. 1872

My dear Hooker I am heartily glad of yr news, & now I hope that you will be able to work with an undisturbed mind.1 I feel yr news quite as a relief, & you must do so in a much greater degree. There are a good many hazels in the sand walk & you are perfectly welcome to have them all; but what appear like suckers seem to me more like branches from old underground cut down stems, & I do not think they wd be easily removed.2 I fully believe you cd buy 100s at a less cost than the journey of yr messenger to & fro; but as I said you are perfectly welcome to send if you think fit. I saw Huxley when I was in town & thought he looked very unwell. I quite agree with what you say about his doing too much miscellaneous work. 3 I have often preached to him & will do so again; but I believe he partly does this work for money for his family & then what can one say. If your scheme could be organized of making him a sort of Director General for the transference of the British Museum & for other Scientific work, this w d be splendid; but how can it possibly be effected?4 Yours affectionately | Ch. Darwin LS DAR 94: 216–17 1 2 3 4

See letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872 and n. 5. CD refers to Thomas Henry Huxley. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872 and n. 2. CD was in London from 14 to 22 December 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, Appendix II). See letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872 and n. 3.

To W. E. Darwin 3 January [1872]1

Down Jan 3d.

My dear William Your letter & facts are quite splendid.—2 I cannot conceive how you could have observed so much without aid.—

January 1872

9

The depth of mould at different parts of slope & base is a most valuable observation.— The little step or slope round the great fallen stones very curious;— I suppose the worms work under the stones, & come up at nearest point, viz close outside.— There are many points which I want to discuss & get explained. Shall you be coming to Down within a month or so? We cannot reconcile the large & capital diagram with the 2d page of your letter: I imagine they refer to different parts. 3 Again I am curious to know whether in the middle part of slope in diagram, whether the inclination is greater, for the furrows for a space are decidedly deeper than above or below.— I have made pencil notes on your letter,4 so that I shall not forget what to Incomplete5 Natural History Museum (Gen. Lib. MSS/DAR: 30) 1 2 3

4 5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from W. E. Darwin, [1 January 1872]. See letter from W. E. Darwin, [1 January 1872]. The diagram has not been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. CD’s notes for Earthworms are in DAR 63–5. The second page of the letter from W. E. Darwin, [1 January 1872], runs from ‘I unfortunately’ to ‘to do it quickly.’ See CD’s annotations to the letter from W. E. Darwin, [1 January 1872]. The bottom third of the third page of the letter has been excised.

From A. C. Ramsay 3 January 1872 London 3 Jany 1872 My dear Mr Darwin There are 4 stones down the midle 16 inches square. 3 at the sides 18 in x 8, 1, 12 x 8 in 1, 17 x 2 in, 1, 18 x 14 in 2 24 x 14 in besides the 2 sides & top & bottom of the paved space, each 7 ft 2 by 3 ft 2. But perhaps the best mode of estimate is as follows. I measured all the lines of the junction of the stones with the walls that bound the pavement, & of the stones with each other. The result is 39 feet 2 inches of narrow interspaces through which worms could come to the surface taking the whole 7 ft 2 in by 3 ft 2 in into account. 1 I am sorry I have delayed a little & hope I am not too late for you. Daylight at this time of the year is rather scarce with me at home except on Sundays & Sir John Lubbocks holidays.2 Yours very sincerely | Andw C Ramsay DAR 176: 18 1

Ramsay describes a pavement running from his house to his garden; the pavement had subsided apparently as a result of the action of earthworms (see Earthworms, pp. 192–3, and Correspondence vol. 19, letter to A. C. Ramsay, 21 December [1871], and letter from A. C. Ramsay, 27 December 1871). Ramsay lived at 29 Upper Phillimore Place, Kensington (Post Office London directory 1871).

10 2

January 1872 John Lubbock had drafted the Bank Holiday Bill, which was passed in 1871 (ODNB).

From St G. J. Mivart 4 January 1872

7, North Bank, | N.W. Janry. 4th 1872

My dear Sir I herewith forward, by book post, a separate copy of my reply to Prof. Huxley’s criticism on the “Genesis of Species”—1 I had hoped to have been able to have sent you at the same time my reply to Mr Chauncey Wright but owing to an accident I must wait till April when I hope it will be out.2 Wishing you very sincerely a happy new year | I remain | My dear Sir | Yours very truly | St Geo Mivart To | C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 197 1

2

There are two copies of Mivart’s reply to Thomas Henry Huxley, published in the January 1872 issue of Contemporary Review (Mivart 1872a), in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL; one is an offprint, and the other has been torn from a copy of the Contemporary Review and is lightly annotated. Mivart also refers to his book criticising CD’s theory of natural selection, On the genesis of species (Mivart 1871a). Huxley’s criticism of Mivart was also published in Contemporary Review (T. H. Huxley 1871a). Mivart published a reply to Chauncey Wright’s review of Genesis of species (Wright 1871a, Mivart 1871a) in the April 1872 issue of North American Review (Mivart 1872b).

To J. J. Moulinié 4 January 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan 4. 1872 My dear Sir I am much obliged for your letter. I was not at all aware that the headings of the chapters had been printed off. Under these circumstances I w d suggest that you shd print the new part of the new chapter VII as an appendix, & explain the circumstances.1 You could also correct all the part that is not printed off in accordance with the new edition; & the corrections are not very numerous. I hope soon to send you some new sheets; but the printers have been unusually slow over this vol. As far as I can judge the new part of Chapter VII wd be worth publication in France.2 I hope you will soon have more leisure. Mrs Darwin joins me in thanking you for your good wishes— Believe me my dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS Bibliothèque de Genève, Ms. suppl. 66 fol. 26–7 1

See letter from J. J. Moulinié, 1 January 1872 and nn. 2 and 3. Moulinié was translating Origin 6th ed. into French (Moulinié trans. 1873).

January 1872 2

11

Part of the new chapter 7 in the English edition of Origin 6th ed. consisted of modified extracts from chapter 4 of the previous editions; the rest was new. Moulinié had already translated chapter 4 from Origin 5th ed. when CD announced that a sixth was to be published, and he translated the whole of chapter 7 of the Origin 6th ed. as the last chapter in his translation.

To St G. J. Mivart 5 January 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan 5. 1872

My dear Sir I am sorry that you have had the trouble of sending me a copy of your article, as I had already procured the Review. 1 I am obliged to you for the opinion which you express about me; but I consider that you have greatly misrepresented my views & conclusions; & I hope I am not quite so bigotted a person as I am made to appear in the Quarterly Review. 2 We however differ so completely in our opinion of what is reasonable & just that it w d be waste of time on both sides for us to discuss almost any subject. Time will decide which of us is in the right. Dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS Natural History Museum (Kohler) 1 2

See letter from St G. J. Mivart, 4 January 1872 and n. 1. CD refers to Mivart 1872a and the Contemporary Review. In Mivart 1872a, p. 173, Mivart wrote, I have ever entertained, and shall continue to entertain for that amiable gentleman and most accomplished naturalist the warmest sentiments of esteem and regard. Convinced as I am that he is actuated by a pure love of truth, admiring, nay, venerating him for his acute, his unwearied and widely-extended researches, it has been to me a most painful task to stand forth as his avowed and public opponent. Mivart had written an anonymous review of Descent in the Quarterly Review ([Mivart] 1871c). Mivart’s authorship was suspected (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to A. R. Wallace, 12 July [1871]), and is confirmed by the Wellesley index.

To Mary Treat 5 January 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan 5. 1872

Dear Madam Your observations & experiments on the sexes of butterflies are by far the best, as far as known to me, which have ever been made. 1 They seem to me so important, that I earnestly hope you will repeat them & record the exact numbers of the larvæ which you tempt to continue feeding & deprive of food, & record the sexes of the mature insect. Assuredly you ought then to publish the result in some well-known scientific journal.2 I am glad to hear that your observations on Drosera will be published. 3

12

January 1872

I have attended to this subject during several years, & have almost M.S enough to make a volume; but have never yet found time to publish it. I am very much obliged for yr courteous letter & remain dear Madam | yours faithfully | Charles Darwin LS Amy Nagashima (private collection) 1

2 3

In her letter of 20 December 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19), Treat wrote about her observations on Papilio asterias (now P. polyxenes asterius, the black swallowtail butterfly), which suggested that the sex of the adult was determined by amount of time the larva spent feeding. Treat repeated her experiments in 1872 and published the results in American Naturalist (Treat 1873). See Gianquitto 2007, pp. 155–9. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Mary Treat, 20 December 1871 and n. 5. Treat’s observations were published in a note submitted by Asa Gray to the American Journal of Science (Treat 1871), and in A. Gray 1872a, p. 44, where Gray wrote of Drosera, ‘in one of our species with longer leaves (D. longifolia) the blade of the leaf itself incurves (as an intelligent lady has observed), so as to fold around its victim!’ Drosera longifolia is now D. anglica (the English sundew).

To L. C. Wedgwood 5 January [1872]1

Jan 5 My dear Lucy Supposing that you have leisure during next 2 or 3 weeks, will you have a try with straight blunt knitting needle to ascertain, whether on steep slopes the worms come to surface at nearly right angles to the slope, or at nearly right angles to the horizon.—2 We have no steep grass-covered slopes here;— 3 On nearly level surfaces the worms come up at all conceivable angles.— It wd be very important for me if I cd. ascertain that they generally come up at rt. ∠s to the slope.— It is not easy to probe the holes.— Yours affect | C. Darwin Cambridge University Library (Add 4251: 331) 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from L. C. Wedgwood, 20 January [1872]. CD thought that if earthworms dug burrows at right angles to the slope, denudation would be increased (see Earthworms, p. 270). Wedgwood lived with her parents at Leith Hill Place, near Dorking, Surrey.

To Francis Darwin 6 January 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan 6. 1872 My dear Frank Very many thanks for all the trouble you have taken. I do not quite understand one or 2 points. You speak of ridges running down the slope; therefore I suppose your wavy line A is a horizontal section of the surface; but if so, how can y r Red letters D

January 1872

13

& E represent an upper & lower part of the same slope?1 Lastly, I do not feel sure whether the difference in thickness of the slope between top & bottom (where I have put 2 blue crosses) refers to the ridges & furrows, or to the upper & lower part of the slope. Please to answer this at your leisure & return the enclosed & I am very much obliged for the trouble you have taken | yours affectly | Ch. Darwin LS(A) Natural History Museum (Gen. Lib. MSS/DAR: 29) FRANCIS DARWIN ANNOTATIONS

1.2 I suppose . . . surface; 1.3] ‘Yes’ added above, ink 1.3 but if so, . . . same slope? 1.4] ‘D & E are only to show that the 2 trenches were not cut across the same furrow’ added above, ink 1.5 difference . . . between] ‘No texture & color only’ added above, ink 1.6 upper & lower part of the slope. 1.7] ‘No to the top & bottom of trenches only’ added below, ink 1

Francis’s letter and diagram have not been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. CD’s notes for Earthworms are in DAR 63–5. Francis wrote his answers to CD’s questions between the lines of the letter; see Francis Darwin’s annotations, at the end of the letter.

From St G. J. Mivart 6 January 1872

7, North Bank, | N.W. Janry. 6th 1872

My dear Sir The way in which I have understood your meaning is one widely diffused & shared by some of the most scrupulously conscientious & intelligent of my friends. If therefore I have “greatly misrepresented” your “views & conclusions”, sorry as I should be for my own sake to have done such an unintentional injustice, yet for your sake, I should rejoice to have been the occasion of your correcting such wrong impressions & so for ever doing away with delusions which otherwise might impair your fame in the eyes of posterity.1 Believe me I shall most willingly and gladly acknowledge myself to have misunderstood (& consequently misrepresented) you as soon as ever you give me the pleasure of reading a disclaimer of what, with all regret, I cannot but regard as fundamental intellectual errors. You will I am sure on reflection, readily acknowledge that as a man of science I have no choice but to pursue “truth” to the best of my ability in spite of consequences in the accidentally painful effects of which I fully share. Whatever may be the spirit in which you may be induced to judge my efforts I shall never be untrue to my published declaration as to these sentiments of esteem with which I am | Yours sincerely | St G. Mivart DAR 171: 198 1

See letter from St G. J. Mivart, 4 January 1872, and letter to St G. J. Mivart, 5 January 1872.

14

January 1872

To F. E. Abbot 8 January 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan. 8th /72/

Private My dear Sir I have just received nor 104 of the Index, & I must write a few lines to say that I feel grateful for the manner in which you have introduced my name, which is in fact a magnificent eulogium on me.1 There are hosts of people, who if they saw the article, would disagree with you as widely as is possible; for it is the fashion here to say that I am a good observer, but possess an utterly illogical mind. I greatly admire the force & eloquence of all the latter part of your article. A firm belief in the laws of nature will some day reign supreme.— 2 Believe me | My dear Sir | Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin Harvard University Archives 1

2

CD began to subscribe to the Index, a newspaper edited by Abbot advocating free religion, in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to F. E. Abbot, 6 June [1871]). CD’s copy of the Index, 23 December 1871, is in DAR 139.12: 2. In an editorial headed ‘The coming empire of science’ (pp. 404–5), Abbot revealed that an quotation approving of his Truths for the times (Abbot [1870]) printed in an earlier issue of the Index (that of 24 June 1871) was in fact from a letter from CD (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to F. E. Abbot, 27 May [1871], for the quotation, which is the last sentence of the letter). He reprinted the quotation, and also the first paragraph of CD’s letter to him of 16 November [1871] (ibid.), which suggested modifications to it. See also ibid., letter to F. E. Abbot, 6 September [1871], and letters from F. E. Abbot, 20 August 1871 and n. 7, and 1 November 1871. Abbot argued for a religion based on scientific method, and a harmonising of modern science and modern religion.

To St G. J. Mivart 8 January [1872]

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan 8th

Private My dear Sir I most fully agree with what you say about pursuing the truth at all costs. 1 I will not enter on any details, as I am convinced that nothing which I could say would have any influence on you.— If I had not been personally known to you, I sh d. not have been vexed at the spirit which seems to me & to some others to pervade all your articles in relation to me, notwithstanding general expressions to the contrary.— I can say this confidently, as I read the Month long before I knew that you were the author, & considered carefully all the arguments, without caring about the denunciation of atheism &c., as I had been well accustomed to covert sneers of all kinds & to denunciations of all kinds.—2 As it is your several articles have mortified me more than those of any other man, excepting Prof. Owen; & for the same reasons, as I was silly enough to think he felt friendly towards me.—3 I hope that you will now let this correspondence drop, as I want to drive the whole subject out of my mind; & I can protect myself for the future by not reading your controversial writings, only those

January 1872

15

devoted to ordinary science.— So you can pursue your course, & I can pursue mine for a little longer, without our interfering with each other. My dear Sir | Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin Postmark: JA 8 72 Natural History Museum (Kohler) 1 2

3

See letter from St G. J. Mivart, 6 January 1872. Mivart had published books and articles critical of CD’s theory of natural selection, including one in the Catholic journal, the Month ([Mivart] 1869). He also published On the genesis of species (Mivart 1871a), and an anonymous review of Descent in Quarterly Review ([Mivart] 1871c), which CD correctly suspected was by him, and a riposte to Thomas Henry Huxley in Contemporary Review (Mivart 1872a). CD had enjoyed apparently cordial relations with Richard Owen, who described fossil mammal specimens from the Beagle voyage, until Owen published a hostile review of Origin in the Edinburgh Review ([Owen] 1860; see Correspondence vol. 8 and ODNB s.v. Owen, Sir Richard).

To John Murray 8 January [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan. 8th

My dear Sir Will you be so good as to give orders for the immediate printing off of copies of the Diagram for the new Edit. of the Origin.2 The new Edit will be (with Index) I think 448 pages; & as it has no illustrations, do you not think 6 s is too dear for a cheap Edit? Would not 5s be better?3 Pray think of this. The public are accustomed to novels for 1s.— Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin Mr Dallas has made an excellent Glossary.—4 National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 f. 271) 1 2 3 4

The year is established by the references to the sixth edition of Origin, which was published in 1872. A fold-out diagram of species descent was included in all editions of Origin; in the sixth edition it faced page 90. Origin 6th ed. was 458 pages long with 21 pages of preliminaries. It sold for 7s. 6d. The first and fifth edition had sold for 15s., and the second, third, and fourth for 14s. (Peckham ed. 1959, pp. 16–22). Origin 6th ed. included for the first time a glossary by William Sweetland Dallas (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to R. F. Cooke, 13 October [1871]).

To ? 8 January [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan. 8th

Sir I am obliged by your letter of Jan. 6th.— But I do not desire to join the movement to which you allude, because I have not sufficiently considered the subject, & therefore am not willing to take any side.—2 I have the honour to remain | Sir | Your obet. servt | Ch. Darwin American Philosophical Society (405)

16 1 2

January 1872 The year is established by the printed stationery, with the address on the right; CD used this type of notepaper from May 1871 until January 1872. The letter has not been found, and the movement has not been identified.

To W. E. Darwin 9 January [1872] Down Jan. 9th My dear William I received this morning the last proof, & I must thank you cordially for all the labour & anxiety, which you have saved & for all grinding work which you have yourself undergone.—1 In one page a whole line had got misplaced, which I see had puzzled you & at first confounded me.— I shall not want the Preface, Index &c looked over by you, so that your work is finally done.— I am so glad we shall see you on Sunday. Yours affectionately | C. Darwin Postmark: JA 9 72 DAR 210.6: 137 1

William had been reading the proof-sheets of the sixth edition of Origin (see Correspondence vol. 19, postcard to W. E. Darwin, 31 [October 1871]).

From Eduard von Eichwald 10 January 1872 Sir, I have the honour to send you a paper on the coasts of Manghischlak and Alaska and beg you inform me, whether Mrs. Gibb and Meek have not published something like it on the same object.1 I have read in the newspapers that the Americans send a Commission with a young geologue Mr. Dall in order to measure the coasts of Alaska and the aleutic islands2 Has this young man published anything on this object? I should like to send him also a copy of my paper, if I only could be informed, where he is to be found. Allow me, dear Sir, to ask you to help me on one occasion. I shoud wish to sell my palaeontogical museum, consisting of about 35000 specimens, of all the formations of Russia on Europe and Asia, fossils plants and animals, among which are those coming from Manghischlak and Alaska and described by me in the present paper. The prize for all the collection is mille p. st.3 The most interesting are the brachiopoda coming from the vicinity of Petersbourg, from the silurian rocks, especially the Orthis, Orthisina, Spirifer, Terebra tube and others genres,4 forming only varieties and not real species or genres, as there are not to be found among them two individuals one like the other. This is the reason why I

January 1872

17

formerly thought that there were no species, but only varieties in the oldest primary neptunian rocks.5 I am with much respect | yours truly admirer Dr. d’Eichwald Petersbourg January 10 1872 Gagarin-street 12. DAR 163: 13 1

2 3 4 5

Eichwald refers to his Geognostisch-paleontologische Bermerkungen über die Halbinsel Mangischlak und die Aleutischen Inseln (Geognostic and palaeontological remarks on the Mangyshlak Peninsula and the Aleutian Islands; Eichwald 1871). The Mangyshlak Peninsula is on the Caspian Sea, and is now in Kazakhstan. There is a copy of Eichwald 1871, inscribed by the author, in the Darwin Library–CUL; the pages are not cut. Eichwald also refers to Fielding Bradford Meek, and possibly to George Gibbs. William Healey Dall was appointed acting assistant to the US Coast Survey in 1871, with responsibility for surveying the Aleutian Islands and Alaskan coastal waters (ANB). Prize: i.e. price. Mille p. st.: £1000 sterling. Genres: i.e. genera. Terebra is a gastropod, not a brachiopod. Neptunian: formed in a marine environment (Challinor 1978).

From St G. J. Mivart 10 January 1872 7, North Bank, | N.W. Janry. 10th | 1872 Private My dear Sir I herewith close this correspondence & will say nothing even in this letter calculated to annoy you in the least. Perhaps it would be better taste not to reply at all but as you let me know you will not read my reply to Mr. C. Wright I feel I ought to inform you of two facts. 1 One is that in charging me with ignoring physical causation when I use the word “accidental” both Mr Wright & P. Huxley misrepresent me grotesquely.2 Secondly Mr Wright takes the liberty to speak of my “theological education”—3 as a fact my education was quite the other way. I was a thorough going disciple of the school of Mill, Bain & H. Spencer4 & I am so strongly persuaded of the intellectual error & moral mischief of their views only because they were once so completely mine— As to “Natural Selection” I accepted it completely and in fact my doubts & difficulties were first excited by attending Prof. Huxley’s lectures at the school of Mines.5 Thirdly— I have a relation who has I think an excellent literary taste— He is no Christian & in speculative matters sympathizes much more with you than with me. 6 It has been his task to look over my proofs & to strike out every expression which might seem to him to be calculated to wound your feelings & I have always deferred to his opinions in the matter. I shall not, of course, trouble you with anything of mine unless perfectly free from controversial remarks. If however, as I hope, I may resume my purely anatomical work

18

January 1872

I shall then take the liberty of sending you my papers— If you think proper to accept & acknowledge them it will give me great pleasure to see once more your hand writing but if not I shall hope that in another world, with misunderstandings removed, we may have pleasant intercourse as to our diverse modes of solving the enigma of nature I am exceedingly sorry to have caused you mortification & I protest, in spite of all you may think, I have, do and shall feel more than “friendly” towards you & that it is not in mere formality that I subscribe myself Yours very sincerely | St Geo Mivart To | C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 199 1 2 3 4 5 6

See letter to St G. J. Mivart, 8 January [1872]. Mivart replied to Chauncey Wright in the North American Review (Mivart 1872b). See Wright 1871a, pp. 68–9; Mivart also refers to (professor) Thomas Henry Huxley (see T. H. Huxley 1871a, p. 474). See Wright 1871a, p. 78. John Stuart Mill, Alexander Bain, and Herbert Spencer. Huxley was professor of natural history at the Royal School of Mines in Jermyn Street, London. Mivart’s relation has not been identified.

From Henri Apatowsky1 11 January 1872

43 Talbot Road | Bayswater W. 11 janvier 1872

Monsieur, En 1870 j’écrivis (à Paris) un mémoire sur la question: “Si l’espèce humaine est un genre sui generis?”. Je me suis rangé du côté de M. Vogt,2 soutenant votre Doctrine et avec plus d’hardiesse. Malheureusement, j’ai terminé ce travail au moment où la guerre éclata entre la France et l’Allemagne, pendant laquelle on ne s’occupait plus de Science.3 Moi-même, j’étais médecin en chef d’une ambulance. 4 Puis venait la guerre civile, et pendant que j’avais soigné leurs malades et blessés, les barbares; car d’atrocités sans exemple dans l’histoire moderne ont été commises de part et d’autre, pendant que je soignais leurs malades et blessés, dis-je, ces barbares ont détruit tout ce que je possédais. Je quittais bientôt la France. Hélas! Je ne suis pas au courant de la langue anglaise pour traduire mon travail écrite en Français. J’ose Vous prier Monsieur, s’il est possible, de recommander mon travail à quelqu’un qui puisse le traduire et publier. Je n’en demande rien pour le moment, et je me rapporterai à la probité de celui-ci qui s’en occupera. Si Vous désirez Monsieur, de prendre lecture de mon manuscrit, veuillez bien m’écrire et je m’empresserai de le mettre à Votre disposition.5 J’ai l’honneur Monsieur d’être avec un profond respect | votre serviteur | Dr. Apatowsky DAR 159: 77 1

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I.

January 1872 2 3 4 5

19

Carl Vogt. The Franco-Prussian War broke out in July 1870. Ambulance: i.e. a mobile field hospital (Chambers). No reply from CD to this letter has been found. The manuscript has not been found and was apparently never published.

To St G. J. Mivart 11 January [1872]1 Down Beckenham | Kent Jan 11. Private My dear Sir It would be ungracious on my part not to thank you for your letter which I can do with sincerity.2 With time my impression may pass away, & I hope so; but impressions slowly gained & continually strengthened do not readily pass away from the mind in old age.— To aid in the good work I will keep to my resolution & not read your answer to Mr Wright—3 The impression which I have taken can hardly be quite fanciful Agassiz has uttered splendid sarcasms on me, but I still feel quite friendly towards him:4 Ld Flourens cd. not find words to express his contempt of me:5 Pictet & Hopkins argued with great force against me: Fleeming Jenkins covered me with first-rate ridicule; & his criticisms were true & most useful: but none of their writings have mortified me as yours have done—.6 Besides having been acquainted with you, & thinking that we had a mutual friendly feeling, I think it is the sense of unfairness on your side, which mortifies me. For instance, when you detailed all my changes of opinion & errors (I maintain that the former are very far indeed from being as great as you state), 7 if you had wished to be fair, you wd. have allowed that the subject was an intricate one—that nearly all the best naturalists in Europe had written on it & criticised my book—that I had in strongest language (at close of Introduction of Origin in all editions) declared that much remained un-explained. Under these circumstances it w d. prove me a fool not to have changed to a certain extent If I had said that I cd. explain everything you might have written as you have done.— But it is folly on my part to have written at this length.— You will hardly be able to read or understand this note, & pray do not answer it.— I should be glad to think that I have been foolish & unjust towards you.— Yours sincerely, | C. Darwin P.S. If you will look at the last words of Introduction of Origin of 1 st & all subsequent editions, you will see how expressly I say that I do not attribute the modification of species exclusively to Natural Selection: & I do not think I c d have chosen a more conspicuous place.—8 I will send you a copy of new Edit. of Origin, soon to be published & now all printed, & I hope there is not a word personally offensive to you or any other man in it— I have had it stereotyped, so that I cannot, thank God, answer any more

20

January 1872

criticisms.—9 Pray do not write when you receive it; for our minds are so fundamentally different that what appears to me (& at least to some others,) sound reasoning will be to you frivolous. C.D. Karpeles Manuscript Library Museums 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from St G. J. Mivart, 10 January 1872. See letter from St G. J. Mivart, 10 January 1872. See letter from St G. J. Mivart, 10 January 1872 and n. 1. CD refers to Chauncey Wright. On Louis Agassiz’s disagreements with CD, see Lurie 1960, pp. 252–302. See also Correspondence vol. 8, letter to Asa Gray, 11 August [1860], and Correspondence vol. 16, letter to Louis Agassiz, 19 August 1868. Marie Jean Pierre Flourens had written a book criticising Origin (Flourens 1864; see also Correspondence vol. 12, letter to T. H. Huxley, 3 October [1864], and Stebbins 1988, p. 130). François Jules Pictet de la Rive had written a review critical of Origin that CD nevertheless thought ‘perfectly fair’ (Pictet de la Rive 1860; see Correspondence vol. 8, letter to F. J. Pictet de la Rive, 1 April [1860]). CD felt that William Hopkins, in his review, did not understand him fully but he nevertheless appreciated Hopkins’s compliments (Hopkins 1860; see Correspondence vol. 8, letter to Charles Lyell, 6 June [1860]). Henry Charles Fleeming Jenkin had criticised parts of CD’s reasoning in the North British Review in 1867; CD took account of his arguments in the fifth edition of Origin ([ Jenkin] 1867; Origin 5th ed., p. 104). Mivart had criticised the theory of natural selection most recently in his Genesis of species (Mivart 1871a) and an anonymous review of Descent in the Quarterly Review ([Mivart] 1871c). See [Mivart] 1871c, pp. 50–2. The last sentence of the introduction to Origin reads, ‘Furthermore, I am convinced that Natural Selection has been the most important but not the exclusive means of modification’ (Origin 5th ed., p. 6). See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to R. F. Cooke, 4 November 1871. Stereotyping was a process in which movable type was set up and used to make a mould, which could then be used to cast a metal plate for printing. Origin 6th ed. was published in February 1872 (Freeman 1977).

From Armand de Quatrefages1 12 January 1872 Paris 12 Janvier 72 Cher Monsieur La lutte pour votre existence, en qualité de Correspondant de notre Académie, va recommencer sous peu. Mais elle aura lieu dans des conditions un peu différentes. Notre collegue Longet, mort depuis les premières batailles, a été remplacé par M r Lacaze du Thiers, qui sans hésiter s’est prononcé pour vous. 2 La majorité de la section est donc très décidée en votre faveur. Elle a bien voulu me charger du Rapport. Je viens de le terminer et n’ai pas besoin de vous dire quelles en sont les conclusions. J’ai toujours rendu justice en vous au naturaliste éminent, au penseur ingénieux et profond. Tout en combattant votre doctrine, j’ai toujours dit qu’elle rendrait un grand service en rappelant l’attention sur la Variabilité morphologique de l’espèce, non moins réelle que la fixité physiologique. C’est donc avec un double plaisir que je défendrai devant l’Académie les Mérites de mon adversaire. 3 J’ai reçu avec reconnaissance votre dernier oevrage. 4 Il est bien à peu près ce que je pensais qu’il pouvait etre, et vos conclusions ne m’ont pas surpris. Pourtant il me

January 1872

21

semble que—même a votre point de vue—vous rapprochez un peu trop l’homme dans le temps de l’evolution. C’est un Marcheur; les singes du nouveau comme de l’ancien continent sont de Grimpeurs. Une fois ce dernier type même ébauché, il ne peut donner naissance à un etre construit sur un plan différent. S’il en etait autrement votre doctrine perdrait un de ses cotés les plus séduisants car alors elle ne rendrait pas compte des affinités, et ne permettrait plus de suivre les généalogies même les plus rapprochées. Je vous soumets cette objection sans prétendre dailleurs juger en dernier ressort. Cette prétention me conviendrait moins qu’à tout autre, puisque j’ai le regret de ne pouvoir etre un de vos disciples. Veuillez donc m’excuser de m’être mêlé de ce qui au fond ne me regarde pas, et croyez moi en dépit de mes dissentiments scientifiques votre bien dévoué confrere | De Quatrefages DAR 175: 9 1 2

3 4

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. In 1872, CD was nominated for election to the anatomy and zoology sections of the Académie des sciences in Paris; he had also been nominated in 1870 (see Correspondence vol. 18). He was not elected to the académie until 1878, and then it was to the botanical section. See Stebbins 1988, pp. 147–9. Quatrefages refers to François-Achille Longet and Félix Joseph Henri de Lacaze-Duthiers. On Quatrefages’s agreements and disagreements with CD, see Stebbins 1988, p. 132. Quatrefages’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Descent (see Correspondence vol. 19, Appendix IV).

To J. E. Taylor 13 January [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan 13th Dear Sir I am very much obliged to you for your kindness in having sent me your article in the Westminster Review, which I have read with great interest. 2 I am also obliged for the manner in which you notice my work.—3 At present natural selection is somewhat under a cloud, but I feel the most entire conviction that it will presently be resuscitated.— Dear Sir | Yours faithfully & obliged | Ch. Darwin Morristown National Historical Park (Lloyd W. Smith MSS 696) 1 2

3

The year is established by the reference to Taylor’s article in the Westminster Review of January 1872 (see n. 2, below). Taylor’s article, ‘The geographical distribution of animals and plants, geologically considered’, was published in the issue of Westminster Review for January 1872 ([Taylor] 1872). There is a lightly annotated offprint of the article, signed by Taylor with the author’s compliments, in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Taylor had written, ‘Natural history has received a similar impetus under the Darwinian theory that astronomy did under the older Copernicus’ ([ J. E. Taylor] 1872, p. 29).

22

January 1872

To Asa Gray 15 January 1872 Down | Beckenham | Kent Jan. 15— ’72 My dear Gray, I have taken up an old subject which formerly interested me, namely the amount of earth brought to the surface by worms.1 I want to know whether you have in the States the little vermiform piles of earth which are so common on our lawns fields woods & waste lands.— Are they as numerous with you as they are with us? I should have assumed that this would naturally be the case had it not occurred to me that the severe winters might make all the difference.— A very few lines in answer would suffice.— It just occurs to me that if you had any correspondent in the Northern parts of Canada you might send this letter to him and thus get me some additional information on the subject.— Overworked as you are I hope you will forgive me for troubling you. Many thanks for Agassiz’s letter which from the handwriting I infer you sent me.— 2 Pray give our very kind remembrances to Mrs Gray3 and | Believe me | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS Archives of the Gray Herbarium, Harvard University (99) 1

2

3

CD’s first publication on earthworms was read to the Geological Society of London in 1837 (‘Formation of mould’). See also Correspondence vol. 17, letter to Gardeners’ Chronicle, 9 May [1869], for CD’s remarks on his later observations. Gray probably sent CD a copy of a letter published by Louis Agassiz in the Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College prior to his departure on the Hassler expedition ( J. L. R. Agassiz 1871; see Marcou 1896, 2: 184–5). In this letter, Agassiz stated his belief that if the world was the work of intelligence, not force and matter, then it should be possible for him to predict that, in accordance with the laws of correlation, primordial forms would be found at the deepest levels of the ocean. He also stated his intention of looking for evidence of glaciation in the southern hemisphere. Jane Loring Gray.

To Arthur Hough 15 January [1872–4]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan. 15 Dear Sir I am much obliged for your kindness in sending me the curious Photograph; but as I have had similar ones sent me, I will not rob you of it.— 2 Dear Sir | Yours faithfully & obliged | Ch. Darwin UCL Library Services, Special Collections (SRE 920 D1 (4)) 1

The year range is established by the printed stationery, with the address in the centre; CD used this type of notepaper between January 1872 and November 1874. Arthur Hough has not been identified. Notes on the original letter read, ‘Mr Hough’s property’ and ‘Arthur Hough’. The letter is tipped into a copy of Origin 5th ed.

January 1872 2

23

The photograph has not been identified.

To Armand de Quatrefages 15 January [1872]1 Down Beckenham, Kent. Jan. 15. 1871. My dear Sir, I am much obliged for your very kind letter and exertions in my favour. I had thought that the publication of my last book would have destroyed all your sympathy with me; but though I estimated very highly your great liberality of mind it seems that I underrated it—2 I am gratified to hear that M. Lucaze du Thiers3 will vote for me, for I have long honoured his name. I cannot help regretting that you should expend your valuable time in trying to obtain for me the honour of election; for I fear, judging from the last time that all your labour will be in vain.4 Whatever the result may be, I shall always retain the most lively recollection of your sympathy & kindness; & this will quite console me for my rejection. With much respect & esteem, I remain dear Sir, | Yours truly obliged | Charles Darwin P.S. With respect to the great stress which you lay on man walking on two legs, whilst the Quadrumana go on all fours— permit me to remind you that no one much values the great difference in the mode of locomotion &. consequently in structure between seals and the terrestrial Carnivora, or between the almost biped Kangaroos and other marsupials. Copy DAR 147: 289 1 2 3 4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Armand de Quatrefages, 12 January 1872. CD wrote 1871 in error. CD refers to the letter from Armand de Quatrefages, 12 January 1872, and to Descent. Félix Joseph Henri de Lacaze-Duthiers. The previous attempt to have CD elected to the Académie des sciences was in 1870; see Correspondence vol. 18.

To John Scott 15 January 1872 Down, Beckenham, Kent, Jan. 15, 1872. My Dear Sir,— Many years ago I wrote a paper showing that stones laid on a grass field gradually become completely covered up by worm castings. I am now resuming the subject and making more accurate observations, as I believe they will bear on the denudation of the land.1 You will remember the appearance of lawns, fields, and commons in England, especially during the autumn. Now I want much to know whether in

24

January 1872

India worms eject their castings on the surface in like manner. 2 A surface which is continually dug is not good for observation, but I suppose you could find some neglected part of the garden which you could observe. I find here abundant castings even in rather thick woods. If there are such castings, I should like to know whether they are numerous, and whether they are larger or smaller than those in England. If you could spare the time I should be very glad to hear how any two or three fresh castings marked by you disappeared. Does the heavy tropical rain wash them quickly away? The heavy rain in England causes a fresh casting to subside into a disk which will flow an inch or so down a slope. If they once get dry they endure for a surprising time, crumble into pellets, with part washed away and the remainder covered by growing grass. If these trifling observations would not trouble you, I should be really obliged. If you watch any fresh castings, you would have to enclose with stakes or somehow the spot, so that no one might trample them down. My Dear Sir, yours very sincerely, | Ch. Darwin. I wrote to you a month or two ago.3 N.B.—I have not yet been able to ascertain whether the castings on a sandy soil ever disintegrate into dust or powder, so that they can be blown away. Have you ever observed how deep worms burrow in India? Transactions of the Hawick Archæological Society (1908): 68 1 2 3

CD refers to ‘Formation of mould’, which was read before the Geological Society of London in 1837. See also letter to Asa Gray, 15 January 1872. CD used information from Scott in Earthworms, pp. 123–8. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to John Scott, 1 November 1871.

From J. J. Aubertin 16 January 1872

10 York St St James’ Square January 16. 1872

Dear Mr Darwin, I hope that you are getting on pretty well in health now, & that a “Happy New Year” has opened for yourself & Mrs Darwin & all your family— I was dining with a friend of mine on Sunday—a Mr. Gooden1 who married a cousin on my mother’s side, & he expressed a great desire to lay a suggestion of his before you, & asked me to take that liberty. He has, in the course of his life suffered very much from that disease in the hair which the Faculty now call “Porigo decalvans”2 which exhibits itself in the simple falling off of the hair either in great round patches, or even altogether all over the body—leaving the skin perfectly clean & without the slightest surface discolouring. He is now very much better, but his mind having been turned to the subject, he has lately observed the same disease in a favourite dog belonging to one of his daughters; & therefore, knowing your doctrine that disease is communicable from Man to the Ape,3 it has occurred to him that this “Porigo Decalvans” in the hairy animal, the

January 1872

25

dog, as well as in man, may prove some link between the two, & show or indicate that Man in passing out of his original “hairy-animal-state”, which you attribute to him, may have brought with him this old disease, pertaining to that first state, & being common still to all hairy animals. I think this is as nearly as possible his proposition, & he is very anxious to know what you would say about it— The disease I believe is parasytical, & is connected with some fungus in the skin which Sulphur destroys. Now pray do not trouble yourself upon this subject— if at your leisure you could without bothering yourself some day send me a few lines I should be only too much obliged to you. Captn. Burton was dining with me the other day. He has been much struck by the mode in which you differ with him about the subject of what “beauty”, in the abstract, is to various nations—savages included: & is most anxious to be introduced to you— However, that would be for March next, if I might some day bring him down. I told him you did not converse long.4 Faithfully yours | J. J. Aubertin. DAR 159: 127 1 2 3 4

Mr Gooden has not been identified. Porrigo decalvans is now known as alopecia areata (Butterworth’s medical dictionary). The ‘faculty’: i.e. the medical profession. See Descent 1: 11–12. Richard Francis Burton apparently did lunch with CD before 20 May 1872, but the exact date is not known (letter from W. W. Reade, 20 May 1872). For CD’s remarks on different concepts of beauty, see Descent 2: 338–54. CD cited Burton on p. 346.

To C. H. Morris 16 January [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan 16th Dear Madam I have the pleasure to send the Photograph as requested. I have directed M r Murray to send to you (free of charge) for Prof. Bouton a copy of my Journal. 2 Dear Madam | Yours faithfully | Ch Darwin Mrs Morris UCL Library Services (Natural Sciences Library Periodical Stores (R920 DAR)) 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Louis Bouton, 15 December 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19). Louis Bouton had asked CD for a photograph of himself and a copy of his Journal of researches, naming Mrs Morris as the London agent of the Royal Society of Arts and Sciences of Mauritius, to whom any request for payment should be sent (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from L. S. Bouton, 15 December 1871). CD also refers to his publisher, John Murray.

26

January 1872

From Fritz Müller 16 January 1872 Itajahy, Sa Catharina, Brazil January 16. 1872. My dear Sir. I must beg your pardon for having delayed so long answering your kind letter of Aug. 2d and expressing my cordial thanks for your having sent me a copy of Mr. Chauncey Wright’s very able refutation of Mr. Mivart’s “Genesis of species”.— 1 But I have been away from my home for about five weeks on an excursion through the northern part of our province. 2 The yellow, white and red Hedychium, mentioned in a former letter, are, as you suppose, distinct species.3 I have no objection to your alluding to my idea of sexual selection having come into play in the case of mimetic butterflies.4 I may here mention a curious fact relating to the same subject, which I observed a fortnight ago. On an excursion, which I made with a friend of mine, we saw two similarly coloured butterflies playing together, whirling round and pursuing each other for a considerable time. At last we succeeded in catching both of them and found, to your great surprise, that they belonged to two widely different species. I had caught the very common Agraulis Juno Cr. and my friend the rare Marpesia Petreus Cr.—5 The shape of the wings and the distribution of the colours is so different and the two butterflies were so close together for a long time, that they could hardly have mistaken each other for specimens of their own species. Apparently they were playing together only in order to behold and admire each other. Unfortunately I forgot to ascertain the sex of the two specimens.— On the same occasion we observed three species of the curious genus Castnia, one of them (A.) being extremely frequent. The hind-wings in two of these species had dull colours; and in these, when at rest, the hind-wings were always overlapped and concealed by the front-wings. In the third species (B)

the black-hind-wings were spotted with red and white, and this species, when at rest, expanded their wings horizontally, so that the hind-wings were fully exposed to view.— You know, that the Castniæ fly about, with great rapidity, during the day.— I have of late been attending to our Termites. They are very curious animals and the several species differ much in their habits. The most interesting fact, I hitherto observed, is the existence, in some species of Calotermes, of larvæ provided with

January 1872

27

wing-like horizontally expanded processes on the prothorax and mesothorax.— The species

of Calotermes do not build nests; they have but one form of neuters (soldiers, but no labourers); the fertilized females do not swell to so enormous a volume, as they do in the genus Termes. All this seems to prove, that they are a more primitive form of the family. And indeed, according to Hagen, the oldest fossil remains of Termites (Calotermes Heerii) appear to belong to that genus, which is perhaps the oldest of all now living genera of insects. 9 The young larvæ provided with the curious processes live under exactly the same conditions with the older ones, in which these processes have disappeared, while the rudiments of the wings make their appearance on the mesothorax and metathorax, and thus it is not probable, that they should have acquired the processes by natural selection; it appears to be more probable, that they inherited them from a very remote ancestor, which in its adult state may have resembled these larvæ. In this case the Calotermes-larvæ might be the oldest of all known forms of insects.— You know, that some ants (Odontomachus) use their long mandibles for making most surprising jumps in a backward direction.10 Is it not a curious coincidence, that the soldiers of some Termites have the same habit of leaping backward with the aid of their mandibles? These leaping soldiers have been described and figured by Hagen under the name of Termes cingulatus, but I have some doubts, whether they

28

January 1872

really belong to that genus.11 Linné already knew the leaping of Termites, for he says of his T. fatale: “maxillis longis altissime resiliens”; 12 but no subsequent observer appears to have seen it.— Have you already seen the Dentalium-like cases of one of our caddish-worms, (Leptocerus(?) Grumicha Vall.)?13 They show, that there may exist strange resemblances even without mimicry or analogous variation. I hope, dear Sir, that this letter will find you in good health and am, as always, with sincere respect | Yours very faithfully | Fritz Müller. DAR 142: 55 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 I must . . . province. 1.5] crossed red crayon 3.1 I have . . . mimetic butterflies. 3.2] double scored red crayon 3.3 On an excursion . . . two specimens.— 3.12] crossed red crayon 1 2

3

4

5 6

7

8 9 10 11 12 13

See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Fritz Müller, 2 August [1871]. Müller refers to Wright 1871a and to St George Jackson Mivart and Mivart 1871a. In a letter to his brother Hermann Müller, dated 11 January 1872, Müller mentioned his trip to Doña Francisca from 11 November until 12 December 1871 (Möller ed. 1915–21, 2: 201). Doña Francisca was a German colony, founded in 1851, lying between the Sierra do Mar and the coast in the province of Santa Catarina. The main settlement was the city of Joinville, about seventy-five miles north of Müller’s home in Itajahy (Columbia gazetteer of the world). See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Fritz Müller, 2 August [1871] and n. 8. In his letter of 14 June 1871 (ibid.), Müller had mentioned the preference of some butterflies for red flowers of Hedychium and other genera. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Fritz Müller, 2 August [1871]. CD had proposed adding a sentence to the second edition of Descent describing Müller’s speculations on the possible role of sexual selection in butterfly mimicry; in fact, he did not add the sentence. Agraulis juno is now Dione juno; Marpesia petreus is the ruddy daggerwing butterfly. Wing A has been identified as belonging to a specimen of Synpalamides phalaris; wing B belongs to a specimen of Imara pallasia (identifications made by John Chainey of the Natural History Museum, London); the wings are glued to the original letter. Both species belong to the moth family Castniidae and have in the past been classified within Castnia (for a complete synonymy for these species, see Lamas 1995, p. 78). Müller probably added the question mark following Calotermes rugosus (now Rugitermes rugosus) not because he was uncertain of his identification of the species, but because he did not know the source of the name. It was first described by Hermann August Hagen in Hagen 1858, p. 63. Calotermes nodulosus is now Rugitermes nodulosus. Hagen had named the fossil Calotermus heerii (Hagen 1858, pp. 73–4); it is now Mastotermes heerii. Odontomachus is the genus of trap-jaw ants. For more on their use of mandibles for jumping, see Patek et al. 2006. Termes cingulatus is now Aparatermes cingulatus. For Hagen’s description of their use of mandibles for jumping, see Hagen 1858, p. 190 and plate I, fig. 13. See Linnaeus 1758–9, 1: 609. Dentalium is the genus of tusk shells (marine scaphopod molluscs), so named because in shape they resemble a tusk or canine tooth. Leptocerus is a genus of long-horn caddisflies. The caddisfly species to which Müller refers was originally named Phryganea grumicha (see Vallot 1855, p. xii), but was transferred to the genus Leptocerus by Hagen, based on the structure of the larval cases (Hagen 1864, pp. 226–7). Hagen was misled by the fact that some leptocerid larvae use the empty cases of this species (see Flint et al. 1999, p. 81). The species is now Grumicha grumicha.

January 1872

29

To W. W. Baxter? 17 January [1872–4]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan. 17th Dear Sir Will you send me thrice the quantity of physic herewith prescribed & kindly mark outside bottle in ounces & drams how much my dose is twice a day, as this is far more convenient than roughly graduated bottle.— Please be careful about the Nux vomica as I am rather afraid of this.2 If you think it a large dose for a man with a very poor constitution, will you be so kind as to inform me.— Please also send 6 or 8 oz of Glycerine Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin Houghton Library, Harvard University: Autograph File, D, (Acquisition: *42M-1971) 1 2

The year range is established by the printed stationery, with the address in the centre; CD used this type of notepaper between January 1872 and November 1874. Baxter was CD’s usual chemist. Nux vomica was used as a stimulant, but is poisonous; strychnine is extracted from it (Milne 1869, p. 136).

From A. E. Dobbs 17 January 1872 Richmond Road | Ealing. W. Sir I send you a pamphlet which I hope you will accept, if only as a mark of respect, & as I hardly expect that your time, which is so valuable to biological science, should even for a few moments be taken up with another subject, I will tell you why I send it, & why I think it would interest you if you were to read it.1 Holding the unity & harmony of all kosmical action, I have applied the principle of that natural selection which you demonstrated, to the working of legislative institutions, & although it does not appear on the surface you will see the same principle in action in a different subject matter & among different surroundings. I have taken Mr Hare’s well known plan, (well known at least to students of political science) & by new dispositions as to the surplus votes, arranged that the action of the electorate & of the candidates will result in a struggle for political life, in which the unfit will be surely eliminated, & the most fit will have most power.2 Mr. Hare, I may say, adopts my plan as it stands in the edition I send you, (I merely mention this to induce you to glance through it)—for if an inventor accepts a modification of his invention it may be taken for granted that it is a real improvement. I will not trespass further, but I am sure that Mr. Darwin is interested in everything which tends to social & political progress, so I send it. I am | With the greatest & truest respect | Yours faithfully | Archibald E. Dobbs. Jan. 17. 1872. DAR 162: 187

30 1 2

January 1872

Dobbs refers to his General representation on a complete readjustment and modification of Mr. Hare’s plan (Dobbs 1871); no copy has been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. Thomas Hare had devised a system of proportional representation for the House of Commons and other electoral bodies (ODNB).

From Henry Huxley 17 and 20 January 1872

26 Abbey Place | St John’s Wood Janry. 17th 1872

Dear Mr Darwin I have nothing to do, so I am going to write to you. Mamma gave me a beautiful box of bricks and pater has gone to Egypt by sea. 1 we have had very bad weather, and on the nineteenth we are going to a circus 20th. Jan. We have just come home from the circus M r Hughes and Lady Lyell took us there we saw Cinderella acted and there was a nice horse whose name was [ Dueroco] and he went round the middle of the room and at the last there were some monkeys riding on ponies.2 With love to you and Mrs. Darwin | I remain | Yours affectionately | Henry Huxley. DAR 166: 286 1

2

Henry’s parents were Henrietta Anne and Thomas Henry Huxley; Henrietta had secured Thomas two months’ leave from the School of Mines and sent him to Egypt to recuperate after his health broke down (A. Desmond 1994–7, 2: 28). Henry, a particular favourite of CD’s (see Correspondence vol. 16, letter to T. H. Huxley, 10 June 1868) had celebrated his seventh birthday on 14 January 1872 (A. Desmond 1994–7, 1: 332). Henry refers to Thomas Hughes and Mary Elizabeth Lyell. Hengler’s Circus, in Argyll Street, London, was putting on the pantomime Cinderella (Penny Illustrated Paper, 20 January 1872, p. 47).

From P. C. Sutherland 17 January 1872 Natal South Africa Jan 17 1872 Dear Mr Darwin I am just going to have another hunt through all your works with the view of finding something that will throw light upon a Curious bird we have just got down from the interior. They are a pair of creatures said by the Dutchman who brought them down to Natal to be a cross between the common fowl and the guinea fowl (Numida Mitrata)1 They enjoy the peculiarity as regards voice and gait of the latter but they have few of their feathers and alas! the spur of the former. I am getting Mr Baines who is here now to make good likenesses of them which I will send to you when ready 2 And if you really attach value to the objects themselves I dare say it will be possible to find means of sending them dead or alive. They are only one year old. One of them has laid eggs which are spotted and so far as I can credit the description given

January 1872

31

of them not unsymmetrical like that of the common fowl but pointed at both ends. They do not fraternize for breeding purposes with the domestic fowl although on friendly enough terms in the yard and the roost. I will take the liberty to trouble you again about this3 yours truly | P. C. Sutherland DAR 177: 321 1

2 3

CD had once asked Sutherland amongst others for skins of locally bred domestic animals (Correspondence vol. 5, CD memorandum, [December 1855]). Numida mitrata is now Numida meleagris mitratus, a subspecies of the helmeted guineafowl. By the common fowl, Sutherland presumably means Gallus gallus domesticus. Sutherland probably refers to Thomas Baines, an artist and African explorer. No drawings of the birds have been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. No further correspondence from Sutherland on this subject has been found.

To J. W. Dawson 19 January 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan 19. 1872 My dear Sir I am greatly indebted to your kindness for having sent me yr valuable memoir on the fossil plants of the Devonian & Upper-Silurian formations. 1 When we remember our state of knowledge only a few years ago, it is wonderful that a monograph sh d have been published on the plants of these ancient formations. With much respect | I remain dear Sir | yours faithfully | & obliged | Charles Darwin LS(A) McGill University Library Rare Books and Special Collections 1

There is a lightly annotated copy of Dawson’s Fossil plants of the Devonian and Upper Silurian formations of Canada (Dawson 1871) in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 188).

To L. H. Morgan 20 January 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan 20. 1872

My dear Mr Morgan I have received, this morning, your grand work on Consanguinity &c & am astonished at the labour which it must have cost you.1 I am greatly indebted to this proof of your kind feelings towards me & I remain | yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS Dept of Rare Books, Special Collections and Preservation, University of Rochester 1

There is a copy of the 1871 printing of Morgan’s Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family (Morgan 1870) in the Darwin Library–Down. Morgan had sent CD an advance copy of the last chapter (see Correspondence vol. 18, letter from L. H. Morgan, 9 August 1870).

32

January 1872

From Amy Ruck to Horace Darwin [20 January 1872]1 Pantlludw, | Machynlleth. Dear Horace I am afraid I have nothing worth telling about worms. I have been rather in despair this seems such a bad country for them as a “worm casting” is quite a rare sight even on our croquet ground where one might expect to see them, there is very few. Atty2 declares there are a dozen moles to every worm here— However on the top of the Hill there are some steep slopes ploughed about 50 or 60 years ago & we have done some digging & measuring there with these results— the furrows going chiefly crossways— We found that the fine soil at the top of the slope was always shallower, being in the furrows at the top 2 12 inches, at the bottom 4 12 ; & that there was always about half an inch difference in the depth of the soil in the ridge & in the furrow, that in the furrow being deepest. We tried a good many times & always found this difference— It is rare to find furrows running down a slope, but we came across a few in a basin, last ploughed during the Peninsular War—& there they almost disappeared at the bottom—the depth of the furrow between the ridges being at the top 4 12 in. at the bottom 1in.3 Papa says, there is a place near his old home Newington called ‘Worm Dale, where they do wonders—4 Dicky & Lenny5 might go & look at it. My thanks to you for wading through this. | ARR. DAR 176: 221 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.2 “worm casting”] underl blue crayon 1.2 quite a rare sight 1.3] underl blue crayon 1.4 dozen . . . here— ] underl blue crayon 2.3 the depth . . . 1in. 2.4] scored blue crayon Top of letter: ‘Jan 20th — 1872’ ink; ‘Weigh | Leonard’ pencil, del pencil 1 2 3 4 5

The date is established by CD’s annotation. Arthur Ashley Ruck, Amy’s brother. CD reported these findings in Earthworms, pp. 295–6. The Peninsular War took place in Portugal and Spain between 1807 and 1814. Lawrence Ruck referred to Wormdale Hill near Newington in Kent. Richard Matthews Ruck (Amy’s brother), and Leonard Darwin.

From L. C. Wedgwood 20 January [1872]

6 Q. A. St. Jan 20th Out of 25 worm-holes probed with a blunt wire between Jan 6 & 14 on different slopes for a few inches, 8 came to the surface nearly vertical to the slope; the rest at various angles.1

January 1872

33

Lucy Caroline Wedgwood. Courtesy of J. J. Heath-Caldwell. I will try some more, and when I have dug some more trenches will send the result about furrows A Postcard Postmark: JA 20 72 DAR 94: 1b CD ANNOTATION 2.2 furrows] ‘[ & furrows]’ ink 1

See letter to L. C. Wedgwood, 5 January [1872]. CD reported Wedgwood’s findings in Earthworms, p. 270, but did not cite her by name.

From Raphael Meldola 21 January [1872]1 Star Chemical Works, | Brentford. Jan. 21st. Dear Sir, The kindness you have displayed in answering former letters induces me to apply to you once again for your opinion in a small matter connected with Natural Selection at which subject I am at present working.2 The paper on mimicry that I presented to the Linnean Soc. & which was read to that body on May 4 th. 1870 was

34

January 1872

returned a few weeks ago by Mr. Stainton to my friend Mr. Butler with a letter stating that the Council had not ordered the paper for publication. 3 Seeing no reason to alter any arguments that I therein adduced to prove that mimicry was produced by Nat. Selec. I have determined to re-model the paper & make large additions & let Mr. Janson publish it as he has consented to do. 4 The object of my troubling you is briefly this:— I have given the Nat. Selec. explanation of mimicry as given by Bates & Wallace & having accepted this explanation as the true one I proceed to make certain deductions from this explanation which I propose to verify by observation. 5 Amongst these deductions is the following:— If mimicry be produced by Nat. Selec. one would expect that mimetic characters being of the utmost importance to a species would have been rigidly fixed by Natural Selection & such characters we should therefore expect to find but little variable or variable only within mimetic limits. Before proceeding to examine mimics for the purpose of verifying this deduction would you be good enough to inform me if the deduction is correct. I am very sorry for thus troubling you but a word or two from you would assure me that I am working in the right direction. Yours obediently, | Raphael Meldola. Star Chemical Works, | Brentford. DAR 171: 117 1 2 3

4

5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to Raphael Meldola, 23 January [1872]. Meldola had corresponded with CD in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19). Arthur Gardiner Butler communicated Meldola’s paper ‘The phenomena of protective mimicry, and its bearing on the theory of natural selection, as illustrated by the Lepidoptera of the British Islands’ to the Linnean Society on 4 May 1871 (Proceedings of the Linnean Society of London (1870–1): xxxiv). Henry Tibbats Stainton was secretary of the Linnean Society (ODNB). Meldola may refer to Edward Westey Janson, who was librarian of the Entomological Society of London. In fact Meldola’s paper was not published until 1873, and then it was in the Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (Meldola 1873). Henry Walter Bates and Alfred Russel Wallace had written on the protective nature of insect and other mimicry (see, for example, Bates 1861 and [Wallace] 1867).

To L. C. Wedgwood 21 January [1872]1 Down.— Jan 21st My dear Lucy You are worth your weight in Gold.— I looked at a good many holes, but kept no account, & it tires my head stooping. It seems natural they sh d come on average more often at right angles than oblique, to surface; but whether I shall be able to form a judgment I know not.—2 I shall be very glad to hear any further observation, & about furrows. It is at present all working in the dark.— I am now getting more

January 1872

35

inclined to trust the result of trenches cut across old furrows on nearly level surface; or to upper & lower part of grass-slope with no old furrows. I have had some curious observations from Wroxeter, & William is working at Stonehenge for me.—3 I hope in time to come to some approximately safe conclusion. If worms would be so good as to come up generally at right angles to slope, it would bring the earth down grandly. By the way I suppose when you say “vertical to the slope” you mean perpendicular or at right angles to the slope. The Mathematician George4 says vertical always relates to the horizon, so you ought to hide your diminished head. Yours affectionately | C. Darwin I find after the late heavy wind & rain the soft subsided castings are much ‘blown over to leeward, even on level grass-field; the sections of all the recent castings were thus

Would you visit the common on Leith Hill when you go home, & look at castings; the late storms must have blown there with terrific force.— 5 Cambridge University Library (Add 4251: 332) 1 2 3

4 5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the postcard from L. C. Wedgwood, 20 January [1872]. See postcard from L. C. Wedgwood, 20 January [1872]. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Henry Johnson, 23 December 1871, and Earthworms, pp. 221–8. Johnson, a Shrewsbury schoolfriend of CD’s, was in charge of the excavation of the Roman ruins at Wroxeter, and offered to make observations for CD. CD also refers to William Erasmus Darwin; see letter from W. E. Darwin, [1 January 1872]. George Howard Darwin. Wedgwood lived at Leith Hill Place, near Dorking, Surrey.

To W. E. Darwin 23 January [1872]1 Down Jan. 23 My dear W. Many thanks.— I will wait till after Dividend & chance it.— It will put off bother & it is always pleasant to receive a good dividend.—2

36

January 1872

Amy Ruck has sent me some good observations on the fine soil on old ploughed land, being everywhere 2 12 thick on top of slope & 4 12 at base of slope.3 And another case of ridges & furrows running down a slope, which were almost obliterated at the base.— The late storms of wind & rain I see have had great power on the recent castings on our nearly flat field— I saw scores presenting a section, thus

Yours affecty. | C. Darwin Look, to old ridges on Southampton Common near you, on left going to Southampton 14 or 12 mile beyond the Turnpike. Natural History Museum (Gen. Lib. MSS/DAR: 34) 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Amy Ruck to Horace Darwin, [20 January 1872]. The letter from William containing advice on an investment to which this letter is evidently a reply has not been found. See letter from Amy Ruck to Horace Darwin, [20 January 1872].

To Francis Galton 23 January [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan. 23d My dear Galton The Rabbits have all lost their patches & are grey of different tints; so you were right. They are quite mature now & ready to breed. We have put 2 does to a buck, for one more generation. Had you not better have the others soon, as we shall soon want space for the Breeders?—2 Have you seen Mr Crookes?—3 I hope to Heaven you have, as I for one shd. feel entire confidence in your conclusion.— Ever yours | sincerely | Ch. Darwin

January 1872

37

UCL Library Services, Special Collections (Galton 191/1) 1 2

3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter, the letter from Francis Galton, 2 December 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19), and the letter from Francis Galton, 28 March 1872. In 1871, Galton had sent CD some transfused rabbits to breed and to take care of until they could be used in further experiments (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Francis Galton to Francis Darwin, 7 April 1871). Galton later recommended that all the young be killed except for a reserve of four or five (ibid., letter from Francis Galton, 13 September 1871), and sent for the old ones in November (letter from Francis Galton, 21 November 1871). CD seems to have kept six young rabbits (ibid., letter from Francis Galton, 24 November 1871), and may have bred from them. Galton’s experiments in rabbit blood transfusions were intended to test CD’s hypothesis of pangenesis (see Variation 2: 357–404) by producing different colours in the offspring of transfused rabbits. Galton had evidently contacted the chemist William Crookes about his investigations of mediums; see letter from Francis Galton, 28 March 1872.

To Raphael Meldola 23 January [1872]1 Down Beckenham | Kent Jan 23. 1871 Dear Sir The point to which you refer seems to me a very difficult one. 2 1st the comparison of the amount of variability in itself wd be difficult. 2ndly. Of all characters, colour seems to be the most variable, as we see in domesticated productions. (3) I fully agree that selection if long continued gives fixity to characters. We see the reverse of this in the great variability of fancy races, now being selected by man. But to give fixity, selection must be continued for a very long period: pray consider on this head what I have said in the Origin about the variability of characters developed in an extraordinary manner, in comparison with the same characters in allied species. 3 The selection must also be for a definite object, & not for any thing so vague as beauty, or for the superiority of one male in its weapons over another male, which can in like manner be modified. This at least seems to me partly to account for the general variability of secondary sexual characters. In the case of mimetic insects, there is another element of doubt, as the imitated form may be undergoing change which will be followed by the imitating form. This latter consideration seems to me, as remarked in my “Descent of man”, to throw much light on how the process of imitation first began—4 I enclose a letter from Fritz Müller which I think is well worth reading, & which please to return to me.5 You will see he lays much stress on the difficulty of several remotely allied forms all imitating some one species. Mr Wallace did not think that there was so much weight in this objection as I do.6 It is however possible that a few species in widely different groups, before they had diverged much, sh d have accidentally resembled, to a certain extent, some one species. You will also see in this letter a strange speculation, which I shd not dare to publish, about the appreciation of certain colours being developed in those species which frequently behold other forms similarly ornamented. I do

38

January 1872

not feel at all sure that this view is as incredible as it may at first appear. Similar ideas have passed through my mind when considering the dull colours of all the organisms which inhabit dull-coloured regions, such as Patagonia & the Galapagos Id s7 I suppose you know Mr Riley’s excellent essay on mimicry in the last report on the noxious insects of Missouri or some such title. 8 I hope your work may be in every way successful & I remain | dear Sir | yours faithfully | Charles Darwin LS(A) Postmark: JA 23 72 Oxford University Museum of Natural History (Hope Entomological Collections 1350) 1 2 3

4

5 6 7

8

The year is established by the postmark. The amanuensis wrote ‘1871’ in error. See letter from Raphael Meldola, 21 January [1872]. See Origin 5th ed., pp. 185–9: ‘A part developed in any species in an extraordinary degree or manner, in comparison with the same part in allied species, tends to be highly variable.’ CD’s point was that a part highly developed in one species but not in other species of the same genus must have been developed relatively recently, and that the tendency to vary that underlay the development was probably still active. In Descent 1: 412, CD suggested that imitation might begin with two forms that resembled each other, one of which was protected by a noxious taste or odour, the other not. Natural selection would favour closer imitation of the protected species by the other, and if the protected species changed its colours as a result of sexual selection, the imitator would follow the same course. CD enclosed the letter from Fritz Müller, 14 June 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19). CD had forwarded Müller’s letter to Alfred Russel Wallace; for Wallace’s comments, see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from A. R. Wallace, 7 August 1871. CD had wondered whether the generally dull coloration he had noticed in animals in the Galàpagos and in Patagonia arose because animals in that environment had not learned to appreciate bright colours; he added a note to this effect to the second edition of Descent (Descent 2d ed, p. 422 n. 34). See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Fritz Müller, 2 August [1871]. The third volume of Charles Valentine Riley’s Annual reports on the noxious, beneficial and other insects in the state of Missouri (Riley 1869–77) was published in 1871; the essay is on pages 159 to 172. See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter to C. V. Riley, 1 June [1871].

From B. J. Sulivan 23 January 1872 Bournemouth Jany 23/72 My dear Darwin I think you would like to see a Photo of Philip King that he has sent me recently. I have sent it to Mellersh who will forward it to you. 1 It makes one feel old indeed to see one we thought so juvenile with a white beard. I have heard nothing for some time from our old shipmates except Hamond2 Very recent accounts from Beagle Channel say all is going on most favorably 3 The natives “docile”—and “learning”. I see that Professor Aggasis is going on a scientific voyage and will call at Falklands.4 Do you think it would be advisable for me to write to him about the Gallegos Fossil bed.5 If he could go there & make a good collection it would perhaps produce

January 1872

39

many new species— You I suppose know him if so and you think it worth writing to him about perhaps you would so and I would send you particulars as to position &c to inclose. a letter to Falklands by the mail of Feb y. 8th. would I think meet him there. I went to College of Surgeons the other day I found the Curator knew nothing about the fossils. we had difficulty in finding one or two of those that had been worked out & the casks of stones not touched when I saw them years after they came home, are now known nothing of, & we could not find them. 6 With our kind regards to Mrs. Darwin & all your party | Believe me very sincerely yours | B J Sulivan DAR 177: 297 1

2 3 4

5

6

Philip Gidley King was midshipman on the Beagle between 1831 and 1836 (Aust. dict. biog.). Arthur Mellersh was midshipman and mate on the Beagle between 1825 and 1836 (Modern English biography). Sulivan was lieutenant on the Beagle between 1831 and 1836 (ODNB). Robert Nicholas Hamond was midshipman on the Beagle from 1832 to 1833 (O’Byrne 1849). Sulivan was a member of the South American Mission Society (see Correspondence vol. 18, letter from B. J. Sulivan, 1 July 1870). Louis Agassiz embarked on a voyage on the Hassler, an experimental steamship of the United States Coast Survey, in December 1871, intending to pass through the Straits of Magellan; the expedition arrived in San Francisco in August 1872 (Marcou 1896, 2: 182–91; Lurie 1960, pp. 371–7). He had hoped to investigate the ‘rivers of stone’ in the Falkland Islands, which he thought might be due to glacial action, but was prevented from visiting the Falklands and some other sites owing to bad weather and defective machinery on the ship (E. C. Agassiz 1885, 2: 695, 711). The ‘American deep-sea exploring expedition’ was reported in The Times, 12 January 1872, p. 6. Sulivan had collected mammalian fossils at the Gallegos river in Argentina in 1845 (see Correspondence vol. 3, letters from B. J. Sulivan, 13 January – 12 February 1845 and 4 July 1845). A later expedition recommended by CD had found more (Correspondence vol. 17, letter from T. H. Huxley, 7 May 1869). For more on Sulivan’s discovery, see Brinkman 2003. William Henry Flower was curator of the Hunterian Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons (ODNB). Two of Sulivan’s fossils were at the British Museum (Nesodon ovinus; Catalogue of the fossil Mammalia in the British Museum (Natural History) 3: 168), and one was recorded at the Royal College of Surgeons (Nesodon imbricatus; Flower 1879–91, 2: 436). See also Owen 1853.

From J. D. Hooker 24 January 1872 Royal Gardens Kew Jany 24/72 Dear Darwin You will I am sure be glad to hear that William has come out in the first division of the Matriculation list at the L.U.1 Have you, or had you ever Zizinia aquatica— we have raised, flowered, & lost it several times: & this looks as if it were an annual, which I can hardly believe. 2 Have you still Leersia?3 No news of my affairs: & I must again stir up the mud4 I met Miss Thackray the other day, & liked her so very much; she talked heaps about you all.5

40

January 1872

I should like to run down to Down on Saturday 3d. if nothing prevents, & Mrs Darwin is “conformable”.6 Just now I am in agonies about these appointments to the Garden & Herbarium, which are taken out of my hands, & thrown open to open competition by Mr Ayrton— just fancy selecting your Gardeners by such a means. 7 I have heard nothing of Henrietta8 for some time; how is she? Ever yrs affec | J D Hooker DAR 103: 103–4 1 2 3

4 5

6 7

8

Hooker refers to William Henslow Hooker and to the University of London. Hooker had asked CD whether he had Zizania aquatica (annual wild rice) in 1871 also (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from J. D. Hooker, 3 July 1871). CD had acquired specimens of Leersia oryzoides in 1864 (see Correspondence vol. 12, letter from William Bennett, 25 May 1864), and sent Hooker specimens in 1866 (Correspondence vol. 14, letter to J. D. Hooker, 5 December [1866]). Hooker refers to his dispute with Acton Smee Ayrton (see letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872 and n. 1). Hooker presumably refers to Anne Isabella Thackeray. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), the ‘Miss Thackerays’ visited Down in March and May 1866. Anne’s sister, Harriet Marian, married Leslie Stephen in 1867 (ODNB). According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Hooker did visit Down on 3 February 1872. Ayrton had directed that appointments at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, be made by open competition in Civil Service examinations, taking no account of horticultural or botanical experience or qualifications (Nature, 11 July 1872, p. 215; L. Huxley ed. 1918, 2: 163). Henrietta Emma Litchfield, CD’s eldest daughter.

From Thomas Stanley1 24 January 1872 Tullamore 24 Jan 1872 Sir In your origin of Species I find an allusion to the glacial Researches of Doctors Haast and Hector in New Zealand.2 I take some interest in antient glaciers, and would be much obliged, if you will say, are the researches published in our language? 3 and if they are, what is the title of the book? and is it possible for me to obtain it through a bookseller? In Procuring a copy of your “naturalists voyage”, I had some faint hopes of the subject being adverted to again.4 You give maories, and missionaries, but none of the ices of the antipodes; nor so much of a stone as a would be geologist dare to sit upon I had no expectations from Jukes, consequently am not disappointed in his “Letters”.5 He deplores the conduct of gentry of supposed amiability, to whose good guardianship he had consigned his lady relatives in England. As he was a devotee of the glacial and fossil religion, He should have ballasted his correspondence with a few ices and lithological speciemens from that other hemisphere, the would have served my turn, and they should be of immense service to amity in her administrations of

January 1872

41

cool admonition to His Excellency and others, when they forgetful of their dignity, turned to rend the lambs on her pastures, and devour the eggs on her hen-coops Hoping to be excused for this intrusion | I remain your obedient Servant | Thomas Stanley DAR 177: 246 1 2 3 4 5

Thomas Stanley has not been identified. See Origin 5th ed., p. 450. Stanley refers to Julius von Haast and James Hector. See, for example, J. F. J. von Haast 1864 (see also Correspondence vol. 12, letter from J. D. Hooker, 15 June 1864 and n. 10), and Hector 1864. Stanley refers to Journal of researches 2d ed.: the spine title was Naturalist’s voyage. Stanley refers to Joseph Beete Jukes and C. A. Browne ed. 1871.

To B. J. Sulivan 24 January 1872 Down Jan 24 | 1872 My dear Sulivan I think it doubtful whether Agassiz wd have time for the work, but if you do not grudge the time it wd be well worth while to send him the requisite particulars. 1 A wonderful amount of light might be thrown on the history of mammals by a large collection made on this spot. If you wd have the kindness to write a few words to Agassiz saying that I had advised you to do so, it wd save my writing a somewhat long letter, & wd do equally well. I am sorry to hear that your specimens have been neglected at the Coll. of Surgeons; but of late years Owen, I suppose from being overworked, neglected as I believe many things. The present head-man at the Coll. viz. Prof. Flower is a first-rate & indefatigable worker. 2 I shall like to see the Photo. of Philip King & will return it,3 but as I feel as old as Methuselah, I do not require it to make me know how old I am— My daughter is going to visit the Langtons at Bournemouth & hopes to call on Lady Sulivan & your daughters—4 With very kind regards from my wife believe | me yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin I am not well & much overworked. LS(A) Sulivan family (private collection) 1 2

3 4

See letter from B. J. Sulivan, 23 January 1872. CD refers to Louis Agassiz. Richard Owen and William Henry Flower were the former and current curators of the Hunterian Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons (ODNB). See letter from B. J. Sulivan, 23 January 1872 and n. 6. CD refers to Philip Gidley King; see letter from B. J. Sulivan, 23 January 1872. CD refers to Elizabeth Darwin, Edmund and Emily Caroline Langton, Sophia and Sophia Henrietta Sulivan, and Catherine Sabine Trench. Elizabeth went to Bournemouth on 25 January 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)).

42

January 1872

From William Bowman [before 25 January 1872]1 5 Clifford St My dear Darwin Any information I may be able to supply is heartily at your service— 2 The difficulty is to speak absolutely of inside & outside where the conditions we are in the habit of observing occur under such very complicated forms— If a particle of dust irritates the front of the eye, the eye waters— it also reddens—and becomes to some extent intolerant of light—that is, the bloodvessels of the lacrymal gland are dilated & filled by a reflection of the stimulus through their nerves & through the lacrymal branch   nerve (of common  )— the vessels of the irritated surface of the globe & lids also fill— Then the whole ciliary region within the globe—or that concerned in the accommodation of the Eye to distances, and in the alterations of the iris under varying light, is excited, the ordinary play of the accommodative movements is disturbed, the pupil contracts— The retina too sympathizes & cannot bear the ordinary light— The effort of looking is painful & difficult, perhaps even the passive reception of an image on the retina is a source of animation & excitement. With these disturbances of the ciliary apparatus of the retinal function, it is highly probable that the   of these internal parts are exci   ted. No doubt the degree of these accessory disturbances of tissues & structural arrangements within the eye ball are liable to vary in accordance with the intensity & persistancy of the external irritation & with the part of the conjunctival surface touched—also with the character of the irritation whether in the nature of scratching, cutting, rubbing &c—i.e. I suppose the minute mechanical differences in the impact of the irritant on the nervous tissue   which receive the impressions. The most common cause of excessive lacrymation is that   meet with in unhealthy children when the surface of the cornea is affected by a small ulcer—or raised speck following an ulcer, when it has existed for some time & unhealthy vessels form in it. With this there is intense photophobia the lids being forcibly closed against the least admission of light, and any attempt at opening them, or even of exposing them when closed to ordinary daylight being attended by a profuse flow of tears. Here the lacrymation is associated with a peculiar heightening of the sensibility of the retina to light— the child will scream violently if exposed to it and I think it is probable that the ciliary region as well as the retina must be unduly vascular, although such excitement does not rise to inflamtn. or do these parts cause permanent damage, or even alter their structure temporarily. It was what we call functional disturbance—yet it seems necessary as a factor when this great lacrymation exists. Now there are very numerous other morbid states & structural alterations of the same surface or conjunctival membrane, and even very terrible inflammations of it which may be attended with little or no lacrymation— or the same inflammation may be attended at one time with much watering, at another time with none at all,—as we say, the excitement of the lacrymal apparatus may accompany or not various forms and stages of such inflammations. Again a somewhat undue secretion of tears very often follows the habitual strain of

January 1872

43

accommodation & the sustained effort to distinguish small print of which the retinal image is indistinct, and the too bright illumination of the small objects looked at, when persons who ought to begin convex glasses to aid their failing accommodation, omit their use. Attending this is commonly an undue contraction of the pupil which is apt to become rigidly small. The retinæ also here are liable to become too sensitive, light to be distressing, especially gas or artifl light—& much more to the same effect might be said. With respect to the influence of morbid states of the internal tissues of the eye on the lacrymal secretion, it is a very large subject— Speaking generally, affections of the retina and of the choroid, and of the sclerotica, are not attended with so much liability to lacrymation, as those of the conjunctiva & corneal surface and accommodative apparatus. Mere undue hardness of the eyeball not rising to inflammation, but implying a want of balance betn the fluids poured out from the intraocular vessels & the fluids they take up again & carry away—does not usually cause any lacrymation or intolerance of light— When the balance is on the other side & the eye soft, there is more tendency to lacrymation and also to intolerance. The most destructive changes may go on in the retina & optic nerve without tears flowing—and so of many other parts—but when intolerance of light is an accompinment of any eye tissue inflamed or irritated, I think lacrymation is more likely to occur.— Still I agree that some excitement by too strong light is not following in any special way by lacrymation—unless indeed the exposure is followed by vascular excitement & persistent intolerance to light.— Then the eyes water as a part of the result. The conjunctiva in such cases may have become injected, & from this injection & irritation, the lacrymal apparatus may have taken up its irritation in turn.— The conjunctive surface you must bear in mind is essentially a part of this lacrymal surface—& I suppose that all parts of this surface are in special association with each other by its nerves. Irritation of the nipple by the sucti n. of the infant excites the mammary secretion—so excitement of the conjunctival surface, which may be regarded as an open expansion of the excreting lacrymal channels, excites the lacrymal secretion. I am afraid I have been dreadfully prolix, but you see I am used to look at these things from the point of view of the practitioner—partly also (but I am afraid less of late years) from that of the Anatomist & Physiologist & one’s powers of observation are applied in that direction & are too apt to be narrowed & limited to that— I should like much to try to observe some of the matters from your point of view if I could I am an entire believer in the doctrine of development—being satisfied that slight as is our present proof of it, to what it will be hereafter, it is in that direction that all true knowledge will expand & grow among the infinite details of organized structures—& if you will let me know what you want me to try to observe I will gladly be a student to help you in my little field.— I am wrong in saying little, for no doubt it is immense, but in the impact which the wide sphere your genius is able to embrace— Yrs very truly W Bowman DAR 160: 265

44

January 1872

CD ANNOTATIONS 1.5 that . . . branch 1.7] scored blue crayon 5.2 and even . . . lacrymation 5.3] scored blue crayon 6.1 Again . . . indistinct, 6.3 double scored blue crayon 7.3 and of the choroid . . . intolerance. 7.9] double scored blue crayon 7.12 I think . . . occur.—] scored blue crayon 7.14 unless . . . turn.— 7.17] double scored blue crayon 9.1 I am afraid . . . little, 9.10] crossed blue crayon Top right corner of each page: numbered blue crayon 1 2

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to William Bowman, 25 January 1872. CD’s letter of enquiry to Bowman has not been found. CD paraphrased some of the contents of this letter in Expression, pp. 171–2.

To William Bowman 25 January 1872 Down Beckenham Jan 25 1872 My dear Bowman I do not know how to thank you enough for having taken so much trouble. Your letter is of the greatest value to me, & it is astonishing how much you have compressed in it.1 I will now gladly say what I am driving at. I do not know why I did not do so before, as it wd have been much the best course; but I shd have hesitated to have troubled you with so long a letter, & now without giving full details, my ideas will appear weaker than I hope they are in reality. (1) Donders has shewn that during violent expiration, the arterial pressure within the eye-ball is increased, & the return of the blood in the veins is impeded; also that the contraction of the orbicular muscles lessens this tendency to distention in the vessels.2 (2) I have such a number of cases under no emotion, & under different emotions, when the strong contraction of the orbiculars is accompanied by the secretion of tears, that I at one time, thought that the strong pressure of the eyelids on the surface of the eye, must lead to this secretion.3 (3) But I find that the strongest, prolonged, voluntary contraction of the orbiculars by children leaves their eyes dry, or only in a very slight degree moistened. (4) Therefore it occurred to me that the distention of the vessels within the eye, during violent expiration, might have a double effect, viz through habit on the contraction of the orbiculars, & through reflex action on the secretion of tears. But I was so ignorant I did not know how far the internal parts of the eye stood in any reflex relation with the lacrymal glands. Now, by your letter I see that this does sometimes hold good, & I further see how difficult the whole subject is. What you say about the hardness of the eye from too much fluid not causing lacrymation, whilst the opposite condition does act in this manner, is greatly opposed to my notion. There may however be some difference in the effects of distention of the eye from distended

January 1872

45

blood vessels & from diffused fluids. If you wd turn this point in yr mind, viz whether judging from abnormal states &c of the eye, it appears at all probable to you that increased arterial pressure & distended veins throughout the eye, would give through reflex action some slight tendency to the secretion of tears, & let me hear y r opinion, it wd aid me most essentially in drawing up the concluding & theoretical part of my chapter on the expression of suffering; & I will lay aside my M.S. until I hear from you.4 It wd be a quite unreasonable request, but it wd be an immense advantage to me, if you wd have the patience to read over this chapter (I suppose 40 to 50 p. s. long) when, in a month or two it is copied out by a first-rate copyist; but I know how wearisome it is to read M.S5 I was very sorry I was not able to call on you when at Albury, but my head was very bad the whole time & I left the place a week before we had intended. 6 I have lost this summer several months & been able to do absolutely nothing.— Accept my hearty thanks for your great kindness & believe me | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin The eyes of a strangled man are said to start from his head,—I suppose from return of the veinous blood being prevented— do you imagine this would cause any lacrymation.— You will now see why I asked whether a tumour in the orbit from pressing on eye cd cause lacrymation—7 LS(A) American Philosophical Society (B/D25.302) 1 2 3

4 5 6 7

See letter from William Bowman, [before 25 January 1872]. CD refers to Frans Cornelis Donders. See Correspondence vol. 18, letter from F. C. Donders, 27 May 1870, and Donders 1870a and 1870b. See also Correspondence vol. 18, letter to F. C. Donders, 13 May 1870, and letter from F. C. Donders, 27 May 1870, and Correspondence vol. 19, letter to William Bowman, [before 26] January [1871], and letter from William Bowman, 26 January 1871. CD refers to Expression, chapter 6. No further correspondence with Bowman on the subject of CD’s manuscript has been found; however, see the letter to F. C. Donders, 17 June 1872. The Darwins stayed at Albury in Surrey from 28 July to 25 August 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, Appendix II). Bowman had a country house, Joldwynds, nearby. This postscript may not belong with this letter: it is on a different sort of paper to the rest of the letter. No letter by CD asking this question has been found.

To J. D. Hooker 25 January [1872]1 Down Beckenham Jan 25. My dear Hooker I am heartily glad to hear about your Willie.—2 I know what a sharp test the matriculation exam: is; for a few years ago I made special enquiries, & came to the conclusion that Horace cd. not have passed it, even with a year’s hard work.— 3 As Willie’s intellectual powers have come to maturity rather late in life, I sh d. fully expect

46

January 1872

that they would go on maturing to an equally later period of life than usual.— 4 It is really a great thing for him to have got into the first division, with all the disturbance of regular work from his voyage.—5 I never had Zizania; but I still have Leersia, & you can take away 21 my plant, or all if you like, for I cannot make the beast produce perfect flowers— 6 We shall truly rejoice to see you here on the 3d. & let us hear the train that we may send to meet you.7 Henrietta is here, but has had a disastrous visit, for she caught a cold or had a relapse into her former state, & has been in bed the whole week. 8 What slow coaches the Ministers are about your affairs.—9 Yours affectly.— | C. Darwin DAR 94: 218–19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

9

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. D. Hooker, 24 January 1872. William Henslow Hooker; see letter from J. D. Hooker, 24 January 1872. CD refers to Horace Darwin; no correspondence on this subject has been found. For Hooker’s concern about his son’s development, see, for example, Correspondence vol. 9, letter from J. D. Hooker, [29 December 1861]. William Hooker was sent to New Zealand in 1869 (see Correspondence vol. 17). See letter from J. D. Hooker, 24 January 1872 and nn. 2 and 3. Perfect: i.e. open. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 24 January 1872 and n. 6. CD refers to Henrietta Emma Litchfield. Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) records: ‘Hen came’ and ‘feverish at night’ on 16 January 1872; ‘fell sick’ on 17 January; ‘H. m. better’ on 28 January; ‘came down’ on 29 January; and ‘Hen went’ on 31 January. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 24 January 1872 and n. 7.

From Raphael Meldola 25 January 1872 Star Chemical Works, | Brentford. Jan. 25th. 1872 Dear Sir, I duly received your kind letter with enclosure— 1 pray accept my best thanks. The question seems to be this:—is mimetic colouring & marking a product of natural or sexual selection? If exclusively of natural selection the mimetic characters being of the most vital importance to the species possessing them one would expect to find these characters tolerably stable—while on the other hand if these characters are produced by the sole action of sexual selection we should expect to find them (as you have demonstrated in the Origin) very variable. 2 In my proposed paper I intend to adopt the view that mimetic colouring is a product of both natural & sexual selections for just as natural selection will prevent sexual selection from developing any character hurtful to a species so I believe that sexual selection will always govern the mimetic colouring of a species; thus only permitting a mode of colouring admired by the opposite sex to survive.3 In some cases as we see, the mimetic colouring is

January 1872

47

limited in its transmission to the female sex only & in such cases—the female being more brightly coloured than the male, natural selection only appears to have been at work—the mimetic colouring being sexually limited in its inheritance. From your kind remarks I feel convinced of the difficulty of studying the variability of mimetic characters for these being as I believe due to the joint action of Natural & Sexual Selection one hardly knows whether to expect great variability or not. I therefore think it advisable to leave this point untouched till I can have the means of examining long series of most of the known mimics. In all cases of mimicry where the resemblance is limited to one sex it is the female only which mimics. Now as the female is in most classes of animals the selecting sex we can I venture to think, understand why in cases such as those just mentioned the female is brighter than her male—for while natural selection has been modifying & brightening the female for the purpose of protection she has remained faithful to the general taste displayed by other species of her genus & gone on coupling with males of the ordinary colour—perhaps even rejecting any male specimen that had partly acquired through inheritance some of her gaudy colours. By this joint action of Natural & Sexual selections it appears to me that the mimetic characters may become fixed to the female sex only & transmitted in a latent state through the males in accordance with your admirable hypothesis of pangenesis.4 I have perused with much pleasure Fritz Müller’s letter for which I am much obliged.5 I enclose it to you but am so bold as to ask you to allow me to retain the specimens for a week or so as they illustrate a very important point which F. Müller does not allude to—viz. a gradation in the secondary sexual characters in the same species of which I already possess an excellent example in Teracolus Danaë collected by my friend Mr. J. K. Lord in Egypt.6 The | of this species has bright scarlet tips to the fore wings while I have a series of females showing a complete gradation from colourless tips to tips as brilliant as those of the males. Here & in F. Müller’s series of Leptalis Melite we have a glorious example of secondary sexual characters in all stages of transmission, from sexually limited inheritance to complete transmission to the female.7 I must confess that with Mr. Wallace, I do not see much difficulty in explaining the fact of several remotely allied forms all imitating one species. 8 The extraordinary amount of variability in that most variable of all characters, colour, in the Lepidoptera is assuredly great enough for the purpose. If Fritz Müllers explanation—that the females select colours similar to those of other species which they constantly see before them9 —be adopted we are still met with the difficulty that varieties approximating to the imitated forms do sometimes occur & if we allow this, then why not at once admit that the variation in that direction is sufficiently large to be of service to the species immediately? Perhaps as Mr. Wallace remarks sufficiently near the imitated form to be mistaken at a distance for one of the latter & so gain a few hours life—enough perhaps to deposit eggs.10 The species from the Satyridæ which imitates & haunts the same stations as two other species is adduced by Müller in support

48

January 1872

of his view but in such a case as this there is certainly not sufficient resemblance to entitle one to rank it as a case of mimicry, nor are we obliged to suppose that the female Satyrus through seeing two species with a white bar on the under surface of the hind wings continually about her acquired a similar taste & began to select males of her own species presenting white barred variations. 11 How mysterious are the laws that govern the colouration of organisms. Natural Selection or Sexual Selec. may sieze upon any particular mode of colouring or marking that may be useful to a species, but how ignorant we are of the cause of any particular colour appearing in an organism. May not Müllers example be explained by what you have termed the direct action of external conditions? We have several species inhabiting the same district & haunting the same stations— is it surprising then that a character common to all the species should be possessed by them? Surely the presence or absence of a minute white spot on the wing of a butterfly cannot affect the welfare of the species— yet Lycæna Agestis of the English list is represented by a var. Artaxerxes in Scotland which differs from its English ally only by the possession of a white spot on the wings. These two extremes are connected by another variety Salmacis—which not only connects them genetically but also geographically being found between England & Scotland.12 On the view of mimicry being produced by Nat. & governed by sexual selection I can conceive that in certain districts the mimic should be commoner than the mimicked species for in these districts another kind of foe is probably keeping down the numbers of the imitated form: a new class of persecutors to the larvæ of this latter form might explain it. I have come to the conclusion that the imitated form must be protected in the imaginal state & not owe its abundance to causes favourable to it in any of its earlier stages of growth. In explaining phænomena of this nature by Nat. Selec. protective resemblance becomes also included & the whole class of phænomena I have applied the term “mimetic adaptation” which is divided into “mimicry” & “protective resemblance”. 13 I must really apologise for stretching my communication to this inordinate extent. With many thanks for your kind wishes concerning the success of my work— | I remain, | Yours obediently, | Raphael Meldola. C. Darwin Esq, M.A. F.R.S. &c DAR 171: 118 1 2 3 4 5 6

See letter to Raphael Meldola, 23 January [1872] and n. 5. See Origin 5th ed., pp. 191–4. On Meldola’s planned paper, see the letter from Raphael Meldola, 21 January [1872] and n. 4. The published paper (Meldola 1873) did not mention sexual selection. For CD’s hypothesis of pangenesis, see Variation 2: 357–404. CD had enclosed the letter from Fritz Müller, 14 June 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19), in his letter to Meldola of 23 January [1872]. Müller had enclosed three sheets of butterfly wings with his letter of 14 June 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19). Meldola refers to John Keast Lord. Teracolus danae is now Colotis danae, the crimson or scarlet tip (Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 66 (2009): 250–5).

January 1872 7

8 9 10 11

12

13

49

Leptalis melite is now Enantia melite. Müller, however, was probably referring to the butterfly now known as Enantia clarissa (formerly Dismorphia melite), which is found in Santa Catarina, Brazil. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Fritz Müller, 14 June 1871 and n. 17. See letter to Raphael Meldola, 23 January [1872] and n. 6. Meldola refers to Alfred Russel Wallace. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Fritz Müller, 14 June 1871. See [Wallace] 1867, pp. 20–1. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Fritz Müller, 14 June 1871 and n. 15. The former family Satyridae (‘browns’) is now considered a subfamily, Satyrinae, of the family Nymphalidae (Niklas Wahlberg, ‘The higher classification of Nymphalidae’, in Nymphalidae.net, www.nymphalidae.net (accessed 12 April 2011)). Lycaena agestis, the brown argus, found in England south of the River Tees, is now Aricia agestis. Lycaena agestis var. artaxerxes, the northern brown argus, found in Scotland and northern England, is now Aricia artaxerxes artaxerxes. The northern English populations of A. artaxerxes (Aricia artaxerxes salmacis, the Castle Eden argus) are similar in appearance to A. agestis. (UK butterflies, www.ukbutterflies.co.uk, accessed 6 September 2010.) Genetically: i.e. in relation to origin or ancestry. The term did not, at this time, have anything to do with genes. Meldola reserved the terms mimicry for the imitation of other animals, and protective resemblance for the imitation of inanimate or vegetable structures (Meldola 1873, p. 154).

From Arthur Mellersh 25 January 1872 Fernhurst | Haslemere January 25. 1872 My dear Darwin, Sulivan sent me Phil. Kings Photo. and asked me to send it on to you. 1 It is a capital picture though if he were to come over here as a “Claimant” I don’t think I could swear to him, and I daresay if he had the Attorney General on his side I should be called some very hard names.2 It is now nearly ten years since Wickham Sulivan and I spent a pleasant evening at your house. 3 One of the three is gone, and in the world what mighty events have happened! probably they will be surpassed by what will be done in the next ten. Sulivan tells me there is a mission established in Tierra del Fuego, I hope it will succeed in preventing the poor people from being “improved” off the face of the earth.4 I feel a strange longing to wander in those lands again, but 60 years, and rheumatic-gouty fingers will I fear keep me at home. With compliments to Mrs. Darwin, I am my Dear Darwin | Yours very truly | A. Mellersh DAR 171: 146 1 2

3 4

See letter from B. J. Sulivan, 23 January 1872. Mellersh refers to Bartholomew James Sulivan and Philip Gidley King. The attorney-general, Henry Hawkins, was addressing the jury in the case of the Tichborne claimant (The Times, 25 January 1872, pp. 11–12). Hawkins was noted for the ridicule he poured on the claimant and his witnesses. King had settled in Australia in 1836. Mellersh, Sulivan, and John Clements Wickham visited Down House on 21 October 1862 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). See letter from B. J. Sulivan, 23 January 1872 and n. 3.

50

January 1872

To W. E. Darwin 26 January [1872] First vol. of new Edit. of Principles has just appeared— No Edit. of Elements since 1865. But “Lyells Students’ Elements of Geology” appeared in 1871, & will I think replace the old Elements1 C. Darwin Jan. 26th.— Postmark: JA 26 72 ApcS DAR 210.6: 138 1

The eleventh edition of Charles Lyell’s Principles of geology appeared in 1872 (C. Lyell 1872). The sixth edition of Lyell’s Elements of geology appeared in 1865 (C. Lyell 1865), and the Student’s elements of geology in 1871 (C. Lyell 1871).

To J. V. Carus 27 January [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Jan. 27 My dear Sir I send off today 3 more clean sheets; & I hope all will follow soon, as I have corrected every word to last page of Index.—2 I forget whether I mentioned before that I am having this edition stereotyped, so that I can never again make any more serious alterations. 3 The little strength left to me shall be employed on new works.— It would be worth your publisher’s consideration to stereotype the German Translation.— My dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | Ch Darwin Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Slg. Darmstaedter Lc 1859 Darwin, Charles, Bl. 78/79 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to J. V. Carus, 5 December 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19). Carus was preparing the German translation of the sixth edition of Origin (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to J. V. Carus, 8 October [1871]). CD had decided in early November 1871 to allow the sixth edition of Origin to be printed from stereotypes (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to R. F. Cooke, 4 November 1871).

To Raphael Meldola 27 January [1872]1 Pray keep the specimens as long as you wish.— I have read your letter with interest & pleasure.—2 I have vague recollection of Mr Trimen in Transact. Linn. Soc. or of

January 1872

51

Mr Butler of Brit. Mus. mentioning the case of | alone mimicking some other Butterfly.3 C. Darwin Down. Jan. 27th ApcS Oxford University Museum of Natural History (Hope Entomological Collections 1350) 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Raphael Meldola, 25 January 1872. See letter from Raphael Meldola, 25 January 1872. CD refers to Roland Trimen, the Transactions of the Linnean Society of London, Arthur Gardiner Butler, and the British Museum. CD was probably recalling a letter by Butler in Nature, 29 December 1870, p. 165 (see also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from A. G. Butler, 2 June 1871 and nn. 5–8, 13).

To John Murray 27 January [1872]1

Down, Beckenham, Kent Jan. 27.

My dear Sir I have today corrected last page of Index &c of Origin. I hope that you will think about the price, on which I wrote before, as well as about printing off copies of Diagram.2 As this is a cheap Book, do for Heaven sake have pages cut, like Lyell’s Manual, and never mind what the senseless booksellers say.3 I am very anxious on that it may have good sale. I hope you may consider it worth while to have it moderately advertised. Pray hurry on the Printers; they have been wonderfully slow. You agreed to send copies to chief Scientific Reviews; and do not omit Popular Science Review. As Mr. Dallas, I fancy, is generally rather short of cash, I hope that you will kindly send him the 10£ for Glossary soon4 My dear Sir | Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin Please send me 10 copies addressed to C. Darwin, Esq Orpington Station Kent per S.E. Railway. I will send a list of a few copies to be distributed in London5 Copy DAR 143: 283 1 2 3

The year is established by the references to the sixth edition of Origin, which was published in 1872. See letter to John Murray, 8 January [1872] and nn. 2 and 3. In 1864, CD had tried to persuade Murray to have the pages of the fourth edition of Origin cut; Murray had pointed out that booksellers objected to this on the grounds that it enabled customers to read books in the shop without buying them (Correspondence vol. 14, letter from John Murray, 18 July [1866] and n. 6). Charles Lyell’s Student’s elements of geology (C. Lyell 1871) was published with the pages cut (see also Correspondence vol. 19, letter to R. F. Cooke, 12 January [1871]).

52 4 5

January 1872

William Sweetland Dallas had compiled the glossary for the sixth edition of Origin (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from R. F. Cooke, 9 October 1871). For CD’s presentation list for Origin 6th ed., see Appendix IV.

From William Green 30 January 1872

Nassau, Bahamas. January 30th. 1872

Mr Charles Darwin | England Dear Sir For a long time, I have had it in my mind to write, but have postponed it till the present. My object is, to call your attention to the writings of A. J. Davis— 1 I have been much interested in them for 25 Years, as well as in your writings. He has written on many subjects, as for instance 1 on the origin of man 2 on the origin of motion, from which is successively developed Life—sensation & intelligence 3 on the philosophy of evil 4 on who, and what is God 5 on the mode of producing rain at pleasure 6 on the laws of Creation as it is called, in which he maintains that every thing that exists is the necessary result of an anticedent cause, consequently nothing was ever created in the usual sense of that term 7 on the final result, or termination of all forms of matter. 8 A Scientific proof of the natural & necessary formation of the Second Sphere of mans existence, as emanations from the worlds existing in space, as natural as the rings around Saturn— These are a few of the many Subjects which he has written upon— In his work on the origin of man, he maintains that he is a developement from the lower Kingdoms, and comes to the same result as you do, but not in the same mode as you suggest— On the supposition that you are not acquaintd with his writings, I will send you 2 or 3 of them, if they would be acceptable, and more of them, in case after reading those, you would like others— I would be pleased to do so, as my contribution to Science— I became acquainted with him about 25 Years ago, when he was dictating his first book. Natures Divine revelations.2 he was then a raw country boy—had never been to school over 6 mos ,—had never read any books—born of very poor, but respectable parents—always had poor social surroundings— I don’t believe that he has ever read a sientific book to this day, and I doubt if he has ever read a book— After he had finishd. the Revelations above spoken of, he was very poor, and I was so well pleased with the book, that I took him into my family, that he might be free from material cares, and he be enable to write more if he wished to do so— the next book he wrote on my lawn, as fast as any one would ordinarily write— 3 it was ready for the press as written, he says that he never has to correct what he writes— In his writings he often quotes from authors that he has never heard of, naming the page of the book— In answer to a question of mine how he does this, he says, that when any thing has been

January 1872

53

written which is applicable to his subject, the book appears open before him and he reads it off— He holds that there never was any particular gift to any person— that what he does, or what any man ever did, belongs to the race, and is only more developed in some, than in others— Some years ago, he said to me that he would like to have questions put to him— that it seemed to him that he could answer them, if proper questioning— From his own Self developement, he has become very intelligent upon most subjects, without study or instruction— Has an extremely well balanced temperament— so that his self command is about perfect.— In the 25 Years that I have been intimate with him, I have never seen him thrown off his balance— in answer to my question as to how he could remain unmoved under circumstances in which I have seen him placed—he answerd that he thought there was nothing that could transpire of sufficient importance in his mind to disturb his equilibrium— In my mind he is a phenomenon which scientific men should investigate,— I am tolerably acquainted with the history of most of those men who have left their impress upon the world, but none of them to my mind compare with Mr Davis— We may not have another like him for a long while— he is now 45 Years old— I think that Jesus was the greatest phenomenon we have had in times past, but he could not or did not give the philosophy of the powers he exercised but I think, he rather concluded that they were a Special Gift from God.— I will append an extract from one of his books, in answer to a question put to him on the origin of man—4 Question. Mr Davis, in your answer to a correspondents question “why are not men and animals produced now, as they were at first?—you say “I do observe a time, when the highest animals started thro’ the reproductive organism of the prepared female” &c, now the question I wish answered is this: What do you mean by the prepared female? Answer.— Readers of the volume of nature, observe that each chapter of material developement, is marked by deep-reaching changes in the fluids & solids of the globe— Vast crises, and earth-wide revolutions—accompanied by the retirement or extinction of one lot of physical conditions, and followed by the inauguration of new and superior circumstances in the material constitution of things. These changes, or crises, or revolutions, or whatever else you wish to term these transition points, and passages in the globe, are far more perfect, and therefore less conspicuous, and less remarkable, in the world of organised animation. By clairvoyance we anticipate the results of scientific discovery, which will be this doctrine of the origin of the Human Species: That mankind came not from the progressive transformation of the physical organisms of the superior animals, or Troglodytes, but by & through the advanced reproductive organisms of females of the ante-human types, which had in this particular respect, arrived at a fruit bearing crisis, or change, in regard to procreation, whereby a higher type (the first human organisms) entered upon existence. The particular philosophy of all this will be explained in our little volume on the Reproductive organism”.— Some of his answers to my questions I cannot understand, as for instance, he calls Love and thought material; & several other questions

54

January 1872

All his writings are in process of translation in Germany by C. G. Wittig in the employ of some person on the continent— His Autobiography, & 4 vols of the Harmonia have been completed & perhaps others—5 Should you desire any further communication on this subject, I shall be pleased to respond, and if you wish the books, please say how you would have them sent— I am spending the winter in this island— shall return home about 15 April next. Any letter will reach me by being addressed to me “Llewellyn Park, Orange N J. box 164 Very Respectfully | Yours William Green DAR 165: 222–4 1 2 3 4 5

Andrew Jackson Davis. Davis’s Principles of nature, her divine revelations and a voice to mankind was first published in 1847 (Davis 1847). Davis 1872 (The penetralia: being harmonial answers to important questions). The extract is from Davis’s Harbinger of health, pp. 301–2 (Davis 1862). The first volume of Davis’s Great harmonia (Davis 1850–68), and Magic staff: an autobiography (Davis 1857) were translated into German by Gregor Constantin Wittig (Davis 1867, Davis 1868).

To John Murray 30 January 1872

Down Beckenham | Kent Jan 30 | 1872

My dear Sir I want very much to beg a favour of you. There will hereafter be no further alterations in the “Origin”, & I am extremely anxious to spread my views. Therefore I want the new edition to appear in America. As Messrs Appleton made new stereotype plates for the last Edit., my only chance of persuading him is to offer him stereotypes of the new edit., at only a very little above the cost price.1 In this case perhaps I cd persuade him, though I am very doubtful on this head, to purchase the new plates, after he has sold every copy of his last edition. You will see that there must thus be some delay, & if any copies of the English edit. are sold in America, which I presume is not likely, there w d be time for their sale. Now I hope & trust you will grant me this request; if so kindly inform me soon what wd be the charge for a complete set of the stereotype plates, so that I c d write & inform Messrs Appleton what wd be the total cost, excepting that of the carriage to America— My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin As the whole of new Edit. is now type, Mess. Clowes2 will know number of stereotyped plates.— LS(A) National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 272–3) 1

2

Appletons of New York published a third US edition of Origin from stereotypes of the sixth London edition in 1873 (Origin 3d US ed.; see Freeman 1977). The head of the firm was William Henry Appleton. On the printing of the second US edition of Origin, see Correspondence vol. 17, letter from Charles Layton, 25 November 1869). William Clowes & Sons were Murray’s printers.

January 1872

55

From John Ball 31 January [1872]1 24 St George’s Road | Eccleston Square | SW 31 Jany My dear Sir Though I have been fortunate enough to meet you only once many years ago I am led to address you at the suggestion of my friend D r Hooker with reference to a subject on which I have addressed a letter to ‘Nature’ which may probably appear next Thursday.2 I should probably have done better to send the letter in the first instance for your consideration but in truth I did not think myself justified in taking up your time in that way and if I am led to write now with a view to supply the obvious deficiencies of a short letter where the subject demanded much fuller treatment I do so without expecting you to take the trouble of replying unless you see any occasion to do so. The subject in question is the application of the theory of probabilities to estimate the chance of survival of a new variety appearing in a given species of plant or animal— The argument first used by a writer in the North British Review has been adopted by Mr Mivart and others and its validity has been admitted by yourself—as I understand your remarks—to a greater extent that I think it fairly deserves. 3 You probably recollect the original passage & may have seen a recent letter in Nature wherein the writer corrects an obvious blunder in the text.— 4 The case as put assumes that within a given area the fixed number of individuals of the given species is 10,000 & that each (on an average) produces 100 descendants of which 99 must be destroyed if the species simply holds its ground without increase or decrease. The reviewer then inquires what would be the chance of survival of a modification appearing in a single individual of such a nature as to make the chance of growth & reproduction for that individual as compared with the unmodified members of the species as 2 to 1.— The answer I make is that in the cases where natural selection can be conceived to be an efficient agent the chance of the modified individual as compared with the others will be very much more favorable than 2 to 1, but I fear that I have not developed the argument sufficiently to make its force fully apparent, nor could I do so in writing for the public without exceeding the limits of a letter. Allow me to indicate a little more fully the way in which I would apply it to a concrete case— For illustration I will take a non-diœcious plant— mutatis mutandis it may be applied to other plants or animals— In the first place it is clear that unless the modified individual—which I shall call the new variety—arrives at maturity & reproduces offspring like itself the chance of survival is nil— we must assume therefore the appearance of 100 individuals of the new variety in the second generation— Let us suppose that the growth of the species is mainly restrained by two adverse influences— The first—e.g. a hot dry climate—operating so that only 101 th of the young plants (ie. those whose seeds have fallen in shady or moist spots) are able to survive— On an average then 90 out of every 100 young plants are destroyed by this cause. But if in the new variety (A) the

56

January 1872

vegetative organs are modified so as to resist better than the others heat and drought it may easily happen that 50 out the 100 young individuals will survive Let the second danger to which the given species is exposed be the larva of some common insect that feeds on the plant so that on an average nine out of ten individuals found growing at the period of activity of the supposed larva are consumed. let the modification of the new variety (B) be the earlier or later germination of the seed or such a modification of the root as will enable the plant to send up new stems after the enemy has ceased to be dangerous— such a change may enormously increase the chance of survival so that five six or eight out of every ten individuals may escape the danger. In the first case then we should have five individuals—in the second say eight that would reach the stage of reproduction and in the third generation we should have at least 500—or 800 descendants of the new variety— But inasmuch as variations that tend to adapt an organism to external physical conditions usually promote & increase the reproductive process it is more likely that the new variety A would on the average produce more numerous offspring e.g. 1000 instead of 500— But confining myself to the smaller supposition I find that by the seventh generation 312500 descendants of the new variety would make their appearance & that if one in twenty of these were to reach maturity we shd have 15625 individuals—i.e. a larger number than the original species counted at the outset. No doubt this result would be modified by the fact that the new variety would often be crossed with pollen from the unmodified form & that a portion of its descendants would be intermediate varieties but the conclusion is I think certain that a modification that tends to give a real advantage in the struggle for existence would generally be preserved, and indeed if any correct application of mathematics were to lead to an opposite result most people would say ‘so much the worse for mathematics.’ Of course a complete inquiry into any concrete case would involve the question whether the new variety wd not gain ground at the expense of other species as well as its unmodified ancestor & at the same time increase the severity of the struggle for existence on the part of the latter. Thus if two varieties were growing together of which one was unfitted or less well fitted to serve as food to a common insect the probability is that a larger proportion of the descendants of the edible variety would be consumed than before the appearance of the new non-edible or less edible variety. But modifications affecting the reproductive organs probably enjoy a still greater advantage in respect to their chance of survival & ultimate preservation. I have followed the reviewer in his assumptions because to a certain extent they correspond with facts & are required to allow the application of figures to the argument. But it is far from true that the population within a given area of most species is at a nearly fixed limit. In ordinary seasons the ground is pretty nearly fully stocked & one main limiting cause that keeps down population is the fact that there is no room for more the young are simply choked off as they attempt to grow. But external agencies—climate organic foes—&c—do not act uniformly in an unfavorable season but a comparatively small number of individuals survive to produce offspring and at such times the chance of survival of a favorable modification better fitted to produce

January 1872

57

healthy offspring becomes very great— In the case of annuals nearly as if a gardener went about destroying one variety and preserving the seeds of another. Perhaps you will allow me to say that speaking as a botanist I have always thought that in the ‘Origin of Species’ you rather overstated the argument for the suppression of intermediate varieties & species—owing to the great advantage in the struggle for existence which you attribute to large groups over small ones— 5 It must be allowed that in the long run the larger group has a slight additional chance in its favour, but this it seems to me is trivial when compared with the advantage enjoyed by any form in any degree better adapted to contend against adverse external conditions. In truth one answer to the objection that we ought to have (if your theory be true) a series of closely connected forms rather than well marked species—is in my humble opinion, that we have such series of closely connected forms to a much greater extent than is commonly supposed. As gaps in our knowledge are getting filled up the number of such groups known to us (botanists) is constantly increasing and speaking of a moderately well known region—such as the European & Mediterranean—it is surprising to an old fashioned botanist to find so small a number of thoroughly well defined species. However inconvenient & even mischievous may be the multiplication of specific names the work done by such men as Jordan so far as it rests on real observations seems to me very important. When he makes 52 species out of so apparently well defined & isolated a specific form as Draba verna of Linnæus & shows that among these there are several such that if the links were removed most botanists would admit them as distinct species—while all maintain themselves at least for a limited time in cultivation he helps very much the argument against admitting well defined species as the rule and groups of nearly allied forms as the exception. 6 I am at present at work upon the collections which Hooker & I brought back from Morocco—moving slowly because I try to examine carefully. 7 It is quite surprising to see how small the number of well marked species is & how many of the plants which must be reckoned as new—are merely well marked but very near allied subspecies or varieties that fall into their places as links in the chain of vegetable forms characteristic of the Mediterranean region— Pray excuse the length of this letter— It has been interrupted & is posted only after the publication of the letter to which I referred at the outset believe me dear Sir | very faithfully yours | John Ball DAR 47: 196–201 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Action | Natural Selection’ blue crayon 1 2 3

The year is established by the reference in this letter to Ball’s letter in Nature, 1 February 1872, pp. 264–5 (‘The chance of survival of new varieties’). Ball refers to Joseph Dalton Hooker, and his letter to Nature (see n. 1, above). Ball refers to an argument in Henry Charles Fleeming Jenkin’s anonymous article in the North British Review ([ Jenkin] 1867). CD discussed the passage in question in Origin 5th ed., pp. 104–5. St George Jackson Mivart mentioned it in Mivart 1871b, pp. 38, 64–8.

58 4 5 6 7

February 1872

In Nature, 28 December 1871, p. 161, a correspondent pointed out a mathematical error in [ Jenkin] 1867. In Origin, CD argued that intermediate varieties in a district between two well-defined varieties would in the long run be supplanted by the varieties on either side (see Origin 5th ed., pp. 211–13). Alexis Jordan described twenty forms of Draba verna, classifying these as separate species with the genus name Erophila ( Jordan and Fourreau 1866–1903, vol. 1). Ball, Hooker, and George Maw travelled in Morocco in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letters from J. D. Hooker, 19 March 1871 and 3 July 1871). The collections were published in Hooker and Ball 1878.

From Francis Galton 1 February 1872

42 Rutland Gate. SW. Feb 1/72

My dear Darwin If you can make it convenient to send, in separate hampers, 1 buck & 1 doe, I should be glad, as then my stock will be large enough to be above risk of accident As for the others, pray do what you like with them. 1 Wd. you send the pair, as before, addressed to Dr. Charles Carter2 University College Gower St. & if you cd. kindly let a postage card be sent to him, to say when they might be expected, they wd. be the more sure, to be immediately attended to I grieve to say, that I find I must abandon the rats, as a task above my power to bring to a successful issue.3 I am most truly obliged to the care you have taken of the rabbits— I heartily wish for my part, that I could have done more in the way of experiment than I have affected.4 Very sincerely yours | Francis Galton DAR 105: A44–5 1

2 3 4

See letter to Francis Galton, 23 January [1872]. Galton sent CD eight young rabbits in April 1871; CD had already sent back some rabbits in December (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Francis Galton to Francis Darwin, 7 April 1871, and letters from Francis Galton, 21 November 1871 and 2 December 1871). Charles Henry Carter. Galton began experiments with rats in or before September 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Francis Galton, 13 September 1871). Galton’s experiments with rabbits and rats were performed in order to test CD’s hypothesis of heredity, pangenesis (see Variation 2: 357–404), but his results had been inconclusive. For CD’s response to the results of Galton’s experiments with rabbits, see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Nature, [before 27 April 1871].

To J. J. Moulinié 1 February 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Feb 1 1872

My dear Sir You will remember that I proposed to write a letter to you, to be translated &

February 1872

59

prefixed to your edition of the Origin. 1 This seems to me highly desirable, & I now enclose it; but if you or Mr Reinwald2 object to any part of it, or can suggest any improvement, please to inform & return the letter, & I will try to meet your wishes. I have received 2 clean sheets from the printers, beyond the 3 which I sent you the other day. As I suppose you are in no hurry, I will keep the 2 until I receive more, which must be shortly as I have corrected the last proofs of the whole work. 3 I shall never make any further alterations in the Origin, as I wish to reserve what little strength remains to me for new work. Consequently I have had the sheets stereotyped; but I do not suppose that M. Reinwald would think of stereotyping the type; & I should be sorry that he should do so until the first half of the volume is corrected in accordance with the 6th edition4 My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin [Enclosure] Down, Beckenham, Kent, England. January 31, 1872. Permit me to state the circumstances under which I have requested you to do me the favour of translating into French the fifth edition of my Origin of Species. When Madame Clemence Royer published the second French edition, I looked over the proof sheets and gave her all the corrections and additions which was then in my power to contribute. Hence, I never doubted that she would have informed me if at any time a new edition was required. But a third had appeared, which is imperfect, as it contained very few of the corrections by which the fourth English edition was increased to the extent of 54 pages.5 A fifth thoroughly revised English edition was published in the spring of 1869; and now a sixth edition has appeared, and you will be able to correct the latter half of your translation in accordance with it. As I naturally feel very anxious that an edition as complete as possible should circulate in France, I am particularly glad that you have undertaken the translation. It is my highest ambition to influence the judgement of the naturalists of that country which has given birth to Buffon, Lamarck, the two Geoffroy St. Hilaires, and so many other eminent men of science. 6 In order that my motives for supporting your edition may not be misunderstood, permit me to add that I have declined to receive the remuneration which has been kindly offered to me by your publisher for the right of translation. Nor am I bound in honour to refrain from giving all the support in my power to your work, by having received any remuneration from the publisher of Madame Royer’s translation [. . . ] 7 Charles Darwin LS Smithsonian Institution Libraries (Special Collections, Dibner Library MSS 405 A. Gift of the Burndy Library); Paul C Richards (Cat. 241) 1

No letter to Moulinié containing CD’s proposal has been found. CD refers to Moulinié’s French translation of the fifth and sixth editions of Origin (Moulinié trans. 1873). A version of CD’s enclosed

60

2 3 4 5 6 7

February 1872

letter, with a parallel French translation, was published in Moulinié trans. 1873, although it was dated 23 September 1872, and seems to have been copied not from this text but from a very similar one written in September, of which an incomplete draft survives (DAR 69: A27–8; see also letter to J. J. Moulinié, 23 September 1872). Charles-Ferdinand Reinwald was the publisher of Moulinié trans. 1873. CD refers to Origin 6th ed.; he finished correcting proofs on 10 January 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Moulinié’s translation (Moulinié trans. 1873) was based on both the fifth and the sixth editions of Origin. See letter to J. J. Moulinié, 1 January 1872 and nn. 2 and 3. For letters about Clémence Auguste Royer’s translations of Origin (Royer trans. 1862, 1866, and 1870), see especially Correspondence vols. 10, 13, and 17. This sentence is omitted from the published version. CD refers to Georges Louis Leclerc, comte de Buffon, Jean Baptiste Lamarck, and Etienne and Isidore Geoffroy de Sainte-Hilaire. The enclosure is known only from a transcript in a sale catalogue; probably only the valediction has been omitted.

From Amy Ruck to Horace Darwin [1 February 1872]1 Will you tell Mr. Darwin that in the case in which the furrows run down the hill & are 4in at the top & 1in at the bottom—the slope is 15o and faces North East. The furrows are about 7 ft apart & on the level ground above are 4in 3 12 in deep, although it is difficult to measure these on account of the mole hills—40 paces long. On another slope of 15o facing S. West the furrows were scarcely perceptible but on level ground at the bottom the same furrows were 3 14 2 12 in deep. The length of the slope was 80 paces— On another short slope of 10 o the furrows at the top were 3 21 at the bottom 1 14 1 12 in deep.2 DAR 176: 222 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Feb 1. 1872 (2d note)’ Bottom of letter: ‘Amy Ruck’ 1 2

The date is established by CD’s annotation. The measurements were made for CD’s research on the action of worms in turning over soil (see also letter from Amy Ruck to Horace Darwin, [20 January 1872]). CD wanted to ascertain how long the ridges of ploughed land would persist after the land was last ploughed (see Earthworms, p. 292).

From Asa Gray 2 February 1872 Botanic Garden | Cambridge, Mass. Feb. 2. 1872 My Dear Darwin Your note of the 15th ult. just in.1 I have read it to two good observers,—who say the “vermiform piles” are common enough here,—and I should think, if not as common as with you thro’ the season, it was owing to interruption in the dry part of our hot summer.

February 1872

61

I know nobody now at hand here who could give a comparison with your country. Perhaps I may find some one in Canada to ask. Now, pray don’t run off on some other track till you have worked out and published about Drosera & Dionæa2 My wife3 joins in kindest regards to you and yours | Ever Yours sincerely | Asa Gray DAR 165: 178 CD ANNOTATIONS 4.1 Now, . . . Dionæa 4.2] crossed pencil Top of letter: ‘Keep’ red crayon 1 2 3

See letter to Asa Gray, 15 January 1872. CD had worked on Drosera and Dionaea intermittently since 1860 (see Correspondence vols. 8–15, 17–19). The results of this research appeared in 1875 in Insectivorous plants. Jane Loring Gray.

From Arthur Mellersh 2 February 1872 Fernhurst | Haslemere February 2d. | 1872 My dear Darwin, I am very gratified at receiving the Photograph as well as your kind letter, which I should have answered before but the continued wet had crowded so many shooting engagements into the last few days that I had no time and I am now rather done. 1 I had procured your Photo, somewhere in London, but it is not so good as that you sent me which I think is excellent.2 I send mine which I had taken the last time I went to the Levèe;3 I have none in plain clothes some of which were thought to be better. The beard alters me, though I do not think I am so changed as the “Claimant”. 4 But I do not think I should know King if I were to meet him. 5 I met two years ago the late 1st. Lt. of my last ship the Forte, and could not call his name to mind until he told me, when of course I knew him at once. 6 Would not Sergeant Ballantyne like to hear this.7 I am now living in sight of the ruins of the pretty cottage where I was born, and surrounded by land that was my Fathers; and I have managed to buy a “corner of about 40 acres of wood land part of a very old inheritance but I am a tenant of the great Architect Mr. Salvin who builds the ugliest houses I ever saw, though his own is rather pretty.8 His second son Osgood tells me he knows you well, and I think he is a very nice fellow.9 I am my dear Darwin | Yours very sincerely | A. Mellersh DAR 171: 147 1 2

CD’s letter to Mellersh has not been found. The photograph that CD sent has not been identified, but he sat for Oscar Rejlander in April 1871 and probably ordered some of the photographs in August 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Elliott & Fry, 23 April [1871]; CD’s Classed account books (Down House MS)).

62 3

4 5 6 7 8 9

February 1872

Levee: ‘in Great Britain and Ireland, an assembly held (in the early afternoon) by the sovereign or his representative, at which men only are received’ (OED). The photograph has not been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. Mellersh refers to the Tichborne claimant, a person who, in a series of dramatic legal cases, claimed to be the rightful heir to the Tichborne estates (ODNB s.v. Tichborne claimant). Mellersh refers to Philip Gidley King; see letter from Arthur Mellersh, 25 January 1872. Mellersh was in command of the Forte between 1862 and 1864, when he retired. The first lieutenant during this time was George Lyon Tupman (Navy list). William Ballantine, serjeant-at-law, had appeared on behalf of the Tichborne claimant in 1871 (ODNB). Anthony Salvin designed his own house, Hawksfold, in Fernhurst (ODNB). Osbert Salvin mentioned meeting Mellersh in his letter of 21 September 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19).

From John Murray 2 February [1872]1

50, Albemarle S.t | W. Feby 2

Dear Mr Darwin It is only reasonable & just that I shd comply with your wishes regarding your own works as far as possible—& I shall certainly not refuse one so strenuously urged by you as that of allowing your American publisher to have a set of stereotypes of the new Edn. of the Origin of Species.—2 I have ascertained from Clowes3 that the cost will exceed £30— Appleton them for £50.— I hope you will receive copies of your new Edn. between the 8th & 10th. My Dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | John Murray Chas Darwin Esq DAR 171: 406 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to John Murray, 30 January 1872. See letter to John Murray, 30 January 1872. Murray refers to Origin 6th ed. CD’s American publisher was D. Appleton & Co. William Clowes & Sons were printers to Murray.

To Anton Dohrn 3 February 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Feb 3 1872

My dear Sir I am very much obliged to you for having sent me your interesting article in Das Ausland I infer that there will be a second article; & if you have a spare copy I should be grateful for it.1 I am particularly glad that you were struck with Huxley’s article, which seems to me inimitably good.2 You will have heard that his health has failed & that he has gone to Egypt for 3 months. I believe he intends on his return to visit your establishment at Naples, which I hope flourishes.3 I believe you are quite right about the cause of Wallace’s sad falling away. 4 Mr Mivart’s book has produced a great effect in England. 5 He much misrepresents my views. The point which seems to have struck most readers in England is about incipient structures not being of use. I have therefore answered this point in some detail

February 1872

63

in a new edition of the Origin which will soon appear, & of which I will send you a copy for the chance of your liking to read this part.6 I did not know until reading your article that my Descent of Man had excited so much furor in Germany.7 It has had an immense circulation in this country8 & in America; but has met the approval of hardly any naturalists as far as I know. Therefore I suppose it was a mistake on my part to publish it; but any how it will pave the way for some better work— Believe me | my dear Sir | yours very sincerely | Charles Darwin LS Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (Ana 525. Ba 699) 1

2 3

4 5 6

7 8

Dohrn’s article ‘Englische Kritiker und Anti-Kritiker über Darwinismus’ was published in the 4 December 1871 issue of Das Ausland (Dohrn 1871e). CD’s copy of the issue is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. At the end of the article Dohrn remarked that a similar review of German criticism would be useful, but no other article has been identified. In Dohrn 1871e, pp. 1154–7, Dohrn gave a synopsis of Thomas Henry Huxley’s essay ‘Mr. Darwin’s critics’ (T. H. Huxley 1871a). Huxley stayed at Dohrn’s house in Naples while Dohrn was in Stettin (now Szczecin in Poland; letter from Anton Dohrn to Henrietta Anne Huxley, 7 March 1872 (Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine Archives, Huxley Papers 13: 210); Heuss 1991, pp. 118–19). Dohrn argued that Alfred Russel Wallace, because of his opposition to mechanistic philosophy, had tried, unsuccessfully, to combine natural selection and spiritualism (Dohrn 1871e, p. 1154). St George Jackson Mivart had written critically about CD’s theory in On the genesis of species (Mivart 1871a). In Origin 6th ed., pp. 176–204, CD responded to Mivart’s criticisms regarding the incompetence of natural selection to account for the incipient stages of useful structures. Dohrn’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Origin 6th ed. (see Appendix IV). Descent was published in 1871 and translated into German by Julius Victor Carus (Carus trans. 1871). Seven thousand five hundred copies of Descent were printed by John Murray in 1871 (Freeman 1977).

From C. F. Martins1 3 February 1872

Montpellier 3. Fev. 1872.

Cher Maitre Votre lettre m’a fait le plus grand plaisir car elle me prouve que j’ai eté assez heureux dans l’exposition de vos idées.2 L’avenir leur appartient mais c’est seulement avec l’aide du temps qu’elles pourront remplacer les anciennes et vaincre les préjugés de tout genre qui regnent encore parmi les Naturalistes. On me signale une refutation écrite par Mr. Joachim Barrande excellent paleontologiste francais residant a Prague connu par ses travaux sur les terrains siluriens de la Bohème. 3 Je ne l’ai pas lue mais l’auteur n’est pas dans les conditions d’impartialité necessaires pour la recherche de la verité. Ancien Instituteur du Duc de Bordeaux 4 il est très catholique, et ne separé pas comme on doit le faire la science de la religion. Sa bonne foi est complette. Son independance ne l’est pas. Beaucoup de nos jeunes naturalistes partagent vos idées mais n’osent l’avouer ouvertement de peur de nuire à leur avancement dans la carrière de l’enseignement. Mon collegue Rouget5 Professeur de Physiologie à la Faculté a été blamé et averti

64

February 1872

officiellement. Nous n’en continuons pas moins tous deux a enseigner ce que nous croyons être la verité. Veuillez agréer mon cher Maitre l’expression de mon admiration et de mon devouement | Ch: Martins DAR 171: 60 1 2

3

4

5

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. CD’s letter has not been found, but probably discussed Martins’s article in the 15 December 1871 issue of Revue des deux mondes on the creation of the organised world according to English and German naturalists of the new school (Martins 1871). CD’s offprint of the article is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection– CUL. Martins refers to Barrande’s work on trilobites (Barrande 1871). Barrande’s multi-volume work on the Silurian system of Bohemia (Barrande et al. 1852–1911) consisted of eight parts in twenty-eight volumes, twenty-one of which were published during Barrande’s lifetime. Eleven volumes had appeared by 1872. In the introduction to Barrande 1871, pp. v–vi, Barrande explained that the book was essentially drawn from his larger work, but with the purpose of showing that the facts did not support theories of transmutation. Henri Charles Ferdinand Marie Dieudonné, comte de Chambord, had been given the title duc de Bordeaux at birth (DBF ). Barrande had been his tutor from 1830 to 1833, and from 1841 became administrator of his lands (Tort 1996). Charles Marie Benjamin Rouget.

From Friedrich Hildebrand 5 February 1872

Freiburg i/B. Febr 5th 1872.

Dear and honoured Sir You will excuse me that I have not answered before your very kind letter of August last, but I had nothing to communicate to you that was worth your while. 1 I was very pleased that you were contented with my experiments on Oxalis Valdiviana, and surely I shall follow your advice in behalf of further experiments about this matter. 2 I hope that your health has become now better again that you may be able to publish all your important observations. With very great interest I have read your last work on the Origin of Man, 3 and in reading a great many questions on botanical matters have come to my mind, but most of them will not be easy to answer. Perhaps you will accept it kindly when I say that one of the very great merits of all your works is, that they lead to a great many questions and observations, nobody has thought or dreamed of before! You will have received my little paper on the fruit of Composits, that I have sent you some time ago, another on the origin and the mechanism of expansion of the tails of seeds is in preparation, but it will last some time before, though small, it will be printed.4 The means with which seeds are provided for their spreading seem to me very interesting and perhaps I shall make and publish in future days some more experiments and observations on this matter.5 As I remember that you asked me some time ago for several seeds, I send you the catalogue of our botanical garden; perhaps you find one or the other species that you

February 1872

65

would like to cultivate, so you will be so kind as to point them out on the catalogue and send it back again.6 Hoping that your health is recovered now I remain | dear Sir | yours | respectfully | Hildebrand DAR 166: 212 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Askenasy | Achenia of Pumilio 1861 p. 5.’ 7 ink 1 2

3 4

5

6 7

See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Friedrich Hildebrand, 10 August [1871]. Oxalis valdiviana is now known as O. valdiviensis (Chilean yellow sorrel). CD advised Hildebrand to perform further experiments to determine the degree of fertility of illegitimate crosses compared with legitimate ones under the same conditions (Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Friedrich Hildebrand, 10 August [1871]). CD referred to crosses made using pollen of the same form of flower in dimorphic or trimorphic plant species as illegitimate, and those made using pollen of a different form as legitimate (see ‘Three forms of Lythrum salicaria’, p. 186). Descent. Hildebrand’s paper on the means of dispersal of the seeds of Compositae (the family is now called the Asteraceae) appeared in Botanische Zeitung, 5 January 1872 (Hildebrand 1872a). His paper on the development of hairy appendages in the seeds of plants appeared in the issues of 12 and 19 April 1872 (Hildebrand 1872b). CD’s annotated copies of these articles are in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection– CUL. Hildebrand published two further articles, on the means of dispersal of the seeds of Graminae, and on the dispersal of seed by adherent organs, both of which appeared in Botanische Zeitung in December 1872 (Hildebrand 1872c and 1872d). CD’s annotated copies of these articles are in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Friedrich Hildebrand, 10 August [1871]. No copy of the catalogue from the botanic garden of the University of Freiburg has been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. CD’s annotations are notes for his reply; see letter to Friedrich Hildebrand, 9 February 1872 and nn. 2 and 6.

From J. D. Hooker [5 February 1872?]1 Royal Gardens Kew Monday D. D. Do not write with enclosed but return it, except indeed you have any questions to ask apropos. it is from Govr Lefroy of Bermuda.2 I was wonderfully rested by my two nights at Down— I had not slept so well for weeks Ever yours affec | J D Hooker I do hope that Mrs Darwin is better & George too.4 DAR 103: 105–6 1

The date is conjectured from a reference in CD’s Account books (see n. 2, below) and from the reference to Hooker’s visit to Down. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Hooker arrived at Down on 3 February 1872. The first Monday following that date was 5 February.

66 2

4

February 1872

The enclosure has not been found, but an entry in CD’s Account book–bank account for 29 January 1872 records a payment of £1 for ‘Lefroy—Castle Moreton (charity)’. John Henry Lefroy was governor of Bermuda from April 1871 to May 1877 (ODNB). According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Emma was ill from 17 to 29 January 1872. There is no mention in the diary of George Howard Darwin’s being ill; however, according to F. Darwin 1916, p. xiv, his health deteriorated over the course of 1872.

From J. F. Mackenzie 8 February 1872

32 London St., | Edinburgh, 8/ Feby/ ’72.—

Private.— Dear Sir, I hope you will kindly excuse my troubling you, but I was much interested in reading your “Descent of Man,” while in India,—& thought I might be of assistance.— I am a Civil Engr. in the Indian Dept. Pub. Works, at present on sick leave, and should be most happy (on my return) to furnish you with any information which might be of use in your investigations.—1 There are one or two phenomena I observed in the Punjab, which struck me:— 1.— I noted as a singular fact that in families with an admixture of native blood, generally of the 3d. or 4th. degree, that while some of the family were as dark as many half-castes, those in which the admixture was not apparent had almost invariably reddish hair and light eyes.— This may (?) be accounted for on the ground that the hair of many dark races is an opaque red, so dark as to seem jet black.— 2 2.— I noticed that the feet of most low-caste domestic servants were flat, fan-shaped (from the spreading of the toes); & that the “big toe” was shorter than the next, & semi-prehensile.—3 I have heard it asserted that such wd. (or ought to) be the classic form of foot, if not distorted by boots!— 3.— Just before reading your “Descent of Man” &c, I was engaged in the country of the so-called “Belooch” tribes of the Derajat, 4 & noticed that many of the men had long ringlets of light-brown hair, while their beards seemed jet black.— 5 I regret that I did not procure specimens, to test, as natives are very fond of staining their beards,—even of a blue, purple, or auburn tint.— 4.— Many persons (Europeans & others) have a partial continuation of the hair of the head in the shape of a hairy triangle stretching along part of the neck.— This seems to be similar to a rudimentary form of mane.— 5.— I had in my possession a Cabuli (Persian) cat, pure white with bushy tail, & eyes of different colours,—viz. one light blue & the other of a hazel tint.— 6 Most cats of this species have both the eyes brown or hazel.— Excuse my intruding, | Yours truly, | John F. Mackenzie. DAR 171: 5 CD ANNOTATION 7.1 4— . . . mane.— 7.3] double scored pencil 1

Mackenzie was a civil engineer in India from 1867 (India Office Records: Financial Department Records IOR/L/F/8/3/242, 26 July 1867).

February 1872 2 3 4 5

6

67

CD discussed the formation of races of humans and the results of crossing in Descent 1: 240–8. In Descent 1: 206, CD suggested that the early progenitors of humans had prehensile feet. The Baloch tribes originated in Balochistan but many settled in Derajat (now in Pakistan) in the fifteenth century. The British took control of the area in 1849 (EB). In Descent 2: 319, CD discussed the colour of the hair and beards of men, claiming that when colour differences were present the beard was invariably lighter. CD received letters from individuals in whom the opposite was the case (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Frank Chance, [before 25 April 1871], and letter from W. B. Tegetmeier, [before 25 April 1871]). ‘Cabul’ is an alternative spelling of Kabul, a province in Afghanistan. In Variation 2: 329, CD had discussed eye colour in white cats, noting a correlation between blue eyes and deafness.

From L. C. Wedgwood [8 February 1872]1

Leith Hill Place, | Dorking.

Xperimt. 1. Measurement of depth of furrows at top and bottom of slope— Old ploughed land has been pasture at least 24 years. Field sloping in 2 directions, but much most along furrows. Measured by laying a straight rod across from ridge to ridge, and measuring distance from furrow to rod. 2 Furrow No 1:— ( Jan 15th 1872) Top. (before there is much slope)

4 in

middle of slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3 43

Bottom of slope (on flat)

3 14

Furrow No 2:— Top (nearly flat)

about

3 34

near top of slope

"

4

Middle

"

3 34

Bottom

"

4

Furrow No 3:— Top.—

about

3 12

Nr. top of slope

" nearly

3

Bottom

3

Furrow No 4:— Top Top of slope

ab.t

4

"

3

3 " It was impossible in above experiment to obtain very accurate results,— any little irregularities in the surface making all the difference. There were marks of drainingpipes running across furrows nr. top & bottom Bottom

68

February 1872

Experimt. 2— Trenches dug one on ridge, one in trough of furrow side by side in same field on slope. Jan. 11th. Line of worm-mould very ill-defined— No apparent difference Beginning of Feb. Two more trenches dug in same field on nearly flat ground along line of furrow. Worm-line very ill-defined only to be seen by an occasional bit of charcoal. These are very rare, but form a sufficiently straight line I think to preclude chance No 1. (ridge)

worm mould

2 34 –4 inches

No 2 (furrow) — — 3 12 –5 Experimt. 3. A sod dug out near top of steep slope in garden and at bottom. (Feb 6th.) Top worm-mould

4 inches

Bottom —— 5 34 pt Ex . 4 Worm mould on common near sqre. yard 3–4 in. On terrace near sq yd. 3 34 3 Mem DAR 63: 79–80 CD ANNOTATIONS 6.1 Experimt. 3. . . . 5 34 6.4] ‘But brushing with besom may have interfered’ added ink 7.1 Expt. 4 . . . 3–4 in.] ‘so that *for endless centuries [interl] here in 30–40 years the whole w d be brought to surface; is little added from below, & this little washed away?’ added ink 7.1 Worm mould on common] ‘space almost level’ interl after ‘on’ ink 8.1 On . . . terrace] ‘Level’ added ink Top of letter: ‘Given to me at Down. Feb. 8th 1872 | Lucy Wedgwood’ ink 1 2 3

The date is established by CD’s annotation. CD was gathering data for his research on the action of worms. In Earthworms, pp. 292–7, CD discussed the gradual disappearance of ridges and furrows on inclined land. CD described the location of the two sections or square yards and the weight of the castings produced in each section in Earthworms, pp. 165–8. In this account, he referred to Wedgwood as ‘a lady’.

To Friedrich Hildebrand 9 February 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Feb 9. 72 My dear Sir Owing to other occupations I was able to read only yesterday yr paper on the Dispersal of the seeds of Compositæ. Some of the facts which you mention are extremely interesting.1 I write now to suggest, as worthy of yr examination, the curious adhesive filaments of mucus emitted by the Achenia of many Compositae, of which no doubt you are aware. My attention was first called to the subject by the Achenia of an Australian Pumilio, (P. argyrolepis) which I briefly described in the Gardener’s Chronicle 1861. p. 5.2

February 1872

69

As the threads of mucus dry & 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 they wd adhere firmly & might be carried to any distance. I was informed that Decaisne has written a paper on these adhesive threads.3 What is the meaning of the mucus so copiously emitted from the moistened seeds of Iberis & of, at least, some species of Linum? 4 Does the mucus serve as a protection against their being devoured, or as a means of attachment?5 I have been prevented reading yr paper sooner by attempting to read Dr Askenasy’s pamphlet;6 but the German is too difficult for me to make it all out. He seems to follow Nägeli completely.7 I cannot but think that both much underrate the utility of various parts of plants; and that they greatly under-rate 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. With sincere esteem believe me | my dear Sir | yours very faithfully | Charles Darwin LS(A) Klaus Groove (private collection) 1 2 3 4 5

6 7

See letter from Friedrich Hildebrand, 5 February 1872 and n. 4. The reference is to Hildebrand 1872a. See Correspondence vol. 9, letter to Gardeners’ Chronicle, [before 5 January 1861]. Pumilio argyrolepis is a misspelling of Pumilo argyrolepis. Joseph Decaisne, in a paper on the structure of the hairs covering the pericarp of some composites, noted that when exposed to water the hairs became sticky (Decaisne 1839, p. 252). Iberis is the genus of candytufts; Linum is the genus of flax. In ML 2: 387 n. 2, Francis Darwin noted some theories on the function of the mucus, namely that by anchoring the seed the entrance of the radicle into the soil was facilitated, or that the mucus acted as a temporary water-store. CD’s annotated copy of Eugen Askenasy’s essay on criticisms of Darwinian theory (Askenasy 1872) is in the Darwin Library–CUL. Carl Wilhelm Nägeli, in his essay on the origin and concept of the natural historical species (Nägeli 1865), claimed that ‘higher’ species evolved through the operation of a ‘perfectibility principle’ (‘Vervollkommnungsprincip’): a tendency within each organism to develop more complicated structures. CD had responded to Nägeli’s critique in Origin 5th ed., p. 151 (see also Correspondence vol. 14, letter to C. W. von Nägeli, 12 June [1866], and letter to J. V. Carus, 21 November 1866). Askenasy supported Nägeli’s view and countered CD’s response in Askenasy 1872, pp. 9–27.

From R. F. Cooke 12 February 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Feby. 12 1872

My dear Sir By post you will receive the 1st. copy of the new edition of the “Origin”, which we hope you will like the appearance of.1 The expenses of this reprint have far exceeded the calculations made when the subject was put in hand. The printer says it was nearly all rewritten & his charges are as if the work was all in M.S.2 The consequence is that when the whole edition (3000 No.) are sold retail at 6/– it will only yield a profit of £100;

70

February 1872

The Students edition of Lyell’s Geology is pubd. at 9/0– & therefore Mr. Murray proposes to fix the retail price of yours at 7/6 which he thinks will be a very cheap volume indeed.3 We wait yr reply. | Yrs very faithfully | Robt. Cooke Chas. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 407 1 2

3

The type-size used in Origin 6th ed. was smaller than for previous editions, in line with CD’s wish to make a cheap edition (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to John Murray, 23 April [1871]). CD had added a new chapter, ‘Miscellaneous objections to the theory of natural selection’ to Origin 6th ed. (Origin 6th ed., pp. 168–204); it included material that had been in several different places in earlier editions, as well as much new content. John Murray had suggested a price of 7s. 6d. for a cheap edition comparable to Charles Lyell’s The student’s elements of geology (C. Lyell 1871), but CD had hoped for an even lower price (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from John Murray, 31 May [1871], and letter to John Murray, 3 June [1871]).

From W. W. Reade 13 February 1872

11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington Feb 13—72

My dear Sir The old adage of save me from my friends! applies with double force to disciples. If you saw the note in the Literary Gossip of the Athenæum you must I imagine feel some curiosity not altogether unmingled with dread as to the use I am going to make of your principles—1 I send you a couple of sheets as a sample, and I need not say how highly I should prize an opinion from you upon them. You will see I have worked in one of your phrases about analogy being a deceptive guide. But my work is a complete mosaic. I make no pretensions to originality.— If it is not asking you too much would you margin note these sheets—with your assent or dissent in relation to special passages— they would then be a pleasant souvenir for me to keep with your letters. In the last chapter of my book I give an outline of the human history from the nebular system to the present time. There is little about Africa—only one point of ethnological importance viz my belief that the Caffres are not radically distinct from negroes—the woolly hair being the only constant character of the West African & that the Caffre has. However I may be wrong, not having seen Caffres. 2 When I am through with this book—I suppose in two or three weeks I had better send you my dissenting remarks about music—sex. selection &c.3 —as my travels wh. I next go to work on will contain little science4 —& whether anything I have collected is first published by you or by me is a matter of indifference— As far as vanity goes, I prefer the former: as you give my statements a wider circulation than I can ever hope to get for them myself. The Pall Mall Gazette will I believe review your new edition of the Origin & Mivart’s Genesis in the same article.5 I have taken care that the reviewer, whoever he may be, is put up to reading Huxley’s article & also to the fact that Mivart was

February 1872

71

the Quarterly Reviewer.6 I have seen him only once since my return, & I found him changed— I half believe he is a Jesuit. However Huxley dressed him down nicely. I was glad to hear from D Forbes7 that you are at work. I may mention with reference to Expression that the native physiognomy in movement is the same as ours, as is evident from this fact—that I cd. read their sentiments in the play of their features & I often observed them very closely studying mine. 8 St. John says in his book on Sutherland that dogs are good physiognomists— 9 that is curious— It is commonly said that parasites affect children, children breed them as the hair-dressers say. Might that not be reversion? Hoping you are in good health | I remain my dear Sir | yours truly | Wd Reade DAR 176: 52 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.2 Athenæum] underl pencil 1.4 you a couple] underl pencil 1.16 as my . . . science— 1.17] scored pencil 2.1 The Pall . . . Origin] scored pencil 1

2 3

4 5 6

7 8 9

The notice in the ‘Literary Gossip’ section of the Athenæum, 3 February 1872, p. 147, read, ‘Mr. Winwood Reade is engaged upon a work called “The Dark Continent” in which he makes an attempt to apply Mr. Darwin’s principles in their full extent to history and religion.’ The work referred to is The martyrdom of man (Reade 1872). The publisher’s marked copy of the Athenæum in the library of City University, London, indicates that the author of the notice was the editor of the Athenæum, Norman MacColl. See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from W. W. Reade, 1 February 1871 and nn. 2 and 3. Reade conveyed some of his objections to statements in Descent in his letter of 12 March 1872, but may have discussed more topics when he visited CD on 19 March (see letter from W. W. Reade, 18 March [1872]). Reade refers to The African sketch-book (Reade 1873). No review of Origin 6th ed. or St George Jackson Mivart’s On the genesis of species (Mivart 1871a) was published in the Pall Mall Gazette. Mivart was the anonymous author of a review of Descent in the Quarterly Review ([Mivart] 1871c). Thomas Henry Huxley had written an article, ‘Mr. Darwin’s critics’ (T. H. Huxley 1871a), which criticised Mivart 1871a and [Mivart] 1871c (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from T. H. Huxley and H. A. Huxley, 20 September 1871). David Forbes. Reade had received a copy of CD’s Queries about expression (see Correspondence vol. 16, letter to W. W. Reade, 21 May [1868] and n. 3); some of his observations are cited in Expression. Charles St John devoted a chapter to dogs and their behaviour in his book A tour in Sutherlandshire (St John 1849, 2: 197–215). The passage Reade refers to is in ibid., p. 38.

To ? [13 February – 21 March 1872]1

9. Devonshire St | Portman Place | London Dear Sir Be so good as to send receipt to above address2 Yours faithfully | C. Darwin Famous Notables letters & miscellaneous

72 1 2

February 1872 The date is established by the address. CD stayed at 9 Devonshire Street from 13 February until 21 March 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). The nature of the receipt is not known.

To John Murray 14 February [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Feb 14 My dear Sir I hope you will send a copy of Origin to the Pall Mall Gazette, as I hear that they intend reviewing it together with Mivart’s Genesis, at some considerable length; 2 but I do not know who the reviewer is, or whether it is to be favourable or hostile— Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin Sotheby’s, New York, 11 Dec 2007 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from W. W. Reade, 13 February 1872. William Winwood Reade had informed CD that Origin 6th ed. and St George Jackson Mivart’s On the genesis of species (Mivart 1871a) were going to be reviewed in the Pall Mall Gazette (see letter from W. W. Reade, 13 February 1872 and n. 5).

From George Sparkes 14 February 1872 Bromley in Kent 14/2/72 Dear Sir, I feel sure I need make no formal apology for addressing you on a scientific subject. There is an old neglected, and now very rare plant, the (dingy) blue Polyanthus, of which I enclose the first flower. For years I tried in vain to induce it to seed, and was told by Major T. Clarke1 that he had been equally unfortunate, but that its pollen was effective on other Primulas. I tried it on a beautiful Polyanthus, and raised a host of seedlings, which proved nothing but degenerate Polyanthus of the coarsest and worst description. A few had the faintest tinge of blue. One of these I again hybridized with the Primrose, but have yet to see the result. 2 There seems to me nothing the matter with the ovary of the Primrose. I tried last year to fertilize it with Polyanthus pollen, but did not succeed. Perhaps I may have better luck this year— The nonfertilization of the Cherimoya in England is very remarkable. I have made enquiries of the excurator at Kew, but neither there nor at Sion do they seem to know any thing about it—3 Friend Coles Child4 here has a plant. I recommended fresh air, dry atmosphere, & touching with a camel’s hair brush— But all in vain— I have suggested that he send you a flower when he next gets one. From Don’s description

February 1872

73

there is nothing in the flower differing from the flowers of other Annona. 5 It is said to fruit in North Africa. I remain | Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Geo Sparkes. C. Darwin Esq DAR 177: 223 1 2

3

4 5

Richard Trevor Clarke. Polyanthus is the common name of a hybrid group derived from some species of the genus Primula. The primrose is P. vulgaris. CD discussed experiments with polyanthus and P. auricula in ‘Dimorphic condition in Primula’ (see also Correspondence vol. 12, letter to J. D. Hooker, 25 April [1864] and n. 8). The cherimoya is Annona cherimola; its flowers are dichogamous (the female parts mature before the male) but its natural pollinators have not been identified. John Smith (1798–1888) was curator of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, between 1842 and 1864. Sparkes also refers to Sion (Syon) Park, on the other side of the Thames opposite Kew. Coles William John Child. George Don described the cherimoya (spelled by him cherimoyer) in Don 1831–8, 1: 89. For Don’s description of the genus and other species, see ibid., pp. 87–90.

From Anton Dohrn 15 February 1872

Naples. Palazzo Torlonia. 15.2.1872.

My dear Sir! There must have been some benevolent spirit somewhere, who knew, that I should be very proud to get a letter from You, and who knew also, that You would be so kind as to write even on behalf of such an insignificant thing, as that article of mine in “Das Ausland.”1 I am innocent of troubling You with my wisdom on Your great theory, and would never have sent that third hand article myself. But since somebody else must have done it, I am exceedingly thankful, that You noticed it, and wrote me Your kind letter in reply. I infer from Your silence on it, that Your health is at present not a bad one, and that You are going to give us some new book out of the immense store-house of Your experience and speculation, and though You will perhaps know it best Yourself, I believe, whatever You would publish, will give a signal to new fighting on the new and the old grounds. I am sorry, You think the publication of the Descent of Man a mistake,— the excitement produced by it shows, how utterly necessary it was, that You spoke plainly on the matter of Man’s descent.2 I have been burying myself for longtime in the history of our great literary epoch from Lessing to the Romantic School, including all the greatest Genius, Germany perhaps produced for the past as well as for the future. And the greatest lucubrations of Lessing, Goethe, Kant, Beethoven3 were almost without exception received with little or no consent from the side of the critics and with great alarm from the

74

February 1872

public. The single individual is perhaps standing to near, to view the whole importance of such productions, by and by he gets better acquainted with it, and—the excitement passed,—he is more ready to acknowledge and to do justice. I wished Goethe was still alive, and had seen the Revolution, Your books have worked,— no greater satisfaction he could have felt than that.4 I shall be very proud, if You will send me a copy of the next edition of the Origin with the addition of the Chapter on the Incipient Structures; 5 it will always remind me of the great obligation, we all have against You. If I may be allowed to speak of my things, I cannot say much about the progress of the Station,—only it is to be done.6 The difficulties in this country are something quite unheard of for all of us northern people. The indolence, dishonesty, hatred even against a good and disinterested enterprise, are quite regular qualities with this people, and it wants one’s last resources of nervous energy to overcome the physical hindrance and the moral disgust, it fills one with. I am now so far, that I can begin the construction, having happily wrought me out of all dishonest elements, which first clung to my affair. I hope that I shall be able to give some more specialized information on the way I intend to build and to organize the Station in one or two other articles in “Nature”, where also some woodcuts will illustrate the whole. 7 I shall be very sorry to miss Professor Huxley on his return home. 8 It is almost certain, that I am to pass March and April in Germany as well for finishing some observations on fish-Embryology as for the sake of the Station. 9 I hope his health will be fully restored by his journey,— I remember last time, when I stayed with him at St. Andrews I viewed his position quite so as it has turned out. 10 And I believe, there are struggles for him in store, for which he will want all his energies to fight them through. Practical life is Scylla and Charybdis at once,—and he may easily meet stronger opponents than Miss Helen Taylor. 11 Ray Lankester, who is staying with me since October wishes to be remembered to You most kindly. He works at Cephalopoda and Sipunculus. 12 With my best compliments to Mrs. Darwin and Your son,13 Believe me, my dear Sir | Yours most sincerely | Anton Dohrn DAR 162: 208 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

See letter to Anton Dohrn, 3 February 1872 and n. 1. See letter to Anton Dohrn, 3 February 1872. Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Immanuel Kant, and Ludwig van Beethoven. Many German researchers, and notably Ernst Haeckel, saw Goethe as a precursor to CD (see Haeckel 1868, pp. 59–79). The reference is to Origin 6th ed.; see letter to Anton Dohrn, 3 February 1872 and n. 6. Building of the zoological station at Naples was delayed, but started in March 1872 (see Heuss 1991, pp. 114–20). Dohrn’s article on the founding of the zoological station appeared in Nature, 8 February and 4 April 1872 (Dohrn 1872a). A longer essay on the purpose of the station appeared in Preussische Jahrbücher (Dohrn 1872b).

February 1872 8

9 10 11

12 13

75

Thomas Henry Huxley was returning from Egypt via Naples. See letter to Anton Dohrn, 3 February 1872 and n. 3. Huxley stayed at Dohrn’s house in Naples from 27 March 1872 until the beginning of April (A. Desmond 1994–7, 2: 34). Dohrn spent March and April in Stettin (now Szczecin in Poland) and returned to Naples in May 1872 (Heuss 1991, pp. 118–19). Huxley had stayed in St Andrews, Scotland, in September 1871 (A. Desmond 1994–7, 2: 24). Dohrn alludes to Helen Taylor’s article ‘The new attack on toleration’, which appeared in the December 1871 issue of the Fortnightly Review (H. Taylor 1871); in it, Taylor criticised Huxley’s article ‘Administrative nihilism’ (T. H. Huxley 1871c) in the November 1871 issue of the same journal. Edwin Ray Lankester studied development in the squid genus Loligo (Cephalopoda), and the histology of Sipunculus nudus, an unsegmented marine worm of the family Sipunculidae (see Lankester 1873). Dohrn had visited CD on 26 September 1870 (Heuss 1991, p. 108). It is not known which of CD’s sons Dohrn met.

From W. W. Reade 16 February 1872

11 St. Mary Abbot’s | Terrace | Kensington Feb. 16.—72

My dear Sir I must in the first place enter my humble protest against the Descent of Man being disparaged by any one, even by its author who may be said to have a right to do what he likes with his own—1 I can only say that your chapters on Man (of the Zoological parts I am of course incompetent to judge) are endorsed by my experience of savages and as you will see when I publish I follow you in toto; 2 and I have read those chapters again & again finding always something new. The depreciation to which the book has been subjected is chiefly owing to Anthropology being a new science: you write on a subject not understood: & then of course you labour under the disadvantage of having produced a masterpiece the Origin of species— The parts relating to the moral sense which have chiefly been attacked seem to me the strongest parts of the book.3 But what does it matter about reviews? Where is Mivart’s article now? 4 Will any human being ever read it or try to read it from this time henceforth? I guess not. But the book remains. There was a paragraph in the Athenæum saying I was writing a book in which I would “endeavour to apply Mr. Darwin’s principles in their full extent to history & religion”. I dont know who wrote it. It was very well put—5 I need not say that I shall be very glad to have the opportunity of seeing you again. I have been leading the life of a hermit since I had the pleasure of seeing you last; so any afternoon will find me disengaged: but you have many old friends whose turn comes before mine—6 Thanks for the new edition.7 What you say about unpopularity does not frighten me— I have always expected the worst. Your approbation makes me hope the book will at all events be read; though I have always found men like yourself more quickly appreciate any sign of merit than ordinary readers. The opening of the chapter ought to be good (ie the first sheet): I wrote it six times at least, making it smaller every time. I got one or two ideas from Tylor—(the dream—& phrases of poetry on facts of ordinary life)—but

76

February 1872

chiefly Mill on Comte—8 I shall give my authorities in an introduction. I wanted to give a clean page—doubting also whether the work was of sufficient importance to load it with references: as I shd. have to if I gave any— My obligations to your works are very great— I am afraid (this I write with a grin) that you will come in for some of the abuse poured on me— Of course do not answer this—till you come to town.9 | I remain | My dear Sir | Yours very truly | Winwood Reade I dont know whether you noticed my page is modelled on yours in the Origin of species. I wish there were other resemblances— DAR 176: 53 1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

9

CD’s letter to Reade has not been found, but see letter to Anton Dohrn, 3 February 1872, in which CD wrote that he felt it was a mistake to have published Descent since it had met with the approval of hardly any naturalists. Reade refers to his book The martyrdom of man (Reade 1872; see letter from W. W. Reade, 13 February 1872). For more on objections to CD’s theory of the development of moral sense, see Correspondence vol. 19. Reade refers to St George Jackson Mivart’s anonymous review of Descent, published in the Quarterly Review ([Mivart] 1871c; see also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from W. W. Reade, 20 September 1871). See letter from W. W. Reade, 13 February 1872 and n. 1. The author of the paragraph was the editor of the Athenæum, Norman MacColl. Reade visited CD on 19 March 1872 (see letter from W. W. Reade, 18 March [1872]). Reade’s first known visit to CD was in January 1871 (see Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). Reade refers to Origin 6th ed. In Primitive culture (E. B. Tylor 1871), Edward Burnett Tylor argued that primitive humans had developed animistic beliefs to explain sleep and dreams. In Reade 1872, p. 168, Reade maintained that savages had been led to a belief in God by their interpretation of dreams. For John Stuart Mill’s critique of Auguste Comte’s positivist philosophy, see Mill 1865. CD stayed in London from 13 February until 21 March 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)).

From D. Appleton & Co. 17 February 1872 D. Appleton & Co. | 549 & 551 Broadway, N.Y. Feb 17/72 Dear Sir Your favor of 3d. is at hand. We will accept the proposal you make respecting the new revised edn. of “Origin” taking casts of plates for 50£ & pay you on the sales.— 1 We more than reimbursed ourselves for the Journal of Travel & it still continues to have a fair sale.2 We hope to render yr a/c by next mail. We think the result will be satisfactory to you. We did not like to delay answering yr letter. We of course desire the plates (electros) of yr new work “Expression of the Emotions” &c & beg you will arrange with Mr Murray when you place the Ms: in his hands.3 Believe us | very faithfully yrs | D Appleton & Co Charles Darwin Esq DAR 159: 88

February 1872 1 2

3

77

CD’s letter of 3 February 1872 has not been found, but see the letter from John Murray, 2 February [1872]. D. Appleton & Co. had published an edition of Journal of researches in 1871, based on stereotypes of the 1870 edition published by John Murray (Journal of researches 1870; see Freeman 1977). A reprint of the 1871 edition was published in 1872 (Journal of researches US ed. (1871) and US ed. (1872)). Expression was published in November 1872 by John Murray. The US edition, dated 1873, was apparently issued in December 1872 (Expression US ed.; see Freeman 1977).

From W. H. Flower 18 February 1872 Hastings 18th. day of Feb 1872 My dear Mr. Darwin I ran down here yesterday for a little change from too much dissecting work that I have been going through for my course of lectures just begun, and fortunately your kind present of the new edition just came as I was starting so I brought it with me, and have read some of the new parts especially chapter VII with great interest. 1 I have certainly some of my difficulties removed by it. Your comparison of the duck’s bills and the whalebone is very striking.2 I must try and get more information about the horny tubercles and on the palate of the Hyperoodon—3 Eschricht has verified the original observation of Baussard on the subject, but a new and detailed description is a desideratum.4 This edition of the work is particularly welcome to me, as I do not possess either of the last two. If it is not presumptuous I should like to make a suggestion but perhaps it is one that you have considered and decided against; but it is that foot notes giving the reference to the work of the authors cited would be a great help. When I find a mention of Bronn or of Broca5 saying so and so, I want to know where and when they said it, and to know the context and general bearings of their remarks, and so I fancy would many others. If this would be much trouble, perhaps you could get Dallas6 or some one to do it for you in another edition—or as I said before, perhaps you have good reasons against it— so please do not trouble to answer this remark— I return to town this evening Believe me | yours very truly | W. H. Flower DAR 164: 140 1

2 3

Flower’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Origin 6th ed. (see Appendix IV). Chapter 7 was ‘Miscellaneous objections to the theory of natural selection’. Flower’s six lectures, delivered at the Royal College of Surgeons of England in February and March 1872, were on the comparative anatomy of mammalian digestive organs. The lectures were published in the Medical Times and Gazette (1872): 215– 19, 291–4, 335–7, 392–4, 451–3, 507–9, 561–4, 621–2, 678–80. See Origin 6th ed., pp. 183–5 (see also letter from Roland Trimen, 13 April 1872, n. 4). Flower had proposed that ziphioid whales (beaked whales of the family Ziphiidae) could be naturally arranged on the basis of the formation of their skull and teeth (Flower 1871a). Flower also discussed Hyperoodon in his article ‘On the ziphioid whales’, which appeared in Nature, 7 December 1871 (Flower 1871b).

78 4

5 6

February 1872

Daniel Frederik Eschricht described small tooth-like projections in the upper jaw and palate of Hyperoodon rostratus, confirming an observation by Monsieur Baussard, who has not been further identified (Eschricht 1845 and Baussard 1789). Heinrich Georg Bronn and Paul Broca. William Sweetland Dallas.

From W. W. Reade 18 February 1872

11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington Feb. 18. 72

My dear Sir I have received the new edition of the origin; and am very proud to have “from the author” a book which like the Principia & the Wealth of Nations has made an epoch in the science of which it treats. 1 I have read your arguments against Mivart.2 In the first place they have proved to me that it is useless for any to enter this controversy unless they are thoroughly acquainted with Zoology— I am therefore & feel myself to be incompetent to judge: but as far as I can judge, it seems to me that you have disposed of his objections. The explanation of the mammary gland removes all mystery from that point at all events; and the sentence with which you close the chapter is a sufficient answer to his theory of jumps.3 A certain sentence of Huxley’s that you had bound yourself too tightly by the Natura non facit saltum beguiled me for a time; but further reading (especially of Lyell’s Principles) & reflection makes me now wonder how evolutionists can believe in any kind of evolution except of the gradual kind.4 But after all the opinions of unscientific men are of little worth— I can only say that I have been much impressed in reading over that chapter, both with your vast resources as regards facts, and your skill in using them. Hoping then to have the pleasure of seeing you some time after you come to town— | I remain | My dear Sir | Yours very truly | Winwood Reade I forgot to say in my last letter that the sheets you read contained matter taken from your neighbour Sir J. Lubbock—as well as from Tylor, Comte & yourself— I owe much to Sir J L’s books— I fancy however he is mistaken about savages not committing suicide.5 The New Zealanders do—(Voy. of Novara) 6 — the aborigines of the West Indies did in the times of Columbus etc. (Irving).7 Believing as they do in the world of shades they do not fear continuation either in punishment or annihilation DAR 88: 74–5 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 I have . . . Zoology— 1.5] crossed blue crayon 2.1 Hoping . . . books—3.3] crossed pencil 3.4 The New . . . (Irving). 3.5] double scored red crayon; ‘Yes’ added blue crayon Top of letter: ‘Keep’ red crayon 1

Reade’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Origin 6th ed. (see Appendix IV). Reade refers to Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica (Newton 1687), and An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations (A. Smith 1776).

February 1872 2

3

4

5

6 7

79

CD added a substantially new chapter to Origin 6th ed., ‘Miscellaneous objections to the theory of natural selection’, in which he responded to criticisms made by St George Jackson Mivart in Genesis of species (Mivart 1871a). In Origin 6th ed., pp. 189–90, CD suggested a possible path of development for the mammary glands. In the last sentence of the chapter (p. 204), he suggested that to believe in sudden transformations, rather than gradual development, was ‘to enter the realms of miracle, and to leave those of science’. Natura non facit saltum: nature does not make jumps (Latin). Reade refers to Thomas Henry Huxley’s review of Origin ([T. H. Huxley] 1860). See also Correspondence vol. 7, letter from T. H. Huxley, 23 November 1859. Charles Lyell had argued in favour of a theory of gradual change in Principles of geology (C. Lyell 1830–3). Reade refers to John Lubbock, Edward Burnett Tylor, and Auguste Comte. In Descent 1: 94, CD wrote that he had been informed by Lubbock of the rarity of suicide among barbarians (see Correspondence vol. 18, letter from John Lubbock, 27 February [1870]). In his account of the voyage of the Austrian frigate Novara, Karl von Scherzer described suicide on the death of a near relative as ‘far from uncommon’ among the Maori (Scherzer 1861–3, 3: 116). Washington Irving discussed the native inhabitants of lands conquered by Christopher Columbus and his contemporaries (Irving 1828 and Irving 1831). In a chapter describing the suppression of the natives in Hispaniola, Irving noted that many people killed themselves in despair and mothers killed their infants to spare them from a life of oppression (Irving 1828, 3: 377).

To A. R. Wallace [19 February 1872]1 9. Devonshire St. | Portland Place Monday My dear Wallace We have taken this house for a month, & if ever you are in this quarter of the Town & want some luncheon at 1 o clock, for Heaven sake call here.— I sent you off on Saturday my new Edit. of Origin, the last which I shall ever bother myself in trying to improve. There is nothing worth your looking at except perhaps the new Chapter VII.— But I have given list of the more important alterations. 2 Many thanks for your Presidential address, which I have read with much interest. I think you hardly do justice to Kovalevsky’s conclusions, when you speak of them as founded on histological research alone. 3 You give an admirable resume of H. Spencer’s doctrine & I wish I could see my way to accept it fully; but I do so essentially in as far as I am quite inclined to believe that each segment originally contained all organs, excepting mouth. 4 Ever yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin DAR 270.1: 24 1 2

3

The date is established by the address. CD stayed at 9 Devonshire Street from 13 February until 21 March 1872. The first Monday following 13 February 1872 was 19 February. In the substantially new chapter added to Origin 6th ed., ‘Miscellaneous objections to the theory of natural selection’ (pp. 168–204), CD responded to criticisms made by St. George Jackson Mivart in Genesis of species (Mivart 1871a) and others. The list of changes appeared on pages xi–xii. In his presidential address to the Entomological Society of London, delivered on 22 January 1872, Wallace mentioned that Alexander Onufrievich Kovalevsky had based his views on the homologies

80

4

February 1872

between annulose and vertebrate types on the ‘supposed histological identity of certain internal organs and tissues, rather than on any accurately determined homologies in the great structural features of each sub-kingdom’ (Wallace 1872a, p. lxix). In Wallace 1872a, pp. lxx–lxxi, Wallace outlined Herbert Spencer’s hypothesis that insects, like all Annulosa, were originally compound (colonial) animals in which the individuals had become specialised over time. Spencer had conjectured that if individuals were arranged in a linear series, conditions at either extremity would be sufficiently different to result in different adaptations. In Thomas Henry Huxley’s system of classification, the Annulosa was a subkingdom that included insects, crustaceans, and worms (T. H. Huxley 1869).

From W. W. Reade 20 February 1872

11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington— Feb— 20. — 72

My dear Sir I saw the Editor of the P. M. Gazette to day—1 he had seen two of my sheets—the biography of Jesus—& prophesies a hot time for me as you do. 2 He tells me that he will send your new edition with Mivart’s to the same man who reviewed your Descent.3 I have read chapter 7 again—4 It seems to me very conclusive— Yours very truly | Winwood Reade DAR 176: 54 1 2 3

4

Frederick Greenwood was the editor of the Pall Mall Gazette. Reade refers to Martyrdom of man (Reade 1872; see pp. 215–25 for the section on Jesus). John Morley had written a review of Descent in the Pall Mall Gazette, 20 and 21 March 1871 ([Morley] 1871a; see also Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Frederick Greenwood, 24 March [1871]). No review of Origin 6th ed. or St George Jackson Mivart’s On the genesis of species (Mivart 1871a) appeared in the Pall Mall Gazette. Chapter 7 was the new chapter added to Origin 6th ed. See letter from W. W. Reade, 18 February 1872 and n. 2.

From D. Appleton & Co. 23 February 1872 New York Feb 23/72 Dear Sir We have the pleasure to hand you the a/c of sales of yr books, showing a balance of £427.13. 81 The difference charged being the cost of casts if Mr Murray had furnished them & the sum we were obliged to pay him makes some difference in the a/c. As we are unable to pay the percentage of 10% on the gross price unless you can secure the casts through yr London publisher we urge you to insist upon this with all future books— We have printed & sold abt. 2000 of yr old Journal.2 Very faithfully & truly | D. Appleton Co. We have instructed Mr Layton3 our agent to send you a cheque for above amount

February 1872

81

Sales by D Appleton & Co to Feby 1/71 of “Darwin’s Origin of the Species” for a/c of Charles Darwin On hand last a/c

521

Printed since

500

Feby 1. 1871 On hand

502

Sold to date

519

@ $2 5% $51.90

Sales to Feby 1/72 On hand Feby 1/71

502 4000

Printed since Feby 1/72

645

On hand

3857

Sold to date

$2 @ 5% 385.70

“Descent of Man” to Feby 1/72 Printed vol 1.

12.000

" " 2. Feby 1/72

11.000 2335

On hand given away

225

sold to date

20.440

@ $2 10% 4.008.– Forward $4.525.60 Forward $4.525.60

On June 1/71 Paid in London by C. Layton £200 value in Currency

$1.109.91

Cost of Composition & Stereotyping here over the cost of Costs of 1.000

the English plates

2.209.91 $2.315.69

Value in Sterling Exch 110 Gold 110 1 4

1 2

£427.13.8 DAR 159: 89

82

February 1872

CD ANNOTATIONS Verso of first page: ‘Origin 80£ or 78 | (80 Origin)’ pencil; ‘428

ink

22 350 1 2

3

’

The payment is recorded in CD’s Account books–banking account (Down House MS) for 22 March 1872, broken down as £350 for Descent and £78 for the last edition of Origin (Origin 2d US ed.). John Murray was CD’s English publisher. The reference is to Journal of researches US ed. (1871). CD had declined to have Descent US ed. and Origin 2d US ed. printed from stereotypes (see Correspondence vol. 17, letter from Charles Layton, 23 December 1869). Stereotyping was a process in which movable type was set up and used to make a mould, which could then be used to cast a metal plate for printing. Charles Layton.

To W. E. Darwin 23 [February 1872 – October 1874]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. 23d My dear W. Langton is so good a judge on all R y affairs that I shd. think you had better follow his advice.2 I hold about the same quantity but am inclined not to sell. Tell me hereafter for what you sell, & how it is to be done & whether you advise it, & I will then determine what to do. Generally I stick to the rule to keep to whatever I have once gone into. your affect | C. Darwin DAR 210.6: 132 1

2

The date range is established by the printed stationery, with the address in the centre; CD used this type of notepaper from January 1872 until 17 November 1874. It is unlikely to have been written in January 1872 because of the lack of relationship between this letter and the letter to W. E. Darwin, 23 January [1872]. Charles Langton evidently advised William on the sale of shares in a railway company that has not been identified.

To Amy Ruck 24 February [1872]

9 Devonshire St | Portland Place Feb 24

My dear Amy I want you to observe another point for me; so you see that I treat you as my geologist in chief for N. Wales.1 The late Prof. Henslow,2 who was a very accurate man, said that he had often observed on very steep slopes, covered with fine turf, (such as may be found in mountainous countries & no where else) that the surface was marked by little, almost

February 1872

83

horizontal, sometimes sinuous & bifurcating ledges; or as he called them, wrinkles. These are commonly attributed to sheep walking in nearly horizontal lines along the sloping surface; & they are undoubtedly thus commonly used by the sheep; but Henslow convinced himself that they did not thus originate. Dr Hooker, to whom Henslow made these remarks, has since observed such little ledges on the Himmalayah & Atlas ranges, in parts where there were no sheep & few wild animals— 3 Henslow speculated that the earth beneath the turf was in some manner gradually washed away; & he compared the wrinkles on the turf to those on the face of an old man whose face is shrunk. I cannot possibly believe in this notion. Would you look at any very steep grass covered slopes near you, & if you can find any appearance such as I have described, will you make for me an eye sketch on some approximate scale of the relative appearance & distance of the ledges. I have been speculating whether the ledges can possibly be due to the washing down of the worm castings, & their union into little ridges, on nearly the same principle that when the wind drifts loose sand, it makes numerous little ridges at right angles to the course of the wind. You must not give yourself much trouble on this subject, but I sh d be very much obliged for any observations or remark. yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin If you find anything of the kind observe whether there are worm-castings on the slope.— Also whether the earth is bare & exposed beneath the little ridges or ledges.— LS(A) Postmark: FE 26 72 DAR 185: 47 1 2 3

Ruck had made measurements of furrows for CD’s research on worms. See letter from Amy Ruck to Horace Darwin, [1 February 1872]. John Stevens Henslow. Joseph Dalton Hooker visited Morocco in 1871 and travelled in the Atlas mountains (see Correspondence vol. 19 and Hooker and Ball 1878). He had travelled in the Himalayan mountains in 1848 (see Hooker 1854).

To G. C. Wallich 24 February [1872]1

9. Devonshire Street | Portland Place Feb 24th

My dear Sir You gave me the enclosed charming photograph. 2 Now I am going to beg a great favour, which it is quite likely you may not wish to grant.— In my little book on Expression I wish to give a plate by the Heliotype process of 2 or 3 smiling faces. For this process the negative is required. Now shd you object to lending me the negative, with the permission to state that the Photograph was done by you.— 3

84

February 1872

You must, of course, have not the slightest scruple in refusing me.— But if you grant this favour, could you send me the negative to above address by Delivery Co y soon, as I want much to get the Heliotypes plates finished soon.— Was the smile intentionally assumed? or taken when the sitter did not know what you were doing? My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin [Enclosure]

Cleveland Health Sciences Library (Robert M. Stecher collection); DAR 53.1: C50 1 2 3

The year is established by the address. CD stayed at 9 Devonshire Street from 13 February until 21 March 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). CD refers to a photograph of Wallich’s daughter, Beatrice Harriet Wallich. The photograph is in DAR 53.1: C50. In Expression, p. 202, CD cited Wallich for providing the photograph, which appears facing page 202 (plate 3, figure 2). The heliotype process was a recent innovation that allowed for the printing of multiple copies of photographs. See Abney 1876, pp. 143–8, and Prodger 1998, p. 399.

February 1872

85

From Charles Nordhoff 27 February 1872 Santa Barbara | California Feby 27th / 72 To | Charles Darwin Esq Dear Sir Coming over to this state, from New York, this winter, I read in the cars your “Descent of Man”, & it occurs to me to tell you, apropos of the endeavors of birds to sing, to wh. you refer at page. 53 of vol. 1, (Am. Edition) 1 that I once, on a voyage of 153 days from Port Louis in the Isle of France, to London, had a singular instance of this: We had on board, at sailing, a coop of fowls; among them, as it happened, was a young cockerel, the only bird of that sex. By chance, all were killed & eaten but he; & he was for some reason reserved, until we got into the English Channel. Before then he of course had become a good sized bird; but he never learned to crow rightly. He constantly practised; but never produced any sound but a very awkward & ludicrous squawk, which made him the sport of the ship’s company. I thought then that this was only because he had no pattern; no grown & accomplished cock crowed in his hearing. It may interest you to know that in this State, where (in the Southern Counties) thousands of horses graze on the plains, it is customary for the owners to herd from twenty to twentyfive mares with a stallion. This the spaniards call a manada, 2 and the male takes the utmost care of his companions. He leads them to the water, which he finds for them; he hunts up the best pastures for them; he keeps them together, will not allow a mare to stray off; and defends them & their colts agst wild animals. He is faithful to his harem, & will not allow strange mares to join them; nor will he tolerate the attentions or interference of other stallions. Cattle owners say, that it is easier, from this peculiarity to manage horses than cattle. The bull takes no such care; & cattle must be herded, more or less, while the manada of mares is freely trusted to the male. I enclose you herein a slip which will show you that your last work is counted “popular reading” here.3 On our railroads boys are employed to sell books & newspapers; on the Pacific RRs. the boys bring around first such a brief Catalogue, & the books follow. of course you concern yrself, in this book only with the animal part of man; but one cannot help wishing to know to what conclusions, as to the spiritual part, or soul, so careful & thoughtful an observer as yourself has come; & I for one shd. be glad if some day you shd be moved to publish something on that head. I read your “Voyage of the Beagle” when I was a sailor, & with the greatest delight;4 & read it frequently now. Mr. Moran, the American Secretary of Legation, in London, by whom I venture to send you this, will tell you who I am. 5 Yours Respectfully | Chas. Nordhoff DAR 172: 72 1

Nordhoff refers to Descent US ed., 1: 53–4.

86 2 3 4 5

February 1872

Manada: herd. The enclosure has not been found. The reference is to Journal of researches; Nordhoff travelled around the world while in the US navy and later as a merchant seaman. He wrote several books based on his travels (DAB). Benjamin Moran passed the letter on; it was enclosed with the letter from E. A. Darwin, 3 April [1872].

To Anatole Roujou? 28 February [1872]1 9 Devonshire St. | Portland Place | London Feb 28— My dear Sir I am much obliged for your note.2 I have read your work, but the subject is so abstruse, & as my health is weak, I am not sure that I have mastered your views. 3 I can however see that your work exhibits much talent. It has delighted me to find that you are not shocked at the belief that man is a modified and wonderfully improved descendant of some lower animal-form.4 This belief, considering the date of the publication & that your country is France, is a surprising & very gratifying fact. Throughout Europe, with the exception of France, the great principle of evolution seems to me to be now fixed on a sure basis; though very many yet demur to man being included in the same category.5 I still fear that we differ much in our views on the origin of the moral sense, but I shall be pleased to find that I am mistaken.6 Pray believe me dear Sir. | Yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin LS The New York Public Library. Astor, Lenox and Tilden Foundations. (The Berg Collection of English and American Literature, Miscellaneous papers) 1 2

3

4 5 6

The recipient is conjectured from the content of the letter. The year is established by the address. CD stayed at 9 Devonshire Street from 13 February until 21 March 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). No letter from Roujou has been found. His paper on analogies between the human type and that of very ancient mammals (Roujou 1872) was presented at a meeting of the Société d’anthropologie on 18 January 1872 (the date is given in the running head of the paper). CD’s annotated copy of the article is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. An inscription on the front reads, ‘A Monsieur Darwin | hommage de profond respect et d’admiration pour ses travaux’ (To Mr Darwin, a token of profound respect and admiration for his works). Arguing from morphological comparison of humans and more ancient mammals, Roujou suggested that the first lemurs appeared well before the secondary period and the first monkeys before the tertiary, and that early humans appeared at the beginning of the tertiary period (Roujou 1872). Roujou argued that the only logical explanation of human origins was the transformist one, and further that all vertebrates developed from a single original type (Roujou 1872, pp. 50–2). CD had recently failed to be elected to the zoological section of the Académie des sciences for the second time (see letter from Armand de Quatrefrages, 12 January 1872 and n. 2). Roujou had argued that the calculated self-interest of individuals produced a kind of morality among certain animals, but he had not further elaborated his views on the origin of the moral sense (Roujou 1872, p. 121). In contrast, CD held that moral sense was not acquired by each individual but was innate and arose from social instincts, and further, that any social animal would inevitably acquire a moral sense if its intelligence were as developed as that of humans (see Descent 1: 71).

February 1872

87

To A. W. Bennett 29 February [1872]1 9. Devonshire St. | Portland Place Feb. 29th My dear Sir I have no address book with me, & so am obliged to send this note to care of M r. Macmillan.—2 It is to ask you to be so kind as to send on Post-card a reference to Prof. Shaler’s paper.—3 He sent me last autumn some account of his observations on Rattle-snakes, but his view did not then, & does not yet, seem to me probable.— 4 I thank you sincerely for your generous review of the last. Edit. of the Origin,— more especially as we differ so greatly & I quite agree with you that the only way to arrive at the truth is to discuss & freely express all differences of opinion 5 My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin K¯obunzo (dealers) 1 2 3 4

5

The year is established by the address. CD stayed at 9 Devonshire Street from 13 February until 21 March 1872 (CD’s Journal (Appendix II)). Bennett was the biological subeditor of Nature; Alexander Macmillan was its publisher (ODNB). Nathaniel Southgate Shaler’s article ‘The rattlesnake and natural selection’ appeared in the January 1872 issue of American Naturalist (Shaler 1872). Shaler’s view was communicated to CD by Henry Bowman Brady, who had met Shaler in Boston (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from H. B. Brady, 18 October 1871). Shaler argued that rattlesnakes mimicked the sound of cicadas, thereby attracting birds within striking range (Shaler 1872, p. 34). Bennett had referred to Shaler 1872 in his review of Origin 6th ed. (see n. 5, below). Bennett’s review of Origin 6th ed. appeared in Nature, 22 February 1872, pp. 318–19. Although Bennett disagreed with CD on several points, he praised CD for not concealing points on which he had changed his mind (p. 318), and as ‘having contributed a larger share’ than any other naturalist to solving the problem of the production of new species (p. 319).

From W. E. Darwin [29 February 1872]1 Soton2 Thursday My dear Father Parsons has sent me the particulars of the chalk, roughly it comes to this, the pure lump chalk contains between 121 & 131 by weight of Clay &c & the powdered chalk taken from between the crevices of the lumps 101 th.3 Does not this seem a great quantity to have been originally in the chalk. Is it likely that water with fine mould in solution would sink into the earth & penetrate the chalk? If I found that organic matter was contained in this residue from the chalk would that show anything? or would organic matter exist in the clay that was in the chalk at its formation; or in the chalk itself ? Do not trouble to answer this, as I shall be up in 10 days. I send a mouth-piece which fits “Voronzoff ” well, if it is inserted with a little screw & pinch.4 Your affect. son. | W.E.D.

88

February 1872

I am surprised to see from the article in the Spect. that the fashionable swell Sir W. Gull takes the Descent of Man as a matter of course, as he argues from the supposition5 DAR 162: 102 CD ANNOTATIONS 3.1 I . . . that the 5.1] crossed pencil Top of letter: ‘Prestwich Address | 1871. Analysis of Chalk. | (Cigars)’ pencil; ‘Worms’ red crayon End of letter: ‘.07 per cent of Alumina & iron | [‘.36’ del] | lowest ch’ pencil 1 2 3

4 5

The date is established by the reference to an article in the Spectator, 24 February 1872 (see n. 5, below). The Thursday following 24 February 1872 was 29 February. Soton: Southampton. Robert Mann Parsons was superintendent of the Ordnance Survey Office, Southampton. In Earthworms, p. 299, CD reported that Parsons determined that some powdered chalk collected near Winchester contained ten per cent earthy matter while fragmentary chalk from the same place contained eight per cent earthy matter. CD was trying to account for differences in depth of mould in different locations and concluded that the percolation of earthy matter into chalk accounted for some of them (see ibid., pp. 297–300). ‘Voronzoff ’ was a Russian brand of cigarette. Early Russian cigarettes were notable for unusual mouthpieces (Evans [1921], p. 38). An article in the Spectator, 24 February 1872, pp. 239–40, ‘Sir W. Gull on physiological intervention’, summarised William Withey Gull’s address to the Clinical Society, delivered on 26 January 1872. Gull had expressed his belief in the steady progress of nature and discussed the possibility of surgically removing vestigial organs in order to improve humans. No overt reference to CD or to Descent appeared in the article.

From T. C. Eyton 29 February [1872]1 Eyton on the Wealdmoors, | Wellington, | Salop. Feb 29th Dear Darwin Though I do not agree with the Darwinian theory I shall be convinced of the truth of it when I see evidence enough to support it. With that view I will send you any notes I can make for or against. I received the other day from America skeletons of Fuligula valisneria and Querquedula discors which I find although they differ triflingly in their plumage correspond in their skeletons precisly with our Fuligula ferina and Querquedula crecca. 2 I remain | yours truly | Tho C Eyton DAR 163: 43 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to T. C. Eyton, 4 March [1872] and by the date, 29 February, indicating that it was written in a leap year. Fuligula valisneria is now Aythya valisineria, the canvasback duck; Fuligula ferina is now Aythya ferina, the common pochard. Querquedula discors is now Anas discors, the blue-winged teal; Querquedula crecca is now Anas crecca, the Eurasian or common teal.

February 1872

89

To August Weismann 29 February 1872 Down, Beckenham, Kent Feb. 29th. 1872 My dear Sir I am rejoiced to hear that your eye-sight is somewhat better; but I fear that work with the microscope is still out of your power.1 I have often thought with sincere sympathy how much you must have suffered from your grand line of embryological research having been stopped.2 It was very good of you to use your eyes in writing to me. I have just received your essay; 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.3 I thought much about isolation when I wrote in Chap. IV on the circumstances favourable to Nat. Selection. 4 No doubt there remains an immense deal of work to do on Artbildung.5 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 spendid plumage of the male; but it would take much to persuade me that the pea-cock 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. 6 I was extremely pleased at hearing from Fritz Müller that he liked my chapter on Lepidoptera in the Descent of Man more than any other part, excepting the chapter on morals. 7 With the most sincere respect and good wishes for your improved eyesight, I remain, my dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin Copy DAR 148: 342 1

2

3

4 5

Weismann’s letter has not been found. From 1864, Weismann had suffered from a rare disease of the retina in his left eye; his eyesight gradually improved, but only fully recovered in 1874 (Petrunkevitch 1963, pp. 21–2). Weismann’s early work on embryogenesis in flies (Diptera) led to his discovery of imaginal discs, sacs of embryonic cells from which the adult head and thorax arose (see Weismann 1864). CD’s copy of a summary in English of Weismann’s discovery (Lowne 1869) is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection– CUL. CD’s heavily annotated copy of Weismann’s Ueber den Einfluss der Isolirung auf die Artbildung (On the influence of isolation on the formation of species; Weismann 1872) is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 857–60). In his letter to Weismann of 22 October 1868 (Correspondence vol. 16), CD commented that Moritz Wagner greatly overrated the necessity of isolation in the formation of species. In Weismann 1872, Weismann strongly opposed Wagner’s view that geographic isolation was the main cause of speciation. For more on the debate between Wagner and Weismann, see Weissman 2010. See Origin 6th ed., pp. 81–5. Artbildung: species formation (German).

90 6 7

March 1872

In his missing letter, Weismann evidently discussed his plan to study the causes of differences in colour in butterflies that were seasonally dimorphic. The results of his investigation appeared in Weismann 1875. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Fritz Müller, 14 June 1871 and nn. 1 and 2.

From Alfred Espinas1 March 1872 Monsieur, Après une lecture attentive de vos ouvrages, je prends la liberté de vous soumettre les deux observations suivantes. Je vous serai reconnaissant de me dire quelle valeur vous leur accordez. 1o. Je n’ai pas trouvé dans l’exposé de votre théorie l’explication de ce fait que les espèces ont varié dans le sens d’une complication progressive à partir des formes les plus basses jusqu’aux formes les plus élevées. Que de nouvelles espèces se forment, c’est ce que le fait de la variation individuelle conservée et développée par la sélection, et la lutte pour l’existence expliquent très suffisamment. Mais pour quelle raison les cas de rétrogradation ne sont pas aussi nombreux que les cas de progression, pourquelle raison la sélection et la concurrence vitale ne conservent pas autant de caractères inférieurs que de caractères supérieurs, c’est ce que je ne puis comprendre. En effet d’une part la sélection s’attache souvent à des caractères défavorables à la lutte, comme la petite étendue des ailes chez l’oiseau, l’éclat des couleurs chez les insectes, le développement exageré des cornes chez les mammifères . . . etc. Vous le constatez vous-même. Il y aurait donc dans ce cas diminution de force, abaissement, rétrogradation au moins aussi souvent que profit et perfectionnement. 2 D’autre part la lutte pour l’existence est souvent soutenue avec avantage par des formes animales inférieures contre de plus élevées. Ainsi dans l’Afrique centrale la tsetsé, simple mouche, détruit sans peine tous les chevaux et tous les boeufs qui sont amenés dans ces parages.3 Vous avez certainement dans la pensée une foule d’exemples analogues. Ce sont précisément les animaux les plus insaisissables (miasmes, microdermes) 4 qui sont le plus redoutables par les maladies qu’ils engendrent et dont la cause reste le plus souvent inconnue. Pourquoi donc les formes supérieures triompheraient-elles, si mal armées qu’elles sont par rapport aux formes inférieures? Il se produira donc plutôt des retrogradations que des progrès et votre arbre généalogique, en admettant qu’il pousse quelques ramaux, s’étiolera bientôt, comme une plante semée dans le désert ou sur le sommet d’une montagne. Vous me répondrez que cela arriverait si la lutte se livrait dans une aire déterminée et comme en champ clos: Mais que la facilité qu’ont les espèces pourchassées de se réfugier en de nouveaux milieux laissera le champ libre à des créations perfectionnées. Mais suffit-il que le fait puisse se produire, et ne se produise que par hazard? Ne faut-il pas qu’il se produise nécessairement et normalement en vertu d’une loi positive? Car, toutes choses restant égales, il pourra arriver aussi souvent que le milieu, par l’adaptation qu’il exige, opère une diminution dans la perfection organique, comme c’est le cas pour les phoques, mammifères dégénérés sous l’action

March 1872

91

du milieu,5 —quand encore il n’arrivera pas, ce qui est supposable cependant, que ce passage, toujours difficile, d’un milieu à un autre, détruise précisement cette espèce, sur laquelle reposent les chances de progrès! Il y a donc là, si je vous ai bien compris, une lacune dans votre théorie. Il faudrait qu’une loi positive, normale, vint communiquer à la puissance sélective une direction déterminée et que cette direction soit celle de la complication organique progressive, ou de la perfection. Voici comment l’explication demandée me parait possible. La variation individuelle peut susciter des êtres qui sont doués exceptionnellement, non pas d’un caractère spécial comme la force ou la vitesse ou la beauté, mais de tous les caractères avantageux à la fois. Je crois ce point de départ incontestable et très conforme à vos vues. Or de tels êtres l’emporteront nécessairement, 1o. sur leurs semblables 2o. sur les espèces avoisinantes. En effet, quant à ce qui concerne la transmission héréditaire, ils auront beaucoup plus de chances de se reproduire, puisque s’il s’agit de combattre, ils seront les plus forts, s’il s’agit de courir ils seront les plus agiles, s’il s’agit de plaire, ils seront les plus séduisants. Quel que soit le caprice de la femelle, ils pourront toujours y répondre, tandisque d’autres, n’ayant comme dit le proverbe français qu’une corde à leur arc ne réussiront que par un concours inespéré de circonstances. Quant aux espèces avoisinantes, de tels individus lutteront avantageusement avec elles, se servant successivement de toutes les armes que comporte la constitution de leur organisme contre chacun de leurs ennemis, opposant à l’un la force, à l’autre la course, à l’autre l’invulnérabilité, à l’autre encore la ruse. Mais c’est surtout par l’aptitude qu’ils possèderont de se plier aux exigences des différents milieux que de tels êtres attesteront leur supériorité. Voyons l’amphibie; quelles ressources ne gagne-t-il pas pour la recherche de la nourriture, la fuite du péril, et la défense contre la sécheresse excessive ou l’inondation par ce fait seul qu’il est apte à se mouvoir dans deux milieux au lieu d’un seul? Et cependant cet avantage ne résulte pour lui que d’une complication nouvelle, toute fortuite, de son organisme, qui l’a rendu propre à respirer plus longtemps l’air en nature, pourvu que cet air soit suffisamment humide! C’est ainsi que l’homme dont l’organisme est le plus parfait ou le plus compliqué (tout en restant un) est celui de tous les animaux qui est le plus apte à changer de milieu, et qui le fait le plus impunément. De là pour lui la ressource de l’emigration, si avantageuse à l’Angleterre et à l’allemagne, etc. En sorte que la nation la plus probablement destinée à la victoire dans le concert Européen n’est pas la plus artiste, ni la plus féconde, ni la plus commerçante, ni la plus savante, ni la plus militaire, mais celle qui par un phénomène de variation originelle réunira en plus grand nombre et au degré le plus haut ces qualités diverses. (Sa fécondité ne sert en rien à la Chine) Admettons maintenant ce que vous avez si abondamment prouvé que l’espèce peut varier, il arrivera dès lors qu’une transformation s’accomplira nécessairement et normalement des formes moins riches aux formes plus riches en complication, c’est à dire des formes moins parfaites aux formes plus parfaites, et que la sélection, (sans faire intervenir la divinité ex machinâ)6 prendra le sens du progrès. L’homme particulièrement, en qui a brillé pour la première fois la pensée réfléchie, disposant par là de l’instrument par excellence de l’adaptation variée, (Spencer) 7 se pliera à toutes les

92

March 1872

exigences de tous les milieux, trouvera le frais sous l’équateur et le chaud parmi les glaces, pêchera sur les côtes, chassera sur les montages, labourera dans la plaine prêtera des ailes à sa flèche pour atteindre l’oiseau, sera de plus en plus riche en puissances variées, et réunira en lui-même les facultés de toute la nature vivante. Nos navires en effet nous font amphibies, nos ballons, oiseaux, nos chevaux, coureurs, et il n’y a pas de limite assignable à cette complexité de l’organisme humain. C’est elle seule qui nous a donné la victoire sur le reste des formes vivantes. En résumé je propose d’ajouter à votre principe de sélection naturelle, agent selon moi indifférent de transformation, le principe de complication organique progressive, qui détermine la force sélective dans le sens de la perfection croissante. Je vous serai reconnaissant de me dire d’un mot ce que vous pensez de tout cela. Ce n’est d’ailleurs qu’un développement de votre doctrine. 2o. Vous avouez quelque part ne pas comprendre pourquoi les individus stériles, pourquoi les neutres eux-mêmes impriment à la descendance de leurs congénères leurs caractères individuels.8 Voici une hypothèse que je soumets à votre jugement. Tant que ces animaux stériles sont considérés comme individus absolument séparés, la transmission de leurs caractères est incompréhensible. Mais considérez le groupe congénère dont ils font partie comme un tout organique indivisible, l’hérédité des caractères appartenant même aux neutres pourra être facilement entendue. Mais comment et pourquoi considérer une famille, une ruche comme un tout vivant indivisible? La est la question. J’observe d’abord que depuis les travaux de Virchow et de Claude Bernard la vie ne peut être regardée que comme une association d’éléments individuels et je soupçonne que ce fait, universel quant à la structure des individus, doit aussi jeter quelque lumière sur les rapports externes des individus entre eux. 9 Si d’autre part je considère, suivant le principe énoncé à la page précédente, l’humanité comme un résumé de la nature inférieure, je vois en elle trois fonctions principales réalisées par l’association 1o. la nutrition, (vie individuelle), réalisée par un groupement de cellules, 2o. la génération (vie domestique) réalisée par un groupement d’individus sexués, 3o. la civilisation (vie politique, πολιτικν ζον) 10 réalisée par un groupement de familles et plus tard de tribus. Je me demande donc si la nature ne renferme pas à l’état d’ébauches partielles cette organisation complexe qui nous a valu la victoire dans ce que vous appelez la plus décisive des épreuves, la bataille de la vie. Or je trouve en effet au bas de l’échelle 1o. les polypiers qui sont d’après Vogt des associations en vue de la nutrition, organes multiples, vie unique, mais faiblement concentrée.11 Chaque polype absorbe la nourriture (corail, Lacaze Duthiers) et en commence la digestion; mais la circulation est confiée au polypier. 12 Ailleurs c’est la digestion qui est commune, ailleurs l’excrétion, ailleurs la préhension ou la locomotion, mais peu importe, le but est toujours la vie nutritive, et cette fonction est toujours l’oeuvre propre de l’individu total composé. 2 o. La famille, fondée sur une communication non plus permanente, mais passagère des conduits et liquides vitaux, et qui force cependant dans presque toute l’échelle les deux sexes à s’agréger physiquement comme le polype. L’arbre généalogique ne peut d’ailleurs être repré-

March 1872

93

senté que par la figure d’un polypier. La famille est constituée d’après différents types, dont le plus bas est celui du poisson, et le plus élevé celui des mammifères, types parmi lesquels on peut distinguer trois plans principaux d’abord l’absence de rapport entre les sexes, ensuite le rapport des sexes accordant la prédominance à l’élément feminin (abeilles, fourmis, termites etc) enfin le rapport des sexes fondé sur la prédominance de l’élement mâle. Ici nous sommes au terme d’une progression constante marquée entre autres caractères par la diminution du nombre des accouplés et des rejetons, et d’autre part, par l’importance de plus en plus grande accordée à l’intelligence dans la conservation des jeunes (partout où le mâle joue un rôle considérable dans la famille, l’éducation en est la fonction capitale)— 3 o. Enfin la cité ou la tribu, préparée dans le règne animal par la bande, le troupeau, le vol, la Tribu, quel que soit le nom qu’on donne à l’association animale qui n’a plus exclusivement la reproduction ni même l’éducation pour fin. Vous avez dans votre dernier ouvrage analysé ce phénomène et vu le premier l’importance des instincts sociaux dans la conservation vitale.13 Cette function, aussi capitale que celle de la nutrition quoique plus élevée, repose sur les rapports ou mouvements harmoniques des centres nerveux et des organes sensoriels. Je le répète: la vie, dans son sens le plus strict n’est pas moins intéressée à ces mouvements coordonnés qu’à ceux des viscères et des appareils reproducteurs. Séparés, les individus doivent périr. Cela étant, il faut voir dans chaque polypier, dans chaque ruche, dans chaque fourmilière, dans chaque famille ou troupeau naturel, dans chaque tribu ou nation, un vaste animal unique, pénétré d’une même vie, concourant dans ses éléments multiples à une fonction commune. Comment donc nous étonner maintenant si les membres de l’un de ces organismes, même stériles, même neutres, communiquent aux descendants de l’organisme total certains caractères qui leur sont propres? L’hérédité des neutres est expliquée. Pour moi je ne m’étonne pas plus de voir les caractères des fourmis neutres se perpétuer par l’hérédité que je ne m’étonne de voir une particularité du sein chez une femme se transmettre à sa fille; la fourmi neutre n’étant à mes yeux qu’une sorte de mammelle de la reine douée d’une vie individuelle et chargée d’une fonction de nutrition, d’un rôle d’éleveuse que celle-ci ne pourrait remplir seule. Voilà, Monsieur, le squelette bien sec de deux idées que vous saurez couvrir des muscles et pourvoir de la vie qui leur manque, grâce à la riche matière de faits dont vous disposez. Avec ces additions, il me semble que votre hypothèse répondrait à un plus grand nombre d’objections, expliquerait un plus grand nombre de faits. Or, (jen reviens toujours à mon principe de sélection par la complexité organique) une hypothèse qui offre les points de vue les plus variés, qui s’adapte à un plus grand nombre de cas, est celle qui triomphera certainement dans la bataille des systêmes, et poussera sur l’arbre de la science en une vigoureuse branche nouvelle. Recevez l’assurance de mon admiration respectueuse, | Alfred Espinas | professeur de philosophie Mars 1872 3 Place Richelieu, Hâvre. DAR 163: 33

94 1 2 3

4 5

6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13

March 1872

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. On retrogression, see Origin 5th ed., p. 144, and Descent 1: 206, 2: 368. CD thought that retrogression might occur when external conditions made greater complexity unnecessary. Tsetse are flies in the genus Glossina; they were believed to cause the horse and cattle disease nagana. For the history of the relationship between the tsetse and both animal and human disease, see Steverding 2008. The belief that miasmas or bad air were agents of contagious disease was popular until the last decades of the nineteenth century (Hannaway 1993). Espinas probably refers to the development (or degeneration) of seals’ flippers from a five-toed foot, as CD described in Origin, p. 200. Espinas’s use of the term degeneration is reminiscent of earlier typetheory (see Sloan 2010). For CD, the reduction of an organ was simply an environmental response (Descent 1: 32). Ex machina: from a device (Latin). The deus ex machina was a Greek theatrical convention (gods were brought on-stage by a sort of crane); the phrase had come to refer to a contrived or inartistic solution to a difficulty in the plot. Espinas was translating Herbert Spencer’s Principles of psychology into French (Spencer 1870–2 and Espinas and Ribot trans. 1874–5). The passage Espinas refers to has not been identified. In Origin 6th ed., p. 230, CD argued that the inheritance of characteristics of sterile organisms could be explained by the fact that natural selection operated on the family (that is, groups of related individuals) as well as on the individual. Espinas refers to Rudolf Carl Virchow and Claude Bernard. πολιτικν ζ ον: political animal (Greek); a reference to Aristotle’s Politics (see 1.2.1253a 1–4, 7–18). Espinas probably refers to a description of corals in Carl Vogt’s Altes und neues aus Thier- und Menschenleben (Vogt 1859, 2: 245–6). Félix Joseph Henri Lacaze-Duthiers described the circulation and nourishment of polyps and polypidoms in Histoire naturelle du corail (Lacaze-Duthiers 1864, pp. 76–83). See Descent 1: 74–86.

To W. E. Darwin [1 March 1872]1

9 Dev: St— Friday

My dear Wm It was a capital thought of yours, to get the chalk analysed. 2 Immediately on getting your note I called on David Forbes, who is the one man in England who has carefully analysed many specimens of chalk. 3 He says that from 1 to 2 per cent of earthy matter is a fair average for the upper chalk with flints. In the lowest & most earthy beds of chalk without flints there is as much as 4 or 5 per cent. Therefore he concludes that the specimens analysed by Capt Parsons must certainly have become penetrated with surface mud.4 This seems to remove the wonderful difficulty of the layer of mould not being thicker at the bottom of your valley. I suppose the chalk about Winchester must be very pure, or unusually porous; for about Down the residue from the dissolved chalk evidently accumulates on the surface, & does not to any great extent percolate into the solid mass— yours affecty | Ch Darwin L(S) DAR 162: 103

March 1872 1 2 3 4

95

The date is established by the relationship between this letter, the letter from W. E. Darwin, [29 February 1872], and the letter from David Forbes, 1 March 1872. In 1872, 1 March was a Friday. See letter from W. E. Darwin, [29 February 1872] and n. 3. CD was in London from 16 February to 21 March 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). CD described the chalk samples found by W. E. Darwin and Robert Mann Parsons in Earthworms, p. 299.

From David Forbes 1 March 1872

11, York Place, | Portman Square, | London. W. 1 March 1872

Dear Mr Darwin As you know that I rather pride myself on being systematic—I was annoyed today that I could not at once lay my hands on the analyses of chalk, I found them the moment you left1 —the difficulty in doing so before being because I had entered them under the head of investigations of the Atlantic mud2 I enclose herewith the results of 2 analyses which you can take as representatives only to show the components of the true chalk which contains the flints—and of the most impure or grey chalk (chalk marl)—lowest in the series Yours very truly | David Forbes White chalk– with flints Shoreham Carbonate of Lime– —

of Magnesia

98. 40 0. 08

Insoluble (silicious rock debris)

1. 10

Alumina (with Phosphoric acid

0. 42 100. 00

Grey chalk-beds resting on greensand level of low water Folkestone Carbonate of lime —

of Magnesium

Insoluble (rock debris) Sea



Phosphoric acid

94. 09 0. 31 3. 61 traces

Chloride of sodium

1. 29

Water

0. 70

infiltration

100. 00 DAR 164: 149

96

March 1872

CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Worms’3 red crayon 1 2

3

See letter to W. E. Darwin, [1 March 1872]. Forbes analysed chalk samples in order to compare them with samples of Atlantic mud collected on the Lightning and Porcupine expeditions (see Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society 27 (1871): xlviii–xlix n., and Thomson 1873, pp. 467 ff.). CD cited the results of Forbes’s analysis of chalk in Earthworms, pp. 299–300.

From Ernst Haeckel1 1 March 1872 Jena 1 März 72 Hochverehrter theurer Freund! Für Ihren lieben letzten Brief und für die gütige Übersendung der VI. Edition Ihres “Origin” sage ich Ihnen meinen freundlichsten Dank. 2 Ich habe mich sehr gefreut, dass wieder einige neue tausend Exemplare Ihres grossen ReformationsWerkes in die Welt hinausgehen und der im Dunkeln tappenden Menschheit den Weg zur Wahrheit mit der Leuchte der Entwickelungs-theorie erhellen. Mögen noch eben so viele Auflagen Ihrer Werke nachfolgen, als schon erschienen sind! Dass Ihre Gesundheit Ihnen wieder so viel Störung verursacht hat, habe ich sehr bedauert, und hoffe, der Sommer soll Ihnen Besserung und Kräfte wieder bringen. 3 Ich selbst bin diesen Winter auch nicht zufrieden. Die Arbeiten häufen sich gar zu sehr, und ich weiss an vielen Tagen buchstäblich nicht, wo ich zuerst anfangen soll. Ausserdem brachte mir der Januar wieder grosse Unruhe, indem ich eine sehr schmeichelhafte Aufforderung erhielt, unter sehr günstigen Bedingungen eine Professor der Zoologie an der neu zu gründenden deutschen Universitaet zu Strassburg (im wiedergewonnenen Eilsass) anzunehmen.4 Doch habe ich auch diese Berufung abgelehnt, eingedenk der Billigung, welche Sie mir als väterlicher Freund vor einem Jahre aussprachen, als ich die verlockende Berufung nach Wien abgelehnt hatte. 5 Ich glaube, der Wissenschaft mehr hier im kleinen Jena nützen zu können, wo ich jedenfalls viel ungestörter arbeiten und schreiben kann, viel harmonischer denken und urtheilen kann, als an einer unruhigen grossen Universität. An der äusseren Anerkennung und dem grösseren Ruhme, den mir letztere geben würden, liegt mir gar Nichts. Mit meiner Spongien-Arbeit werde ich immer noch einige Monate zu thun haben. 6 Die Ansichten von Clark und Carter, dass die Spongien Protozoen und speciell Flagellaten sind, werde ich ausführlich widerlegen. Sie sind vielmehr den hydroiden Zoophyten und Corallen nächst verwandt. Die Entwickelungsgeschichte ist sehr einfach, aber sehr interessant.7 Über Ihre Theorie der Pangenesis wollte ich in meiner neuen Auflage der “Nat. Schöpfungsgeschichte” ein besonderes Capitel schreiben. Da aber mein Editor

March 1872

97

wünscht, dass die neue Auflage nicht vermehrt wird, habe ich es unterlassen. 8 Ich hoffe aber, an einem anderen Orte die Theorie der Vererbung mit Rücksicht auf Pangenesis zu erörtern. Ich glaube allerdings nicht, dass die Pangenesis-Theorie die ausserordentlich schwierigen Hereditaets-Phaenomene völlig erklärt. Aber ein guter Kern einer richtigen Vorstellung ist jedenfalls darin. Nur glaube ich, dass hierbei mehr die vergleichende Histologie und namentlich die Ontogenie der Gewebe zu Rathe zu ziehen ist. Man wird immer von den einfachsten Vererbungs-Erscheinigen bei der Zellen-Theilung ausgehen müssen, um die complicirteren Hereditäts-Vorgänge bei den vielzelligen Organismen begreifen zu lernen. Besonders die Moneren und Rhizopoden, namentlich auch die Polythalamien, scheinen mir hierfür höchst wichtig zu sein.9 Ich hoffe sicher, in diesem oder im nächsten Jahre einmal wieder nach London zu kommen und Sie zu sehen. Wie Viel hätte ich Ihnen mitzutheilen! Mit den ergebensten Grüssen an Miss Darwin10 und mit den besten Wünschen für Ihr Wohlergehen stets Ihr treu ergebener | Ernst Haeckel DAR 166: 57 1 2 3 4

5 6 7

8 9

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Ernst Haeckel, 27 December 1871. Haeckel’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for the sixth edition of Origin (see Appendix IV). See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Ernst Haeckel, 27 December 1871. Alsace (now part of France) was ceded to Germany by France in 1871, at the end of the Franco-Prussian War (Wawro 2003, p. 304). The Alsatian University of Strasbourg was re-founded in 1872 under the auspices of the Prussian government (Craig 1984). See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Ernst Haeckel, 3 March 1871. Die Kalkschwämme (Haeckel 1872a) was published in December 1872 or early 1873 (see letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 December 1872). In a letter of 27 December 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19), CD had asked Haeckel for his opinion of Henry James Clark’s view that sponges were flagellate infusoria. Haeckel outlined both Clark’s and Henry John Carter’s views on the nature and structure of sponges in Haeckel 1872a, 1: 28–31. While Carter had agreed with Clark that sponges were related to protozoans, he differed in likening them to rhizopods rather than flagellated infusoria (for more on the history of protozoan classification, see Corliss 2001). Both Carter and Clark opposed Haeckel’s view that sponges, along with corals, belonged to the Coelenterata (Carter 1871, p. 10; see also H. J. Clark 1871 and Haeckel 1870). The term infusoria referred to a variety of single-celled aquatic protozoans, but is no longer in scientific use; rhizopods were amoeba-like protozoans that used pseudopodia to move (modern Rhizopoda is a class within the phylum Protozoa). Coelenterata is a former taxon, roughly equal to the modern phyla Ctenophora (comb jellies) and Cnidaria (corals, sea anemones, true jellyfish, etc.). Hydroid zoophytes belong to a class within Cnidaria, the Hydrozoa. In modern classification, sponges belong to the phylum Porifera and are thought to be related to choanoflagellates, single-celled creatures that resemble the choanocytes, or collar cells of sponges. The third edition of Haeckel’s Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte (Natural history of creation; Haeckel 1872b) was published in 1872. For CD’s hypothesis of pangenesis, see Variation 2: 357–404. Haeckel later published a pamphlet, Die Perigenesis der Plastidule, oder die Wellenzeugung der Lebenstheilchen (Haeckel 1876b), discussing the process of heredity in very simple organisms, such as Monera. CD’s

98

10

March 1872

copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Monera is an obsolete kingdom consisting of what are now the domains Archaea and Bacteria. Polythalamids are multi-chambered forms of Foraminifera, single-celled animals with shells perforated with holes. Haeckel may refer to Elizabeth Darwin, or to Henrietta Emma Litchfield, who had married in 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19).

From W. E. Darwin [3 March 1872]1 Sunday My dear Father, I send you the dirt residue from Chalk as Prof. Forbes would probably be able to judge whether this is the result of soakage.2 Parsons weighed them when quite dry, & he is a good chemist; He says B. gets wet from having traces of Chloride of Calcium.3 Your affect | W E D DAR 162: 104 1 2 3

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to W. E. Darwin, [1 March 1872]. The first Sunday after 1 March 1872 was 3 March. William refers to David Forbes; see letter to W. E. Darwin, [1 March 1872]. William refers to Robert Mann Parsons. See letter from W. E. Darwin, [29 February 1872], and letter to W. E. Darwin, [1 March 1872]. B: presumably the samples of dirt residue were labelled A and B. Calcium chloride is hygroscopic.

From A. R. Wallace 3 March 1872 Holly House, Barking | E. March 3rd. 72/ Dear Darwin Many thanks for you new Edition of “The Origin” which I have been too busy to acknowledge before.1 I think your answer to Mivart, on initial stages of modification, ample & complete; & the comparison of Whale & duck most beautiful. 2 I always saw the fallacy of these objections, of course. The eye & ear objection you have not so satisfactorily answered,—and to me the difficulty exists of how three times over, an organ of sight was developed with the apparatus even approximately identical. 3 Why should not, in one case out of the three the heat rays or the chemical rays have been utilised for the same purpose in which case no translucent media would have been required, & yet vision might have been just as perfect. The fact that the eyes of insects & molluscs are transparent to us, shows that the very same limited portion of the rays of the spectrum is utilised for vision by them as by us. The chances seem to me immense against that having occurred through “fortuitous variation”, as Mivart puts it.4 I see still further difficulties on this point but cannot go into them now.

March 1872

99

Many thanks for your kind invitation. I will try & call some day,—but I am now very busy trying to make my house habitable by Lady day when I must be in it. 5 Believe me | Yours very faithfully | Alfred R. Wallace— DAR 106: B109–110 1 2

3

4 5

Wallace’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Origin 6th ed. (Appendix IV). See also letter to A. R. Wallace, [19 February 1872]. Origin 6th ed. contained a substantially new chapter answering objections to the theory of natural selection by St George Jackson Mivart and others. See letter to A. R. Wallace, [19 February 1872] and n. 2. Mivart had questioned the usefulness of baleen in its early development (Mivart 1871b, pp. 45–7). In Origin 6th ed., pp. 182–6, CD suggested that the progenitors of whales with baleen might have had mouths constructed like the lamellated beaks of ducks. In his Genesis of species 2d ed. (Mivart 1871b, pp. 57–61), Mivart argued that chance variation and natural selection were not sufficient explanations for the independent development of complex sense organs like eyes and ears. CD responded in Origin 6th ed., pp. 151–2, arguing that the resemblance between cephalopod, cuttlefish, and vertebrate eyes was merely superficial, and that some similarity was necessary for the organs to be able to fulfil the same function. See, for example, Mivart 1871b, p. 68. See letter to A. R. Wallace, [19 February 1872]. Wallace was having a house built in the village of Grays, Essex. Lady Day is 25 March, the traditional day for beginning and ending annual contracts. Wallace had bought the site of his new house on a ninety-nine year lease, and would have been renting his previous property. (Raby 2001, pp. 209–11.)

From Alexander Agassiz 4 March 1872 Cambridge, March 4, 1872. Many thanks for the copy of the new edition of the “Origin of Species,” which I have just received from you.1 There are several points, especially in Embryology, which I shall take some other occasion to write you about, which may be of general interest.2 I am getting on toward the end of the Report on Echini from the deep sea of Florida, and hope to be able to send you a copy before long. 3 The number of young I have been compelled to examine has led me to modify my views of the nature of genera, species, and in fact of all subdivisions. I cannot find anything that is stable, the greater the material in space and number (age) the more one is adrift to get a correct diagnosis of a genus or a species, and the gradual passage in Echini of the most widely separated groups leaves in my mind but little doubt that our classification is nothing but the most arbitrary convenient tool, depending upon the material at our command at a special time. The generalizations to which I am led from the careful study of such a small group as the Echini I shall publish at the end of my “Revision of the Echini” and as the Plates for the descriptive part are far advanced, I hope I shall not be long delayed.4 We have excellent news from the Hassler Expedition from Rio.5 Not much was expected from the dredging on this side of Cape Horn owing to the lateness of the season, but the single haul made off the Barbados must have been a wonderful catch of which I trust we shall hear and see more by and by.

100

March 1872

Incomplete G. R. Agassiz ed. 1913, p. 119 1 2 3

4

5

Agassiz’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Origin 6th ed. (Appendix IV). No such letter has been found. Agassiz inserted portions of his earlier ‘Preliminary report on the Echini and starfishes dredged in deep water between Cuba and Florida Reef ’ (A. Agassiz 1869) into his Revision of the Echini (Agassiz 1872–4; see p. 371). Agassiz devoted the first three parts of his Revision of the Echini (Agassiz 1872–4) to descriptions of particular species of Echinus and notes on synonymy, and the fourth part to a general discussion of the genus. He also produced a volume of ninety-four plates. Alexander Agassiz’s father, Louis Agassiz, embarked on the Hassler expedition to South America in December 1871 (Marcou 1896, 2: 181–91; see also letter to Asa Gray, 15 January 1872, n. 2). Rio: Rio de Janeiro.

To T. C. Eyton 4 March [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. [9 Devonshire Street, London.] March 4th Dear Eyton I know that you disbelieve in evolution, & therefore it is all the kinder your sending me the note about the Ducks. It is curious how much easier it seems to be for plumage to alter than any other visible character. 2 If you continue testing facts as favouring or opposed to the principle of evolution, I think that you will become a convert; but whether you will believe in natural selection is another question.— If you do not, you will, I believe, find it impossible to account for the innumerable adaptive structures everywhere to be seen.— It is really astonishing how rarely I now meet with any naturalist who does not admit evolution under some form.— Pray believe me, dear Eyton | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin Special Collections, University of Birmingham (Eyton Letters EYT/43) 1

2

The year is established by the printed stationery, which is of a style that CD used between January 1872 and November 1874, and by the relationship between this letter and the letter from T. C. Eyton, 29 February [1872]. The 29 February letter from Eyton has no year on it, but the date 29 February occurs only in leap years; the only leap year between 1872 and 1874 inclusive was 1872. See letter from T. C. Eyton, 29 February [1872].

From Asa Gray 7 March 1872 Botanic Garden, | Cambridge, Mass. March 7, 1872 Dear Darwin Mr. Packard, one of our best entomologists a most excellent & modest man, has asked to be introduced to you that he may pay his respects. 1

March 1872

101

I shy or refuse such applications generally—saying you can rarely see visitors, or callers. But Packard is “fish to your net”—has his head crammed with facts bearing on derivation—is a disciple of the Hyatt-Cope school, that you may have heard of,— people who have got hold of what they call a law—tho’ I do not see that they contribute any vera causa at all.2 Packard has a bad palate, so can’t be a hard talker. But he speaks quite intelligibly, and is very sensible If you will turn the world of science upside down, you must expect that people will wish to see you. I am just getting rid of a troublesome state of throat, that has bothered me much, and is always liable to return. Mrs. Gray,3 about as usual for health, joins in kind regards to you and yours. | Sincerely yours | A. Gray The very sad news comes to-day that Mrs. Charles Norton4 died at Dresden— 8 days after child-birth! DAR 165: 179 1 2

3 4

In the event, Alpheus Spring Packard Jr did not visit Down (see letter from A. S. Packard Jr, 1 August 1872). Edward Drinker Cope and Alpheus Hyatt promoted a theory of evolution based on acceleration and retardation of development. CD mentioned their work in Origin 6th ed., p. 149; see also letter to Alpheus Hyatt, 10 October [1872] and nn. 3–5. Vera causa: a true cause that brings about an effect as a minimum independent agency (OED). Jane Loring Gray. Susan Ridley Sedgwick Norton was the wife of Charles Eliot Norton.

From L. C. Wedgwood to Elizabeth Darwin [7 March 1872 or later] 1 had it hav’nt you? Are not you glad that wretched claimant is to be tried for perjury? That was an amusing acct. of his meeting with his friends in the D. News.2 Mamma & I are going to Down Ampney next week.3 What heavenly spring weather we have been having, weather in which it is perfect bliss to sit & bask in the sun with closed eyes Was your horticultural fête pretty? Yrs. dear Bessy | Lucy Wedgwood Will you tell Uncle Charles I did find some parallel ridges on the chalk downs, some near the bottom of some chalk rubbish thrown out of a pit & grassed over, some at the top of a steep field, which may have been wholly made by sheep. 4 They did not run into each other much, & there were not many worm casts in either place. I enclose the rough sketch I made on the spot, but it does not shew much. I want to go again & xplore further some day. I see my scrawls are so slight as hardly to be worth sending

102

March 1872

[Enclosure]

Incomplete DAR 181: 58 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 had . . . pretty? 5.1] crossed red crayon Top of second page: ‘Worms’ added red crayon 1 2

3 4

The date is established by the reference to articles in the Daily News (see n. 2, below). The Tichborne claimant, who claimed to be Roger Tichborne, was charged with perjury after his court case was stopped by the jury in March 1872. The perjury charge and an account of a meeting of the claimant’s supporters were reported in the Daily News, 7 March 1872, pp. 6–7. Wedgwood’s mother was Caroline Sarah Wedgwood. Her sister Margaret Susan married Arthur Charles Vaughan Williams, vicar of Down Ampney, in 1869. CD’s interest in the remains of ancient furrows related to his work on earthworms (see, for example, Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Francis Wedgwood to Emma Darwin, [before 4 January 1871] and n. 2).

From J. B. Innes to Emma Darwin 8 March 1872 Milton Brodie | Forres NB— 8 March 1872—

Dear Mrs. Darwin, Reversing the usual practice I will begin with business. If it is not too much trouble would you tell me about Downe Church restoration, on which subject I am mystified. Some time ago Mr. Ffinden sent me a report and plan of certain improvements & additions.1 A chief part was to be done to the Church (apart from the Chancel) for about £1100, and he asked me to give £50. I agreed on condition that not less than

March 1872

103

1000 should be laid out. Hearing that the subscriptions were liberal and must interest taken, I hoped all proposed, and perhaps even more might be done, and sent an offer having promised £50 to 1000 that I would give £25 towards additional £500. I have a letter today from Mr Ffinden to say some objections and difficulties were raised at a vestry, that no apse, organ chamber, or other addition can be made, that the sum will be only £700, and to know if I will still give £50. So I ask for information and as orators say pause for a reply, asking you to tell me what is the matter and what the hitch is If you have had as mild and pleasant a winter as we have had M r Darwin will have rejoiced. We have had very little wet, only two days ice, when we were slow and did not get ice houses filled, no snow, and a succession of warm days when even my wife has been out without much wrap and preferred open carriage. The Apricots and peaches on the open walls are in full bloom, and I expect no fruit in consequence, for frost must come. I hope you have good reports of all your family, specially of your daughter. I think she is in London,2 it must be a great change from the bracing air of Downe. Jack has not favoured us with his company for some time. He was in for examination at Christmas, and only got away for a week or two.3 He proposes to be here at Easter. I hope to get South when the butterflies come out and see some of my friends, I vegetate here till I get as immovable and crusty as an oyster. I hoped to have seen the old Church restored. Did you see the Architects report? I had no notion it had been quite as good before it was modernized— With our kindest regards to Mr Darwin and all your party | Believe me Dear Mrs Darwin | Yours faithfully | J Brodie Innes DAR 167: 31 1 2 3

George Sketchley Ffinden was the vicar of Down; Innes was the former vicar. On Victorian church restoration, see Crabbe 1878. Henrietta Emma Litchfield and her husband were staying with CD and Emma Darwin at a rented house, 9 Devonshire Street, Portland Place, London (Emma Darwin (1904) 2: 254). John William Brodie Innes, Innes’s son, took his BA degree at Cambridge University in 1872.

From John Murray 9 March 1872 50, Albemarle S.t | W. Mar 9/72 My Dear Dear I shall be happy to give you for the present Edition of your work on Man, consisting of 1000 copies, the sum of Three Hundred Guineas, being as nearly as I can calculate, 23 ds of the probable profits of the Edition, nearly half of wch are disposed of 1 Since however, greater part of these were sold so recently that I shall not be paid for them until Septr next—I propose to give you my note of hand for the above

104

March 1872

named sum, at 4 months date from the 1st. March last— On receiving your assent to this proposal I will have the pleasure to send you the note I remain | My Dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | John Murray Charles Darwin Esq DAR 171: 408 1

The fourth printing of the first edition of Descent was made in December 1871 (Freeman 1977).

To John Murray [9 March 1872 or later]1

9. Devonshire St | Portland Place My dear Mr Murray Many thanks for your note. It really makes no difference to me whether you give me a Bill, or a cheque at the time proposed, for the 32 profits, i.e. £ 315,— Pray do whichever seems best to you. I have been vexed to find that some of my friends & as I hear some booksellers, complain of the type of the new Edit. of the Origin.2 I found no difficulty in reading the proofs, & my eyesight now is not very good; yet the lines now do seem to me not very distinct.— But there is no help for it, so it is no use thinking about it.— Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 274–5) 1 2

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from John Murray, 9 March 1872. The sixth edition of Origin was cheaper than the earlier ones. It had a smaller typeface and less spacing between the lines.

To Bartholomaus von Carneri 12 March 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. [9 Devonshire Street, London.] Mar 12. 1872 Sir I am at present staying away from home,1 but on my return to Down in a fortnight’s time I will look for some German translations of my works, which I shall have much pleasure in sending to yr Society. 2 If I have no German translations to spare I will send some English editions. With my best wishes for the success of your Society, I have the honour to remain, Sir, | your obedient servt | Ch. Darwin LS Wienbibliothek im Rathaus, Handschriftensammlung (H.I.N. 39418) 1

CD was in London from 16 February to 21 March 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)).

March 1872 2

105

Carneri may have asked for books for the Naturwissenschaftlicher Verein für Steiermark (Natural science association of Steiermark), of which he was a member. CD’s current German translator was Julius Victor Carus; earlier translations had been made by Heinrich Georg Bronn.

From Raphael Meldola 12 March 1872 Star Chemical Works, | Brentford, | W. March 12th. 1872 Dear Sir, I made notes of one or two of the facts given by Fritz Müller in the letter which you were good enough to submit to my perusal some time since.1 Do you think that this gentleman would have any objection to my publishing them in my forthcoming paper—provided of course you have no intention of doing so yourself. 2 I may remark that it is only the facts that I want—as you advise, I should not dare to publish his view that ~ butterflies have their tastes altered by constantly seeing other beautiful forms inhabiting the same district. It is a proposition at present incapable of proof. The specimens accompanying Fritz Müller’s letter, for the loan of which I am much obliged to you, I shall shortly return. Many specimens ranked by Müller as one species have been resolved by my friend Mr. A. G. Butler into several species & this considerably alters the views expressed by Müller in his letter. I will send you the names of the species with the specimens. The case of mimicry by a | butterfly only to which you referred me was given by Mr. Butler in “Nature”—3 This gentleman has since told me of other cases in which |s are better mimics than their ~. These cases I propose publishing as telling against Mr. Wallace’s statement that no | mimic only is known. 4 I have just perused with interest the 6th. ed. of your “Origin”— I was always impressed with the idea that the theory of Nat. Selec. had nothing to fear from Mr. Mivart’s “Genesis of Species”5 & in a very warm (but entirely one-sided) debate at the London Union6 in which, (against every speaker that rose), I maintained the proposition that you had satisfactorily demonstrated the descent of man from some lower animal, I had to reply in chief part to objections taken from Mr. Mivart’s work. Your recent reply to this zoologist’s objections is to my mind eminently satisfactory, & Prof. Huxley’s criticism in “Contemporary Review” appears also to have completely answered his theological & ethical objections.7 Believe me to be, | Yours with respect, | Raphael Meldola. C. Darwin Esq, M.A. &c. DAR 171: 119 1 2

See letter to Raphael Meldola, 23 January [1872], and Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Fritz Müller, 14 June 1871. Meldola did not mention Müller in his paper (Meldola 1873; see also letter from Raphael Meldola, 21 January [1872]).

106 3

4

5 6 7

March 1872

See letter to Raphael Meldola, 27 January [1872], and Correspondence vol. 19, letter from A. G. Butler, 2 June 1871 and n. 13. Arthur Gardiner Butler published a letter on the subject in Nature, 29 December 1870, p. 165. Meldola did not mention these examples in Meldola 1873. No published statement by Alfred Russel Wallace on independent mimicry in male butterflies has been found, but in Descent 1: 414–15 n. 31, CD reported Wallace’s belief that no male butterflies had protective coloration that was not shared by females of the same species. Meldola refers to St George Jackson Mivart and Mivart 1871a. CD added a substantially new seventh chapter to Origin 6th ed. to discuss objections to the theory of natural selection by Mivart and others. The London Union Society was a university students’ club founded in 1869 (Lancet, 11 September 1869, p. 398). Meldola refers to Thomas Henry Huxley’s article ‘Mr. Darwin’s critics’ (T. H. Huxley 1871).

From W. W. Reade 12 March 1872

11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington March 12—72

My dear Sir I’ve been morn noon & night over my book & have only just this minute finished it or wd. have written before the Heads—of matter—in Descent of Man—1 There is really little to alter as far as my special knowledge is concerned— 1. Negroes have whiskers.2 2. Their music is sometimes agreeable.3 3. The Caffres are negroes.4 This last statement is open to discussion no doubt: the first two are easily proved beyond a doubt. I have come across some evidence on dark-haired Europeans surviving lighthaired in tropics which I believe you will consider of some importance. 5 As to beauty you have very fairly stated the evidence on both sides & I dont see what more you can do. That you have discovered a new law is quite clear though I doubt its application to the black skin of the negro—except as an accessory perhaps. 6 I can let you have details on these subjects whenever you want them. My time will now be quite free. I become a gentleman of leisure. I shall go to work on my travels but shall take it quietly.7 By the way when you praised my style I ought to have told you that I often read a little of the Origin of Species before composing—especially in the scientific parts— I shall send you a copy I hope in a fortnight or so, and I can assure you that as my obligations to you, in respect to this book, are greater than they are to any other writer, dead or alive, so I am more desirous of your approval for it than for any one else’s—& I must own I think your approval will be considerably qualified. I remain | with best wishes for your health | yours very truly | Winwood Reade DAR 176: 55 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 I’ve . . . concerned— 1.3] crossed blue crayon 1.5 agreeable.] ‘agreeable’ added pencil 3.1 I have . . . importance. 3.2] scored blue crayon; ‘(Will give me)’ added pencil

March 1872

107

5.1 I . . . details.] underl blue crayon 5.2 I become . . . qualified. 5.9] crossed blue crayon Top of letter: ‘Descent’ blue crayon 1

2

3 4

5

6 7

Reade was working on his Martyrdom of man (Reade 1872); it was published in May 1872 (Publishers’ circular, 16 May 1872). Reade’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Descent; he had already commented on parts of Descent in his letter of 16 February 1872. In Descent 2: 321, CD wrote, ‘With negroes the beard is scanty or absent, and they have no whiskers’; in Descent 2d ed., he amended this to, ‘and they rarely have whiskers’. See also Correspondence vol. 19, letters from W. W. Reade, 21 February 1871 and 12 September 1871. In Descent 1: 64, CD referred to the ‘hideous music admired by most savages’. See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from W. W. Reade, 12 September 1871 and n. 3. In Descent 1: 220, CD referred to the negroes of the eastern and western coasts of Africa, the Hottentots, and the Caffres as four different groups. See also letter from W. W. Reade, 13 February 1872. In the nineteenth century, the term ‘Caffre’ or Kafir was usually used to refer to some groups of the Xhosa people of south-eastern Africa, while ‘Hottentot’ was usually used to refer to peoples of southwestern Africa (the Khoikhoi); for nineteenth-century uses of the term ‘Hottentot’ and ‘Caffre’, see Stocking 1987, Dubow 1995, and S. J. Gould 1997. CD discussed the correlation of hair and skin colour with immunity from certain poisons and parasites in Descent 1: 242–5, but concluded that there was no foundation for the idea that different hair and skin colours had arisen because of any constitutional advantage that they gave. CD discussed to what extent colour in mammals as well as birds was attributable to sexual selection in Descent 2: 294–7. Reade refers to his African sketch-book (Reade 1873).

From W. W. Reade 14 March 1872

11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington March 14.—72

My dear Sir It will be of course a great treat for me to have another chat with you;1 only, as I said before, I have scruples about invading your time when your health allows you to give only a part of it to conversation & there are so many others whom you have known longer & better than myself. However I will keep myself clear for the next week, and if you find that you have a really open day & feel yourself strong please send me a card mentioning the day, & I will be with you at 1 oclock. I can then in the course of two or three minutes give you if you like, what I have picked up about dark-haired men—2 Many thanks for your kind intention of reading my book as soon as it is out—but when I send it I will direct your attention to the parts which relate to Darwinism. The greater part of the book is purely historical. 3 I remain | yours very truly | Winwood Reade DAR 176: 56 1

2

The letter containing CD’s invitation to Reade has not been found. CD was in London from 21 February to 16 March 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Reade had previously visited Down at the end of January 1871 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). See letter from W. W. Reade, 12 March 1872 and n. 5.

108 3

March 1872

Part of the last chapter of Martyrdom of man (Reade 1872, pp. 395–468) dealt with the evolution of life and the origin and early history of humans.

From Amy Ruck 15 March [1872]1 Pantlludw, Machynlleth. March 15th. Dear Mr. Darwin I am very sorry that I am unable to tell you anything about the ledges, as hitherto we have failed to discover any appearance of what you describe— The steep slopes here are perfectly smooth, & it is difficult to imagine any change taking place in them, as worm-casting are rarely to be seen on the hills. 2 Thanking you for your letter I am | Your’s sincerely | Amy Ruck DAR 176: 223 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘(Worms)’ blue crayon 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to Amy Ruck, 24 February [1872]. CD had asked for a drawing of ledges that might have been formed by the washing down of wormcastings (see letter to Amy Ruck, 24 February [1872]).

To D. Appleton & Co. 16 March 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. March l6. 1872 Dear Sir I received a short time since your letter of Feb. 23d , in which you give me so gratifying an account of the sale of my works.—1 I have heard from Mr. Layton that he will pay me in a few days a cheque for £ 427"s 13"d 8, & I now write to you to express my acknowledgments for this remuneration which I consider magnificent. 2 I beg leave to remain | Dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin To | Messrs Appleton & Co I am very much pleased that my old Journal of Travels 3 has sold pretty well.— American Philosophical Society (412) 1 2 3

See letter from D. Appleton & Co., 23 February 1872. See letter from D. Appleton & Co., 23 February 1872 and n. 1. No letter from Charles Layton on the subject has been found. Journal of researches US ed. (1871). See letters from D. Appleton & Co., 17 February 1872 and n. 2, and 23 February 1872.

March 1872

109

From A. F. Boardman 18 March 1872 Brunswick Maine. | United States March 18. 1872 Mr Charles Darwin Dear Sir I don’t know but I weary you with my letters.1 If so, of course, you have only to throw them in the fire, and need not answer them. I don’t know where I may wander before I close but I commence with calling your attention to one of the points of a subject in which you certainly take an interest ie “Natural Selection”. I don’t recollect that you have ever directed attention to what, I think, is a fact, that “Natural Selection” is operative in developement not only by preserving those best adapted to the conditions encountered but also by removing those less adapted to those conditions to other and more favorable ones. Variations upward in the scale, will of course often render the subject of them less adapted to the surrounding conditions and while the earth was scantily covered with men or animals emigration was usually open to those less adapted to the place where they were; and of course many of those emigrating found more favorable conditions of existence or of developement. It was no advantage, I take it, in the direction of developement for men or animals to be relieved of stimulants to exertion. Emigration among men and I presume among animals also takes place with those who are discontented from any cause with their location. Adventurers, in the main, settled the new world. But the “Pilgrim Fathers”, as we call them, would have been glad to have remained in England or on the continent if the surrounding conditions had not been ill adapted to them. Imperfect as they certainly were and illy adapted to their surroundings, they had many very noble traits in advance of their times. “Natural Selection” instead of eliminating them sent them to leaven the new world. The Huguenots the cream of France, unwilling emigrants, mixed with German and English and other blood, on new soil, and in a different air, have probably raised the standard of mind of the world more than they would remaining in France unpersecuted and unthinned. Natural Selection sends the Irish too little crossed with other blood and too long exposed to an excessive gulf stream air and poorly adapted to their surroundings in Ireland to this country, where in time and especially if mixed with other blood they make valuable citizens. Assuming that mankind originated in Asia Minor or vicinity, “Natural Selection” sent those who loved a warm climate and easy life to the “flesh pots of Egypt” while an opposite class would go to Greece &c thus increasing and perpetuating the initial difference. In your work “The descent of man” you quote as follows “that residence in the Western states during the years of growth tends to produce increase of stature.” And then you say that Mr B A Gould arrived at the conclusion that the influences which thus act on stature “did not relate to climate the elevation of the land soil’ &c. 2 It is perfectly notorious here that Western people are much taller and heavier than eastern people and also that the soil in the west is much deeper and richer and more

110

March 1872

fruitful. It is also well established I think that “fat pastures” in several generations or even sooner will materially increase the size of small cattle. In view of these things it is a mystery to me how Mr Gould could arrive at the conclusion that the climate & soil had nothing to do with this increase. I don’t say that it is proved that the air & soil are the cause but I do say that the contrary is not proved and untill I hear of some more probable cause I shall consider the soil and air as the main causes. In this case it cannot be the abundance or need of the comforts of life or an excess of food eaten which makes the difference as New Englanders eat too much rather than too little. New Englanders also get their grain and much of their beef from the west, but no increase of stature has occurred since they did so, that I am aware of. The climate of the west is much drier and consequently more of what moisture is in the air must come from its excessively rich soil and be laden with its proportions, but this may or may not be an element in the case. Mr Maury in his “Physical Geography of the Sea” thinks that the valley of the Mississippi is watered by rains which come from the sea on the west coast of South America.3 The south east trade winds there carry the evaporation to the equatorial calm belt where they rise and are carried over the North East trade winds and over the Rocky Mountains to the Mississippi valley. This if true (and he says that the rain winds in that valley are the south west winds, and reasons plausibly otherwise,) adds another factor to the contents of the gulf stream. At any rate their rain comes from the west and not from the east or Atlantic, and though taller and larger they are not so intellectual as Eastern people. This is in accordance with the views which I advocate in regard to the gulf stream air.4 In New England too as in old England, as we are obliged to import so much of our food, it comes from a much wider range; and higher organisation, I imagine, results very much at least from higher combination. I have another speculation which may seem to you too bold. It does to me sometimes. I understand Astronomers to suppose that the moon from being smaller and composed of lighter materials has run its course faster than the earth and has now cooled off & has now no appreciable atmosphere &c. As I understand them the earth will in time reach the same point and be uninhabitable to such beings as now live on it. But the earth long ago was utterly uninhabitable by man and yet our ancestors were here, why in the distant future when the earth is uninhabitable by such as us, may it not be peopled by our altered decendants. “Is Gods hand shortened that he cannot save?”5 Why may not mankind grow more & more etherial untill finally divested of earthly clogs they enter upon another and a higher state of existence? To the mind familiar with the distance which mankind has already advanced does such a future progress seem too great? The passage of the Red Sea by the Israelites & other similar things are nowhere. We have been led through the oceans for thousands of years, and I am not sure that our emergence from the sea to the air is not as great a feat as our emergence, from air

March 1872

111

which gradually grew rarer & rarer, to the realms of space would be. But perhaps I have got up into the clouds too much. But how could the Spaniards when they first saw the new world help speculating? The truth is, in my opinion, we don’t begin (scarcely) to see where the great fact of evolution is going to carry us. It will make a great scattering among the dry bones especially of the interpretations of the Bible, but I have great faith that the true word of God standeth sure. Yours respty and gratefully | Alex F. Boardman DAR 160: 232 1 2 3 4 5

Boardman’s last letter to CD was that of 3 April 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19). The quotations from Benjamin Apthorp Gould’s Investigations in military and anthropological statistics (Gould 1869) appear in Descent 1: 114. The reference is to Matthew Fontaine Maury and Maury 1855, pp. 115–16. Boardman discussed the significance of the Gulf Stream in his letters of 26 January 1867 and 29 January 1868 (Correspondence vols. 15 and 16). The quotation is from Isaiah 50:1: ‘Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save.’

From W. W. Reade 18 March [1872]1

11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington March 18

My dear Sir The note I meant was the one your card replied to— I gave it to the servant to post & found she might have mislaid it, as she had one about the same time. I am sorry you have had the trouble of writing again— 2 I shall have the pleasure of seeing you tomorrow (Tuesday) at 1. I enclose a proof of my title—as it will be advertised. It is for you not to suggest but to direct what words I use to express your views, so pray consider the modification made, & I will note it down tomorrow— 3 I am very much obliged to you for giving me the pleasure of another interview, and remain | Yours very truly | Winwood Reade DAR 176: 57 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from W. W. Reade, 14 March 1872. The card has not been found; the note may have been the letter from W. W. Reade, 14 March 1872. Reade’s Martyrdom of man was advertised with a number of different subtitles (and finally none at all) in the Pall Mall Gazette, 18 March, and 4, 5, 6, and 30 April 1872. The first title was The martyrdom of man and his apotheosis: a narrative of nations. See also letter from W. W. Reade, 3 May 1872.

From Gaston de Saporta1 18 March 1872

Aix le 18 mars 1872

Monsieur, J’ai attendu pour venir vous remercier de l’obligeant envoi de votre livre sur la descendance de l’homme d’avoir achevé de le lire une première fois, sans à y revenir un peu plus tard, car vos ouvrages demandent d’être relus, si l’on veut bien saisir

112

March 1872

l’enchaînement de vos idées.2 Il y a cette fois des parties, dans votre travail, qui m’ont frappé particulièrement, tout ce qui est philosophique, surtout l’exposition des phénomènes moraux et intellectuels chez l’homme et chez les animaux, les relations et les passages de la pensée à l’instinct, la génération de la conscience etc.— Vous avez déployé dans l’examen de ces questions difficiles et des plus complexes une puissance d’analyse des plus rares, et j’ai pu souvent, en faisant des retours sur moi-même me convaincre de la vérité de vos déductions. Je suis entièrement de votre avis lorsque vous insistez sur la place incontestable de l’homme comme faisant partie intégrante des mammifères. Les liens intimes qui rattachent l’homme à cette classe sont tellement peu susceptibles d’être méconnus que la démonstration même en paraît singulière, et que l’on conçoit à peine que l’on soit dans le cas de le démontrer à des naturalistes, en accumulant preuves sur preuves en faveur d’une vérité de ce genre. Que l’homme soit un animal par son corps, tous les philosophes et les religions même n’ont cessé d’en faire l’aveu; qu’il se soit élevé au dessus des autres animaux par un développement prodigieux, mais très-inégalement départi, de ses facultés mentales, basées pourtant sur le même fond commun, c’est encore une réalité dont vous rapportez des preuves surabondantes avec votre force, votre abondance et votre logique ordinaires. Mais vous insistez trop, et c’est sur ce point que je veux vous faire part de mes objections, vous insistez trop à mon sens, et inutilement, si ce n’est pas démontrable hic et nunc, sur la descendance de l’homme d’un prototype Simien et grimpeur soit anthropomorphe soit provenant de quelque autre rameau détaché de la même famille.3 Je trouve que votre doctrine n’implique nullement, à mes yeux, ce résultat, mais qu’elle entraîne seulement la descendance d’un prototype plus voisin de l’animalité proprement dite que le type humain actuel et dépourvu par conséquent d’une partie au moins des facultés mentales et de l’organisation physique qui sont l’apanage des races humaines les plus inférieures. Je ne remarque parmi les indices sérieux d’une descendance directe Simienne que les suivants dont la portée est loin, il est vrai, d’être méprisable: Le caractère tiré de la dentition qui doit être placé en première ligne; puisqu’il semble dénoter une liaison exclusive avec les Singes de l’ancien continent, ensuite les règles des femelles et subsidiairement l’odeur qui rend les femmes attrayantes à beaucoup de singes.4 Ce sont là des présomptions graves qui s’expliquent cependant par l’hypothèse de la descendance d’une prototype, souche commune des deux groupes, avec divergence mutuelle et progressive. Il existe chez tous les singes une adaptation évidente à l’état de grimpeur. Chez les Anthromorphes eux-même cette adaptation demeure visible bien qu’elle tende à se modifier quelque peu de manière à produire une marche incomplète et en tout cas différente par son mécanisme de celle qui est propre à l’homme. Il n’y a chez l’homme inférieur aucune tendance de retour, aucune transition vers la vie de grimpeur, et vous ne pouvez citer à ce point de vue, dont l’importance ne saurait vous échapper que le penchant qui porte les enfants à grimper sur les arbres. 5 L’homme aussi bien qu’on le suive vers son berceau primitif se montre troglodyte, c’est à dire marcheur, s’aidant des pieds et des mains pour gravir et s’élever et se servant sans doute de cette faculté, si rare chez les animaux de grande taille pour se procurer un genre de vie spécial. Je

March 1872

113

suis parfaitement et entièrement de votre avis, lorsque vous supposez que l’homme avait acquis un commencement d’intelligence et de langage articulé et inventé probablement le feu avant sa dispersion qui l’amena à multiplier ses peuplades et à les répandre jusqu’aux extrémités des grands continents, dès une époque probablement fort reculée. Physiquement l’homme était alors à peu près ce qu’il est, et il l’avait été antérieurement depuis un temps déjà long; car une loi invariable et universelle en paléontologie veut que les groupes se soient comporté jadis à travers le temps, comme ils se comportent actuellement lorsqu’on les considère dans `l’espace.6 Cette faculté particulière à l’homme de ne donner lieu qu’à des races, de varier beaucoup et aisément, mais dans des limites restreints, de façon à ne jamais diverger audelà d’un certain terme, en gardant la fécondité mutuelle des races entr’elles, cette faculté a du distinguer l’espèce humaine depuis très-longtemps, probablement à partir de l’époque même où elle se detacha de la souche prototypique pour revêtir les caractères du groupe qu’elle représente, de même que les Simiens se détachaient de leur côté de la même souche pour accentuer de plus en plus l’organisation propre à leur groupe et manifester sous bien des points de vue des caractères qui sont l’opposé de ceux du groupe humain. En effet, La multiplicité des tribus et des genres, la pluralité des espèces, et l’impossibilité physique des rapports sexuels entre les formes les plus élevées, comme on le voit pour les Anthropomorphes, constituent des caractères propres aux Simiens et il en existe encore d’autres. Mais je voudrais aborder la question à un autre point de vue.— J’ai toujours pensé que les questions d’origine, beaucoup moins insolubles qu’on est porté à le supposer, ne se résoudraient pourtant qu’a l’aide de l’accord des faits actuels et des faits anciens et par l’étude comparative de ces deux ordres de phénomènes. Je le crois encore et j’admets également que dans cet ordre d’idées les mêmes lois et les mêmes indices ou aperçus se trouvent plus ou moins applicables à tous les êtres organisés, sans en excepter l’homme. Je me suis donc appliqué à découvrir les lois ou commencement de lois ou encore les règles qui résultent de l’examen des genres fossiles et en particulier de ceux, comme c’est le cas pour les plantes, qui, attachés au sol et naturellement immuables, doivent fournir plus de lumières sur la marche suivie autrefois par les êtres, dans leur mode de distribution et de développement. C’est ainsi que je suis arrivé à un certain nombre de notions générales qui me paraissent applicables à l’origine même de l’homme. Les types génériques, vous le savez, sont parfois étonnamment fixes; ceux même qui sont le résultat d’une longue série de modifications successives se montrent tels que nous les voyons jusque dans un temps fort éloigné. C’était l’opinion de M. Lartet pour le Renne, le cerf et le Cheval, qu’il fallait remonter jusque dans le Miocène pour apercevoir dans ces types, même en les considérant sous leur forme actuelle, les changements susceptibles d’être traduits par la charpente osseuse. 7 Et cependant, il s’agit là de types qui ont du subir physiquement une élaboration des plus complexes, puis qu’ils n’ont revêtu leurs caractères définitifs, qu’a force de s’éloigner de prototypes construits tout autrement qu’ils ne le sont et par suite d’une adaptation des plus rigoureuses. Chez l’homme, cette adaptation est loin d’avoir exigé au physique, le

114

March 1872

même travail organique de soudure et d’avortement des parties dures, et la tendance à la marche bipède a pu exister chez le prototype humain, comme elle se montre chez quelques rongeurs. L’adaptation simienne aux fonctions d’animal grimpeur est au moins aussi exclusive que celle de l’homme pour la marche, et rien ne peut dire si l’un de ces états a précédé l’autre, en ce qui concerne le prototype des deux groupes, ou si ce prototype, ainsi qu’il a du arriver le plus souvent, n’a pas été une sorte de terme vague, susceptible de donner également passage vers ces deux états. Je suis donc porté à croire que l’homme est fort ancien sous sa forme physique actuelle et qu’on le retrouverait avec peu de changement, en remontant très-loin, sauf pourtant le développement du cerveau qui a du accompagner celui des facultés mentales. J’ai été frappé de la probabilité de ce fait en voyant les restes humains trouvés à la Denyse près du Puy en Velay, que je considère comme les plus anciens connus jusqu’ ici, bien qu’il ait été fait peu de bruit autour de la découverte; le propriétaire de ces restes, homme peu sensé, s’attachant, par bizarrerie d’esprit, à suspecter leur authenticité, pourtant irrécusable.8 On reconnait sur une des têtes, dont la calotte cranienne est dégagée de la gangue, une énorme dépression des parties du front qui correspondent à l’intelligence pure, mais peu de crétes osseuses et rien qui rappelle autre chose que l’homme actuel avec une tournure idiote. L’ homme primitif, mais non encore pourtant prototypique, il est vrai, devait ressembler plus ou moins au crétin; c’est la je crois le veritable retour à un état antérieur, sans les ressources de l’instinct qui se sont sans doute de plus en plus oblitérées. Mais je continue et je trouve ceci.— En prenant pour point de départ les végétaux fossiles, je déduis de leur observation deux lois ou indices de lois.— La première c’est que beaucoup de genres observés dans la végétation tertiaire ancienne se trouvent encore actuellement disposés suivant un mode de distribution en rapport avec la configuration des terres et des mers particuliers à la période à laquelle ils appartiennent. Ainsi les genres caractéristiques de la Flore des Gypses d’Aix (Eocène supérieur) habitent de nos jours des régions qui étaient terre ferme au temps de la mer nummulitique, ce qui fait voir que leur distribution moderne est en relation avec leur aire d’extension primitive et que ces genres parconséquent ne sont que des prolongements d’un ordre antérieur. Il ne s’agit pas évidemment ici de ces genres qui étant purement cosmopolites ne sauraient donner lieu à aucun indication véritable, mais de genres soit amoindrés soit ayant persisté dans les pays chaud seulement: ou sur certains points extraeuropéens. Le second principe constaté par moi est le suivant: il existe un parallélisme et un balancement d’un hémisphère à l’autre, d’un continent à l’autre, et même de genre à genre et d’espèce à espèce d’une région à l’autre, ensorte que les groupes qui se sont développés largement sur une partie du globe peuvent être restés faibles ou rudimentaire sur le point opposé ou n’ avoir donné lieu qu’ à un développement des plus inégaux. De cette façon, les deux groupes rivaux correspondants peuvent chacun regner dans un des hémisphères et posséder pourtant des répresentants isolés et peu caractérisés dans l’autre. Il en est ainsi des Protéacées qui paraissent avoir été remplacées dans l’Europe tertiaire par des Myricées, tandis qu’à côté même de

March 1872

115

ces nombreuses Myricées, il a du exister un petit groupe de Protéacées tertiaires européennes sans importance, de même qu’en Australie et au Cap à côté de la foule des Protéacées prédominantes quelques rares Myricées se montrent également. 9 Les Fagus antarctiques comparées aux aux riche Quercinées de l’hémisphère boréal font voir les effets de la même inégalité de parallélisme et on pourrait multiplier les exemples de cette loi dont les Marsupiaux d’Australie persistant vis à vis de ceux de l’Europe, si promptement éliminés offrent une autre application. 10 Je crois les deux lois que je viens de déterminer parfaitement susceptibles d’application relativement à l’homme et à ses origines et toutes deux tendent, si elles lui sont appliquées, à démontrer l’ancienneté de son type physique. J’ai souvent été frappé de ceci que les principales races humaines se trouvaient distribuées à la surface de l’ancien continent d’une manière conforme a l’ancienne répartition des terres et des mers tertiaires. Pour vérifier ce fait, il faut faire abstraction des changements et mélanges que les traditions historiques permettent de saisir. Dans ces conditions, si l’on remet en place cette grande mer interieure, partageant tout l’ancien continent, dont la méditeranée n’est qu’un reste, et qui a persisté en variant fort peu dans ces limites principales jusqu’à la fin du Miocène, si on la fait de nouveau s’étendre d’une part vers l’Océan indien, de l’autre au centre de l’Asie et jusqu’en Chine, on reconnait aisément combien les principales races humaines sont groupées naturellement le long des rivages de cette mer. C’est ainsi que les Malais des îles de l’Afrique à l’Asie méridionale se rattachent à des terres jadis continues, depuis en partie submergées. Les Nègres ne dépassent pas au nord la limite du Sahara et ont pour région mère le sol primitif de l’ Afrique centrale, ancien littoral de la mer Saharienne. Les Canaries dont le rôle a été si grand autrefois, possédait les Guanches.11 La race Jaune a été parqué au Nord est de la grande mer intérieure asiatique. Au nord, en Europe, comme en Sibérie cette mer a eu les Ouraliens, Touraniens,12 Finnois Lapons, les races troglodites de l’âge de pierre— Sur le rivage opposé, dans la haute Asie, se trouve le berceau des Aryas et des Sémites, qui n’ont du commencer à se disperser et à s’étendre dans plusieurs directions divergentes qu’après le retrait de la grande Méditerranée centro-asiatique. Il n’est pas jusqu’aux Eskimaux dont l’existence ne soit en rapport avec ce que la paléontologie végétale nous apprend sur le passé des contrées qu’ils habitent. Ces peuples se sentent eux-même décheoir. Ils n’ont certainement pas pénétré dans les pays arctiques sous l’empire des conditions actuelles; mais nous savons qu’il y avait là, dans l’âge miocène, un grand continent continu avec l’ancien et le nouveau continent, richement peuplé en plantes et en animaux. L’homme s’y est répandu sans doute dans un temps où le climat y conservait encore quelque chose de sa primitive douceur. Depuis, il y est resté forcément luttant contre des changements défavorables et s’y adaptant peu à peu. Les Esquimaux sont à mon sens un exemple excellent et le premier de tous de qu’a du être l’homme, immédiatement après que ses facultés lui eurent permis de se répandre sur toutes les grandes terres. L’Esquimaux est encore ce qu’il a été originairement et une fois stationnaires les races ne changent jamais plus. Comme le Sequoia de Californie, l’Esquimaux est un type devenu permanent

116

March 1872

à partir d’une certaine époque et qui peut disparaître, mais ne se modifiera jamais plus. Cette distribution de l’homme, conforme à celle des genres de plantes que l’on observe à l’état fossile et en rélation avec la configuration ancienne des terres et des mers, est évidemment favorable à la croyance qu’il remonte, entant qu’homme physique, à une antiquité fort-réculée et que ses caractères matériels n’ont pas varié depuis longtemps, circonstance qui explique du reste à merveille la fécondité mutuelle de ses races. La seconde loi n’est pas moins applicable à l’homme, et loin que je voie en lui une déviation latérale du type simien, je reconnais chez lui les caractères d’un ordre longtemps parallèle, devenu enfin supérieur, dont le développement est très-loin d’avoir suivi la même marche, et cette sorte d’antagonisme entre les deux groupes me fait parfaitement comprendre la voie divergente suivie par chacun d’eux. Je vois chez l’homme les caractères d’une adaptation tout à fait opposée à celle des singes. Le type simien, grimpeur, arboricole, fécond en diversités de tribus, de genres et d’espèces, divergeant rapidement et multipliant les types secondaires de manière à donner lieu a une ramification complexe et à aboutir à un certain nombre de chefs de série sans rapports directs entr’eux, se développe exclusivement dans la zone tropicale; il exige impérieusement la chaleur et se trouve promptement éliminé dès ce que cet élément fait défaut; chez lui, le plus souvent il existe un arrêt brusque de l’intelligence vers l’âge adulte, des cris et rien qui ressemble à l’articulation des mots ni à une voix; puis si l’on s’attache à ce qui est secondaire: abondance de poils rudes, peu de différences entre le poil des membres et celui de la tête— Les tendances de l’homme sont opposées: marcheur, troglodyte, il ne donne lieu, même en pénétrant partout qu’à des diversités superficielles qui n’altèrent jamais assez les convenances physiques pour rendre stériles les unions réciproques. Il a donc du diverger lentement et s’éloigner peu, sauf par le développement intellectuel du prototype d’où il est derivé. L’ homme, contrairement à ce qui existe pour les Singes, est cosmopolite de plus, il ne s’est pleinement développé que sous l’influence d’un climat froid ou tempéré et à l’époque où cette sorte de climat a prévalu. Ce qui a éliminé le type simien de l’hémisphère boréal a évidemment favorisé l’homme. Son expansion date justement du temps ou la température s’est graduellement abaissée. Chez lui, peu de force musculaire, mais une tendance au développement des facultés de l’intelligence— Les Sauvages, il faut le remarquer, ne sont pas musculairement plus forts que nous, et de plus, ils sont généalement glabres quoique nus. Là encore la divergence est très-marquée. Il semble donc que l’homme ait eté originairement un type propre à l’hémisphère boréal, de même que le type simien est un produit équatorial et torride qui s’avançait jusque dans nos latitudes, tant que notre zone a été chaude et qui s’en est retiré dès qu’elle s’est refroidie. L’homme, tout l’annonce et c’est même ce qui explique cette invention première de feu, a du se constituer vers le nord, et plus tard il aura envoyé des peuplades dans les autres directions et jusque dans le Sud, de même que les Simiens en ont eu Jadis dans le nord. Mais je crois que ces événements, c’est à dire le détachement progressive de l’homme de son prototype, quel qu’il soit, et l’affinité probable de ce dernier avec une souche encore plus primitive reporte l’homme im-

March 1872

117

mensément loin dans le passé. L’homme avant sa diffusion a du vivre à l’écart, au fond des bois, à portée des cavernes où grâce à son mode de progression il a du se retirer et amasser des provisions— Il a du être timide, défiant, vivant par couples ou familles isolées, et la nécéssité où il a été, de se procurer des armes le prouve— Avant de posséder le feu, l’homme devait éprouver bien des difficultés pour se nourrir; il vivait sans doute exclusivement de certains fruits et peutêtre de racines et d’oeufs. Ce que vous dites de la séparation antérieure probable du type simien d’Amérique de celui de l’ancien continent a pour soi les apparences et la probabilité; 13 comment le savoir pourtant? L’homme tend effectivement à perdre les dents de sagesse; 14 il a pu antérieurement en perdre d’autres encore. La formule dentaire a pu varier plus ou moins chez le prototype et se fixer définitivement, alorsque les trois types avaient déjà divergé. . . . Comment? il est impossible de le savoir et vous le dites vous- même; mais plus je reflêchis, plus je suis porté à admettre que la divergence à partir d’une souche prototypique ne peut être que très-éloignée. Et lorsque l’on voit dès l’éocène le type Vespertilio15 déjà tout constitué et n’ayant dès lors plus varié, on est bien forcé d’avouer qu’au point de vue physique, et tout l’effort d’adaptation ayant porté du côté purement intellectuel, l’homme a bien pu être à peu près ce qu’il est encore, matériellement, à partir d’un âge excessivement lointain peutêtre dès l’éocène. Je vous livre, Monsieur, ces réflexions jetées au hazard de la plume et qui partent du reste d’un transformiste des plus convaincus et d’un admirateur sincère de vos travaux— J’avais offert à la Revue des deux mondes de rendre compte de votre dernier ouvrage, mais je n’ai pas encore su ce que souhaite à cet égard la rédaction.— Je suis du reste tellement absorbé en ce moment par mes travaux et sur la flore Jurassique et sur celle de l’Eocène des Gypses d’Aix que je n’insiste pas, me réservant pour les mois d’été où je dispose de plus de temps.16 Je vous prie d’excuser une aussi longue lettre et d’agréer l’expression de mes sentiments les plus devoué | Cte G. de Saporta DAR 177: 32 1 2

3

4

5 6 7 8

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Saporta had evidently received a copy of the first volume of the French edition of Descent (Moulinié trans. 1872). The second volume was not published until November 1872 (see letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 23 November 1872). Hic et nunc: here and now (Latin). In Descent 1: 185–213, CD discussed evidence for a simian ancestor of humans. He wrote: ‘There can consequently hardly be a doubt that man is an offshoot from the Old World Simian stem; and that under a genealogical point of view, he must be classed with the Catarhine division’ (ibid., p. 196). CD had pointed out the similarity in human and Old World monkey dentition in Descent 1: 196. CD did not discuss menstruation in humans and Old World apes and monkeys in Descent. For more on the attractiveness of human females to apes, see Ritvo 1990, p. 33, and Schaik 2004, pp. 88–9. CD discussed tree-climbing in children in Descent 1: 122, and bipedalism in humans in ibid., pp. 141–4. In Descent 2: 390, CD concluded that the development of human intellect including language and tool use occurred in the remote past. Edouard Lartet had described Miocene fossils at Sansan, including those of extinct deer (see Lartet 1851). The remains found at Denise formed part of the collection of M. Pichot-Dumazel, who has not been further identified, but who was described by Charles Lyell as ‘an advocate of Le Puy’ (C. Lyell 1863,

118

9 10 11

12 13 14 15 16

March 1872

p. 196). The authenticity of the remains was discussed at the twenty-second scientific congress of France in 1855 (see Congrès scientifique de France. Vingt-deuxième session, tenue au Puy, en Septembre 1855, pp. 299–303, and C. Lyell 1863, pp. 194–200). Myricaceae (sweet gale) is a family in the subclass Hamamelidae; Proteaceae (proteas) is a family in the subclass Rosidae. Antarctic or southern beeches are now in the genus Nothofagus in the family Nothofagaceae; the former family Quercinaceae is now subsumed within the family Fagaceae (beeches, chestnuts, and oaks). The Guanches were the original inhabitants of the Canary Islands. Although their origins were not known for certain, from remnants of their language they were believed to be related to the Berbers of northern Africa (Humboldt 1814–29, 1: 279–82). ‘Turanian’ was broadly used to refer to languages of Asiatic origin, except the Aryan and Semitic, and similarly applied to the speakers of these languages (OED). See Descent 1: 198–202. See Descent 1: 26. Vespertilio is a genus of bats. Saporta refers to his work on the classification of plant fossils found in gypsum beds of Aix. His ‘Révision de la flore des gypses d’Aix’ was published in parts between 1872 and 1874 (Saporta 1872–4).

To G. C. Wallich [20 March 1872]1

9. Devonshire St | Portland Place Wednesday

My dear Sir At last I have got your negative from the Heliotype Co y.—& it appears not in the least injured.—2 The manager tells me that he has succeeded in making a very good new negative. The Coy. gives me a written guarantee that no negative used in my Book shall be used for any other purpose.—3 I thank you sincerely for the use of this beautiful work of art, which, however, will make all the others on the same Plate look ugly.— My dear Sir | yours faithfully & obliged | Ch. Darwin I return the parcel by my servant. I go home to Down, tomorrow morning. 4 Northumberland Collections Service, Woodhorn (SANT/BEQ/4/4/55A) 1 2 3

4

The date is established by the reference to CD’s return home from his stay at 9 Devonshire Street, London (see n. 4, below). See letter to G. C. Wallich, 24 February [1872] and nn. 2 and 3. The Heliotype Company had premises in London. No letter has been found from the Heliotype Company regarding the use of negatives. Ernest Edwards, the inventor of the heliotype technique, is listed as works manager in 1875 and probably held this position in 1872 (photoLondon (www.photolondon.org.uk (accessed 17 June 2011); Prodger 2009, p. 109). CD returned to Down on Thursday 21 March 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)).

To John Lubbock [after 21 March 1872]1 My dear L. Mr. F.2 has called this morning on my wife, but I did not see him as I was unwell.—

March 1872

119

He wishes that I shd write to you but I have very little to say. It seem that I misunderstood his plan, & there is no intention to abolish pews, only to alter their arrangement. & to this my wife has no sort of objection. M r Ffinden is afraid that the paper which I & others signed may be used against his getting the proper faculty; but I conceive that this is error: anyhow I signed the paper solely to let you know what we thought, & shd not wish my signature to go further.3 The most serious point is that the Ecc. Commiss4 will not give their £ 300, unless your pew on each side of the altar is removed; this decision as I hear from [ Mr ] L. is not at all owing to Mr Ffinden. Mr Ffinden is afraid, unless some arrangement can be come to before the vestry next week, that he will not only fail to get the £ 300 from the Commiss, but that he shall eventually be compelled to return the money that has been subscribed to the subscribers; & this certainly seems a great pity, as to necessary repairs, will then be thrown on the Parish alone.—5 Draft DAR 96: 137–8 1 2 3

4 5

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Emma Darwin to H. E. Litchfield, [21 March 1872] (DAR 219.9: 97; see n. 3, below). George Sketchley Ffinden. Evidently, CD had signed a petition in favour of the retention of church pews at St Mary’s, Downe. In her letter to Henrietta Emma Litchfield of [21 March 1872], Emma Darwin wrote, ‘Parslow says about 9 signed the paper & he thinks there is a very general wish to retain the pews, so F[ather] is satisfied at having signed—’ (DAR 219.9: 97). Joseph Parslow was the butler at Down House. Ffinden had the box pews replaced with bench pews (Village tour, www.downenews.com (accessed 17 June 2011)). The Ecclesiastical Commission determined the distribution of revenue for the Church of England (see Chadwick 1970, 1: 126–41). For more on Ffinden’s proposed repairs and improvements, see the letter from J. B. Innes to Emma Darwin, 8 March 1872.

From John Scott 22 March 1872 Royal Botanic Gardens [Calcutta] 22 March 1872 Dear Sir, I have delayed writing in the hope that I might add to my own scraps of information on the habits of worms that from friends which I have written to in the hills and Central India. I fancy however from their silence as yet that they have nothing to tell me of those just now and this I can understand if they are as inactive on the surface there as here. I shall thus delay no longer in sending my own moiety.— 1 Worms are indeed abundant everywhere here: in the jungles (dry and grass clad) lawns & rice fields (when the rains are over they could not live in them I fancy during the growing season when all is covered with water. As regards our lawns I indeed am mistaken if they are not even more troublesome than they are in Britain. At the close of the rains they are most inactive: the finest of our lawns is then only kept in anything like order by almost daily rolling. If left to work undisturbed then for a

120

March 1872

very few days they would have it studded with large castings: their activity has often surprised me. I can give you no exact information as to how the castings disappear, as they annually and naturally do: but I shall be careful to afford you it when the time comes round again for making the observations. This I know however that the casts do attain a considerable size on unrolled grassy surfaces during the early part of the cold season when the upper soil is moist and easily bored in by them: these as a rule remain nearly intact until the following rainy season, when you find them gradually disappearing and unless the soil is of a very tenacious character all becomes again fairly well levelled down by the end of the rains, when the operation of up casting is resumed. I cannot tell you the worms fend in the low rice lands during the rains, the soil being always less or more submerged. Still when the crops are cut and the surface clear of water, then do you again find worms at work. In the gardens here you then see them on the surface amongst the grass and their paths. I have never observed them making fresh castings there; but I shall see to this as the rains return. Any work they could do of this sort then would be quickly levelled I think.— In the cold season we do not as a rule find the worms boring much under the surface: I do not think much beyond ten inches or a foot. In the hot season they go deeper. I cannot actually say how much; I have heard of them boring down to about four feet; but I have never actually seen them more than 2 12 feet: at 2 feet they are not infrequent.2 In this season you will rarely observe any fresh castings in any open lawns: in dense woods or any shady and moist place you may find a few; but anywhere they then lay and seemingly pass the hot season in a quasi dormant state. The period for active work is thus with the rainy and hot seasons confined to little over two months annually, but really during that time the alteration they effect in the surface of our lawns &c, is by no means trifling, and as I have said (and as I think subsequent observations will prove) greater than on parity at home. It will I assure you be a very great pleasure to me to work up this matter in the coming rainy and cold seasons, and I only beg that you will tell me of any observations that you wish made and that I may be competent to and it shall not be a lack of time which will interfere with my making them. You asked in one of your letters lately about the Leersia, 3 I had seeds of this from you in Incomplete DAR 177: 120 CD ANNOTATIONS 2.1 abundant everywhere] underl red crayon 2.1 jungles] underl red crayon 2.5 the finest . . . castings: 2.7] scored red crayon 2.10 the casts . . . size 2.11] underl red crayon 2.15 by . . . operation] underl red crayon 2.17 crops are cut] underl red crayon 2.18 clear of water,] underl red crayon 3.4 cold . . . deeper. 3.6] scored red crayon

March 1872

121

3.9 find a few;] underl red crayon 3.10 hot] underl red crayon 3.10 quasi dormant] underl red crayon 4.1 rainy . . . annually, 4.2] underl red crayon 4.4 greater . . . home] underl red crayon 6.1 You . . . in 6.2] crossed ink 1 2 3

CD had asked Scott for observations on wormcastings in his letter of 15 January 1872. CD cited Scott for his information on the depth of worm burrows in Earthworms, pp. 125–6. In a letter to Scott of 3 June 1868 (Correspondence vol. 16), CD had asked whether Leersia produced perfect (that is, open or non-cleistogamic) flowers in India.

To ? 23 March [1872–4]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. March 23d My dear Sir In a table which I drew up several years ago of all the authentic crosses amongst the Phasianidæ, I give the Gold & Silver pheasant; 2 but, though I give references to every other case, I have by some accident omitted this single one! I feel certain I shd. not have introduced it without fairly good evidence. I hope that you will publish your case. My dear Sir, Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin American Philosophical Society (406) 1 2

The year range is established by the printed stationery, with the address in the centre; CD used this type of notepaper between January 1872 and November 1874. CD discussed the plumage of the gold pheasant (Phasianus pictus; now Chrysolophus pictus) in Variation 1: 275. CD did not use a species name for the silver pheasant; the original name was Phasianus nycthemerus, though CD probably knew it as Euplocamus nycthemerus (it is now Lophura nycthemera). In Descent 2: 192, CD noted that female pheasants of several species, including gold and silver, resembled each other in plumage. The table of crosses has not been found.

From Raphael Meldola 26 March 1872 Star Chemical Works, | Brentford, | W. March 26th. 1872 Dear Sir, I enclose the specimens which you were good enough to send me with Fritz Müller’s letter & beg to thank you for your kindness in lending them to me. 1 Mr. Butler2 has looked over them & named them for me— should you ever require to allude to these butterflies it may be useful to you to have their names which are as follows: —3

122

March 1872 I. 1.

Daptonoura limnoria?— Godt.

1a

Leptalis psamathe? Fabr.4

2.

Acræa thalia. Linn.

2.

Leptalis acræina. Hewit.5

3.

Mechanitis Lysimnia. Fabr.

3

Leptalis Astynome. Dalm.6

a

a

II. 1.

Eresia (Phyciodes.) langsdorfi. Godt.

2.

Heliconia phyllis. Fabr.7

3.

Heterochroa—sp.

4.

Euptychia sp. nov.

5.

Ithomia Sylvo. Hübn.8 III.

1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 8 12 13 14.

⎫ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎬

Leptalis sp.

Leptalis— perhaps | Melite. Linn. ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎭  ⎫ ⎪ ⎬ ⎪ ⎭

probably ~ of preceding. probably sexes of a third sp. Daptonoura limnoria? Godt.9

You will at once perceive on referring to the letter that F. Müllers view concerning III 8—becomes untenable when this specimen is made a distinct sp. as Mr. Butler believes it to be.10 And now I have a few facts to communicate which may possibly be of service to you on some future occasion. First as regards the numerical proportion of varieties among plants under cultivation. Mr. Butler informs me that he sowed one pennyworth of seed of the “Canterbury Bell”11 from which he raised over 150 plants. Of

March 1872

123

these only 5 presented structural variations: one had the bell half as long again as in the normal type, 3 had double & one treble bells one within another. The next fact relates to “prepotency of transmission.” A friend of mine in Twickenham crossed the Bramah (cock) with the “Silver-Spangle” (hen) & the mongrel offspring (exactly like one another), all resemble the father to a very much greater extent than the mother. 12 There is one point concerning mimicry about which I should much like to have your opinion before venturing to publish anything on the subject. You state your belief (Descent &c) that when the process first began the mimicking & the mimicked forms were probably nearer to their common progenitor & consequently the incipient variations would not have been required so large as supposed. The imitated species afterwards diverging would lead its mimic along the same line so that the latter might come to differ to any extent from the allied species of its genus. Now on this view should we not be right in inferring à priori that the mimic would be allied to its model in more structural characters than mere colour & form? For, if the mimic & the model were nearer to their progenitor when the imitation was first set up they must have been allied to each other in structural characters more closely than are the other species of both genera (mimicked & mimicking) at the present time & as the mimic on your view has preserved its resemblance to the model species from that remote period when they were more closely allied to the present time when divergence has gone on in both genera, one would expect to find that more than superficial resemblance obtained, in some cases at least, between a species & its mimic. Now if this could be proved it would I venture to think, be an absolute demonstration of your view & would effectually answer those naturalists who are continually clamouring about incipient stages. I am therefore endeavouring to collect evidence on this head. Mr. Butler in his paper on the genus Elymnias (Proc. Zoo. Soc. June 1871) states (p. 519)13 that he finds “that some of the species differ so considerably from the type form in the neuration of the hind wings that it will be advisable to separate them as a distinct genus; whilst others exhibit differences of a less marked character, such as will only serve in an imperfect manner to separate the smaller sections of the group. I have noticed that this transitional state of things often occurs in genera largely acted upon by mimicry” I think this interesting fact should throw some light on the subject. Again, Mr. Trimen has recorded (Trans. Linn. Soc. Vol. XXVI p. 519) the fact that Papilio Ridleyanus mimics Acræa Egina in colour of palpi.14 These are all the facts that I have as yet been able to collect. With expressions of gratitude for the assistance which you have so kindly rendered in the preparation of my essay on mimicry. | I remain, | Yours very respectfully, | Raphael Meldola. P.S. | I am much indebted to you also for permitting me to make use of F. Müller’s facts— they are very important as bearing on the question of the possibility of the conversion by natural selection of one form of inheritance into the other. I allude to the series of Leptalis Melite III. 2–7-& 10–11 DAR 89: 89–90b

124

March 1872

CD ANNOTATIONS 3.1 And now . . . plants. 3.4] crossed pencil 3.6 The next . . . group. 4.25] crossed pencil Top of letter: ‘Raphael Mendola’ pencil 1 2 3

4

5

6 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

See letter to Raphael Meldola, 23 January [1872] and n. 5. Arthur Gardiner Butler. Some of Meldola’s species names differ from the names that were supplied by Fritz Müller on the sheets of specimens that he had sent CD (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Fritz Müller, 14 June 1871 and the plates of butterfly wings facing pp. 442 and 443). Adolph Gerstaecker had identified the speciess for Müller. The specimen described here as Daptonoura limnoria? was not given a name on Müller’s sheet, but Müller referred to it as Daptonoura lycimnia (now Melete lycimnia) in his paper on mimicry in Leptalis (F. Müller 1876, p. 8). The mimicking species (1 a ) was given as Leptalis melite ~ by Müller. Leptalis psamathe is not a published name; the original combination was Papilio psamanthe and the species is now Enantia lina. However, the specimen is probably Enantia clarissa (formerly Dismorphia melite), a species found in Santa Catarina, Brazil. Acraea thalia is a synonym of Actinote thalia (for more on interspecific mimicry in Actinote and the identification of Müller’s published specimens of A. thalia, see Francini and Penz 2006). Müller had identified 2a as Leptalis with no specific epithet. Leptalis acraeina is not a published name; the original combination was Phyciodes acraeina and the species is now known as Castilia perilla, but it is not found in Brazil. The species was referred to as Leptalis thalia in F. Müller 1876, but not published. In a later paper Müller noted the close resemblance between Acraea thalia and Eueides pavana (F. Müller 1878, p. 222). Müller had identified 3a as Leptalis with no specific epithet. Leptalis astynome is now Dismorphia astynome; Müller discussed mimicry between Mechanitis lysimnia and L. astynome in F. Müller 1878, p. 222. Eresia lansdorfi (‘langsdorfii’ is an incorrect subsequent spelling) is now sometimes called the false erato in reference to its resemblance to Heliconius erato phyllis (the current name for Heliconia phyllis; the genus name ‘Heliconia’ is an invalid emendation). Ithomia sylvo is now Pteronymia sylvo. Müller had identified the specimens III: 1–9 as males of Leptalis melite and III: 10–13 as females of the same species. See n. 4, above. In his letter of 14 June 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19), Müller had described catching, late in the season, two male Leptalis melite specimens (III: 8) whose colouring did not differ from female specimens. Campanula medium. Brahma is a breed of domestic fowl; silver spangle is a colour that occurs in both Polish and Hamburgh fowls. CD discussed domestic fowls in Variation 1: 225–75 and crossing in Variation 2: 85–99. Meldola refers to Butler’s ‘Monograph of the Lepidoptera hitherto included in the genus Elymnias’ (A. G. Butler 1871, pp. 518–19). Meldola refers to Roland Trimen’s paper ‘On some remarkable mimetic analogies among African butterflies’ (Trimen 1868, pp. 518–19). Papilio ridleyanus is now Graphium ridleyanus (the acraea swordtail). Unlike most species of swordtail, it lacks caudal appendages and its palpi are yellow.

From J. R. Martin 27 March 1872 The | Artizans, Labourers, & General Dwellings Co., | Limited. 26, Ramsden Estate Buildings, | Huddersfield, 27 March. 1872. Sir, I dont know whether your attention may have been drawn to a Leader which appeared in Saturday’s “Daily Telegraph” on the subject of our Company. But it has

March 1872

125

occurred to me you might like to peruse it, & I therefore beg to hand you a Copy of that Journal with the Article marked.1 I have to thank you for your much valued note in which you express good wishes for the Company’s success.2 I regret that we were deprived of the honor of your distinguished presence at the Soirée, but I know well how invaluable is your every moment, & I am very sorry to learn that the state of your health is such that it would not permit of your gratifying the wishes of the Directors, even if there had been no other difficulty. I sincerely trust you may be speedily & completely restored. We had a most enthusiastic Meeting, about 300 Ladies & Gentlemen interested in the Society being present. Lord Shaftesbury presided, supported by Archbishop Manning, Canon Woodruff, Sir Curtis Lampson & other eminent Persons. 3 The Secretary announced that since the Books were closed for the past Financial Year, on the 2nd. March, there had been applications for shares to the am t. of £9000. One Gentleman, John B Wanklyn Esquire of Mayfield, Cheam, Sutton, Surrey, took 100 shares last week, & Sir Curtis Lampson, with whom I had a long Conversation in London last week, will I think take a like Interest. I have just received an application from Mr. Wm. Tipping MP for Stockport for 20 shares. Several of our principal Shareholders, including Mr. Thomas Carlyle, Archbishop Manning &c have doubled their shares. We are making an Appeal to all our Shareholders to increase their holdings, & we have received but 2 or 3 unfavorable replies so far. It is most important that no one should take shares without satisfying himself of the genuineness & safety of the Investment, without a knowledge that it pays a moderate rate of Interest, & is in all respects perfectly bonâ fide. I have the fullest confidence in asserting that the Investment fulfils these conditions, & I therefore have the less delicacy in asking a further extension of your confidence by making your shares into 20. 4 I beg to hand you a Report of statement of A/cs. for the past year in the Commercial World.5 I have left Liverpool temporarily to take the management of the Company’s Business in this County. May I therefore ask you kindly to oblige me by addressing your much esteemed reply to me at Huddersfield? I have the honor to hand you a List of our present principal Patrons. 6 Since I took the liberty to address you in October last Mr. Tyndall,7 Sir Charles Wheatstone, Mr. John Forster,8 Mr. Martin Tupper & General Sabine9 have taken shares through me. With profound respect & very humble esteem, | I have the honor to be, | Sir, | Your Most Obliged & Very Obedient | Servant, | J. Royle Martin. To | Charles R. Darwin Esquire FRS. DCL10 | &c &c &c | Down, | Beckenham. DAR 171: 54 1

2

The enclosure has not been found. The article Martin refers to was a report on the fifth annual soirée of the Artizans, Labourers, & General Dwellings Company, which was held on 20 March 1872 at the Westminster Palace Hotel (Daily Telegraph, 23 March 1872, p. 5). The company was set up to provide housing for the working class (Artizans’ & General Properties Company Ltd [1967].) CD’s letter has not been found.

126 3

4

5 6 7 8 9 10

March 1872

Anthony Ashley Cooper, seventh earl of Shaftesbury, was president of the Artizans, Labourers, & General Dwellings Company (Daily Telegraph, 23 March 1872, p. 5). Henry Edward Manning was the archbishop of Westminster; Thomas Woodroffe was canon residentiary of Winchester. Martin also refers to Curtis Miranda Lampson. CD purchased ten shares worth £100 in September 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to J. R. Martin, 15 September 1871 and n. 2). No further purchase of shares is recorded in CD’s Investment book (Down House MS). The report has not been found. The list has not been found. John Tyndall. John Cooper Forster. Edward Sabine. DCL: Doctor of Civil Law (the highest public honour bestowed by the University of Oxford). CD was offered an honorary degree in 1870, but declined on the grounds of ill health (see Correspondence vol. 18, letter from Robert Cecil, 7 June 1870 and n. 1).

From Francis Galton [before 28 March 1872]1

Leamington— Sunday

My dear Darwin On Tuesday or Wedy. I will write about the rabbits.2 I am not quite sure, where they can best be bestowed until returning to town & seeing my stock.—wh: have not even yet been operated on (owing to trouble about instruments, due from Germany) How curious those changes are, in the colour of the silver greys. The fact of their turning out of different shades of grey is nothing unusual; at all events, in the particular breed to wh: these belong, for Mr. Royds3 (the rabbit fancier from whom I first got them, always insisted upon the fact of the shades being very variable and said that the fanciers had recently changed their taste from dark silver grey to light. You asked me about Himalayas,4 the assertion I have more than once heard, is that any breed of silver grey is liable (without crossing) to throw Himalayas whether these revert, I don’t know, for when I asked, I was told that they were not kept & studied. One breed, I had from Mr. Rayson,5 a rabbit fancier in Yorkshire, was very apt, as he told me, to throw Himalayas. Some times they were yellow with black tips & sometimes white with black tips. One of my own breeding, from his stock was a yellow Himalaya, & at first I hoped it might be successful mongrelisation. About Dr. Butler and the curious inherited trick— I shall be glad to amend & fortify the statement I sent you, for I have cross questioned the whole family & the grand child is now regularly under observation. I will send you the results when I have them— the trick is still more curious than I thought, for it occurs in D r. Montague6 Incomplete DAR 159: 114 CD ANNOTATIONS 0.3 My dear . . . to light. 1.8] crossed pencil 3.1 About Dr . . . . Montague 3.4] crossed pencil Top of letter: ‘Armitage’ pencil

March 1872 1 2 3 4 5 6

127

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Francis Galton, 28 March 1872. Galton’s letter about the rabbits has not been found. For more on Galton’s experiments with rabbits, see letter to Francis Galton, 23 January [1872] and n. 2. Ernest Edmund Molyneux Royds. CD’s query has not been found. Charles Rayson. In his letter of 22 December 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19), Galton had described George Butler’s habit of putting his arm across the top of his head when sleeping in a chair. His arm would eventually drop, hitting his nose and waking him. Galton had noted that Butler’s son, Henry Montagu Butler, and granddaughter, Agnes Isabel Butler, inherited this habit. See also Expression, pp. 33–4 n. 8.

From Francis Galton 28 March 1872

5 Bertie Terrace | Leamington March 28 /72

My dear Darwin I enclose the revised statement about the curious trick in Dr Butler’s family.1 I questioned his widow only a fortnight before her death all his 7 children his son’s wife & her 2 nurses.2 There is no contradictory evidence whatever. Now about Mr. Crookes I have been twice at his house in Séance with Miss Fox who puts her powers as a friend, entirely at his disposal & once at a noisy but curious seance Sergeant Cox!3 I can only say, as yet, that I am utterly confounded with the results—and am very disinclined to discredit them. Crookes is working deliberately and well. There is not the slightest excitement during the sittings, but they are conducted in a chatty easy way. & though a large part of what occurs might be done if the mediums were free, yet, I dont see how it can be done when they are held hand & foot, as is the case. I shall go on with the matter as far as I can, but I see it is no use to try to enquire thoroughly unless you have (as Crookes has) complete possession of a first class medium.—4 The whole rubbish of spiritualism seems to me to stand & fall together. All orders are given by raps. Levitation—luminous appearances hands. —writings.—& the like are all part of one complete system. The following is confidential at present. What will interest you very much, is that Crookes has needles (of some material not yet divulged) which he hangs in vacuo in little bulbs of glass. When the finger is approached the needle moves, sometimes by attraction sometimes by repulsion. It is not affected at all when the operator is jaded but it moves most rapidly when he is bright & warm & comfortable, after dinner. Now different people have different power over the needle & Miss Fox has extraordinary power. I moved it myself, & saw Crookes move it, but I did not see Miss Fox (mem the warmth of the hand cannot radiate through glass)

128

March 1872

Francis Galton in middle life. Karl Pearson, The life, letters and labours of Francis Galton (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1914–30), vol. 1 plate LXI. By permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library.

March 1872

129

Crookes believes he has hold of quite a grand discovery & told me & shewed me what I have described, quite confidentially but I asked him if I might say something about it to you & he gave permission. I ca’nt write at length to describe more particularly the extraordinary things of my last seance on Monday. I had hold in one of my hands of both hands of Miss Fox’s companion who also rested both her feet on my instep & Crookes had equally firm possession of Miss Fox. The other people present were his wife & her mother5 & all hands were joined yet paper went skimming in the dark about the room & after the word “Listen” was rapped out the pencil was heard (in the complete darkness) to be writing at a furious rate under the table, between Crookes & his wife & when that was over & we were told (rapped) to light up the paper was written over — all 4 sides of a bit of marked note paper (marked for the occasion & therefore known to be blank when we began) with very respectable platitudes— rather above the level of Martin Tupper’s composition and signed “Benjamin Franklin”!! 6 The absurdity on the one hand & the extraordinary character of the thing on the other quite staggers me. Wondering what I shall yet see & learn I remain at present quite passive with my eyes & ears open | Very sincerely your’s Francis Galton DAR 105: A46–9 1 2

3

4 5 6

The enclosure has not been found, but see the letter from Francis Galton, [before 28 March 1872] and n. 6. Sarah Maria Butler died on 24 February 1872 (England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1861–1941 (Ancestry.com, accessed 7 February 2012)). ‘His son’s wife’: Georgina Isabella Butler, wife of Henry Montagu Butler. Her nurse was Emma Wale and the nursery maid was Elizabeth Greenway. William Crookes was known for his investigations of mediums (see letter to Francis Galton, 23 January [1872] and n. 3). Catharine Fox was an American medium. Edward William Cox was a serjeant-atlaw (barrister of the highest rank). For more on spiritualism and Crookes’s experiments, see Oppenheim 1985 and Noakes 2002 and 2004. Galton probably alludes to Daniel Dunglas Home, a medium who was intensively studied by Crookes (ODNB). Ellen Crookes and Elizabeth Humphrey. Galton alludes to Martin Farquhar Tupper’s Proverbial philosophy (Tupper 1838). The book and its author were parodied in the comic press from the 1860s and Tupper’s name became a byword for banality (ODNB).

To Raphael Meldola 28 March 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Mar 28. 1872 Dear Sir I thank you for your information on various subjects. The point to which you allude seems to me very obscure, & I hardly venture to express an opinion on it. 1 My first impression is that the colour of an imitating form might be modified to any

130

March 1872

extent without any tendency being given to the retention of ancient structural peculiarities. The difficulty of the subject seems to me to follow from our complete ignorance of the causes which have led to the generic differences between the imitating & imitated forms. The subject however seems worth investigating. If the imitator habitually lives in company with the imitated, it w d be apt to follow in some respects the same habits of life, & this perhaps wd lead to the retention or acquirement of some of the same structural characters. I wish you all success in your essay & remain | dear Sir, | yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin LS Oxford University Museum of Natural History (Hope Entomological Collections 1350) 1

See letter from Raphael Meldola, 26 March 1872.

From Leonard Darwin [29 March 1872]1 Dear Father The following is the solid content of the box, which I forgot to measure last week. 211. 44 Cubic inches Your affec son. | Leonard Darwin Iron box of earth. Measurement after being well dried before the fire. = 180 .8 Cubic inches. This shews that it has diminished 10 per cent on the original earth, without taking into account internal shrinking, although cracks were visible on the surface. 2 DAR 162: 75 CD note: March. 29.1872. Leonard Earth dug out of ground & thrown up in fortification increase of  above 1 2

3

1 th 12

of bulk.—3

The date is established by CD’s note. In Earthworms, pp. 161–2, where he gave measurements of dried earth by weight rather than volume, CD concluded that the largest castings were produced on the poorest soils, indicating that worms had to swallow a greater amount of earth on poor land in order to obtain enough food. A further set of calculations, made by George Howard Darwin on the letter, estimates that the loss in 1 . volume of the dried earth is approximately 16

To F. C. Donders 29 March 1872

Down | Beckenham | Kent March 29. | 1872

My dear Professor Donders In your letter about the eyes of a person lost in meditation, which interested me so much, you shew that the eyes are not fixed, & that the lines of vision even diverge;

March 1872

131

the divergence being greater, the more the eyes are upturned. You consider this divergence as passive, or as due to the relaxation “of the internal muscles”. 1 Now I am anxious to learn which are these muscles; & why, when all the muscles are passive, do these pull the eyeballs, & the more outwards the more the eyes are upturned? Are they stronger than the other muscles, so as to conquer them when all are equally passive or relaxed? I am the more anxious to understand this, from what Sir C. Bell of the rolling upwards & inwards of the eyes during sleep, fainting &c He accounts for this movement by the four voluntary straight muscles ceasing to act as consciousness fails, & being then overmastered by the oblique muscles, which he says are little or not at all under the power of the will.2 Is this correct? I ask because I have heard that Bell was mistaken about the oblique muscles. But what most concerns & perplexes me is, that according to Bell, when consciousness begins to fail & the muscles of the eye are relaxed, the eyeballs are turned upwards, & inwards;3 where as you have shewn that when the mind is lost in meditation & the muscles are relaxed, the eyeballs are turned outwards, & so much the more outwards the more the eyeballs are upturned. If during incipient sleep or fainting the eyeballs had rolled outwards, the 2 cases wd. have been harmonious. Now will you forgive me for being so very troublesome, & before long try to remove my difficulty? I am now getting on pretty well with my essay on Expression, but I have been sadly delayed by ill health all last summer & Autumn. 4 With cordial thanks for your former kind & to me invaluable assistance, believe me | my dear Professor Donders | yours very sincerely | Charles Darwin Copy American Philosophical Society (B/D25.322) 1 2 3 4

See Correspondence vol. 19, letter from F. C. Donders, 16 June 1871. Charles Bell had described the action of the eye under such circumstances as ‘not a voluntary one’ and ‘irresistible’ (Bell 1844, p. 102). CD scored this section of the text in his copy (see Marginalia 1: 48). See Bell 1844, p. 185. CD’s health had been poor during the summer of 1871 and a month-long vacation had done nothing to help. He wrote his publisher, John Murray, that he had been so unwell for six weeks that he could do ‘absolutely nothing’ (Correspondence vol. 19, letter to John Murray, 23 September [1871]).

To Francis Galton 29 March [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. March 29th My dear Galton I think that I have never been more interested in my life than by your letter. It takes one’s breath away, & I am much more inclined to believe in some wonderful force from your account than if I had been myself a witness. The case of the needle in the vacuum (which I will not mention) is incomparably in my opinion the most important. I hope that Mr Crookes will stick to this & work it out, & that you may

132

March 1872

continue to be a witness with, as you say, eyes & ears very open.2 It is rather dreadful to think what we may have to believe. Very many thanks about the case of inheritance. I cannot do better than give your own words. If I do not hear to the contrary, I will insert “female” in passage about the 3d. generation3 I thank you most heartily for your letter | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Cleveland Health Sciences Library (Robert M. Stecher collection) 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Francis Galton, 28 March 1872. See letter from Francis Galton, 28 March 1872 and n. 3. The reference is to William Crookes. See letter from Francis Galton, 28 March 1872. CD quoted Galton on the inheritance of a characteristic arm gesture in Expression, pp. 33–4 n. 8. The quoted text does not match precisely the text of letters from Galton since CD did not use any of the names of the individuals referred to, but see Correspondence vol. 19, letters from Francis Galton, 22 December 1871 and [after 22 December 1871], and this volume, letter from Francis Galton, [before 28 March 1872] and n. 6. In the passage referred to, CD wrote, ‘One of his children, a girl’ (Expression, pp. 34 n. 8).

From Thomas Rivers 29 March 1872 Bonks Hill, | Sawbridgeworth. Mar 29/72 My Dear Sir/ I have much pleasure in finding you still full of experimental life & have sent you two vines for acceptance with my best wishes One is a variety of Frontignan with green leaves this is to be the stock the other is a purple leaved sort the Chasselas Noir this is the scion. 1 Pardon me for giving you some instruction— The stock should be shortened to 3 feet & placed in heat when its shoots are from one to two inches long it is ready to insert The scion vine should be kept out of doors & as dormant as possible—in a northern aspect without this precaution “bleeding”2 will take place The best covering for the graft is a lump of tenacious clay the size of an elongated pullet’s egg & over this a lump of moss the size of a turkey’s egg or so should be bound with lint & this should be kept moist till the union has taken place. The scion vine should be shortened so as to have 2, 3 or 4 buds above the junctions The operation is very simple yet as usual much work is required. I am now an old man & am suffering from a late attack of influenza 75 is not an age to recuperate but I am still interested in culture & in experiments now carried on by my son3 for I am now an idle man the seedling crossed fruits are of high interest but the thought will intrude “shall I see the end of these matters”? Still I am free from pain & infirmity & have the “mens sana & I am thankful for the prosperity I have long enjoyed I am My Dear Sir | Yrs. ever truly | Thos. Rivers In the Revue Horticule for this month is the figure of a plum-peach, Prunus Simonii with the flesh of a plum & a rough stone, peach-like this is from China. 4 We

March 1872

133

shall have the same hybrid here ere long a seedling gage plum last spring had its young fruit covered with down it was from blossoms crossed by my son with the pollen of the peach thus dropped off I have forgotten to add that the purple colour is only brought out by exposure to the open air in August or September The vines should be with you to morrow DAR 176: 173 CD ANNOTATIONS 2.1 Frontignan] underl pencil 2.2 Chasselas Noir] underl pencil 1 2 3

4

Frontignan and Chasselas noir are grapevine varieties now more commonly known as Muscat blanc à petits grains and Dolcetto, respectively. Bleeding is the extravasation of sap, such as occurs in vines injured in the spring, during leaf expansion ( Jackson 1900). Thomas Francis Rivers. Thomas Rivers (senior) was cited frequently in Variation, especially on the characteristics of graft hybrids. For CD’s earlier correspondence with Rivers on graft hybrids, see Correspondence vols. 11 and 14. Rivers refers to an article in Revue horticole 44 (1872): 111–12 on Prunus simonii, the apricot-plum.

From J. D. Hooker to Charles Lyell 30 March 1872 Royal Gardens Kew March 30 /72 My dear Lyell Prof Braun of Berlin has urged me to procure signatures to the enclosed approval of the new rules for the Leopold: Acad:1 Braun is so sound & good a man that I have no hesitation in signing a similar copy to that enclosed, & returning it as addressed. If you do not object to sign enclosed copy, please do so, & forward it with this note its to C. Darwin to sign, who will post the paper to Dresden as addressed 2 Ever yrs | Jos D Hooker DAR 103: 107–8 1

2

Hooker refers to the Academia Caesarea Leopoldino-Carolina Germanica Naturae Curiosorum (the German academy of sciences), known as Leopoldina. The new rules were introduced in order to establish a permanent home for the academy, which, since its inception, had moved its location to wherever the current president was based. As part of the reorganisation, in 1872 the new post of deputy (Stellvertreter) was created and Alexander Carl Heinrich Braun was chosen for the post (see Berg und Kaasch 2010). CD became a member of Leopoldina in 1857; it was the first foreign society to elect CD to membership (see Correspondence vol. 6, letter to Secretary, Academia Caesarea Leopoldino-Carolina, 8 September [1857] and n. 2).

134

March 1872

From V. O. Kovalevsky 30 March 1872

Berlin | Behrenstrasse 13. 30. March. 72.

Dear Sir! It is a pretty long time, I had no news from You, but knowing that Your Home Secretary is gone I did not write fearing to encroach upon Your time which is much better occupied elsewhere then in letter writing. 1 However I am now much interested in the progress of Your new work upon “Expression” and I hope You will entrust it to my care for translation as You have done so kindly with Your former works. 2 I have just a faint hope to come this spring to London to finish in the Britisch Museum something I begun last year, but I am by no means sure of it. 3 I hope Your health is better now then it was at the time of my visit last year.— This winter I began a comparative miology of the Marsupials,4 but schall interrupt it for the summer to do something in Palaeontology and then finish the Marsupials in future winter; I regret I cannot send You a copy of my Anchiterium, as the plates are ready but the letter press is not yet finisched.5 If the work on “Expression” is in progress I should feel extremely obliged for a pair of proofscheets, as I have now every day some free hours which I should like to employ in translation.— With compliments to Mrs Darwin I am | very truly Yours | W. Kowalevsky. DAR 169: 90 1

2 3 4

5

Kovalevsky alludes to CD’s daughter Henrietta Emma Litchfield. Before her marriage in August 1871, Henrietta had helped CD by reading and commenting on his work. CD’s last extant letter to Kovalevsky is that of 2 June [1871] (Correspondence vol. 19). Kovalevsky had translated Variation and Descent into Russian. Expression was published in November 1872 (Freeman 1977). Kovalevsky arrived in London in the middle of June 1872 (Davitashvili 1951, p. 224). While in Jena in the winter of 1871–2, Kovalevsky worked under the supervision of Carl Gegenbaur on the comparative myology of several marsupial genera, including Phascolarctos (wombats), Dasyurus (quolls), Didelphis (American opossums), Thylacinus (Tasmanian wolves), and Macropus (kangaroos and wallabies). Kovalevsky planned to extend this work in order to determine the underlying relationships between marsupial and placental mammals, but he did not publish on the subject (see Davitashvili 1951, pp. 219–21). Kovalevsky refers to his monograph on Anchitherium aurelianense, a fossil horse (Kovalevsky 1872). CD’s copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.

From Francis Galton 31 March 1872

5 Bertie Terrace | Leamington March 31 /72

My dear Darwin Your letter will be a great encouragement to Crookes & I have forwarded it to him to read, telling him what I had written.1

March 1872

135

About the ‘female’—I hesitated a full 10 minutes before inserting the word ‘it’, on the ground that the subject of the story might be identified in after life & that that the knowledge of the trick might damage her marrying value.!2 I do not know if I am over fastidious.— It is purely my own idea—no objection was raised by any of the family. So do entirely as you like. Very sincerely yrs | Francis Galton DAR 105: A52 1 2

See letter to Francis Galton, 29 March [1872]. Galton refers to William Crookes. See letter to Francis Galton, 29 March [1872] and n. 3. In his report to CD (now missing), Galton had evidently hesitated to name the sex of the grandchild mentioned in his letter of [before 28 March 1872] (Agnes Isabel Butler). The ‘trick’ was an arm movement carried out while sleeping.

From James Murie 31 March 1872

50 Georgiana Street | London NW. March 31st. 1872.

Dear Sir May I ask if you will kindly favour me with an expression of your opinion as to my fitness to fill the Chair of General and Comparative Physiology at the Royal Veterinary College here. The Governors have advertised for a Professeur and I am about to become Candidate.1 Besides my published researches which have been more particularly devoted to Comparative Anatomy and Zoology my training in Physiology and the branches connected therewith has been ample. Chemistry I studied with vigour for a long time working at analysis organic and organic so as almost to have prepared myself to follow that instead of anatomical pursuits. I respectively held the Offices of Pathologist to the Glasgow Royal Infirmary— Assistant Conservator Museum Royal College of Surgeons London, Prosector Zool. Soc. and Lecturer on Comp. Anat & Zoology at Middlesex Hospital. Altogether I have devoted some 20 years to Biology in all its phases and with experience as a Teacher, Experimenter &c shall only be too glad to continue my researches and be the instructor of others As I have only just learned of the Vacancy, and find the application testimonials &c have to be sent in by Thursday next (4th. April) I shall feel favoured by an early reply Trusting in your support | I am | Dear Sir | Yours with esteem | James Murie P.S. I owe you an apology for remissness in answering some questions respecting the elevation of the horses tail &c but as I have had much anxiety of late and the subject a difficult one to reply to—I left it aside for the time being.2 Some 2 large Monographs of mine are now printed off and I hope their issue very shortly3 I regret you have not seen them as I am sure they will please JM DAR 171: 322

136 1 2 3

April 1872

The post of professor of physiology, therapeutics, and pharmacy at the Royal Veterinary College was advertised in the British Medical Journal, 30 March 1872, p. 356. No correspondence between CD and Murie regarding the elevation of the tail in horses has been found. Murie probably refers to ‘On the form and structure of the manatee’ (Murie 1870), published in the September 1872 issue of the Transactions of the Zoological Society of London, and ‘On the organisation of the caaing whale’ (Murie 1867), published in the February 1873 issue of the same journal.

From F. C. Donders 1 April 1872 My dear and respected Sir, Sir Ch. Bell’s statement, that the eyeballs are turned upwards and inwards, when consciousness begins to fail, is quite correct; I saw it with remarkable distinctness in a young hysterical person, who was reputed to take scarcely any food, the eyelids being so lean and thin, that even the colour of the iris could be perceived. But his explication is, as you supposed, quite a mistake.1 Bell was not aware of the function of the muscles of the eye. I pointed out (1847), that the oblique are in the same relation to the innervation by the will as the straight, and that a combined action is required in every movement upwards (rectus superior et obliq. inferior) and downwards (rectus inferior et obliquus superior).2 The leading principle of my researches was this; that, in every mechanism, we always ought to determine in the first place the mouvements, and, after these beeing wel determined, in the second place, the muscles, by which they are produced. You may find an abstract of my doctrine (generally adopted) in Soelberg Wells, Treatise on the diseases of the eye. London 1869, p. 548 seqq., which book Mr. Bowman will be happy to send you, at your desire. 3 Now, I think, it is evident, that the mouvement of the eyeballs upwards and inwards, when consciousness begins to fail, is not at all a relaxation of the muscles, but is to be considered as the result of contraction of the r. superior, r. internus and (if the vertical meridian acquires the same inclination as in the normal sight) of the obliquus inferior: Other groups of muscles are also in contraction during the sleep, especially the sphincteres.4 The conditions of failing consciousness by sleep and of being lost in meditation are quite different and correspond to different conditions of the central nervous system. Therefore the innervation of muscles may be also a quite different one. The parallel or even diverging direction of the lines of vision, which accompanies the profound meditation, is indeed a relaxation, as far as the two m. recti externi 5 are never contracted together. If we look upwards in the meantime, there is contraction of the rect. superior and obl. inferior, if to one side, the right for instance, there is contraction of the rectus externus of the right eye and of the rectus internus of the left eye. But looking straight before us, the two recti externi and recti interni may be considered as being relaxed. The active condition is the convergence. It is well known, that a blind eye, which is no longer moved inwards for the purpose of binocular vision, almost always deviates outwards, after a short lapse of time.

April 1872

137

The innervation of the eye-muscles is a most interesting problema. It has been studied in my laboratory two years ago by a Russian, Dr. Woinow. His results are only published in Dutch, Russian and German. 6 They are shortly reproduced in a paper, which I published, some weeks ago, p 13–15, of which I take the liberty to send you a copy. Probably a French abstract of this paper will be published, and I will allow myself to send you also a copy of that.7 You will see, that the innervation, regulated by the corpora quadrigemina,8 is always simultaneous for the two eyes, the double-eye of Hering.9 Now it never succeeds to produce by irritation of the centrum, contraction of the two recti externi beyond the normal abduction.— Of course, we can imagine that in the parallel position of the lines of vision both, recti externi and interni, remain in a state of contraction; but this would only represent an increase of the elastic forces in equilibrium, which has no object. At all event, if a slight contraction (more than tonus and elastic tension) remains, it will be the same in the mm. externi et interni,—neither prevailing, when the mind is lost in meditation. Just now, writing this letter, I find, that holding an object near to the eyes, I can, in alternating fixation, much more rapidly converge for binocular vision of this object, than diverge for binocular vision of a remote object: in the last case the double images approach even with diminishing rapidity, evidently because the contraction of the external muscles terminates here.10 It will not be necessary to remark that in every position of the eye the elastic forces of the contracted and relaxed (but extended) muscles are equal, being in equilibrio. Now I admit, that, without contraction by innervation the elastic tensions of the internal and external straight muscles determine nearly the parallel direction of the lines of vision (in normal eyes), and that, looking downwards, the direction becomes a little convergent, looking upwards, a little divergent. This difference corresponds to the fact, that we look generally downwards for seeing near objects, with convergence, and upwards, for seeing remote objects, without convergence. Indeed, it seems sufficiently proved, that the direction of the external and internal muscles, which changes a little with the mouvements of the eyeballs upwards and downwards, explains the indicated difference,—though I could not deny, that difference of innervation also is not quite excluded. Allow me, dear Sir, to add a last observation: it is this, that the divergence, in question, is very slight, and certainly in some eyes des not or scarcely exist. Moreover, you will have observed, that I always speak of the lines of vision, not of the optic or corneal axes. They do not coincide, and the difference in different eyes is rather important. Now the expression depends on the direction of the corneal axes, not directly on that of the lines of vision. Where the lines of vision are parallel, myopic eyes seem to converge, hypermetropic (the inverse refraction of myopic) seem to diverge. If you wish to enter in this question, you find some remarks about it in my book: on the anomalies of accommodation and refraction of the eye, p. 248 seqq.— 11 I hope, my dear and most honoured Sir, to have proved, that I have the best will, to give you every information, you like, from the physiological department. It is a pleasure and an honour for me to do so. If now I do not succeed and if I fall in too

138

April 1872

great prolixity, Let me hope, that you will excuse me. Next time, I will try to be more concise. I heard with the greatest pleasure that your health is now much better than it was, and that you are now getting on very well with your essay. 12 Believe me, my dear Mister Darwin, with great respect, | Yours very sincerely | Donders Utrecht, 1 April 1872.— a tricennium after the 1 April 1572,—the most memorable day in our history, so nicely related, as You observed, by Motley13 DAR 162: 230 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.2 is quite correct;] underl blue crayon 1.5 Bell . . . eye. 1.6] ‘[ Prof Donders Expression]’ added pencil 1.6 I pointed out] underl blue crayon 2.2 is . . . muscles,] underl blue crayon; scored blue crayon 3.1 The conditions] opening square bracket blue crayon 3.5 is indeed . . . together. 3.6] underl blue crayon 3.10 The active . . . convergence.] underl blue crayon 3.10 It is . . . time. 3.12] scored blue crayon 4.7 simultaneous] ‘simultaneous’ added above pencil 4.13 tonus] ‘tonus’ added above pencil 6.1 the divergence . . . slight, 6.2] scored blue crayon 6.2 very slight,] underl blue crayon 6.3 lines of vision,] underl blue crayon 1 2

3

4 5 6

7

8

See letter to F. C. Donders, 29 March 1872 and n. 2. Donders refers to Charles Bell and Bell 1844, pp. 102–3. In an essay on the theory of the movements of the human eye (Donders 1848, pp. 137–142), Donders had shown how the oblique and straight (rectus) muscles worked in conjunction to produce different eye movements. The ophthalmic surgeon William Bowman was a friend of both Donders and CD (see Correspondence vol. 17, letter from William Bowman, 3 September [1869]). John Soelberg Wells had studied with Donders and was also Bowman’s clinical assistant between 1860 and 1867 (Plarr 1930). Donders refers to the sphincters of the iris, which function to constrict the pupil. He also refers to the superior rectus and the medial rectus (rectus internus) muscles of the eye. Donders refers to the lateral rectus (musculus rectus externus) muscles of the eye. Mikhail Mikhailovich Woinow had published an article on binocular vision in which he reported that the innervation for accommodation (the process by which the eye changes focus as distance changes) was not exactly the same as that for the movements of the eyes for binocular vision (Woinow 1870, pp. 210–11). Donders refers to his paper ‘Die Projection der Gesichtserscheinungen nach Richtungslinien’ (projection of visual phenomena along lines of direction; Donders 1871). CD’s annotated copy, in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL, contains a handwritten English translation of pages 13 to 15. CD’s copy of the abstract in French (Donders 1872) has not been found. Donders concluded that different innervations controlled directional eye movements (i.e. up and down or left and right) and movement of adduction and abduction. The corpora quadrigemina (quadruplet bodies) are reflex centres of the brain involved in vision and hearing.

April 1872 9 10 11 12 13

139

Ewald Hering had argued that the musculature of both eyes reacted simultaneously to the same impulse as though there were only one eye (the ‘Doppelauge’; see Hering 1977, p. 17). See Donders 1871, pp. 5–6 n. See Donders 1864, pp. 248–50. See letter to F. C. Donders, 29 March 1872. Donders refers to Expression. In his Rise of the Dutch republic (Motley 1855, 2: 352–4), John Lothrop Motley described the capture of Brill (Brielle) by Dutch rebels on 1 April 1572 as laying the foundation of the Dutch Republic. There is no mention of Motley in CD’s surviving letters.

To Briton Riviere 1 April 1872 Down, Beckenham, Kent April 1st. 72 Dear Sir As I presume that your picture is now finished I hope that you will allow me to thank you for your very great kindness in saying that you would try, when well enough, whether you could make two rough pencil sketches of a dog in the two attitudes explained in the notes, which I again send. 1 A German artist, lately dead whose name I forget, made for me through Mr Wolf the two enclosed drawings, but they seem to me so little expressive that I shall not use them. 2 The hostile dog is I think much the best of the two, and would perhaps do with a little alteration. I do not think that the enclosed photograph, about which you spoke to Miss Bonham Carter, shows what I mean.3 A dog approaching another dog from a little distance with hostile feelings always holds, I think, his head lower than in the drawing; and his ears are always pointed forwards. There is no trace in the photograph of the eminently characteristic bristling of the hair on the neck and back. I went, at your suggestion, to the two most likely photographers about taking a dog in the act of caressing his master; but they said they had no opportunity, and after reflection were evidently convinced that if they had they could not succeed. From what I hear that you say about the great difficulty of drawing a caressing dog, I shall perhaps have to give up the two desired illustrations; but I regret this as I have two good drawings on wood of a savage and caressing cat done by Mr Wood who draws for the Field. 4 Mr. W. is not very familiar with dogs, and seems very doubtful whether he could represent what I have described in the enclosed notes; nor am I in the least surprised at this, now that I have heard what you said to Miss B. Carter on the subject. Pray forgive me for troubling you with this long letter and I remain my dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin Copy DAR 147: 318 1

Riviere exhibited Daniel in 1872 at the Royal Academy (ODNB). CD may have met Riviere while in London from 13 February until 21 March 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). The enclosure has not been found, but there are two pages of notes, in Emma Darwin’s hand, on the appearance of a dog when hostile and pleased, in DAR 53.2: 99.

140 2

3

4

April 1872

The enclosures have not been found. The German artist has not been identified. Joseph Wolf provided CD with drawings for Expression (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Joseph Wolf, 3 March 1871). In DAR 53.1: C164, there are two drawings of a dog, initialled ‘J.W.’; instructions have been written on them, probably by Francis Darwin, regarding aspects of the drawing that needed alteration. For more on these and other animal drawings made by Wolf and Riviere, see Prodger 2009, pp. 144–55. The enclosure was evidently a photograph of the painting Alexander and Diogenes by Edwin Henry Landseer (see letter from Briton Riviere, 3 April 1872). The photograph is in DAR 53.1: C141. CD had received information from Riviere on expression in dogs through Elinor Mary Bonham-Carter (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Briton Riviere to E. M. Bonham Carter, 26 June 1871). The woodcuts of cats made from drawings by Thomas W. Wood are in DAR 53.1: 160–1 and appeared in Expression, pp. 58–9. The Field was a weekly newspaper. In Expression, pp. 52–5, CD used woodcuts from drawings of hostile and affectionate dogs by both Riviere and Arthur Dampier May.

To Georg von Seidlitz 1 April 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Ap 1. 1872 Dear Sir I am much indebted to you for yr kindness in having sent me copies of your Literatur & Tables sur Descendenztheorie, taken from y r work, Die Darwinsche Theorie.1 I read this some little time since with very great interest, as it seemed to me very well done, though taking too favourable a view of my work; it contained a considerable amount of matter new to me. I know that I intended to write to you on the subject, but as I have to write many letters I cannot remember whether I ever did so. 2 With the papers just recd there came an essay on my last book, written I suppose by your father, & I particularly request that you will present my sincere thanks for his kindness.3 I beg leave to remain | dear Sir | yours faithfully & obliged | Ch. Darwin LS Zoologische Staatssammlung München 1

2 3

CD refers to a thirty-page bibliography of works dealing with Darwinian theory (‘Literatur’), together with additional copies of a table describing various transmutation theories including his own. These are bound together with CD’s annotated copy of Die Darwin’sche Theorie (G. Seidlitz 1871) in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 753). There was no earlier letter to Seidlitz (see letter from Georg von Seidlitz, 22 April 1872). An offprint of Karl von Seidlitz’s review of the German translation of Descent (K. Seidlitz 1871; Carus trans. 1871–2) is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Karl von Seidlitz had corresponded with CD in 1869 (Correspondence vol. 17, letter from Karl von Seidlitz, 22 March 1869).

To James Murie 2 April 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. April 2nd. 1872 My dear Sir, I have much pleasure in expressing my high estimation of your great knowledge,

April 1872

141

as shewn by your various publications, of the comparative anatomy of all the higher animals. I cannot speak with respect to your knowledge of physiology, but as an intimate acquaintance with Structure in all its details is of such manifest importance in this respect, and as you have proved your accurate powers of observation, I cannot doubt that you would be well fitted for the Chair of General & Comparative Physiology of the Royal Veterinary College; and I hope that you may be successful in obtaining it.1 Believe me my dear Sir | Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin To | Dr. Murie LS(A) Linnean Society (Murie Papers 281) 1

See letter from James Murie, 31 March 1872. Murie evidently did not succeed in his application. He was medical officer at the Bethnal House Lunatic Asylum, Cambridge Road, London, from 1871 to 1874 (Medical directory).

From E. A. Darwin 3 April [1872]1 Dear Charles Mr Moran asked Mr Lawrence to convey the enclosed letter to you, as he did not like to do so directly without some one assuring you that he was respectable. 2 I have written Mr Moran’s address if you send any acknowlednt to him as Mr Lawrence evidently hoped you would. ED 3 Ap. DAR 105: B81 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Charles Nordhoff, 27 February 1872. The enclosure was the letter from Charles Nordhoff, 27 February 1872. Benjamin Moran was the secretary of the American legation in London (ANB). Mr Lawrence has not been identified.

From W. W. Reade 3 April 1872

11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington April 3.—72

My dear Sir I enclose a proof of the passage relating to yourself in my preface. 1 I thought afterwards it would be better on your account not to say anything that wd. lead to the impression that my book contains a correct exposition of the Darwinian theory. At the same time I wished to convey so far as cd. be done my literary obligations to you—yet without making you responsible for my statements some of wh. are doubtless

142

April 1872

erroneous, & for my opinions with some of wh. you will I think disagree, or at all events you will not wish to be identified with them. If however there is anything in this passage which you dislike I will alter it— The statement you were kind enough to write will not be thrown away—2 I dare say I shall often travel over this ground again & I shall take care to put prominently forward the fact that according to your theory the faculties & affections though founded on selfishness pass out of the selfish stage— I quite understood that from your book, & I think I have expressed as much in my work—3 It will be out in ten days or so— Do not trouble to answer this unless you wish the Preface altered. The minor points I allude to are chiefly questions in relation to Sex. Select. producing dark skins &c. though I fully see its power as a modifying agent.4 Sex. select. among the Africans acts in this way—the chiefs selecting women to their taste—but no doubt in the semi-human period the females selected, I remain | yours very truly | Winwood Reade DAR 176: 58 1

2 3

4

The enclosure has not been found, but Reade refers to the preface of his book The martyrdom of man. Reade noted that he disagreed with CD about some statements made in Descent (see Reade 1872, pp. iv– v). The statement referred to has not been found. Reade may have received it when he visited CD in London on 19 March 1872 (see letter from W. W. Reade, 18 March [1872]). In Reade 1872, p. 445, Reade stated that moral sense developed according to Darwinian law and argued, ‘The moral sense is founded on sympathy, and sympathy is founded on self-preservation.’ He added that for gregarious animals, including humans, self-preservation was dependent on the preservation of the herd. For CD’s argument for the social basis of the moral sense, see Descent 1: 70–106. In Reade 1872, p. 423, Reade maintained that racial differences were the result of differences in climate and food, and further, that distinctions among races were unimportant and external. Reade had also presented this view in his letter of 12 September 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19). See also letter from W. W. Reade, 12 March 1872 and n. 6.

To Thomas Rivers 3 April 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Ap. 3. 1872 My dear Sir I am very much obliged for yr kind present of the vines, & for all the information which you have been so good as to give me.1 I fear that the experiment will be more difficult than I had expected. I return with many thanks by this post the periodical about the Amygdalus—2 I am glad to hear that your health keeps good, & as your mind is so full of knowledge I dare say you will be able to occupy yourself— With many thanks | believe me | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS John Wilson (catalogue 61) 1

See letter from Thomas Rivers, 29 March 1872. Rivers had sent two vines, together with instructions for grafting one to the other.

April 1872 2

143

CD refers to an article in Revue horticole 44 (1872): 111–12 on the apricot-plum, Prunus simonii (see letter from Thomas Rivers, 29 March 1872). Amygdalus was the genus of peaches and almonds; it is now subsumed within Prunus, which also includes plums, apricots, and cherries. In Linnaean systematics, Prunus was originally restricted to plums and apricots.

From Briton Riviere 3 April 1872

16 Addison Road, | Kensington. W. April 3/72

Dear Sir I shall be very glad indeed if I can succeed in drawing the two expressions that you want.1 I think that I understand your descriptions perfectly, whether I can carry them out is another question. Will you kindly ask your wood engraver2 to send me a couple of blocks of the size required, as if I can manage the expressions I may as well put them at once onto the wood. This will be no inconvenience to me & will I think be better for the drawings. I quite understand your objections to Landseers “Alexander” in reference to expression No 1.3 Trusting that I shall not cause delay & then fail in my part of the work I am Dear Sir | Yours truly | Briton Riviere The German drawing shall be taken care of 4 Charles Darwin Esq DAR 176: 175 CD ANNOTATION End of letter: ‘Orpington’ pencil 1 2 3

4

See letter to Briton Riviere, 1 April 1872 and n. 1. James Davis Cooper engraved the woodblocks in Expression (see Expression, p. 26). Riviere refers to the figure of the white dog (‘Alexander’) in the painting ‘Alexander and Diogenes’ by Edwin Henry Landseer. The expression referred to as ‘No 1’ was of a dog in a hostile attitude (see letter to Briton Riviere, 1 April 1872 and n. 1). See letter to Briton Riviere, 1 April 1872 and n. 2.

From Chauncey Wright 3 April 1872 Cambridge Mass. April 3. 1872 My dear Mr Darwin I sent you about a fortnight ago copies of my paper on Phyllotaxy. 1 It took a much longer time than I believed it possibly could to get this paper through the press; but the delay was partly due to my own fault in avoiding the disagreeable work of driving the printer. The first seven pages and the last third of the paper (from p 400) would, I think, be intelligible without the intermediate mathematical discussions; or might at least furnish an adequate motive for the effort of wading through them. The

144

April 1872

diagram appended will, I believe, by graphically representing these discussions, be of some aid in making them clearer. I have read with the greatest interest and pleasure most of the additions in the new edition of the “Origin” of which you were so kind as to send me a copy. 2 I was especially delighted with your discussions of Mr. Mivart’s objections. 3 This was partly, perhaps, from having a recent and lively sense of his merits and abilities got by reading two recent papers by him; his reply to Huxley, and more especially a reply to my pamphlet, which will appear in the forthcoming (April) number of our Review. 4 It is in the form of a letter and a direct reply: I have read over the communication hastily in proof sheets, and find myself pilloried—thus early a martyr to the cause! A judicious friend thinks that the somewhat snappish tone of his comments makes them ineffective; but to me the weight of what he says seems quite disproportioned to the vigor of his style. The lawyer and the advocate are even more prominent in this paper than in his book. Passages are picked out and turned from their purpose and into ridicule in the ablest and most adroit manner. I had of course the right to make a rejoinder to so direct a reply, but I have given it up, at least for this number, though I may have something to say next July, especially on the use he makes of the old heathen atheists in his book, and defends in his reply. 5 One point of scientific interest I have noticed, which may be worth developing. In his answer to Huxley he speaks of the action of natural selection as “fixing slight beneficial variations into enduring characters”, for which he thinks it quite incompetent; and in his reply to me he speaks of “the origin, not, of course of the slight variations, but the fixing of these in definite lines and grooves”; and this origin, he thinks, cannot be natural selection.6 And I believe that he is right,—that is, if the more obvious meaning of these expressions are their real ones. They appear to mean that natural selection will not account for the unvarying continuance in succeeding generations of simple changes made in individual structures (whether the change be large or small;) or will not account for the direct conversion of a simple change in a parent into a permanent alteration of its offspring. On the other hand they might possibly be taken as loose expressions of the opinion that this cause will not account for permanent changes in average characters or mid-points about which variations oscillate; and in this case I believe that he is wrong. The first and quite obvious meaning of these expressions has let in light upon his theory and his difficulties which I did not have before. They show how fundamentally the matter has been misconceived either by him or by me. I did not know that it was supposed in the theory of natural selection that variations ever become fixed by any power whatever. The effect of this cause (if I understand the theory,) is not to fix variations; though it must act to determine their averages, and limit their range; and must act indirectly to increase the useful ones and to diminish the injurious; and when these are directly opposed to each other, it must act to shift the average or normal character, instead of fixing it. What fixes species or any characters in them, (when they are fixed), is, I supposed, the continuance of the same conditions for the action of selection, together with the force of long

April 1872

145

continued inheritance. This though trite from frequent repetition appears a very difficult conception for many minds; probably on account of their retaining the old stand-point.7 Mr. Mivart, it would appear, is really speaking of the fixed species of the old philosophy, or about real species as they are commonly called. (Not the same as real kinds in logic.) Natural selection cannot of course account for these figments. Their true explanation is in the fact that naturalists formerly assumed without proper evidence that a change too slow for them to perceive directly could not exist and that characters so far advanced as to become permanently adapted to very general and unchanging conditions of existence, like the numbers and positions of the organs of locomotion in various animals, the whorl and the spiral arrangements of leaves in plants, and similar homological resemblances could never have been vacillating and uncertain ones. Natural Selection does not, of course, account for a fixity that does not exist, but only for the adaptations and the diversities of species, which may or may not be changing at any time. They are fixed only as the “fixed” stars are fixed, of which very many are now known to be slowly, though sensibly moving. Mivart appears to think that unless a species or a character is tied to something it will run away. I have a little difficulty in regard to my paper on Phyllotaxy which perhaps you can help me to solve. Only fifty copies, the author’s edition, are yet ready for publication or are likely to be for some time. The others will appear in the volumes of the Memoirs.8 I wish to dispose of these in the most effective and economical manner; but from my ignorance of the addresses of those to whom it would be best to send them I do not feel able to do so. Dr Gray9 has kindly given me the addresses of some of the more eminent botanists of Europe, and I can add a few other names to the list. If you think of any men of science, especially zoologists to whom it would be well to send the paper I shall be glad to know of them. Twelve or thirteen additional copies would be all that I could thus send abroad. Very sincerely yours | Chauncey Wright DAR 181: 167 1

2 3 4

5

Wright’s paper, ‘The uses and origin of the arrangements of leaves in plants’ (Wright 1871b), presented an explanation of phyllotaxy based on natural selection (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Chauncey Wright, 1 August 1871 and n. 15). CD’s lightly annotated copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection– CUL; he forwarded the other two copies he received to Nature and to the Linnean Society (see letter to Chauncey Wright, 6 April 1872). Wright’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Origin 6th ed. (see Appendix IV). CD had added a substantially new seventh chapter to Origin 6th ed., largely devoted to responding to criticisms made by St George Jackson Mivart in his book Genesis of species (Mivart 1871a). Mivart replied to Thomas Henry Huxley’s article ‘Mr. Darwin’s critics’ (T. H. Huxley 1871a) in ‘Evolution and its consequences. A reply to Professor Huxley’ (Mivart 1872a). Mivart replied to Wright’s Darwinism: being an examination of Mr. St. George Mivart’s ‘Genesis of species’ (Wright 1871a) in ‘Specific genesis’ (Mivart 1872b), which was published in the North American Review. Wright’s article ‘Evolution by natural selection’ appeared in the July 1872 issue of the North American Review (Wright 1872). Wright also refers to Mivart 1872b, pp. 451–2 (for Wright’s response, see Wright 1872, pp. 6–9).

146 6 7 8 9

April 1872

See Mivart 1872a, p. 170, and Mivart 1872b, p. 453. Wright refers to the concept of ideal types that informed many pre-Darwinian theories of species. For more on the type concept, see Lewens 2007, pp. 83–90. Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Asa Gray.

To Briton Riviere 4 April 1872 Down, Beckenham, Kent April 4, 1872 Dear Sir I thank you most sincerely for your kindness. You must not think of trying until you feel some inclination and strength for the task. I have written to Mr. Cooper (188 Strand) to send you the blocks.1 My dear Sir | yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin P.S. I may as well add my address for parcels viz. C. Darwin Esq. | Orpington Station | South Eastern Railway Copy DAR 147: 319 1

See letter from Briton Riviere, 3 April 1872. CD refers to James Davis Cooper.

From Adam Elliot 5 April 1872

6 Dod’s Buildings | Liverpool. 5th. April 1872

Professor Darwin &c &c Sir The accompanying photograph of a group of people comes from Burmah with the following story,1 The King was offended with one of his women & punished her by having her confined in a large cage with an Ape, she was there for two years, during this time she became pregnant & brought forth figure No. 1, whose appearance cleared up in the King’s mind a suspicion that the keeper of the cage might be the father, but it was decided that the Ape must be the father, N o. 2 is a convict whom in order to save his life accepted the alternative of marrying N o. 1, Nos. 3 & 4 are the issue of this marriage. Such is the story, & I take the liberty of sending you the Photo, as I fully expect you will at once pronounce, whether it is reliable. Is it not probable that even had the woman become pregnant by a highly cultivated European & left confined with the ape, her progeny might have been as these are, & that the keeper in all likelihood is the father & not the Ape? Is it possible for the woman to become pregnant by an Ape or vice versa, an ape by a Man? 2 If so, has the progeny a soul? Is it possible that the descendants of such, could again breed? or would they be sterile as the mule? If they did breed, say with human beings, in what generation would

April 1872

147

the soul have entered into their composition? & what would the probability be of a “cast back” in some future generation. Do you suppose a “missing link” of the kind of a gradual developement of the Ape species to have existed, though not yet discovered, with all our researches not a vestige I believe, If it be proven that Apes & human beings can breed, even now, when human beings have developed into a high state of perfection as compared with the Ape, why should we not have been at one time on most intimate terms or relationship, when it is proven that the difference between the lowest type of savage & the Ape is considerably less than between this low type & the most cultivated European— I have taken a great liberty in putting as many questions to you Sir, but I would beg a few lines on the group I send, which you can get copied if you think fit, but please return the original. If you pronounce the whole story a myth please excuse my boldness, but I feel a deep interest in what you & Professor Huxley3 have written— Begging the favor of an opinion— I am, Sir, | Your obedient servant | Adam Elliot No. 2 is apparently a low type, what if he had been a high caste? No. 4 seems less remote than No. 3, will No. 5 be still less remote? The feet & hands seem so perfect— DAR 163: 16 1

2 3

The photograph has not been found. CD had discussed a Burmese family covered with hair in Variation 2: 77, 327, and Descent 2: 378, although in Descent he described them as being Siamese. On the family and their history, see Bondeson and Miles 1996. The possibility of ape–human hybrids had been suggested by Charles White in the late eighteenth century (see Ritvo 2000, p. 849). Thomas Henry Huxley.

To August Weismann 5 April 1872 Down, Beckenham, Kent April 5th. 1872 My dear Sir I have now read your essay with very great interest. 1 Your view of the origin of local races through “amixie” is altogether new to me, and seems to throw an important light on an obscure problem.2 There is however something strange about the periods or endurance or variability.3 I formerly endeavoured to investigate the subject, not by looking to past time, but to species of the same genus widely distributed; and I found in many cases that all the species, with perhaps one or two exceptions, were variable. It would be a very interesting subject for a conchologist to investigate, viz: whether the species of the same genus were variable during many successive geological formations. I began to make enquiries on this head, but failed in this, as in so many other things, from the want of time and strength. In your remarks on crossing you do not, as it seems to me, lay nearly stress enough on the increased vigour of the offspring derived from parents which have been exposed to different conditions.

148

April 1872

I have during the last 5 years been making experiments on this subject with plants, and have been astonished at the results, which have not yet been published. 4 In the first part of your essay I thought that you wasted (to use an English expression) too much powder and shot on M. Wagner; but I changed my opinion when I saw how admirably you treated the whole case, and how well you used the facts about the Planorbis.5 I wish I had studied this latter case more carefully. The manner in which, as you show, the different varieties blend together and make a constant whole, agrees perfectly with my hypothetical illustrations 6 Many years ago the late E. Forbes described three closely consecutive beds in a Secondary formation, each with representative forms of the same fresh water shells: the case is evidently analogous with that of Hilgendorf, but the interesting connecting varieties or links were here absent.7 I rejoice to think that I formerly said as emphatically as I could, that neither isolation nor time by themselves do anything for the modification of species.8 Hardly anything in your essay has pleased me so much personally, as to find that you believe to a certain extent in sexual selection. 9 As far as I can judge, very few naturalists believe in this. I may have erred on many points, and extended the doctrine too far, but I feel a strong conviction that sexual selection will hereafter be admitted to be a powerful agency. I cannot agree with what you say about the taste for beauty in animals not easily varying. 10 It may be suspected that even the habit of viewing differently coloured surrounding objects would influence their taste, and Fritz Müller even goes so far as to believe that the sight of gaudy butterflies might influence the taste of distinct species. 11 There are many remarks and statements in your essay which have interested me greatly, and I thank you for the pleasure which I have received from reading it. With sincere respect, I remain | My dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Charles Darwin If you should ever be induced to consider the whole doctrine of sexual selection, I think that you will be led to the conclusion that characters thus gained by one sex are very commonly transferred in a greater or less degree to the other sex. 12 Copy DAR 148: 343 1 2

3

4 5

CD had received Weismann’s essay on the influence of isolation on the formation of species (Weismann 1872) in February 1872 (see letter to August Weismann, 29 February 1872 and n. 3). Weismann coined the term Amixie to refer to the total prevention of crossing between two populations due to isolation (Weismann 1872, p. 49 n. 3). Weismann argued that Amixie did not necessarily result in the formation of new species and conversely that Amixie was not a necessary requirement in the formation of new species. He cited examples to illustrate his argument (ibid., pp. 49–51). Weismann hypothesised that populations experienced periods of increased variability interspersed with longer periods of constancy and argued that periods of variability could be triggered by changes in external conditions. Isolation was only one sort of change that might be encountered (Weismann 1872, pp. 51–2). CD refers to his research on successive generations of cross-fertilised and self-fertilised plants, published in Cross and self fertilisation in 1876. Moritz Wagner had argued that a population had to be isolated geographically in order to form new species (Wagner 1868a, 1868b, and 1870). Using successive varieties of a ram’s horn snail referred to as Planorbis multiformis, Weismann argued that new species could form without being isolated from the

April 1872

6

7

8 9

10 11

12

149

parent species (Weismann 1872, p. 15). Ram’s horn snails are freshwater pulmonate gastropods; the species referred to as P. multiformis are now in the genus Gyraulus; see Nützel and Bandel 1993, p. 318). In Origin 5th ed., p. 362, in his discussion of the absence of intermediate varieties, CD mentioned only briefly Franz Hilgendorf ’s discovery of the series of forms described as Planorbis multiformis (Hilgendorf 1866). Later in the same section (ibid., pp. 366–7), CD presented a hypothetical case of successive species found in different strata in order to show the difficulty of determining intermediate varieties that originated from a common progenitor. Edward Forbes had described different forms of the same genera of freshwater gastropods in three distinct strata in his preliminary report on the strata and organic remains in the Dorsetshire Purbecks (Forbes 1850, pp. 80–1). See Origin, pp. 105–9. Weismann argued that sexual selection could influence the formation of new species (Weismann 1872, pp. 72–4); he assigned sexual selection a secondary role in evolution, a role which was not dependent on environmental influences, but which could increase the amount of variability in a species (ibid., pp. 61– 2; see also Marginalia 1: 859 for CD’s comments on some of Weismann’s points on the role of sexual selection). Weismann argued that even if populations became isolated, the preference or taste for a certain appearance in the opposite sex would remain constant (Weismann 1872, p. 70). See Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Fritz Müller, 14 June 1871. Müller had suggested that females of one species might be attracted to the bright colours of males of another species, and that consequently males of the first species might start to resemble those of the second species. See Descent 2: 18, 23, and 46 ff.

To Chauncey Wright 6 April 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Ap. 6 1872 My dear Sir I have read your paper with great interest, both the philosophical & special parts. I have not been able to understand all the mathematical reasoning; for irrational angles produce a corresponding effect on my mind. Nevertheless I have been able to follow the general argument, & I am delighted to have a cloud of darkness largely removed. It is a great thing to be able to assign reasons why certain angles do not occur, or occur rarely.1 I have felt the difficulty of the case for some dozen years, ever since Falconer threw it in my teeth.2 Your memoir must have been a laborious undertaking, & I congratulate you on its completion. The illustration taken from leaves of genetic & adaptive characters seems to me excellent,3 as indeed are many points in your paper. You sent me 3 copies; & after reflection I have sent one to “Nature”, as one of the editors is a botanist & may notice it;4 the second, I have sent to the Linnean Soc. as most botanists belong to it. I will lend my own to M r Airy (the son of the Astronomer Royal) who has attended to phyllotaxy & who expressed a wish to read yr paper.5 I sent you some time ago a copy of my new edit. of the Origin which I hope you have received, but pray do not trouble yourself to acknowledge it. 6 Believe me, my dear Sir | yours very sincerely | Charles Darwin P.S. I have heard that Mr Mivart will answer, I suppose savagely, your pamphlet in the Popular Science Review, the April number, which ought now to be published. 7

150

April 1872

Do you ever see Fraser’s Magazine, there is a striking article on Divinity & Darwinism, by I suppose by L. Stevens, who married one of the Miss Thackerays.—8 LS(A) American Philosophical Society (B/D25.275) 1

2

3

4 5 6 7 8

Wright sent CD copies of his paper on phyllotaxy in March 1872 (Wright 1871b; see letter from Chauncey Wright, 3 April 1872 and n. 1). Wright considered why certain theoretically possible leaf arrangements did not occur (Wright 1871b, pp. 386–406). In a paper on fossil elephants (Falconer 1863, p. 80), Hugh Falconer mentioned the laws of phyllotaxy as being suggestive of ‘a deeper seated and innate principle, to the operation of which “Natural Selection” is merely an adjunct’ (see also Correspondence vol. 10, letter to Hugh Falconer, 1 October [1862]). ‘Genetic’ in this context refers to features characteristic of a genus. Wright had argued, ‘In those most important features of organic structures, which are now called genetic characters, and were formerly called affinities, few or no specific uses can in general be discovered’ (Wright 1871b, p. 380). Alfred William Bennett was a subeditor for Nature from 1870 until 1874 and also botanical reviewer for the Academy (ODNB). Hubert Airy was the son of George Biddell Airy. CD had offered to lend Airy Wright’s paper when he received it (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Hubert Airy, 10 [December] 1871). Wright’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Origin 6th ed. (see Appendix IV); the book was published in February 1872 (Freeman 1977). CD refers to St George Jackson Mivart’s reply to Wright 1871; it appeared in the North American Review for April 1872 (Mivart 1872b). No response by Mivart appeared in Popular Science Review. Leslie Stephen’s article ‘Darwinism and divinity’ appeared in the April 1872 issue of Fraser’s Magazine, ([Stephen] 1872). It was signed L.S.; his authorship is confirmed by the Wellesley index. Stephen’s wife was Harriet Marian Stephen, a daughter of William Makepeace Thackeray.

To William Bowman 8 April [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Ap. 8th My dear Bowman Donders in describing the movement of the eye in meditation refers me to “Sölberg Wells, Treatise on the Diseases of the Eye 1869;” & says that perhaps you could lend it me.—2 If you could spare it for only 2 or 3 days it would be quite sufficient. Can you do so? I suppose that it is a large book, as he refers to p. 548.; so, it had better be sent (if you can send it) to C. Darwin Orpington Station Kent South Eastern Railway. Believe me, my dear Bowman | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Sir John Paget Bowman (private collection) 1

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from F. C. Donders, 1 April 1872.

April 1872 2

151

See letter from F. C. Donders, 1 April 1872 and n. 3. CD refers to John Soelberg Wells and Wells 1869.

To F. C. Donders 8 April 1872 Down. | Beckenham. Kent. Ap.l 8. 1872. My dear Professor Donders, I am greatly obliged to you for having taken such great trouble to illuminate one as ignorant as I am on the functions of the eye—1 Your information has been many times of the greatest use to me; & what is even a still greater kindness, you have saved me from having fallen into many errors—2 I have received the German Pamphlet & read the part indicated; & have written to Bowman to borrow Mr Wells’ work.3 When I go again over my M.S., I will carefully reconsider all that I have written; & as the subject is so intricate, the result I think will be that I will strike out a good deal, & only give some facts & quote what you have told me—4 I feel every day that to write on expression, a man ought to have ten times as much physiological knowledge as I possess; but I hope to succeed in giving a good many observations, especially on the expression and gestures of Savages; & then some one hereafter will correct my speculations. I must again say how extremely kind it is in you, full of knowledge & busily employed as you are to spend so much time in aiding me. Believe me | Yours very gratefully— | Charles Darwin. Copy DAR 143: 413 1 2 3 4

See letter from F. C. Donders, 1 April 1872. For CD’s earlier correspondence with Donders, see Correspondence vols. 17 and 18. The pamphlet referred to is Donders 1871; see letter from F. C. Donders, 1 April 1872 and n. 7. See also letter to William Bowman, 8 April [1872]. CD refers to John Soelberg Wells and Wells 1869. CD made frequent references to information from Donders in Expression.

To Joseph Kaines?1 8 April 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Ap 8. 1872 Dear Sir I am much obliged to you for having sent me your interesting paper & for yr kind remarks about my works.2 Although I formerly read Miss Martineau’s book & some others on Comte I had entirely forgotten his striking observations on the relations of Man to the lower forms of life.3 Pray believe me dear Sir | yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin American Philosophical Society (413)

152 1 2

3

April 1872

The recipient is conjectured from the content of the letter. Kaines probably sent a copy of his article ‘The anthropology of Auguste Comte’ (Kaines 1871). The article was published in the January 1872 issue of the Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. CD subscribed to the journal, and his copy of the issue is in the collection of unbound journals in the Darwin Library–CUL. The copy sent by Kaines has not been found. For Kaines’s references to CD, see ibid., pp. 352–3. Harriet Martineau had introduced British readers to Comte’s writing in her book The positive philosophy of Auguste Comte (H. Martineau trans. 1853). Comte had argued that humans and animals had both instincts and intelligence, and further, that the differences between human and animal intelligence were not essential but only differed in degree (H. Martineau trans. 1853, 1: 464–5). He favoured the study of animal societies as a method of understanding human society.

From G. C. Oxenden 8 April 1872 Broome Park | near Canterbury April 8. 1872 Dear Sir Being a mere stupid Plant hunter, I hardly take courage to write to you— The Works you have so kindly given me, have been largely in my hands this Winter—& often have I felt both enlightened & bewildered—1 —One result of actual Observation has been this—that all such Wild Plants as dwell on the Confines of Civilization, undergo lowering & debasing process, as to their natural average standard of height & vigour— —In the case of Wild Orchids— —Any Lady Botanist, & any Planthunting Gentleman—with the accursed Trowel in his hand, will tell you that the Average stature of Bee, & Spider, Orchis, is Six or2 —I myself, on close-bitten, sheep haunted Hills, find them so utterly dwarfed & bullied, as to be almost trailing plants—& very pretty they are— But on such portions of our own Forest Ground as no Hoof ever invades “Arachnites” becomes a very tall upstanding Plant, with large & splendid Flowers 3 —and even Bee Orchis often exceeds two feet in height— I think I sent your One, a year or two since, 26 inches high—4 A day or two ago, by chance, I found the stem of One which grew close to my own Door almost, which last year was over 2 feet high—and I now send it to you— —A great deal of my own Early life was spent at Downton Castle with that cleverest l 5 of V. Physiologists, Thomas Andrew Knight, so long President of the Horticult.— —One day he said to me, “Mr Oxenden, you are fond of Gardens, & you are young— —If you like to experimentalize, & will begin with the White Currant I will promise you that in twenty years you shall have them as large as Sweetwater Grapes, & as sweet—6 —This past atrocious Winter Spring has nowise injured or affected the Wild Orchids— —On the, Contrary, I have never seen them so healthy or so abundant— Of the truly wonderful & lovely “yellow Bee” I know of over 50 Plants—& only hope they may evade their Ovine Persecutors—7 Your’s very faithfully & obliged | G. Chichester Oxenden

April 1872

153

DAR 173: 69 1 2

3

4 5

6 7

Oxenden received a presentation copy of Orchids (Correspondence vol. 10, Appendix IV). His name does not appear on any other presentation list up to and including 1872. The bee orchid (Ophrys apifera) can grow up to 30 cm (12 inches); the spider orchid (Ophrys aranifera; now called the early spider orchid, O. sphegodes), can grow up to 30 cm, but is typically between 5 and 15 cm (2 and 6 inches) tall in grazed fields (Hutchings 2010, p. 868). The plant known to CD and Oxenden as Ophrys arachnites was probably what is now known as O. fuciflora (the late spider orchid; see CD’s description in Orchids pp. 72–3). Ophrys arachnites of Miller 1768 is now O. apifera. Ophrys fuciflora can grow up to 40 cm tall. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter from G. C. Oxenden, 21 July 1871. Knight was president of the Horticultural Society of London from 1811 until his death in 1838; from 1808 or 1809 he lived at Downton Castle in Herefordshire (ODNB). Vegetable physiologist was an old term for a botanist who studied the physiology and morphology of plants rather than systematics. The white currant is a cultivar of the red currant (Ribes rubrum); sweetwater is a grape cultivar of Vitus vinifera with both white and black varieties. Oxenden may refer to Ophrys lutea, but this species is native to Mediterranean regions. See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from G. C. Oxenden, 21 July 1871 and n. 1. On the positive effects of sheepgrazing on orchid populations, see Hutchings 2010.

To Gaston de Saporta 8 April 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. April 8th. 1872 Dear Sir I thank you very sincerely and feel much honoured by the trouble which you have taken in giving me your reflections on the origin of Man. It gratifies me extremely that some parts of my work have interested you, and that we agree on the main conclusion of the derivation of man from some lower form.1 I will reflect on what you have said, but I cannot at present give up my belief in the close relationship of Man, to the higher Simiæ. I do not put much trust in any single character, even that of dentition; but I put the greatest faith in resemblances in many parts of the whole organization; for I cannot believe that such resemblances can be due to any cause except close blood-relationship 2 That man is closely allied to the higher Simiæ is shewn by the classification of Linnæus who was so good a judge of affinity.3 The man who in England knows most about the structure of the Simiæ, namely Mr Mivart, and who is bitterly opposed to my doctrines about the derivation of the mental powers, yet has publicly admitted that I have not put man too close to the higher Simiæ, as far as bodily structure is concerned. 4 I do not think the absence of reversions of structure in man is of much weight; C. Vogt indeed argues that Microcephalous idiots is a case of reversion.5 No one who believes in evolution will doubt that the Phocæ6 are descended from some terrestrial carnivore; yet no one would expect to meet with any such reversion in them. The lesser divergeance of character in the races of man in comparison with the species of Simiadæ, may perhaps be accounted for by man having spread over the world at a much later period than did the Simiadæ.7 I am fully prepared to admit the high antiquity of

154

April 1872

man; but then we have evidence in the Dryopithecus of the high antiquity of the Anthropomorphous Simiæ.8 I am glad to hear that you are at work on your fossil plants, which of late years have afforded so rich a field for discovery. With my best thanks for your great kindness and with much respect | I remain Dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Charles Darwin PS Your article on the transformists in the Revue which I read some time ago interested me much.—9 LS(A) A. de Saporta (private collection) 1 2

3

4

5 6 7

8 9

See letter from Gaston de Saporta, 18 March 1872. Saporta had received a copy of the French edition of Descent. In his letter of 18 March 1872, Saporta had argued that humans developed from a type which originated in a boreal zone, while simians developed in the tropics. Saporta had based his argument for separate orders for humans and simians on a few characteristics, for example, tree-climbing in simians as opposed to walking in humans. Simia was a Linnaean genus that included most primates except lemurs (Lemur) and humans (Homo). These genera were part of the Linnaean order of Primates along with the genus Vespertilio, which included all bats (Linnaeus 1758–9). The genus name Simia is no longer used. St George Jackson Mivart maintained in ‘Ape resemblances to man’ (Mivart 1871d) that there could be no doubt that humans were closely related to the anthropoid division of Old World apes. Mivart concluded, ‘I none the less completely differ from him [CD] when I include the totality of man’s being. So considered, Science convinces me that a monkey and a mushroom differ less from each other than do a monkey and a man.’ CD refers to Carl Vogt and Vogt 1867. See also Descent 1: 121 and n. 34. Phoca is a genus of earless seals. In his letter of 18 March 1872, Saporta contrasted the prolific speciation in simians with the marked lack of speciation in humans after their divergence from a hypothetical common ancestor. Simiadae was one of three suborders of Primates in Thomas Henry Huxley’s classification, the others being Anthropidae and Lemuridae (T. H. Huxley 1869, p. 99; see also Descent 1: 195). Only humans were placed in Anthropidae, with all other apes and monkeys in Simiadae. The modern family Hominidae includes humans along with the great apes (orang-utans, gorillas, and chimpanzees). Dryopithecus is an extinct ape genus of the Miocene period. The first fossils of a species of Dryopithecus were found by Edouard Lartet in France (Lartet 1856; see also Descent 1: 199). CD refers to Saporta’s article ‘L’école transformiste et ses derniers travaux’ (The transformist school and its recent works), which appeared in the 9 October 1869 issue of Revue des deux mondes (Saporta 1869). CD’s annotated copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.

To Georg von Seidlitz 10 April 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Ap 10. 1872 Dear Sir Since writing to you a short time ago, I have received your very kind present of 2 copies of your interesting work Die Darwinsche Theorie.1

April 1872

155

As I had already procured, as I had previously told you, a copy of your work, I will send one to our Royal Soc. & another to the Linnean Soc, where they will be seen by the members.2 With my best thanks & respect | I remain dear Sir | yours faithfully | Charles Darwin LS Zoologische Staatssammlung München 1 2

See letter to Georg von Seidlitz, 1 April 1872 and n. 1. The reference is to G. Seidlitz 1871 The copies of G. Seidlitz 1871 that CD sent to the Royal Society of London and to the Linnean Society are listed in their respective catalogues.

To Chauncey Wright [11 or 21] April [1872]1 Down, Beckenham, Kent April 21st My dear Sir In Transactions Royal Soc[iety]. Edinburgh, Vol XXVI Part II In Session 1870– 71. p. 467, then in a paper on [Phyllotaxy] (ie on abnormal cones of Firs) by Prof. Alex. Dickson The University Glasgow.2 My dear Sir Yours vy sincerely Ch. Darwin Joseph M. Maddalena Catalog 16: Spring 1992 1

2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Chauncey Wright, 24 May 1872. The day is given as ‘21’ in the Joseph M. Maddalena catalogue, but as ‘11’ in a David Schulson Autographs catalogue from July 2003. The transcription given is that of the Joseph M. Maddalena catalogue, in which the letter was transcribed in full. CD refers to Alexander Dickson’s paper ‘On some abnormal cones of Pinus Pinaster’ (Dickson 1871). The page reference given is incorrect; it refers to the article immediately preceding Dickson’s in volume 26 of the Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.

To Williams & Norgate 12 April [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. April 12th Dear Sir Please to send me “The Higher Ministry of Nature by J. Leifchild: Hodder & Stoughton.—”2 Also please try & get the enclosed for me.—3 I think that I formerly ordered (do you keep any list? & can you see whether you have already ordered it for me) “A Review of Darwin’s Theory by James Hunter: Appleton & Co. New York.”—4 I am anxious to get this.— Dear Sir, | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin American Philosophical Society (414)

156 1 2

3

4

April 1872

The year is established by the reference to Leifchild 1872 (see n. 2, below). John Roby Leifchild’s book (Leifchild 1872) was published in March 1872 (Publishers’ circular, 16 March 1872, p. 177). Leifchild was the author of critical reviews of CD’s works in the Athenæum (see, for example, Correspondence vol. 8, letter to Asa Gray, 22 July [1860] and n. 6). The enclosure was an advertisement for an offprint of the article ‘The application of Darwinian theory to flowers and the insects which visit them’ (H. Müller 1871). The article appeared in the July 1871 issue of American Naturalist. CD’s annotated copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. CD refers to an offprint of a review of Descent by James B. Hunter that originally appeared in the Journal of Psychological Medicine (Hunter 1871). CD’s copy of the offprint is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection– CUL.

From G. J. Allman 13 April 1872

Athenaeum Club | Pall Mall April 13, 1872

Dear Mr. Darwin I have to thank you and the excellent translator very much for the opportunity of reading Malm’s paper on Flat-fish1 My own ignorance of the languages of Scandinavia renders a translation of any portion of its zoolo-literature most acceptable, and when the subject is of such interest as the production of asymmetry in the Pleuronectidæ my obligations for being put in possession of it are especially great. 2 Malm’s observations appear to be quite reliable. I think we may regard the retention of the eye on a level with the surface of the head as established by them, and its migration through the skull as untenable.3 I have been reminded by this paper of another point which has doubtless also struck yourself. I refer to the apparent connexion between the stalked condition of the eye in the podophthalmic crustacea and the habits of the animal. I believe that in the Podophthalmia the direction of locomotion in swimming is always retrograde— it certainly is so in the macrourous species, and the connexion between this form of locomotion and the possession of an eye seated on a moveable stalk which enables it to be turned in the direction of the locomotion is obvious. 4 The bracyurous forms moreover are macrourous and eminently natatory with retrograde progression in the zoea stage with—if I remember rightly—the eye-stalks excessively developed in this stage.5 I do not think that the sessile-eyed Crustacea are retrograde in their motions. You will perhaps remember how it is with the young barnacle. Believe me | Very sincerly yours | Geo. J. Allman I return the translation of Malms paper by this post. DAR 159: 54 1

2

CD had evidently sent Allman a manuscript translation of substantial extracts from a Swedish paper on the migration of the eye in flatfishes by August Wilhelm Malm (Malm 1867). The translation, which appears to be in the hand of George Howard Darwin, is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Pleuronectidae is the family of righteye flounders, so called because adults lie on the sea bottom on their left side, with both eyes on the right side. Malm had studied the development of some species of

April 1872

3 4

5

157

these fishes from the earliest embryonic stages and noted the gradual movement of the eye as the fish matured. CD discussed Malm’s observations in Origin 6th ed., pp. 186–7. Several authors had suggested that the eye in Pleuronectidae actually moved through the head during development. See Traquair 1865, pp. 263–5, for a review of theories of eye movement. Podophthalmia was formerly the division of stalk-eyed Crustacea that included the orders Decapoda and Stomapoda (Milne-Edwards 1834–40). Locomotion in stalk-eyed Crustacea varies widely and many species are capable of more than one method. Macrurous, or long-bodied, forms of Podophthalmia (all formerly included in the now defunct order Macrura) include lobsters, crayfish, shrimp, and prawns. Brachyurous, or short-bodied, forms of Crustacea include true crabs, porcelain crabs, and squat lobsters. The zoea stage is one or more of the larval stages of crustaceans. True crabs have several zoeal stages, during which the abdomen is still stretched out, so that they resemble macrurous forms.

From Roland Trimen 13 April 1872

Colonial Secretary’s Office, | Cape Town. 13th. April, 1872.

My dear Mr. Darwin, About 10 days ago I had the great pleasure of receiving your very kind gift of a copy of the new edition of the “Origin of Species”. 1 Not knowing of the new issue, but recognizing your handwriting on the cover, I at first imagined that your wonderful industry and originality had taken us all by surprise with the production of some new work. Pray accept my very cordial thanks for your kind thought of me. My brother forwarded to me your note of 13th. Novr. last after I had left England. I was very glad to receive an autograph note, as it seemed to give me some assurance that your health had improved.2 I have been much interested and instructed in reading the additional matter in the new edition of the “Origin”, (particularly, of course, the discussion of objections in the re-moulded Chapter IV.)3 I think that I can follow you in all your arguments in reply to objectors. The illustration of the ‘baleen’ difficulty by means of the various modifications presented by the bills of different ducks strikes me as very good. 4 You have a most happy and enviable power of perceiving and demonstrating the analogies existing between structures with which people are in a general way familiar, and those more unusual ones at which everybody wonders. The delightful account of the Flat-fishes’ eyes is in the main new to me; for I did not know that in actual free life the eyes of those fish were ever symmetrically placed.5 As regards the rattlesnake, I fancy your explanation to be the true one (Please excuse the fragmentary letter paper!) viz: that the object of the rattle is to alarm the snake’s enemies;6 because it is quite likely that the temporary surprise and consequent stoppage of a pursuing enemy occasioned by the unexpected rattling noise might, however brief in duration, just afford the snake time to effect its escape to some place of security. I observe, however, that in a recent number of ‘Nature’, M r. A Bennett describes some American observer as “coming to the rescue of Natural Selection” in this case, inasmuch as he has noted that the noise of the rattle closely resembles the note of the Cicadas, and that birds are thus attracted to the immediate vicinity of the snake.7 Now, the only feeble rattle of the rattlesnake that I ever heard

158

April 1872

came but indistinctly through a glazed case, so that I am not a judge of the character of the sound; and not having been in America, I can’t say how the New-World Cicadas sing; but the shrill din of the African Cicadas strikes me as being very far removed from anything approaching the sound of a rattle. There is something rather taking, however (and indeed I think quite humorous) in the notion of the hungry rattlesnake cunningly “playing-up” the birds to the ancient nursery rhyme of “Will you, will you will you, will you come and be killed”?8 Yet it doesn’t do to be too incredulous when one thinks of those clever “Fishing-frogs” attracting the small fry by their worm-like filaments.9 It has occurred to me that the time has arrived for the commencement of something like a systematic search for very early human or semi-human remains in such recent strata as offer themselves in the regions where it may not unreasonably be conjectured that our race originated. None of the investigations hitherto made (deeply interesting as they have proved) seems to have attempted or contemplated any discoveries of remains prior to those of the Drift. Might not the “imperfection of the Geological Record” be lessened by some well-considered exploration with the discovery of still earlier races than “Stone-Age” man as its chief end in view? 10 I am sorry to say that I have been obliged almost to neglect Natural History since I returned hither. I get more & more involved in dull office details, which allow me less time and strength than ever for the work I most like. I have applied for the Museum Curatorship here, with the hope (if I be appointed) of making what leisure I have of use to Natural Science. The emoluments attaching to the Curatorship are so very small that the Trustees cannot hope to obtain more than the leisure hours of any man competent for the post, unless (like Layard of late years) he be provided likewise with one of those comfortable sinecures (now alas! almost extinct among offices) which make no demand upon his time.11 I have been just as much puzzled as yourself about Owen’s attitude in respect to Evolution. At one time he seems anxious to take the credit of the theory to himself; at another, rather to treat the doctrine as something quite generally accepted & scarcely worth insisting upon; and then again, quite to bristle up at the very idea of such a thing!12 I am afraid that, with all his great ability and knowledge, we must admit the unfortunate defect of great jealousy of anybody’s presuming to deal with the great problems of Biology, unless with his special sanction and (one may almost say) permission. Sir H. Barkly, our present Governor, takes great interest in Natural Science. He has placed a sum on the Estimates in aid of the completion of the ‘Flora Capensis’; and, as the Colony is just now in an unusually flourishing financial condition, I fancy the legislature will be well disposed to vote the money.13 With renewed thanks, and sincerest wishes for your good health, I am | Very faithfully yours, | Roland Trimen Charles Darwin, Esqre. | &c &c DAR 178: 191 1

Trimen’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Origin 6th ed. (see Appendix IV).

April 1872 2

3 4

5 6 7

8 9 10 11

12

159

CD had been unable to see Trimen before he returned to Cape Town. In his letter to Trimen of 13 November [1871] (Correspondence vol. 19), CD mentioned that he had been ill for a week. Trimen’s brother was Henry Trimen. See Origin 6th ed., pp. xii and 168–204. In Origin 6th ed., pp. 182–5, CD had countered St George Jackson Mivart’s objection that it was hard to imagine how early stages in the development of baleen in whales could have been useful. CD described gradations in the the development of lamellae in the beaks of various geese and ducks to illustrate how the adaptation for sifting fine particles in water might have come about. See Origin 6th ed., pp. 186–8, for CD’s account of movement of the eye in flatfishes of the family Pleuronectidae. See also letter from G. J. Allman, 13 April 1872 and nn. 2 and 3. See Origin 6th ed., p. 162. Trimen refers to Alfred William Bennett’s review of Origin 6th ed. in Nature, 22 February 1872, pp. 318– 19. Bennett mentioned Nathaniel Southgate Shaler’s view that rattlesnakes mimicked the sound of cicadas, thereby attracting birds within striking range (Shaler 1872, p. 34). See letter to A. W. Bennett, 29 February [1872] and nn. 3–5. Trimen probably refers to the nursery rhyme ‘Mrs. Bond’, which contains the line, ‘Dilly, dilly, dilly, dilly, come and be killed, For you must be stuffed, and my customers filled!’ (see Crane [1876]). Fishing-frogs are fishes of the genus Lophius, also known as monkfish; they have three long filaments attached to the middle of the head. One of the filaments is used as a lure to attract other fishes. Chapter 10 of Origin 6th ed. is ‘On the imperfection of the geological record’. Trimen became curator of the South African Museum in 1872 on the same terms as his predecessor, Edgar Leopold Layard, that is, £100 a year in addition to his official salary. He was given one day a week to attend the museum (Iziko: www.iziko.org.za/sam/muse/hist/trimen.html (see Internet archive, Wayback machine, 21 November 2008)). Layard had been commissioner at the Mixed Commission Court at the Cape of Good Hope; the Mixed Commission was abolished in 1870 (Gibbs 1889, p. 34). Trimen evidently refers to the introductory ‘Historical sketch’ in Origin 6th ed., p. xviii, in which CD wrote: When the first edition of this work was published, I was so completely deceived, as were many others, by such expressions as ‘the continuous operation of creative power,’ that I included Professor Owen with other palaeontologists as being firmly convinced of the immutability of species; but it appears (‘Anat. of Vertebrates,’ vol. iii. p. 796) that this was on my part a preposterous error. In the last edition of this work I inferred, and the inference still seems to me perfectly just, from a passage beginning with the words ‘no doubt the type-form,’ &c. (Ibid. vol. i. p. xxxv.), that Professor Owen admitted that natural selection may have done something in the formation of new species; but this it appears (Ibid. vol. iii. p. 798) is inaccurate and without evidence. I also gave some extracts from a correspondence between Professor Owen and the Editor of the ‘London Review,’ from which it appeared manifest to the Editor as well as to myself, that Professor Owen claimed to have promulgated the theory of natural selection before I had done so; and I expressed my surprise and satisfaction at this announcement; but as far as it is possible to understand certain recently published passages (Ibid. vol. iii. p. 798), I have either partially or wholly again fallen into error. It is consolatory to me that others find Professor Owen’s controversial writings as difficult to understand and to reconcile with each other, as I do.

13

For more on Richard Owen’s correspondence with the London Review, see Correspondence vol. 14, letter to J. D. Hooker, 31 May [1866] and n. 11. Henry Barkly was governor of Cape Colony from 1870 until 1877 (ODNB). The first three volumes of Flora Capensis were published between 1860 and 1865. The main author, William Henry Harvey, died in 1866 and the work was left uncompleted. Barkly urged Joseph Dalton Hooker to complete the work and a subsidy of £200 per volume was approved by the colonial parliament in 1872. The direction of the completion of the work was assumed by William Turner Thiselton-Dyer in 1877; the fourth volume appeared only in 1897 and the work was finally completed in 1925 (see Thiselton-Dyer 1925).

160 From Arthur Russell 15 April 1872

April 1872 10, South Audley Street. W. April 15 | 1872

Dear Mr. Darwin Some years ago I imported from France a lot of Ranæ esculentæ and put them into a pond at Woburn Abbey, where they have done very well & increased in numbers, and where their croaking charms me every summer. 1 I observed that some of the females were compelled to submit in the spring to the rude embraces of common English toads2 & I expected that the discovery of a new species of batrachian in Bedfordshire would be announced some day. Being at Woburn during the Easter holidays I observed a French frog who had copulated with a female toad— I took them home & kept them till the toad had spawned. I brought the spawn with me but though it has not yet decayed it does not seem to develop. I want to ask you whether you know of any experiments in crossing frogs & toads or R. esculenta with R. temporaria, our common frog? I think I remember reading that Spallanzani tried these experiments long ago without success.3 Excuse the liberty I have taken and believe me | yrs. sincerely | Arthur Russell DAR 176: 225 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Hybrids’ pencil 1

2 3

Rana esculenta is the edible frog, which it is now considered to be a hybrid of Pelophylax ridibundus (the Eurasian marsh frog) and P. lessonae (the pool frog). Although fertile, the hybrid (now known as P. esculentus or P. kl. esculentus) will normally only persist when it mates with one or other of its parent species in mixed populations, but viable hybrid-only populations have been identified (see Christiansen and Reyer 2009, pp. 1756–7, for more on reproduction in the edible frog). For more on Russell’s interest in natural history at the family seat at Woburn Abbey in Bedfordshire, see Correspondence vol. 17, Appendix V. The common toad is Bufo bufo. For more on Lazzaro Spallanzani’s unsuccessful attempts in hybridising frogs and toads, see Capanna 1999, pp. 191–2.

To John Scott 15 April [1872]1

Down, Beckenham, Kent, April 15.

My Dear Sir,— I thank you sincerely for your letter of March 22nd. Almost every word in it is of value to me, and you have proved yourself, as on so many other occasions, the most obliging of observers. I have heard from Dr Asa Gray that the worms do plenty of work in the U. States, so that now I think I may opinion that they work in much the same way in all parts of the world.2 I will specify a few of the points in which I should be very glad for further information. As before asked, do the very heavy rains fairly wash down the castings? 3 I should be especially glad to hear if you can find any castings on a slope, whether

April 1872

161

they are washed in any perceptible degree from the slope by very heavy rain. Do the castings ever disintegrate into dust, at the commencement of the dry season, so that the casting could be blown away by the wind? How deep down do you generally find worms? You have given me some information on this head.4 Do your worms draw leaves or little sticks into the mouths of their burrows, or pile pebbles over the mouths, as our worms are continually doing? It is astonishing to me that the worms can exist in the flooded rice fields. I did receive your paper on the sandalwood parasites, and read it with much interest. 5 Pray do not trouble yourself to send the Lecosia, for as the wretch will not make perfect flowers, I care very little about it.6 I very sincerely wish all success to your great work, of which you send me the contents; it must be a very arduous undertaking. 7 Once again I cordially thank you for your letter and observations, which are of real value to me. Yours very sincerely, | Ch. Darwin. Transactions of the Hawick Archæological Society (1908): 69 1 2 3

4 5

6

7

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from John Scott, 22 March 1872. See letter from Asa Gray, 2 February 1872. CD had asked whether heavy tropical rain washed away fresh worm castings, but Scott had been unable to supply the information as his observations were carried out during the dry season (see letter to John Scott, 15 January 1872, and letter from John Scott, 22 March 1872). See letter from John Scott, 22 March 1872. Scott’s letter of 22 March 1872 is incomplete. The section that mentions his paper on members of the parasitic plant family Loranthaceae (Scott 1870–4, pt 2) has not been found. Both the Loranthaceae and the Santalaceae (sandalwood) belong to the order Santalales. CD’s annotated copy of an offprint of this paper is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. In his letter to Scott of 3 June 1868 (Correspondence vol. 16), CD had asked whether Leersia grown in Calcutta produced perfect flowers (in CD’s definition, perfect flowers are flowers of hermaphrodite plants that are perfectly expanded at the time of flowering; see Forms of flowers, pp. 3–4). Scott mentioned Leersia in his letter of 22 March 1872, but the letter is incomplete and most of that section of the letter has not been found. The transcription, ‘Lecosia’, in the printed source is evidently in error. The section of Scott’s letter of 22 March 1872 containing information about the work Scott was planning is now missing. The work itself has not been identified.

To A. G. Carlier 16 April [1872] Down, | Beckenham, Kent. April. 16 Dear Sir I am much obliged to you for your very courteous note & kind present of your work, which I hope before long to read with all the attention which I daresay it deserves.—1 With my best thanks | I remain | Dear Sir | yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin Postmark: AP 16 72 Special Collections, University of Birmingham (Papers of Edmond William Wace Carlier US47/234)

162 1

April 1872

CD’s copy of Carlier’s book, Darwinism refuted by researches in psychology (Carlier [1872]) is in the Darwin Library–Down.

To Friend Lewin 16 April [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. April 16 My dear Sir I have just discovered that at a more distant station viz Chiselhurst on the same line there is a rather later train, viz one leaving at 9 o 34 , but Chiselhurst is a full hour’s drive from my house. If not inconvenient to you & Dr. Maudsley, will you return by this train, which will give us nearly 1, 34 hour instead of only a full hour. I can send you in my carriage to Chiselhurst Station. So if this suits you, do not keep your Fly from Orpington; but you can take return tickets, as the 2 stations are on the same line.— 2 In Haste | Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin I am sure you & Dr. Maudsley will allow me to leave the room for quarter of an hour, if my head fails me.— The 9o. 34 Train from Chiselhurst reaches Charing Cross at 10 o , 11 The National Library of Sweden, Manuscripts 1 2

The year is established by a reference to the visit of Friend Lewin and Henry Maudsley in Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) for 17 April 1872. Chislehurst and Orpington were on the South Eastern Railway line; Chislehurst is about four miles and Orpington eight miles from Down. See also letter from Henry Maudsley, 6 November 1872.

From F. C. Donders1 17 April 1872 Utrecht, 17 Avril | 1872, My dear and most honoured Sir,— J’éprouve le besoin de répondre encore en quelques mots à votre dernière lettre, et je l’aurais fait immédiatement, si je n’avais été indisposé. Vous parlez de “strike out a good deal, and only give some facts and quote what you have told me”—. 2 Je ne me pardonnerais jamais, d’avoir été la cause involontaire de quelque suppression de votre part. Nous autres, spécialistes, nous sommes heureux de mettre nos connaissances à votre disposition. Tout le monde a fait la même chose à l’égard d’Alexandre de Humboldt. Ce sont de purs renseignements.— Si vous croyez qu’il suffit d’être physiologiste pour écrire un livre sur l’expression, qui fasse faire un pas à la Science, vous vous trompez: nous l’attendons de vous, d’après votre conception, qui vous est propre et qui se rattache à l’esprit qui a dicté tous vos ouvrages. Soyez en bien assuré, si nous avons le bonheur de recevoir un livre de votre main, ce sont les grandes qualités qui frappent et—suffisent. Qui aurait l’esprit assez étreint et borné pour faire attention et pour se complaire à quelque petite inexactitude en matière

April 1872

163

de physiologie ou de toute autre science accessoire?— Permettez-moi donc de vous prier de ne rien effacer de ce que vous avez écrit que le strict nécessaire. Si vous y tenez haut, de ne vous rendre coupable du moindre peché contre la physiologie, et si vous continuez à m’honorer de votre confiance, envoyez-moi tout simplement les épreuves des parties où il y a question de physiologie spéciale; je les examinerai directement et vous les renverrez; je ne suis plus occupé au même point que jadis.— Il est très probable que je viendrai vous rendre visite vers la fin du mois de juillet, si vous le permettez.3 Avec la plus haute considération | Votre devoué | Donders DAR 162: 231 1 2 3

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. See letter to F. C. Donders, 8 April 1872. Donders quotes verbatim from CD’s letter. In the event, Donders probably did not visit (see letter from F. C. Donders, 14 July 1872 and n. 3).

From Charles Crawley [18 April 1872]1 Bryngwyn Rectory | Newport | Monmouthshire Thursday Dear Mr Darwin My father thinks that the yellow original will have more interest for you than a copy, so I enclose it though I am afraid it will involve the trouble of sending it back— He says that B means boarder at Butler’s, ‘b’ which graces your name & others, boarder at “Mother Bromfield’s” & j boarder at Jeudwine’s 2 I enclose a translation of the Plautus & with my father’s very kind remembrances & my own | Believe me | yrs very truly | Charles Crawley Plautus. Mil Glor. Act II sc 2. l 47–593 “Pray see yonder how he is standing his brow bent in anxious thought— He strikes his breast with his fingers. I suppose he intends to call out his wits from within— See now he turns away & leans with his left hand upon his thigh. with his right hand he is telling off the arguments on his fingers striking his right thigh so laboriously do his gestures supply what he wants to do now he’s snapped his fingers— he’s in a puzzle— He keeps changing his posture. See he shakes his head, he doesn’t like the plan he has hit upon Whatever it is, he will not produce it in a crude state he will send it out well digested Now look he’s turned architect he has pillared his chin upon his hand Bah! I certainly don’t like that style of architecture for I have heard that the ‘pillared chin’ is the characteristic of a barbarian poet who is never without two guards at his elbow the whole day long” Notes say that the last three lines are an allusion to a Latin poet probably Naevius—4 also that putting the hand beneath the chin is a sign of grief DAR 161: 238 CD ANNOTATIONS 3.1 Plautus . . . 47–59] ‘See Blue Mark—Reflection’ blue crayon

164 4.8 Now . . . hand 4.9] enclosed in square brackets pencil; ‘Plautus describes a man [after del ‘young’] deeply suffering and puzzled’ pencil 4.8 He’s turned architect] del pencil 4.8 he has . . . hand 4.9] underl blue crayon Top of letter: ‘Reflexion & Meditation’ pencil 1 2

3 4

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to Charles Crawley, 19 April [1872]. The Thursday preceding 19 April 1872 was 18 April. William Crawley had evidently sent the list of pupils at Shrewsbury School and the boarding houses where they resided. Samuel Butler was headmaster and John Jeudwine was second master of the school when CD was a pupil there. The quotation is a translation from the comic play Miles gloriosus (The braggart captain) by Plautus. For more on the allusion by Plautus to the Roman poet Naevius, see Hammond et al., eds. 1970, p. 96.

To William Bowman 19 April [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. April 19th

My dear Bowman I send by Railway today the book which you lent me.—2 I could not help looking through many parts; & my wonder is that any us have eyes in our heads, seeing what a frightful number of horrid diseases the eye is liable to. Many thanks | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Sir John Paget Bowman (private collection) 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to William Bowman, 8 April [1872]. Bowman lent CD John Soelberg Wells’s A treatise on the diseases of the eye (Wells 1869; see letter from F. C. Donders, 1 April 1872 and n. 3).

To Charles Crawley 19 April [1872]1

Down. | Beckenham. Kent. April 19

My dear Mr Crawley. Pray thank your Father sincerely for me for having sent so venerable a Relic— 2 It is characteristic how much more most of us consider our superiors than our inferiors, that I remember more or less almost every boy above me or in the same form & very few of those below me in the school. I am very much obliged to you for your translation which seems to me Capital— 3 I fear as snapping the fingers here means being puzzled & not contempt, it will not serve my purpose— But “he has pillared his chin upon his hand” will come in under puzzled meditation.3 With my best thanks. | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin. Frank is gone to Chatham for the Engineers Ball. 4 Copy DAR 143: 301

April 1872 1 2 3 4

165

The year is established by the reference to the Engineers’ Ball (see n. 4, below). See letter from Charles Crawley, [18 April 1872] and n. 2. The venerable relic was a list of pupils at Shrewsbury School. See letter from Charles Crawley, [18 April 1872] and n. 3. In Expression, p. 230, CD quoted these words from the passage of Plautus’s Miles gloriosus that Crawley had translated for him. Brompton Barracks in Chatham is the headquarters of the Corps of Royal Engineers. Francis Darwin’s brother Leonard was commissioned in the Royal Engineers in January 1871 (RMAS archives, Sandhurst collection). A grand ball was held on 18 April 1872 at the barracks (The Times, 20 April 1872, p. 5).

From Francis Galton 19 April 1872 42 Rutland Gate April 19/72 My dear Darwin I have only had one séance, since I wrote, but that was with Home in full gas light.1 The playing of the accordion, held by its base by one hand under the table & again, away from the table & behind the chair was extraordinary. The playing was remarkably good & sweet. It played, in Sergeant Cox’s 2 hands, but not in mine although it shoved itself, or was shoved, under the table, into them. There were other things nearly as extraordinary What surprises me, is the perfect apparent openness both of Miss Fox 3 & Home. They let you do whatever you like, within certain reasonable limits. These limits not interfering with adequate investigation. I really believe the truth of what they allege, that people who come as men of science are usually so disagreable, opinionated and obstructive & have so little patience, that the séances rarely succeeed with them. It is curious to observe, the entire absence of excitement or tension about people at a séance Familiarity has bred contempt of the strange things witnessed, & the people find it as pleasant a way of passing an idle evening, by sitting round a table and wondering what will turn up, as in any other way. Crookes I am sure, so far as it is just for me to give an opinion, is thoroughly scientific in his proceedure. 4 I am convinced, the affair is no matter of vulgar legerdemain & believe it well worth going into, on the understanding that a first rate medium (& I hear there are only 3 such) puts himself at your disposal. Now, considering that the evenings really involve no strain, but are a repose— like the smallest of occasional gossip.— Considering that there is much possibility of the affair being in many strange respects true.— Considering that Home will, bonâ fide, put himself at our disposal for a sufficient time (I assume this from Crooke’s letter & believe it, because it wd. be bad for Home’s reputation, if, after offering, he drew back. But of course, this must be made clear) Considering I say, all these things, will you go in for it? & allow me to join? Home is a restless man, as regards his movements & cd. be induced to go to- & fro— I am sure I could,—if I could ensure a dozen seances, at which only our two selves & Home

166

April 1872

were together. (Others might be in the room if you liked, but, I shd. say, not present within reach) It is impossible, I see, to prearrange experiments One must take what comes, & seize upon momentary means of checking results— Home encourages going under the table & peering everywhere. (I did so & held his feet while the table moved) So I am sure, you need not feel like a spectator in the boxes while a conjuror is performing on the stage. He & Miss Fox just want civil treatment & a show of interest. Of course, while one is civil & obliging it is perfectly easy to be wary. Pray tell me what you think of the proposal in Crooke’s letter 5 | Very sincerely yrs. | F. Galton DAR 105: A53–6 1 2 3 4

5

See letter from Francis Galton, 31 March 1872. Galton was investigating phenomena associated with spiritualism. Daniel Dunglas Home was a well-known medium. Edward William Cox was a serjeant-at-law (a barrister of the highest rank). Catherine Fox. William Crookes had investigated and tested Home in 1870, and concluded that Home possessed a psychic force that could be used to modify gravity and produce musical effects (ODNB; see also letter from Francis Galton, 28 March 1872). The letter from Crookes has not been found, but may have described an apparatus for testing psychic abilities (see letter to Francis Galton, 21 April [1872]).

To G. G. Leveson-Gower, Earl Granville [before 19 April 1872] 1 Memorial of British Authors to the Right Hon. Earl Granville, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, on the subject of Copyright in the United States. Looking forward with satisfaction to the prospect of harmonious relations being happily established between the United States and the United Kingdom, we, the undersigned, hope for a reconsideration of the policy in virtue of which British authors, as authors, enjoy no rights which American citizens are bound to respect. 2 Letters from influential Americans—one of them a leading New York publisher— which have recently appeared here, joined with the approval of them expressed in the journals of the United States, show the desire of the Americans for the conclusion of a Copyright Convention between their country and ours.3 We understand that the demands of publishers in this country have hitherto been the most formidable obstacles to the negotiation of a Copyright Convention. We are of opinion that the interests of our publishers in American copyrights are quite independent of the just claims of British authors; and that the latter may be fully admitted without recognition of the former. We think it would be a grave error if the settlement of this matter were retarded, or rendered impossible, in consequence of two classes of claims, which, in essence, are wholly distinct, if not antagonistic, being regarded by negotiators representing this country as identical and inseparable.

April 1872

167

Americans distinguish between the author, as producing the ideas, and the publisher, as producing the material vehicle by which these ideas are conveyed to readers. They admit the claim of the British author to be paid by them for his brain-work. The claim of the British book-manufacturer, to a monopoly of their book-market, they do not admit. To give the British author a copyright is simply to agree that the American publisher shall pay him for work done. To give the British publisher a copyright is to open the American market to him on terms which prevent the American publisher from competing. Without dwelling on the argument of the Americans that such an arrangement would not be free trade, but the negation of free trade, and merely noticing that further argument that, while their protective system raises the prices of all the raw materials, free competition with the British book-manufacturer would be fatal to the American book-manufacturer, it is clear that the Americans have strong reasons for refusing to permit the British publisher to share in the copyright which they are willing to grant to the British author.4 We venture to suggest, therefore, that, responding to the cordial feeling recently expressed by Americans on the subject, and duly appreciating the force of their reasons for making the above distinction, future negotiations should be conducted with a view to secure a copyright on the conditions they specify. Without making it the foundation of a formal claim for reciprocity of treatment, we mention the fact, that American authors may, if they please, secure all the advantages of copyright in the United Kingdom which are enjoyed by native authors. (Signed) HERBERT SPENCER (And 51 others.)5 Memorial Correspondence between the Foreign Office and Her Majesty’s representatives abroad, and foreign representatives in England, on the subject of copyright: 1872–75. House of Commons Parliamentary Papers session 1875 (1285) LXXVIII.233–4 1

2

3

This memorial was forwarded to Earl Granville, the foreign secretary, on 19 April 1872, according to the letter that precedes it in Parliamentary Papers. A version of it, also signed by CD, was presented at a meeting of publishers in New York on 6 February 1872 (Publishers’ and Stationers’ Weekly Trade Circular, 8 February 1872, pp. 91, 94–5; Appleton 1877, pp. 247–8). The only significant difference between the version presented in New York in February and the version transcribed here is that the words ‘Looking forward with satisfaction to the prospect of ’ were omitted from the beginning of the New York version, and the following text was added after the first sentence of the second paragraph: ‘They maintain that such a convention should provide for the vesting of the British author’s American copyright absolutely and inalienably in him. That condition appears to us both equitable and satisfactory.’ No copyright treaty existed between the United Kingdom and the United States, with the result that American publishers could reprint and sell British books without offering any recompense to the author or publisher (Seville 2006, pp. 148–9). CD’s own books were by this time regularly published in the United States by D. Appleton & Co, who paid CD a percentage out of courtesy and in the hope of receiving early copy to enable them to publish in advance of competitors (see Correspondence vol. 8, enclosure to letter from Asa Gray, 20 February 1860). There was correspondence on the subject of international copyright in The Times in October and November 1871; William Henry Appleton, head of D. Appleton & Co., had a letter published on 20 October 1871, p. 10 (see also Seville 2006, p. 200 and n. 166).

168 4

5

April 1872

British printing costs were lower than US printing costs at this period; many US publishers were in favour of an international copyright treaty on condition that it covered only works wholly manufactured in the US (Seville 2006, pp. 199–201). For the full list of signatories, see the Daily News, 6 May 1872, p. 6; CD, Joseph Dalton Hooker, Thomas Henry Huxley, Thomas Carlyle, George Henry Lewes, John Lubbock, John Stuart Mill, and John Tyndall were among them. What is probably an interim printed version of the memorial, containing twenty-nine printed signatures and CD’s handwritten signature, was advertised for sale by Pickering & Chatto of New Bond Street, London, in their Bulletin 35 (March 2012).

To F. C. Donders 20 April 1872 Down | Beckenham, Kent Ap: 20. 1872. My dear Professor Donders. Your kind letter is very encouraging. I feel sure that I have struck out nothing but what had better be omitted.1 Few authors, I think, strike out half enough; & I am not half severe enough on my own writings. But I write now to say how generous your offer is about looking over my proof sheets. 2 I am however perplexed about accepting it. More or less physiology comes in in many parts, & I do not think it would be much good, unless I sent you all the sheets; & though the volume will not be a long one, this is greatly too much to expect from you. On account of the delay otherwise caused, it wd be necessary to send to send you the first proofs, though I could run through them, just enough to see that they were intelligible. I always correct my proofs heavily, & it would be too great a loss to the publisher to make serious alterations in the second or corrected proofs. Therefore I have great scruples in accepting your very kind offer. Moreover I doubt whether the book will have sufficient value to justify me in giving you this trouble. I had therefore better send only any sheets which at the same time seem to me the most doubtful. If you come to England in the summer we shall be delighted to see you here.3 Yours very truly obliged | Charles Darwin. Copy American Philosophical Society (B/D25.324) 1 2 3

See letter from F. C. Donders, 17 April 1872. Donders had offered to check proof-sheets of Expression for technical accuracy. Donders planned to visit England in July (see letter from F. C. Donders, 17 April 1872).

To Francis Galton 21 April [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Ap. 21st. My dear Galton I have considered your proposition well. It seems to me highly desirable that the subject shd. be investigated, & that it is a sort of duty in every one who can do so to aid.—2 I have consulted my wife, & she thinks even more strongly than I do, that it

April 1872

169

wd. be impossible for me.— It is very rare that I can converse with anyone & be in any way excited for an hour: my head then begins to rock, & all power of attention is lost. I am, also, so often too unwell to go out, that I shd. frequently break any appointment.— Moreover, odd as it may seem, an extreme desire to be well on any particular day, or rather evening, is very apt to make me bad.— I regret it much, but I dare not accept Mr. Home’s3 remarkably liberal offer. Do not give up yourself.— Can you not get some man known for physical science to join you? If Mr Crooke succeeds in making his apparatus, & can get some instrument-maker to sell it, then everyone could buy one & try for himself— 4 This would settle the question at once, whether any power does come out of the human body of certain or many individuals.— It wd. undoubtedly be a very grand discovery.— With very sincere thanks for your letter | Yours very truly | Ch. Darwin I regret my decision deeply, but I am sure it is unavoidable.— Only those who live with me can know how strange a state I am in in health, I never pass 24 hours, without failing several times, when I can do nothing whatever & not even read a line.— Cleveland Health Sciences Library (Robert M. Stecher collection) 1 2 3 4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Francis Galton, 19 April 1872. See letter from Francis Galton, 19 April 1872. Galton had invited CD to attend a séance. Daniel Dunglas Home. William Crookes had already attempted to record Home’s phenomena on self-registering instruments between April and July 1871 (ODNB s.v. Home, Daniel Dunglas). He evidently planned to construct new instruments for this purpose.

To ? 21 April 1872 Down, Beckenham, Kent April 21— 1872. Charles Darwin With Mr. Darwin’s compliments.— Wellcome Library (MS.7781/9)

From Georg von Seidlitz 22 April 1872 Dorpat [Tartu] Ap. 22 1872 Sir! Your letters from the 1. and 10. of April have caused to me a great joy. 1 But I am very sorry to see, that the bookseller Köhler in Leipzig and his commissionaire in England have been very neglectfull in executing my orders; for already in July 1871 I sent by this way the copies of my work to you and to Prof. Huxley. 2 I am much

170

April 1872

indebted to you for your kind intention of sending my book to the Royal and Linnean Societies, where it will be accepted, as comming from you, with greater interest than I could expect otherwise.3 I have intended peculiarly to demonstrate, that it is neither the direct influence of the exterior relations, (which Haeckel in his “Generelle Morphologie” raises to eminence) nor the “law of migration” extended extremely by M. Wagner, which effects the transmutation of species, but exclusively natural selection [ releited] upon inborn variability. (v. pag. 109–111, 205 (19), 211 (31)) 4 In Germany many philosophers are inclined to accept absolutely M. Wagners theorie of migration, and therefore it is needfull to restain her in just limits. 5 You say that you intended to write to me on my book, but that you can’t remember, wether you did so.6 Nobody can judge better than you, if I may hope to have contributed a little to greater propagation in Germany of your luminous theorie and to combat the manifold misunderstandings and stupid oppositions. Therefore I should have been very glad to see accomplished your kind intention; but before this time I did not receive another letter from you. The literature compiled by me, is very imcomplete, and peculiarly in the English literature you will find many defects. Hitherto I have registrated supplements of more than 100 (most german) titles and many corrections. For instance M r Carneri (philosopher), who figures between the adversaries, is in contrary a defender of your theorie, and his work “Sittlichkeit und Darwinismus” one of the best books induced by your “Origin of species”.7 Permit to me, dear Sir, to tell you how very much obliged to you I should be if I could hope that you will send me occasionally your photographical portrait.— My great veneration for the founders of the theorie of transmutation I have documented publicly in giving to my first born son the name of “Lamarck Darwin”. 8 Accept, Sir, the expression of the respectful sentiments with which I have the honour to be | Your most obedient servant | G. Seidlitz P.S. My father9 charges me to send to you his respectful salutations. DAR 177: 133 1 2

3 4

5

6

See letters to Georg von Seidlitz, 1 April 1872 and 10 April 1872. The firm that acted as agent for K. F. Koehler Verlag in England has not been identified. CD had only just received two copies of G. Seidlitz 1871 (see letter to Georg von Seidlitz, 10 April 1872). Seidlitz also refers to Thomas Henry Huxley. See letter to Georg von Seidlitz, 10 April 1872 and n. 2. Seidlitz refers to Ernst Haeckel and Haeckel 1866, and to Moritz Wagner and Wagner’s law of migration or separation theory (see Wagner 1868b and Wagner 1870). The page numbers refer to G. Seidlitz 1871 and the numbers in parentheses refer to notes. Wagner had argued that migration leading to geographic isolation was a necessary factor in the emergence of new species (see Wagner 1868b). For CD’s opposition to Wagner’s view, see Origin 6th ed., pp. 81–3, and Correspondence vol. 16, letter to Moritz Wagner, [April–June 1868]. See letter to Georg von Seidlitz, 1 April 1872.

April 1872 7

8 9

171

Bartholomäus von Carneri’s work (Carneri 1871) explored the implications of Darwinian theory for moral philosophy. Carneri had sent CD a copy in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Bartholomäus von Carneri, 17 April [1871]). For more on Carneri’s views on Darwinian theory, see Di Gregorio 2005, pp. 386–92. Gerhard Karl Lamarck Darwin von Seidlitz. Karl von Seidlitz.

To W. H. Edwards 23 April [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. April. 23d Dear Sir I am very much obliged to you for your kindness in having sent me Part 9. of your Butterflies, which is one of the most beautiful works which I have seen. 2 Your careful observations on the dimorphism or rather trimorphism of Papilio ajax, strike me as most remarkable & interesting.3 Believe me Dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Charles Darwin John Hay Library, Brown University (Albert E. Lownes Manuscript Collection, Ms. 84.2 (Box 3, Folder 38)) 1 2 3

The year is established by the reference to Edwards’s work (see n. 2, below). Edwards sent part 9 of The butterflies of North America (Edwards 1868–72), which was published in December 1871. CD’s annotated copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. In the section of Edwards 1868–72 (unpaginated) titled ‘Papilio III’, Edwards discussed his experimental breeding of different varieties of Papilio ajax (now Iphiclides ajax, the zebra swallowtail). He concluded that the three forms were seasonal variations of one species.

To Rifle Volunteer Corps 23 April 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Ap. 23. 1872. Gentlemen I am sorry that the state of my health will prevent my attending the proposed concerts in aid of the Rifle Corps Fund1 & therefore I must decline the honour of having my name [he must decline the honour of being a patron; wishing them nevertheless all success in the undertaking]2 Ch. Darwin LS incomplete3 Bonhams (dealer), London, 22 November 2011, lot 223 1

The Rifle Volunteer Corps was established in 1859, funded by public support. By the early 1860s some government funding was made available (for more on the funding of the Corps, see Beckett 1982, pp. 125–38).

172 2 3

April 1872

The first page of the letter (down to ‘name’) has been transcribed from an image on Bonham’s website; the part in square brackets and the signature are from the description in the catalogue. The original letter is complete and is advertised in the sale catalogue as being two pages long.

From A. B. Meyer 25 April 1872 Manila Philippin Islands April 25th 1872 Dear Sir The following notice will perhaps be of some interest to you: 1) The inhabitants of Luzon, the Tagals, when saying “yes” do not, like we do, bend the head forward, but throw it backwards, while saying oö (yes) or opo (yes sir) I do not know whether this is confined to the Tagals (Tagalocs) or is to be found also with other Malay races.1 I myself did not observe it on Celebes or other parts of the Phil. Islds, but nevertheless am not quite sure of it, as I, before I saw it on Luzon, did not pay special attention to it. 2) All these eastern people of the Malay and Phil. Archipelago, make another movement with the hand, as we do, when they are calling someone and make a sign to him that he shall come. They stretch the arm and bend the hand, and move the fingers or the whole hand towards their body, the outer side of the hand always remaining above. As I fear I have expressed myself bad in Englisch, I describe the same with other words in German on the following page, knowing you understand German quite well. Hoping that you enjoy a good health and hoping that I once shall have the honour of speaking to you again I remain, dear Sir, | as always | Yours sincerely | Adolf Bernhard Meyer P.S. Letters always reach me care of Messrs Behn Meyer & Co Singapore. When dissecting an Orang-utan from Borneo, I perceived that the smell of the flesh was not like that of other monkeys, but like that of human flesh. M. 1) Die Tagalen auf Luzon nicken nicht, wie wir, beim “Ja” sagen mit dem Kopfe, sondern werfen ihn zurück, das Kinn nach vorn. 2) Alle Völker des indischen Archipels machen wenn sie Jemandem winken eine andere Handbewegung als wir. Sie strecken den Arm horizontal nach vorn, steif, u beugen die Hand nach unten. Dann bewegen sie entweder die Finger nur, oder die ganze Hand wiederholt gegen ihren Körper, u bewegen den Arm selbst nur dann, wenn sie ihrer Pantomine einen besonderen Nachdruck geben wollen. Wenn wir winken wie es bei uns üblich ist, so verstehen sie es nicht. 2 DAR 171: 168 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Expression | Attention’ blue crayon

April 1872 1

2

173

Meyer refers to the people native to Luzon, one of the Philippine Islands, and the Austronesian language spoken by them (more usually now referred to as Tagalog (OED)). CD cited Meyer for this information in Expression, p. 275. Translation: 1) The Tagals of Luzon do not nod their head as we do when saying ‘Yes’ but throw it back, with the chin to the front. 2) All the peoples of the Indian archipelago make a different movement of the hand when waving at someone than we do. They stretch out their arm horizontally in front of them, stiff, and bend the hand downwards. Then they move either their fingers only, or their whole hand, repeatedly towards their body, and move the arm itself only if they want to give special emphasis to their mime. Whenever we wave in our accustomed manner, they do not understand it.

From F. C. Donders1 26 April 1872

Amsterdam, 26 Avril | 1872.

Mon cher & très honoré Monsieur Darwin,— Ce n’est pas pour repondre à votre dernière lettre—à laquelle d’ailleurs je n’ai rien à redire—que je vous adresse encore une fois quelque lignes. 2 Ce n’est que pour vous annoncer que l’Académie royale des Sciences, établie à Amsterdam, vient de vous conférer le titre de Membre étranger. Je ne sais que trop que vous ne pouvez nullement tenir à des hommages, dus à vos merites si éminents; mais j’ai osé croire que vous recevriez avec quelque satisfaction la preuve que la grande majorité des naturalistes et des physiologistes Hollandais a adopté la doctrine que vos études laborieuses et vos recherches ont établie.— Dans quelques jours, quand le Roi aura donné son approbation, notre secretaire aura l’honneur de vous communiquer officiellement la décision de l’Académie.3 Nous espérons donc que vous daignerez lui donner une reponse favorable. Veuillez, Mon cher et très honorer Monsieur, agreer l’assurance de mes sentiments d’affection et de respect | Votre devoué | Donders DAR 162: 232 1 2 3

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. See letter to F. C. Donders, 20 April 1872. Donders refers to the Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen. CD was officially made a foreign member on 11 May 1872, but no letter from the secretary or diploma has been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL (KNAW, Past members: www.dwc.knaw.nl/english/academy/past-members (accessed 27 January 2011)). In 1872, the king of the Netherlands was Willem III.

To F. C. Donders 29 April [1872]1

Down | Beckenham Kent. April 29.

My dear Professor Donders. Very many thanks for your letter. The honour of being elected a foreign member of your Royal Society has pleased me much.2 The sympathy of his fellow workers

174

April 1872

has always appeared to me by far the highest reward to which any scientific man can look My gratification has been not a little increased by first hearing of the honour from you. Believe me | yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin— Copy DAR 143: 414 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from F. C. Donders, 26 April 1872. See letter from F. C. Donders, 26 April 1872 and n. 3.

From J. D. Hooker 30 April [1872]1

April 30th /71

Dear Darwin I owe you for two letters, & wish I could cancel my debt by giving you a letter to Dr. O. Mahoney, but I confess myself unknown from not knowing even who he is. 2 Thanks for your offer of the photographs— pray send them if they are quite to spare— I have some [ monster] photos: of California [ Scenery] that I have had framed for the Museum3 My Mother4 is certainly no worse, but does not seem to rally materially. I wish that I could see more of her— I fear that Aunt Hannahs 5 leaving will be a sad blow to her Kind love to you all—I am distracted with work. | Ever yr affec | J D Hooker Barton L. Smith MD (private collection) 1 2 3

4 5

Hooker evidently erred in writing the year. In April 1871 he was travelling in Morocco. The year is established by the reference to Hooker’s mother, who died in October 1872 (Allan 1967, p. 224). No letters from CD to Hooker have been found since Hooker’s last known letter to CD of [5 February 1872?]. Dr Mahoney has not been identified. Hooker presented ten large photographs of California forest scenery to the Kew Museum of Economic Botany in July 1871 (Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Museum entry book, p. 284). The entry notes that the photographs were given to Hooker by Mrs Gray ( Jane Loring Gray) in 1870. See also plate on p. 175. Maria Hooker. Hannah Sarah Brightwen was Maria Hooker’s sister.

To J. J. Weir 30 April [1872]1 Down, Beckenham, Kent April 30 My dear Sir Many thanks for your note. I am not much surprised at incipient disease causing an alteration in the female, so that she would cease to be attractive to the male. 2 I am sorry that your official duties have been of late so heavy; but I suppose it is the fate of all whose services become more valuable. 3 I much hope, however, that your

April 1872

175

Grisley giant, 1861. By Carleton Watkins. Archives of the Gray Herbarium, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

176

May 1872

duties may not altogether interrupt your wonderful powers of observation in Natural History. My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin. Copy DAR 148: 329 1 2

3

The text of the letter is taken from a copy made for Francis Darwin for his editions of CD’s letters (LL, ML), although Francis did not publish it. The year was supplied by the copyist. The letter from Weir has not been found. In Descent 1: 262–3, CD discussed the preferences among animals for more vigorous and attractive members of the opposite sex, noting that it was usually females who exercised this choice. Weir was employed in HM Customs, rising to the rank of accountant and controller-general in 1874 (ML 1: 319).

From G. H. Darwin 2 May 1872 Dr. Rayner’s | Malvern1 May. 2. 72 My dear Father, I enclose a copy of some sentences out of Helmholtz, which I intended to tell you about an age ago, but about which I forgot.2 It is about the difference between minor & major chords, not a succession of notes. You see that he says that the minor has a sort of tinge of discordance in it, which the major is without. The resultant tones which he speaks of arise when two notes are sounded simultaneously, but they do not exist in either separately as do the overtones or harmonics of which I have talked to you before.— Your affectionate Son | G H Darwin [Enclosure]3 Helmholtz p 277 Dans les accords majeurs, les sons résultants du premier ordre, et même les plus graves du deuxième ordre, ceux désigné par des croches ne font que doubler les sons de l’accord à l’octave au dessous.— Dans les accords mineurs au contraire, les sons résultants du premier ordre, facilement perceptibles, viennent déjà apporter des perturbations. Ils ne sont pas, il est vrai, assez près les uns des autres pour produire des battements, mais ils sont en dehors de l’harmonie x x x En revanche, les sons résultants du deuxième ordre, ceux désignés par des croches, sont assez voisins soit des sons de même ordre, soit des sons primaire de l’accorde et des sons resultants du premier ordre, pour que des battements puissent prendre naissance; dans les accords majeurs, au contraire, les sons de cette catégorie sont encore entièrement compris dans l’accord x x x x x x Cette influence perturbatriée des sons résultants du deuxième ordre, sur l’accord mineur est trop faible cependant pour lui donner le caractère des dissonance; mais

May 1872

177

elle augmente la dureté de l’accord comparé à l’accord majeur d’une manière sensible sur un instrument juste; c’est à dire accordé d’après les intervalles mathematiques. Sur nos instruments tempérés ordinaires, cependant, cette dureté, produite par les sons résultants, se fait relativement peu sentir à côté de celle, beaucoup plus grande, produite par les consonnances inexactes. Dans la pratique, l’influence des sons résultants graves du premier ordre, les plus intenses me paraissent beaucoup plus importante; ils n’augmentent pas il est vrai, la dureté mais ils introduisent des élements étrangers à l’accorde, qui pour l’accorde mineur d’ut appartiennent aux accord majeur de la  et de mi . Aussi l’accord mineur présent-t-il quelque chose d’étrange qui n’est pas assez prononcé pour détruire entiérement la sensation de la consonnance mais qui suffit cependant pour donner à l’harmonie et à la signification de cet accord quelque chose de voilé, de vague, dont l’auditeur ne fait pas démêler la cause, parce que les faibles sons resultants qui le produisent sont couverts d’autres sons plus forts, et ne peuve être distingué que par une oreille exercée. C’est ce qui fait que les accords mineurs sont propres à exprimer des sentiments vagues sombres ou austères. Dans son Esthetique (3e. partie §772) Vischer4 a très bien développé ce caractère du mode mineur et montré qu’il s’adaptait à la verité à des nuances multipliées de la joie et de la douleur, mais que la caractère général des sentiments exprimés par le mode mineur, consistait dans quelque chose de voilé et de vague.— DAR 89: 131–2, 187 1 2

3 4

George was evidently taking the water cure at Thomas Rayner’s establishment in Malvern. The passage in the enclosure is from Hermann von Helmholtz’s Theorie physique de la musique (Helmholtz 1868, pp. 277–8). There are minor errors and alterations in George’s transcription. CD referred to Helmholtz’s work on music (but not this particular passage) in Descent, Expression, and Descent 2d ed. For a translation of the enclosure, see Appendix I. Helmholtz refers to Friedrich Theodor von Vischer’s Aesthetik, oder Wissenschaft des Schönen (Aesthetics, or science of the beautiful; Vischer 1846–57).

To Henry Johnson 2 May [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 2d. My dear Johnson I am very much obliged to you for your notes of experiments, for I want to learn all that I can about the castings. The amount of Ammonia surprises me & shows that the castings must serve as a good top-dressing. 2 I am doubtful about the percentage of 11. 1 of organic matter, because in speaking lately to David Forbes on the subject, he positively asserted that almost all published analyses of the amount of carbon in vegetable mould were valueless, as the water of composition had not been allowed for. This is not of course expelled by any ordinary drying, but is expelled at the same time that the carbonaceous matters are burnt.— 3 Your notes will in all probability come in & be of use some day.— I have not been observing much on subject of late; but I have heard from N. America & Calcutta that

178

May 1872

the worms threw up castings there as with us; & at Calcutta apparently on a greater scale even than here.—4 Some time this autumn I hope to put my notes together & see what results turn up.— With many thanks | Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin I am beginning to suspect that worms perhaps search for animacules or other food, & do not blindly swallow earth for the sake of extracting the commingled organic matter.— I feel certain that a good deal of matter is swallowed, simply for sake of burrowing.—5 Torquay Museum Society (AR 470) 1 2 3 4 5

The year is established by the reference to CD’s meeting with David Forbes (see n. 3, below). In Earthworms, p. 242, CD wrote that Johnson had found 0.018 per cent of ammonia in worm castings. Johnson’s notes have not been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. CD visited Forbes on 1 March 1872 (letter from David Forbes, 1 March 1872). Water of composition: water that is chemically (rather than physically) bound. See also Earthworms, p. 238. See letter from Asa Gray, 2 February 1872, and letter from John Scott, 22 March 1872. See Earthworms, chapter 2, for CD’s conclusions on worms’ feeding.

To G. H. Darwin 3 May [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 3d My dear George Many thanks for the extracts which I will keep, but the subject of music is beyond me.—2 I was thinking the other day of suggesting to you to deliberate over 1 or 2 sentences at the end of your paper on dress, where you speak of the subject being very interesting.3 I remember once putting in some such sentence, & it was objected to me that the Reader was the proper judge of this. This may be Hypercriticism.— I am heartily glad that you were not too late for being called to the Bar.—4 Good Heavens what two days work you had— The Lovers seem supremely happy, & Amy’s eyes are as bright as they can be, & her cheeks rosy.—5 We had a perfectly charming & most cordial letter from Mrs. Ruck today. She approves of my suggestion that the marriage sh d. not be immediately. Mr. Ruck’s name is never even mentioned!—6 Yours affectionately | C. Darwin DAR 210.1: 7 1 2 3 4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from G. H. Darwin, 2 May 1872. See letter from G. H. Darwin, 2 May 1872. CD refers to George’s article ‘Development in dress’, which was published in the September 1872 issue of Macmillan’s Magazine (G. H. Darwin 1872). George was called to the bar on 30 April 1872 (Men-at-the-bar).

May 1872 5 6

179

According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Amy Ruck was at Down from 25 April to 4 May 1872; she was engaged to Francis Darwin. Mary Anne Ruck’s letter has not been found. Lawrence Ruck had spent time in the Moorcroft lunatic asylum, Middlesex; among the evidences offered of his insanity were that he had accused his wife of being a prostitute, and claimed that he himself was haunted by a maidservant who had, according to him, borne him two children (see The Times, 25 August 1858, pp. 5–6, 26 August 1858, p. 7). He was found to be sane by the commissioners of lunacy and successfully sued the proprietor of the asylum for illegally and unnecessarily confining him (British Medical Journal, 2 July 1859, pp. 534–5). Amy and Francis were married on 23 July 1874 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)).

From W. W. Reade 3 May 1872 11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington. May 3. —72 My dear Sir I was just going to write to you to ask you not to hurry about reading the book & to suggest that you should begin by reading from 387 to 463—such being the true commencement of the book, and also the Darwinian part— it is a kind of free translation from yourself, I fear with some errors: but I intend to recast the book, to cut out & transplant the African & polemical passages, & to make it a concise & well constructed narrative of Universal History—filling out the 4 th. chapter with no dodging backwards & forwards. 1 So I shall be able to make corrections— I shall not do it for a good while yet to come—& also add to my knowledge of history & science in the meantime. I am very glad Mrs. Darwin likes the preface; a personal statement is always delicate ground. I fear that she will not approve of my tone in treating questions relating to religion. But in the work I am now on, my narrative of travel, I hope to reconcile some of those this book will offend.2 I have taken up the Religion of duty as the one business of my literary life; & shall endeavour to show that it is not inferior to Christianity as a religion of the affections, while far superior to it in all that concerns the intellect. I took care the book shd. look well by stipulating with the publisher (who is frightened out of his wits) that it shd. be modelled on the Origin of Species. There is something very ludicrous in Mivart, your opponent, aping your title, your construction of chapters & summaries, & your binding—everything but your style, which he could not reproduce quite so easily.3 But it seems to me to be almost natural for a disciple to do so— My book is a child of your masterpiece & there shall be an outward resemblance at all events. Apropos of Mivart I wonder why they dont review you in the P.M.G. as promised— I hope to see the editor after he has read my book—& shall offer to do it myself if Morley does not mean to.4 The editor said he wd. send it to Morley. Perhaps he (Morley) finds it too scientific. I shall apply for your new book at the same time.5 I have no scruple abt. doing so, as though incompetent to deal with it, I know as much about it as the others on the staff. Lewes I fancy has had a split with them.6

180

May 1872

With best wishes for your health believe me | yours very truly | Winwood Reade Nobody regrets the death of apotheosis— Few people knew what it meant, I found: & young ladies suspected it was something improper7 DAR 176: 59 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Preface (—Authorities)’ pencil 1

2 3 4

5 6

7

Reade refers to his Martyrdom of man (Reade 1872). There is an annotated copy in the Darwin Library– CUL (see Marginalia 1: 698). The page range suggested by Reade covers the last section of the third chapter (‘Materials of human history’), and two sections of the fourth chapter (‘Animal period of the earth’ and ‘Origin and early history of man’). A second edition was published in 1875. Reade refers to his African sketch-book (Reade 1873). Reade’s publisher was Nicholas Trübner. St George Jackson Mivart was the author of Genesis of species (Mivart 1871a). See letter from W. W. Reade, 20 February 1872 and n. 3. Reade was hoping for a review of Origin 6th ed. The editor of the Pall Mall Gazette was Frederick Greenwood; John Morley had reviewed Descent for him ([Morley] 1871a). Reade 1872 was reviewed in the Pall Mall Gazette, 23 November 1872, pp. 11–12. Expression was reviewed anonymously in the Pall Mall Gazette, 23 April 1873, pp. 11–12. George Henry Lewes had reviewed Variation for the Pall Mall Gazette ([Lewes] 1868). He had given up writing for the Pall Mall Gazette because of a critical review of a poem by his partner, Marian Evans (George Eliot; Ashton 1991, p. 246). Martyrdom of man was once advertised under the title The martyrdom of man and his apotheosis (see letter from W. W. Reade, 18 March [1872] and n. 3).

From J. H. Schmick 3 May 1872

Cologne, | Trutzenberg 68. Mai 3d 1872.

Most honoured Sir, About eighteen months since I had the honour to send you two essays of mine, in which my new theory on “A secular transposition of oceans” was developed, and established by facts of geology, geography and natural history. 1 I then also told you of a book of mine to be published as soon as possible, in which particularly facts of geology and geognosy were to be adduced as so many evidences of the truth of my theory, and in which I intended to explain the breaks or intermittence of the series of petrifactions. You had the kindness to acknowledge the receipt of the two essays, to encourage me in the pursuit of researches and to style as greatly meritorious for science a result as promised in my letter to you. That result is now obtained, as far as I can see, and I have the pleasure of forwarding to you, together with this note, the book, in which I think to have succeeded in establishing my theory as an “eternal law of nature”.2 I wish you would not shun the trouble to read the work and to mediate, if possible, its more general notoriety among English geologists, to whose enquiries we are indebted for so numerous important facts concerning the formation of the earth’s crust.

May 1872

181

I remain with the most distinguished consideration | Yours | ob. serv. | Dr. H. Schmick. DAR 177: 56 1

2

See Correspondence vol. 18, letter from J. H. Schmick, 12 November 1870. Schmick refers to his Die Umsetzungen der Meere und die Eiszeiten der Halbkugeln der Erde, ihre Ursachen und Perioden (The transpositions of the seas and the ice ages of the hemispheres of the earth, their causes and periods; Schmick 1869) and his Thatsachen und Beobachtungen zur weiteren Begründung seiner neuen theorie einer Umsetzung der Meere durch die Sonnenanziehung und eines gleichzeitigen Wechsels der Eiszeiten auf beiden Halbkugeln der Erde (Facts and observations to further justify his new theory of a transposition of the seas through the attraction of the sun and a simultaneous alternation of ice ages in both hemispheres of the earth; Schmick 1871): there are annotated copies of both books in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. CD’s letter to Schmick has not been found. Schmick refers to his Die neue Theorie periodischer säkulärer Schwankungen des Seespiegels und gleichzeitiger Verschiebungen der Wärmezonen auf Nord- und Südhalbkugel der Erde (The new theory of periodic secular changes in sea level and simultaneous shifts in the warm zones of the north and south hemispheres of the earth; Schmick 1872). No copy has been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL.

From Paolo Mantegazza1 4 May 1872

Florence 4 Mai 1872—

Illustre Monsieur. J’ai l’honneur de vous annoncer que dans une de ses dernières seances la Société Italienne d’Anthropologie et d’ Ethnologie vous a acclamé à son Membre honoraire, et que vous en recevrez sous peu de temps le diplome.2 J’ai reçu la dernière édition de votre immortel ouvrage sur l’origine de l’espèce. 3 Mille et mille fois merci de l’honneur que vous avez voulu me faire. Je le garderai comme un de mes plus chers souvenirs. Vous recevrez quelques unes de mes brochures anthropologiques: j’appelle votre attention sur les deux cas de dents surnumeraires observés par moi, dont un dans un nègre. (Brochure verte. pag. 23).4 Dans l’étude de mon index cephalospinal et cephalorbitaire, c’est à dire sur le rapport du volume de la moelle épinière et des orbites avec la capacité du crâne vous trouverez des singuliers rapprochements entre les singes et l’homme Je m’occupe maintenant de la mesuration des fosses nasales, qui vient de m’être rendue possible par un ingenieux instrument inventé par Mr Broca. En sommant le volume des fosses nasales et celles des orbites je pense êtablir l’index prosopocephalique c’est à dire le rapport entre les cavités des sens et la cavité du crâne; et je crois que j’aurai un moyen plus scientifique pour établir la yerarchie d’un crâne qu’avec l’angle facial et l’angle sphénoidal.5 Pour votre election sexuelle je vous prie de lire mon mémoire sur les Caractères sexuels du crâne humain, dans le quel je veux demontrer que le developpement des arcades supraorbitaires est le caractère plus masculin du crâne humain. Je viens de trouver un crâne de negre dinka avec un seul os nasal. 6 Dans deux autres crânes de la même race il y a une grande tendance à la fusion des deux os

182

May 1872

& dans un seul. On dirait que l’un est avorté. J’ai observé le même fait dans un crâne très simien de la Sardaigne.— Dans trois crânes de la Nouvelle Zelande l’os intermaxillaire est bien defini, et se separe par une veritable suture incomplete de l’os maxillaire. Je vais publier ces faits, mais j’ai voulu les annoncer au grand pontife de la science nouvelle.7 J’espère que vous pouvez les ajouter aux autres semblables dans une seconde edition de votre dernier ouvrage. 8 Vos idées marchent en Italie, et bien vite. On ne contraste que votre election sexuelle, pour la quelle je n’ai pas pu me convertir même avec votre dernière lettre.— 9 Aimez moi, comme je vous [ aime].— Votre admirateur et ami | Prof. Paul Mantegazza | President de la Societé italienne d’anthropologie etc. DAR 171: 38 1 2 3 4

5

6 7 8 9

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. For the diploma, see Appendix III. Origin 6th ed. There are three essays by Mantegazza, printed continuously and bound in green paper, in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL; their titles are: ‘Dei caratteri sessuali del cranio umano’ (Sexual characteristics of the human skull), ‘Il cranio di una donna microcefala e quello di una donna imbecile’ (The skull of a microcephalous woman and an imbecile woman), and ‘Due casi di denti sopranumerarii nell’uomo’ (Two cases of supernumerary teeth in humans). The pages are not all cut, but there is an annotation by CD on page 16 (the conclusion) of the first article and another on the outside cover. The articles were originally published in Archivio per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia 2 (1872): 11–34. No other 1872 articles by Mantegazza have been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. Paul Broca invented at least twenty-seven instruments for the study of craniology (DSB). In Revue d’anthropologie 1 (1872): 3–4 and 35 Broca describes and provides an illustration of a sliding calliper that he used for measuring the nose. Mantegazza’s publications on this subject were Mantegazza 1870a, 1871, 1872a, and 1873. The Dinka are the largest ethnic group in South Sudan (Appiah and Gates 2005). Mantegazza published his research in Mantegazza 1873. Mantegazza refers to Descent: a second edition was published in 1874, but it did not cite Mantegazza’s new work on human skulls. CD’s letter to Mantegazza has not been found.

To Hermann Müller [before 5 May 1872]1

Down, Beckenham, Kent My dear Sir, I have now read with the greatest interest your essay, which contains a vast amount of matter quite new to me.2 I really have no criticisms or suggestions to offer. The perfection 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 of producing sterile workers! But I have been most interested by your discussion on secondary sexual differences: I do not suppose so full an account of such

May 1872

183

differences in any other group of animals has ever been published. 3 It delights me to find that we have independently arrived at almost exactly the same conclusion with respect to the more important points deserving investigation, in relation to sexual selection. For instance, the relative number of the two sexes,—the earlier emergence of the males,4 —the laws of inheritance &c. 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. 5 Many of your facts about the differences between male and female bees are surprisingly parallel with those which occur with birds. The reading your essay has given me great confidence in the efficacy of sexual selection; and I wanted some encouragement as extremely few naturalists in England seem inclined to believe in it. I am, however, glad to find that Prof. Weismann has some faith in this principle.6 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. I have therefore enclosed a briefly and roughly drawn up account of this habit. 7 Should you succeed in making any observations on this subject, and if you would like to use in any way my M.S. 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. I hope that you may long have health, leisure and inclination to do much more work as excellent as you recent essay. Believe me, my dear Sir | Yours sincerely | Charles Darwin [Enclosure]8 Über die Wege der Hummel-Männchen.9 Am 8. September 1854 sah einer meiner Söhne einige Hummeln in eine Auszackung am Fusse des grossen Eschenbaumes (siehe den Plan) 10 eintreten. Da ich ein Hummelnest darin zu finden hoffte, blickte ich hinein, konnte aber keine Höhlung sehen. Während dessen nahm eine andere Hummel ihren Eintritt in die Auszackung, kam fast unmittelbar wieder heraus, stieg am Stamm ungefähr eine Elle empor und flog durch eine Gabelung zwischen zwei grossen Zweigen hindurch. Ich entfernte darauf alle die Gräser und Pflanzen, welche in der Auszackung wuchsen, aber es war daselbst keine Höhle vorhanden. Nach einer oder zwei Minuten kam eine andere Hummel und brummte über dem nun von Pflanzen entblössten Boden, flog aufwärts und passierte gleich der vorigen Hummel durch die Gablung. In der Folge sah ich viele, welche jedesmal nach wenigen Minuten eintrafen, sämtlich in derselben Richtung kamen und sich alle in genau der nämlichen Weise benahmen, mit der Ausnahme, dass einige rings um den Stamm der grossen Esche, statt durch die Gablung flogen. Ich vergewisserte mich später, dass das alles Männchen der Gartenhummel (Bombus hortorum) waren. An vielen darauffolgenden Tagen beobachtete ich ähnliche Thatsachen. Ich verfolgte die Hummeln von der grossen Esche bis zu einem kahlen Fleck an der Seite eines Grabens, woselbst sie stets brummten,

184

May 1872

dann weiter zu einem Epheublatt in einigen Ellen Entfernung, woselbst sie wiederum brummten. Ich will daher diese Stellen, woselbst sie für wenige Sekunden anhielten, “Brummplätze” nennen. Von dem Epheublatt stiegen sie in den trockenen Graben, in welchem eine dichte Hecke wuchs, hinab und flogen langsam längs des Grundes zwischen den dicht verwachsenen Dornsträuchen hindurch. Ich konnte sie längs dieses Grabens nur dadurch verfolgen, dass ich mehrere meiner Kinder veranlasste, hineinzukriechen und darin auf ihren Bäuchen zu liegen, aber in dieser Weise verfolgte ich ihre Spur ungefähr 25 Ellen weit. Sie kamen aus der Hecke stets durch dieselbe Öffnung in das offene Feld heraus und hier führten drei (in dem Plane durch punktierte Linien angedeutete) Wege auseinander, die so weit eingetragen sind, wie ich den Hummeln folgte. Sie brummten an vielen und stets an den nämlichen Stellen in der Entfernung weniger Ellen von einander auf allen ihren Wegen. Einer der Brummplätze war ein sehr seltsamer, da die Hummeln auf den Boden einer sehr dichten Hecke bis zur Tiefe einiger Fusse eindrangen, über einem abgestorbenen Blatte brummten und geradenwegs wieder zurückkehrten. Ich verfolgte sodann die Flugbahn auf eine Entfernung von ungefähr 150 Ellen, bis sie zu dem grossen Eschenbaum kamen; längs dieser Linie brummten die Hummeln an vielen feststehenden Plätzen. An dem weiteren Ende, dicht bei der “gestutzten Eiche” teilte sich der Weg in zwei, wie im Plane angedeutet. An manchen Tagen flogen sämtliche Hummeln in der hier beschriebenen Richtung, an andern Tagen kamen einige in der entgegengesetzten Richtung daher. Nach der grossen, an günstigen Tagen beobachteten Zahl, die sämtlich in derselben Richtung zogen, müssen sie, denke ich, in einem grossen Zirkel fliegen. Sie halten mitunter an und saugen auf ihrer Reise an Blumen. Ich vergewisserte mich, dass sie, im währenden Fluge mit der Schnelligkeit von ungefähr zehn englischen Meilen in der Stunde fliegen, aber sie verlieren viel Zeit an ihren Brummplätzen. Die Wege bleiben für eine beträchtliche Zeit die nämlichen und die Brummplätze sind bis auf einen Zoll genau die gleichen. Um dies zu erweisen, will ich erwähnen, dass ich wiederholt fünf oder sechs meiner Kinder, jedes dicht bei einem Brummplatz aufstellte, und dem am meisten entfernten sagte, dass es, sobald eine Hummel dort brumme, schreien solle: “hier ist eine Biene”, und so auch die andren Kinder nacheinander, und die Worte: “hier ist eine Biene”, wurden von Kind zu Kind, ohne dass jemals eine Unterbrechung eintrat, überliefert, bis die Hummel an dem Brummplatze, woselbst ich stand, ankam. Nach mehreren Tagen waren die Wege teilweise verändert; die Hummeln begannen nämlich am Fusse eines hohen, dünnen Dornbaums in einer der grossen Esche gegenüberliegenden Hecke zu brummen; sie flogen dann langsam und dicht an dem Stamme des Dornbaumes bis zu einer beträchtlichen Höhe empor, kreuzten über einen grossen Ast der Esche, woselbst sie brummten, und wurden aus dem Gesicht verloren, indem sie höher über den Eschenbaum emporflogen. Ich habe Dutzende von Hummeln an diesem besonderen Dornbaum emporsteigen sehen, sah aber niemals auch nur eine einzige herabkommen. Diese Gewohnheiten sind in verschiedenen Jahren von der Mitte des Juli bis zum Ende des Septembers beobachtet worden. Die Mitte eines warmen Tages ist für die Beobachtung am geeignetsten. Ich habe nunmehr den seltsamsten Teil der ganzen Affaire hinzuzufügen. In

May 1872

185

mehreren aufeinanderfolgenden Jahren haben die Männchen nahezu dieselben Wege verfolgt, und haben an einigen, genau die gleichen gebliebenen, Plätzen gebrummt, z. B. in der Auszackung am Fusse der grossen Esche, und sind darauf durch dieselbe Gablung hinweggeflogen. Sie sind auch denselben trockenen Graben entlang gewandert und durch genau dieselbe kleine Öffnung am Ende der Hecke herausgekommen oder eingetreten, obwohl daselbst zahlreiche ähnliche Öffnungen vorhanden waren, welche ebensogut dazu hätten dienen können. In dem einen Jahre sah ich Dutzende von Hummeln durch diese besondere Öffnung eintreten und den Boden des Grabens entlang bis zu dem grossen Eschenbaum fliegen. In einem zweiten Jahre besuchten die Hummeln hingegen den nämlichen, vorhin erwähnten Dornbaum und flogen daran empor, aber in einem anderen Jahre besuchten sie einen dicht dabei wachsenden Dornbaum. Zuerst war ich durch diese Thatsachen verwirrt und konnte nicht begreifen, wie diese während aufeinanderfolgender Jahre geborenen Hummeln möglicherweise dieselben Gewohnheiten erlernen könnten. Aber sie scheinen es vorzuziehen, längs der Hecken und Wege zu wandern und sie lieben es, am Fusse der Bäume zu brummen, so dass ich annehme, die nämlichen Wege und die gleichen Brummplätze seien in irgend einer Weise anziehend für die Species: worin aber dies Anziehende besteht, davon kann ich mir keinen Begriff machen. An vielen Brummplätzen ist durchaus nichts Bemerkenswertes vorhanden. Nachdem einer derselben häufig besucht worden ist, kann sein Aussehen, ohne dass die Besuche darum unterbrochen würden, gänzlich verändert werden. So bestreute ich den einen Fleck mit weissem Mehl und riss alles Gras und alle Pflanzen am Fusse der Esche aus, ohne irgend welchen Wechsel in den Besuchen herbeizuführen. Thatsächlich liegt keine grössere Schwierigkeit vor, zu verstehen, wie die Hummeln in aufeinanderfolgenden Jahren den nämlichen Wegen folgen und dieselben Brummplätze auswählen, als darin, zu begreifen, wie die Männchen desselben Nestes oder verschiedener Nester in demselben Bezirk, den nämlichen Wegen folgen und an den nämlichen Plätzen brummen, denn ich glaube, dass stets ein Männchen nach dem andern ausschlüpft und ich habe niemals auf ihren Wanderungen zwei in Gesellschaft gesehen. Auch bin ich niemals im stande gewesen, den Zweck dieser Gewohnheit, längs derselben Linie zu wandern und an denselben Plätzen zu brummen, womit sie viel Zeit verschwenden, zu ergründen. Ich habe nach Weibchen ausgeschaut, aber niemals eins auf den Wegen gesehen. Die Männchen von Bombus pratorum haben Brummplätze und benehmen sich in mancher Hinsicht den Männchen von Bombus hortorum ähnlich; aber ihre Art und Weise zu wandern erscheint etwas verschieden. Während ich mich in Devonshire aufhielt, vergewisserte ich mich, dass die Männchen von Bombus lucorum in gleicher Weise Brummplätze besuchen.11 Herr J. Smith12 am Britishen Museum wusste nichts von dieser Gewohnheit, aber er verwies mich auf eine kurze Notiz über den Gegenstand von Col. Newman in den “Transact. Entomol. Soc. of London (New Series Vol. I. part 6, 1851, p. 67). 13 Ich habe stets bedauert, dass ich nicht mit Gummi ein Flöckchen Baumwolle oder Daunenfeder auf den Hummeln befestigt habe, weil es dann viel leichter gewesen wäre, ihnen nachzuspüren.

186 [Manuscript diagram by CD]14

May 1872

May 1872

187

Copy and (encl) published translation DAR 146: 433; DAR 194.1; Krause ed. 1885–6, 2: 84–8 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

8 9 10

11 12 13

14

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Hermann Müller, 5 May 1872. There is an annotated copy of Müller’s article ‘Anwendung der Darwin’schen Lehre auf Bienen’ (The application of Darwinian theory to bees; H. Müller 1872) in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. In Descent 2d ed., p. 292, CD cited H. Müller 1872 for Müller’s conclusion that sexual differences in colour in some bee species were due mostly to sexual selection. CD cited H. Müller 1872 for Müller’s observations on the relative number of male and female bees, and the earlier emergence of the males from their cocoons, in Descent 2d ed., p. 254. In Descent 2d ed., p. 228, CD cited H. Müller 1872 for Müller’s observation that males of Bombus had pollen-collecting apparatus like that of the females, although they did not collect pollen. CD had received in February a copy of August Weismann’s Ueber den Einfluss der Isolierung auf die Artbildung (On the influence of isolation on the formation of species; Weismann 1872); see letter to August Weismann, 29 February 1872 and n. 3. For Weismann’s views on how sexual selection influences speciation, see Weismann 1872, pp. 72–4. CD cited Weismann 1872 in Descent 2d ed., p. 312, for his comment that the bright blue upper wing-surfaces of the male of a certain butterfly species, which were hidden when the butterfly was at rest, could not be protective. The original enclosure has been lost; however, it concerned the paths taken by males of Bombus (the humble-bee; see letter from Hermann Müller, 5 May 1872). A German translation of the enclosure was published in 1886 (Krause ed. 1885–6, vol. 2), from the original, which was then among Müller’s papers (Freeman 1968, p. 179). An English translation of this German translation is in Freeman 1968, pp. 181–3. The German version is reproduced here, with a new translation back into English in Appendix I. CD’s original observations of bees following fixed routes, with fixed ‘buzzing places’, year after year, began in 1854. In 1876, Müller wrote to CD that he had not observed the ‘regular traveling in certain pathways’ that CD had reported (letter from Hermann Müller, 4 October 1876 (Calendar no. 10631). For a translation of the enclosure, see Appendix I. See also n. 7, above. CD’s original title was ‘On the routes of the males of Bombus’ (see letter from Hermann Müller, 5 May 1872). Bombus are humble-bees (bumble-bees). A reproduction of CD’s diagram was published with the German translation (Krause ed. 1885–6, vol. 2) and reproduced in English in Freeman 1968, p. 180. The diagram reproduced here is CD’s own drawing, now in the Darwin Archive–CUL (DAR 194.1). Bombus pratorum is the early bumblebee; B. lucorum is the white-tailed bumblebee. The reference is to Frederick Smith (the ‘J.’ was evidently an error in transcription). Henry Wenman Newman’s report on the habits of humble-bees was read at a meeting of the Entomological Society of London, 2 June 1851, and published the same year (Newman 1851). Newman wrote that each species had ‘its own peculiar mode of going its round, some near the ground, others through hedges, trees, shrubs, &c.’ (p. 88). He noted that males made a round of visits to particular spots during the day (p. 91). The diagram is reproduced at 50 per cent of its original size. See n. 10, above.

From Hermann Müller 5 May 1872 Lippstadt 5 May 1872. My dear Sir Your kind letter has very much delighted me.1 That my essay on bees2 has given

188

May 1872

many facts new and interesting to you, will encourage and incite me most efficaciously to apply my leisure-time also whilst this coming summer and the next ones to the observation of bees. I have read with the greatest interest your courious observations “on the routes of the males of Bombus”.3 The fact was quite unknown to me, and I will do my best for making observations on this subject. Many thanks for your great kindness in having confided to me your manuscript. My work on the fertilisation of flowers by insects and the reciprocal adaptations of both is now finished, and yesterday I have sent the manuscript to the publisher (W. Engelmann of Leipzig) As soon as I receive exemplars, I send you one. 4 With my best thanks believe me, my dear Sir | yours very sincerely | H Müller. DAR 171: 298 1 2 3 4

See letter to Hermann Müller, [before 5 May 1872]. H. Müller 1872. See letter to Hermann Müller, [before 5 May 1872] and n. 7. Müller’s Die Befruchtung der Blumen durch Insekten und die gegenseitigen Anpassung beiden (The fertilisation of flowers by insects and their mutual adaptation; H. Müller 1873) was published by Wilhelm Engelmann. There is an annotated copy in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 610–12).

To Williams & Norgate 6 May [1872] Be so good as to send me “Unsere Zeit” with Frauenstadt’s article.—1 I am much obliged for the information—2 C. Darwin Down May 6th — Postmark: MY 7 | 72 ApcS photocopy DAR 249: 118 1

2

There is an offprint of the second part of Julius Frauenstädt’s article ‘Darwin’s Auffassung des geistigen und sittlichen Lebens des Menschen’ (Darwin’s conception of the intellectual and moral life of humans; Frauenstädt 1872), published in the 1 May 1872 issue of Unsere Zeit, in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection– CUL. No letter from Williams & Norgate on this subject has been found.

From Albert Günther 10 May 1872 British Museum 10.5.72. Private Dear Mr. Darwin By the death of Mr. George Robert Gray, the post of Assistant-keeper in the

May 1872

189

Zoological Department has become vacant. This post is that of an “officer” of the establishment, next above the rank which I hold at present. Although I am entitled to claim promotion to this rank, I am prevented from doing so at once, until I have ascertained some rule of official etiquette, there being a senior in the same class of Assistants to which I belong (Mr. Fred. Smith). 1 I shall obtain this information at the beginning of next week. Of late, it has been the custom of candidates for this rank in the Museum, to obtain testimonials from 2 or 3 men not connected with the Museum, & to add them to the recommendation of one’s own superior chief; testimonials speaking to the candidate’s qualifications as a man of science and gentleman; and eventually, I would ask you and Sharpey for such a testimonial.2 Now my object in sending you this preliminary note, is to secure your to me invaluable assistance, if you think yourself justified in giving it to me; and also in informing you of the state of things, if you should hear, as, doubtless, you will, of the exertions of ornithologists to make Mr. Salvin the successor of the late Mr. Gray. 3 My promotion would be one to a higher rank, & would not interfere with the appointment of a well qualified Ornithologist to an Assistantship in the Zoological Department. That is to say, I should claim that I should hold the same relative position to the newly elected ornithologist, which Mr. G. Gray occupied to myself. I trust you will pardon my presumtion in making you the confidant of my individual anxieties Yours very truly A Günther DAR 165: 247 1 2 3

Frederick Smith was an entomologist in the zoology department of the British Museum (Entomologist 12 (1879): 89–92). William Sharpey was professor of anatomy and physiology at University College, London (ODNB). Osbert Salvin was a founder member of the British Ornithologists’ Union and editor of its journal, the Ibis; he did not have a position at the British Museum.

To Charles Lyell 10 May [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 10th My dear Lyell I received yesterday morning your present of that work, to which I for one, as well as so many others, owe a debt of gratitude never to be forgotten.— 2 I have read with the greatest interest all the special additions; & I wish with all my heart that I had the strength & time to read again every word of the whole book. I do not agree with all your criticisms on natural selection; nor do I suppose that you would expect me to do so. We must be content to differ on several points. I differ most about your difficulty (p. 496) on higher grades of organisation being evolved out of lower ones. 3 Is not a

190

May 1872

very clever man a grade above a very dull one; & would not the accumulation of a large number of slight differences of this kind lead to a great difference in the grade of organization? And I suppose that you will admit that the difference in the brain of a clever & dull man is not much more wonderful than the difference in the length of the noses of any two men. Of course there remains the impossibility of explaining at present why one man has a longer nose than another. But it is foolish in me to trouble you with these remarks, which have probably often passed through your mind. The end of this chapter (XLIII) strikes me as admirable & grandly written.4 I wish you joy at having completed your gigantic undertaking, & remain my dear Lyell, Your ever faithful & now very old pupil | Charles Darwin American Philosophical Society (415) 1 2

3 4

The year is established by the reference to the eleventh edition of Lyell’s Principles of geology, which was published in 1872 (C. Lyell 1872). There is a annotated copy of the eleventh edition of Lyell’s Principles of geology in the Darwin Library– CUL (C. Lyell 1872; see Marginalia 1: 544–5). CD had had a copy of the first volume of the first edition (C. Lyell 1830–3) with him on the Beagle (see Correspondence vol. 1); this copy is also in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 530–1). C. Lyell 1872, 2: 496. In C. Lyell 1872, 2: 501 (end of chapter 43), Lyell pointed out that scientific discoveries and new theories were often resisted, and wished that they might instead be welcomed, even if they offended the supposed dignity of the human race.

From Samuel Butler 11 May 1872

15. Clifford’s Inn | Fleet Street E. C. May 11. 1872

Dear Sir I venture upon the liberty of writing to you about a portion of the little book Erewhon1 which I have lately published and which I am afraid has been a good deal misunderstood. I refer to the chapter upon Machines, in which I have developed and worked out the obviously absurd theory that they are about to supplant the human race and be developed into a higher kind of life. When I first got hold of the idea I developed it for mere fun, and because it amused me and I thought would amuse others, but without a particle of serious meaning; but I developed it and introduced into “Erewhon” with the intention of implying “see how easy it is to be plausible, and what absurd propositions can be defended by a little ingenuity and distortion & departure from strictly scientific methods” and I had Butler’s analogy in my head as the book at which it should be aimed, but prefered to conceal my aim for many reasons. 2 Firstly the book was already as heavily weighted with heterodoxy as it would bear, and I dare not give another half ounce lest it should break the camel’s back, secondly it would have interfered with the plausibility of the argument, and I looked to this plausibility as a valuable aid to the general acceptation of the book: thirdly it is more amusing without any sort of

May 1872

191

explanation, and I thought the drier part that had gone before wanted a little relieving; and also the more enigmatic a thing of this sort is the more people think for themselves about it, on the principle that advertisers ask “Where is Eliza?” and “Who is Griffiths?”3 I therefore thought it unnecessary to give any disclaimer of an intention of being disrespectful to the Origin of Species a book for which I can never be sufficiently grateful, though I am well aware how utterly incapable I am of forming any opinion on a scientific subject which is worth a moment’s consideration.

Samuel Butler. Paris Exhibition, 1867. By permission of the Master and Fellows of St John’s College, Cambridge. However, you have a position which nothing can shake and I knew very well that any appearance of ridicule would do your theories no harm whatsoever, and that they could afford a far more serious satire than anything in Erewhon— the only question was how far I could afford to be misrepresented as disbelieving in things which I believe most firmly. On thinking it over I determined to say nothing in the preface, but to wait for a second edition before explaining—that is if a second edition

192

May 1872

were called for.4 On the whole I think I did wisely, though I am sincerely sorry that some of the critics should have thought that I was laughing at your theory, a thing which I never meant to do, and should be shocked at having done— I am Sir | your’s respectfully | S. Butler P.S. Let me beg of you not trouble to answer this letter DAR 106: A3–5 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Please Return this’ pencil 1 2

3

4

[S. Butler] 1872a. Butler refers to Joseph Butler and his Analogy of religion, natural and revealed, to the constitution and course of nature ( J. Butler 1736). CD had used a quotation from the Analogy of religion in the preface to Origin 2d ed., p. ii. Joseph Butler made an analogy between the principles of divine government as set out in the Bible and the principles observable in nature as part of an argument that both were created by God. ‘Who’s Griffiths?’ was an advertising slogan painted on walls in the 1860s; Griffiths was a safemaker (Wynter 1863, p. 47). ‘Where’s Eliza?’ was a phrase that appeared on walls in the 1840s (C. M. Smith 1857, p. 119). The second edition of Erewhon appeared in July 1872 (S. Butler 1872b; see Raby 1990, p. 132).

To Albert Günther 11 May [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 11 (Confidential) My dear Günther I hope that the enclosed letter will serve as a testimonial of my opinion. I have preferred to send it at once, because it will save me from great embarrassment, sh d Mr Smith or Mr Salvin apply to me, as I could then say that I had already written to you. Both these gentlemen have repeatedly & most kindly assisted me, & it will be very painful to me to refuse to do any thing which they may ask. 2 For the same reason I hope that you will not object to my opening sentences, as I should like to be able to say that I have expressed an opinion only on your general qualifications, & not in relation to any special post. For instance, as far as the mere classification of birds is concerned, I suppose that Mr Salvin knows more than you; & Mr Smith with respect to insects. I hope that my letter will satisfy you; it expresses my opinion of your high merits with entire sincerity. Yours very truly— | Ch Darwin P.S. I have received from Gegenbauer a paper about the limbs of fishes; I see he discusses your views.—3 I have read only a page or two & find the German difficult; but I must try & make it out.— Are you contented with his conclusions? Your view seemed to me a great step in advance.— P.S. 2d. When I saw not very long ago G. R. Gray, he was very well.— 4 What caused his death?

May 1872

193

[Enclosure] Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 11 1872 From C. Darwin Esq. M.A., F.R.S. My dear Dr Günther I am not aware of the rules followed in the British Museum with respect to the promotion of the officers; nor how far special studies are attached to each particular post; but I have the greatest pleasure in expressing my deliberate opinion that you hold a very high position amongst the first naturalists of Europe; & that you have most justly earned this high position by your various publications. Allow me to add that I have been invariably struck & have greatly profited by the freedom & kindness with which you have always placed your extraordinary amount of knowledge at my disposal. You are at perfect liberty to use this letter in any way which you may think fit, as it expresses my sincere conviction. Pray believe me | yours very truly | Charles Darwin To | Dr. Günther F.R.S. LS(A) Natural History Museum (Gen. Lib. Günther 44) 1 2

3

4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Albert Günther, 10 May 1872. Osbert Salvin had most recently helped CD with information about ducks for Origin 6th ed. (see Correspondence vol. 19). Frederick Smith had given CD information on insects for Descent. See letter from Albert Günther, 10 May 1872. Carl Gegenbaur’s paper ‘Ueber das Archipterygium’ (On the archipterygium (primitive fin); Gegenbaur 1872) appeared in the April 1872 issue of Jenaische Zeitschrift für Medizin und Naturwissenschaft. CD’s copy has not been found, but he may have passed it on to Günther (see letters from Albert Günther, 13 May 1872 and 21 May 1872). In an earlier paper (Gegenbaur 1870), Gegenbaur had argued that all varieties of fins could be traced back to a single ancestral form derived from a shark-like ancestor. In Gegenbaur 1872, p. 132, he referred to Günther’s recent description of the structure of the fin of the newly discovered living lungfish, Ceratodus forsteri (now Neoceratodus forsteri), and concluded that Ceratodus represented a more primitive state, from which elasmobranch fishes (sharks, etc.) had developed (for more on the contemporary debate on the evolution of paired limbs, see Nyhart 2002). CD refers to George Robert Gray. CD had last been in London from 13 February to 21 March 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)).

From J. D. Hooker 11 May 1872 Royal Gardens Kew May 11 / 72. Dear old Darwin The die is cast, Lord Derby calls for my correspondence with the First Lord of the Treasy in the Upper House without delay.1 I cannot tell you how I hate & loathe the process. The responsibility of the act rests with my “friends” Tyndall, Huxley, Bentham & Lubbock 2 —but it is adopted with my entire concurrence—asked & given unhesitatingly.

194

May 1872

As to the upshot, I am confoundedly indifferent. I know that a subordinate can have no chance in fighting against his own Superior, himself a Minister of the Crown, & backed by the P. M & whole Cabinet. It is the operation I so dislike—having Kew’s dirty linen washed in public. I have a most charming letter from Lord Russell, just so, promising to go to the House & support Lord Derby when the discussion comes on. 3 Now that my part in the fight is over,—with my stomach still full of fight, I feel as if I should burst & disintegrate, by turns. You may not understand this, no more do I, but it is so all the same. Now for the silver edging— Harriette4 came home yesterday, so well & happy I should like much to go to Down soon for a few days if you are going to be at home—& bring some writing with me for Gen. Plant, which I shall never get through here.5 Would Mrs Darwin let me bring Harriete for a couple of days?— Ever yours affec | J D Hooker I have just had a splendid Greenland collection, which supports my views altogether, & I am ready to do fight for these with you.6 DAR 103: 109–10 1

2 3

4 5 6

Edward Henry Stanley, the earl of Derby, was leader of the House of Lords (ODNB). Hooker had written to William Ewart Gladstone, prime minister and first lord of the Treasury, about his disagreements with Acton Smee Ayrton, the commissioner of works. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872 and n. 1. The Hooker–Ayrton dispute was discussed in the House of Lords at the end of July 1872 (The Times, 29 July 1872, p. 5). The correspondence was printed in Parliamentary Papers, 1872 (335) XLVII.527. John Tyndall, Thomas Henry Huxley, George Bentham, and John Lubbock. A copy of the letter from John Russell is in the Archives of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (Papers relating to Kew 1867–72, Ayrton controversy, f. 193). For the debate in the House of Lords, 29 July 1872, see Hansard parliamentary debates 3d ser., vol. 213 (1872), cols. 2–23. Harriet Anne Hooker, Hooker’s daughter. Hooker refers to Genera plantarum (Bentham and Hooker 1862–83). CD and Hooker had disagreed over the survival of Scandinavian flora on Greenland after the glacial period: CD thought that Greenland had been entirely depopulated during the glacial period, and repopulated by the accidental transport of plants from Scandinavia, while Hooker thought that some plants must have survived in the south of the island and spread north when temperatures rose. See Correspondence vol. 10, letters to J. D. Hooker, 4 November [1862] and n. 6, and [10–]12 November [1862], and letter from J. D. Hooker, 7 November 1862; see also Hooker 1860.

To Francis Darwin 13 May [1872]1

Down, Beckenham, Kent. May 13th.

My dear Frank Will you try to persuade Mr. Bartlett to do me a great favour (and if he will, report the result to me)—viz. to show to the Porcupine a live snake, observe whether the sight of the snake will make it rattle the quills on the tail, as Mr. Bartlett showed me that the Porcupine does when angered. 2 You can read this note to Mr. Bartlett. Yours affectionately | C. Darwin.

May 1872

195

Copy DAR 153: 17 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from A. D. Bartlett, 16 May 1872. Abraham Dee Bartlett was superintendent of the Zoological Gardens, Regent’s Park, London.

From Albert Günther 13 May 1872 British Museum 13.5.72. Private Dear Mr. Darwin My most sincere thanks for your testimonial which, even if it should not be used for the purpose, for which it is written, will be a memorial dear to me for ever. 1 The pleasure at receiving it is only diminished by the idea that I appear to have caused you some embarrassement. I ought to have avoided this by stating more explicitly the cause which rendered me so anxious to secure your kind assistance. I had been shown the copy of a document, by which the members of the British Ornithologists Union “pledge themselves to secure Mr. Salvin’s2 appointment”; and I thought it very likely that this document would be sent to you, and that, possibly, by signing it, you would be prevented from saying a word in favour of some of your other friends. Mr. Salvin and Mr. Smith3 have probably much better claims to your assistance than I have; and having myself given testimonials to 2 or 3 different candidates for the same post, I did not intend to monopolize your assistance, but merely to ask you not to join the signers of that document, by which every other candidate is excluded. Possibly, there will be no collision at all; tomorrow I shall be able to say whether I am going to apply for the Assistant-Keepership. Qualifications for that post are, beside distinction in some speciality, a liberal education & general zoological knowledge; acquaintance with the management & arrangement of zoolog. collections etc. I have not seen yet Gegenbaur’s new paper; I trust he will send me a copy. 4 G. R. Gray5 had a great deal of trouble & anxiety lately, chiefly from the duties of the post which he occupied but a short time. His brain showed signs of exhaustion for the last four or five weeks; finally he took to bed, & became unconscious 2 or 3 days after. He never rallied, remaining in the same state for 10 days. Yours ever faithfully | A Günther DAR 165: 248 1 2 3 4 5

See letter to Albert Günther, 11 May [1872]. Günther was applying for a promotion at the British Museum. Osbert Salvin. Frederick Smith. See letter to Albert Günther, 11 May [1872] and n. 3. George Robert Gray.

196

May 1872

To Albert Günther 13 May [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 13

My dear Dr. Günther Will you have the kindness to answer me a simple question. Is the Horned Toad, of Oregon, the Tapaya Douglassii, a Batrachian or Lizard? I ask because I believe that the the Horned Frog of California, the Phrynosoma Cornuta is a Lizard.— If the names are synonyms, which is right; & have I spelled them rightly?2 I shall be anxious to hear, as I sincerely hope may be the case, that you are successful about promotion in B. Museum. I do not know whether I judged wisely but I thought my form of Testimonial would be the best for the Trustees, as many of them know nothing of science, but wd. regard a European reputation.3 Yours very sincerely | C. Darwin Shrewsbury School 1 2

3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Albert Günther, 10 May 1872. CD discussed Tapaya douglasii (now Phrynosoma douglasii, the pygmy short-horned lizard) in Expression, p. 105. Phyrnosoma cornutum is the Texas horned lizard. Batrachia is a former order that included frogs, toads, and salamanders. The term batrachian is still used in an informal sense to refer to these amphibians. In modern taxonomy, frogs and toads are in the order Anura, and salamanders in the order Caudata, of the class Amphibia; lizards are in the order Squamata of the class Reptilia. See letter from Albert Günther, 10 May 1872, and letter to Albert Günther, 11 May [1872]. CD refers to the British Museum.

From J. D. Hooker to Emma Darwin [13 May 1872]1

Royal Gardens Kew Monday.

My dear Mrs Darwin I feel quite sorry that I wrote, & troubled you to write. I am again entangled in a lot of work that will prevent my leaving home at present, & hence with great regret defer my visit to you.2 I am beginning to wish that Vesuvius was nearer at hand, to put an end to all our troubles in a dignified manner.3 My wife sends her love & thanks— she wants a change badly, but cannot get away yet. I had said nothing to Harriete.4 Most sincerely Yrs | J D Hooker DAR 103: 111 1 2 3 4

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. D. Hooker, 11 May 1872. The Monday following 11 May 1872 was 13 May. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 11 May 1872. Mount Vesuvius began erupting on 24 April 1872 (The Times, 26 April 1872, p. 12). Hooker’s wife was Frances Harriet Hooker; Harriet Anne Hooker was their daughter.

May 1872

197

To H. E. Litchfield 13 May 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 13 1872 My dear Etty Litchfield’s remarks strike me, (ignorant as I am), as very good; & I sh d. much like to insert them. But I cannot possibly give them as my own.—1 I used at school to be a great hand at cribbing old verses, & I remember with fearful distinctness, Dr Butler’s prolonged hum, as he stared at me, & which said a host of unpleasant things, with as much meaning & clearness as Herbert Spencer could devise. 2 Now if I publish L.s remarks as my own, I shall always fancy that the public are humming at me. Would L. object to my beginning with some such sentence as follows. “M r Litchfield, who has long studied music has given me the following remarks”;—& then give these remarks in inverted commas.—3 L. was quite right, about there being a good deal of repetition, & 2 or 3 pages can be condensed into one.— The discussion does not read so atrociously bad, or innanely poor as I had fancied; but that is the highest praise which can be bestowed on my part— Yours affectionately | C. Darwin Send me a line in answer.— I am dead tired.— Woolners come on Sunday.— I believe we shall ask S. Butler, author of “Erewhon”, & grandson of D r. Butler, my old Master.4 DAR 185: 32 1

2

3 4

In December 1871, or earlier, CD had consulted Richard Buckley Litchfield on the expression of emotion through music (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from R. B. Litchfield, [before 2 December 1871], and letters to H. E. Litchfield, [before 2 December 1871] and 2 December [1871]). Further letters on the subject from R. B. Litchfield have not been found, but CD quoted him at length in Expression, pp. 89–90. CD refers to his headmaster at Shrewsbury School, Samuel Butler (1774–1839). CD found Spencer’s writings obscure (see Correspondence vol. 11, letter to J. D. Hooker, 23 [ June 1863]), and Autobiography, pp. 108–9. CD used this phrasing in Expression, p. 89, except that he wrote ‘attended to’, not ‘studied’. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Alice Gertrude and Thomas Woolner, and Samuel Butler (1835–1902) visited Down on Sunday 19 May 1872. Erewhon was published in 1872 ([S. Butler] 1872a). See letter from Samuel Butler, 11 May 1872.

From W. B. Tegetmeier 13 May 1872

The Field. | 346, Strand, | London, W.C. May 13 1872

My dear Sir. I am sure you will pardon my offences when fairly acknowledged Some time since I asked you for the skull of the “Horned Cock” figured by you— I find that you returned it in a small tin box separate from the others and thus it was mislaid pray excuse my troubling you— 1

198

May 1872

I send you a photo shewing the bleaching action of the suns rays on “dun” feathers in pigeons— It was taken apropos of a discussion on the effect of light on Plumage. In which, knowing something about the subject practically, and my opponents only writing from supposition I came out victorious 2 In your suggestion as to the possibility of breeding pigeons with different coloured sexes. Your supposition is strangely near the truth—3 “Silver” Dragons are often a sport from Blues—but they are almost always hens, and a silver hen and blue cock mated together will breed in the greatest number of instances a blue cock and silver hen in the same nest. Cocks are hard to procure, during the last two years I failed in procuring one and consequently bred 10 silver dragon hens but not one cock from, blue cocks and silver hens matched together This year I have been fortunate in getting two silver cocks to breed from. they are both matched to silver hens, bred as before stated. The pair has had two nests. The first nest a blue cock and silver hen— the second a single blue bird two young to determine sex.— Second pair now breeding— There would be no difficulty in raising a breed in which all the cocks should be blue and the hens silver.— In fact the difficulty is not to do it—4 Dr Chapuis is quite right respecting the dark markings of cocks of the mealy or “pâle panaché” of the Belgian voyageurs—5 I send you two or three errata should you not have discovered them You have been so kind as to send me a copy of all your later works, my edition of the Origin is the first (your gift)6 I want to read the last and I should indeed be pleased to have it like the others with your signature. forgive me if my request is impertinent but I am not often a beggar.— I send you three notes that occurred to me as I read the volume; 7 , and should I put down any more I will send them. You frequently quote E S Dixon I do not regard him as a reliable authority he is certainly wrong about the pairing of guinea fowls which you quote8 Believe me | very truly Yours W B Tegetmeier C Darwin Esq [Enclosure 1] Vol I Notes for M r Darwin page 19. . . A very strong athlete whom I described in the Field ( ) had the power of throwing the neck into deep fissures by the contraction of the platysma. page 25. May not the fœtal lanugo be regarded as analogous with the temporary fœtal hair of certain mammals—that which is shed at birth. ex seal in which it is shed in enormous quantity. page 39 Terror causes feathers on head of cowardly game cock or hen to be raised, a mark of cowardice recognised by cock fighters. 9

May 1872 [Enclosure 2]

DAR 88: 175–6, DAR 90: 101, DAR 178: 83, DAR 193: 22 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 I . . . by you— 2.1] cross in margin pencil 1.1 I . . . victorious 3.4] crossed pencil 4.4 instances] ‘instances’ added above pencil 4.5 Cocks] ‘Silver’ added pencil

199

200

May 1872

4.5 Cocks . . . sex.— 5.4] ‘When [‘Blu’ del] a Silver-cock was procured others Blue?’ added pencil 7.1 I . . . beggar.— 8.4] crossed pencil; marked with cross pencil; ‘Dr Bree’ 10 added pencil 10.1 he . . . quote 10.2] double scored red crayon End of letter: ‘Polygamy & Pairing’ pencil Enclosure 1: 2.1 page . . . quantity. 2.3] crossed ink Enclosure 2: Back of photograph: ‘To show effect of light on Dun feathers’ pencil 1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9 10

See Correspondence vol. 19, letter from W. B. Tegetmeier, 17 [ July] 1871, and letter to W. B. Tegetmeier, 18 July [1871]. The illustration of the horned fowl’s skull appeared in Variation 1: 265. The discussion, if it was published, has not been found. See Descent 1: 284–5. CD cited Tegetmeier for this information, and his later breeding results, in Descent 2d ed., p. 446. Tegetmeier refers to Félicien Chapuis, author of Le pigeon voyageur belge (The Belgian homing pigeon; Chapuis 1865), and possibly to CD’s comment in Descent 1: 285 that a Belgian pigeon breed existed in which only the males were streaked with black. In Chapuis 1865, p. 87, Chapuis wrote that the characteristic could be used to determine sex in this breed; CD scored this information in his copy in the Darwin Library–CUL. Pâle panaché: pale streaked (French). Tegetmeier’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for the first edition of Origin (see Correspondence vol. 8, Appendix III). Tegetmeier refers to Descent. In Descent 1: 270 n. 9, CD cited Edmund Saul Dixon for the information that the eggs of the guinea fowl were infertile if more than one female was kept with the same male. In Expression, p. 100, CD cited Tegetmeier for this information. Charles Robert Bree. See letter to W. B. Tegetmeier, 14 May [1872] and n. 4.

From Albert Günther 14 May 1872 Surbiton 14.5.72 Private My dear Sir I have been so busy this morning, that I was obliged to defer my letter to you till I came home. The morning’s business commenced with Mr. Smith informing me, that being 66 years of age, he would not become a candidate. 1 This act of Mr. Smith’s is all the more creditable, as it is entirely spontaneous. When I told Owen of it, he took off his cap in admiration of this act of unselfishness.2 On the other hand, I heard that Salvin was actually applying for the Assistantkeepership, and not for the charge of the ornitholog. collection only. I certainly did not think that he would attempt to deprive men of their reward for many years hard service; he might have been justified, if he had special qualifications for this post, which we old servants do not possess.3 But having known Mr. Salvin for many years, I could not say that his general zoological knowledge is superior to that of Mr. Smith or my own. Dr. Gray asked me, then, this morning formally, to make my application to the Trustees.4 I shall have the cordial cooperation of Owen & Gray, & therefore, I am

May 1872

201

not afraid of the issue, if I can get those Testimonials I mentioned to you before. 5 The Trustees will be informed of the work I have done in the Museum, by the official reports of my superiors; and those testimonials (which are always required in filling up an officer’s post) are required to show to the Trustees, that I am not merely a Specialist (which would disqualify me for the post), but that the merit which may be in my special work, is the consequence of a good general zoological education and knowledge. This is probably better known abroad, where I published a handbook of Zoology,6 & other papers on various subjects. Beside yourself & Sharpey, I intend to write to Kölliker, Troschel, van Beneden, Steenstrup and Reinhardt. 7 I think your Testimonial will give the Trustees what they require.8 Tapaya is a synonym of Phrynosoma, and douglasii and cornutum are two species of the same genus.9 The proper spelling is Phrynosoma (or Tapaya) douglasii Phrynosoma cornutum I will write again when my case enters into a new stage Yours very sincerely | A Günther DAR 165: 249 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

See letter from Albert Günther, 10 May 1872. Günther refers to Frederick Smith. Richard Owen was superintendent of the natural history departments of the British Museum, where Günther was applying for promotion to the post of assistant keeper in the zoological department. Osbert Salvin was an ornithologist and entomologist, and did not have a position at the British Museum. John Edward Gray was keeper of the zoological collections at the British Museum. See letter from Albert Günther, 10 May 1872. Günther refers to his Handbuch der medicinischen Zoologie (Günther 1858). William Sharpey, Rudolf Albert von Kölliker, Franz Hermann Troschel, Edouard van Beneden, Japetus Steenstrup, and Johannes Theodor Reinhardt. See letter to Albert Günther, 11 May [1872]. See letter to Albert Günther, 13 May [1872] and n. 2.

To James Hector 14 May 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 14th 1872 Sir I beg leave to thank you for your letter in which you inform me that the New Zealand Institute has conferred on me the honour of electing me an Honorary member; & I request that you will return for me my very sincere acknowledgment for this honour.—1 I remain, Sir, | Your most obedient servant | Charles Darwin To | Dr. Hector Te Papa Archives, Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa (MU000279/001/0001/0001)

202 1

May 1872

CD may refer to the diploma from the New Zealand Institute, which Hector signed as manager of the institute (see Appendix III); no other letter from Hector on the subject has been found.

To J. D. Hooker 14 May [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 14th My dear Hooker I am very sorry that you cannot come here, as I had been looking forward to the pleasure, & it would have been a change for you; but I am far more sorry that you are still so much troubled.2 I know no man in the world that has so little merited trouble as you. Good God how I do hope that they will in the House of Lords pitch into that accursed fellow.—3 Come here when you conveniently can—. Yours affectionately C. Darwin DAR 94: 224 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. D. Hooker, 11 May 1872. See letter from J. D. Hooker to Emma Darwin, [13 May 1872]. CD refers to Acton Smee Ayrton; see letter from J. D. Hooker, 11 May 1872 and n. 1.

From J. D. Hooker 14 May 1872 Royal Gardens Kew May 14/72 Dear Darwin I was indeed concerned to have to call off my visit to you—but the “Treasury” has wakened up, & begins to find out that it will get into trouble with me—& that I am not to be “put down” in short, & this has brought about an official correspondence.1 I have just heard that there is a hot fight raging between the Treasury & Mr Ayrton, & “My Lords” are all on a sudden wondrous civil to me— The conduct of Gladstone, & indeed of the whole Ministry, is truly despicable— They are in abject terror of the correspondence being called for in Parliament, & coolly advise me to wait till a new Ministry comes in!, as if it was not this Ministry’s duty to put me right; & as if “another Ministry” had nothing else to do but to rectify their blunders, & short-comings.2 Gladstone, Lowe, Ld Ripon, Cardwell, Ld Halifax, Bruce & D. of Argyll, all say I am wholly in the right, & that I have been officially as well as privately, infamously treated—3 but not one will raise a finger to help me, till exposure in Parliament is imminent—.

May 1872

203

I hoped to have seen Lord Derby4 call for the papers last night— I regret that it is delayed— The exposure will render it impossible that I & Ayrton should retain our respective positions, & I am perfectly ready for the worst. It is my clear duty to the public to expose this affair irrespective of personal consequences, & I shall not raise a whisper to stop it: but I rather expect, now, that active measures in my favor will be immediately resorted to; & they have the Whitsuntide recess to think over their position. Gladstone cannot wish for the production of a correspondence in which I have officially accused Ayrton of having deceived him (the P.M.) in a public document, & telling him a falsehood in a private letter— Accusations made 10 months ago, & to this hour unanswered!5 Ever yours affect J D Hooker DAR 103: 112–13 1 2 3

4 5

See letter to J. D. Hooker, 14 May [1872]. Hooker refers to his dispute with Acton Smee Ayrton over the running of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (see letter from J. D. Hooker, 11 May 1872 and n. 1). William Ewart Gladstone became prime minister at the end of 1868; this parliament was dissolved in January 1874, and Benjamin Disraeli became prime minister (ODNB). Robert Lowe, George Frederick Samuel Robinson (the marquess of Ripon), Edward Cardwell, Charles Wood (Viscount Halifax), Henry Austin Bruce, and George Douglas Campbell (the duke of Argyll) were members of Gladstone’s administration. Edward Henry Stanley, the earl of Derby. Hooker had written to Gladstone on 19 August 1871 (see Nature, 11 July 1872, p. 213). The Whitsuntide recess lasted until the end of May 1872.

To W. B. Tegetmeier 14 May [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 14th My dear Sir I am very much obliged for all the very interesting details in your letter.— I am particularly pleased to hear about the sexual colours in pigeons. Pray add to your kindness by hereafter telling me the sex of the single bird, & colours of any other pairs from 2 silvers.2 Thanks for photograph (which is a very good one of yourself) 3 I do not quite understand whether the bird was uniformly coloured before exposure to strong lights. You give Dr Bree a good thrashing; he is just what you call him “impertinent”: he in fact accused me, without a shadow of foundation, of lying, shortly after the publication of the Origin; he has not the soul of a gentleman in his body. 4 I will send you with very great pleasure the last edit. of Origin, & have written to Murray; you can paste in enclosed, whenever you get the copy, 5 With many thanks | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Archives of the New York Botanical Garden (Charles Finney Cox Collection ser. 14)

204 1 2 3 4

5

May 1872

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from W. B. Tegetmeier, 13 May 1872. See letter from W. B. Tegetmeier, 13 May 1872 and n. 4. See second enclosure to letter from W. B. Tegetmeier, 13 May 1872. In the Field, 11 May 1872, p. 430, Tegetmeier had responded to Charles Robert Bree’s criticisms of his observations on the stomach contents of some finches. Tegetmeier wrote that he undertook the observations ‘truthfully and conscientiously’, and that to call them ‘inaccurate, useless, and sensational’ was ‘unscientific and impertinent’. Bree had published a book in which he insinuated that CD had fabricated the remark by a ‘celebrated author and divine’ included in Origin 2d ed., p. 481 (Bree 1860, p. 244; the remark was, in fact, from Charles Kingsley). See Correspondence vol. 8, letter to J. S. Henslow, 26 October [1860]. Bree published An exposition of the fallacies in the hypothesis of Mr. Darwin in 1872 (Bree 1872). CD refers to his publisher, John Murray; the dedication he sent has not been found.

From Gerard Krefft 15 May 1872 Australian Museum Sydney May 15/ 1872 Charles Darwin Esq | F.R.S | &c &c &c | Down, | Beckenham | Kent Dear Sir I have taken the liberty to address to you a copy of the “Sydney Mail” containing a short review of Professor Owens last paper on the Thylacoleo Carnifex which in my opinion was nothing but a harmless Phalanger and not more carnivorous than these animals are at the present day.1 I am anxious to obtain your opinion on the subject because the Thylacoleo is a most interesting animal allied to nearly every one of our marsupial families Do you believe that it was “the fellest of Carnivores” as Professor Owen thinks2 & will you kindly favour me with a few lines at your convenience.— I often observe our animals & one fact which I once communicated to Prof. Huxley will interest you. The Frilled Lizard Chlamydosaurus Kingii which is common in N. E Queensland has a habit of squatting on its haunches raising the arms clear off the ground & on one occasion I have noticed it hop, for a short distance. It is certainly the only Saurian which possibly can perform such a feat & I believe it has the longest hindlegs of any species of the tribe. Prof Huxley had written a paper on Archæopteryx & in consequence of reading it I made the experiment & succeeding in startling my specimen kept in a large enclosure on to its hind quarters.— 3 I sent Prof. H a skeleton by the next mail but have never heard from him since. If you care about having a specimen I can supply you & if I can be of service to you in any other way please command me. I may not be able to send you Photogr. of my sketches/restorations of Thylacoleo &c this mail & I enclose rough tracing of some of the principal objects referred to in my review.— I may also tell you that I discovered traces of man at the Breccia Cavern of Wellington & of the tooth I found you shall also have a Photo.—4 I hope to receive a line from you & remain dear Sir | yours very | sincerely | Gerard Krefft

May 1872 [Enclosure 1]5

[Enclosure 2]

205

206 [Enclosure 3]6

May 1872

May 1872

207

[Enclosure 4]7

[Verso] Right and left upper 3d. incisor much worn Thylacoleo from Casts originals in Prof Owens hands DAR 169: 116; Darwin Pamphlet Collection, CUL, G748 CD ANNOTATIONS 3.2 service] pencil cross in margin 4.1 discovered . . . Wellington 4.2] scored pencil 1

2 3 4 5 6

7

Krefft’s review from the Sydney Mail, 18 May 1872, is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. A corrected version was printed in the Annals and Magazine of Natural History (Krefft 1872). Owen’s most recent paper on Thylacoleo carnifex was Owen 1870, which was reprinted from the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London under the title A Cuvierian principle in palaeontology tested by evidences of an extinct leonine mammal (Thylacoleo carnifex). Krefft had put forward the view that T. carnifex was not more carnivorous than present-day phalangers in Krefft 1866. Phalanger is a genus of the family Phalangeridae, brushtail possums or cuscuses. Only partial skull fragments of T. carnifex had been found. See Owen 1870, p. 219. In T. H. Huxley 1868, Thomas Henry Huxley argued that the fossil animal Archaeopteryx was closer to birds than to reptiles. Krefft refers to the Wellington Caves of New South Wales. Breccia Cavern is now Mitchell Cave. The photograph of a tooth has not been found. The drawing is reproduced at 48 per cent of its original size. The tracings of teeth (top right-hand corner) are from Thomas Livingstone Mitchell’s Three expeditions into the interior of eastern Australia (Mitchell 1838, 2: plate 32). The skull (top left-hand corner) is from a plate accompanything Owen 1858, Owen’s first paper on Thylacoleo carnifex in the Philosophical Transactions. The tracings are reproduced at 60 per cent of their original size. The photograph is reproduced at 58 per cent of its original size.

208

May 1872

From A. D. Bartlett 16 May 1872 Zoological Society’s Gardens, | Regent’s Park, | London, N.W. May 16th. 1872 Dear Sir I turned a Snake loose into the yard with 2 of Grotes Porcupines, one of them shook his tail at the sight of the Snake, the other did not, but gnashed his teeth and appeared much inclined to bite the snake, I then tried the Crested Porcupine he did not shake his tail, but set his spines up and I thought he would attack the snake with his teeth 1 he walked round the snake and appeared angry but did not touch it— I then put the Snake into the yard with the little Java Porcupine2 but he was evidently frightened of the snake and kept as far from it as possible but did not rattle his tail. I believe from what I saw that the Porcupine if hungry and in a wild state met with a snake he would kill and eat it, Yours faithfully | A D Bartlett Chas. Darwin Esq. DAR 160: 47 1

2

See letter to Francis Darwin, 13 May [1872]. In Expression, p. 93, CD reported that one porcupine rattled its quills and shook its tail when a snake was placed in its enclosure. Grote’s porcupine (Hystrix grotei) is now H. brachyura (the Malayan porcupine). The crested porcupine is H. cristata. The Java porcupine is now known as the Sunda porcupine (Hystrix javanica).

From W. W. Reade 16 May 1872

11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington May 16—72

My dear Sir I really feel more grateful to you for your blame & for your warnings than for your praise, as I think that you would not bestow the former unless you felt some interest in my future career.1 I shall bear in mind what you have said, and it accords with some reflections that occurred to me—as to whether punching the public’s head (such a thick head too) is the way to improve its mind— Perhaps I have only bruised my own knuckles. Respecting my travels I shall at least take care to state any scientific fact that I may have to contribute, in scientific language. But it will be a personal narrative, & I shall put in nothing which will not interest women—2 My plan however is still rather cloudy. Of course I will not ask you to answer this letter: if at any future time I stand in need of your advice or have anything wh. I think may interest you I will write again. Pray do not hesitate to ask me for details on any African point that may occur to you; all my raw material is at your disposal. I only wish it was of more value— I am afraid Mrs. Darwin is not pleased with the theological parts of the Martyrdom if she has read them and that she has discovered the word “presumptuous” is applicable to the writer of the book—though not to the writer of the preface— 3 When my book of travels comes out I shall venture to ask her for her opinion of it.

May 1872

209

So then au revoir, and I need not say how earnestly I hope you may have good health which you know so well how to employ for our benefit & instruction I remain | Yours very truly Winwood Reade Trübner says that book is going off very well.4 DAR 176: 60 1 2 3 4

CD’s letter to Reade has not been found, but evidently concerned Reade’s Martyrdom of man (Reade 1872; see letter from W. W. Reade, 3 May 1872. Reade refers to his African sketch-book (Reade 1873). See letter from W. W. Reade, 3 May 1872. Nicholas Trübner was the publisher of Reade 1872.

From Briton Riviere 16 May 1872

16 Addison Road | Kensington W May 16/72

My dear Sir I fear that long ere this you must have repented waiting for my sketches of the two dogs which I have just sent per rail to the Orpington Station. 1 It is very likely that they will be of no use to you but I shall be very glad if they are. I have endeavored to keep to your written directions as much as possible. 2 Should the sketches be worth cutting, if you will kindly let me know when they are in Mr Cooper’s hands I will call & see him about them (I know him very well) as expression hangs upon so subtile a difference of lines that what may be right in the drawing can be easily made wrong in the engraving. 3 Trusting that these sketches will be of use I am | Dear Sir | Yours truly | Briton Riviere DAR 176: 176 1

2 3

CD had asked Riviere to draw two sketches of dogs for Expression, one of a hostile dog, one of an affectionate dog (see letter to Briton Riviere, 1 April 1872, and letter from Briton Riviere, 3 April 1872). Sketches by Riviere were reproduced in Expression, pp. 52 and 53. See letter to Briton Riviere, 1 April 1872 and n. 1. The engraver was James Davis Cooper (see letter from Briton Riviere, 3 April 1872 and n. 2).

From E. D. Smith 16 May 1872

Petoraghur. 16 May 1872.

Sir. When reading yr. Naturalist’s Voyage round the World the account of a Hail Storm at P. 115 interested me much.1 As regards the size of hail stones I hope you will not think me forward in writing to tell you of the largest of three that I measured the other day (the 12 th. April). The stones all fell on a thatched roof and thus escaped breaking they were brought to

210

May 1872

me by a Havildar of my Regt and I only thought of measuring after some little time had elapsed.

In shape they were like a Pine Cone blunted at the top and flattened at the bottom the resemblance in other ways was very great having all the separate fronds (I know no other word) clearly traceable and distinct, but closer packed together than in the cone, the centre was much more opaque than the fronds and very large Had these stones fallen on the hard ground each frond would have formed an ordinary sized stone as seen in common hail-storms and the opaque centre would have been larger than a pigeons egg.— The shape is not accurately represented for I tore the paper round the base as best I could. I will answer for the size being in no way exaggerated—the circumference was 14 of an inch longer than this sheet of paper.2 The Natives do not remember ever having seen such a hail-storm— I have however heard of no accident to man or beast, although the cattle had not yet been housed for the night Petoraghur is 5500 feet above the level of the sea, in the Himalaya on the Western Frontier of Nepal close to Almorah (60 miles) and 90 from Nynee Tal.—3 Hoping Sir you will excuse this liberty I have taken | I am with every feeling of respect | Yrs ffthy. | E D Smith. I enclose my card as a guarantee.4 DAR 177: 190 1

In Journal of researches (1860), p. 115, CD gave an account of hailstones as large as small apples, which reportedly killed wild animals, including deer. This edition has the spine title Naturalist’s voyage round the world.

May 1872 2 3 4

211

Smith’s notepaper is seven inches long. Petoraghur (now Pithoragarh), Almorah, and Nynee Tal (now Nainital) are in northern India, west of Nepal. The card has not been found.

From Hugh Browne 17 May 1872

Nottingham 17 May 1872

Dear Sir The following note in Moore’s diary may be worth your notice as an hereditary peculiarity—6 Moore’s Memoirs by Russell page 46.—1 “In talking of handwriting & its being sometimes hereditary, Brougham 2 said he had found some of his gr father’s which exactly resembled his own, tho’ the gr father had died before he was born & his father’s writing was altogether different.”— Your prophesy as to our family color blindness comes true—3 a few days since my brother Michael brought his eldest boy—2 21 years old—& boasted he had not had it, the boast was hardly uttered when the lad looked at a band in my wifes dress & pronounced it blue—4 It was rose color.— It is surprising how many fail at a distance to distinguish the scarlet flowers or fruit of japonica5 from the leaves— I cannot. Please don’t waste your time in replying unless you want something that I can supply.— Yours truly | Hugh Browne Chas Darwin Esq | Down Beckenham Kent DAR 160: 332 1 2 3

4 5

Browne refers to the Irish poet Thomas Moore, his biographer John Russell (the first Earl Russell), and T. Moore 1853–6. William Brougham. No letter from CD to Browne has been found. Browne had written to CD about colour-blindness in his male relatives (see Correspondence vol. 16, letter from Hugh Browne, 30 May 1868, and Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Hugh Browne, 17 April [1871]). Browne refers to Michael Browne, Michael Ross Browne, and Mary Selina Browne. The common name japonica was usually applied to species of Chaenomeles, the flowering quince, especially C. japonica (Maule’s quince).

From Albert Günther 17 May 1872

British Museum 17.5.72

Private My dear Sir I heard yesterday that I shall not have Salvin as an opponent, and that a new application is being circulated, requesting for him an assistancy. Thus that part of the “pledge” by which he came into collision with me, appears to have been abandoned. 1

212

May 1872

I cannot help thinking that the Ornithologists did not go to work properly. Of course they were entitled to urge the necessity of the appointment of an Ornithologist, if this had not been attended to by the authorities; but it appears to me very impolitic, to commence by pledging themselves in favour of one man, thus preventing fair competition. And I understand, two or three other competent men would have tried for the place. It looked like an attempt to force the Trustees to appoint Salvin. Whilst there was a prospect of opposition, the Principal Librarian 2 advised me not to limit myself to 2–3 testimonials, but to obtain more. Consequently I applied to Busk, Flower and Huxley,3 who very kindly promised to comply with my request. Yours very truly | A Günther I understand Huxley was the first who pointed out that Salvin’s appointment must not interfere with claims of men already in the establishment. DAR 165: 250 1 2 3

See letter from Albert Günther, 13 May 1872. The reference is to Osbert Salvin. John Winter Jones. George Busk, William Henry Flower, and Thomas Henry Huxley.

From Athénaïs Michelet1 17 May 1872

Paris | rue d’assas | 76— 17 mai 1872

Monsieur Le nom de mon mari vous étant connu, je l’espère, par ses grands travaux historiques, et notre admiration pour votre génie, étant exprimée dans plusieurs de ses ouvrages, je viens en humble disciple, demander l’aide de vos conseils pour un travail qui m’occupe en ce moment.2 Il s’agit des chats, mes hôtes et mes favoris, depuis ma plus tendre enfance. 3 Elevée à la campagne, dans une sorte d’arche de Noé, j’ai passé ma jeunesse solitaire à observer et noter les impressions que je recevais de mes compagnons habituels. Mon livre, néanmoins, n’a pas de prétentions scientifiques. Il sera le frère de l’oiseau, de l’Insecte, etc, où nous avons cherché, ensemble, à donner aux gens du monde, le goût de l’histoire naturelle, à faire naître le désir de la mieux connaître, près des maîtres de la science.4 J’ai lu très attentivement dans votre ouvrage des variations, le chapitre qui concerne les chats, regrettant bien sa briéveté. 5 Je puis vous affirmer, monsieur, que les métis demi angora, se reproduisent entr’ eux, et avec les chats communs.—6 Autour de ce fait, je vous intéresserai peut-être, en vous donnant quelques détails.— J’avais reçu, il y a quelques années, une couple de chats. Le mâle magnifique angora noir et blanc, semblait pourtant avoir subi un léger mélange. La femelle, était une vraie chatte de gouttière, maigre, rase, élancée. Au printemps, les époux songeant à la famille, se retirèrent discrètement au fond de mon jardin. Mais un chat noir fumeux, vint roder par là, et eut avec le mari légitime, les duels accoutumés.—

May 1872

213

Trois petits chats naquirent de cette union. Je les gardai tous. Voici leur signalement:— L’aîné, blanc et noir comme son père, avait, par opposition, le poil ras et toutes les allures de sa mère.— Le second, une petite chatte, avait au contraire, la robe entièrement de la couleur de sa mère; mais avec la fourrure longue et soyeuse de son père, ce qui donna lieu, plus tard, aux reflets les plus chauds, les plus délicats. Je l’appelai: La blonde. Le troisième, fut un mâle tout noir, non pas du noir de jai de son père, mais du noir éteint de l’étranger. La singularité, c’est que son poil plutôt laineux que soyeux, avait en même temps, la longueur et l’ampleur d’un chat angora. Je le surnommai Pluton. Je l’ai gardé 5 ans. Il a péri d’un coup de feu.—7 Dès sa première année, il y eut mariage entre lui et sa soeur. Mais celle-ci, souffrante d’unions trop précoces, eut une mauvaise portée. Affaiblie, elle ne manifesta aucun instinct maternel. Les petits moururent presque en naissant.— Cependant après cette espèce d’avortement, sa santé reprit le dessus; elle devint merveilleusement belle; mais conserva de ses premières épreuves, je ne sais quelle grâce morale, dans les poses et les mouvemens. On eût dit une personne. L’année suivante, au moment où elle allait nous donner des petits de Pluton, (le père et le frère aîné, étaient déjà morts d’accident,) elle fut prise dans une piège, et étranglée.— Ceci, en prouvant la fécondité des métis, prouverait aussi que la sélection intentionnelle, n’est pas si difficile que l’on pense. À Paris, où l’on enferme les chats auxquels on tient, s’il y a couple, le ménage ne semble nullement proccupé de chercher ailleurs. J’ai même constaté que les époux se témoignent, aux saisons calmes, des signes d’attachement réciproque. J’ai vu la femelle s’irriter et souffleter un mari qu’elle croyait volage. L’indépendance indomptable des chats, la besoin impérieux des sorties nocturnes, empêchera toujours, dans les villes, la longévité de l’individu, mais, en tenant le ménage sédentaire aux époques voulues, on pourra jusqu’à un certain point modifier une race. Votre ouvrage ayant été publié avant les deux expositions qui se sont faites à Londres, vous n’avez pu en parler.8 Oserai-je vous prier, monsieur, de me dire s’il en a été fait des comptes rendus qui méritent qu’on s’y arrête? Je voudrais savoir aussi, s’il existe en anglais quelques biographies, ou des études partielles d’amateurs, sur les chats domestiques et sur les grands chats, lion, tigre etc. Tout doit aller à vous, monsieur comme en hommage, et ces renseignements précieux pour moi, vous les avez, j’en suis sûre, sous la main.— Recevez, je vous prie, l’expression de notre très haute considération. | A Michelet P S. J’aurai l’honneur de vous envoyer mon petit livre, réclamant d’avance pour lui, toute votre indulgence. C’est une monnaie généreuse que les grands esprits ne savent pas refuser. DAR 171: 170

214 1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8

May 1872

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Jules Michelet, Athénaïs’s husband, was a well-known French historian; Athénaïs collaborated with him on many works. In January 1872, Michelet had resumed work she began in 1868 on a book on the history and behaviour of cats; her original intention, first conceived in 1861, had been to write a fictionalised account of her own cats. Her incomplete manuscript was published after her death (A. Michelet [1904]). (A. Michelet 1978, pp. i–xx.) Michelet refers to J. Michelet 1856 and 1858. Michelet refers to Variation 1: 43–8. In Variation 1: 45, CD wrote, ‘In England half-bred Angora cats are perfectly fertile with the common cat; I do not know whether the half-breeds are fertile one with another; but as they are common in some parts of Europe, any marked degree of sterility could hardly fail to have been noticed.’ In Variation 2d ed. 1: 47, CD omitted the text after ‘common cat’. The cats mentioned are discussed in A. Michelet [1904]. The first official London cat show was held at the Crystal Palace on 13 July 1871 (Era, 16 July 1871, p. 4); a second was held at the Crystal Palace on 2 and 4 December 1871 (The Times, 4 December 1871, p. 12). See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from George Grove, 15 July 1871, and letter to George Grove, 17 July [1871].

From William Green 18 May 1872

Orange N. Jersey 18. May 1872

Mr Darwin Dr Sir Not knowing your address, when I wrote you from the West Indies, I address d it England, and as I have not heard from you since my return home, thinking it may have never reached you, I now send a duplicate of it, having obtain d your address from the Messrs. Appletons, and hope for a reply1 Yours Respectfully | William Green DAR 165: 224 1

Green enclosed a copy of his letter of 30 January 1872 (the copy is in DAR 165: 223–4). No letter to Green from CD has been found. D. Appleton & Co. was CD’s US publisher.

To Briton Riviere 19 May [1872]1

Down, Beckenham, Kent May 19th

Dear Sir I am most sincerely obliged for your great kindness. The hostile dog does excellently; but the hairs on the neck and shoulders (and not on loins) ought to stand closer (a serried mass) and to be more erect; but I daresay that you intend to explain this to Mr. Cooper. Will you have the kindness to do so, and I will despatch the block tomorrow (Monday morning) telling him not to touch it, till he hears or sees you.2 The other drawing does not appear to me to express affection and joy. I showed it to several of my sons and other members of my family, without any explanation, and

May 1872

215

they all thought, as I had done, that the expression was that of a humble dog coming to be beaten. I believe that those are right who have said to me that it is impossible to represent a dog wagging his tail, as we associate movement with the expression. I fancy that I can see a few alterations (but whether they are possible I know not) which might improve the expression, but I doubt whether it is worth the trial. And now I want to beg a little favour of you and to excuse me. I have been trying in vain to think of some book or other trifle which you would like to possess and keep as a mark of my obligation to you. Will you therefore be so good as to procure some trifle for yourself with the enclosed3 and believe me | Yours truly obliged | Ch. Darwin Copy DAR 147: 320 1 2

3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Briton Riviere, 16 May 1872. See letter from Briton Riviere, 16 May 1872 and n. 1. James Davis Cooper engraved woodcuts for Expression (Expression, p. 26). On Riviere’s preference for working on blocks, see the letter from Briton Riviere, 3 April 1872. In his Account books–cash account (Down House MS), CD noted a payment by cheque of £5 5s. on 20 May 1872 for ‘Riviere Science drawing’, but later crossed it out. Riviere returned the cheque (see letter from Briton Riviere, 20 May 1872).

From W. W. Reade 20 May 1872

11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington May 20.—72

My dear Sir I do not know how to thank you for your very kind letter; as you will see by the enclosed reviews I have not had much encouragement in print, & though I was prepared for any amount of abuse on the religious business, & any amount of ignorance on my exposition of your theory in ch iv, I did think they wd. say the 1st. chapter was well written.1 The Athenæum contains 14 distinct terms of abuse & three allusions to a book written in my teens—2 But I rather like the Scotsman, & I think he is more a friend of ours than he chooses to say.3 Well as I was going to say your letter has really cheered me up for though I know how kindly is your nature & that you are one of those who appreciate something in everything you read, and therefore that you are a more friendly critic than the general reader wd. be, yet as you condemn nothing in the book wh. I have not already myself condemned, and have selected for your praise those passages in which I put my trust—I am accordingly emboldened to place faith in the book at least to a moderate extent. Its chief defect—& it cannot get over it—is that of form. I began it as a chapter to be inserted in my travels: then it became a Hist. of Africa: then what it is I shall in the course of 2 years or so, perhaps less, recast it—cut out & transplant Africa & the polemics, make it a Universal His t. breaking it up into smaller chapters—putting in dates—maps—& authorities as you suggest. 4

216

May 1872

Savages breaking out into verse is personal knowledge. 5 I can give you a description of a case whenever you wish. I found Blyth (of India) at the Geographical 6 reading that part in the Library— We were introduced but my name was not mentioned & he pointed out that passage to me saying “There is a good deal of truth in that you know”— he also read me several other passages with approval—e.g. the preceding passages on p 441— But I said who is this man? Does he know anything abt. savages. Whereupon he gave me a short account of myself. He did not seem to like the anti-Jesus part regarding it as premature & such seems to be the general opinion. However I mean to devote my life to war on Christianity. I know the passage you allude to about the tendrils & had it in fact noted down to be used. But the extreme brevity required in c. iv. has prevented me as you observe from giving facts.7 However I am not aware that I say anything about moral & intellectual evolution which has not been said by yourself or which may not be fairly deduced from what you say— I dont think I can teach you anything on that point. I am glad the passage on Mind & Matter in p 410 did not strike you as absurd. I was rather nervous about it.8 As to the prospects of the book I am dubious & were it not that I s hd. be sorry for Trübner9 to lose money I shd. not much care. It cannot become a classic in its present form but looking upon it as a rude block I believe I can carve it into a permanent work, adding new facts—& what is of more importance new ideas— My travels will be out in the autumn—10 It will be a book written for women— in a kind of prose poem if I can manage it—& will therefore not contain much ethnological detail I shall supplement it with miscellaneous essays on Africa— I suppose you do not agree with the passage abt. Caffres identity with negroes (273): a naval surgeon who has been on both coasts & also at the Cape told me however that he was never of any other opinion.11 I merely go by portraits of Caffres that I have seen, not having been at the Cape. Erewhon seems likely to have a run— Author did not put his name to it because his father is a clergyman—12 Burton who tells me he had a delightful lunch with you, is just off to Iceland. 13 As I said before I do not know how to thank you. I will merely say that I went to my work this morning in a happier frame of mind than I have been for many a day. I remain | yours very truly | Winwood Reade DAR 176: 61 1 2

3

CD’s letter to Reade has not been found, but see the letter from W. W. Reade, 16 May 1872. Reade refers to his Martyrdom of man (Reade 1872). The reviewer in the Athenæum, 11 May 1872, pp. 587–8, described Reade 1872 as thoroughly worthless, needlessly profane, indecent, trashy, offensive, pretentious, vulgar, and blasphemous; the reviewer compared it to a three-volume novel published by Reade in 1860, Liberty Hall (Reade 1860). Reade 1872 was reviewed in the Scotsman, 17 May 1872, p. 3; the reviewer accused Reade of being led by an ‘erratic fancy’, which did not permit of his being ‘strictly logical, to say nothing about accuracy’, and concluded, ‘The man who constructs a new scheme of creation, demolishes old religions, and constructs one that is new, should be moderate in tone, and not like Mr Reade, use the language of the betting ring with the freedom of a horse-couper or fishwife.’

May 1872 4 5

6 7

8

9 10 11 12 13

217

Reade published his travels in Africa in 1873 (African sketch-book, Reade 1873), but the work of recasting Reade 1872 was never completed. In Reade 1872, pp. 440–1, Reade suggested that the conversation of primeval humans was conducted in verse and song, adding that modern-day peasants and savages sang in their talk, like people in an opera. Edward Blyth had spent more than twenty years in India (ODNB). The Royal Geographical Society had premises at 1 Savile Row, London (Post Office London directory 1872). Chapter 4 (the last chapter) of Reade 1872, ‘Intellect’, covered the period from the origin of the universe to the development of organised religion. CD had written on the development of tendrils (see Climbing plants), but it is not known to what specific point he had alluded. In Reade 1872, p. 410, Reade wrote, ‘Mind is a property of matter. Matter is inhabited by mind. There can be no mind without matter; there can be no matter without mind.’ He went on to argue that the difference between the tendency of atoms to cohere and the thoughts and emotions of a human mind was one of degree and complexity only. Nicholas Trübner was the publisher of Reade 1872. Reade’s African sketch-book (Reade 1873) was not published until 1873. See Reade 1872, p. 273; see also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from W. W. Reade, 1 February 1871. The naval surgeon has not been identified. Thomas Butler, rector of Langar, was the father of Samuel Butler (1835–1902), the anonymous author of Erewhon ([S. Butler] 1872a). See also letter from Samuel Butler, 11 May 1872. Richard Francis Burton was going to Iceland to look for sulphur (ODNB). See also letter from J. J. Aubertin, 16 January 1872 and n. 4.

From Briton Riviere 20 May 1872 16 Addison Road | Kensington W May 20/72 Dear Sir I am very glad that the first block will be of use to you but I must alter the hairs on the dog back myself. The engraver cannot so will you kindly ask M r Cooper to send it to me again.1 With regard to the second dog I endeavoured to carry out your written remarks & in one important respect did so contrary to my own belief & experience (viz, in putting the head down instead of up I think that a dog seldom or never puts its head down when it sees its master unless it is afraid of him. A dog never puts on the expression you want except in the presence of a man & always looks at the mans eye & so always puts its own head up. To give the effect of a wagging tail is impossible in a drawing which can only illustrate a climax. In painting it can only be hinted at & the observer must know what is meant before he looks at the picture. Setting on one side the “wagging tail” I think that the accompanying rough sketch gives an idea of the expression you want & should you think so I should have much pleasure in drawing it on the wood for you if you will kindly ask Cooper to send another block with the 1 st illustration.2 I am quite sure you will forgive me for returning your very kind present & will understand my motive when I tell you that as a student of animal expression it has given me much pleasure to assist you & I told Miss Bonham Carter that I had so steadily refused to draw on wood that these sketches would be simply a labour of

218

May 1872

love.3 What I should like would be if you would send me a copy of the book when it is done4 I am dear Sir with many thanks | Yours truly | Briton Riviere DAR 176: 177 1 2 3 4

See letter to Briton Riviere, 19 May [1872] and n. 2. Riviere refers to James Davis Cooper. The sketch has not been found. The dog in Expression, p. 53, fig. 6, has its head tilted up. See letter to Briton Riviere, 19 May [1872] and n. 3. Riviere refers to Elinor Mary Bonham-Carter; see also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Briton Riviere to E. M. Bonham-Carter, 26 June 1871. Riviere’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V).

To G. S. Ffinden 21 May [1872]1

May 21 My dear Sir As you state that your funds fall short, I shall be h. to raise my S. by £10 & here enclose a cheque for £35, but I am not willing to go beyond this amount— 2 Permit me to add that Mr Powell misunderstood me in supposing that I intend to subscribe in any case for the building of Vicarage. 3 I did so only under the [1 word illeg] [ circumstances] which then occurred.— I sincerely hope that all your exertion & labour which you have taken about the Ch. may be successful & I remain | my dear s | yours —— | C. D. AdraftS DAR 96: 122 1 2

3

The year is established by the reference to a payment for the repair of Down Church (see n. 2, below). No letter from Ffinden on this subject has been found. In his Account books–cash account (Down House MS), CD recorded a cheque payment of £35 on 21 May 1872 for ‘Ffinden Repair of Down Church’. See also letter from J. B. Innes to Emma Darwin, 8 March 1872, and letter to John Lubbock, [after 21 March 1872]. Henry Powell had been vicar of Down until 1871. The lack of a vicarage in Down had been a longstanding problem for the clergy (see Correspondence vol. 16, letter from J. B. Innes, 4 December 1868).

From Albert Günther 21 May 1872 Surbiton 21.5.72 My dear Mr Darwin Carbonnier’s paper is known to me, and I have noticed it in Zoolog. Record VI. p. 133. & VII. p. 94. Macropus is a fish belonging to the family of Labyrinthici, the members of which are more or less domesticated in the East Indies, and I am sure (although I cannot prove it here in Europe) that many of the species and even genera recognized in our Catalogues are the products of domesticity. 1 For that reason I recommended on a former occasion (Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 1861. May, in a paper on Mugil) these fishes for acclimatization in Europe. The “Pla-Kat” mentioned by me there is most closely allied to “Macropus”.2

May 1872

219

I have just finished the Record for 1871; and right glad I am of it; I trust I shall now find time of reading Gegenbaur’s paper with attention. 3 In the Museum I have to look at present after many things about which I did not care formerly: Owen, Gray, Smith and Butler are on the sick-list, evidently under the influence of the shocking weather we have had.4 My own affairs are now all arranged as far as I am concerned; and I quietly wait for the issue of which I may hear in about four weeks. 5 At all events I have the great satisfaction to have learned that my fellow-labourers hold me in higher esteem than I ever fancied; and if only half is fact what they have said in their testimonials, I was wrong in thinking that the success of my labours had never equalled my good intentions. Yours ever truly | A Günther DAR 165: 251 1

2 3

4

5

No letter to Günther enquiring about this subject has been found. Günther mentioned Pierre Carbonnier’s papers on the breeding behaviour of a Chinese Macropodus (Macropus is a misspelling) in Zoological Record 6 (1869): 133 and 7 (1870): 94. CD cited Carbonnier’s papers (Carbonnier 1869 and 1870) in Descent 2d ed., pp. 341–2 and n. 27. According to Pauly 2004 (s.v. Gouramy), the fish in question was Macropodus opercularis (the paradise fish). Labyrinthici is a former order of fishes now represented by the suborder Anabantoidei, labyrinth fishes. The genus Macropodus is now in the subfamily Macropodinae of the family Osphronemidae. Günther refers to Günther 1861; Mugil is the genus of grey mullets. The pla-kat, then Macropodus pugnax, is now Betta pugnax, the penang mouth-brooding fighting fish. Günther had been editor of the Zoological Record up until 1869; when Alfred Newton took over with the 1870 issue, Günther continued to write a number of sections himself (Zoological Record 6 (1869), 7 (1870)). Günther refers to Carl Gegenbaur and Gegenbaur 1872 (see letter to Albert Günther, 11 May [1872] and n. 3). Günther refers to colleagues at the British Museum: Richard Owen (superintendent of the natural history departments); John Edward Gray (keeper of the zoological collections); Arthur Gardiner Butler (assistant keeper, zoological department), and Edgar Albert Smith. There had been heavy rain in parts of the country in the previous week (The Times, 21 May 1872, p. 5 (‘The volunteers’)). Günther had applied for the post of assistant keeper in the zoological department of the British Museum (letter from Albert Günther, 10 May 1872).

From Fulvio Martinelli 21 May 1872

Modena 21st , May 1872

A. Curious Accident I had not yet reached manhood, that I strongly felt inclined to breed in pigeons; to these innocent animals I dedicated my liesure time, and the limited resources of my age. What was in childhood an amusement advancing in years, it took the shape of a particular bent of my mind, so much so that I undertook throughly to study the habits, and all what concerned these members of the feathered family. I don’t think

220

May 1872

I have decieved, or flattered myself, if I say that through assiduous studies, I have succeeded in obtaining useful, and rather important results, about these animals. When pubblic feasts were given in Florence, in occasion of the marriage of the Royal Prince of Puidemont,1 I exhibited 90 pigeons; the product of my method. They have been judged and found rare; and fine for the gay variety of their plumage, and not less praised have been those that I gave in order that the savour of their flesh might be judged. This exebition procured me the most flattering encouragements from learned persons and the Ministry of Pubblic Instruction. Agriculture Industry and Commerce, the documents that prove this my assertion are published in my Memoria ec.2 Yielding to the invitation of Car De Birenger’s rapport commissioned by the Agriculture and Commerce Ministry3 I resolved to render pubblic the method of my own invention and give to the print my Memoria sulla non piu mia Collezione di Colombi Nostrali (Memoirs of my ex collection of National Pigeons) to this my little work I owe the laughable Curioso Accidente (Curious Accident) that I now give to my readers. No lucrative purpose induced me to give to the pubblic my little work, so that I did not put it to sale, and except a few copies that have been most kindly accepted by several learned persons, and Academies (see All to A)4 the whole work, I sent as a present to the Ministry of Pubblic Instruction, Agriculture, and Commerce, dividing it thus. Sixty copies to the former and 500 to the latter, asking my work should be distributed to the Veterinary Schools, and Agriculture Assemblies (Comizi Agrari) as it is in the attributions of the saed Ministry to do it; to this my request I joined the letters that I here pubblish (see Allto B.) However trifling my Memoria ec may be yet it has excited the attention of some celebrated and learned men of our days (see Allto C.) and was with distincteon accepted by the Minister Correnti, and the imployés of Pubblic Instruction (see All to D.) and the Ministry complies to my demand of encouragement with the sum of 250 franc. But if things went on smothly with these Communaties Mr. Castagnola’s5 unaccountable behaviour in this business desorves to be called to the bar of pubblic opinion. Having given up to whatever pretention (see All to E) I cannot be charged that this my remonstrance is the result of disappointment for the refusal I have had; no I am urged to do it, to shou hou the advantage of the Comizi Agrari (Agriculture Assembliles) is managed; consideration that induced me to write to the Minister himself (see All to F.) On the 11th. March the case containing the 500 copies was envoyed by rail way with the express; previous its sending I warned M r. Castagnola with a letter prepaye’d. I have long, and patiently waited M Castagnola’s answer; (great undertakings must be long meditated) at last on the 29th. March the longed for answer came, and its meaning is so odd and droll that I cannot forbear giving it here with the impressions it brought me. The afore said letter runs thus “The examplars of your book on Pigeons ec of which you give me warning with the foglio marked in margin did not reach this Ministry, But please your Lordship this is on untruth: beg your pardon, this is not exat Fy! It is not impossible for persons of your merit to make blunders, but should not,

May 1872

221

ought not to utter an untruth. No Sir your assertion is not precise, and I can prove it you, not with a mere declaration of reception, but with a regular receipt of the case dated 14the March (see Allto G) that is three days after the deliverance, and fifteen before the letter you deny. Indeed your lordship is capable of gorgeous blunders.— The letter continues “I pray you to look for the case at the Office where you consigned it, and withdraw it if possible. But Sir you quize me! It is a common opinion to judge of others according our own actions; and who does not know the punctuality, and order that distinguishes your Lordship in the despatch of affaires. What idea would give of your admistration this piece of advice recall a marchandize sent with the express, eighteen days after having consigned it to the Office! This is a Ministerial joke that would not go neither with a Depudate of the Right sworn to approbation. But this is not a blunder it is . . . .” The letter follows “while this Ministry finds it of no use” Sir, how can you say so. Do you know my book, to refuse it and stigmatize it as useless! Where grounds this your conviction! Which are your just reasons, that induce you to refuse a present; a present made not to you but to the Comizi Agrari (Agriculture Assemblies), without asking them! Where have you acquired this right, here is an instance of such a conduct! An italian adage says that to a horse given in present the mouth is not examined If proverb shou the wisdom of Nations, they certainly do not show the wisdom of a Minister at your capt M. Castagnola. Blessed the Nation that can boast endowed with prophetic spirit its leader. Thou o Italy, thou alone hast such a prototype. What a treasure of time spared! How much trouble avoided and above all how many useful discoveries are left unwakened in order not to mar what our grandfathers did, That this is a blunder, you yourself must be persuaded, as you answered, to my first letter (see Allto E) with, one (see Allto F) with which you try an attempt to apologies rather endirectly, and I answered it (see All to F) declaring to act as I presently do. It was my mind to give to the pubblic this my writing through a journal of the most difused in Italy, but I must own M. Castagnola that I felt rather reluctant to take for myself the third page of it, destined to politics; but I did not choose to see Martinelli– Castagnola’s controversy, shine out amongst the addertisement of cosmetics, for hair, and complection and Sewing-Machines. In concluding most Honoured Minister I pray you to be so condesending as to return me the case containing the 500 exemplars; condesention that I have already asked you with my letter 25th May (see Allto I) that I may dispose of the book just as you advise me. I even pray your Lordship to prepay this letter, and not charge me to pay them taxed as was the case with your last. Surely your autographs are precious, but after all eight sous, are eight sous. I pass now to express the feeling of my admiration, and while I pay the tribute of my gratitude I earnestly wish, to see always at the head of my country a person that distinguishes himself for wisdom, and penetrating views, indefatigable work, posseing the spirit of prophcy, so that with his patronage will succeed in performing wonders to the benefit and progress of Science). This is what I can judge from the

222

May 1872

short intercourse we have had and has given birth to the Curioso Accidente. I think my readers that I may conclude quothing the solemn words of my early studies— Quod erat demonstrandum!!! The Surgeon | Fulvio Martinelli | of Modena AMemorandumS DAR 171: 59 1 2 3 4 5

The wedding of the prince of Piedmont, later Umberto I of Italy, and Princess Margherita di Savoia took place in 1868 (The Times, 25 May 1868, p. 10). ec: i.e. etc. Martinelli refers to Martinelli 1872. The report and its author have not been identified. Allto: allegato, attached. No attachments have been found. Stefano Castagnola.

To Charles Lyell 22 May [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 22

My dear Lyell Very many thanks for your letter. You will find at p. 332 & again at p. 348 of new Edit. of Origin some remarks on forms not changing when migrating in a body.— 2 Some naturalists have been struck with probable truth of this view.— By the way if you care to read anything new on general subject, a pamphet by one of best zoologists in Europe, Prof. Weismann, viz “Ueber den Einfluss der Isolirung: Leipzig 1872”, is well worth in some respects, reading.—3 What a grand tour you have had & how young you are: I wish I was as youthful.— 4 Ever yours | C. Darwin American Philosophical Society (416) 1 2

3 4

The year is established by the reference to the sixth edition of Origin, which was published in February 1872 (Freeman 1977); see n. 2, below. Lyell’s letter has not been found. In Origin 6th ed., p. 332, CD wrote that Arctic species moving south in a body as the climate changed would not have been liable to much modification; on p. 348, he applied the same argument to species arriving on an island in body, or receiving regular reinforcements from the same species on the mainland. There is a heavily annotated copy of Weismann 1872 in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 857–60). See also letter to August Weismann, 5 April 1872. In April 1872, Lyell and his wife, Mary Elizabeth Lyell, visited the Aurignac caves in the south of France (K. M. Lyell ed. 1881, 2: 438.

From Briton Riviere 22 May 1872

16 Addison Rd | K. May 22/72

Dear Sir Thank you for your letter I shall certainly have another trial at the pleased dog 1

May 1872

223

I should very much like to have any of your books especially the “Origin of Species.2 Believe me | Very truly yours | Briton Riviere Mr Cooper will I suppose send me another block with the sketch of the first dog. 3 DAR 176: 178 1 2 3

CD’s letter has not been found. Riviere was making drawings of dogs for Expression (see letter to Briton Riviere, 19 May [1872]). In the missing letter, CD had evidently offered Riviere books in place of a gift of money (see letter to Briton Riviere, 19 May [1872], and letter from Briton Riviere, 20 May 1872). James Davis Cooper was engraving woodcuts for Expression; CD had approved Riviere’s drawing of a hostile dog (‘the first dog’), with slight modifications (see letter to Briton Riviere, 19 May [1872]).

To ? 22 May 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 22—1872

Gentlemen In answer to your Circular I shall be happy to subscribe £ 10 for the intended Road, whenever sufficient money is subscribed for the work; though as I always go through Farnborough, I doubt whether the new road will be of much service to me. 1 I hope, however, that you may succeed, & remain, Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Ch. R. Darwin Photocopy DAR 221.5: 10 1

The planned road has not been identified.

From J. D. Dana 23 May 1872

New Haven May 23, 1872.

I have addressed to you a copy of my book on Corals and Coral Islands, and have commissioned my son, Edward S. Dana, to present himself along with it, and also to assure you of my unfailing esteem, and my admiration for your labors in behalf of Science.1 My son, having graduated at our University, 2 goes to Europe to continue his studies in Science next autumn in Germany. In the meantime he looks forward to excursions during the summer in the Alps, as one means of benefiting his health, now somewhat impaired. I was sorry that your sons did not visit New Haven when on this continent, and give me a chance to show my appreciation of their father. 3 Gilman 1899, p. 315

224 1 2 3

May 1872

There is an annotated copy of Dana’s book on corals (Dana 1872) in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 179–80). E. S. Dana graduated from Yale University in 1870; J. D. Dana was professor of geology and mineralogy there (DAB). George Howard and Francis Darwin visited the United States in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Asa Gray, 16 July [1871]).

To Athénaïs Michelet 23 May 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 23 1872 Madam I am much obliged for the honour of your interesting letter; & it will give me much pleasure to do any thing that you wish, as far as lies in my power. I wrote immediately to a gentleman who had served as one of the judges at the Crystal Palace, for the dates of the reports, & for information about any books on cats. 1 I heard from him this morning that he was just starting on a journey, but that he wd write to me in a week’s time.2 As soon as I hear I will endeavour to get what you desire, & send you any publications which I can procure. I do not know of any works exclusively on the larger Feline animals; perhaps as good an account as any will be found in Brehm’s Thierleben, which I believe has been translated into French. 3 I am much obliged for your information about the fertility of crossed Angora & common cats. It is not believd by physiologists that the characters of two fathers can be transmitted to one & the same individual; & experiments on plants seem to negative any such belief. But I was reading the other day a paper by Fritz Müller which seemed to render this belief in some degree probable. 4 I thank you for the kind present of your book, which I shall have great pleasure in reading when I receive it.5 Possibly I may find something about the expression & gestures of cats under different emotions; & this is a subject which much interests me. I have the honour to remain with much respect | yours faithfully | Charles Darwin LS American Philosophical Society (417) 1

2 3 4

See letter from Athénaïs Michelet, 17 May 1872 and n. 8. CD may have written to Harrison Weir or John Jenner Weir, two of his correspondents who were also judges at the cat show (The Times, 4 December 1871, p. 12), but his letter has not been found. Neither letter has been found. Brehm et al. 1864–9 was translated into French as La vie des animaux illustrée (Brehm [1869–73]). Michelet had described a litter of three kittens, two of which had resembled their parents, and the third of which resembled a rival to the male parent. In the first part of F. Müller 1872–3, pp. 42–3, Fritz Müller had discussed the apparent influence of two male parents in a single fruit. Müller crossed species of Abutilon, using pollen from two different species applied to a third species; he noted that an individual crossed fruit produced some seed that showed characteristics of one male parent and some that showed characteristics of the other male parent. Müller showed that the different types clustered, although both types might occur in any single cell of seeds.

May 1872 5

225

See letter from Athénaïs Michelet, 17 May 1872 and n. 3.

From Henry Montague 24 May 1872

26 Museum Street1 24th. May 1872

Sir, Permit me to call your attention to the accompanying programme of a work now ready for the press—a work replete with interest, strictly original, and setting forth the doctrine of progressive developement as made manifest, not only in the planet we inhabit, but carrying it through all the systems of the Universe. It opens out to Intelligences comprehending an illimitable field for mental action and physical inquiry, countless paths of research many of which have heretofore been untrodden by man.2 My object in thus drawing your attention to the work is this— 43 years of mental toil and self abnegation tell upon the old man of three score and ten— I require the assistance of one who has the mental capacity to assist in the final arrangements of printing and publishing the work, of supplying by supplementary notes and comments, the necessary information that bears more immediately upon the various subjects, attend to the translations, & generally work with me, myself taking upon me the labours of the press. In return he will receive one half the profits of the English Copyright. I also propose to establish a monthly magazine carrying out the principles evolved and facts elicited, a work of this nature being greatly needed.3 The works of Mr. Charles Darwin are sufficient apology for my thus writing to you. If you come to town occasionally I shall happy to enter upon the subject more minutely, to show the astronomical drawings, & such portions of the work as may be necessary for the better understanding of it. Believe me to be, Sir | With the profoundest respect | Your Obedt. Servant | H. Montague | Editor of the London Commercial Record 5 & 6 Hart Street | Mark Lane, City DAR 171: 231 1 2 3

Twenty-six Museum Street, London, was the address of a hairdresser (Post Office London directory). No publication by Montague has been identified. No such magazine edited by Montague has been identified.

From Chauncey Wright 24 May 1872 Cambridge Mass. May 24, 72 My dear Mr Darwin I have received two letters and a note from you lately for which I am very much obliged.1 It was very gratifying to have, in your judgment, added anything positive, or otherwise than as a critic of the controversy, to the discussions of natural selection. I

226

May 1872

have sent copies of my paper to the Societies which you were so kind as to suggest. 2 I had previously sent one to Professor Dickson whose memoir I saw and read cursorily in a copy lent me by Dr Gray while my paper was going through the press. 3 I saw that the direction of his studies was exactly the reverse of mine; expanding the theory of Phyllotaxy to a still greater degree of subtilty than ever it was, I imagine, inflated before;—actually presuming that a set of numerical laws, assumed as ultimate in nature, and without any utility or ulterior reference, ought to hold in some way even in the production of irregular growths or monstrous forms. It is surprising to what lengths these type-struck thinkers and even observers will go! I have never read Prof. Cope’s essays,4 but have heard of them from a clever friend who attempted in vain to comprehend them, and also failed to get from conversations with the author himself any clear ideas of his views. I shall make a point of reading Mr Steven’s essay in Fraser’s at the earliest opportunity.5 Almost immediately after writing to you I determined upon answering Mr Mivarts communication. I was repelled at first by the tone of his reply; but on reflection I concluded that this very tone ought to be answered, and in a different tone. The essay was hastily written and almost as speedily put into print. I sent you a proof of it last week. My promptness rather than the merits of the paper accounts for its apparently prominent position as Art. I of the Review. 6 I wished to have it off my hands that I might be free to make arrangements and preparations for my long anticipated trip to Europe which is now definitively fixed for the 2 d. of July. While reflecting upon the subject of fixedness in the characters of species an analogy occurred to me for which I did not find a place in my article: But what you say about the effect of the long-continued transmission of characters by inheritance recalls it.7 The relative fixedness of different kinds of characters, the homological and the adaptive appeared like the stability if different geological strata, the underlying and the superficial. Adaptive characters are generally superposed on genetic ones, (like new and changeable formations in geology on earlier and consolidated ones,) thus giving them an indirect utility and preserving them, as the new strata cover and protect the older ones.8 It would not be correct from this point of view to speak of any characters as merely genetic or useless, except those that are more or less aborted. Those characters, which are not only useless in themselves but no longer serve as the bases of later and useful ones, would of course be subject to similar mutations as the latter through the causes of variation; as geological forces act alike on older and newer formations when both are alike exposed. But the older formations are the harder and will not be worn away so fast as the new; and for a similar reason rudimentary characters in organisms offer great resistance to the destructive agencies of variation. Yet there is a limit to the hardness which any rock can have; and this agrees with what you say on the effect of hereditary transmission,—that a 1000 generations may be as good as 100,000 for fixing a character in this way. It struck me that this analogy carried out might furnish at least

May 1872

227

a provisional representation of the relations of variations to their unknown causes. Analogies are, it is true, blind guides; But then in the dark blind guides are as good as the keenest-sighted ones; better perhaps than the ideas of those who imagine they can see. Very sincerely yours | Chauncey Wright DAR 181: 168 1 2 3 4

5 6

7 8

Wright refers to CD’s letters to him of 6 April 1872 and [11 or 21] April [1872]; the third item has not been found. See letter to Chauncey Wright, 6 April 1872; Wright refers to his paper on phyllotaxy (Wright 1871b). See letter to Chauncey Wright, [11 or 21] April [1872] and n. 2. Wright refers to Alexander Dickson, Dickson 1871, and Asa Gray. The reference to Edward Drinker Cope must have been in the missing letter or note (see n. 1, above). Cope’s views on species (see Cope 1868 and 1869) are briefly discussed in Origin 6th ed., p. 149; see also Correspondence vol. 19, letter to W. E. Darwin, [after 11 November 1871]. See letter to Chauncey Wright, 6 April 1872. Wright refers to Leslie Stephen, [Stephen 1872], and Fraser’s Magazine. St George Jackson Mivart had published a reply to Wright’s review of his Genesis of species (Mivart 1871a, Wright 1871a, Mivart 1872b). Wright’s reply, like his original review and Mivart’s reply, was published in the North American Review (Wright 1872), where it was the first item in the July issue. There is a lightly annotated proof copy of Wright 1872 in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. CD’s statement may have been in the missing letter or note (see n. 1, above). Wright uses ‘homological’ to refer to morphologically fixed characters and ‘genetic’ to refer to characters that are genealogically related.

From Francis Galton 26 May 1872

42 Rutland Gate SW May 26/72

My dear Darwin I feel perfectly ashamed to apply again to you in my recurring rabbit difficulty, which is this—I have (after some losses) got 3 does & 1 buck of the stock you so kindly took charge of, cross circulated & so have means of protracting the experiment to another generation, of breeding from them & seeing if their young shew any signs of mongrelism.1 They do not thrive over well in London, also we could not keep them during Summer at our house, because the servants in charge when we leave, cd. not be trusted with them. Is it possible that any of your men cd. take charge of them & let them breed, seeing if the young shew any colour then killing the litter & breeding afresh, 2 or 3 times over? I would most gladly pay even a large sum,—many times the cost of their maintenance to any man who would really attend to them. Can you help me? As regards Spiritualism, nothing new that I have seen, since I wrote, for Home & Miss Fox have been both absent.2 I wrote a letter of overtures to Home, when I enclosed yours, but got no reply. I have kept up communication with Crookes & am satisfied that he has the investigation thoroughly in hand & delays publication on

228

May 1872

grounds of desiring a little more completion of data. 3 He is a most industrious taker of notes. How very kind your letter was, about Home. It grieved me much that you had to speak in such terms about your health4 Ever sincerely ys | Francis Galton DAR 105: A57–8 1 2 3

4

CD had looked after some rabbits for Galton in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Francis Galton, 14 April [1871]). See letter to Francis Galton, 21 April [1872]. Galton refers to Daniel Dunglas Home and Catherine Fox, mediums. William Crookes, a chemist and science journalist, was investigating mediums (ODNB); he had published two papers in the Quarterly Journal of Science (Crookes 1870 and 1871) and published a further one in 1874 (Crookes 1874). See letter to Francis Galton, 21 April [1872].

From Briton Riviere 26 May 1872 May 26/72 Dear Sir Pray accept my best thanks for the two books which I shall value much. 1 I am going to Scotland tomorrow week but I hope to send you the other sketch before then & I will see Cooper about the cutting of the blocks. 2 I am dear Sir | Yours truly | Briton Riviere DAR 176: 179 1

2

A copy of Journal of researches, inscribed ‘Briton Riviere from the author May 1872’, was acquired by an antiquarian bookseller (19th Century Shop, private correspondence). The other book sent to Riviere by CD to thank him for providing sketches of dogs for Expression has not been found; he had mentioned Origin as a book that he would like in his letter of 22 May 1872. The ‘other sketch’ was an a second attempt at an affectionate dog; James Davis Cooper was making woodcuts from Riviere’s sketches (see letter from Briton Riviere, 22 May 1872).

To Francis Galton 27 May [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 27th My dear Galton We shall be very happy to keep the 4 Rabbits & breed from them.— I have just spoken to my former groom (now converted into a footman) 2 & he says he will do his utmost to keep them in good health.— I have said that you would give him a present, & make it worth his while; & that of course is the sole expense that you will be put to; & I have thought that you would prefer doing this to letting me do so, as I am most perfectly willing to do.—

May 1872

229

If you will send an answer by return of Post, I will direct our Carrier, 3 who leaves here every Wednesday night to call on next Thursday morning at whatever place you may direct. Next week, we shall probably be at Southampton for 10 days.— 4 We have now got 2 litters from some of the young ones which you saw here; & my man says that in one litter there are some odd white marks about their heads; but I am not going again to be deluded about their appearance, until they have got their permanent coats.5 Yours most sincerely | In Haste for Post | C. Darwin UCL Library Services, Special Collections (Galton 39 E) 1 2

3 4 5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Francis Galton, 26 May 1872. CD may refer to William Jackson, a former groom who became his butler in 1875 ( J. Browne 2002, p. 459), or Mark Ansell, a groom at Down House in 1871 (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/855/83/1). George Snow. CD and Emma Darwin visited their eldest son, William Erasmus Darwin, in Southampton from 8 to 20 June 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). See letter to Francis Galton, 23 January [1872] and n. 2. Galton probably visited Down to see the rabbits in November 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Francis Galton, 24 November 1871).

To ? 27 May 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 27, 1872 [To a gentleman inviting him to dinner and overnight the next Friday, and giving directions at length from London to his house in Kent. ‘. . . I have heard from Mr. Litchfield that you are in London . . . will you give us the pleasure of seeing you here . . . ’]1 LS incomplete2 R. F. Batchelder (Cat. 22) 1 2

CD refers to Richard Buckley Litchfield; the correspondent has not been identified. The original letter is complete and is described in the sale catalogue as being two pages long.

From Francis Galton 28 May 1872

42 Rutland Gate May 28th 1872

My dear Darwin You are indeed most kind & helpful and I joyfully will send the rabbits. But really & truly I must bear every expence to the full & will rely on your groom telling me, at the end,—in addition to his present.1

230

May 1872

The rabbits are none of them absolutely recovered, at all events the buck & 1 doe are not, but they will want no further attention in respect to what remains unhealed of their wounds.2 Two of the does are believed to be in kindle having been left with the buck a fortnight & 10 days ago. I will tell Dr. Carter to label and send all particulars with them & to mark their backs with big numerals. in ink. 3 The carrier4 should call at University College for them, asking the porter at the gate. I enclose a paper to him. Once again, with sincere thanks | Ever yrs. | Francis Galton I have just corrected proofs of a little paper to be shortly read at the Royal Society on “Blood-relationship” in which I try to define what the kinship really is, between parents & their offspring— I will send a copy when I have one; it may interest you. 5 DAR 105: A59–60 1 2

3 4 5

See letter to Francis Galton, 27 May [1872]. Galton was carrying out transfusion experiments on rabbits to test CD’s hypothesis of pangenesis (see Variation 2: 357–404), on the assumption that the units of heredity circulated in the blood (see also Correspondence vol. 19, and Galton 1871). Charles Henry Carter, curator of the anatomical museum at University College, London, was assisting Galton in his experiments (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Francis Galton, 21 November 1871). George Snow operated a carrier service between Down and London (Freeman 1977). Galton’s paper read at the Royal Society of London (Galton 1872a) was reprinted in Nature, 27 June 1872, pp. 173–6. There is a copy of the relevant pages from Nature in DAR 205.5: 6–7.

From Briton Riviere 28 May 1872

May 28/72 Dear Sir If this beginning seems right to you will you kindly send it back to me & I will either finish it before I go or take it with me & send it back by post in the course of a week or two. Neither of these plans will give me any inconvenience so if you would like it done please let me have it again.1 I am dear Sir | Yours truly | Briton Riviere DAR 176: 180 1

Riviere sent a sketch of a friendly dog for inclusion in Expression (see letter from Briton Riviere, 26 May 1872).

To Briton Riviere 29 May 1872 Down. Beckenham, Kent May 29, 1872. My dear Sir I thank you for your great kindness. I shall be very glad to get the drawing of the dog engraved.1 A lady, who I think is a good critic has just remarked, I think with truth that the outlines of the back and flanks are too smooth; but perhaps this

May 1872

231

is owing to its unfinished state. I cannot but think, and I hope you will reflect on this, that it would be an improvement if the tail were a little more raised, and if possible a little curved to one side. I shall send my MS to the printers next week, so that to save time, will you have the kindness to send the block when finished to Mr. Cooper 188 Strand, and I will instruct him to lose no time in engraving. 2 With very sincere thanks believe me | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin Copy DAR 147: 321 1 2

See letter from Briton Riviere, 28 May 1872. CD refers to his manuscript of Expression; James Davis Cooper was making woodcuts for the book (Expression, p. 26).

From Samuel Butler to Francis Darwin [before 30 May 1872] 1 15. Clifford’s Inn | Fleet Street Dear Darwin My young friend May has brought me these this morning: he tells me to say that they are entirely at Mr Darwin’s disposal, and that he shall be delighted in case he finds them in any way useful.2 I don’t think the lower one satisfies him, but I should think that a suggestion would be attended to: he said he found it so far more difficult to get a dog into the fighting attitude than the fawning one, that he had less chance of studying. I send the drawings to you rather than to your father because it is no use troubling him at all unless you think them likely to please him. Would you like to meet the youth? he seems to me to shape uncommonly well. Your’s very truly | S. Butler. DAR 106: A6–7 1 2

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Samuel Butler, 30 May 1872. CD used Arthur Dampier May’s drawings of a hostile and an affectionate dog in Expression, pp. 54–5.

From Samuel Butler 30 May 1872

15. Clifford’s Inn | Fleet Street E.C. May 30. 1872

Dear Sir Thank you very much for your kind letter received this morning with its very handsome enclosure for young May.1 I really do not know what to do about it: the lad is a mere boy, only 18 years old, who has never earned a penny in his life, and had no idea of being paid for what he did. He gave me the sketches, and understood perfectly that there was no money to be given for them: he has been brought up as one of your disciples, and was delighted at the notion of doing any thing which might by any chance be of use to you;

232

May 1872

but yet I cannot find it in my heart to take a couple of guineas out of a boy’s mouth when I remember how mine would have watered at the thought of them at his age. For I make no doubt that they are the first that he has ever had offered him for the work of his hands. On the other hand, you very likely will not use the drawings at all, in which case I shall have been the means of putting you to needless expence, and repaid your kindness & hospitality in a way which does not please me—2 However on a balance of consideration I have resolved to send your note and cheque to the boy, and, as I know that he would be utterly uncertain what to do, shall tell him to write you a line of thanks and acknowledgement: 3 at the same time if you want the fawning dog drawn on wood I might venture to pledge him to reproduce it, and he would feel much more comfortable in taking the money if he was to feel that you had not paid it for something which was useless to you— Still, if it could be done by photography it would be better still. I shall be proud to send the second edition of “Erewhon” which is now in preparation. I should have sent the first, but I felt very uncertain how far you might approve the book, and in your answer to my letter you told me that you had sent for it. I have set myself quite straight in the preface about having intended no villainy by the machines, and I have added a bit or two here and there—4 With kind regards and many thanks to Mrs Darwin and yourself for a visit of which I shall always retain a most agreeable recollection 5 | I am | Your’s very truly | S. Butler DAR 106: A8–10 1

2 3 4

5

In his Account books–banking account (Down House MS), CD recorded a payment of £2 2s. to Arthur Dampier May on 29 May. CD’s letter has not been found, but see the letter from Samuel Butler to Francis Darwin, [before 30 May 1872]. CD used May’s drawings of a hostile and an affectionate dog in Expression, pp. 54–5. No letter from May has been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. Erewhon was first published anonymously in 1872 ([S. Butler] 1872a); its authorship was announced in the Athenæum on 25 May 1872. The initial printing was sold out by the end of May, and the book was reset with minor changes and reissued in July (S. Butler 1872b). See Raby 1990, pp. 120–32. CD’s letter to Butler has not been found. In S. Butler 1872b, p. vi, Butler wrote, ‘I regret that reviewers have in some cases been inclined to treat the chapters on Machines as an attempt to reduce Mr Darwin’s theory to absurdity.’ See also letter from Samuel Butler, 11 May 1872. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Butler visited with Thomas and Alice Gertrude Woolner on 19 May 1872.

To Nicholas Trübner 30 May [1872?]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. May 30 Mr C. Darwin encloses stamps for 1s. & wd be much obliged to Mr Trübner2 to send parcel, thus addressed

May 1872

233

Ch. Darwin Esq Orpington Station S E. Railway. Dealer not identified ( June 1994) 1

2

The year is conjectured from the printed stationery, with the address in the centre (CD used this type of notepaper from January 1872 until November 1874), and from the possibility that CD was ordering [S. Butler] 1872a (see n. 2, below). Nicholas Trübner was a publisher and bookseller in London. CD may have been in the process of ordering Samuel Butler’s Erewhon ([S. Butler] 1872a); see letter from Samuel Butler, 30 May 1872.

From Hubert Airy 31 May 1872 Flamsteed House, Greenwich, London S.E. 1872. May 31. My dear Sir I beg to return Mr. Chauncey Wright’s paper on Leaf-arrangement, with many thanks for the loan of it, and with my apology for having kept it so long. In lending it to me, if you remember, you kindly gave me permission to write to you again on the subject; and I hope the following notes will not tax your patience too much. 1 Mr. Wright’s views may be briefly summarized thus:— There is a property that distinguishes existing (including fossil) spiral orders of leaf-arrangement ( 21 , 13 , 25 , 38 , &c; 14 , 15 , 27 &c.) from other possible but non-existent orders ( 47 , 59 , &c.), and that distinguishes (among existing orders) those that are common and modern ( 25 , 38 , &c.) from those that are rare and ancient ( 14 , 15 , 27 &c.); and this property is most conspicuous in a certain hypothetical order represented by the ultimate value (k) to which the successive terms of the first series ( 12 , 13 , 25 , 38 &c) approximate, and from which the higher terms ( 38 , 135 , &c.) differ by an inconsiderable amount in respect of the degree in which they possess this property; and we are not to attribute to this “typical angle” k any special virtue beyond its leading us to recognize lower degrees of the same property in the series of fractions that approximate to k. The property in question is “thorough and rapid distribution of the leaves around the stem,” (p. 389,) “exposure of the leaves to light and air around the stem,” (p. 389) “ample elbow-room, or space for expansion in the bud,” (p. 389,)—and the different degrees in which the various orders (existent and non-existent) do or would possess this property are investigated with admirable subtlety and displayed very clearly in the elaborate diagram at the end of the pamphlet. The essential feature in those orders which best display this property, is that every leaf is found at that point in the circumference which has been left most open by the previous leaves of the cycle. Mr. Wright argues that, presupposing the existence of the spiral arrangement as a whole, this “distributive property” has furnished material for the action of Natural Selection among various orders of the spiral arrangement, and has determined their

234

May 1872

relative frequency or infrequency in Nature, amounting to total exclusion in the case of some, as 47 and 59 . (p. 396.) Again, besides their distributive property, existing spiral orders also display a cyclic property, in virtue of which the leaves form two or three or five or eight (&c) vertical ranks, one cycle being completed between every two successive leaves in the same rank. This cyclic feature Mr. Wright supposes to involve, and owe its origin to (through Natural Selection), some advantage of internal nutritive relations between successive leaves in the same vertical rank. (pp. 402–404.) He also suggests (p. 414) that this feature of cyclic regularity and simplicity may owe some of its fixedness or constancy to the advantage of being easily recognized by the eyesight of those insects which are serviceable to the plant. Mr. Wright then proceeds (p. 405) to examine into the probable utilities and origin of the spiral and verticillate arrangements. 2 He frames the remarkable hypothesis (p. 406) that the natural spiral (reckoned the shortest way round) is “the trace of a former physical connection of the members, or even of a continuity of leafy expansion along this path; a leaf-like expansion resembling a spiral stairway. The leaves, according to this supposition, are the relics of segments made in such a spiral leaf-like expansion around the stem.” This spiral expansion Mr. Wright supposes (p. 409) to originate in a twist of an earlier ancestral “single-bladed frond,” “a frond with one of its blades undeveloped;”— and to owe its origin to the advantage which a twisted frond would have over a plane frond, first, in virtue of a more favourable relation to light and air or water; second, in virtue of its greater strength at the time of “the transition of plant-life from aquatic conditions to those of the dry land and the air.” It is afterwards suggested (p. 410) that “a two-bladed frond might be similarly twisted and give rise to a double spiral surface like a double spiral stairway.”— And this is supposed to give rise, by a process of segmentation, to a succession of continuous leaflike expansions around the stem, which may be regarded as the original form of the whorl.— The spiral and the whorl being thus provided, as general types of structure, furnish bases “on which the subsequent utilities (of distributive and cyclic arrangement) had to erect existing adaptations of structure.” On the successive steps of this theory, permit me to make the following remarks:— If the “distributive” property were of such importance as Mr. Wright supposes to the adult and growing leaves, by securing “the most complete exposure of the leaves to light and air around the stem,” we should rightly expect to find the most perfect attainment of that end in the mature and adolescent state of the twig. But it only needs a glance at the nearest holly-branch to see that the leaves have much ado to present themselves favourably to the light and air, in spite and defiance of their distribution around the stem, by curves and twists of their stalks. Their native arrangement is a positive disadvantage to them in the lateral twigs. It is only in vertical and unembarrassed twigs that the leaves remain content with their distributive position: and these are a very small portion of the whole tree. Indeed one chief use of the leaf-stalk

May 1872

235

seems to be to enable the leaf-blade to make the best of an unfavourable birth-place. The arrangement of leaves in the bud is far more regular than their adult disposition, thus warped and wrung by contortion of stem and stalks; and this fact alone goes far to prove that the utility which has determined that arrangement is to be looked for, not in the adult twig, but in the bud. Mr. Wright mentions as one advantage of the distributive property, “ample elbow-room or space for expansion in the bud” (p. 389), “compact arrangement in the bud” (p. 400); but he does not follow that idea any further, and therefore misses (as it seems to me) the real secret of spiral orders. That thorough distribution of the leaves around the stem is of no great importance in the adult twig, is shown by the wide prevalence of the order 12 , (elm, lime, beech, mulberry &c.) in which the leaves are crowded in two ranks on opposite sides of the stem, and keep their native positions contentedly, without any contortion of stalks in search of better distribution. An elm-shoot will run up straight into the air, and its leaf-blades will preserve their alignment with beautiful regularity; but if the crowding were a disadvantage, surely we should expect, from the behaviour of leaves in general, that they would break their ranks by irregular bending of their stalks or by a twist of the stem, and so gain greater freedom for the individual leaves. It is certainly true,—and Mr. Wright has brought it out with wonderful skill,—that the “distributive property” is possessed by the more complex spiral orders, and that those orders which do not exist, especially 74 and 59 , are exactly those which would not possess that property: and no theory of Leaf-arrangement can be accepted which does not account for the absence of those orders 47 and 59 . But I believe I shall be able to show, in a subsequent letter, that the distributive property is only incidental to the attainment of a more important end, by means which would necessarily exclude the non-existent orders. The idea that leaves enjoy advantage in respect of nutrition by standing in the same vertical rank, is a natural one, and may well be true; but I wish that it were supported by more facts than Mr. Wright has adduced. Mr. Wright speaks of this feature as “essential” (p. 401); but there are so many instances where it is impossible to decide whether the 5th. or 8th. or 13th. or 21st. (&c) leaf is to be taken as completing the cycle, that I cannot agree with him in supposing that there is any vital importance in this cyclic feature. And here I must disagree with an argument which Mr. Wright is constantly using, (pp. 386, 387, 389, 394, 396, 401,) as, for instance, in page 386, where he maintains that “the fractions 38 and 135 would be undistinguishable in actual measurement, since 1 they differ from each other by 104 , which is much less than can be observed, or than stems are often twisted by irregular growth.”— But surely nobody attempts to determine the order to which a given specimen belongs, by measuring the angular space between two successive leaves of the natural spiral; but rather by fixing on the cyclic leaf, vertically above the original, with a careful eye to the fibres and ridges of the bark, and then numbering all the leaves that intervene. Thus, when the 8 th. leaf 8 (= 131 th. of the circumference) according as is reached, its position will vary by 104

236

May 1872

our specimen belongs to 38 or 135 ; and this difference, in a moderate condensation of leaves or bracts, (such as is found in a twig of rhododendron,) is amply sufficient to settle the question. This consideration tends to invalidate Mr. Wright’s argument in all the above-mentioned passages. How far insects’ eye-sight is qualified to recognize the cyclic feature in the spiral orders, in spite of irregularities, is surely too uncertain to admit of being used as valid argument. With regard to Mr. Wright’s hypothesis that leaves “are the relics of segments made in a spiral leaf-like expansion around the stem,” 3 I wish I could hear what you think. It strikes me as monstrous. The only fact that is made to lead up to this hypothesis is that in the rarer and more ancient (fossil) orders the angles of divergence between successive leaves in the natural spiral are smaller than in common modern orders:— a fact of very doubtful relevancy. This fact M r. Wright takes as evidence that there is something real, not merely formal, in the natural spiral. The ‘something real’ is then made the subject of arbitrary definition in the terms of the hypothesis; without a single fact of embryonic development, or survival of intermediate forms, to rest upon. It is pure unfounded hypothesis. A “single-bladed frond” is a very strange and unnatural form to assume as the simple original of the spiral orders; and the more natural form of a “double-bladed frond” would require the most felicitous segmentation to produce the simplest form of the whorl. In either case, Mr. Wright must submit to have his own words turned against him,—(p. 403) “we ought, by the analogy of embryology, to find some traces of the process in the bud.” Then it seems to me that the hypothetical utilities, first, of better exposure to light and air; and second, of greater strength,—in the twisted frond,—in default of any actual evidence on the point,—are very flimsy. If these utilities were real, we should surely find them largely exemplified at the present day in the vegetable kingdom, for they are of a general character: leaf-blades would be found spiral instead of flat: and strength with economy of material would be shown in flattened twisted stems instead of or as well as in straight tubular or fluted stems, (which at present we regard as models of stiffness.) As a matter of fact, the hypothetical “twisted frond” would gain nothing in point of strength,—would be no better able to hold up its head,—would be bent and broken just as easily as the straight frond. (This cannot be easily tested, because a flat strip of paper cannot be twisted into the shape of a “spiral stairway”, which is an ‘undevelopable’ surface, as mathematicians say; but it is plain that such a spiral surface would offer no more resistance than if straight, to a force that tended to bend it round the radial line at any given point.) But surely a much graver objection to the hypothesis presents itself, if we ask what principle of reproduction it supposes— For if Mr. Wright allows that leaves are, in some way, the sexless progeny of the plant, real organisms, not mere organs, (—vegetable working-bees, so to speak, morphologically identical with the fertile vegetable Queens and drones, the pistils and stamens,)—then his hypothesis be-

May 1872

237

comes a monstrous confusion of the whole brood into one undistinguished spiral mass. The only interpretation of the physiology of the bud, that allows any meaning to his hypothesis, is, that the bud-axis with its complement of leaves is a single individual, of which the leaves are merely organs. (In that case, a curious question arises,—Should we regard the terminal bud, in those plants in which the terminal bud survives, as a new generation or as part of the old?) M r. Wright has not mentioned the embryo-buds in the axils of those leaves; but I suppose he would say that they would be sure to go with the leaves for the sake of protection. The axillary bud, however, is more important to the future welfare of the plant than the short-lived leaf, and it would have been more reasonable to regard their common arrangement as determined by the interests of the bud rather than by those of the leaf. This interpretation of a bud as a single individual, appears to receive support from such phænomena as the axillary bulbils of the tiger-lily, which lose their attachment to the stem and will grow if planted: but this same phænomenon of the tiger-lily bulbils (like so many geranium-cuttings) can be easily understood on the other and far simpler and more universal interpretation, according to which each leaf, each bract, each stamen, each carpel, is an individual organism,—identical, morphologically regarded, however much they may have been differentiated by the division of labour in the vegetable economy of the whole compound plant. 4 It deserves unfavourable notice that Mr. Wright’s paper, from beginning to end, does not contain the name of a single plant. This, I think, betrays the purely theoretical character of the investigation. I do not believe he could have avoided allusion to actual instances, if he had really studied them, for the actual instances have a great deal more to say than what is contained in the barren arithmetic of Phyllotaxy. Pray forgive me if I have expressed myself too strongly in these notes. I shall be very anxious to hear your general opinion in a few words; and then I shall ask permission to send you a sketch of my own theory of the origin of leaf-orders.5 Believe me, my dear Sir, with great respect | Yours very sincerely | Hubert Airy Charles Darwin Esqre. M.A., F.R.S., F.L.S. &c &c. DAR 159: 15 1

2 3 4 5

CD had offered to lend Airy his copy of Wright’s paper on phyllotaxy (Wright 1871b) when he received it (Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Hubert Airy, 10 [December] 1871). CD had received the paper in early April 1872 (letter from Chauncey Wright, 3 April 1872, and letter to Chauncey Wright, 6 April 1872). No letter from CD accompanying the paper when it was lent to Airy has been found. On Wright’s views, see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Chauncey Wright, 1 August 1871, n. 15. Verticillate: whorled (Chambers), i.e. where the leaves arise from the same level on a stem, and form a circle around it, as opposed to appearing around the stem at successively higher levels. Wright 1871b, p. 406. Bulbil: ‘small bud that may grow into an independent plant’ (Chambers). Airy alludes to the Goethean view that floral organs are modified leaves (see Goethe 1790, pp. 77–8). No reply from CD has been found unless it is the letter to Hubert Airy?, 9 June [1872?]. For Airy’s published views on phyllotaxy, see Airy 1873.

238

May 1872

From Asa Gray 31 May 1872 Botanic Garden, | Cambridge, Mass. May 31, 1872 My Dear Mr. Darwin By the hands of an old correspondent of yours, and cousin of ours, Mr. Brace, I send you a little book, which may amuse you, in seeing your own science adapted to juvenile minds.1 In some of those hours in which you can do no better than read, or hear read, “trashy novels”, you might try this, instead. 2 It will hardly rival “the Jumping Frog”, and the like specimens of American literature, which you first made known to us.3 Pray enable me to add a page or two at the end, by publishing your observations on Dionæa & Drosera.4 Ever, Dear Mr. Darwin | Yours sincerely | Asa Gray DAR 165: 180 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Dr Packard | Brace’ blue crayon 1

2

3 4

Charles Loring and Letitia Brace visited Down on 11 July 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). CD and C. L. Brace had corresponded in 1863 and 1867 (see Correspondence vols. 11 and 15). Gray sent a copy of part 2 of his Botany for young people (How plants behave; Gray 1872a); there is a lightly annotated copy in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 347). The first part of Botany for young people, How plants grow, was published in 1858 (Gray 1858b). CD had once written to Gray, ‘I have given up hearing the newspaper read aloud as Books are more amusing & less tiring. Good Heavens the lot of trashy novels, which I have heard is astounding.—’ (Correspondence vol. 12, letter to Asa Gray, 25 February [1864]). Gray refers to Mark Twain’s ‘The celebrated jumping frog of Calaveras County’ (in Twain 1867). CD published his observations on Drosera and Dionaea in 1875 in Insectivorous plants. He had been working on them since about 1860 (see Correspondence vol. 8). See also letter from Asa Gray, 2 February 1872.

To Charles Lyell 1 June 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. June 1 1872 My dear Lyell I am much obliged for Mr Wood’s1 interesting letter. There is plenty of evidence of most of our vars of fruit trees transmitting their characters to a large extent; but such close identity has not often been observed as in M r Wood’s cases.2 Sometimes the diversity is surprizing as recorded with care by Decaisne. 3 The most remarkable point in Mr Wood’s account is the sterility of his seedlings; but I must think, if they had been planted separately in good ground, they w d not have been so sterile after early youth. This is supported by the great fertility of seedling peach trees in N. & S. America & in Australia. 4 I return Mr Wood’s letter with many thanks & remain | yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin

June 1872

239

[Enclosure] Brentwood, Essex. May 19. 1872 Dear Sir Charles. My father5 is obliged to you for the offer of a specimen of Unio littoralis from Grays and will be glad of it as an authentic example. He thinks that you should in your next edition of either “Elements” or “Principles” mention that you obtained the shell yourself at Grays as there does not seem to be any reliable personal statement extant of anyone having found the shell there and as it seems to be absent from the recent excavations in which the Cyrena in association with Unio pictoria occurs in myriads doubts would arise hereafter which such a statement by you may obviate 6 It occurs to me that you may care to know my own experiments as to the state of things alluded to in your second Vol of the Principles bottom of page 306 & top of p 307—7 in 1859 (13 years ago) I planted a number of the pips of 3 varieties of apple. 1 was the Stone pippin 2 The Norfolk Biffin & 3 an eating apple which our gardener called a Cockle pippin The offspring of 1 & 2 were robust plants. & I preserved some of them without grafting & they are now trees 12 to 15 feet high. Only one of these ungrafted progeny bore fruit and that was for one year only (about 1863 or 4). the rest never have borne fruit & I should judge by their appearance never will do so but so far as their leaves afford a criterion they are true apples of the same stock as their progenitors they are however evidently barren, not producing even flowers save occasionally a blossom here & there which never comes to anything. The one tree which bore had only 3 apples on it & they were all 3 of them true stone pippins not distinguishable in any way from the parent apple. This tree never bore or blossomed again until this spring when it has now a few blossoms on it. Those individuals of the crop thus sprung from pips which I grafted or budded bore in 1863 & have done ever since. None of these ungrafted trees bear any greater resemblance to the wild crab than do the original fruit bearing trees from which they sprung & Dr. Hooker is quite right in saying that the wild crab is a different thing. But is not I think quite accurate in stating that the pips of apples produce “crabstates” of the varieties to which they belong. 8 My experience & what I can learn from cottagers who have tried to raise trees from pips is that the apple produces true scions in its progeny but that most of these are barren or nearly so the rare exceptions which do occur of prolific individuals forming the new varieties from time to time introduced The apple seems therefore to me to afford a striking example of the reason why some of our cultivated forms of the vegetable kingdom cannot become permanent wild species viz that they cannot reproduce themselves in sufficient force & number to compete in the battle of life. It is quite otherwise with the varieties of Brassica, for these are extremely fertile & so long as they are not allowed to intermingle produce a perpetual succession of the varietal form but as all the varieties freely intermingle with each other they when allowed to run wild become represented by the most reproductive variety among them & this is a sort

240

June 1872

of kale of which a few specimens (called rogues by gardeners) generally shew themselves in all sowings of every one of the cultivated varieties & are carefully eliminated by the gardener from the rest— The apple & the cabbage are thus it seems to me restrained from becoming wild species by precisely opposite agencies the one by feebleness of reproductive power & the other by the excessive reproductive power of one of its varieties— The wild crab is on the contrary extremely fertile—we have an old one here in a hedge that is covered every year with flowers & fruit—& the leaves are quite different from the apple progeny. The pips of no 3 produced very feeble plants & these died away in a year or two & their leaves were so entirely unlike apple or crab leaves that the late Dr Woodward9 who saw them in 1860 would not believe that they had sprung from apple pips The leaves were trifid like those of the hawthorn & as apples and pears are sometimes grafted on the hawthorn, (I have some pears here which bear freely grafted by myself on simple hawthorns & others on a hawthorn hedge) I have wondered whether the Cockle pippin from which these feeble examples spring might not have been growing on a hawthorn stock & become so far affected by the hawthorn stock as to have shewn it in their pips progeny— I in the same year planted a number of peach & nectarine stones the progeny of which grew into good sized trees but were never healthy, always dying back in their branches— Our garden peaches are always budded on to plum stocks owing I suppose to this unhealthy constitution of the seedling peach. Some of them bore fruit sparingly but the fruit would never come to maturity invariably dropping off that of some of the trees at an early stage of growth & that of others at a more advanced but still immature stage. It is clear therefore that none of those could reproduce themselves as wild species for a similar reason to that which restrains the apple from becoming wild but I was told by a New Zealand colonist that the peach tree has sprung up along the river valleys of that island abundantly from stones thrown away (derived from garden peaches introduced) & that these wild peaches bear an abundance of fruit equal to the finest garden peaches of Europe. 10 (I fancy that something similar occurs in America). It would then appear that the climatal conditions of a Pacific island remote from the parent Country of the wild almond from which the peach is supposed to have sprung are favorable enough to convert a garden fruit that cannot under the conditions of an European climate become wild into a true wild species.11 Many years ago I tried the seed of red geraniums of choice varieties & I found these produced for the most part barren progeny or at least geraniums with very few blossoms & those very poor. I could also say much about what I consider to be the popular delusion of birds restraining the development of insect life having watched that problem many years but I have already I doubt exhausted your patience as well as my paper. I am Dear Sir Charles | yours faithfully | Searles V. Wood Jn LS American Philosophical Society (418); Edinburgh University Library (Lyell 1: 6267–8) 1

Searles Valentine Wood (1830–84).

June 1872 2 3 4 5 6

7

8 9 10 11

241

In Variation 1: 350, CD suggested that seedlings raised from well-marked kinds of apple resembled ‘to a certain extent’ their parents. CD discussed the considerable variability of cultivated fruit trees in Variation 1: 334–51, citing Joseph Decaisne for his work on variation in pears (see Variation 1: 350 and Decaisne 1863). CD discussed the fertility of peach trees raised from seed in North America and elsewhere in Variation 1: 399. Searles Valentine Wood (1798–80). In the most recent edition of his Elements of geology, in a discussion of the conflicting evidence for the post-Pliocene climate of Europe, Lyell had referred to the discovery at Grays, Essex, of remains of the freshwater molluscs Unio littoralis and Cyrena fluminalis, neither of which were still to be found in northern Europe (C. Lyell 1871, p. 161). Lyell had also discussed these finds in Antiquity of man (C. Lyell 1863, pp. 157–60). Wood also refers to Lyell’s Principles of geology, the most recent edition of which was the tenth (C. Lyell 1867–8). Wood refers to the eleventh edition of Lyell’s Principles of geology, in which Lyell, following Joseph Dalton Hooker, argued that cultivated varieties of plants left to grow in uncultivated soil, rather than reverting to a single parent form, would produce offspring still recognisable as different varieties; Hooker described cultivated apples that produced ‘crab states’ of the varieties when left to run wild, rather than producing true crab-apples (Hooker 1859, p. ix; C. Lyell 1872, 2: 306–7). See n. 7, above. Samuel Pickworth Woodward. Searles Valentine Wood (1798–80) had given CD information about the fertility of peach trees grown from seed in New Zealand (Correspondence vol. 14, letter from S. V. Wood, 16 July 1866). CD had discussed the evidence for peach trees’ descent from the almond in Variation 1: 339.

To Chauncey Wright 3 June [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. June 3d My dear Sir Many thanks for your article in the N. American Review, which I have read with great interest.—2 Nothing can be clearer than the way in which you discuss the permanence or fixity of species.— It never occurred to me to suppose that anyone looked at the cases as it seems Mr. Mivart does. Had I read his answer to you,3 perhaps I shd. have perceived this; but I have resolved to waste no more time in reading reviews of my works or on evolution, excepting when I hear that they are good & contain new matter, or are written by men whom I respect. It is pretty clear that Mr Mivart has come to the end of his tether on this subject.— As your mind is so clear, & as you consider so carefully the meaning of words, I wish you wd. take some incidental occasion to consider when a thing may properly be said to be effected by the will of man.— I have been led to the wish by reading an article by your Prof. Whitney versus Schleicher.4 He argues because each step of change in language is made by the will of man, the whole language so changes; but I do not think that this is so, as man has no intention or wish to change the language. It is a parallel case with what I have called “unconscious selection” which depends on man consciously preserving the best individuals & thus unconsciously altering the breed.—5 My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin

242

June 1872

American Philosophical Society (B/D25.278) 1 2

3 4

5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Chauncey Wright, 24 May 1872. Wright had sent CD a proof copy of a paper that was part of an exchange with St George Jackson Mivart (see letter from Chauncey Wright, 24 May 1872 and n. 6); it was published in the North American Review. The proof copy, lightly annotated by CD, is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Mivart 1872b. There is an annotated copy of William Dwight Whitney’s paper criticising the views of August Schleicher on the nature of language (Whitney 1871) in the Darwin Pamphlet collection–CUL. Schleicher had sent CD his paper on Darwinism and language, and CD also had the English translation (Schleicher 1863 and 1869; see Correspondence vol. 13, letter from August Schleicher, 9 February 1865, n.1). CD distinguished between ‘methodical’ selection (breeding with the modification of a particular feature in view) and ‘unconscious’ selection (breeding from the best animals and plants with no particular improvement in mind) in Origin, pp. 34–8. Schleicher had argued that languages were independent entities that developed organically through a mechanism which he likened to natural selection and which was independent of human agency. Whitney argued that language was a wholly human artefact, with its natural tendency to vary kept in check through acts of individual and collective will, whose development required ‘the will of man as a determining force’ (Whitney 1871, p. 47); CD annotated this passage in his copy of the paper, ‘but without reflection on the result’. For more on the views of Schleicher and Whitney, see Alter 2005, pp. 129–35.

From Francis Galton 4 June 1872 42 Rutland Gate SW June 4/72 My dear Darwin Thank you very much about the rabbits— I however sincerely trust you did not send your man all the way on purpose for them alone! 1 Any how I feel I have put you to much trouble and can only repeat how greatly I am obliged. Your criticisms on my paper are very gratifying to me the more so that the question you put, is one to which I can at once reply.2 You ask, why hybrids of the first generation are nearly uniform in character while great diversity appears in the grand children & succeeding generations? I answer, that the diagram shews (see next page) that only 4 stages separate the children from the parents but 20 from their grand-parents and therefore judging from these limited data alone, (ignoring for the moment, all considerations of unequal variability in the different stages & of pre-potence of particular qualities, &c—) the increase of the mean deviation of the several (from the average hybrid) √ √ grandchildren over that of the several children is as 20: 4 or more than twice as great. The omitted considerations would make the deviation (as I am prepared to argue) still greater.3

June 1872

243

I will add the explanatory foot-note you most justly suggest, 4 & should be very glad if you wd. let me have your copy back (I will return it) with marks to the obscure passages that I may try to amend them. I found the   an uncommonly tough job;—having to avoid hypothesis on the one hand & truism on the other and, again, the difficulty of being sufficiently general & yet not too vague. It is very difficult to draw a correct verbal picture in mezzo tint, I mean by burnishing out the broad effects and not by drawing hard outlines. Ever very sincerely | Francis Galton I have knocked every symbol out of my paper & wholly rearranged the diagrams &c to make it less unintelligible.—5 FG A pleasant journey & rest, to you all!6 DAR 105: A61–3 1 2

3 4 5 6

See letter to Francis Galton, 27 May [1872]. Galton had offered to send CD a copy of a paper on blood-relationship that he was preparing for a meeting of the Royal Society (Galton 1872a; see letter from Francis Galton, 28 May 1872). The paper was read on 13 June 1872. CD’s comments have not been found. Galton marked different elements of his diagram in red and blue crayon; elements marked in red are reproduced here in bold type, and elements marked in blue are reproduced in italic type. There are no footnotes in the published paper (Galton 1872a). See Galton 1872a, pp. 398 and 399. The Darwins went to stay with William Erasmus Darwin in Southampton from 8 to 20 June 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)).

244

June 1872

From M. C. Stanley 4 June 1872 23. S.t James’s Square. | S.W. June 4/72 Dear Mr. Darwin Sackville would be extremely pleased to be allowed to be present with M r Galton at a Séance of Mr Crookes’.—tho’ he doubts being able to form any opinion without going thoroughly into the Evidence, & this,—with the work he has in hand would not be possible.1 But the truth is I am very eager Sackville should be at one of M r Crooke’s séances, & if you think it likely Mr C. wd. allow him to go with Mr. Galton—wd. it be asking too much of you to try to arrange it? Sackville is very sceptical on the point but very curious— I am all ready to hear of a new force & very curious indeed. 2 Alas’ nothing tempts Mr Alexander— he is determined to come to Holwood next June.3 Believe me | Yrs very sincerely | M C Derby4 DAR 162: 165 1

2

3

4

Sackville Arthur Cecil, Stanley’s son, was an employee of the Great Eastern Railway Company (Stevenson 1969, p. 128). Francis Galton and William Crookes had been attending séances to investigate the powers claimed by mediums; Galton had offered to arrange for CD to be present (see letter from Francis Galton, 19 April 1872, and letter to Francis Galton, 21 April [1872]). Crookes was devising experiments to test for the existence of a psychic force (see the letter from Francis Galton, 19 April 1872 and n. 5). For more on the investigation of the powers claimed by mediums at this period, including those undertaken by Crookes, see Noakes 2007. Stanley and her husband, Edward Henry Stanley, rented Holwood House in Beckenham, close to Down, from Robert Alexander; he had given them notice in April that he intended to occupy the house himself from the following year (Vincent ed. 1994, p. 104). Stanley was countess of Derby.

To M. C. Lloyd 5 June [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. June 5th My dear Miss Lloyd I received yesterday a most spirited drawing of a dog, & I have heard to day that it was sent by you.2 I admire it much, but regret exceedingly that you should have taken so much trouble in vain; for two sketches of dogs in the same frame of mind are now actually in the hands of the engraver.3 I did not understand that Miss Bonham Carter was going to apply to you; but some little time ago I expressed in her presence my trouble about drawings; & she, I presume, wrote to you.— 4 I had at that time one sketch which would do moderately well, & directly afterwards I received a second from a young artist, which seemed to me so true & spirited that I at once sent it off to be engraved.5

June 1872

245

Pray accept my cordial thanks for your great kindness, & believe me | Yours truly obliged | Charles Darwin Dr Sherman M. Bull (private collection) 1 2 3

4

5

The year is established by the reference to engravings of dogs for Expression (see n. 3, below). The sketch has not been found. Sketches of hostile and affectionate dogs had been made by Arthur Dampier May and Briton Riviere and were being engraved as plates for Expression by James Davis Cooper (see Expression pp. 52–5; see also letter to Briton Riviere, 29 May 1872, and letter from Samuel Butler, 30 May 1872 and n. 2). Elinor Mary Bonham-Carter had provided CD with information on expression in dogs, including some from Riviere (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Briton Riviere to E. M. Bonham-Carter, 26 June 1871). See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter to A. D. Bartlett, 19 December [1871], for CD’s efforts to secure suitable drawings. CD received the sketches done by May, a teenager, through Samuel Butler at the end of May 1872, when he was already in possession of those by Briton Riviere (see letter from Samuel Butler to Francis Darwin, [before 30 May 1872], and letter from Samuel Butler, 30 May 1872).

To William Marshall 6 June [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. June 6th. Dear Sir Permit me to trouble you with a few lines to thank you for your kindness in having sent me various interesting publications; especially one on the structure of man in relation to the lower animals, & a second, received only a few days since, on the osseous protuberances of the skulls of Birds. 2 I have been particularly glad to see this latter memoir, & have seldom been more interested than by your statement that these protuberances appear early in life in those species in which both sexes are thus furnished, & late in life in those in which the males alone possess them. 3 This is a parallel case to that given by me in the Descent of Man about the horns of the ReinDeer; & I believe that the fact has a very important bearing on the acquisition of sexual characters.4 It has pleased me much to observe that you admit to a considerable extent the influence of sexual selection.5 With much respect & my best thanks, I remain, Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin Smithsonian Institution Libraries (Special Collections, Dibner Library MSS 405 A. Gift of the Burndy Library) 1 2

3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from William Marshall, 15 October 1872. CD’s annotated copies of Marshall 1870 (on resemblances between humans and other animals) and 1872a (on bony protuberances on the skulls of birds) are in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL, together with papers sent by Marshall on elongated tail feathers in birds of paradise (Marshall 1871), and general observations on birds’ tails (Marshall 1872b). See Marshall 1872a, p. 174; CD scored this passage three times in in his copy of the paper and wrote ‘very important’ in the margin.

246 4

5

June 1872

CD had proposed in Descent that secondary sexual characteristics generally appeared later in life than characteristics that were shared by both sexes. He illustrated this with the case of reindeer, which develop antlers at an unusually early age and are the only members of the deer family in which females have antlers as well as males (Descent 1: 288, 295). CD added Marshall’s similar conclusions about birds to this section in Descent 2d ed., p. 235 and n. 43, citing Marshall 1872a; he also cited Marshall 1872a and 1872b in a discussion of the development of ornament, and Marshall 1871 on moulting in birds of paradise (Descent 2d ed., pp. 383–4 and nn. 65 and 66, 393 n. 82). In his work on bony crests in birds, Marshall concluded that those found only in the males must often have arisen through sexual selection; he also suggested that some features that had arisen through sexual selection might not be easily identifiable as such, having assumed an additional function over time and lost their original role (Marshall 1872a, p. 174).

From Briton Riviere 6 June 1872 Rathelpie | St. Andrews June 6 1872 My dear Sir Thank you for your kind letter which was forwarded to me today but too late for me to catch the post.1 I myself requested Mr Cooper to send me proofs as soon as possible. This is an important thing as very often they need much correction & look very different to the drawings.2 Pray do not take my name out of your introduction. If you have been kind enough to put it there it will be a pleasure to me The only reasons that I have for being timid in putting my name to wood drawings are first that I do not consider my work in that material at all happy, & secondly that I fear the engravers rendering of it. 3 I am Dear Sir | Very truly yours | Briton Riviere DAR 176: 181 1 2 3

CD’s letter has not been found. James Davis Cooper was producing engravings of drawings of dogs made by Riviere for use in Expression (see letter to Briton Riviere, 29 May 1872). CD acknowledged Riviere in the introduction to Expression for providing two drawings of dogs (Expression, p. 26; see also figures on pp. 52 and 53). See also letter from Briton Riviere, 20 May 1872. Riviere’s engravings are unsigned, though his name is given in the caption.

From Hubert Airy 7 June 1872 Grasmere 1872 June 7 [On leaf arrangement.]1 DAR 159: 14a (fragile) 1

The letter is one of a small bundle in too poor a state of preservation to be separated, and is too fragile for any further text to be transcribed, but for its possible contents see the letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872 and n. 2; it is one of a series of letters from Airy discussing phyllotaxy.

June 1872 From Francis Galton 7 June 1872

247 42 Rutland Gate SW June 7/72

My dear Darwin I did not reply yesterday about the Spiritualists as I expected that day & this to have heard from Mr. Home & Crookes is out of town.1 It will give me great pleasure to do what I can, for Lord Sackville Cecil but rather doubt whether I shall have power to do much. I can’t myself get to these séances as often as I like— indeed I have had no opportunity for a long time past. The fact is, that first class mediums are very few in number & are always ailing— Also that Crookes & others are working their very best at the subject and entertain a full belief that they will be able to establish something important and lastly what, I see, is a real difficulty with them, the introduction of a stranger always disturbs the séances. I say all this to excuse me in your eyes, if I dont fulfil your wishes as you wd. like, but I will do my best & write—whenever I have anything to say, to Ld. S. Cecil as you propose. The person most likely to help would, I think, be Lord Lindsay. 2 I wonder if I have offended Home by my last letter to him— he has never replied & I hear incidentally there is to be an important seance this very night! Alas for me. Ever yours sincerely | Francis Galton DAR 105: A64–5 1

2

CD had been asked to help arrange an invitation for Sackville Arthur Cecil to attend a séance with Galton and William Crookes; Crookes was investigating the claims of mediums, including those of Daniel Dunglas Home (see letter from Francis Galton, 26 May 1872 and nn. 2 and 3, and letter from M. C. Stanley, 4 June 1872). No letter from CD to Galton passing on the request has been found. James Ludovic Lindsay had published the results of an experiment that suggested Home could detect magnetic force, and a description of an apparent instance of levitation (Lindsay 1871; see Noakes 2007, pp. 11–12).

From John Murray 7 June [1872]1

50, Albemarle S.t | W. June 7

Dear Mr Darwin I have to announce to you the safe receipt by Mess Clowes of your MS Work on Expression & also to enclose 3 specimen pages purposely set up by M r Dorrell— The most comprehensive of these No 1—will bring the whole MS. into a compact Volume of above 370 pages exclusive of Cuts (some to be worked separately) This wd not be too large, & on the whole I incline to favor this but I wish to have your opinion 2 The other two pages have rather a spun out appearance The Printers are prepared to carry out all your wishes. The woodblocks had better be sent in to them3 I shall announce the work in my next Quarterly Book List 4 I remain My Dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | John Murray Charles Darwin Esq DAR 171: 409

248 1 2

3 4

June 1872

The year is established by the reference to the manuscript of Expression (see n. 2, below). Dorrell, who has not been further identified, was a printer with the firm William Clowes & Sons (see also Correspondence vol. 14, letter to ?, 10 May [1866?], and Correspondence vol. 18, letter to Mr Dorrell, 9 August 1870). The Dorrell family, headed by Edmund Robson Dorrell, had a bookselling and stationery business next to Clowes at 15 Charing Cross Road (Post Office London directory 1872). Expression was published by Murray on 26 November 1872 and comprised 374 pages (Freeman 1977). James Davis Cooper was producing engravings of the plates for Expression (Expression, p. 26). No advertisement by Murray for Expression has been found earlier than that in his list in the Publishers’ Circular, 9 December 1872, pp. 820–1.

From Alfred Tylor 8 June 1872

Shepley House | Carshalton June 8 1872

My dear Sir My brother E B Tylor has mentioned to me that you are not disinclined to look into the evidence for a “Pluvial Period” This term has been adopted, since I first introduced it, by Prof Morris & Prof T. R Jones in their lectures and in the Geol. Magazine, by Prof Phillips in his lectures and in his new book 1 It has met with great opposition at the Geological Society and I have had the greatest difficulty to get any allusion to it permitted in the Quarterly Journal. 2 As Mr Belgrand was 20 years later than myself in his idea of great rainfall I thought the late president might have put in a note of reference to some of the papers of which I enclose a list as the argument of Belgrand in 1870 was the same as my own in 1853 3 I suppose on account of my having opposed the High & low level gravel theory of Prestwich & Lyell some years since (which is now rarely mentioned by any of its supporters) there has been a feeling of opposition against the Wet period as being in bad company4 My paper, which the Council refused to publish Nov 1868 contains some important evidence new facts, & new reasoning, and I hope the Council will allow it to be published as a postponed paper.5 I wish your friend Sir C Lyell would look into the whole subject & particularly at the points of difference— I have a paper coming on at the Civil Engineers on the Flow of Water and have many new facts about rivers. The Somerset House authorities make such a favour of publishing any thing in the river way that I am obliged to send my paper elsewhere. 6 If more mechanical views & reasoning were admitted & considered some of the unsettled questions might be solved in geology. Mr Lumb of Buenos Ayres died at Carshalton 2 months since He mentioned you to me in his last illness with great affection7 | Yours Truly Alfred Tylor DAR 178: 199 1

Edward Burnett Tylor had visited CD on 6 June 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). In a series of papers read in 1867 and 1868, Alfred Tylor theorised that early post-glacial river gravel deposits could be explained by a ‘Pluvial’ period of higher than normal rainfall (A.Tylor 1867, 1868a, 1868b, 1868c). John Morris was professor of geology at University College, London, and Thomas Rupert Jones was professor of geology at the Royal Military College, Sandhurst; the term appears in a report

June 1872

2

3

4

5

6

7

249

of a Geologists’ Association excursion to Guildford led by Morris (Geological Magazine 6 (1869): 331– 3), in a paper ‘On the primæval rivers of Britain’ by Jones (T. R. Jones 1870), and in the report of a lecture by Jones on the geology of the Kingsclere valley (Geological Magazine 8 (1871): 511–15). John Phillips, professor of geology at Oxford, used the term in his Geology of Oxford and the valley of the Thames (Phillips 1871, p. 492). An abstract of Tylor’s paper on the Quaternary gravels of England, read at the meeting of the Geological Society of London on 6 May 1868, was published in the Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society (A. Tylor 1868a); it was published in full in the next volume (A. Tylor 1868b). In the discussion following the reading of the paper all nine recorded speakers disagreed with Tylor’s thesis, including Joseph Prestwich, William Boyd Dawkins, Charles Lyell, and Searles Valentine Wood (1830–84) (Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 24 (1868): 456). Tylor read a paper at the Geological Society in December 1852 on the causes of sea-level change and denudation, but it was withdrawn from publication and appeared only as an abstract in the 1853 volume of the society’s Journal (A. Tylor 1852). The abstract does not make explicit reference to a sustained period of increased rainfall. In a recent address to the Geological Society, the outgoing president, Joseph Prestwich, had referred to claims by the French hydrologist François-Eugène Belgrand that evidence from the Seine basin suggested rainfall in the early post-glacial period had been substantially heavier than in modern times (Prestwich 1872, p. lxviii; see also Belgrand 1869). The enclosed list has not been found, but see n. 6, below. Prestwich, followed by Lyell, had identified two distinct levels of gravel deposits along the river Somme that they considered to be of glacial origin but of different ages (Prestwich 1859, 1862; C. Lyell 1863, pp. 130–44). Tylor had challenged this view, arguing that the gravel deposits were more recent than Prestwich and Lyell suggested, were all of the same age, and were the result of flooding (A. Tylor 1866 and 1867; see also A. Tylor 1872, pp. 498–9). A paper by Tylor on the formation of deltas was read at the Geological Society meeting of 11 November 1868, but only an abstract of it was published by the society (A. Tylor 1868c); a full version of the paper appeared in the Geological Magazine in 1872, together with an appendix outlining Tylor’s view of the disputes surrounding it (A. Tylor 1872). The Geological Society had rooms in Somerset House on the Strand in London until 1874. There are no papers by Tylor recorded in the Minutes of the Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers, and no paper on water flow is listed in the bibliography attached to his obituary (Geological Magazine 2 (1885): 142–4). CD had stayed with Edward Lumb in Buenos Ayres in 1833 during the voyage of HMS Beagle; Lumb had arranged for some of CD’s fossil specimens to be shipped to Britain (Correspondence vol. 1, letter from Edward Lumb, 13 November 1833, and letter from Edward Lumb to J. S. Henslow, 2 May 1834).

From John Tyndall 8 June [1872]1 Royal Institution of Great Britain 8th June My dear Darwin The enclosed is now being copied & you will be asked to sign it in a day or two. 2 We propose confining the signatures to 10 or 12 good names. 3 I hope you will think that we have made out a good case. I have boiled down the correspondence so as to enable outsiders to form a quick judgement Yours ever | John Tyndall Chas Darwin Esq DAR 106: C9

250 1 2

3

June 1872

The year is established by reference to the enclosed memorial; see n. 2, below. A memorial in support of Joseph Dalton Hooker in his dispute with Acton Smee Ayrton over the running of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, was sent to the prime minister, William Ewart Gladstone, on 20 June 1872 and published on 11 July (enclosure to letter from John Lubbock to W. E. Gladstone, 20 June 1872; Nature 6 (1872): 211–16; see also letter from J. D. Hooker, 14 May 1872). In addition to CD and Tyndall, the memorial was signed by George Bentham, George Burrows, George Busk, Henry Holland, Thomas Henry Huxley, Charles Lyell, James Paget, Henry Creswicke Rawlinson, and William Spottiswoode.

From V. O. Kovalevsky [after 8 June 1872]1

47. Bernard Street. Russel Square Dear Sir! I come for a couple of months to England with the object of writing a osteological monography of the Hyopotamus and Anthracotherium, for which I collected ample materials in France and Switzerland, and I am busy comparing them now with the same genera from the Isle of Wight in the Brit. Museum. 2 If your health allows You to receive visits, I shall be very happy to call on You the first Sunday You find convenient, and spend some hours at Down.3 Your very truly | W. Kowalevsky DAR 169: 55 1

2

3

The date is established by the reference to Kovalevsky’s work on Hyopotamus and Anthracotherium in the British Museum; he began this work in mid-June 1872, having been in Lyon until at least 8 June (Davitashvili 1951, p. 224). Kovalevsky had spent the previous summer in Paris studying the fossil collections at the Muséum d’histoire naturelle (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 19 August [1871] and n. 5). For his discussion of fossil bones found on the Isle of Wight, including humerus and ulna of the extinct ungulate Hyopotamus, see Kovalevsky 1873, especially pp. 32–6, and Kovalevsky 1873–4. Kovalevsky visited CD sometime before mid-July; although the visit was not recorded in Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), it was mentioned in a letter to his brother, Alexander Onufrievich Kovalevsky (Davitashvili 1951, p. 157).

To Hubert Airy? 9 June [1872?]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. [Bassett, Southampton.] June 9th My dear Sir I shall be very glad to read your paper; but you must not trust to my judgment. I am essentially a very poor critic, as I have often found to my cost,— I am always inclined to believe all I read, & differ only after long reflection; & this is now becoming hard work for me on new subjects.— Moreover I have no mathematical knowledge of any kind or power in this line.—2 So do not trust me, but believe me yours very sincerely | C. Darwin American Philosophical Society (408)

June 1872 1 2

251

The correspondent and the year are conjectured from the probable relationship between this letter and the letters from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872, and 16 July 1872. See the letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872, with Airy’s detailed mathematical modelling of leaf arrangement.

From C. L. Sutherland [9–19 June 1872]1 Cicely Hill | Cirencester. r

Dear M . Darwin, Professor Wrightson, of The Royal Agricultural College here, will be staying with me for a few days at our place Coombe, near Croydon, & is anxious to have the pleasure of an introduction to you. I therefore propose to drive him over to call upon you between 3 & 4 o’clock on Saturday afternoon next the 22 nd. if you will chance to be at home at that time.2 My address will be as above at Cirencester up to Friday next when I leave here for Coombe. I am going through a course of lectures at the College. 3 With my compliments to Mrs. Darwin & hoping your sons are all well | I remain, | Yours truly | Charles L Sutherland DAR 177: 319 1

2

3

The year and month are established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from C. L. Sutherland, 12 September 1872, and the date range by the date of Sutherland’s proposed visit to Down (see n. 2, below). Sutherland may have been writing as early as Sunday 9 June 1872, referring to the Friday and Saturday of the following week, or as late as Wednesday 19 June 1872, referring to Friday and Saturday of the same week. There is no reference in Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) for 22 June 1872 to a visit by Sutherland and John Wrightson, but Sutherland, whose second home, Downe Hall, was close to the Darwins, did meet CD at some point in June 1872 (see letter from C. L. Sutherland, 12 September 1872). Sutherland was a keen animal breeder and later served on the Royal Commission for Agriculture (WWW ).

To Herbert Spencer 10 June [1872]1 Bassett, Southampton June 10th Dear Spencer I daresay you will think me a foolish fellow, but I cannot resist the wish to express my unbounded admiration of your article in answer to M r Martineau.2 It is indeed admirable, & hardly less so your second article on Sociology (which however I have not yet finished): I never believed in the reigning influence of great men on the world’s progress; but if asked why I did not believe, I shd. have been sorely perplexed to have given a good answer.3 Everyone with eyes to see & ears to hear (the number, I fear, are not many) ought to bow their knee to you, as I for one do.— Believe me | yours most sincerely | Ch. Darwin

252

June 1872

We have come here to my son’s house for 10 days’ rest; as I have just finished & sent my M.S. on “Expression of the Emotions in Man & the lower animals” to the Printers.—4 Do not think of wasting your time by acknowledging this scrap.— University of London, Senate House Library: manuscript reference MS791/80. (Courtesy of the Athenaeum.) 1 2

3

4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Herbert Spencer, 12 June 1872. In his response to James Martineau’s article ‘The place of mind in nature and intuition in man’ ( J. Martineau 1871), Spencer, while strongly denying that the theory of evolution was intrinsically materialist, countered Martineau’s arguments for the existence of a divine creator and his apparent misinterpretation of Spencer’s doctrine of ‘survival of the fittest’ as ‘survival of the better’ (Spencer 1872). Between April 1872 and October 1873 Spencer published a sixteen-part paper in the Contemporary Review appealing for social science to be recognised as a discrete and valuable discipline (Spencer 1872–3). In the second part, ‘Is there a social science?’, which appeared in the May 1872 issue, Spencer characterised those who refused to recognise it as ‘the class which sees in the course of civilization little else than the record of remarkable persons and their doings’; his counter-argument was that great persons arose from the societies in which they lived (Spencer 1872–3, part 2, pp. 705–10). CD sent Expression to the printers William Clowes & Sons in the first week of June (see letter from John Murray, 7 June [1872]); CD and Emma Darwin stayed with William Erasmus Darwin from 8 to 20 June 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)).

From Asa Gray 11 June 1872

Cambridge June 11, 1872

My Dear Darwin I dare say you have long ago the clever thing referred to in Prof. Rood’s 1 letter; I send the copy by a friend who will post it in Liverpool—so that it should reach you nearly as soon as this letter. We are closing up our domestic affairs—for a vacation-visit to California and the Rky Mts. and am much hurried.2 Ever yours cordially | Asa Gray [Enclosure]

341 East 15th. St | New York June 8th. 1872.

Dear Professor: I send you by express two copies of The Young Darwinian, (from the artist, Mr Beard)3 One is intended for Mr Darwin the other for yourself. The artist assured me that it was executed in a purely neutral spirit, and without any intention of casting ridicule—on either side. We in New York enjoyed it very much— Sincerely | O. N. Rood Prof Asa Gray

June 1872

253

Beard is a very talented fellow, and would no doubt be delighted by a line from you, though he dont expect it. | R— DAR 106: D13–14 1 2 3

Ogden Nicholas Rood. Gray and his wife, Jane Loring Gray, planned to spend a month in the Yosemite Valley, California ( J. L. Gray ed. 1893, 2: 625). A photograph of a drawing based on an oil painting by William Holbrook Beard had been exhibited in the Century Association in New York on 3 June 1871. Beard is believed to have painted the original work, called ‘The youthful Darwin expounding his theories’ and now in the American Museum of Natural History, as a response to Origin (Peck 1994, p. 699). Beard specialised in satirical paintings substituting animals for humans; ‘The youthful Darwin’ depicts a young humanoid with a vestigial tail showing two older apes a series of creatures from fish to amphibian (see plate, p. 290). The enclosure to Rood’s letter has not been found, and may have been a copy either of the drawing, or of the photograph (see also letter to Asa Gray, 8 July [1872]).

From Menyhért Lónyay 11 June 1872

565.

Magyar | Tudomanyos | Akademia

Igen tisztelt Baronet, A Magyar Tudományos Akadémiának, május 24-én tartott nagy-gyülésén, szerencséje volt Nagyságodat, a természeti tudományok körüli érdemeiért, küls˝o tagjává megválasztani. Különös örömemre szolgál tolmácsolhatni azon tiszteletet, melylyel e Magyar Akadémia a tudomány érdemes elébbviv˝oi iránt viseltetik, s egyszersmind, nagyra becsülésünk jelé˝ul, Akadémiánk oklevelét ide zárva megküldeni. Fogadja Nagyságod mély tiszteletem kifejezését, melylyel vagyok

Most Honoured Sir, The Hungarian Academy of Sciences, in its General Assembly of the 24-th May, has had the honour to choose You, as foreign Member, in regard of Your highly distinguished merits in natural sciences. It is on my side a particular pleasure to give words to this proof of respect the Hungarian Academy owes to one of the worthy promoters of science, and to join hereby as a token of our consideration the respective Diploma.1 Assuring You, most honoured Sir, of my perfect consideration, I am

Pest 1872 junius 11-én | Nagyságod | alázatos szolgája

Pest, the 11th. Juny 1872 | your most obedient servant

Gr. Lónyay Menyhért | elnök2 Sir Charles Darwin, Bart. in London. DAR 96: 154

254 1 2

June 1872

For a transcription and translation of the diploma, see Appendix III. Elnök: chairman or president; Gr., i.e. gróf : count (Hungarian).

To Menyhért Lónyay [after 11 June 1872]1 Sir I beg leave to acknowledge the receipt of your obliging letter of June 11 th. in which you announce to me that the H. A. of Sc. has conferred on me the d. h. of electing me a f. member.—2 I have received the D. & beg permission to return my sincere thanks.3 I have the h. to remain | Sir | your obd svt To the P. of the H. Acad. of Sciences. ADraft DAR 96: 154r 1 2 3

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Menyhért Lónyay, 11 June 1872. See letter from Menyhért Lónyay, 11 June 1872. H. A. of Sc.: Hungarian Academy of Sciences. For a transcription and translation of the diploma, see Appendix III.

From Herbert Spencer 12 June 1872

37 Queen’s Gardens, | Bayswater, W. 12 June 1872.

Dear Darwin, Though you interdict a rejoinder to your letter, yet as you have been at the trouble of writing to express your satisfaction with the articles you name, I cannot consent to let your letter pass without saying how much gratified I am by your approval. 1 I should very well have liked, had time permitted, to deal somewhat more fully with the metaphysical part of Mr. Martineau’s argument. If, as I expect him to do, he makes some reply, it will probably furnish the occasion, after an interval, for a fuller exposition; by which I hope to make clear to quite ordinary apprehensions, the absolute emptiness of all such propositions as that with which Mr. Martineau deludes himself & his readers. I am glad to hear you have got through your book on “Expression”, & that (as I gathered from Mr. Tylor at the Athenæum the other day) you are in good condition notwithstanding your work.2 My own lucubrations on the same topic are also finished, & will appear in the forthcoming number of the Psychology, which you will probably find waiting for you when you get back to Down.3 very sincerely yours | Herbert Spencer DAR 177: 230

June 1872 1

2

3

255

See letter to Herbert Spencer, 10 June [1872]. CD had written praising Spencer’s rejoinder to an article in which James Martineau criticised the theory of natural selection and argued for the existence of a divine creator ( J. Martineau 1871; Spencer 1872). The manuscript of Expression was sent to the printers at the beginning of June (see letter to Herbert Spencer, 10 June 1872 and n. 4). Edward Burnett Tylor became a member of the Athenaeum Club in 1872 (Waugh [1888], p. 139); he visited Down on 6 June 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). The second edition of The principles of psychology was published in parts between 1870 and 1872, with the penultimate part, including a section on ‘Language of the emotions’, issued in June 1872 (Spencer 1870– 2, 1: v–vi, and 2: 539–57); CD’s annotated copy of Spencer 1870–2 is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 773).

From J. D. Hooker to W. E. Darwin [13 June 1872]1 Royal Gardens Kew Thursday Dear Darwin The bearer takes an address for your father to sign; please direct him to where he shall find your father.2 Ever yours | J D Hooker DAR 103: 116–17 1 2

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to J. D. Hooker, 14 June [1872]. The Thursday before 14 June 1872 was 13 June 1872. CD signed a memorial supporting Hooker in a dispute over the administration of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; it was sent to the prime minister, William Ewart Gladstone, on 20 June 1872 (letter from John Lubbock to W. E. Gladstone, 20 June 1872). CD and Emma Darwin stayed with William Erasmus Darwin at Bassett, Southampton, from 8 June to 20 June 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary ((DAR 242)). See also letter from John Tyndall, 8 June [1872].

To J. D. Hooker 14 June [1872]1 Bassett | Southampton June 14th My dear Hooker I signed with real pleasure yesterday the memorial.— The man was in a great hurry & William had to send him back in his carriage so as to catch the return train; & in the hurry I addressed the memorial to Tyndall & hope I did not thus cause any delay or confusion.—2 The memorial seems to me very clear & good; but I cannot help fearing too severe, not against justice, but for policy. I enjoyed the severity much; but on reflexion became fearful about it.— I have not written to you for a long time, as all your time must be absorbed; but you have often been in my mind. I was very glad a week ago to have had the chance of a long talk to Lady Derby about your affairs, & as she went away, she said of her own accord, I shall repeat all what you have said to L d. Derby.3 We remain here till next Thursday morning.

256

June 1872

May all your enemies be cursed, is my pious frame of mind, | Yours affectionately | Ch. Darwin DAR 94: 220–1 1 2

3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. D. Hooker, 15 June 1872. See letter from John Tyndall, 8 June [1872], and letter from J. D. Hooker to W. E. Darwin, [13 June 1872]. For the memorial organised by Tyndall in support of Hooker in a dispute over the administration of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, see the enclosure to the letter from John Lubbock to W. E. Gladstone, 20 June 1872. CD and Emma Darwin stayed with William Erasmus Darwin at Bassett, Southampton, from 8 June to 20 June 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). The earl and countess of Derby, Edward Henry Stanley and Mary Catherine Stanley, were renting Holwood House, Beckenham, near Down (see letter from M. C. Stanley, 4 June 1872 and n. 3). Lord Derby, a member of the Tory opposition, had already been consulted on the best strategy for presenting Hooker’s case in parliament, and had received copies of the correspondence regarding Hooker’s case from Tyndall (MacLeod 1974, pp. 60–1).

From J. D. Hooker 15 June 1872 Royal Gardens Kew June 15/72 Dear Darwin A thousand thanks:— you were right to return the address to Tyndall. I quite expect that it will make Gladstone frantic— he is already utterly out of temper with my affair—but I must put a good face on it.— I don’t tell Tyndall this. 1 The Govt now regret having granted Ld Derby the correspondence in the upper House! I have obliged Lubbock to postpone this moving from there in the lower till Monday—2 this looks fishy as the boys say. My wife is at St. Albans for change of air, not that she is ill but terribly harrassed with this affair she returns on Wednesday.3 Thank God my mother4 does not yet know of it. Ld. J. Manners is very kind, he reminds me that it will render it impossible for Ayrton & me to hold our relative positions.5 I hold to my old motto “Servate animam æquam”6 with what tenacity I can, but need hardly conceal, that my frame of mind is hardly philosophical, under the circumstances of the last few weeks! I do long for rest Ever dear old friend | Yours | J D Hooker DAR 103: 114–15 1 2

See letter to J. D. Hooker, 14 June [1872] and n. 2. Hooker refers to John Tyndall and William Ewart Gladstone. Edward Henry Stanley, earl of Derby, moved for a discussion of the dispute over the administration of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, in the House of Lords in mid-July, and John Lubbock for discussion in the Commons on 21 July. Copies of the correspondence relating to the affair were formally presented to Parliament on 26 July, and Stanley spoke on the subject in the House of Lords on 29 July. (MacLeod 1974, pp. 64–6.)

June 1872 3 4 5 6

257

Hooker and his wife, Frances Harriet Hooker, had a friend in St Albans, Hertfordshire (Correspondence vol. 12, letter from J. D. Hooker, 29 March 1864). Maria Hooker. John James Robert Manners was one of Acton Smee Ayrton’s recent predecessors as first commissioner of works, under whose jurisdiction Kew fell (ODNB). Servate animam aequam: keep a level head. The phrase may be a recollection of Horace, Odes, 2.3.1– 2: ‘Aequam memento rebus in arduis | servare mentem’ (Remember to keep a level head in difficult circumstances).

From B. A. Renshaw 15 June 1872 London. Charing + Hotel. 15. June. 1872. Sir: My only excuse for troubling you with these lines is the hope & belief that the subject of them may be of interest to you, as it has certainly been to myself. In the island of Teneriffe, from which I have just returned, there lives near the “Villa de la Orotava”, at a place called “Agua Mansa”, the offspring of a man & woman, so much resembling a monkey, that she is called “La Machanga del Agua Mansa”.1 She is now 14 years old & is the pet child of her parents, tho’ her brothers & sisters are fine & unmistakeable specimens of the human species. The head of the machanga is small & her body is thickly covered with hair. Her mode of scratching herself with upturned hands, of throwing things over her shoulder; her passion for climbing trees, & her ways & habits generally resemble those of a monkey. Her hands & feet are more like the human hand & foot, only the fingers & toes are unusually long. She is very shy, but is easily allured by the sight & smell of food; she speaks only in inarticulate sounds, & is at times quite savage. She has been baptized & confirmed according to the rites of the Roman Catholic Church. I do not remember whether the parish priest told me that she had also made her confession: but I do not see how she could easily have managed that. On the occasion of her confirmation the Bishop, who then saw her for the first time, was very much startled at the sight of her, & enquired whether she was a fit subject for the sacrament. I am aware that the circumstances of her birth will need, (& I presume that previously to baptism they were subjected by the ecclesiastical authorities to,) the strictest examination. Although I had been in the island already six months, & was living not very far from Orotava I did not come to know of her existence till towards the end of my stay; & that quite accidentally, while speaking one day with the “Beneficiado”, or priest of the place, about your late work on the “Descent of Man”.2 I was also surprised to find that most foreigners & some even of the natives had never heard of her. I suppose she will be victimised one of these days by some enterprizing Barnum, & I have no doubt he will make a good thing of it.3 Whatever be the ultimate explanation of the phenomenon, I am convinced of its existence.

258

June 1872

I am extremely sorry that, in the first place, I was unable to see the creature myself, & that consequently I can only speak from hearsay, though on the most undoubted authority & testimony; & that, in the second place, being no naturalist, I did not know what were the chief points to enquire into. I was infinitely more desirous of seeing this monkey, than of making the ascent of the Peak; 4 but, after having made all my arrangements, I was prevented at the last moment from making the journey by various difficulties, chiefly delicate health & the unfit state of the roads at that season. If the subject is of any interest to you, I shall be most happy to give, or gather through my relatives & friends on the island any further or more precise information which you should desire. I am going to write by the steamer of the 18 th. from Liverpool, & shall endeavour to get a complete description from three separate & independent sources; from the parish priest, from the gentleman on whose estate she lives, & from an intelligent Swiss tutor, all of whom have seen the machanga & spoke to me of her. I had the idea whilst on the island of getting photographs taken of her, but gave it up as impracticable in those confines of civilization— But as D r Carpenter,5 of the London University, to whom also I have written on this matter, suggests that some good photographs, on a sufficiently large scale, & giving the profile as well as other views of the head & face, would be especially valuable, I will do my best to get them. I am in hopes of returning to the island myself for winter after next. My address is:—“Care of Messrs. Brown, Shipley, & Co. London”.6 I shall be in London till about the 22d. of this month, & in England for a week or so longer after that date. The above is my permanent address should you care to write me a line. I am, Sir, | Yours obedly. | Benjamin A. Renshaw. M.A. To | Charles Darwin Esq. DAR 176: 121 1

2

3 4 5 6

La Orotava is a settlement in a valley on the north-west coast of the island of Tenerife; Aguamansa is in the mountains to the north. Machanga: a Spanish dialect term, principally in use in Latin America, for the female of a type of South American monkey (Stephens 1989); for the relationship between Canary Spanish and Latin-American Spanish, see Lipski 1994, pp. 55–61. CD had discussed degrees and patterns of hairiness in humans and other primates in Descent, concluding that the differences were a result of sexual selection with occasional instances of reversion (Descent 2: 375–81). Phineas Taylor Barnum, a circus owner, was famous for his lucrative touring shows featuring unusuallooking people (ANB). Pico de Teide, Tenerife. William Benjamin Carpenter. The merchants Brown, Shipley, and Company had London offices at Founders’ Court, Lothbury (Post Office London directory 1872).

From L. C. Wedgwood [15 June 1872?]1 Chalet de Villars | Montagnes d’Ollon | Aigle, Vaud Dear Uncle Charles. The steep grassy hill-sides here are very distinctly scored with ridges. They run parallel to each other with great regularity, about 3 or 4 ft apart and about 1 ft

June 1872

259

wide or nearly. They very seldom run into each other. There are worm-casts—but not abundant. I cannot help thinking they are made by the cows—(there are very few sheep)— they are undoubtedly used by them, being very often cross-ridged into those peculiar furrows cows always make in soft places by stepping in each others footsteps. I thought it wd. be useless to draw them as it wd. be merely a no. of parallel lines.2 We stay here another 4t. night (till 29th ) in case you (and the post takes 4 or 5 days) should wish to know anything more about them; If not, I need hardly say of course do not answer this. We are enjoying ourselves exceedingly in this most beautiful place, with splendid weather Yr. afft niece | Lucy Wedgwood Would some one kindly direct enclosed to Bessy 3 if not at home as I dont kno’ where she may be.? DAR 181: 61 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘(Worms)’ pencil, square brackets in MS 1 2

3

The date is conjectured from the subject matter of the letter (see n. 2, below), and from a pencilled annotation, ‘Saturday 15th ’. The only month in 1872 when 15th fell on a Saturday was June. CD cited ‘a friend’ for this information on cow-trodden parallel ridges in Earthworms, pp. 278–9; he had asked Wedgwood to make observations on the angle of wormholes earlier in the year (letters to L. C. Wedgwood, 5 January [1872] and 21 January [1872], and letter from L. C. Wedgwood, 20 January [1872]), and she had also sent information on parallel ridges (letter from L. C. Wedgwood to Elizabeth Darwin, [7 March 1872 or later]). CD had first sent out enquiries concerning furrows and other forms of ridges in 1871, but most of his requests were made early in 1872 as part of his investigation into the transformation of landscape through the action of earthworms (see for example Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Francis Wedgwood, 4 January 1871, and letter to Archibald Geikie, 27 December [1871], and this volume, letter from W. E. Darwin, [1 January 1872], and letter from Amy Ruck to Horace Darwin, [20 January 1872]). Elizabeth Darwin. The enclosure has not been found.

From T. H. Farrer 16 June 1872 Abinger Hall, | Reigate. (Post Town) | Gomshall (Station) S.E.R. 16. June/72 My dear Mr Darwin A practical, not scientific request. Mr Wedgwood tells me you have at Down some good “Forget me nots”—dissitiflora, I imagine.1 We have been unable to get them. Could your gardener give me some seed? Hope also mentioned a fine anemone, the name I forget, which Miss Wedgwood had in her garden in plenty—2 I am a glutton for those things & go about picking & stealing. There is a curious result of change of circumstances on a plant, which I have noticed here this year. There were some five hollies growing under high trees. I have cut down several of the trees & the hollies are exposed to the sun. & sky. Last year

260

June 1872

they fruited to an extraordinary extent, and the berries have made them look like red pyramids quite into summer— But they have exhausted themselves and are I fear dying from their exertions. The same thing has happened to some boxes which I moved out of shade into sunshine, but to a better soil. The curious thing with them is that they grew well the first year and only this year have flowered themselves to death, the flowers appearing on every part of stem & branches The Wedgwoods will I trust establish themselves here near us. It will be very pleasant to have them as neighbours—on many accounts—for myself & my daughter— And Effies songs reconcile me to the piano again 3 Sincerely yours | T H Farrer DAR 164: 72 1

2 3

Josiah Wedgwood III lived at Leith Hill Place, Dorking, Surrey, close to Abinger Hall (Freeman 1978). Myosotis dissitiflora is the early forget-me-not; CD had recorded experiments with cultivated Myosotis in Variation 2: 128. Emma Darwin’s sister, Sarah Elizabeth Wedgwood, was a neighbour of the Darwins in Down; Hope Elizabeth Wedgwood was one of their nieces. Katherine Euphemia Wedgwood (Effie), Hope Wedgwood’s sister, was noted for her singing; in the summer of 1872 their parents, Hensleigh and Frances Emma Elizabeth Wedgwood, were contemplating moving out of London; they settled at Ravensbourne, Kent. Effie married Farrer as his second wife in 1873; Farrer’s daughter, Emma Cecilia Farrer (Ida), married Horace Darwin in 1880 (Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980, pp. 298–9; 301–3; 314).

From Friedrich Tiemann 16 June 18721

Breslau2 Juni 1872.

den 16 Hochwohlgeborner, Hochgeehrter Herr! Vor nahe 3 Monate ist hier in Breslau ein Thier geboren worden, dass vielleicht der Stammvater einer neuen, bis heute noch nicht gekannten Race werden kann. Aus diesem Umstande glaubte ich, dass Sie, Hochgeehrter Herr, die Mittheilung dieser Thatsache gern entgegen nehmen würden. Der Sachverhalt ist folgender: Eine Ziegenmutter, Capra hircus. L.3 ~, hat 3 Junge geboren, von denen 2 nur im Haar wenig von den typischen Ziegen abweichen, das dritte aber, ohne Haare, ganz nackend geboren worden ist, und auch haarlos bleiben wird; nur auf dem Kopfe und den Ohren zeigen sich wenige Haare. Dem aüssern Anscheine nach ist die Haut dieses Thieres genau übereinstimmend mit der der nackten türkischen Hunde, die Färbung ist absolut dieselbe. 4 Die Ähnlichkeit ist so gross, dass wenn man die Haut dieser Ziege mit einer von einem nackten Hunde zusammenlegt, man schwerlich die beiden Häute treffend von einander unterscheiden wird, abgesehen von den die Thierart characterisirenden Merkmalen. Das in Rede stehende Individuum ist männlichen Geschlechts, von ausserordentlich schöner Ziegengestalt und hat bereitz mehrere Zoll lange Hörner. Es wird Sie vielleicht noch interessiren Näheres über diese Ziegenfamilie zu hören: Die Ziegenmutter ist etwa sieben Jahre alt, der Bock welcher sie gedeckt hatte, war ten

June 1872

261

ihr eigner Sohn und erst sieben Monate alt; beide sind in keiner Weise von andern Ziegen unterschieden. Der Begattungsact wurde nur einmal vollzogen und resultiren hieraus die drei obenangeführten Individuen, darunter das nackte. Die Mutter zeigte bald nach der Geburt des letztern eine entschiedene Abneigung gegen dasselbe, wie dies auch bei anderen Thierarten beobachtet wurde, wenn die Nachkommen nicht ganz einschlägig ausfallen, so dass es entfernt werden musste. 5 Das nackende Böckchen erregt hier viel Aufsehen und die Zahl der Bewerber um dasselbe mehrt sich mit jedem Tage. Genehmigen Sie, Hochgeehrter Herr, die Versicherung meiner vorzüglichsten Hochachtung mit der ich zeichne | Ew. Hochwohlgeboren | ganz ergebenster | Fr. Tiemann | Conservator am Zoologischen Museum | der Königlichen Universität. P.S. Ich habe es vorgezogen in meiner Landessprache zu schreiben, indem ich glaubte in dieser mich exacter ausdrücken zu können als in der englischen, obgleich mir dieselbe bekannt ist. | der Obige. DAR 178: 127 1 2 3 4 5

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Breslau is now Wrocław, Poland; it was formerly in Prussia (Germany). Capra hircus: the domestic goat. CD mentioned hairless Turkish dogs in Variation as examples of domesticated breeds with characteristics that made them unfit to survive in the wild (Variation 1: 34, 37; 2: 227). Tiemann also published a note about the hairless goat (Der Zoologische Garten 13 (1872): 186–7).

To F. C. Donders 17 June 1872

Down. | Beckenham Kent. June 17.— 1872.—

My dear Professor Donders In about 10 days from the present date I expect to receive proofs of the first sheets of my book on Expression. Since receiving your very generous offer of looking over any part which referred to Physiology, I have often reflected on the subject; but I still feel great difficulty in deciding what parts would be thus most benefited, as there are so many references to Physiology.1 I also feel some doubt whether the later chapters would be intelligible to any one who had not read or skimmed over the earlier ones— On the other hand it is out of the question to expect you to look through all the sheets; more especially as the book is certainly not an important one— The Printers calculate that the M.S will cover 370–380 pages of the size & type of my Descent of Man.2 So I must trust to chance in escaping error; but I will consult you if I feel doubts about special points: Yet I fear that a man is most apt to fall into error exactly where from his ignorance he feels no doubts. The chapter which I thought most dangerous, viz that on weeping was read over in M.S. some time ago by Mr Bowman; so I feel pretty safe about this Chapter. 3 In yr. last letter you said that you shd. probably come to England in July; & in this case I most sincerely hope that you will come & dine & sleep at Down; I shall then

262

June 1872

have the real pleasure of thanking you in person for the assistance which you have given me, which has been of the greatest value— I do not know whether you will stay in London with Mr Bowman; but if so & you can persuade him to accompany you to Down it will give us great pleasure— 4 Mrs Darwin begs to be very kindly remembered to you. Believe me | Yours very sincerely & obliged | Charles Darwin— Copy DAR 143: 415 1 2 3

4

See letter from F. C. Donders, 17 April 1872, and letter to F. C. Donders, 20 April 1872. Expression was published in November 1872. Both Descent and Expression were published by John Murray, printed by William Clowes and Sons, and were in small or crown octavo format; Expression was 374 pages long without front and backmatter. See letter to William Bowman, 25 January 1872. Expression, chapter VI, is ‘Special expressions of man: suffering and weeping’; in it, CD thanked Bowman for information and for having introduced him to Donders (Expression, p. 160, n. 14). See also the letter from William Bowman, [before 25 January 1872], providing detailed information on the causes of weeping. See letter from F. C. Donders, 17 April 1872. There is no evidence of a visit to Down by Bowman and Donders in 1872; see the letter from F. C. Donders, 14 July 1872 and n. 3.

From Albert Günther 19 June 1872

British Museum 19.6.72

My dear Sir You will be glad to hear that I have been appointed Assistant Keeper last week; 1 as I was spared the trial of a competition, the affair passed off very smoothly. Fred. Smith is still unwell & away, although he writes me he hopes to be back next week. But whilst he is away, I have to look after so many things, that scientific work is neglected altogether. Yours very sincerely | A Günther DAR 165: 252 1

At Günther’s request, CD had provided a testimonial in support of his application to become assistant keeper of the zoological department at the British Museum (letter from Albert Günther, 10 May 1872, and letter to Albert Günther, 11 May [1872]).

From John Lubbock to W. E. Gladstone 20 June 1872 Royal Institution of Great Britain 20 June 1872. My dear Mr. Gladstone, I have been requested to forward to you the accompanying memorial from some of our most eminent scientific men, on the subject of the changes recently introduced as regards the botanical establishment at Kew.

June 1872

263

The signatures have been intentionally restricted to a few well-known names, but I have reason to know that the opinions expressed in the memorial would be shared not only by the science of England, but by scientific men throughout the world. I am, &c. | John Lubbock The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, | &c. &c. &c. [Enclosure] Enclosure in No. 39. To the Right Honourable W. E. Gladstone, First Lord of the Treasury, &c. We, the undersigned, deeply interested in the condition of English science, and viewing with special concern the treatment which the eminent Director of the Botanical Establishment at Kew has systematically received at the hands of Mr. Ayrton, since his appointment to the office of First Commissioner of Works, do most respectfully beg your attention to the following statements and observations:— 1 In the year 1840, the private Botanic Gardens of Kew, which had previously been in the possession of the Royal Family, were handed over by the Queen to the Government. A commission, then appointed to report on their condition, recommended that they should be enlarged and maintained as a national scientific establishment, which should form a centre of reception for the useful products of the vegetable kingdom, a centre of reference and distribution for England, India, and the Colonies, and a means of augmenting the rational pleasure, increasing the knowledge and refining the taste of the English public. The late Sir William Hooker was at that time professor of botany in the University of Glasgow. The founding of an establishment like that contemplated at Kew harmonised so completely with his scientific tastes and power of organisation, that at a sacrifice of more than half his income, he offered to undertake the superintendence of Kew Gardens; his offer was accepted, and he was appointed Director of Kew at a salary of 300l. a year. Sir William Hooker was at that time the possessor of an excellent private herbarium, and of a scientific library, both of which were wanting at Kew;2 to provide house-room for these an additional 200l. was granted by the Government. No allowance, however, was made for the maintenance or increase of either the herbarium or the library; the expense of both fell upon the Director. During his residence in Glasgow the excellence of his collections had attracted to the house of Sir William Hooker various active investigators, the number of which increased materially after his arrival at Kew. Fourteen rooms of the house he occupied were devoted to his herbarium, which, for 12 years, was the resort of the scientific botanists of Europe. Unaided by the Government, save to the extent above mentioned, Sir William Hooker devoted his private means to the purchase of new books and specimens, and opened a correspondence with botanists of all lands; he

264

June 1872

thus made his house the most extensive botanical laboratory in this country, and most important centre of reference regarding systematic, economic, and descriptive botany, as illustrated by his herbarium. The Gardens expanded equally under his vigorous and enlightened supervision; in 10 years after his appointment they became the first in the world. For 25 years he had been collecting textile fabrics, drugs, gums, dyes, and other products to illustrate the structure, uses, and physiognomy of plants; with these collections, made at his private cost, Sir William Hooker founded in Kew Gardens the first museum of the kind that had ever been established. Of such museums there are now three at Kew; they contain upwards of 50,000 named objects of scientific and economic interest, views of tropical vegetation, and maps illustrating the distribution of plants over the globe. These museums constitute concrete courses of instruction, unrivalled in concentration and completeness; and the public interest in them is proved by the number of persons who avail themselves of the stores of information thus provided.3 The contributions of Sir William Hooker to these museums were his free gift to the country, for which he never received a farthing of remuneration. In 1852 the Director’s salary, which had previously been raised to 600l. a-year, was augmented to 800 l., together with a house which had become vacant at the time. The Herbarium was then lodged in a separate building, and immediately afterwards donations and legacies (some to the Director, some to the Government of the day) poured into it.4 The labour of naming the collections of expeditions, and of drawing up botanical reports, became at length so excessive that the public need of the Herbarium was still further recognised by the Government. The Director had previously borne the expense both of assistance and maintenance; of these he was now relieved, though he still continued to bear the cost of books for his library, and of new specimens of plants. Without this personal devotion on the part of the Director the development of Kew would have been a simple impossibility. For five-and-twenty years his purchases were made and his collections elaborated at his own expense and risk, though they were constantly employed in the work of the country. Before his death, knowing that his son could not afford to be as regardless of pecuniary considerations as he had been himself, he gave directions to have his Herbarium valued by competent persons, and offered it to the Government at the lowest valuation. On these terms the collections which had previously been devoted to the nation’s use became the property of the nation itself.5 This is a brief but sufficient statement of the relationship of Sir William Hooker to Kew Gardens. It shows him to have been their virtual creator. The antecedents and achievements of the present Director of Kew may be thus sketched. In 1839 Dr. Joseph Hooker was appointed assistant surgeon and naturalist to the Antarctic Expedition, the most perilous, perhaps, that ever sailed from these shores, and the scientific results of which exceeded in importance those of any other naval exploring expedition of this century. During this voyage Dr. Hooker received

June 1872

265

from the Government the pay of his rank as a medical officer. His outfit, his books, his instruments, were provided by his father. The expenses of travelling and collecting ashore during his four years’ voyage of circumnavigation, were defrayed from the same source, though this work was done with the express object of enriching a public establishment. On his return he waived his claim to promotion in the Navy, and devoted four additional years to the classification and publication of the results of the voyage. 6 He also aided his father, as an unpaid volunteer, in the development of the scientific branches of the Kew establishment. In 1847, Dr. Hooker was sent to India to explore, in the interests of Kew, an unknown region of the Himalaya; and he was directed to proceed subsequently to Borneo, to report on its vegetable resources. 7 His outfit both for India and Borneo, which embraced a large collection of expensive instruments, cost the Government nothing. To cover all expenses incidental to his three years’ travelling and collecting, including the cost of assistants and specimens, a sum of 1,200l. was received, while the real disbursements of Dr. Hooker during this time amounted to 2,200l. The difference was contributed by Sir William Hooker and his son in the interest of the establishment to which they had consecrated their best energies. On his return from India, Dr. Hooker again devoted himself to the work of aiding his father in the scientific development of Kew. He was also employed by the Admiralty during the nine years from 1851 to 1860, in publishing the botanical discoveries of various naval and other voyages, from Captain Cook’s downwards to parts of the world visited by Dr. Hooker himself.8 For this service he received three years’ pay as a medical officer in the Navy, together with a sum of 500l., which was accompanied by the expression of their Lordships’ approbation of the zeal, perseverance, and scientific ability displayed in bringing to a successful completion this great botanical work. For three years he was occupied with the arrangement and distribution of his Indian collections and the publication of his journals. 9 To cover the expense incidental to these labours, an allowance of 400l. a year was granted by the Government. Besides the voyages and travels above adverted to, Dr. Hooker has made journeys to various parts of Europe, to Western Asia, and to North Africa. The expenses of these journeys, though they were made with the express object of adding to the interest and completeness of Kew, have been borne by himself, and the results given to the establishment of which he is a director. We place these data before you, not with a view of founding on them either censure or complaint. The labours of Dr. Hooker, and the heavy drain upon his father’s purse which his unexampled education as a botanist involved, constituted the discipline which made him the man he now is. But we think it highly desirable that you and England should know as much of his career as will enable you to decide whether its arbitrary interruption by your First Commissioner be creditable to the Government of this country. In 1855, Sir William Hooker being then 70 years of age, Dr. Hooker was appointed his Assistant-Director, at a salary of 400l. a year, without a house; and from this time

266

June 1872

his share in the duties of the garden were added to his more purely scientific ones. In 1858 his salary was increased to 500l. a year, with a house; and in 1865, on the death of his father, he succeeded to the Directorship without an assistant. The liberality of his father and his own self-denying life in the public service have, we think, been sufficiently illustrated. We will, therefore, ask permission to place before you only one additional specimen of his conduct. As regards the Floras of Asia, Africa, and America, the Herbarium at Kew had been long unrivalled. Europe, however, was but scantily represented. Three years ago a collection, embracing the very Flora needed for the completion of Kew, was offered for sale in Paris. At his own private cost, Dr. Hooker purchased this collection for 400l., and presented it to the Kew Herbarium.10 His income at Kew is 800l. a year, and here is one-half of it voluntarily devoted to the establishment which it had been the continual object of his father and himself to raise to the highest possible perfection. Had these things been known to the Parliament and public of England, the First Commssioner of Works would, we imagine, have hardly ventured to inflict upon the Director of Kew the unnecessary toil, worry, indignity, and irredeemable loss of time against which this memorial is a remonstrance. Under the auspices of his father and himself, Kew Gardens have expanded from 15 to 300 acres. They have long held the foremost rank in Europe. In no particular does England stand more conspicuously superior to all other countries than in the possession of Kew. The establishment is not only without a rival, but there is no approach to rivalry as regards the extent, importance, or scientific results of its operations. Upwards of 130 volumes on all branches of Botany, including a most important series of Colonial Floras, but excluding many weighty contributions to scientific societies and journals, have issued from Kew. To these are to be added guide books and official papers. This vast literature has been produced and published through the efforts of the Directors of Kew, for the most part at no expense whatever to the nation. To these labours is to be added the correspondence of the Directors with all parts of the world, a mere selection from which, now bound together at Kew, embraces some 40,000 letters addressed to the Directors, and for the most part answered with their own hands. Of the popularity of the gardens, which has been attained without prejudice to their scientific use and reputation, it need only be stated that from 9,000 visitors in 1841, the numbers have risen to an average of 600,000 a year. What they have done towards the elevation and refinement of tastes and conduct of the working classes may be inferred from the fact, that last Whit Monday 37,795 visitors entered and quitted the gardens without a single case of drunkenness, riot, theft, or mischief of any kind being reported.11 Since Dr. Hooker’s accession the gardens have been to a great extent remodelled, and the establishment wholly re-organised. A great saving in outlay has been thus effected, without any sacrifice of efficiency. During the ten years from 1863 to 1872

June 1872

267

inclusive, the number of living plants sent from Kew to various parts of the world has been doubled, amounting on an average to eight or nine thousand annually. Of seeds ripened at Kew, or obtained by the Director from various parts of the world, the annual average distributed amounts to about seven thousand. Of the practical value of these labours, the introduction of the Cinchona plant into India, Ceylon, and Jamaica, the commercial success of which is established, constitutes one of many illustrations. The introduction of ipecacuanha is another. 12 This will be corroborated by Her Majesty’s Secretaries of State for India and the Colonies. We would add, that there is scarcely a horticultural establishment at home or abroad which would not be willing to acknowledge its indebtedness to Kew. In India, upwards of thirty gardeners, trained at Kew, are now employed in forestry, cotton, tea, and cinchona plantations, Government gardens &c., and a far greater number are usefully employed in other parts of the world. 13 By the joint efforts of the Directors, a series of complete Floras of India and the Colonies was set on foot at Kew, of which those of the West Indies, all the Australian Colonies, New Zealand, Tropical Africa, the Cape Colonies, and British India are completed or in progress. These are standard works of inestimable value in the countries whose plants they describe, as well as to scientific travellers and institutions in Europe. We have hitherto confined ourselves to a statement of Dr. Hooker’s services in relation to Kew, and have said nothing of his labours in geology, meteorology, and other sciences, nor of his researches while botanist of the geological survey. During his single year of office he contributed to the records of the survey, two memoirs, which are to be regarded as landmarks in the history of fossil botany. In presenting the Royal medal to Dr. Hooker in 1854, the President of the Royal Society spoke of these memoirs as “one of the most important contributions ever made in fossil botany.”14 We may add a reference to his adventurous explorations of the northern frontier of India, in regions never visited by a European before or since. It is not likely that a man of these antecedents, accustomed to the respect which naturally follows merit of the most exalted kind, would in any way expose himself, and more especially in matters relating to the welfare of Kew, to the just censure of his official superiors. Until the advent of the present First Commissioner, he had never been the object of a censure, and was never interfered with in the practical discharge of his duties by the Board of Works. His proposals and suggestions were rightly scrutinised, and his estimates regulated by the opinions of the Board, but the current duties were left entirely to his conduct and supervision; the extension and improvement of the establishment being always the origination and work of the director. With this sketch of the early training of Dr. Hooker for his present post before you, you will be able to compare with it the early training of Mr. Ayrton for the position which, by your favour, he occupies as Dr. Hooker’s master. You will be able to judge how far the First Commissioner is justified in treating the Director of Kew with personal contumely, and in rudely upsetting the arrangements which he had

268

June 1872

made with reference to the invaluable collections for which he is responsible, not to Mr. Ayrton alone, but to his conscience and his country. Neither you, Sir, nor the English public have forgotten the speech of the First Commissioner on presenting himself for re-election at the Tower Hamlets, when he went out of his way to insult “architects, sculptors, and gardeners.” 15 That speech was a warning to every cultivated man who held office under the Board of Works, and it was, as you know, duly laid to heart by the Director of Kew. His desire to avoid all cause of offence was thus expressed in a letter addressed to yourself, on the 31st of August 1871:—“Having regard to the tenour of the sentiments Mr. Ayrton is reported to have expressed in public on accepting office, I felt it incumbent on me to be especially circumspect in my conduct and demeanour under his rule.” Circumspection, under the circumstances, was of small avail, and one of Mr. Ayrton’s first acts, after taking office, was to send a reprimand to Dr. Hooker. It was a new experience to the Director of Kew. During his 30 years of public service such a thing had never once occurred; indeed, the very reverse of it had always occurred, the respect due to intellectual eminence and moral worth having been always cheerfully accorded to Dr. Hooker by his official superiors. This first reprimand of his life, was moreover not due to any fault of his, but arose entirely from the First Commissioner’s own misconception. The responsibility of the warming and ventilation of the plant houses had by special order devolved upon the Director. After a searching inquiry, Dr. Hooker had been entrusted by a previous First Commissioner with the task of remodelling the heating apparatus throughout the establishment, and this led to the construction at Kew, in accordance with the Director’s plans, and estimates of the most complete existing range of hot houses for scientific purposes. 16 In 1871 however, he accidentally discovered that he had been superseded in this duty without notice given or reason assigned. He wrote a respectful letter of inquiry to the First Commissioner, and received the short, we are persuaded you will agree with us in adding, insolent intimation that he had been superseded, and would have to govern himself accordingly. 17 He would in our opinion have been equally unfaithful to the science of which he is a leader, and the public which he had so long served, if he had bowed in silence to this rebuke. He wrote a second letter of remonstrance to the First Commissioner, in which he expressed himself as follows: “The matter therefore stands thus: several months ago I was unknown to myself deposed from the discharge of a function of great importance; I was left to hear this accidentally, and I have now to add through one of my own subordinates. I do not for a moment question the First Commissioner’s power to exercise arbitrary authority over the Director of Kew, but I do submit that there has been hitherto no plea whatever for such action as regards myself, and that the repetition of such acts, and the leaving me to be informed of them, on each occasion by my subordinate, constitute a grievous injury to my official position, and tend to the subversion of all discipline in this department.” At this point, Sir, Dr. Hooker turned in the fullest confidence to you. He had undoubting trust in your will and power to protect both Kew and him from the

June 1872

269

arbitrary, and we would add ignorant acts, of the First Commissioner. He respectfully claimed the privilege of bringing the matter under the cognisance of the Right Honourable the First Lord of the Treasury. You doubtless remember the letter addressed to you by Dr. Hooker on the 19th of August 1871.18 You could not fail to remark the reluctance with which he appealed to you, and his previous anxiety to take all possible measures to avert the necessity of such an appeal; “I cannot express to you, Sir,” he writes, “the anxiety that this step costs me, nor how earnestly I have endeavoured, by suppressing all personal feelings, to conduct my duties here under Mr. Ayrton to his and to my own satisfaction. “After upwards of 32 years spent in the public service at home and abroad without a suspicion of mistrust on the part of my many previous superiors, I have had since Mr. Ayrton’s accession to submit to various arbitrary measures, which though compromising my position and authority, have been concealed from myself and become known to my subordinates, through whom alone I have first been made cognisant of them.” From you, Sir, the Director of Kew received no direct reply to this communication, but by the First Commissioner he was requested to furnish the dates and particulars of the conspicuous proofs of disregard to his office, and the particular occasions and facts, with dates, of his being left to be informed through his subordinates of acts of arbitrary authority of the First Commissioner, and the dates and particulars of those acts. To this challenge the Director of Kew replied by adducing five distinct acts of arbitrary interference, with their dates proofs and particulars. (Dr. Hooker’s letter containing these charges was never answered or even acknowledged by Mr. Ayrton.) Among them was included what we have a right to call clandestine tampering with the subordinates at Kew. For example, the curator of the gardens was tempted by Mr. Ayrton personally to leave Kew by the offer of a higher position, involving authority over works at Kew; and he was requested by Mr. Ayrton to keep the fact from the knowledge of Dr. Hooker. To the loyalty of this man to a master whom he trusted and loved, the Director of Kew owes the discovery of proceedings which under any previous First Commissioner would have been impossible. 19 Your attention, Sir, was drawn to this reply in a letter addressed to you by the Director of Kew on the 31st of August 1871. It is in every respect so excellent and so sure to be appreciated by all who know the real meaning of scientific work, and the baneful effect upon such work of this harassing conflict with your First Commissioner, that we do not hesitate to reproduce it here in extenso. “Royal Gardens, Kew, 31 August 1871 “Sir, I beg most respectfully to submit copies of my further correspondence with the Right Honourable the First Commissioner of Her Majesty’s Works, &c. “The acts detailed in the accompanying letter are I believe correctly described. I trust that I do not exaggerate in characterising them as grievously injurious to my

270

June 1872

official position, and tending to the subversion of discipline in this establishment; and I have evidently no protection from a repetition of them, except through the intervention of a higher authority. “Of these acts thus referred to under 1, 2, 3, formed the subject of a prolonged correspondence between the First Commissioner and myself; that under 4, I brought to the notice of Mr. Stansfeld,20 and the result was the abandonment of the proposal; that under 5, will, I venture to hope, be revoked by your authority; I refrain from commenting on these acts of the First Commissioner in reference to their seriously interfering with the execution of my peculiar and multifarious duties here. “These include the labours of a scientific botanist, a horticulturist, and the administration of public gardens, museums, and pleasure grounds frequented annually by upwards of 600,000 persons. “Besides the living collections, I have the direction of the largest and by far the most frequented Herbarium (by botanists and amateurs) in existence, and a very extensive library. “I conduct, without a secretary, a responsible and onerous correspondence with Foreign and Colonial gardens, as also with the Admiralty, and Indian, and Colonial Offices, on all subjects connected with horticulture, forestry, botany, and the appointment of officers to duties in connection with these matters, and the introduction of useful plants everywhere. “I have further the editorship or control of various botanical works now being published by order of Government at Kew; and I have to devote every moment that I can spare from my duties to maintaining, by researches and publications of my own, a position as a scientific botanist. “Until the accession of Mr. Ayrton, I have been enabled to fulfil these duties with satisfaction to myself, having been treated with uniform confidence, consideration, and courtesy by my superiors. I was invariably consulted on all prospective changes affecting my own and my subordinates’ positions and duties. On the revision of my estimate at the Board, before their transmission to the Treasury, I was referred to; and, amongst my other current duties was the control of the construction and repairs of the hot-houses and heating apparatus throughout this establishment. “Subsequently to Mr. Ayrton’s accession my position has been materially changed in all these respects. He had hardly entered on his duties when he hastily administered to me a wholly unmerited reprimand (the first I ever received), and his last act (known to me) has been to take from me the above-mentioned control without pretext, warning, or subsequent intimation. “I venture to hope that this may be restored to me, if the reasons I have adduced in the enclosed letter to the First Commissioner are satisfactory to you. To these I would add, that in all similar establishments with which I am acquainted in England or abroad, the opinion of the cultivator is entitled to the first consideration in all matters relating to plant-houses and heating apparatus; that to trust him with the care and treatment of invaluable collections, and make him amenable to the opinions of another in respect of the apparatus he requires, is as obviously wrong in principle

June 1872

271

as to refuse a surgeon his choice of instruments and hospital appliances. Nor would it be candid in me to withhold from you my conviction that I have by this arbitrary act of the First Commissioner been lowered in the eyes of those who know no more of the circumstances than that I am deposed from the full control of buildings and apparatus which I was entrusted to erect, and have still to use. “Let me assure you, Sir, that I am unconscious of any feelings of personal animosity against Mr. Ayrton. Having regard to the tenour of the sentiments he is reported to have expressed in public, on accepting office, in respect of professional duties such as mine, I felt it incumbent on me to be especially circumspect in my conduct and demeanour under his rule. And in evidence of this let me add, that when still smarting under his unprovoked reprimand, I, at his special request, devoted many nights to examining and reporting upon various books and pamphlets on the public parks of England, France, and America, for his guidance; a labour not very congenial, and wholly beyond my province as Director of Kew; and which I further undertook in the hope that it might lead the First Commissioner to judge more generously of the acquirements and duties of some of the officers of the department he controls. “I am, &c., “Jos. D. Hooker, Director.” “To the Right Honourable the First Lord | of the Treasury” To this letter Dr. Hooker was honoured by a reply from yourself, couched in kind and considerate terms. You had communicated with Mr. Ayrton, and had received his explanations, which you forwarded to the Director of Kew, in the hope that they would convey to his mind the assurance that there has been no intention on Mr. Ayrton’s part to disregard his feelings, or withhold the consideration due both to his person and his office. Stress of public duty is quite sufficient to account for the fact of your overlooking the serious omissions and inaccuracies of the First Commissioner’s explanations. These, however, were immediately pointed out to you by Dr. Hooker. The object in addressing you was not simply to complain of personal discourtesy on the part of the First Commissioner, but of five official acts subversive of discipline in the Kew establishment and fraught with mischief to the public service. Had these acts merely affected him personally, he would have been perfectly willing to accept the assurance of Mr. Ayrton’s consideration, though he failed to discover any trace of it, either in his explanations or in the treatment which official papers sent from Kew continued to receive from the Office of Works. He regarded it, however, as his duty, as an officer in the public service, to the Government and the scientific public, to spare no effort to procure a reversion of the policy introduced into the management of each and all of the departments of Kew (the Gardens, Museum, and Herbarium), by the present First Commissioner. The specific acts enumerated by Dr. Hooker, in answer to the request of the First Commissioner, are thus summarised in a letter to yourself.

272

June 1872

1. A transaction with my subordinate of a nature so new to my long experience of official life, and so repugnant to my principles that I refrain from characterising it. 2. Removing the curator from his duties under me without any communication with me. 3. Empowering the curator to act independently of me in regard to the times he should consider himself under my orders, and instructing me to make my arrangement in deference to his, and in concert with him. 4. Submitting to the Treasury plans and estimates for extensive alterations in the museum at Kew, without even informing me of his intentions; which works would have most seriously embarrassed me, as Director of the museums, and would have involved a large expenditure for which, I believe, no estimate was submitted, and which would have been in every respect detrimental. 5. Superseding me without previous or subsequent communication, in duties for the execution of which I held the Board’s authority, and which I am of opinion should unquestionably be performed by the Director, i.e., the control of the heating apparatus of the hot-houses, &c. In Mr. Ayrton’s letter of explanations, which you considered so satisfactory, the first three of these charges are skilfully ignored, and the other explanations contain statements which are demonstrably at variance with fact. In the very considerate note above referred to, which was addressed by you from Balmoral21 to Dr. Hooker, you say: “There must be some mistake about Mr. Ayrton’s failing to see you at Kew, as he assures me that he paid the visit there for the very purpose of personal and friendly communication.” We respectfully ask you to consider how this purpose was carried out. Dr. Hooker was at home when the First Commissioner paid his visit to Kew. He omitted to inquire for the Director at his house or at the Gardens, or of his subordinate, to whom Mr. Ayrton’s visit was really paid. He held a conversation with this subordinate seriously compromising the Director’s position and authority, which conversation he subsequently desired should not be communicated to the Director. The result of this conversation, moreover, was a communication to the Treasury affecting Kew, which was also kept from the knowledge of the Director. You will learn from these facts what the First Commissioner understands by “personal and friendly communication.” From its effects upon himself Dr. Hooker could infer how disturbing the continual intrusion of this subject upon your attention must be. He was anxious to reduce this disturbance to a minimum, and therefore ventured to suggest that he should be put in communication with one of your private secretaries, to whom he might explain his position. To this request you, in the kindest manner, assented and placed Mr. West 22 in communication with the Director of Kew. Sorely against his inclination, but driven to it by the necessities of the case, Dr. Hooker at an interview with Mr. West on the 30th of October, distinctly pointed out the grave errors and omissions contained in the “explanations” given by the First Commissioner to the First Lord of the Treasury.

June 1872

273

The end of the year approached without any answer being made to these communications and representations, and towards the close of December Dr. Hooker wrote again to Mr. West, who thereupon replied that a plan was under the consideration of the Government which would materially alter his position with reference to the First Commissioner of Works. He was subsequently informed semi-officially that the scheme was maturing, and the hope was expressed that he would take no step likely to embarrass the Government. This was far from his wish or intention. But after waiting till the 21st of February, the Director was semi-officially informed that the Government plan for his relief and for the protection of Kew had been abandoned.23 In the hope of a satisfactory settlement, the matter was subsequently placed by you in the hands of the Marquis of Ripon, and on the 13th of March 1872, before a Committee of the Cabinet, consisting of the Marquis, Lord Halifax, and Mr. Cardwell, 24 Dr. Hooker, by the desire of the Committee, handed in a memorandum containing a statement of the points wherein his relations to the Government required definition and correction. The upshot of these friendly efforts, was this: On the 15th of April 1872, Lord Ripon was asked to convey the following verbal message from yourself to Dr. Hooker, which, the noble Marquis added, was to be regarded by the Director of Kew as a final answer to his appeal. Mr. Ayrton has been told that Dr. Hooker should in all respects be treated as the head of the local establishment at Kew, of course in subordination to the First Commissioner of Works. At this time the controversy had, unhappily, reached a pitch far too serious to be stilled by such a message. In a letter to your private secretary, written immediately subsequent to the interview on the 30th of October, Dr. Hooker put his case thus: I am at a loss what to say as to my future position under a Minister whom I accuse of evasion, misrepresentation, and misstatements, in his communications to the First Minister of the Crown, whose conduct to myself, I regard as ungracious and offensive, and whose acts I consider to be injurious to the public service, and tending to the subversion of discipline. Granting, he continues, that the functions of a director are restored to me, how am I to act when ordered to undertake works that involve wasteful expenditure, or are otherwise detrimental, I should be thankful for Mr. Gladstone’s instructions on this head. With great deference, we submit that the verbal intimation conveyed from you to Lord Ripon, and from Lord Ripon, through Mr. Helps, 25 to Dr. Hooker, by no means met the issues here raised by the Director of Kew. He had suffered from the secret tampering of the First Commissioner with his subordinates; he had successfully resisted extravagant and foolish proposals made by the same Minister; his duties and responsibilities as regards the warming of the plant-houses, had, to the imminent jeopardy of plants of the rarest value, been transferred, without notice or justification, to the Director of Works.26 Another class of duties had, in the same secret manner, been transferred to the Secretary of the Board of Works. 27 Surely, Sir, your message through Lord Ripon, to all intents and purposes, empowered the

274

June 1872

First Commissioner to continue his course of studied indignity? Wrong upon wrong had been committed which your answer left unredressed. No wonder that, notwithstanding his esteem and regard for you personally, and his respect for all authority rightly exercised, the Director of Kew should be driven to address to you, on the 22nd of April, a letter containing the following remonstrance. The fact is, that the Directorship of Kew, which was formerly subordinated to the First Commissioner alone, has been by Mr. Ayrton officially subordinated to the Secretary of the Board and the Director of Works in London, and this surreptitiously, without fault found or notice of any kind given, the Director being left to discover his altered position as best he could, and the director has further been subjected to a series of arbitrary and offensive measures on the first Commissioner’s part, against which he could not defend himself. These measures being destructive of discipline, and injurious to this establishment, the Director felt it to be his duty to bring both their nature and consequences officially under your notice, and to seek from you that justice which (as he has been assured by the officers of the Treasury) could be obtained only through an official appeal to the Prime Minister. After eight months interval, during which further arbitrary measures have been resorted to by the First Commissioner (and four of which were passed under the assurance that a measure for effectual relief was under consideration) the position of the Director of Kew is not better, but worse than when it was first brought under your notice; for within that period his views with regard to the scientific and other appointments in the establishment have been absolutely set at nought. These circumstances are well known to the Director’s subordinates; they know that he has been virtually deprived of authority and responsibility, and that his official appeals have been unanswered, and his complaints ignored. The basis of all order and discipline in the establishment is thus sapped, and the position of the Director rendered so anomalous, that his desire and determination to uphold the interests of science at Kew, strengthened as they are by the moral and material support guaranteed to him, hardly suffice to render that position endurable. Your own practical wisdom will enable you to judge whether such a state of things is to be remedied by the curt and vague announcement (and such you must allow me to call it) which you have been good enough to make me through Lord Ripon. I have, &c. | J. D. Hooker. Your verbal announcement through the Marquis of Ripon was subsequently defined by Mr. West as a private and friendly communication, and your secretary proposed that, as an official answer would be sent to Dr. Hooker’s official application, the letter from which the foregoing extract is made should be considered as non avenue. 28 Dr. Hooker, however, had shown his letter to friends whose counsel he had sought in this matter, and he therefore pleaded that you ought to see that which had been seen by others. With regard to the character of the verbal communication, Dr. Hooker had been given distinctly to understand that it was official and final. He, however, cheerfully accepted the assurance of your secretary, and awaited the official reply. It came; and we hereby respectfully submit it to your calm interpretation.

June 1872

275

The letter here referred to is that from Mr. Stronge to Dr. Hooker, dated 25th April 1872, No. 18, see page 21.29 The concluding paragraph of this document, which is evidently the really important one, has been submitted to various persons accustomed to the language of official life, and we do not believe that a single one of them is sure of its meaning. Dr. Hooker, while willing to put the best construction upon it, thought it necessary to make a final inquiry, which was preceded by these remarks:— I am most desirous of giving their Lordships no further trouble, and am of course prepared either cheerfully to submit to their decision, whenever it is clearly given, or to resign the office which I hold; but I am unable to find in your letter any judgment whatever upon the points contained in the accompanying memorandum, which have been submitted to the First Lord of the Treasury in my letters of August 19 and 31, or to the Committee of the Cabinet which I had the honour of attending on March 13, at Lord Ripon’s residence. I trust that their Lordships will observe that in seeking their decision on these several questions, I am raising no superfluous difficulties; but that it is impossible for me to understand my position until it receives their Lordships’ authoritative definition in respect of the above matters. I am, &c. | Jos. D. Hooker, | Director. Charles W. Stronge, Esq.

MEMORANDUM. 1. Up to the date of the appointment of a director of works (under the Board of Works) in 1870, I was entrusted, by a special warrant of the Board, with the duty of preparing the estimates for the construction and repairs of the plant-houses, museums, and warming apparatus in this establishment. This warrant has been cancelled, without fault found, inquiry made, or even intimation given, and the duty transferred to the Director of Works. Will you be good enough to inform me if it is their Lordships’ decision that the powers conferred upon me by that warrant be restored to me? 2. Previous to the accession of the present First Commissioner to office, I was consulted whenever changes were made in the estimates which it is my duty to submit to the Board, prior to their transmission to the Treasury. Am I to understand that hereafter the estimates will not be altered by the Board without giving me an opportunity of stating my views? 3. I was entrusted with the custody and distribution to scientific bodies of the copies of the first volume of the “Flora of Tropical Africa,” a work the publication of which I am officially instructed to superintend at Kew. On the publication of the second volume, the undistributed copies of the first were withdrawn, without inquiry, from my custody, and sent, together with those of the second volume, to the Stationery Office, for sale.30

276

June 1872

Would you be so good as to state whether I am in future to be entrusted with the custody and distribution of scientific works of which I (the unpaid editor) am entrusted with the publication by the Board? 4. Previous to the accession of the present First Commissioner to office, I was consulted in all cases of prospective changes in the position and duties of my subordinates, and in all cases of proposed works that might affect my duties and responsibilities. I shall be glad to know whether I am in future to be consulted in regard to such matters? 5. The Department of Works having been brought under the rules of the Civil Service Commissioners, all candidates for employment at Kew are liable to be chosen by open competition, except in cases where the qualifications required are wholly or in part professional, or not ordinarily to be acquired in the Civil Service, as set forth in Clause VII. of the Commissioners’ Rules. The present First Commissioner of Works refuses to allow me to take advantage of Clause VII. in cases both of purely botanical and horticultural appointments. Am I hereafter, to be allowed to avail myself of this clause, when it is of importance to the public service that I should do so? 6. The Director of Works having been given power to interfere in matters for which I am still in part responsible, I am anxious to know— Whether I am to consider myself subordinate to the Director of Works in such matters, and to submit to his control in respect of them. Kew, 1 May 1872. Jos. D. Hooker. To this letter no answer has been received. It but rarely falls in either with our duties or our desires to meddle in public questions; and not until we found Dr. Hooker maimed as regards his scientific usefulness, not until we saw the noble establishment of which he has hitherto been the living head, in peril of losing services which it would be absolutely impossible to replace; not indeed until we had observed a hesitation upon your part which we believe could only arise from lack of information, did the thought of interference in this controversy occur to us. Knowing how difficult it must be for one engrossed in the duties of your high position to learn the real merits of a conflict like that originated by the First Commissioner of Works, we venture to hope that you will not look with disfavour on an attempt to place a clear and succinct statement of the case before you. That statement invites you respectfully to decide whether Kew Gardens are or are not to lose the supervision of a man of whose scientific labours any nation might be proud, in whom natural capacity for the post he occupies has been developed by a culture unexampled in variety and extent, a man honoured for his integrity, beloved for his courtesy and kindliness of heart, and who has spent in the public service, not only a stainless, but an illustrious life. The resignation of Dr. Hooker under the circumstances here set forth would we declare be a calamity to English science, and

June 1872

277

a scandal to the English Government. With the power to avert this in your hands, we appeal to your justice to do so. The difficulty of removing the Directorship of Kew from the Department of Works cannot surely be insuperable; or if it be, it must be possible to give such a position to the Director, and such definition to his duties, as shall in future shield him from the exercise of authority which has been so wantonly abused. Charles Lyell. Charles Darwin. George Bentham, President Linnean Society. Henry Holland, President Royal Institution. George Burrows, President Royal College Of Physicians. George Busk, President Royal College of Surgeons. H. C. Rawlinson, President Royal Geographical Society James Paget. William Spottiswoode, Treasurer Royal Society. T. H. Huxley. John Tyndall. Parliamentary Papers 1872 (335) XLVII.527, pp. 41–9. 1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

12

See letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872 and n. 1. The reference is to Acton Smee Ayrton. In 1841, Asa Gray had declared that William Jackson Hooker’s herbarium was ‘the largest and most valuable collection in the world, in possession of a private individual’ (Hooker 1903, p. xxxii). The museums at Kew emphasised economic botany; one displayed dicotyledons and gymnosperms, a second monocotyledons and cryptogams, and a third a timber collection (R. Desmond 1995, p. 193). In 1852, William Arnold Bromfield’s herbarium and library were given to Kew, and in 1854, George Bentham presented his herbarium and library. These two donations formed the nucleus of Kew’s official herbarium as W. J. Hooker’s herbarium, although housed at Kew, remained his private property. See R. Desmond 1995, p. 200. W. J. Hooker’s library, scientific correspondence, botanical portraits, and herbarium were purchased for the nation for £7000 in 1866 (Allan 1967, pp. 216–17). The reference is to J. D. Hooker’s Flora Antarctica (Hooker 1844–7); see also Hooker 1853–5 and Hooker 1855–60. The Antarctic Expedition took place from 1839 to 1843 (R. Desmond 1999, pp. 19–85). For Hooker’s expedition to India and other travels, see R. Desmond 1999. For J. D. Hooker’s publications between 1851 and 1860, see L. Huxley ed. 1900, 2: 491–6. This work culminated in the publication of J. D. Hooker’s Himalayan journals (Hooker 1854) and Flora Indica (Hooker and Thomson 1855). J. D. Hooker purchased Jacques Gay’s herbarium in 1868 (L. Huxley 1900, 1: 48). Whit Monday was a traditional holiday for workers; it became an official holiday with the Bank Holidays Act of 1871, which Lubbock had introduced (Parliamentary Papers, 1871 (88) 1.55: 3). For the venues open on Whit Monday (20 May) 1872, including Kew, see ‘The Whit-Monday holiday’, Daily News, 21 May 1872, p. 2. For Kew’s contribution to commercial botany, and in particular to the India Office’s establishment of Cinchona plantations, see R. Desmond 1995, pp. 212–15, and R. Desmond 1999, p. 221. Cinchona, a South American genus of shrubs and trees, was the source for quinine, used for treating malaria, which was rife in British troops stationed in India. The introduction of Cinchona from South America had begun under W. J. Hooker’s directorship of Kew. In 1862, CD had sent advice regarding the artificial fertilisation of Cinchona in order to establish it in Ceylon (Sri Lanka; see Correspondence vol. 10, letter to

278

13 14

15 16 17

18

19 20 21

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

June 1872

G. K. H. Thwaites, 15 June [1862]). The Brazilian plant Psychotria ipecacuanha was an emetic widely used in medicine. It was established in India from a single plant sent to Kew in 1866 (Allan 1967, p. 230). For the involvement of W. J. and J. D. Hooker in the staffing of colonial botanic gardens, see R. Desmond 1995, pp. 211–13. The president of the Royal Society of London, William Parsons, said that J. D. Hooker’s ‘essay on the carboniferous vegetation’ (Hooker 1848c) was ‘one of the most important contributions ever made by Botany to Geology’ (see Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 7 (1851–4): 261–2). Hooker worked at the Geological Survey from 1846 to 1847 (ODNB). He contributed two other papers to the Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, Hooker 1848a and 1848b. Ayrton’s speech was reported in The Times, 9 November 1869, p. 4. He was re-elected as Liberal MP for Tower Hamlets. For the improvements at Kew undertaken in 1868 to 1869, see R. Desmond 1995, pp. 230–1. J. D. Hooker’s ‘respectful letter of inquiry’ of 12 July 1871, and the ‘insolent’ reply on 17 August 1871 from Robert John Callandar, assistant secretary at the office of works, were printed in Parliamentary Papers, 1872 (335) XLVII.527: 106, 28. J. D. Hooker’s letter to Gladstone is in the Hooker collection at Kew (MacLeod 1974, p. 74 n. 49); it was not included in the report on the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (Parliamentary Papers 1872 (335) XLVII.527: 1–180). Ayrton had offered John Smith (1821–88), curator of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, the post of superintendent of works in Hyde Park (see L. Huxley ed. 1918, 2: 162, and Drayton 2000, p. 214). James Stansfeld was the financial secretary to the Treasury (ODNB). Balmoral was Queen Victoria’s Scottish residence. The letter must have been written between 29 September and 7 October 1871, when Gladstone was there (see ‘Court circular’, The Times, 29 September 1871, p. 7, and 7 October 1871, p. 9). Algernon Edward West. See the letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872, for the first mention of such a plan. George Frederick Samuel Robinson, marquess of Ripon; Charles Wood, Viscount Halifax; and Edward Cardwell. Arthur Helps was clerk of the Privy Council (ODNB). Ayrton had secured the creation of the new post of director of works; Douglas Strutt Galton was appointed to this post in 1870 (MacLeod 1974, pp. 53–4). The secretary of the Board of Works was George Russell (Post Office London directory 1871, s.v. Office of the commissioners of Her Majesty’s works and public buildings). Non avenu: not having occurred; in legal usage, annulled (French). The final paragraphs of the letter to J. D. Hooker from Charles Walter Stronge, clerk to the Treasury, read: Their Lordships find that there is no difference of opinion upon the question of your position, which may be briefly defined as that of head of the local establishment at Kew, of course in subordination to the First Commissioner, and they anticipate no difficulty in the future regulation of the relations of that important establishment, to the Office of the Board of Works, in which the duties and powers of management are vested by statute. The present form of estimate for Kew Gardens, laid by their Lordships before the House of Commons, cannot now be altered, but it will be acted upon, and will in future be framed in accordance with this letter.

30

(Parliamentary Papers 1872 (335) XLVII.527: 21.) The Flora of tropical Africa (Oliver 1868–77) had been sanctioned by the Treasury in 1864 with the costs to be borne by the Stationery Office. Daniel Oliver, under the supervision of J. D. Hooker, produced the first two volumes in 1868 and 1871. See L. Huxley ed. 1900, 2: 164. For correspondence between Hooker and the Office of Works concerning transfer of remaining stock to the Stationery Office, see the letter from the Secretary of the Office of Works, 29 September 1871, and Hooker’s reply of 9 October 1871 (Parliamentary Papers, 1872 (335) XLVII.527: 67–8).

June 1872

279

From B. J. Sulivan 20 June 1872 Bournemouth June 20/72 Private My dear Darwin Snows conduct on the Mission vessel was so bad, that the Clergyman who went out to take charge of the mission had to put him out of the vessel which he did with advice and approval of the Govr & Col officers.1 The fact was he had been caring more about exploring than the work of the mission, shamefully neglected the station and those there—and knowing the clergyman coming out as superintendent would put a stop to this, on his arrival he disputed his authority, refused to obey his orders & claimed to act as he liked with the vessel. The Clergyman tried every thing he could to show him his folly—and only when there was clear proof he was going off with the vessel he appealed to the authorities & Snow was put out of her. He brought an action against the Committee & “in forma pauperis”—he took his own case & for six hours abused us all like pickpockets & told no end of falsehoods, & even then Cockburn told him on his own statement alone without calling on us to reply he must non suit him—but on his declaring there were documents at Falklands to bear out his statements. Cockburn said if we would not object he would adjourn the trial to give time to send out for them. This was done; eight months after the trial went on with the documents they proved that he had been making false statements. Cockburn showed him up thoroughly in his address so the jury saw through the motives of his conduct clearly—and the jury without leaving the box instantly gave us a verdict—but it cost us 500£ as we could not get a penny from him 2 since then I have heard of some [ quere] think getting some one to go with him & his wife3 to America & then leaving them—& the wife in great distress. I did not know he had turned up in England again— He threatened me again and again with actions for personal defamation. Merely because I stated what was the truth but finding he could get nothing out of me by threats he gave it up. 4 I believe him to be a most dangerous and unprincipled man. that it is better to keep quite clear of. He is a sailor, & did pretty well at first—but soon got to treat the vessel as a yacht for his pleasure & amusement & for pretended exploring and discovery trips that would enable him to write letters and puff himself—and he did not like being entirely controlled & having to do real work for the Mission. His conceit & self esteem is unbounded—& sometimes it made me think he must be a little out of his mind. Do not mention my name to him in any way or I shall have more threats of actions. Even for your own sake I should advise you to keep clear of him—for you will never hear the last of him if you once give him an opening. 5 I have been gradually getting over the bad state of my head; every year I can trace improvement—& now a sneeze (which is my barometer) which used to give me pain for two or three days—and even a year since for two or three hours—

280

June 1872

only gives me slight pain for some minutes—so I think there must be very great improvement. sometimes I am so well that I forget, and do what I ought not in the way of exertion—& then I am pulled up for a few days. I was glad to hear pretty good accounts of you all from Langton, M rs. L & baby are going on well.6 With our kind regards to all your circle Believe me | Dear Darwin | yours most sincly. | B. J. Sulivan PS. I entirely forgot to tell you what wonderful accounts we have from Beagle Channel Bishop Stirling found the station going on very favorably & quite a revival commencing with the natives.7 Several of those trained at Station he was able with confidence to Baptise & I suppose some others, as—with their young children—he baptised above 30. & of the adults he says he had not a doubt about their fitness for it. On one occasion he accidentally heard a party all natives holding a prayer meeting in a hut and one of them was praying earnestly for the conversion of their fellow natives. He also married several couples some had been living together before others not— I have been very anxious that some of those finer natives from the East coast should be got over to the Falkland station. It would be great thing to do something for them. I was much interested in Musters book—but the natives sunk in my estimation as hunters from letting that Bull escape. We would have had him at Falklands in Phelomel days even without horses or trees to aid. 8 BJS. DAR 177: 298 1

2

3 4

5

William Parker Snow had been dismissed in 1856 from command of the Patagonian (later South American) Missionary Society’s vessel, Allen Gardiner, by the superintending missionary in the Falkland Islands, George Pakenham Despard, supported by the governor, Thomas Edward Laws Moore. Snow had refused to carry a party of missionaries led by Despard from Stanley in East Falkland to a recently established mission station on Keppel Island off the coast of West Falkland; according to Snow, the group was insufficiently provisioned. In 1857, Snow privately circulated his account of the affair; the society responded in a pamphlet, and Snow published an expanded account in 1858 (Patagonian Missionary Society 1857; Snow 1858). For the history of the mission station and Snow’s involvement, see also A. G. E. Jones 1979, ODNB s.v. Snow, William Parker, and Philpott 2009. Snow brought an action for wrongful dismissal against the Committee of the Patagonian Missionary Society in December 1858 in the Court of Common Pleas; the trial resumed in December 1859 in the Court of Queen’s Bench and was presided over by Alexander James Edmund Cockburn (The Times, 8 December 1859, p. 8). In forma pauperis: in the character of a pauper (Latin). Sarah Snow. Sulivan was called to give evidence at the trial as he had instigated the Patagonian Missionary Society’s acquisition of the vessel that Snow commanded; he described acrimonious meetings between himself and Snow after Snow’s return from South America in 1856 (The Times, 8 December 1859, p. 8). At various periods Snow promoted emigration to South America and to New Zealand (A. G. E. Jones 1979, p. 29). Snow was in financial difficulties in the 1870s and had presumably approached CD for help. Though no evidence has been found in CD’s accounts that he gave or lent any money, Snow later referred

June 1872

6

7

8

281

to CD’s rendering of ‘temporary aid . . . a few years ago’ (letter from W. P. Snow, 21 November 1881 (Calendar no. 13495); see also A. G. E. Jones 1979, p. 27). Emma Darwin’s nephew Edmund Langton and his wife Emily Caroline Langton lived near Sulivan in Bournemouth; their third daughter, Diana, was born on 6 June 1872 (R. B. Litchfield, Births, Deaths and Marriages (DAR 248/3); Burke’s landed gentry s.v. Massingberd). Waite Hockin Stirling, the bishop of the Falkland Islands, had established a mission to the Fuegians at Ushuaia in the Beagle Channel, Patagonia. In 1867, CD contributed £5 to the ‘Fuegian mission’ through Sulivan, who kept him informed of its progress (CD’s Classed account books (Down House MS); see also Macdonald 1929, pp. 69–70, and Correspondence vol. 18, letter from B. J. Sulivan, 27 June 1870, and letter to B. J. Sulivan, 30 June [1870]). George Chaworth Musters had recently published an account of an expedition to Patagonia in 1869, including a description of an unsuccessful hunt during which one wild bull escaped when Musters misfired after tripping over a root and a native hunter’s lasso was caught in a tree, and another when a bolas failed to bring it down (Musters 1871, pp. 150–3). Sulivan took part in a surveying expedition to the Falklands on board the Philomel in 1842 to 1845 (ODNB).

From Rudolf Sundström 20 June 1872 Stockholm, Sweden, June 20, 1872. Sir. By the printer mr Albert Bonnier invited to render into the Swedish language your admirable work “The Descent of Man”, it is with a feeling of the greatest veneration, that I dare to send to you the first part of my translation.1 If I have succeeded in interpreting on my native-tongue the thoughts, that you have written down in “The Descent”, belongs not to me to judge. But I shall always be satisfied of having, what depends on me, prepared my countrymen an occasion to become acquainted with the by you first proposed and after you so rightly denominated doctrine— I have already from my arrival to the Academy of Upsala, partly from a dislike for the Speculative philosophy, partly—and this chiefly—compelled by my zoological studies, reflected upon the relation of man to the other animals, its origin etc. From my teachers and cordial friends, the professors W. Lilljeborg and T. Thorell, I have received many useful hints with regard to this sake. But it was first after my settling in Stockholm and after having been acquainted with professor N. J. Andersson, a warm adherent of the Darwinismus, that my attention was more specially directed on your doctrine— After this time I have assiduously studied your works and found in them an expression of what I long ago had more vaguely thought. For the thus obtained certainty I have many times thanked you in my thoughts, and I do it now by all my heart in words. To what I had previously read in the works of Huxley, Gegenbauer, Häckel, Rolle (whose “Ch. Darwins Lehre von die Entstehung der Arten” I have rendered into Swedish) etc., I have by your own words; “The Descent” lately found a further confirmation.2 As soon as the latter part of my translation will have appeared, I shall immediately send it to you. Thence you shall at least see, that it gives men in Sweden, who esteem

282

June 1872

and honour your name and, notwithstanding the lamentations of the orthodox and the sneering of the ignorant, glory themselves in being your partisans. I long very much for the new work—On the emotions of the higher animals, expressed in their features—with wich, as I am assured, you are occupied.3 If you at some occasion would wish notices, that I can procure you, from my country, so is my adress: Sweden, Stockholm, Dagbladets Redaction. 4 Believe me to be, Sir, yours sincerely | Rudolf Sundström. | Doctor Philosophiæ. I send the book with the packet-post. DAR 177: 318 1 2

3 4

Sundström’s translation of Descent was published in two volumes in 1872 (Sundström trans. 1872). The copy sent to CD has not been found. Sundström refers to Thomas Henry Huxley, Carl Gegenbaur, Ernst Haeckel, and Friedrich Rolle, and to his translation of Rolle’s book explaining Darwin’s theories on the origin of species (Rolle 1863; Rolle 1870). Sundström refers to Expression. Dagbladets Redaction: editorial office of Dagblad (Daily Post; Swedish).

To Albert Günther 21 June [1872] Down, | Beckenham, Kent. June 21st My dear Dr. Günther One word to say how heartily & sincerely I rejoice at your appointment.1 Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Shrewsbury School 1

Günther had been appointed assistant keeper of the zoological department at the British Museum (see letter from Albert Günther, 19 June 1872).

From Athénaïs Michelet1 26 June 1872

Paris | rue d’assas 76 26 Juin 72—

Monsieur, Mon excuse pour avoir trop tardé à vous remercier, est toute entière, dans l’état de santé de mon mari.— La maladie de coeur dont il souffre depuis nos horribles évènemens, s’est agravée.2 Je suis absorbée, brisée, je vis dans l’effroi de l’avenir.— Le travail dans ces conditions est presque impossible. La vie est trop scindée.— Je cherche à me ressaisir dans les courts sursis que me donne son mal; mais il n’y a aucune liberté d’esprit.— Si je puis me remettre à la chose, je profiterai de vos conseils, tâchant de dire mes impressions comme elles me sont venues quand je ne songeais nullement à faire un livre.3

June 1872

283

Ce qui nuit presque toujours à nos jugements, c’est que nous ne surveillons pas assez nos tendances instinctives.— Pour le chat, par exemple, il n’y a pas de milieu; il ne laisse personne indifférent. Il est aimé ou haï—conséquence de tempérament?— Cela provoque des affirmations à priori.— Dès lors, tout est compromis. Je ne me cache pas d’avoir pour eux une sorte de ferveur. Créature nerveuse moi-même, je sens peut-être davantage, et mieux ce qui prédomine, ou plutôt le domine, presque entièrement— Dans l’ordre des affections, on peut dire que le chien aime avec tout son coeur, le chat avec tous ses nerfs.— L’infini du détail dans les sensations.— Ce fait propre à la race féline, n’empêche pas l’originalité de l’individu et les dissemblances des caractères, tout comme chez l’humanité.— aussi, je fais un chapitre sous ce titre: “Il y a chat et chat.”4 Je vous remercie encore monsieur de votre excellente lettre, encourageante, ainsi que des brochures.—5 Maintenant je vais vous faire une prière. Je voudrais avoir la photographie de l’homme qui m’a tant passionnée par ses écrits. Si vous la signez, monsieur, vous en doublerez le prix. Avec admiration et profonde estime, | A Michelet DAR 171: 171 1 2

3 4 5

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. See letter to Athénaïs Michelet, 23 May 1872. The Michelets had returned to Paris in April 1872 from Italy, where they had spent several months, both for the sake of Jules Michelet’s health, and to escape the siege of Paris by the Prussians and the subsequent upheaval of the Commune; they supported the French army while in Italy, and supported amnesty for the Communards on their return ( J. Michelet 1959–76, 4: 531; BDWS). See letter from Athénaïs Michelet, 17 May 1872 and n. 3. See A. Michelet 1978, pp. 224–31. See letter to Athénaïs Michelet, 23 May 1872; the pamphlets have not been identified.

From Francis Darwin [before 30 June 1872]1 New University Club, | S.t James’s Street. S.W. Dear Father I couldn’t catch Garrod2 last night. He cannot give a definite answer without thinking over it. He thinks that in the quick beating of the heart in fear, it is not doing any more work— He cannot say even that it is actually working harder in hard exercise— Its seems to be rather complicated & not to easy to say what working harder means— He thinks that running & feeling the pulse wouldn’t prove anything.—3 Yrs F D DAR 162: 52 1

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from A. H. Garrod to Francis Darwin, 30 June [1872].

284 2 3

June 1872

Alfred Henry Garrod. CD had presumably asked Francis to seek information that he could use in Expression in his discussion of the physical effects of strong emotion (see Expression, pp. 74–6). Garrod had been a contemporary of Francis Darwin’s at Cambridge University and had recently published a paper on the regulation of the frequency of the pulse (Garrod 1872). See also second letter from Francis Darwin, [before 30 June 1872], and letter from A. H. Garrod to Francis Darwin, 30 June [1872] and n. 6.

From Francis Darwin [before 30 June 1872]1 New University Club, | S.t James’s Street. S.W. Dear Father I managed to catch Garrod this morning at the Gardens—2 He doesn’t seem inclined to give a definite opinion even though quoted with all possible caution All he says is that it does not necessarily follow that the heart shall be doing more work when it is beating quickly— He thinks that something can be made out by taking a sphygmograph of a person in a state of fright, & he promises to do it as soon as he can—3 I send a photo of Joe, the pouting one is a failure I find, as the lips are all blurred, will you ask Bessy to put it in my book when people have looked at it 4 Yrs affec | F Darwin DAR 162: 53 1 2 3

4

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from A. H. Garrod to Francis Darwin, 30 June [1872]. Alfred Henry Garrod was prosector to the the Zoological Society of London; the society’s gardens were in Regent’s Park (ODNB). Garrod had recently published a theory of the regulation of the frequency of the pulse (Garrod 1872), and as a student at Cambridge had made improvements to the sphygmograph, an instrument used to record pulse beats (ODNB). See also letter from A. H. Garrod to Francis Darwin, 30 June [1872] and n. 6. CD had been asking for information on pouting in children for Expression (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to W. E. Darwin, 11 February [1871]; Expression, pp. 234–5). Question 14 in CD’s Queries about expression was, ‘Do children when sulky pout and greatly protrude their lips?’ (see Correspondence vol. 19, Appendix VII). Joe was possibly Josiah Clement Wedgwood, born on 16 March 1872 (ODNB); the photograph has not been found. Francis also refers to his sister Elizabeth Darwin.

From A. H. Garrod to Francis Darwin 30 June [1872]1 11, Harley Street, | Cavendish Square, W. June 30th. Dear Darwin I made an attempt this morning to take a sphygmograph tracing during fright, & fear that I have not been very successful. At the Hospital the house-physician & I went to a woman, Abt 30, & commenced putting on the sphygmograph, 2 & when quite ready asked her if she minded being hurt a little, upon which she, being rather of a nervous temperament, jumped up & said she would have nothing done to her at all & wanted to dress & leave immediately. She was very much terrified & it was with

June 1872

285

great difficulty that we could get her quiet enough to take a trace & we only did so by telling her I did not mean to hurt her at all. At last, she still being very excited & frightened, we took the lower trace & after about 10 minutes the two upper ones. She did not quiet down for some time afterwards & then remained suspiciously nervous, so that it was not possible to take a normal trace. The pulse did not become much increased in rapidity after the fright, being nearly 100 a minute before the fright & but little more during it. On the whole I think that little or nothing can be learnt from the trace. I have been looking up any points that seem to bear on the point your father is working at & think that the following two may be of use. 3 I. In P. Lorain’s work on the pulse there are some normal sphygmograms of a woman (p. 193. p. 194) & on p. 194 is one of the same woman in a rage. It is very different to the others & much quicker.4 II. In a paper by L. Lortet of Lyons in the Annales des Sciences Nat. Sci. 5. Tom VII. p296 & seq. the wonderful increase in the rapidity of the blood current on a horse scenting food & commencing to eat is shown diagrammatically in a most excellent manner, & this increase in blood current may assist in the increased glandular action necessary for the digestion of the food. There are other kindred points of interest in the same paper.5 I shall be very happy to lend you Lorain’s book if it is of any service to you. Upon my theory of pulse rate, the only way that fright &c can influence the circulation for good is by its influence on the pneumogastric nerve, which thus indirectly alters the calibre of the coronary small arteries & so modifies the nutrition of the heart.6 I have not yet had any ruminant dead, so have not yet got any lig. nuchae for you, but I have not forgotten it.7 Hoping to see you when you have any spare time | Believe me | Yours very truly | A. H. Garrod DAR 165: 10 1 2

3 4

5 6

7

The year is established by the reference to Garrod’s theory of the pulse, which was published in Garrod 1872, and by the publication date of Expression (see n. 4, below). Garrod was a medical associate of King’s College Hospital, London; there were a number of assistant physicians at the hospital (Lyle 1935, pp. 204–5). See also second letter from Francis Darwin, [before 30 June 1872] and n. 3. See first and second letters from Francis Darwin, [before 30 June 1872]. CD cited Paul Lorain’s work on the pulse (Lorain 1870) in Expression, published in November 1872, in a discussion of the physiological effects of rage; he acknowledged Garrod for supplying him with the reference (Expression, p. 74 n. 9). CD did not cite Louis Lortet’s work on the circulation of the blood (Lortet 1867) in Expression. In a paper completed on 10 June 1872, Garrod suggested that the frequency of the pulse was regulated not by the resistance offered by the arteries to blood pumped away from the heart, but by the ease with which blood returned to the heart; if the return flow was impeded by compression of the blood vessels, as in lying down for example, the pulse was slowed (Garrod 1872). Francis was studying medicine at St George’s Hospital, London; he later published the results of animal experiments carried out at the Brown Institution (ODNB, F. Darwin 1874 and 1875). The nuchal

286

July 1872

ligament, or ligamentum nuchae, is vestigial in humans but in some animals supports the weight of the head.

From Dr von Gloeden1 1 July 1872

Anholt (Rheinpreussen) d 1e. Juli 1872.

Sehr geehrter Herr! Mit welchem Interesse ich dem Erscheinen Ihrer Werke von der “Entstehung der Arten” bis herab zum jüngsten, “die Abstammung des Menschen,” gefolgt bin, brauche ich nicht erst zu schildern, denn die Begründung Ihrer Theorie ist der hohen Beachtung jedes denkenden Menschen sicher, umsomehr aber Jemandes, der, wie ich, den Naturwissenschaften mit ganzem Geiste ergeben ist.2 Um Entschuldigung bitten aber muss ich, dass ich überhaupt an Sie schreibe, allein die schlummernden Sympathien, die Sie in meinem Innern wachgerufen, kommen nicht in ebene Bahnen, bis ich dem Reformator der bisherigen Ansichten über die wichtigsten Vorgänge des organischen Lebens näher getreten, und einige, wenn auch unbedeutende Punkte, die mir beim Durcharbeiten Ihrer Werke aufstiessen, weil ich ihnen meinen Beifall versagen zu müssen glaubte, besprochen habe. Gestatten Sie, dass ich heute aus Ihrem letzten Werke, der Abstammung des Menschen, unter Zugrundelegung der Uebersetzung von V. Carus, eine Stelle herausnehme, die mich am meisten frappirte. Band I Seite 233 finde ich den Ausdruck “mysteriös”; der Uebersetzer hat hier offenbar ein unpassendes Wort gewählt, denn Mysterien sind auf dem Felde der Naturwissenschaften doch am allerwenigsten daheim.3 S. 267 wird sodann nachgewiesen, dass bei ausserehelichen Verbindungen verhältnissmässig mehr Mädchen als Knaben geboren werden. Der natürliche Vorgang der Zeugung kann sich nicht im Bann einer rein civilisatorischen Einrichtung, wie die Ehe ist, befinden, geleugnet kann indessen nicht werden, dass die Zeugenden, und namentlich der weibliche Theil, im illegitimen Fall von einer andern fast peinlichen Situation beeinflusst werden, im Hinblick nemlich auf die möglichen Folgen, und so die Ehe einen indirecten Einfluss auf den Character der Zeugungsproducte äussern kann. Es ist aus jenem Grunde natürlich, dass das Mädchen viel weniger leicht sich einer illegitimen Verbindung hingiebt, als einer legitimen; es wird also Seitens des Mannes zunächst ein viel grösserer Reiz ausgeübt werden müssen, um den Widerstand, resp. die Furcht vor den Folgen zu besiegen, auf diese Weise könnte das weibliche Element, stärker affivirt, auch mehr zur Geltung gelangen. In der Regel sind illegitime Verbindungen sehr vorübergehender Natur, wo sich aus ihnen aber ein daurendes (illegitimes) Verhältniss entwickelt, da finde ich, freilich nur unter Zugrundelegung der mir bekannten Fälle, dass das Genus der Erzeugten in keiner Weise mehr einen Massstab für die Natur der Verbindung gibt; der weibliche Theil hat eben Furcht und Scham abgelegt und vergessen. Das bedeutend grössere Ueberwiegen der männlichen Geburten bei Juden als bei Christen dürfte sich durch die gewissenhafte Befolgung der Enthaltsamkeits Regeln während und nach der Menstruation erklären lassen. Bei allen Thieren findet die

July 1872

287

Begattung (und Befruchtung) während der Brunstperiode statt, der Mensch allein macht eine Ausnahme, eine Annomalie womit der weibliche Theil allein zu belasten ist, und es lässt sich wol begreifen, dass das weibliche Element um so weniger zur Geltung kommt, je weiter es jene Periode hinter sich hat. Joh. Müller sagt zwar (Physiologie II. S. 613): “die Menstruation des Menschen ist ganz verschieden, und hat nichts mit der Brunst gemein”, doch glaube ich dieselbe immerhin als eine analoge Erscheinung betrachten zu dürfen.4 Ich möchte hier auch auf eine originelle Abhandlung in Halle’s fortgesetzter Magie Bd. VII über “die Ausartung der organisirten Körper” aufmerksam machen.5 Indem ich die mir bekannten Ehen Revue passiren lasse, will es mir scheinen, als ob zu Anfang der Verbindungen die weiblichen Geburten überhaupt ein Uebergewicht haben. In Bezug hierauf habe ich einen mir befreundeten Bürgermeister um Auszüge aus Heiraths und Geburtsurkunden gebeten, um demnächst den statistischen Prüfstein anlegen zu können. Wenn es anders zutreffend ist, liesse sich ein solches Verhältniss vielleicht dadurch erklären, dass die Fruchtbarkeits Periode des Weibes von viel kürzerer Dauer ist, als die des Mannes, und dass dadurch ihre geschlechtliche Vererbungskraft anfangs stärker auftrit. Abgesehen von individuellen Ausnahmen vererbt das männliche Geschlecht seine übrigen Charactere stärker als das weibliche, es ist daher nicht verständlich, wesshalb der Sexualcharacter davon eine Ausnahme machen sollte, und da das männliche Geschlecht bei seiner länger währenden Fruchtbarkeit voraussichtlich auch mehr Nachkommen hinterlässt, als das weibliche, so muss schliesslich wieder ein Ueberwiegen männlicher Geburten statthaben. Der Unterschied müsste indessen wol grösser sein, als er in der That ist, wenn nicht das durchschnitlich spätere Heirathen der Männer und das Junggesellenthum als Regulator diente. Es ist wol als sicher anzunehmen, dass das Geschlecht des Embryo im Zeugungsacte bestimmt wird, wenigstens würde es schwer halten diese dunkeln Vorgänge auf andere Weise zu verstehen; es kann dann aber das Geschlecht das Product des verschiedenen Zusammenwirkens des männlichen und weiblichen Elementes sein, oder die männlichen Samenzellen von heute sind zur Hervorrufung eines andern Geschlechtes disponirt als morgen, oder dasselbe ist mit dem weiblichen Ei der Fall. Wie aber steht es alsdann mit den Zwillingsgeburten, die häufig verschiedenes Genus zeigen, wenn sie (im zweiten Fall) nicht das Product verschiedener Zeugungsacte sind? Bei domesticirten Vögeln hängt das Geschlecht mitunter mit der Farbe zusammen, so sind p.e.6 die ganz isabellfarbigen Kanarienvögel fast ausnahmslos Weibchen; paart man weisse und gelbe Lachtauben miteinander, 7 so sind die Nachkommen entweder weiss oder gelb, die ersteren aber fast stets weiblichen, die letztern ebenso männlichen Geschlechts, gleichviel ob sie in der Farbe dem Vater oder der Mutter gleichkommen; sind ausnahmsweise beide Jungen gelb, so sind’s meist wieder Männchen, weiss dagegen ein Pärchen. Ein doppeltes Streben ist allen organischen Wesen gemein, nemlich das nach Erhaltung des Individuums, und das nach Erhaltung der Art, und es scheint als ob die Hauptaufgabe des Daseins in der Erreichung dieser beiden Ziele bestände, wenig-

288

July 1872

stens gehen manche Organismen nach Erlangung des letztern zu Grunde. Sonderbar ist hierbei der Umstand, dass die Lösung dieser beiden Aufgaben einander feindlich entgegentreten, indem die Erhaltung der Art die des Individuums beeintrachtigt; so sehen wir Frauen durch geschlechtlichen Umgang viel schneller hinwelken als durch Enthaltsamkeit. Dass unverheirathete Männer in der Regel nicht ein so hohes Alter erreichen als verheirathete ist wol nicht auf Conto der Abstinenz zu schreiben,— es ist nicht das Junggesellenthum, sondern Junggesellenleben. Kanarienvögel in der Hecke dauren höchstens 8–12 Jahre, ausser derselben 20 und mehr Jahre. Bekannt ist das ungewöhnlich hohe Alter, das Bastarde häufig erreichen; je unproductiver ein Thier ist, um so grösser seine Lebensdauer. Eigenthümlich ist, dass bei Tauben das zuerstgelegte Ei in der Regel ein Männchen liefert; wird aus den beiden Eiern nur ein Junges erbrütet, so ist dies der Regel nach ebenfalls männlichen Geschlechts, und das verlorene Ei meist unbefruchtet, was den Anschein hat, als ob die Begattung, welche das zweite Ei befruchten sollte, zu spät, nachdem bereits die Bildung des Eiweisses begonnen, eingetreten sei, wenn es anders richtig, dass zur Befruchtung jedes Eies ein besonderer Begattungsact nöthig ist, wobei es höchst sonderbar, dass gerade das zweite Ei fast ausnahmslos von diesem Unglück betroffen wird. Nach Joh. Müller (Physiologie II. 637.) sind bei Maulthierhengsten keine Spermatocoen gefunden worden, Brehm dagegen, Illustrirtes Thierleben II, 373, berichtet mehrere Fälle, wo Maulthierstuten fruchtbar waren; 8 bei einem Stieglitz-Kanarienvogel ( J. Müller) wurden Samenzellen gefunden, deren Form aber von der beider Elternarten abwich, resp. unvollkommen war.9 Wenn Bastarde nicht absolut unfruchtbar sind, welchem Umstand haben sie mitunter Productivkraft zu danken, und was nimt dem gesunden Bastardorganismus die Secretion keimfähigen Samens? Hiermit will ich mich für heute verabschieden. Genehmigen Sie die Versicherung vollkommenster Hochachtung mit der ich die Ehre habe mich zu nennen | Ihr ergebenster | Dr. von Gloeden. DAR 165: 57 CD ANNOTATIONS 0.1 Anholt] ‘Anholt’ pencil 3.1 Das bedeutend . . . machen. 3.12] scored pencil 1 2 3

4 5

6

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Dr von Gloeden has not been identified. Gloeden refers to Origin and Descent. Julius Victor Carus, who made the German translation of Descent (Carus trans. 1871), had, in fact, been faithful to CD’s statement in Descent 1: 264 that the proportion of male and female births was ‘mysteriously affected’ by whether the births were legitimate or illegitimate. Gloeden quotes from Johannes Müller’s Handbuch der Physiologie des Menschen ( J. P. Müller 1833–7, 2: 640). The treatise in volume seven of Johann Samuel Halle’s Fortgesetzte Magie, oder, die Zauberkräfte der Natur, so auf den Nutzen und die Belustigung angewandt worden (Continuous magic, or, the magical powers of nature applied for profit and entertainment; Halle 1788–1801), considered ‘the degeneration of the organised body’. p.e: presumably ‘par example’, although p.e. is not a German abbreviation.

July 1872 7 8 9

289

The Lachtaube or ringneck dove is Streptopelia risoria. Gloeden refers to Alfred Edmund Brehm and Brehm et al. 1864–9. J. P. Müller 1833–7, 2: 637–8.

To F. E. Abbot 2 July 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 2d. 72/ My dear Sir I am ashamed to say that I kept no memorandum when I first subscribed for the Index.— I now send the amount, according to my sons calculation, for two years subscription & postage; so kindly make a note the date to which this extends & which will probably last out my active life.— 1 I was very much interested two or three months ago by a grand Lecture which you delivered in Boston.—2 I had the great pleasure of having here to dinner a short time ago Col. Higginson: he seems in every way a man, whom one may have been proud to have received.— 3 With all good wishes | In Haste, My dear Sir | yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin Harvard University Archives 1

2

3

For CD’s arrangement to receive the Index, see the letter to F. E. Abbot, 8 January 1872, n. 1. CD’s calculation of the amount for two years’ subscription with postage was probably based on Abbot’s printed letter head, which stated: ‘Office of the Index, a weekly paper, devoted to free religion. Terms $2.00 a year.’ Abbot’s lecture ‘The god of science’, published as an Index tract (Abbot 1872b), had been delivered on 11 February 1872 in the Horticultural Hall, Boston, as part of a course of Sunday afternoon lectures under the auspices of the Free Religion Association. There was a short notice of the lecture in the Index, 24 February 1872, pp. 57–60. Thomas Wentworth Higginson recalled his visit to Down in Higginson 1898, pp. 283–5.

To Asa Gray 8 July [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 8th My dear Gray Very many thanks for your book “How Plants behave”: it is a capital idea, capitally executed.— It has in many ways delighted me, & I am even more delighted to hear that you think of publishing in extenso on subject. 2 Can you support your idea that tendrils become spiral after clasping an object, from the stimulus from contact running down them, in as much as they become spiral when they have clasped nothing?—3 I am now correcting proofs of my small book on Expression; & when this is done, I hope (health permitting & if summer not too late) to begin on Drosera. 4 I am thinking of republishing all my quasi-botanical papers with 2 or 3 new ones in a volume.— I hope it may be in time for you.—5

The youthful Darwin expounding his theories, by William Holbrook Beard. Image # 3021, American Museum of Natural History Library.

July 1872

291

I am astonished at Mrs. Gray’s spirit & audacity in going all the way to California, though to be sure this is not much after the Nile.—6 It makes my blood run cold to think of such expeditions. I forgot to thank for engraving of the ape-man, which I am glad to possess, though I am surprised it was thought worth painting & engraving. 7 Your cousins the Brace’s are coming here the day after tomorrow to dine & sleep. 8 By the way, you will remember that you wrote about Dr Packard. As soon as I saw in Nature that he was in London, I wrote to him to care of the Editor, but heard in answer that Dr P. had started for Paris, & whether he ever received my invitation to Down I know not.9 My dear Gray | Yours ever very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Archives of the Gray Herbarium of Harvard University (107) 1 2

3

4 5 6

7 8 9

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Asa Gray, 31 May 1872. See letter from Asa Gray, 31 May 1872 and n. 1. In the preface to How plants behave (the second part of Botany for young people), Gray had written that he expected to treat the subject in a ‘different way, and probably with somewhat of scientific and historical fulness, in a new edition of a work intended for advanced students’ (A. Gray 1872a, p. viii). Gray presumably referred to his intended revisions to the fifth edition of his textbook Introduction to structural and systematic botany (A. Gray 1858a); the much expanded sixth edition (Structural botany) was published in 1879 (A. Gray 1879). CD’s annotated copy of A. Gray 1872a is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 347). In his copy of A. Gray 1872a, p. 18, CD scored the sentence ‘If a stick be left in contact the coiling will be permanent; and a downward propagation of the same action is what throws the whole tendril into spiral coils’ and made a marginal note underneath, ‘No, because a tendril that has caught nothing coils’ (see Marginalia 1: 347). CD recorded that he finished working on the proofs of Expression on 22 August and began work on Drosera on 23 August (‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). CD did not publish a collection of his earlier botanical papers. Jane Loring Gray and Asa Gray travelled to California on the newly completed transcontinental railroad in late June 1872 and toured there for several weeks (Dupree 1959, pp. 345–7). In 1869, the Grays had taken a river cruise on the Nile for three months (ibid., pp. 337–8; J. L. Gray ed. 1893, 2: 572–86). See also Correspondence vol. 17, letter from Asa Gray and J. L. Gray, 8 and 9 May 1869. See letter from Asa Gray, 11 June 1872, and plate on p. 290. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Charles Loring Brace and Letitia Brace were at Down on 11 July 1872. Gray had written a letter of introduction for Alpheus Spring Packard Jr (see letter from Asa Gray, 7 March 1872 and n. 1). Packard’s presence at a meeting of the Entomological Society of London was reported in Nature, 11 April 1872, p. 475. CD’s letter was not received by Packard until he had arrived back in the United States (letter from A. S. Packard Jr, 1 August 1872).

To John Denny 9 July 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 9. 1872

Dear Sir I have read with great interest yr two articles at the Congress, published in the Gardener’s Chron., copies of which I owe to the kindness of some one with the initial “D”, perhaps to you.1 I have thought that you wd perhaps excuse my asking you a question. Is the D. of Cornwall Pelargonium fertile with its own pollen, as well as with that of the 2 or 3 vars mentioned by you, whilst it is sterile with other reputed

292

July 1872

vars? Or is the Duke sterile with its own pollen & fertile only with certain vars? This latter fact is highly remarkable & wd deserve to be published in full detail—i.e. the number of trials on father’s & mother’s side &c. But the former case w d be quite new, & in my opinion of the highest importance. Might I also ask whether you have repeatedly tried to fertilize other vars of the Ivy-leaved Pelarg., besides Peltatumelegans, with pollen of the Zonal, & have always failed; whilst, as I understand, you have succeeded easily with var. peltatum.2 Very few such cases have been recorded, & here again I hope to see full details hereafter published.3 Your statement that the transmittance of characters from either parent depends in large part on strength of constitution is quite new to me; 4 & it wd be very interesting to discover whether the same rule holds with other families of plants. With respect to transmittance of character, when both parents are of equally good constitution, I shd expect from what little I know that different rules wd hold in difft families.5 If you are not already acquainted with Gärtner’s 2 works, you wd find them valuable & interesting.6 I hope that you will forgive the liberty I have taken in troubling you, & I remain with much respect | Dear Sir | yours faithfully | Charles Darwin LS(A) Special Collections, Library, University of Otago (DeB MS 55) 1

2

3 4 5 6

The Gardeners’ Chronicle, 29 June 1872, pp. 871–2, and 6 July 1872, pp. 904–10, published a report on the Birmingham Horticultural Congress; in the report, Denny’s paper ‘The relative influence of parentage in flowering plants’ was printed in two parts (Denny 1872a). The copies CD received have not been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. Denny had artificially fertilised pelargoniums in order to obtain evidence of the relative influence of the male (or pollen) parent and the female (or seed) parent on the resulting progeny (Denny 1872a). His purpose was to help horticulturists produce new cultivars by throwing light on whether the parental influence was the same when crossing varieties as when crossing species, despite the difficulty of distinguishing between species and varieties among the large number of pelargonium cultivars. Denny concluded that his experiments on crossing pelargoniums showed that the male parent had most influence on the progeny when the two parents were constitutionally equally strong. The experiments also revealed inexplicable ‘antipathies and affinities’ (p. 904); antipathies were exemplified by apparent varieties, including ‘Duke of Cornwall’, ‘Dr Muret’, and all the doubles that sprang from ‘Beauté de Suresnes’, which were fertile only with one another but not with other varieties, and affinities by the crossing of supposed distinct species as when the pollen of a zonal pelargonium fertilised a variety of ivy-leaved pelargonium Denny referred to as Peltatum elegans. Peltatum elegans was a nursery-bred plant, whose origin is now obscure, first put out in 1865 (Wilkinson 2007, pp. 166–7); horticulturists’ use of binomial nomenclature often signified a garden variety, rather than the botanical convention of genus and species. In Denny 1872a, p. 904, Denny had stated: ‘My notes would furnish innumerable examples in support of the theories I have founded upon them, did time admit of my going further into detail.’ See Denny 1872a, p. 872. See also n. 2, above. CD probably refers to the cross-breeding experiments described in Variation 1: 305–411. CD’s heavily annotated copies of Gärtner 1844 and Gärtner 1849 are in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 248–98). Instances of sterility, especially between varieties, were of great importance to CD because he believed that they provided the clearest evidence of evolutionary gradation from varieties to species. For the significance he placed on Karl Friedrich von Gärtner’s experiments on crossing Verbascum, see Correspondence vol. 9, letter to J. D. Hooker, 28 September [1861] and nn. 11 and 12.

July 1872

293

From John Denny 12 July 1872 Stoke Newington July 12th. 1872 Dear Sir Thinking you might be interested in the subject I endeavoured to treat of I took the liberty of forwarding you my paper.1 In reply to your queries, the Duke of Cornwall Pelargonium is fertile with its own pollen. With regard to the Ivy leaved sections, I have repeatedly tried to fertilize other varieties besides Peltatum Elegans, but have invariably failed to do so. 2 Others besides myself have (of late) obtained hybrids from Peltatum Elegans, but have also failed to do so from other varieties Mr. Grieve has succeeded in obtaining a golden variegation in the foliage of Peltatum Elegans, by employing the pollen of a gold & bronze bi-color. 3 To ascertain whether the transmittance of character, under certain conditions, differs in different families of plants, requires the accumulation of data my paper advocates; and for this object, as well as for the discussion of the subject, of the influence of parentage, in all its branches, and bearings, I should like to see a really working society formed. I have not seen Gärtners works, & I fear they are in German.4 My experiments upon the Pelargoniums have been conducted with more than ordinary care, & that you may be able to judge of this fact, I take the further liberty of forwarding you a number or two of “The Florist”, which contain a detailed account of my mode of procedure.5 I am just now endeavouring to fertilize Peltatum Elegans with the pollen of the wild blue geranium, & there are signs of my having succeeded but which I fear are but delusive; to succeed in such a cross would be most interesting6 From Chiswick I have received a communication informing me, that in a number of seedling grapes raised—from careful cross-fertilization, my theory of the prepotence of the male parent—is fully borne out. 7 I have also received other interesting communications upon the subject of my paper.8 In Orchids I think you have carried out a series of experiments,—& therefore could give us some valuable information. 9 I shall continue my experiments on the Pelargonium—& if time, upon other flowers, & should be happy with your permission to inform you of any results that appear to me worthy of special notice. Thanking you for your note, | Believe me to remain | Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | John Denny P.S. There is no need to return the numbers of the Florist DAR 162: 159 1

See letter to John Denny, 9 July 1872 and n. 1.

294 2

3

4 5 6

7

8

9

July 1872

See letter to John Denny, 9 July 1872 and n. 2. The extensive cross-breeding of pelargoniums by florists and nurserymen, especially in the early nineteenth century, and the consequent problem of distinguishing hybrids from species and varieties, made pelargonium classification (and the subsequent identification of old cultivars) difficult. Both botanists and horticulturists began to group pelargoniums into named sections in order to make recognition easier, but the two classificatory systems differed in their method of ordering. From 1860, William Harvey’s division of the genus into fifteen sections became the accepted standard for botanists. Horticulturists, however, continued to base their sections on appearance and use, regardless of whether a plant was a species or a hybrid, with some plants appearing in more than one section. What horticulturists termed the ivy-leaved section was not popular among breeders until the production of some attractive hybrids in the early 1870s. See Wilkinson 2007, pp. 8–11, 70–1, 160–7, 251–66, and D. Miller 1996, pp. 25–9. Denny may refer to Peter Grieve’s new strain produced by fertilising a variety of an ivy-leaved pelargonium with the pollen of a zonal; this was reported on in Gardeners’ Chronicle, 8 June 1872, p. 762. CD had asked about such crosses in his letter to Denny of 9 July 1872. ‘Bicolor’ usually refers to pelargoniums with two colours in the upper petals of the flower, but Denny appears to use it to denote the colouring of the foliage. Zonal pelargoniums are so called because their leaves are divided into two colour zones. Pelargonium peltatum and Pelargonium zonale (from which all zonal pelargoniums derive) belong to the same botanical section Ciconium (see D. Miller 1996, p. 160). Denny specialised in breeding zonal pelargoniums (Wilkinson 2007, p. 177). CD had recommended that Denny read Gärtner 1844 and Gärtner 1849 (see letter to John Denny, 9 July 1872 and n. 6). Denny’s article ‘On cross-breeding pelargoniums’ was published in three parts in the Florist (Denny 1872b). CD’s annotated copies are in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. The wild blue geranium, Geranium pratense, is commonly known as the meadow cranesbill. Pelargoniums were originally thought to belong to the same genus as geraniums, but in 1792 the botanist Charles L’Héritier separated them into two distinct genera of the family Geraniaceae. Geraniums are native to Europe; pelargoniums, native to South Africa, were not introduced into Europe until the seventeenth century. (W. J. Webb 1984, pp. 7–9.) It is possible that Denny was attempting to produce a blue-flowered pelargonium (Wilkinson 2007, p. 178). For Denny’s theory of the prepotence of the male (or pollen) parent, see Denny 1872b, p. 50, and the letter to John Denny, 9 July 1872 and n. 2. The communication from Chiswick may have come from Archibald Barron, superintendent of the Royal Horticultural Society’s garden at Chiswick, or from William Turner Thiselton-Dyer, recently appointed professor at the Royal Horticultural Society. Barron had special charge of the vines at Chiswick. See Fletcher 1969, pp. 215–20. These communications might have included information from the editors of the Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society, Miles Joseph Berkeley and Thiselton-Dyer, about the relative size of pollen-grains in different varieties affecting whether fertilisation occurs or not. The editors may have communicated with Denny before publishing this information at the end of the version of Denny 1872a that was reprinted in their journal (Denny 1872d, p. 24). CD’s experiments aimed to show that the floral morphology of most orchids prevented self-fertilisation (see Orchids, especially pp. 249–65). CD had therefore studied prepotency of pollen from a separate individual within the same species, or even from a separate flower on the same plant, but had not looked at hybrids from the perspective that interested Denny, namely which parent’s characteristics dominated the hybrid.

To J. D. Hooker 12 July [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 12th

My dear Hooker I must exhale & express my joy at the way in which the newspapers have taken

July 1872

295

up your case. I have seen Times, Daily News & Pall Mall, & hear that others have taken up the case. The memorial has done great good this way, whatever may be the result in the action of our wretched government. 2 On my soul it is enough to make one turn into an old honest Tory. You will have done one noble service to all men of science by showing governments that they cannot be trampled like dirt under the feet of any paltry official man.—3 If you answer this I shall be sorry that I have relieved my feelings by writing. Yours affectionately | C. Darwin DAR 94: 222–3 1 2

3

The year is established by the reference to reports of Hooker’s dispute with Acton Smee Ayrton (see n. 2, below). CD and others had signed a memorial in support of Hooker in his dispute with Ayrton (see letter from John Lubbock to W. E. Gladstone, 20 June 1872 and enclosure). There were articles about the dispute in The Times, 8 July 1872, p. 11; the Daily News, 10 July 1872, p. 5; and the Pall Mall Gazette, 11 July 1872, pp. 10–11, all of which were favourable to Hooker. CD’s suggestion that he might change his political allegiance to the opposition Tory (conservative) party indicated how reprehensible he thought the actions of Ayrton, and the Liberal Government he served, to be. Even the Liberal newspapers were critical of Ayrton; the Daily News, 10 July 1872, p. 5, claimed that his meddling would turn Kew ‘from a botanic into a bear garden’.

To Charles Lyell 12 July [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 12th

My dear Lyell I have been glad to see the enclosed & returned.— 2 It seems to me very cool in Agassiz to doubt the recent upheaval of Patagonia, without having visited any part; & he entirely misrepresents me in saying that I infer upheaval from the form of the land, as I trusted entirely to shells embedded & on the surface. It is simply monstrous to suppose that the terraces stretching on a dead level for leagues along the coast, & miles in breadth, & covered with beds of stratified gravel 10–30 feet in thickness, are due to subaerial denudation.3 As for the pond of salt water, twice or thrice the density of sea-water, & nearly dry, containing sea-shells in same relative proportions as on the adjoining coast, it almost passes my belief.4 Could there have been a lively midshipman on board, who in the morning stocked the pool from the adjoining coast? As for glaciation I will not venture to express any opinion, for when in S. America I knew nothing about glaciers, & perhaps attributed much icebergs which ought to be attributed to glaciers.5 On the other hand Agassiz seems to me mad about glaciers, & apparently never thinks of drift ice.— I did see one clear case of former greater extension of a glacier in T. del Fuego.—6 I hope that you are enjoying your holiday. My dear Lyell | Yours affectionately | Ch. Darwin American Philosophical Society (420)

296 1 2

3

4 5

6

July 1872

The year is established by the reference to J. L. R. Agassiz 1872a (see n. 2, below). Lyell evidently sent CD a copy of an article from the New York Tribune, 26 June 1872, in which some of Louis Agassiz’s conclusions regarding glacial action in Patagonia were published ( J. L. R. Agassiz 1872a). This article was reprinted in Nature in two parts, 11 and 18 July 1872 ( J. L. R. Agassiz 1872b), but the reference cannot be to Agassiz 1872b as the part of the paper describing the topics mentioned by CD was not published until 18 July. Agassiz was a member of the deep-sea dredging expedition to South America aboard the US coast survey steamer Hassler from December 1871 to August 1872 (E. C. Agassiz 1885, 2: 697–764). In March 1872, while the Hassler was anchored off Cliff End in the Gulf of San Mathias, Patagonia, Agassiz made observations on the tertiary deposits of Patagonia that were inconsistent with CD’s view (see J. L. R. Agassiz 1872a, pp. 1–2). Agassiz considered the voyage an opportunity to test evolutionary theory (Lurie 1959, p. 106). For Agassiz’s observations on the salt-water lake, see J. L. R. Agassiz 1872a, p. 2. Agassiz argued that the whole southern extremity of South America exhibited the effects of glacial action, and that the angled scratches and furrows in the rocks of Chatham Island showed that they could not have been made by floating ice but only from the pressure of an ice sheet moving from the south-east to the north-west ( J. L. R. Agassiz 1872a, p. 2). CD may refer to the glacier he described in ‘Distribution of the erratic boulders’, pp. 428–9.

From W. D. Fox 13 July [1872]1

Broadlands | Sandown July 13

My dear Darwin I have thirsted very much to see you again for some time past, and quite hoped to have been able to offer myself for a day, if you could have me next week. But our plans are now altered and we do not go thro London. I supposed we should on our way to Cheshire. What an age it is since we have met. 2 I should be so glad if you can find ten minutes spare time, in which to tell me about yourself and M rs Darwin and your family. Are you a Grandfather yet? We have much enjoyed our stay here since last November, tho’ owing to my lingering too long in the North, I got a nip in the Lungs which invalided me for some months.3 Now I wish we could induce you and Mrs Darwin to come and inhale our air here, when we return in the early Autumn. We have let our house here from next Tuesday for six weeks—and when that is over, we hope to return here. Do write me a few lines to Delamere Rectory Northwich Cheshire. Mrs Fox4 unites with me in kindest regards to Mrs Darwin (if not forgotten by her) & Believe me | Always yours affecly | W. Darwin Fox Tell me how Mrs Wedgewood5 is & remember me to her. DAR 164: 195 CD ANNOTATIONS Verso of last page: ‘Etty | p. 17 | Omit’6 pencil, del pencil

July 1872 1 2 3

4 5 6

297

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to W. D. Fox, 16 July [1872]. The last time CD and Fox met was in London on 13 February 1863 (see Correspondence vol. 11, letter to W. D. Fox, 9 March [1863] and n. 3). From 1870, Fox and his family spent winters at Broadlands on the Isle of Wight and the remainder of the year at Delamere Rectory in Cheshire (see Correspondence vol. 18, letter from W. D. Fox, 28 October [1870]); in 1872 they evidently extended their stay on the Isle of Wight due to Fox’s ill health. Ellen Sophia Fox, Fox’s wife. Caroline Sarah Wedgwood, CD’s sister. CD’s annotations do not directly relate to his reply to Fox (see letter to W. D. Fox, 16 July 1872), and are probably notes made in connection with Henrietta Emma Litchfield’s reading of proofs of Expression (see letter to H. E. Litchfield, 25 July 1872).

From J. V. Carus 14 July 1872 Leipzig, July 14th. 1872 My dear Sir, You would oblige me exceedingly if you would kindly let me know, if your Essay on Expression will be published soon.1 In consequence of an illness of my children and my wife,2 who overworked herself in nursing them, and as I am myself rather knocked up, I am sent by the doctors to some place to regain strength for all of us. Before that I must be present at our Naturalists’ Meeting here in Leipzig, so that I cannot go before the 18th. of August.3 If I could do some of the translation before that term, it would be very nice. We are now printing the new edition of the Origin. I rather think you are going a little too far in Mr Mivart’s objections. As far as I know it did very little harm here in Germany.4 In a very short time I shall send you a copy of my History of Zoology which is finished now, I am happy to say.5 You will see I had to go into very strange details. Believe me, | My dear Sir, | Yours ever sincerely, | J. Victor Carus DAR 161: 82 1 2 3 4

5

Carus was going to translate Expression into German (Carus trans. 1872b; see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to J. V. Carus, 8 October [1871]). Sophie Catherine Carus and J. V. Carus had three daughters (NDB s.v. Carus, Julius Viktor). The meeting of the German society of naturalists and physicians was held in Leipzig from 12 to 18 August 1872 (Tageblatt der 45. Versammlung deutscher Naturforscher und Aerzte in Leipzig). Carus had prepared the German translation of Origin 6th ed. (Bronn and Carus trans. 1872), in which CD had added a substantially new chapter seven in order to discuss the objections of St George Jackson Mivart and others to the theory of natural selection. It does not appear that Mivart’s Genesis of species (Mivart 1871a and 1871b) was translated into German. Carus’s history of zoology, which should have been completed in 1868, had been commissioned by the Historical Commission of the Royal Academy of Science in Munich for a series on the history of science in Germany (see Correspondence vol. 15, letter to J. V. Carus, 5 April 1867 and n. 2). There is a copy of Geschichte der Zoologie bis auf Joh. Müller und Charl. Darwin (History of zoology up to Johannes Müller and Charles Darwin; Carus 1872a) in the Darwin Library–Down.

298

July 1872

To John Denny 14 July [1872]1 July 14th Dr. Denny— Dear Sir I am much obliged for your le. & present of the Florist.—2 You have been scrupulous in your manipulation & memoranda; 3 but I am surprised that you have not protected as it appears the flowers from insects. I have found this indispensable in most of the [ various] experiments wh. I have made during last 5 year.— These have been made for a distinct purpose from yours, & varieties have been avoided, & when employed no record was kept of the transmittance of character from the parents, in this I grieve to say I cannot aid you.—4 Before long a tr. of Gs. work will be published by Ray Soc.5 He is as emphatic as you are but in an opposite direction; viz that there is no difference in power of transfer by the f & m.; but he made his [illeg] experiments on distinct species, in which difference of constitution w d not probably come into play.— As you have found out that the D. of Cornwall &c is fertile with its own pollen, 6 & with that of some other varieties, when it is sterile with other vars, you have made in my opinion a remarkable discovery. I assume that the four experimented on are vars. ie not different in a state of nature, & that you have made many trials.— 7 This discovery will, however, interest only a few of the more philosophical naturalists; & will I feel sure be easily lost to science, if published only in Hort. Journ. & without in much fuller detail than that given in the G. Chronicle.—8 Permit me, therefore, to urge on you to draw up a full account,— giving names of vars. (which were sterile with the D. of Cornwall &c) & reason for believing that they are vars— the number of trials made, both on the male & fem side &c—& send the account to some Botanical Journal. or Soc.— The Linnean Soc wd be the most appropriate; & your paper wd then be sent on to all the Scientific Soc. of Europe.— 9 I shd be glad to aid in draw attention to it by a letter to Nature. 10 If you will do this it wd be advisable perhaps I think to begin your paper by stating that you had discovered or raised, (as the case may be) vars of Pelargonium which were fertile with their own pollen &c &c &c, — & in so far partook of the character of true & distinct species— It wd further be well to give full details about the converse case of the Ivy-leaved P., in which a var has assumed an abnormal degree of fertility.— 11 In my Var. under Dom Vol. 2. p. 108 you will find an account of the sole [ acknowledged] case, ever recorded in Nicotiana.—12 I hope that you will excuse the familiarity with which I have written to you & I remain— | C. D. ADraftS DAR 96: 114–15

July 1872 1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8

9 10 11 12

299

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from John Denny, 12 July 1872. Denny had sent CD the issues of the Florist containing Denny 1872b (see letter from John Denny, 12 July 1872 and n. 5). CD later cited this paper in Cross and self fertilisation, p. 142. In Denny 1872b, Denny described the methods of keeping written records as well as the tools required when cross-breeding pelargoniums by artificial fertilisation. See letter from John Denny, 12 July 1871 and n. 9. CD had suggested that the Ray Society translate Gärtner 1849 (see Correspondence vol. 12, letter to Ray Society, [before 4 November 1864]). Although the Ray Society minutes for 3 February 1865 record a resolution by the Council to employ a translator for Gärtner 1849, the work was never undertaken (see Curle 1954, p. 26). See letter from John Denny, 12 July 1872. For a brief account of the crosses Denny attempted with the pelagonium varieties ‘Surpasse Beauté de Suresnes’ and ‘Duke of Cornwall’, see Denny 1872b, p. 52. Denny’s paper ‘The relative influence of parentage in flowering plants’ had been published in the Gardeners’ Chronicle (Denny 1872a). It was published again, with no revisions, in the Journal of Horticulture on 11 July (Denny 1872c) and in the Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society of London (Denny 1872d). There is no paper by Denny in the Journal of the Linnean Society (Botany), nor is there any record of one having been read to the society. In the event, Denny did not publish a fuller account of his experiments. Denny had referred to this variety of ivy-leaved pelargonium as Peltatum elegans. See letter to John Denny, 9 July 1872 and n. 2. In Variation 2: 108, CD described experiments by Joseph Gottlieb Kölreuter that showed that when five varieties of common tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) were crossed with one another the offspring were as fertile as their parents, but when these five varieties were crossed with a different species, N. glutinosa, the resulting hybrids were ‘very sterile’ in four of the varieties but less so in the fifth, var. perennis. CD concluded that this showed that the ‘sexual capacity of this one variety [had] certainly been in some degree modified, so as to approach in nature that of N. glutinosa’ (ibid., pp. 108–9). For the value CD placed on these experiments, see also Correspondence vol. 10, letter to T. H. Huxley, 18 December [1862].

From F. C. Donders 14 July 1872 Utrecht, 14 July 1872 My dear and most honoured Sir,— I am very much obliged for your kind letter, and delayed only to answer, whilst I could not tell you, if I was to come over to England.1 Now I am exceedingly fatigued by practical work, my friend Dr. Snellen, my partner in practice having been obliged to take a rather long holiday, and I feel that after his return—at the 16 of July—I have to spend a few days quietly near the sea, for seeing if I become able to support the fatigues of a Congress (opthalmological) at the 1st. of August in London.2 Certainly, I hope so, and in the case I come in London, I will be most happy to avail my-self of your kind invitation to pass a day in your house and in your family. So we would find plenty time to speak about some physiological questions, if you like to do so. I suppose that my friend Bowman will like very much to come also. 3 I think, it is not necessary to tell you again that it will be a pleasure and a great honour to me, at any time, to do for facilitating your physiological studies any thing

300

July 1872

I am able to do. I am always learning by trying to answer to your questions and I would do it not less by reading over some chapters of your book.—4 With the greatest consideration and sincere attachment | Yours very truly | Donders DAR 162: 233 1 2

3

4

See letter to F. C. Donders, 17 June 1872. Hermann Snellen was an assistant physician at the Netherlands Hospital for Eye Patients (Nederlandsch Gasthuis voor Ooglijders), where Donders was director. The fourth international ophthalmological congress was held in London in early August 1872. Donders attended the congress; his portrait was reproduced as the frontispiece of the Report of the fourth international ophthalmological congress (1873). CD expected that Donders might visit on either the 30 or 31 July (see letter to J. T. Gulick, 28 July [1872] and n. 3). Donders, however, did not arrive in London until 30 July; he stayed with William Bowman until probably 7 or 8 August (see letter from William Bowman, 31 July 1872). There is no evidence that they made a visit to Down. Donders had offered to read the proofs of any part of Expression that referred to physiology (see letter from F. C. Donders, 17 April 1872).

From Hubert Airy [before 15] July 18721

13. Eliot Place. Blackheath. S.E. 1872. July.

My dear Sir In laying before you the opinions which I have been led to form concerning the probable origin of the existing orders of Leaf-arrangement, I must premise that I have not yet studied closely any foreign or fossil botany (except a few cactuses and lepidodendrons), and that my facts are only facts of observation among our ordinary English plants, and facts of experiment by means of models. I am aware that a much wider investigation is required, before my theory can be considered safe and sound; and I only put forward this first sketch by way of hoisting my colours. I shall be very sorry if my letter proves tedious and unsatisfactory to you, but I feel that I must send it to you, as a schoolboy sends up his verses to the Headmaster. 2 1. Our problem is, to discover the origin,—the uses,—the relations,—of the various orders of leaf-arrangement.— To us who accept the theory of Evolution as giving good food to our minds, the question naturally suggests itself,—have we among existing leaf-orders any direct representative of the ancestral order (or disorder) from which we may suppose the whole variety of leaf-arrangement to have been by means of natural selection derived? And in seeking for an answer to this question, we naturally look to the simplest of existing leaf-orders, to see if it will give any solution of the problem. That simplest order is the alternate distichous order, defined in Phyllotaxy by the fraction 21 , exemplified most conspicuously in the elm and beech. I shall endeavour to show that there are reasons for thinking that this order may have been the original of all the spiral orders;3 and that a distichous order, not alternate but collateral, may have given rise to all the whorled orders. 4 It will then appear that the original of all may have been an earlier distichous order, in which there was no definite relation

July 1872

301

between individual leaves of opposite rows, but which could admit of such definite relation in two ways, the alternate and the collateral, and so could give rise to two divergent types of leaf-arrangement, the spiral and the whorl. 2. In considering the series of spiral leaf-orders denoted by the series of fractions 1 1 2 3 , , , &c.,5 we see that one may be made to pass into another by a twist of 2 3 5 8 the axis that carries the leaves. The whole series is bounded by its first two terms 12 and 13 ; and a twist of the axis, such as to change the order 12 into the order 13 , will have carried the system through all the more complicated orders of the series.— The idea is thus suggested, that all these orders may have been derived from an original 1 -order by different degrees of twist in the axis. (It was this consideration that first 2 hinted the theory to me) 3. We have now to consider what conditions exist and have existed, which would demand and obtain such a twist in the axis and such a modification of an original distichous order.— Whatever may have been the causes that moulded and modified some earlier order into those which now survive, I am convinced that we must look for the actual operation of those causes, not in the mature twig, but in the bud. For it is in the bud that we find the effect of those causes most manifest and most complete; it is in the bud that we find the most perfect and regular arrangement of leaves, stipules, scales, compact and close; while, as the bud developes into the twig, the leaves become separated by long internodes, the stem often gets a twist, the stalks of the leaves are contorted to present the blades favourably to the light, and the order that was so beautifully exhibited in the bud is scarcely to be recognized under the extravagances of the grown twig. Accepting this principle, we have to ask what advantage the bud enjoys in virtue of this compact and regular arrangement of its embryo leaves.— It is evident that by the condensation space is economized, the bud is shorter and more spherical, retires more under the protection of the foster-leaf from the heat of summer, is less exposed to chance violence, offers a smaller surface to superficial dangers,—above all, acquires the shape that enables it best to endure unsheltered yet unscathed the long frosts of winter and especially the sudden alternations of heat and cold, showing less of a salient point from which its vital heat may pass off by radiation, and clothing itself more uniformly and equally on all sides with scale overlapping scale, closing all inlets against the enemy. Accordingly I believe that frost has been the chief agent in moulding an earlier and less economical order (such as 21 ) into the beautifully condensed orders now seen in the 5-angled bud of the oak, the 13-ranked (?) cone of the Scotch fir, or the multitudinous head of the sunflower. 4. We have now to ask, what evidence there is pointing to an original order 12 . The fact that this is the simplest of surviving orders is perhaps unimportant, except as giving us a hint of the direction in which to look; for it is conceivable that the more complex might have been the earlier, in a case where the complexity is not of organization but of geometrical position. Much more important is the fact that the order 12 prevails especially in the Gramineæ, which are comparatively a tropical, gregarious, and low-developed group; 6 while

302

July 1872

in the firs, which are pre-eminently alpine in their habits, and bravers of cold in high latitudes, we find the greatest condensations of leaves, scales, or bracts. To trace the conditions which have allowed the elm of our temperate zone to retain its simple 12 order, while the tropical tree-ferns have been compelled into an order that rivals the complexity of the conifers, would be a difficult but a most interesting research. These and many other apparent anomalies would lead us to look to some other cause than cold. Heat may have been the enemy in the case of the tree-ferns, as it probably is in the case of tropical bulbs and other condensations. The many star-like weeds that lie flat on the surface of the ground and so escape the close-cropping lips gums and teeth of their graminivorous foes, may perhaps owe their many-rayed complexity in part to that danger, which practically sets a premium on shortness of bud and stem. 5. There is no lack of instances of survival of the order 21 pure and simple. Elm, beech, lime, mulberry, and grasses, as far as I have observed, never deviate from it.— But are there any instances of the transition from 21 to more complex orders?— Yes, many: a fact full of interest and importance. One of the best is seen in the sweet chestnut, where (at least in the lateral twigs) the first half-dozen leaves are in order 12 , and the remainder fall into 25 or something very near it. That is to say, (as I interpret the fact) the exposed summit of the bud has felt the need of condensation (in the course of ages) as protection against cold; while the lowest part of the bud, pinched and protected between the parent twig-stem and the foster leaf-stalk, has retained its (supposed) original order 12 . The same phenomenon is seen in the Portugal laurel; but here, as a rule, it is not till after two or three years’ growth that the terminal shoot of a lateral twig deserts the 12 and assumes the 25 , though in favourable leading situations 25 may be seen in lateral twigs of the first year. In the common laurel, it is only when the terminal shoot of a lateral bough of several years’ standing becomes important enough to be considered a leading shoot, that it deserts its parental order 12 and affects 25 . The vertical leaders often show 25 from the first. In the nut, the vertical leaves are generally in order 25 , and the lateral twigs in order 1 In the ivy, the creeping shoots   ground or against a wall, are in order 12 , but 2 where they branch out into the air, the order is 25 or more complex. The above instances agree in presenting the complex order in the buds that occupy the most exposed situations, while they retain the (supposed) ancestral order 12 in the less exposed, lateral, buds. A common greenhouse cactus often contains a complete epitome of Phyllotaxy in a single plant or in a single shoot: but here the succession of orders is reversed, for it is the lowest part of the shoot that presents the most complex order, as 218 , passing higher up successively into 135 , 38 , 25 , 13 , and lastly becoming a flat stem with marginal buds in order 12 . Here I suppose the earliest and oldest part of the bud has been most in need of condensation: there is no leaf-stalk (nothing but a microscopic scale) 7 to prevent it from leaving the old simple order 12 ; and the younger part, not exposed to the same dangers as the older, and probably formed and developed in warmer

July 1872

303

weather, reverts to the (supposed) ancestral order 12 . 6. I think we have additional evidence to the same effect, in the arrangement of rootlets on roots. Very many plants, such as radish, spinach, beet, mullein, sowthistle, shepherd’s-purse, land-cress, groundsel, black nightshade, &c., in which the leaves are in order 25 or 38 (nearly), present two rows of rootlets on the main roots, often with evident alternation near the tip. (The commom dock has three rows: parsnip and carrot have four, which are probably to be regarded as two pairs of rows: sycamore sometimes has four: many seem to be irregular. With these exceptions, as far as I have observed, the prevalent rootlet-order is distichous.) These two rows of rootlets are found in line with the first pair of leaves (seed-leaves) on the stem.— That there is some ancient homology between stem and root is shown by the gemmation of buds from roots in some plants, and the striking of rootlets from stems in others; and though the aërial rootlets of ivy teach us (I think) that rootlets are not homologous with leaves, yet the arrangement of those same aërial rootlets in two rows, not indeed in line with the two rows of leaves, but in line with the two chief stipular ligneous bundles, appertaining to those leaves, on either side,—teaches us that there is some close relation between leaves and rootlets, at least as regards their position; and I think we must take the prevalence of the distichous order in rootlets as an indication of a former prevalence of the same order in leaves. Supposing leaves and rootlets to have had one and the same order at some ancient date, we can see ample reason why the former should have gained a change of order while the latter still retained the original. It is certain that the root, hidden in the earth, has not been exposed, in the course of past ages, to the same dangers as the stem above ground. Sudden changes of temperature, from mid-day sun-heat to midnight frost under a clear sky, are smoothed down before they penetrate many inches below the surface of the earth, conduction of heat is very slow there, and the root has had no need to pack its rootlets (supposing it possible) in a dense and carefullyshielded bud to enable them to meet such changes. Rootlets again are not exposed to chance blows— In fact, the only similarity of conditions (in rootlets and leaves) is that both have had similar need (if any) of that “perfect and rapid distribution” round their axis, which Mr. Chauncey Wright regards as so important,8 —to secure the surrounding aliment uncrowded, and any effect resulting from this need might be expected to be equal in the two cases.— We might fairly expect, then, to find the old leaf-order preserved, or at least indicated, by the arrangement of the rootlets on the root; while in the leaves on the stem we must look for the result of millions of years’ struggle with the hardships and difficulties of life above ground. “The old order changeth, giving place to new.” 9 7. Now comes the interesting question, can we show by experiment that the less simple orders, 13 , 25 , 38 &c., do admit of formation from a preexisting order 12 by force of longitudinal compression or contraction? —I think we can.— Take a number of equal spheres (oak-galls for instance) to represent unformed embryo leaves, as they may be supposed to exist in the earliest infancy of the bud: thus: attach them by pins in alternate order of 12 to the

304

July 1872

opposite edges of a long stretched india-rubber band, the elastic contraction of which is to do duty for our supposed force of longitudinal compression. Now give the band a very slight twist, (to determine the direction of twist in the subsequent contraction) and relax tension:— the two rows of spheres will roll up into a tight complex order, See page 15. Fig. I.10 which, if the spheres are in close contact with the axis, will be nearly the order 13 , plainly tristichous,11 with three very steep spirals; and if the spheres are set a little away from the axis, the order becomes condensed into 52 with wonderful precision and stability. (It is really startling to see the original two rows flash in an instant into a perfect 5-ranked model of an oak-bud, as it were, which can then be thrown about the room without dislocation of any of its members.) In the model it is easy to see that further contraction, with increased distance of the spheres from the axis, will produce the orders 38 , 135 , 218 &c. in succession; and that these successive orders are successive maxima of stability; but the limits of the elasticity of our band make it difficult to realize the higher condensations. It is also easy to see in the model, that the necessary sequence of these successive steps of condensation, determined by the geometry of the case, does necessarily exclude the non-existent orders 14 , 27 , 37 , 49 &c. Perhaps the following figure will aid in setting forth these important points. Fig I is a drawing of the complex order assumed by our two rows of oak-galls, when in close contact with the axis, as described on p. 13.12 The three steep spirals there mentioned are 1, 4, 7, 10, 13: 2, 5, 8, 11, 14: and 3, 6, 9, 12. (This is the nearest approach to the order 31 that can be obtained by mere vertical contraction from an original order 12 . To make these three ranks accurately vertical, we must have the agency of some auxiliary force, which may be advantage in respect of nutrition enjoyed by leaves in the same vertical rank, (an advantage which Mr. Chauncey Wright regards as all-important in fixing the cyclic feature in leaf-orders,) or, more probably I think, may be advantage of protection and co-adaptation between successive leaves in the same vertical, while in the bud,— the mid-rib of every leaf lying in the trough prepared for it by the inward fold of the leaf below.) The two original ranks have become the spirals 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13: and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14. Now let us see what must happen under further longitudinal contraction.— Contraction cannot take place without some increase of girth: the spheres (which we take to represent mobile leaf-germs in the forming bud) must be pushed outwards from the axis (the bud-stem growing thicker as it grows

July 1872

305

shorter,) just so far as to accommodate the descent of their fellows above. Then it is plain that Nos. 6 and 1 will squeeze together between 3 and 4, and will found an approximately vertical rank: 9 and 4 will found a second: 7 and 2 a third: 10 and 5 a fourth: and 8 and 3 a fifth: and thus we shall have a new system with five ranks, the 2 order, the most compact and stable and prevalent of all. 5 Under still further compression or contraction, 6 will slip away to the right of 1, and 4 to the left, and 9 will descend between 6 and 4 onto 1:— a similar process goes on all round; and the result is again a new system, with eight ranks, in order 38 . The next stage of compression will bring down 14 between 9 and 6 onto 1, and will produce the order 135 .— It must be remembered that the first stage of compression would bring 14 onto 9 (order 25 ); and the next would bring 14 onto 6 (order 38 ); while at the same time 9 (side by side with 6) has descended upon 1; and then the meeting of 14 and 1 between 9 and 6 is seen to follow at once in the third stage. In like manner, the fourth stage would produce the order 218 : but this is beyond our figure. —Now for the exclusion of non-existent orders.— It is evident in our figure (I) that no amount or degree of compression will avail to bring N o. 5 down upon No. 1— That is, we cannot have an order 14 . No. 8 cannot come down onto 1: it would slip between 5 and 6 onto 3, with 6 and a lower one between 1 and 3. That is, we cannot have an order 37 or 27 . No. 10 will descend upon 5, and then upon 2, but not upon 1. So we cannot have 4 . 9 No. 12 will slip onto 4, as 9 onto 1, to make the 38 order, and in the next stage 12 will slip between 4 and 7 onto a lower one, (as 14 between 6 and 9 onto 1) to make the 135 order. So we cannot have a stable order 114 . In short, the only stable orders which will arise by compression of the system shown in Fig. 1. are those defined by the convergent series ( 12 . 13 .): 25 , 38 , 135 , 218 &c.: and these are the very orders that have long been recognized as occurring in nature. Surely this is more than a coincidence. At any rate it is proved that the less simple orders do admit of formation from a pre-existing order 12 by force of longitudinal contraction. 8. To illustrate the possible derivation of the whorled orders from an original distichous order (not alternate, but opposite or collateral,) we require another model, with the two rows of oak-galls arranged thus along the band.— Relax tension, and the system contracts into the crucial or opposite order with perfect accuracy, and perfect stability. Whorls of 2 are found passing into whorls of 3 in fuchsia, sycamore, lilac, maple &c. (especially in shoots growing from a stump or stool). Whorls of 3 are found passing into whorls of 4 in lemon scented verbena. Hence it appears that whorls of 2 involve those of 3 and 4; and I think experiment would/will show that the transition was/is easy under longitudinal compression with due distance of the spheres from the axis, but I have not yet pursued the experiment so far.

306

July 1872

We naturally ask, why have we no surviving instance of the distichous collateral order, as we have of the distichous alternate? I think the answer will be found in the manifest instability of the former, compared with the latter. The former, under a force of longitudinal contraction, will pass into the crucial order 13 (nettle, ash, &c); and, under a force of lateral pressure, will pass into the distichous alternate, the members of one row finding accommodation in the intervals of the opposite row: the distichous collateral order has no economic value in its own right, but only in subservience to one of those two, the crucial or the alternate, according as the pressing need is one of longitudinal or of lateral economy. The distichous alternate order, on the contrary, is manifestly stable and economical under lateral pressure, and to this advantage I believe it owes its survival. What happens to it under a superior force of longitudinal contraction, I have already considered, and have shown that the whole of the spiral orders may have had their origin thereby. In that part of my subject I had to confine my attention to the need of longitudinal contraction: but in a general view of all leaf orders we must recognize that the need is, in general terms, a need of economy of space, a need of contraction in the bud in all its dimensions: this need of general contraction resolves itself into two forces, one longitudinal, the other lateral, (a force of contraction and a force of constriction,) opposing one another and balancing one another, according to the demands of the slowly varying conditions of life. The shape of the bud is the visible expression of this equilibrium between these two forces; and according as one or the other prevails, so will the embryo leaves be arranged in few ranks (2 or 3) in a long narrow bud or in many ranks (5, 8, 13, 21 &c) in a short thick bud. Compare the need of lateral economy in crowded grasses, with the need of longitudinal economy in the winter-braving wind-bitten bud of our English oak. (Looking at Fig I, (p 15.)14 we see that 4 is not exactly over 1, but a little to the left—and after the first stage of contraction, 6 will not be exactly over 1, but a little to the right (because it has to squeeze between 4 and 3, and 4 is higher than 3). So after the 2nd. stage of contraction, 9 will not be exactly over 1, but a very little to the left.— And so on, through successive stages. Now, I have considered, in the case of 13 , how some other utility than that of contraction might step in to ensure exactly vertical ranks: but I think we very often find that very inexactness remaining uncorrected in nature. I venture to say that it is difficult to find a specimen that is exactly in order 25 , or exactly in order 38 , &c.— Again and again I have found myself baffled in trying to assign its proper order to a plant, and have been obliged to content myself with calling it 2 “nearly” or 38 “nearly.”— see how generally the five ranks of the oak-bud present 5 a decided twist: and the oak-bud is strikingly regular. Surely these facts support the views put forward.) To sum up, I suppose first, as the original of all existing leaf-orders, a distichous arrangement, somewhat irregular (Fig. II. a. resolving itself into two regular modifications, the alternate b. and the opposite (or collateral) c. From the former are

July 1872

307

derived all the alternate or spiral orders, and from the latter, all the whorled orders.

Beyond the scope of the present inquiry, but suggested by it, are questions concerning the nature of leaves and their relation to the stem from which they spring and to the bud-axis which supports them. Leaves sometimes produce buds at their edges, at the tips of their veins, as in the “tree of life.” (I have not seen a “tree of life”, but only one of its leaves, and am assuming that its leaves are not such false leaves, real stems, as those of the butcher’s broom.)15 The modified leaves which form the carpels in the fruit of plants produce ovules at their edges.— Have we, in these facts, a hint that the original form of vegetable life was nothing more than a leaf, bearing young leaves at its two edges, and therefore naturally in distichous order? How often the veins of leaves are alternate! Is the ovule a leaf, with the gift of marginal gemmation and continuous elongation? Is the bud a leaf, with the same gift, under protection of a barren foster-leaf ? Is every twig a leaf, augmented by the roots of the leaves it bears? Is the whole tree nothing but a leaf, made huge by the persistent roots and bones of all its progeny? I do not know if these questions have been asked and answered already. I do not see how the tree is to be understood, unless they are all answered in the affirmative: though, as they stand, with so little support, I fear you will condemn them as very wild.— In that case I must fall back on my previous pages, and hope for your favourable opinion on the narrower ground of leaf-order rather than the wider field of leaf-nature. Believe me, my dear Sir, with great respect, | Yours very sincerely | Hubert Airy Charles Darwin Esqr. M.A., F.R.S., F.L.S. | &c. &c.

308

July 1872

P.S. I hope I may have an opportunity some day of showing you the behaviour of my models—16 DAR 159: 16 CD ANNOTATIONS17 5.9 scale . . . scale,] ‘Meehan’18 added pencil 5.10 Accordingly . . . sunflower. 5.13] cross in margin pencil 7.1 Much more . . . bracts. 7.4] scored pencil; ‘Not grass’ added pencil 7.7 These . . . condensations. 7.10] scored pencil 15.1 Supposing] after horizontal line pencil 18.13 In the model . . . succession; 18.15] ‘enlarge Distychous’ added pencil 41.1 To sum up, . . . orders. 41.4] ‘Is distichous supported by cotyledon’ added pencil 43.5 Have we, . . . alternate! 43.7] ‘I doubt wisdom of insisting this, beyond [ infer]’ added pencil 1 2

3 4 5 6 7

8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

16 17

The date is established from the reference in the letter from Hubert Airy, 24 July 1872, to having received a letter from CD dated ‘the 15th’. After reading Chauncey Wright’s paper on phyllotaxy (see letter from Hubert Airy, 31 May 1872 and n. 1), Airy may have asked in a letter of 7 June 1872 whether he could send his own views to CD (Airy’s letter of 7 June 1872 is extant but severely damaged and illegible; see, however, letter to Hubert Airy?, 9 June [1872?]). CD later communicated Airy’s paper to the Royal Society of London (see Airy 1873). Alternate distichous: placed on opposite sides of a stem on a different line in two vertical ranks. Spiral: as though wound round an axis. ( Jackson 1900.) Collateral distichous: standing side by side in two vertical ranks. Whorl: in a circle round an axis. ( Jackson 1900.) For the significance of this series (the Fibonacci sequence), see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Chauncey Wright, 1 August 1871 and n. 15. The family Gramineae, now known as Poaceae, includes cereals, grasses, and bamboos. They are found in a wide range of habitats, including high latitudes and altitudes. Scale: a flattened, membranous, more or less circular plate of cellular tissue, usually a rudimentary or degenerate leaf, as the covering of leaf-buds of deciduous trees, the bracts of catkins, etc. (OED). See Wright 1871b, p. 389, where Wright discussed the arrangement that ‘would effect the most thorough and rapid distribution of the leaves around the stem’. CD scored this passage in his copy of of Wright 1871b (Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL). Airy misquotes Alfred Tennyson’s ‘The passing of Arthur’ from Idylls of the King, in which King Arthur proclaimed as he was dying, ‘The old order changeth, yielding place to new’ (Tennyson 1859). ‘See page 15. Fig. I.’ was added by Airy at the bottom of the page and refers to page 15 of his letter and to the second diagram in section 7. Tristichous: arranged in three vertical ranks ( Jackson 1900). ‘p. 13’ refers to page 13 of Airy’s letter, which encompasses the first part of section 7 (from ‘Now comes’ to ‘axis, will be’). Fig. 1 is the first diagram in this section. Crucial: cruciate or cross shaped. See n. 10, above. The tree of life (arborvitae) is Thuja occidentalis, a North American coniferous evergreen. Butcher’s broom is Ruscus aculeatus, an evergreen shrub that has cladodes rather than leaves. Cladode: a branch of a single internode simulating a leaf ( Jackson 1900). Airy was the first to develop experiments using hard spheres to produce physical models, and to see the role of phyllotaxy as a solution to a packing problem (Kuhlemeier 2007, pp. 143–4). CD’s annotations are evidently notes for his reply to Airy, which has not been found, but see the letter from Hubert Airy, 16 July 1872.

July 1872 18

309

Thomas Meehan challenged the view that the purpose of bud scales was to protect the tender parts beneath in Meehan 1871. There is an annotated copy of Meehan 1871 in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.

From Hubert Airy 16 July 1872 13. Eliot Place. | Blackheath S.E. 1872. July 16. My dear Sir Please accept my hearty thanks for your kindness and patience in reading my pages of MS, and for the valuable suggestions you have given me. 1 I must take time to reflect on what you say, and will not presume to offer any hasty remarks in this letter on the points you raise, beyond a word on one of them:—where I speak of “contraction” of the bud-axis, I do not mean a contraction taking place in the individual bud, after the axis has once been developed; but a contraction, the result of successive favourable modifications in the course of ages, from an ancestral uncontracted form. Thus the elastic cord in my mechanism represents what I suppose to have been the operation of ages of favourable modification, not of a force that takes full effect in the life-time of a single bud.— But I recognize,—and thank you for pointing out,—that the expression is one that might be mistaken, and that needs explanation. I am very glad indeed that you have suggested the two cotyledons of Dicot s. as supporting my view.—2 In the first notes that I put together on the subject, that fact stands first of all: but I was restrained from stating it in my letter to you3 by the consideration that the next leaves immediately take the crucial position in a plane at right angles to the first two. That arrangement, however, would seem imperatively required by the conditions of pressure between the first two leaves. So I shall gladly fortify my position anew with that argument.— But I will not let myself touch upon any further points at present. Only let me express my growing conviction that the true theory of phyllotaxy will be found to give most convincing illustration and proof of the great theory of Evolution. Thank you for your very kind invitation to call upon you— I shall look forward with great pleasure to the day when I may do so, and I hope by that time I may have brought my arguments into a form more deserving of your attention. Believe me, my dear Sir, with great respect, | Yours very truly Hubert Airy DAR 159: 17 1 2

3

CD’s reply has not been found, but see the letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872. Cotyledons: the first leaves of the embryo. Dicots : Dicotyledons, or plants of the class denoted by their possession of two cotyledons. ( Jackson 1900.) Airy argued that leaf-order was most perfect in the bud, where the compact arrangement of its embryo leaves would be advantageous to a plant’s survival (Airy 1873, p. 177). See letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872.

310 To J. V. Carus 16 July 1872

July 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 16 1872

My dear Sir I am sorry to hear of the illness in your family, which is the greatest misery a man can suffer.1 I am not surprized that you want rest, for no man I shd think has done so much hard work as you have. My book on expression will be about equal to 400 pages of the same size & type as the “Descent”. I have corrected about half in first proofs, & I will today write to the printers to send me an extra copy of the second proofs whenever I get them. These I will transmit to you.2 There will be 21 wood-blocks & 7 plates printed by the heliotype process. 3 Your publisher will have to procure these ready to bind in vol. in London, & the cost of 1000 copies of the 7 plates I conjecture will be about £50. I am glad you have finished the Origin: I can assure you that Mivart’s book produced a great effect here & in America. I was induced to discuss at some length the benefit of incipient structures, partly because it gave me a good occasion to introduce many cases of gradation. 4 When next you write to yr publisher, will you ask him to send me a copy of your translation of the Descent with one of the Origin, as I gave away the German Descent to Dr Klein.5 Please to remark that I do not by any means vouch that my Expression book is worth yr translating. Very many thanks for yr intended present of the Hist. of Zoology—6 My dear Sir | yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS(A) Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Slg. Darmstaedter Lc 1859 Darwin, Charles, Bl. 84/85 1 2 3 4 5

6

See letter from J. V. Carus, 14 July 1872. Carus had translated Descent into German (Carus trans. 1871) and wanted to begin the German translation of Expression (Carus trans. 1872b). See letter to G. C. Wallich, 24 February [1872], n. 3. See letter from J. V. Carus, 14 July 1872 and n. 4. Eduard Friedrich Koch was director of the publishing house E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung of Stuttgart, publisher of the German translation of the sixth edition of Origin (Bronn and Carus trans. 1872) and of Descent (Carus trans. 1871). CD probably knew Edward Emanuel Klein through Francis Galton (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Francis Galton, 21 November 1871 and n. 4). Carus 1872a. See letter from J. V. Carus, 14 July 1872 and n. 5.

To W. D. Fox 16 July [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 16.

My dear Fox I am very sorry to hear that your lungs have been a little affected. 2 It is indeed a

July 1872

311

long time since we have met, & I much wish you could have paid us a visit; though, as I grow older I am able to talk with anyone or stand any excitement less & less. It is very odd, for I can work slowly for 3 or 4 hours daily, if nothing disturbs me.— I am now correcting proofs of a small book on the Expression of the Emotions in Man & animals.— My wife is fairly well; but I cannot say much for my children; two of my sons being now in Germany for health sake.3 Henrietta has no child, & I hope never may; for she is extremely delicate.4 Erasmus is moderately well, & so is Caroline. 5 Here is a full bulletin of health! Many thanks for your kind invitation; but I never feel up to visit anywhere. A Cambridge man, a friend of one of my boys, was visiting here lately, & he is, an ardent collector of Beetles; & old days with you were so vividly recalled by hearing about Panagæus! I wonder whether Albert Way is alive.— 6 Farewell my dear old Friend | Yours most sincerely | Ch. Darwin Pray give my & Mrs. Darwin’s very kind remembrances to Mrs. Fox.—7 American Philosophical Society (B/D25.269) 1 2 3

4 5 6

7

The year is established by CD’s reference to the proofs of Expression; he finished correcting them on 22 August 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). See letter from W. D. Fox, 13 July [1872]. The failure of George Howard Darwin’s health in 1872 led him to seek a cure in the spa town of Homburg in Germany that year (F. Darwin 1916, p. xiv). He was probably accompanied by Horace Darwin, although Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) indicates that they returned home by different routes: an entry on 2 August 1872 reads, ‘Horace from Ireland’, and one on 8 August reads, ‘G. came from Switz’. Horace’s poor health is confirmed by CD’s Account books–cash account (Down House MS); on 29 June 1872 £12 was paid for ‘Horace Darwin for Malvern Water-cure.’ Henrietta Emma Darwin had married Richard Buckley Litchfield on 31 August 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, Appendix II). Erasmus Alvey Darwin had visited Down between 6 and 9 July (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). CD also refers to Caroline Sarah Wedgwood. CD often associated Fox and Albert Way, his fellow-students at Cambridge, with the hunt for the beetle Panagaeus crux-major (see Correspondence vol. 1, letters to W. D. Fox, May 1832, [7–11] March 1835, and 15 February 1836; Autobiography, p. 63). The Cambridge man has not been identified. Ellen Sophia Fox.

To Gerard Krefft 17 July 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 17. 1872 Dear Sir I am much obliged for yr note & the newspaper together with yr excellent illustrations.1 I have read the article with great interest. It would be presumptuous on my part, from want of knowledge, to express any decided opinion with respect to yr conclusion. Nevertheless, it seems to me scarcely possible to read all yr statements & reasonings & doubt that you are correct. Your conclusion also agrees with that of

312

July 1872

Prof. Flower & others. It is lamentable that Prof. Owen shd shew so little consideration for the judgment of other naturalists, & shd adhere in so bigotted a manner to whatever he has said.2 This is a great evil, as it makes one doubtful on other points about which he has written. The Cuvierian principle may evidently be extended much too far: 3 Toxodon is a good instance of this, as no one I believe has ventured to surmise from the skull, whether it was an aquatic or terrestrial animal.4 I am extremely obliged for yr kind offer of assistance; & should I ever want (which is not the case at present) information or specimens from Australia, I will apply to you. I am the more obliged for yr kindness as, if you will allow me to say so, I have long respected your able & indefatigable labours in the cause of natural science. Pray believe me | dear Sir | yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin LS(A) Mitchell Library, Sydney (MLMSS 5828) 1 2 3

4

See letter from Gerard Krefft, 15 May 1872 and n. 1. CD refers to Krefft’s review of Richard Owen’s work on Thylacoleo carnifex. See letter from Gerard Krefft, 15 May 1872 and n. 1. For William Henry Flower’s view of T. carnifex, see Flower 1868. Owen had stated that he was following Georges Cuvier’s principle that the first task in the study of a fossil animal was to explore the form of the molars to determine whether the animal was a carnivore or herbivore (Owen 1870, p. 228). His argument against Krefft 1866 and Flower 1868, however, was based on function not structure. Owen did not claim that the dentition of Thylacoleo carnifex resembled that of carnivores, but that the incisors in T. carnifex evidently had a laniary (tearing) function; he then compared the wear patterns in functionally similar teeth. Owen had described the cranium of the Toxodon collected by CD during the Beagle voyage; from the position of its nasal openings he had deduced that it was aquatic (see Fossil Mammalia, pp. 17, 21–3).

From F. E. Abbot 18 July 1872 Office of The Index, | Toledo, Ohio July 18, 1872. Mr. Darwin: My dear sir, I am honored and flattered by your thinking the Index worth subscribing to again, and for the $5.00 you are so very kind as to enclose in the letter just received from you,1 the paper shall be sent, not only the two years you mention, but as long as you shall be willing to accept it—which I hope will be many, many years. Without this last remittance from you, it was my intention to continue sending the paper indefinitely: for you have paid for it many times over by your kind permission to use your expression concerning the “Truths for the Times”. This has been worth a great deal to me; and I cannot tell you how delighted I was by your letter of January 8th, saying that you were pleased with the manner in which I had introduced your name. 2 I can never without deep gratitude remember your generosity to me in this matter. Although I cannot certainly be of much importance to you in any way, I cannot help

July 1872

313

saying that your kind treatment has called forth sentiments towards yourself that I cannot venture to express. But there is one young man in America who not only admires, but loves, Mr. Darwin. It is very pleasing to know you entertained Col. Higginson, and enjoyed him. I do not know any American who stands higher at home in the esteem of his countrymen.3 He is every inch a man. Your flattering reference to my lecture on “The God of Science” is exceedingly gratifying.4 How earnestly we all long for “more light” on that great subject! Most respectfully yours, | Francis E. Abbot. DAR 159: 4 1 2

3 4

See letter to F. E. Abbot, 2 July 1872 and n. 1. See letter to F. E. Abbot, 8 January 1872 and n. 1. For Abbot’s reasons for wishing to include CD’s view of ‘Truths for the times’ (Abbot [1870]) in the Index, see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from F. E. Abbot, 1 November 1871. See letter to F. E. Abbot, 2 July 1872 and n. 3. Thomas Wentworth Higginson was well known as an abolitionist, but his recent fame was based on his book Army life in a black regiment (Higginson 1870). See letter to F. E. Abbot, 2 July 1872 and n. 2.

From Hubert Airy 20 July 1872

13. Eliot Place. Blackheath S.E. 1872. July 20.

My dear Sir I thank you much for your letter received last night, reminding me of the distinction between the spiral and the whorled arrangements in respect of the number of leaves that spring from a node.1 I must confess that I am not familiar with the writings of physiologists on that point, and do not know what are the arguments for assigning any independent importance to the node, which I take to exist only through and in dependence upon, the leaf which it carries.— Let me adopt your words, that “the presence of a leaf causes the node,” and “the proposition is little more than a truism,” as exactly expressing my ideas on the subject. In the whorled arrangement it often happens that there is a separation (in height) between different leaves belonging to the same whorl, and each leaf carries with it its own share of ‘node’: and it would be easy to collect a series of specimens in gradation from the whorled to the alternate arrangement, in which it would be impossible to say where the ‘node’ lost the whorled character and acquired the alternate. A similar, but inverse, series might be collected of specimens in which the normal arrangement is alternate, but which present occasional approximations to the whorled feature, with the same impossibility of assigning any value to the ‘node’ except as the starting-point of a leaf, subject therefore to any disarrangement that takes place among the leaves. I suppose the most distinct development of the ‘node’ is found in canes; but is it not a fact that in canes (as in our common English reeds and grasses) the origin of the

314

July 1872

leaf completely embraces the stem and overlaps itself, thus:— and therefore calls for nodal development all round? It is true, the highest nodes in grass-stems (wheat &c.) have retained their development, though the leaves at those points have become obsolete:2 but does not this appear to be a special modification? (—for strength?) With great respect, I remain, | my dear sir, yours very truly, Hubert Airy DAR 159: 18 1 2

CD’s letter to Airy has not been found, but see the letter from Hubert Airy, 16 July 1872. Spiral arrangements have one leaf per node; whorled arrangements have multiple leaves per node. The uppermost leaves of a plant are known as flag leaves. It is unclear whether Airy’s use of the term obsolete meant that in grasses these leaves persisted but were no longer functional or whether he thought that they were vestigial and almost or entirely absent.

To C. L. Brace 20 July [1872]1 Down | Beckenham Kent July 20th. My dear Sir I am much obliged for your extremely kind note. 2 I cannot speak positively about the Sequoia, but my impression is that Heer found it in the lignite beds of Devonshire.3 Since you were here my wife has read aloud to me more than half of your work and it has interested us both in the highest degree & we shall read every word of the remainder.4 The facts seem to me very well told and the inferences very striking But after all this is but a weak part of the impression left on our minds by what we have read; for we are both filled with earnest admiration at the heroic labours of yourself & others, with hearty respects and our very kind remembrances to Mrs. Brace.5 | Believe me. | My dear Mr Brace. | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin. Copy DAR 143: 142 1 2 3 4

5

The year is established by the reference to Letitia and Charles Loring Brace’s visit to Down (see n. 4, below). Brace’s note has not been found. Oswald Heer had described the fossil Sequoia couttsiae (now Quasisequoia couttsiae) found in some of the lignite beds of Bovey Tracy, Devon, in Heer 1861. Letitia and Charles Loring Brace visited Down on 11 July 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). CD refers to Brace’s book The dangerous classes of New York, and twenty years’ work among them (Brace 1872), a copy of which is in the Darwin Library–Down. Letitia Brace.

July 1872

315

From John Denny 20 July 1872 Stoke Newington July 20th. 1872 Dear Sir In the first place allow me to thank you very much for the compliment you pay me, in suggesting that the results of my experiments in the fertilization of the Pelargonium family should be communicated to a scientific society. & more especially for your kind offer to be the medium of its communication; believe me I thoroughly appreciate both the compliment & your kindness.1 But you must permit me to observe, that it is one thing to write a paper for a Horticultural Congress, and another to do so for the Linnean Society, & moreover one worthy of your introduction.2 An undertaking I hardly feel myself qualified to attempt, at any rate before doing so it would be necessary to decide (if possible) the essential point of my case, viz, the origin of the Duke of Cornwall, & other var. in question. From my statements it seems you assume them to be varieties only of the zonals I’ve tried to cross with them.3 if you refer to my paper, & to the Florist, you will see I speak of them as being “to all appearance but mere varieties of the zonal section”. 4 Hence the difficulty I speak of in the early part of my paper.. that for the want of some distinctive evidence, or line of demarcation, we are unable to decide what are varieties, & what belong to distinct species. There is I presume no means of ascertaining this—as regards the plants in question? The Duke of Cornwall is a robust grower, but in all other respects, resembles both in flower & foliage—the ordinary varieties of the Scarlet section; it is a very old variety, and at present I am quite unable to trace its parentage.5 Beauté de Suresnes, & Dr. Muret are similar in habit of growth; & of french origin, so I fear their history is not easily obtained either. These varieties may possibly have sprung from one, & a distinct parentage from the zonals I’ve tried to cross with them. 6 For instance, in another section of the Pelargonium family.—the class known by the name of “Fancies” seem to be quite distinct from the class called “Show” or large flowering, for they will not cross, yet to all appearance they are sufficiently alike, to lead one to suppose them to be but varieties. 7 Therefore it seems to me, that unless I could prove that these varieties I name, have descended from the same parents as those I’ve attempted to cross with them, my case is worthless.8 In answer to your remark, I would observe I have tried hundreds of times, & numerous varieties of the zonal section, to effect a cross upon, & from these Var s. failing to produce fructification in every instance, unless by using their pollen upon themselves or upon each other of these varieties. & upon, or from the double varieties which sprang from Beauté de Suresnes.

316

July 1872

With regard to the Ivy leaved variety—Peltatum Elegans, the case is clearer, for I suppose this section of the Pelargonium family—represents a distinct species “or a supposed distinct species.” but with these I should like to continue my experiments at least another season, & to let the results become more fully developed, & more numerous, before reporting upon them to a scientific Society. I am this season putting the pollen of Peltatum Elegans upon the zonal section—& I seem to have some seed approaching maturity from this cross; if so this variety of the Ivy-leaved section is reciprocally fertile with the zonal. With regard to your remark respecting the exclusion of insects,—by the aid of a powerful glass,—there seems to me no difficulty in ascertaining that the stigma (in the pelargonium family) is in a state of perfect virginity, viz, that there is not a grain of pollen on it; & I assume that as soon as I have covered it completely with the desired pollen, that it is proof against the receipt of any other; or at any rate that the chances are as a thousand to one, against its becoming impregnated subsequently.9 The remarks I make in my paper—(you see) rather anticipate the probability of the influence resulting from constitution &c. &c. being different, when distinct species are employed, from my experiments on varieties, so that Gärtners conclusions may be correct without upsetting mine.10 But to be able to form any decided opinion upon the various points mooted at the commencement of my paper, we require an accumulation of reliable evidence.—& facts more distinctly given than I’ve yet seen. I am now trying some experiments in crossing Lilies of more opposite characters, to see the effects of parentage in that family, as regards transmission of size, shape, color, & perfume. Professor Dyer tells me he has Gärtners works in hand, but it did not appear to be clear, how soon they would be ready for publication. 11 We took some steps at our meeting on Wednesday of the Roy. Horticultural Society regarding Ayrton’s scandalous conduct towards Dr. Hooker. Not at all too soon for as I took the liberty to remark, it was a disgrace to the Society not to have been the first to move in the matter12 Fearing my prodigiously long letter has long since tired you out | Believe me | Dear Sir | to remain yours faithfully | John Denny DAR 162: 160 CD ANNOTATION 15.1 With . . . subsequently. 15.6] 2 crosses in margin pencil 1 2 3 4 5

See letter to John Denny, 14 July [1872]. Denny 1872a was originally delivered at the Birmingham Horticultural Congress (see letter to John Denny, 9 July 1872 and n. 1). See letter to John Denny, 14 July [1872] and n. 7. The statement was made in Denny 1872a, p. 904. See also Denny 1872b, p. 52. The scarlet section was one of the sections into which pelargoniums had been divided by Richard Colt Hoare in 1821. Hoare’s classification reflected the priorities of horticultural hybridisers rather than being based upon botanical characters (see also letter from John Denny, 12 July 1872, n. 2). The scarlet section contained some of the earliest hybrids, but there was little evidence of the origin of these plants.

July 1872

6

7

8

9 10

11

12

317

By the 1840s it was unclear even which plants were being referred to as scarlet pelargoniums. See Wilkinson 2007, pp. 84–6, 131–3. From the 1850s the French had become keen pelargonium breeders and the variety ‘Beauté de Suresnes’ was widely used for the production of hybrids. Attempts were made to distinguish which of these plants were zonal pelargoniums, but in 1867 a Paris commission of horticulturists found the task impossible and instead divided the plants according to colour. See Wilkinson 2007, p. 202. Both fancy and show pelargoniums had been developed by florists; fancy types had round flat flowers with all five petals often of the same colour and show types had large blotches on the two large upper petals (Wilkinson 2007, pp. 161–2). One of Denny’s aims in producing as many crosses as possible in the scarlet section of pelargoniums was to determine whether the influence of the parents was the same when crossing varieties as when crossing species. CD’s own researches had shown that this was not the case; see, for example, Variation 2: 187, and CD’s conclusions in Cross and self fertilisation, pp. 391–2. In Denny 1872a, p. 904, Denny alluded to ‘the possible difference in the respective influence of the parents in true hybridisation’, that is, when species rather than varieties are crossed. CD had presented Karl Friedrich von Gärtner’s views in opposition to those of Denny in his letter to John Denny, 14 July [1872]. William Turner Thiselton-Dyer had presumably been asked to prepare the translation of Gärtner 1849 for the Ray Society (see also letter to John Denny, 14 July [1872] and n. 5). No translation of Gärtner’s work was published. At a meeting of 17 July 1872, the Scientific Committee of the Royal Horticultural Society responded to Acton Smee Ayrton’s interference with the running of the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew by resolving to support the director, Joseph Dalton Hooker, in ‘his efforts to maintain unimpaired the scientific character of Kew’ (Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society of London n.s. 4 (1877): xxx). It was further resolved that the committee would also support the memorial that was sent to William Ewart Gladstone (see letter from John Lubbock to W. E. Gladstone, 20 June 1872 and enclosure).

From Hubert Airy 21 July 1872 13. Eliot Place. | Blackheath. S.E. 1872. July 21. My dear Sir I am afraid I made a bad mistake in my letter yesterday, in saying that the leaf belonging to the topmost node in grass-stems is obsolete. On examination I see that the leaf is fully developed; and I hope you will obliterate that passage from my letter. 1 With this, I send one or two lilac twigs, which present a characteristic series of variations from the normal 2-whorl, in illustration of the ‘nodal’ question. 2 I could also show you an oak-twig affecting a succession of 3-whorls with long internodes from whorl to whorl; as a specimen of variation from the alternate towards the verticillate arrangement.3 I am, my dear Sir, | Yours very truly | Hubert Airy DAR 159: 19 1 2

See letter from Hubert Airy, 20 July 1872 and n. 2. In Airy 1874, pp. 304, Airy discussed variability of the number of leaf-ranks in the same species, giving as an example whorls of three being produced by plants like lilacs that usually bear whorls of two. The

318

3

July 1872

‘nodal’ question relates to Airy’s view that the node had no independent importance and existed only as the starting point of the leaves (see letter from Hubert Airy, 20 July 1872 and n. 1). The variation in oak showing the alternate going to a verticillate (or whorled) arrangement involved an increase from one leaf per node to three per node.

To John Denny 22 July 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 22 1872

My dear Sir I thank you for yr kind & interesting letter, which has not been too long for me by a single word.1 In my opinion the peltatum case, after you have made some more experiments, wd be worth communicating by itself to the Linn. Soc. But I also strongly think that the other cases wd be well worth giving, with a statement that the parentage of the supposed vars. was not known. You cd state that you cd perceive no marked difference between the 2 sets of vars. which are mutually sterile; & it w d add greatly to the value of yr paper, if you cd get some botanist, whose name is known, to compare the vars & to say whether he cd detect any difference which appeared of specific value.2 Please to remark how strange a fact it is that forms, to all appearance mere vars, shd be mutually sterile, whilst other vars are mutually fertile. I dare say not one of yr experiments has been vitiated by insects not having been excluded; but you might like to hear that the pollen of a pre-potent form will fertilize a stigma, already thickly coated with its own pollen: I know this experimentally, & in the case of Primula the second dose of pollen was put on after an interval of 24 hours—3 After a grain of pollen has remained on the stigma for about half a day, & all the contents have passed down the pollen-tube, I have found the detection of the shrunken envelope of the grain very difficult. With my best hopes for the success of yr future observations believe me my dear Sir | yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin P.S. I was quite delighted to see the action of the Hort. Soc y. about Dr Hooker.—4 LS(A) Special Collections, Library, University of Otago (DeB MS 55) 1 2

3 4

See letter from John Denny, 20 July 1872. There is no evidence that Denny sent a communication to the Linnean Society concerning what he took to be inter-species crosses between the ivy-leaved pelargonium, Peltatum elegans, and zonal pelargoniums. For Denny’s other cases, see the letter from John Denny, 20 July 1872 and n. 8. See ‘Three forms of Lythrum salicaria’, p. 187 (Collected papers 2: 121). See letter from John Denny, 20 July 1872 and n. 12.

From Armand de Quatrefages1 23 July 1872

Paris 23 Juillet 1872

Cher Monsieur et confrere, J’ai le bien vif regret de vous annoncer qu’en dépit de tous mes efforts j’ai échoué et que votre candidature n’a pas réussi.2 Après trois longues séances de discussion

July 1872

319

on est allé au scrutin hier. 19 voix seulement se sont ralliées autour de votre nom. Loëven en a eu 32.3 Bon nombre de membres comme vous voyez se sont abstenus de voter.— Comme vous l’aviez prévu, votre dernier livre a été pour beaucoup dans ce résultat.4 Plusieurs orateurs on dit très nettement que sans cette publication, ils auraient voté pour vous. Je regrete très vivement que les choses se soient passées ainsi. Mais je ne renonce pas à vous compter plus tard parmi nos collegues. Il y a encore une place vacante et je ferai de nouveaux efforts dans ce but. Croyez cher Monsieur que des dissentiments de doctrine ne m’empêcheront jamais de rendre justice a vos mérites et que je ferai mon possible pour que l’Académie agisse de même5 Votre bien dévoué | De Quatrefages DAR 175: 10 1 2

3

4 5

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. CD had failed to be elected as correspondent to the anatomy and zoology section of the Académie des sciences, Paris. For Quatrefages’s earler attempts to get CD elected, see letter from Armand de Quatrefrages, 12 January 1872 and n. 2. Sven Lovén was elected correspondent to the section for anatomy and zoology on 22 July 1872 (Comptes rendus hebdomadaires des séances de l’Académie des sciences 75 (1872): 194). The record states that forty-eight members were in attendance and the votes numbered thirty-two for Lovén, fifteen for CD, and one blank paper. Quatrefages refers to Descent. For Quatrefages’s reservations about CD’s theories, see Quatrefages 1870.

From Hubert Airy 24 July 1872

13. Eliot Place. Blackheath, S.E. 1872. July 24.

My dear Sir Your letter of the 15th. gave me much to think about, and I hope you will allow me to write to you further on the several points you raise,—not so much by way of answer as for the sake of clearing my own ideas.1 1. The slight twist required in my mechanism:—what is to represent it in nature? I can only suppose a slight twist of the bud-axis in the process of development. The supposition is warranted by the frequent (sometimes regular) occurrence of twist in stems and branches;—which are at least founded on bud-axes. The stem of the horsechestnut is generally twisted to the right (ascending), never to the left. Spanish chestnut is often strongly twisted, to right or to left. The twists of climbing plants are best known to yourself. It is a suggestive fact that in the elm, beech, and lime, which (according to my view) keep the original two-ranked leaf-order unaltered by any twist, there is, as far as I have yet observed, little or no twist of stem or branch to be seen. It is curious to see how, when the stem of a tree has a twist, the branches also have the same. In the middle of Greenwich Park there is an old oak, called Queen

320

July 1872

Elizabeth’s, religiously preserved, naked of bark, and displaying a strongly-marked twist throughout, even to the tips of the small branches. 2 Assuming a twist, then, as a probable primary variation from an originally straight bud, I suppose that this twist would be taken advantage of, and perpetuated, by natural selection, in subservience to the close packing of the embryo leaves. The twist is equally required, whether the packing force be a force of contraction of the bud’s boundaries on certain given contents; or a force of expansion of the contents against given boundaries; or a balance between the two.— But I will return to this point further on. 2. It is true that my mechanism fails to produce truly vertical ranks, and I have nothing to add at present to my plea of extenuating circumstances. This figure, (copied from Asa Gray’s, First Lessons in Botany,3 Fig. 142. p. 73. crosssection of stalk of sedge,) though only diagrammatic, illustrates the importance of vertical alignment for mutual accommodation. If leaf No. 4 lay to one side of the vertical, it looks as if No. 1 would suffer a very awkward bend on one side of the middle line. (3. Thank you for pointing out the need of definition of such words as “distichous” & “collateral.”)4 4. I must admit that I attached undue importance to frost as the chief agent in keeping buds small.5 I took it as the representative of cold, and was thinking of the buds in our English winter; but I should have done better to speak more generally of “vicissitudes of climate,” when I was speaking for the whole earth. 5. I must also acknowledge (not without a little regret) that my contrast between grasses and firs, as it stands, is not convincing—6 I ought to go further back to the less-highly-developed Families, in search of the original order. Balfour (Manual of Botany, 1860. p. 570) gives a drawing of one of the Hepaticæ, fig 778. with the note, “Branches covered with imbricated leaves, arranged in a distichous manner.”— 7 Flat blades, with marginal gemmation, are frequent among algæ, are they not? 8 6. I have no more to say at present about the change of leaf-order that is found in Spanish chestnut and so many other trees. 7. Thank you much for your suggestion of internal pressure among the nascent leaves, combined with small size of bud, as effectual in condensing the leaves— I had a feeling of this state of pressure, but I had not put it in words. Neither of these two forces alone, unresisted by the other, would have the effect in question: it is the result of a balance between them; not forgetting the subsidiary balance which I insisted upon in my paper, between the advantages of shortness and narrowness.—9 And I do not see how all these forces together could avoid the non-existent 4-ranked, 7-ranked, 9-ranked orders, except by having to operate upon an original 2-ranked order. I quite agree with you that I shall do well to insist more distinctly on the successive stages of stability assumed by my mechanism in

July 1872

321

condensation, and especially on the explanation which is thus given of the nonappearance of such orders as the above-named.10 8. You mentioned the position of the cotyledons in the seed, as supporting the view that the original order was two-ranked, and I may add that the arrangement of the cotyledons in the Monocots as compared with that in the Dicots gives a striking illustration of the divergence of the alternate and the whorled types from an earlier two-ranked but irregular order. In the Monocotyledonous embryo, the advantage of lateral economy has prevailed:— in the Dicotnous. embryo, the advantage of longitudinal economy has prevailed, compressing the first leaves into the crucial order. 11 Lastly, let me thank you for your kind warning against attempting more than one subject at a time. I feel that the one I have taken up is much more than I can do justice to—one needs to examine the whole vegetable kingdom, past and present! Believe me, my dear Sir, with great respect, yours very sincerely | Hubert Airy DAR 159: 20 1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

CD’s letter has not been found, but it was a response to the letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872. See also letter from Hubert Airy, 16 July 1872. The oak in Greenwich Park, London, was hollow; its interior was large enough for Queen Elizabeth to use as a place for refreshments, and later, when fitted with a door, it served as a lock-up for those who broke the park rules. The tree died in the nineteenth century but was held upright by the ivy that grew around it. See Webster 1971, p. 7. It was brought down in 1991 when heavy rain washed away the surrounding soil. A. Gray 1857. See letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872 and nn. 3 and 4. CD had put a pencil ‘X’ in the margin against Airy’s statement that frost was the agent that brought about smaller buds; see letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872. See section 4 of the letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872. John Hutton Balfour’s drawing showed the branches of Jungermannia tamarisci, a liverwort whose leaves overlap like roof-tiles in two vertical ranks along the branch (see Balfour 1860, p. 570). Marine algae, or seaweeds, and fresh-water algae asexually produce buds or gemmules on the edges of their blades. These buds break off and produce new individuals (W. H. Harvey 1849, p. 67). See section 7 of the letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872. See also Airy 1873, pp. 177–8. In his published paper, Airy stated that the action of forces not only gave rise to successive orders ‘of successive maxima of stability’ but also necessarily excluded others (see Airy 1873, p. 178). See letter from Hubert Airy, 16 July 1872 and n. 2. Airy’s arguments concerning the cotyledons in monocotyledons and dicotyledons were the basis of his conclusion that all leaf orders derived from a two-ranked arrangement; he held that in monocotyledons lateral forces produced an alternate order of leaves (giving rise to spiral orders) and in dicotyledons vertical forces resulted in a crucial order (leaves at right angles to one another), which in turn produced whorled orders (Airy 1873, p. 179).

From William Bowman 24 July 1872

5 Clifford St July 24. 72

My dear Darwin I have just heard from Donders that he comes to me on next Monday— He would very much like to see you I know, but as he only stays through our Ophthalmological

322

July 1872

Congress it may be impossible for us to come over to see you at Down— We would if we cd. find a day if you wd. let us know if you are at home—1 But possibly you might be in town— If so (and you would let me know beforehand) he would be here to receive you on Tuesday or Wednesday of next week—& I can offer you luncheon— The three last days of the week are engaged & the following week is very doubtful—as he must leave England on the 6th. Yrs most truly | W Bowman I fear it is idle to ask you to a conversazione on Aug 1. at 9 P.M American Philosophical Society (B/D25.309) 1

For Frans Cornelis Donders’s proposed trip to London to attend the fourth international ophthalmological congress in early August 1872, see the letter from F. C. Donders, 14 July 1872 and nn. 2 and 3.

To H. E. Litchfield 25 July 1872

Down. July 25th 1872

My dearest H. What a deal of pains you have taken over the chapt.— I am quite sorry that you shd. have had the trouble of writing out cleanly your corrections, though you thus saved me much trouble. It was, however, a tough job considering all your alterations, almost everyone of which has been accepted & all are good.— I struck out the long par. about which I asked you; though I did so at last with some regret.— When in doubt do not take your trick is a golden rule, I believe, in writing.— I agree to what you say about latter pars. in Chapt. & I have partly accepted your alterations. In the last Par. I cut the Gordion Knot by leaving out all about the philosophy of language. It ends rather flat, & flat it must remain.1 If you have nothing to say, say it, is not a golden rule in writing. Very many thanks, I hope I have not killed you. I know that I am half-killed myself.— Yours affect., | C. Darwin F. says the Tennyson passage will do just as well afterwards. 2 I have written to Uncle Ras. & I hope he will come at once.— 3 We had a nice little sight of Ravens. [yesterday]. 4 Albert is really fatter I am convinced.5 We shall be delighted to see Hope & E. Camilla comes Monday so I hope we shall have them first.6 I hope u will turn up Sat. I am feeling so utterly dead w. the heat 7 I can hardly bear to think of the W.M.C. for Sat.8 John Wilson (dealer) 1

Litchfield was probably reading the proofs of a chapter of Expression, possibly chapter eight, at the end of which CD gave a brief reference to Hensleigh Wedgwood’s On the origin of language (Wedgwood 1866) in his discussion of devotion. The phrase ‘do not take your trick’ may allude to card games such as whist

July 1872

2

323

in which it is sometimes necessary to lose a trick in order to strengthen your hand (see H. Jones 1868, p. 72). The postscript is in Emma Darwin’s hand. F.: father. In Expression, p. 240, CD misquoted Alfred Tennyson’s lines sharp breaths of anger puffed Her fairy nostril out

3 4 5 6

7

8

from ‘Merlin and Vivien’, the sixth poem in Idylls of the king (Tennyson 1859). CD may have copied these lines from Hensleigh Wedgwood’s A dictionary of English etymology (Wedgwood 1872, p. xlvi), where they are also misquoted (‘nostrils’ for ‘nostril’). Wedgwood 1872 was published in April 1872 (Publishers’ Circular, 16 April 1872, p. 247). There is an annotated copy of Wedgwood 1872 in the Darwin Library– CUL (see Marginalia 1: 853). There is no evidence that Erasmus Alvey Darwin visited Down at this time. Ravensbourne in Keston, Kent, was the home of the Bonham-Carter family. (Post Office directory of the six home counties 1872). Emma Darwin uses a symbol for yesterday: a circle with a tail pointing to the left. Albert: probably Albert Venn Dicey, who married Elinor Mary Bonham-Carter in 1872. He suffered from muscular weakness due to an injury at birth (ODNB). According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Frances Emma Elizabeth Wedgwood and ‘H’, possibly Hope Elizabeth Wedgwood, Frances’s daughter, stayed at Down from 29 to 31 July 1872; Camilla, probably Camilla Ludwig, also arrived on Monday 29 July and stayed until 10 August; and ‘Eupha’, Katherine Euphemia Wedgwood, was at Down on 2 August 1872. Emma Darwin recorded in her diary (DAR 242) that the temperature on 25 July 1872 was 82 degrees Fahrenheit, and that Henrietta and Richard Buckley Litchfield visited Down on Saturday 3 August 1872. W.M.C.: Working Men’s College, sixty or seventy members of which used to take country rambles in the summer. Litchfield wrote that CD and Emma invited the group to tea at Down House from 1873 onwards (Emma Darwin (1904) 2: 262). Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) for 30 June 1872 notes ‘W.M.C. party went’; there is no further mention of the WMC in that year.

To Heinrich Fick 26 July [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 26th Dear Sir I am much obliged for your kindness in having sent me your Essay, which I have read with very great interest.2 Your view of the daughters of short-lived parents inheriting property at an early age, & thus getting married with its consequences, is an original & quite new idea to me.— So would have been what you say about soldiers, had I not read an article published about a year ago by a German (name forgotten just at present) who takes nearly the same view with yours, & thus accounts for great military nations having had a short existence. 3 I much wish that you would sometimes take occasion to discuss an allied point, if it holds good on the continent,—namely the rule insisted on by all our TradesUnions, that all workmen,—the good & bad, the strong & weak,—sh d. all work for the same number of hours & receive the same wages. The unions are also opposed to piece-work,—in short to all competition. I fear that Cooperative Societies, which many look at as the main hope for the future, likewise exclude competition.4

324

July 1872

This seems to me a great evil for the future progress of mankind.— Nevertheless under any system, temperate & frugal workmen will have an advantage & leave more offspring than the drunken & reckless.— With my best thanks for the interest which I have received from your Essay, & with my respect, I remain, Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin Helene Fick ed. 1897–1908, 2: 314–15 1 2 3

4

The year is established by the reference to Heinrich Fick 1872. There is an annotated copy of Heinrich Fick 1872 in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. There is an annotated copy of Hermann Eberhard Richter’s Die Zukunft der Soldatenvölker (The future of the military class; Richter 1871) in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Fick argued that national vigour was sapped by policies that required strong young men to serve in the military but exempted the weak, who then gained a selective advantage in the struggle for existence. To counter this he suggested that marriage restrictions be placed on those ineligible for military service. Fick also believed that socioeconomic equality would benefit the weak and lead to degeneration. See Heinrich Fick 1872 and Weikart 1995. CD added a reference to Heinrich Fick 1872 in Descent 2d ed., p. 134. The Trade Union Act of 1871 had legalised trade unions for the first time in Britain. From 1863, British co-operative societies began to come together to form the Co-operative Wholesale Society, which, by means of bulk purchases, provided cheaper goods to its members (Redfern 1938, p. 32).

From R. F. Cooke 27 July 1872

50, Albemarle S.t London | W. July 27. 1872

My dear Sir By the enclosed note as well as from a call we have received from D r. W. Kowalevsky, I suppose you have been in communication with your foreign translators respecting your new work.1 I have also seen Mr Mc Leod of the Heliotype company.2 You must kindly let us know your wishes, respecting all these. I told Mr Mc Leod, to certainly print off 1500 sets of the plates to begin our edition with. But he wishes to know how many will be wanted for America & the Continent.!!!? Let us know, if we are to order sets of the Electros from the woodcuts (Clowes) & how many.3 Again as to proofsheets who is to have them & how soon? We shall not publish I presume before our Annual Trade Sale (Nov?) & we must bind the translators down not to publish before hand. I suppose you are at home & I hope in good health. Mr Murray is in Scotland. Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke Chas. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 410 1

The enclosure has not been found. Vladimir Onufrievich Kovalevsky, who was translating Descent into Russian, was spending a couple of months in London (see letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, [after 8 June 1872]). CD’s new work was Expression. CD had already been in touch with the German translator (see letter from J. V. Carus, 14 July 1872 and n. 1).

July 1872 2

3

325

The Heliotype Company had three premises in London: 22 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden; 219 Regent Street; and 6 and 7 Lincoln Terrace, Kilburn (Post Office London directory 1872). Mr McLeod has not been further identified. In order to reproduce the woodcuts made for Expression, William Clowes and sons printed from electrotypes. Electrotypes were produced by the electrolytic deposition of copper on the woodblocks; the copper moulds were then removed and reinforced from behind with lead, leaving the original woodcuts intact. (Twyman 1998, pp. 54–5.)

From J. T. Gulick 27 July 1872

Saturday July 27th 1872

To | Charles Darwin Esq | F.R.S. Dear Sir: Your account of the Nat. History of the Gallapagos Is., which I read many years ago, was the means of leading me to investigate the distribution of species at the Sandwich Is. where I was then residing1 You have perhaps seen in the number of “Nature” for July 18 my brief statement of some of the facts gathered in that field. 2 As I am now in England for a short visit, it will be a great pleasure, to meet you. If you can appoint an hour when when it will be convenient for you to see me I will bring (with me) some of my Sandw Is. land shells illustrating the extremely limited distribution of the species, and the continuous gradation of forms from one species into another. I shall be able to come any time next week or the week after; but sometime early next week will be the most convenient for me, as I am expecting to leave soon on my way to North China and Mongolia.3 Yours respectfully. | John T. Gulick Address | c/o Mrs Delacour | Frindsbury Hill | Rochester | Kent ADraftS American Philosophical Society (421) 1

2 3

Gulick refers to ‘Descriptions of new species of Achatinella, from the Hawaiian Islands’ ( J. T. Gulick 1856) and to chapter 19 in Journal of researches. Gulick’s father was a Presbyterian missionary on the Sandwich Islands (Hawaii; A. Gulick 1932). Achatinella is a genus of Hawaiian tree-living land snails. J. T. Gulick 1872a (‘On the variation of species as related to their geographical distribution, illustrated by the Achatinellinæ’). Gulick departed for his missionary work in China and Mongolia in March 1873, after visiting his parents in Honolulu (A. Gulick 1932, pp. 236–9).

To A. R. Wallace 27 July [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 27th My dear Wallace I have just read with infinite satisfaction your crushing article in Nature. 2 I have been the more glad to see it, as I have not seen the book itself: I did not order it, as

326

July 1872

I felt sure from Dr. B.’s former book, that he cd. write nothing of value. But assuredly I did not suppose that anyone would have written such a mass of inaccuracies & rubbish.— How rich is everything which he says & quotes from Herbert Spencer! 3 By the way I suppose that you read H. Spencer’s answer to Martineau: it struck me as quite wonderfully good, & I felt even more strongly inclined than before to bow in reverence before him.—4 Nothing has amused me more in your Review than Dr. B.s extraordinary presumption in deciding that such men as Lyell, Owen, H. Spencer, Mivart, Gaudry &c &c are all wrong.5 I daresay it would be very delightful to feel such overweening confidence in oneself. I have had a poor time of it of late: rarely having an hour of comfort, except when asleep or immersed in work; & then when that is over I feel dead with fatigue. I am now correcting my little book on Expression; but it will not be published till November, when of course a copy will be sent to you. I shall now try whether I can occupy myself, without writing anything more on so difficult a subject, as evolution. I hope you are now comfortably settled in your new house & have more leisure than you have had for some time.— I have looked out in the paper for any notice about the curatorship of the new museum, but have seen nothing.— If anything is decided in your favour, I beg you to inform me. 6 My dear Wallace | Very truly yours | C. Darwin How grandly the public has taken up Hooker’s case: 7 British Library (Add 46434) 1 2 3

4

5 6

7

The year is established by the dates of the publications mentioned in the letter. The article, ‘The last attack on Darwinism’ (Wallace 1872b), was a review of Charles Robert Bree’s An exposition of fallacies in the hypothesis of Mr. Darwin (Bree 1872). In his article, Wallace exposed the errors Bree had made when quoting other authors, including his attempt to interpret a passage from Spencer 1867 (Wallace 1872b, p. 237). For CD’s opinion of Bree, see the letter to W. B. Tegetmeier, 14 May [1872]. There is an annotated copy of Bree’s earlier book, Species not transmutable (Bree 1860) in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 69). Spencer 1872 (‘Mr. Martineau on evolution’) was a reply to James Martineau’s article ‘The place of mind in nature and intuition in man’ ( J. Martineau 1871). See letter to Herbert Spencer, 10 June [1872] and n. 1. Charles Lyell, Richard Owen, Herbert Spencer, St George Jackson Mivart, and Albert Gaudry were all criticised by Bree for affirming some form of evolution. See Wallace 1872b, p. 239. In March 1872, Wallace had moved into The Dell, the house he had built in Grays, Essex (Wallace 1905, 2: 91–3). He had applied for (but did not get) the post of director of a new museum combining art and natural history ‘for the instruction of the people’ at Bethnal Green (ibid., 1: 415–16). CD probably refers to the numerous newspaper articles that had appeared about the dispute between Joseph Dalton Hooker and Acton Smee Ayrton (see letter to J. D. Hooker, 12 July [1872].

To J. T. Gulick 28 July [1872] Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 28th My dear Sir I read your article with the greatest possible interest & admiration.— 1 I shd. be

July 1872

327

very glad to see you here & see a few of your specimens; but I labour under a great disadvantage, as I am much out of health, & am utterly unable to talk with anyone for more than a very short time & some days I can hardly see anyone. But if you will take your chance & come here & allow me to leave you as soon as I feel my head failing, I shall be delighted; yet I fear it will not be worth your trouble. Here is another misfortune, I expect Prof. Donders of Utrecht (whom I could not refuse to see) to come here on Tuesday or Wednesday, & I could not possibly talk to two persons on the same day.—2 We lunch daily at 1 12 & dine at 7o. & we shd be very glad to see you at either time; or at about 4 oclock: my head is daily bad from 2 12 to 4 oclock. I enclose list of Trains: Orpington (on the S.E. R y.)3 is our nearest station, 4 miles from this house.— Pray forgive me for writing so much about myself & health; but I could not avoid doing so, without leaving an impression of inhospitality on your mind.— If you think it worth while to come, pray inform me of day & hour, that I may endeavour to keep as fresh as I can.— Believe me dear Sir| yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin Postmark: JY29 72 American Philosophical Society (422) 1 2

3

CD refers to J. T. Gulick 1872a. For Frans Cornelis Donders’ proposed visit to Down on either 30 or 31 July, see the letter from William Bowman, 24 July 1872. In the event, Gulick visited CD on 2 August (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). CD was so interested in their conversation that he invited Gulick to stay for dinner in order to continue the discussion (A. Gulick 1932, p. 234). S.E. Ry.: South Eastern Railway.

To R. F. Cooke 29 July 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 29. 1872 My dear Sir It is all right about the Russian & German translations. E. Koch will require a formal authorization.1 It will of course be very necessary to guard against any foreign edition, of which probably there will be several, appearing before ours. There are several points about which I may as well now write; & I must trouble you with a very long letter. It wd be very advantageous to make some arrangement, if not too costly, with Messrs Clowes to keep the type till Novr.; as I shall be surprised & disappointed if not more than 1500 copies are ultimately sold. I shall have to give away a frightful number of copies.2 I shall be particularly obliged if you will find out at once the cost of stereotypes of the 21 blocks; making some small profit out of them, as on former occasions, so as to decrease slightly our joint outlay on the drawings.

328

July 1872

I likewise wish much to know the exact cost of 1000 copies of the 7 heliotype plates; for I have forgotten the estimate which was given to me.3 I can then inform the foreign editors, & find out how many copies they will require, & will communicate with you or the H. Company.4 It wd save much trouble if you will undertake to supply the foreigners with the heliotypes; receiving payment beforehand. I do not think it wd be fair to increase the price of the heliotypes, but I understood from the Co. that they wd allow me some small discount for copies ordered thro’ me; but this, if realized, ought to go to our joint acct. The copies when received ought to be cursorarily examined to see that they are fairly good. How can this be managed? There is another very important point; I have not yet seen lettered proofs; & will you please to give distinct orders that lettered proofs are sent to me before any copies are printed off. W d it not be adviseable to have the 1500 copies printed soon, so as to be safe from future delay? Here is another important point: I want Mr Murray to let Messrs Appleton have stereotypes of the text;5 I think I have a right to ask this, as it will add considerably to my direct profits & somewhat to our joint profits. The fairest plan, as it seems to me, wd be to ascertain the exact cost of the stereotypes & then to make some moderate addition to the cost. If you add much Messrs Appleton will re-set up the books & I shall be a gt loser & you also to a moderate extent. Please to let me hear pretty soon on this head, as I must communicate directly with Messrs Appleton, & I have agreed with them that they shall publish the book. 6 Mr Cooper’s acct has not been paid (for the 21 blocks);7 & I fear that it will be rather heavy, as several of the larger figures were difficult to execute. I have paid all the artists as by enclosed memm.;8 & you can repay me when the book is published. I shall want a short index made. The book will be only about 380 pages; & perhaps you can tell me what ought to be paid to the maker. I cd then mention the sum to Mr Dallas,9 & if he does not think it worth undertaking, you cd then recommend me some one else. Mr Murray offered me a bill, due July 1 for £315 for the last ed. of the Descent. I said it wd do just as well to pay the amt into my bank at this date; but I have received no notice of the payment.10 I am very sorry to have troubled you with so gigantic a letter; but I beg you to consider all the points mentioned; & then I think I shall cause no more trouble.— My dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS(A) National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 263–6) 1 2 3

4

See letter from R. F. Cooke, 27 July 1872 and n. 1. Eduard Friedrich Koch was the publisher of the German translation of Expression (Carus trans. 1872b). William Clowes & Sons were the printers of Expression. For the number of copies CD gave away, see Appendix V. In the letter to J. V. Carus, 16 July 1872, CD had conjectured that the cost of the heliotypes would be £50. The twenty-one woodcuts were produced by electrotypes not stereotypes (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 27 July 1872 and n. 3). H. Company: Heliotype Company (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 27 July 1872 and n. 2).

July 1872 5 6 7 8

9 10

329

John Murray was CD’s publisher; D. Appleton & Co. published CD’s works in the United States. See letter from D. Appleton & Co., 17 February 1872. James Davis Cooper had produced the wood engravings for Expression from the artists’ drawings (see Expression, p. 26). This memorandum has not been found. CD’s Classed account books (Down House MS) for 1872, however, record payments of £7 7s. to Oscar Gustaf Rejlander for ‘Photos’ on 14 March, £2 2s. for ‘drawing’ on 29 May, and £20 9s. 6d. to Thomas W. Wood on 13 June. William Sweetland Dallas had provided indexes for Variation and Descent. See letter from John Murray, 9 March 1872, and letter to John Murray, [9 March 1872 or later]. CD recorded the receipt of £315 for ‘Reprint of Descent of Man’ on 7 August 1872 in his Account books– banking account (Down House MS).

From Francis Galton 29 July 1872

42 Rutland Gate | SW July 29/72

My dear Darwin May I lunch with you on Thursday and arrange about rabbits? 1 We shall then be staying for 2 days in your neighbourhood, at Mrs. Brandram Hayes Common2 Your letter reached me just before we were leaving town for a Saturday & Sunday visit & I did not reply at once, waiting to be sure about our engagements. 3 If I don’t receive a post card at above address to say ‘no’ I will come4 Ever sincerely yrs. | Francis Galton The spiritualists have given up; I fear I can’t get another invite to a scéance. 5 DAR 105: A66 1 2

3 4 5

CD’s footman was looking after the rabbits that Galton was conducting experiments on (see letter to Francis Galton, 27 May [1872] and n. 2). A Mrs Brandram is listed at Hayes, Kent, in the Post Office directory of the six home counties 1874. This is probably Maria Brandram (BMD (Death index); England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1875 (Ancestry.com, accessed 9 January 2012). CD’s letter has not been found. Galton evidently did not visit on Thursday 1 August (see letter to Francis Galton, 1 August [1872]). For Galton’s investigation of spiritualism, see the letters from Francis Galton, 28 March 1872, 19 April 1872, and 7 June 1872.

To Eduard Strasburger 29 July 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 29th /72

My dear Sir I thank you very sincerely for your kind & most courteous letter, & for your present of your work on the Coniferæ &c with its wonderfully elaborate Plates.— 1 Nothing in the world is so satisfactory to me as to think that I have guided, in however slight a degree, a naturalist in his work; so that what you say has pleased me much. Your

330

July 1872

historical sketch (p. 173–223) is a real curiosity, as showing what a number of eminent men have attacked the problem of the nature of the ovules. I shall be curious to see what conclusion you arrive at; but to my ever recurrent & bitter regret I read German with extreme difficulty.2 With my cordial thanks for your kindness & with my respect, I remain | my dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Charles Darwin Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Bonn, Nachlaß Eduard Strasburger (Strasburger 1) 1

2

Strasburger’s letter has not been found, but CD’s copy of Die Coniferen und die Gnetaceen (Strasburger 1872), inscribed by the author, is in the library of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, presumably as a gift from CD. Strasburger stated that CD’s theory of descent had created new goals in research and offered solutions to difficult morphological problems (Strasburger 1872, 1: iii); his own research aimed at understanding the morphology of the gymnosperm flower. In his historical sketch (ibid., pp. 173–223), Strasburger described about fifty different works dating from about 1810 that considered the form of flowers and fertilisation in gymnosperms.

To Edwards & Kidd 30 July [1872]1

July 30 My dear Sir I believe I can tell you accurately everything which passed between us about the estimate.— Mr Edwards originally gave me a written estimate, rather lower than the rate in your printed papers & which I showed you, & you liberally said that you thought the Coy would be bound by this;2 but I on the other hand said I did not think your coy was so bound, & I accepted the printed estimate; with the exception that as my plates are none of them deeper than 7 inches, whereas 3 of them were longer (viz one 11 14 long, another 6 43 & another 6 long,) I it not seem to me fair to charge me by the scale in your printed paper, in which depth increases together with the length & you agreed July to this & said there shd be a fair reduction. And thus the affair was left.— I wrote yesterday to Mr Murray & asked him to inform me at once what your precise charge, for 1000 copies of all 7 Plates would be; so that I might correspond with the translators & learn from them how many copies they would require; 3 I suggested to Mr Murray to undertake supplying the foreigners with these copies; but securing in every case payment for them before they were sent away; & I told him that from all you have said to me I supposed that you wd allow us some [ small] discount. ADraft DAR 96: 144 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to R. F. Cooke, 29 July 1872. CD refers to Ernest Edwards of Edwards and Kidd, producers of heliotypes prints for Expression (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to R. F. Cooke, 22 April [1871] and n. 3); the company was the Heliotype Company, which shared the premises of Edwards and Kidd at 22 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden (‘Commercial’ and ‘Streets’ sections of the Post Office London directory 1872).

July 1872 3

331

CD refers to his publisher, John Murray, and the letter to R. F. Cooke, 29 July 1872.

From H. H. Howorth 30 July 1872 Derby House Eccles July 30th 1872. My dear Sir I beg to send you a copy of a paper lately read before the Anthropological Institute and to hope that you will not find in it any expression which can be construed into anything disrespectful.1 I owe too much both of my taste for science and of my scanty knowledge to your books to be guilty of anything of the kind, and I should like to have the opportunity of correcting anything of which you disapprove in a future paper. In the reading of facts it is impossible that we should all agree, & it is only by the conflict of opinion that we arrive at the truth. If I differ from my master however I cannot do so in the terms which are congenial to some controversialists. I am afraid I have forgotten myself once or twice with Mr Wallace.2 My excuse is that he indulged in some rather contemptuous phrases which are irritating & not very convincing. Captain Galton has asked me to enlarge 2 or 3 letters which appeared in Nature into a paper on the areas of upheaval & subsidence in the Earths crust. 3 I have found the work by no means easy, but have collected a good many observations on the rise of land in various places which promise a curious result. This I will send you if you care to have it. Evidence of depression is less easy to find. Your work on Coral islands is the main collection of facts on the subject.4 I have added a good many places to your list, but am not well satisfied with my work. It seems to me that mangrove swamps which surround many coasts ought to be evidence pro or con on this matter. Your experience of tropical countries is so great and your range of facts so great also that I venture to hope you may have considered this question, namely whether mangroves grow in a subsiding area or not. I can only be sure of one place where a mangrove forest is to be found in an area of upheaval & in this all the trees are dead. If I can do anything of any kind for you in Lancashire I hope you will make use of me. I remain | Yours very respectfully | Henry H. Howorth C. Darwin Esq. DAR 166: 277 CD ANNOTATION 2.4 which promise . . . result.] scored pencil 2.5 Your work . . . subject. 2.6] ‘Danas work’ 5 added pencil 2.10 I venture . . . not. 2.11] double scored pencil 1

Howorth refers to ‘On fertility and sterility’ (Howorth 1872c), the first part of his paper ‘Strictures on Darwinism’. The paper has not been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL.

332 2

3

4

5

July 1872

Howorth had sent a letter to Nature (Howorth 1871a) that prompted responses from CD (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Nature, 1 July [1871]) and Alfred Russel Wallace (Wallace 1871). Howorth’s published reply (Howorth 1871b) was deferential to CD, but it characterised Wallace’s ‘dogmatism’ as ‘puerile’ (p. 200). Howorth probably refers to Francis Galton, vice-president of the Royal Geographical Society in 1872, rather than Douglas Strutt Galton, a captain in the Royal Engineers. Howorth’s letters to Nature, ‘Circumpolar land’ and ‘Recent climatic changes’ (Howorth 1871c, 1872a, and 1872b), were expanded into two articles (Howorth 1873 and 1874) in the Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London. Howorth argued that geological uplift was greatest in high latitudes and was centred on the north and south poles. In Coral reefs, CD had argued that the growth of barrier reefs and atolls was a sign that the sea floor was sinking, and had included a map that showed the areas of the ocean in which they occurred. CD’s annotation is probably a note for his reply, but no letter to Howorth has been found. He probably refers to James Dwight Dana’s Corals and coral islands (Dana 1872), having recently received a presentation copy of it (see letter from J. D. Dana, 23 May 1872). CD’s annotations on the section ‘Subsidence indicated by atolls and barrier reefs’ (Dana 1872, pp. 321–32) in the copy in the Darwin Library–CUL indicate that he had some doubts about Dana’s evidence (see Marginalia 1: 179).

To ? 30 July [1872–4]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. July 30th Dear Sir I am much obliged for your kindness in having taken the trouble to communicate to me the singular colouring of the eyes of the Shepherd dogs. Dear Sir | Yours faithfully & obliged | Ch. Darwin American Philosophical Society (B/D25.283) 1

The year range is established by the printed stationery, with the address in the centre; CD used this type of notepaper from January 1872 until November 1874.

From William Bowman 31 July 1872

5 Clifford St July 31. 72

My dear Darwin I did not reply to your most kind invitation before to day because I could say nothing definite— Donders only came last evening so that his time is still more limited than I had expected—1 He must go at all events on Thursday morning of next week—& possibly on Wednesday morning—but if not on Wednesday I hope we should be able to come over to you on Wednesday & spend a few hours. In that case we should reach Orpington from Ch. X at 11.21 & should have to return from O. at 4.19— If you will be so good as send me the address of a flymaster of whom I

July 1872

333

may order a conveyance at O. Station I will write to him nearer the time, if nothing unforeseen should prevent—2 I hope very much we shall come— Donders is most desirous of doing so & begs his kind regards. Yrs most truly | W Bowman How odiously Hooker has been treated! I do trust nothing will induce him to resign.3 American Philosophical Society (B/D25.310) 1 2

3

CD’s letter to Bowman has not been found. Frans Cornelis Donders had originally intended to arrive on 29 July (see letter from William Bowman, 24 July 1872). Bowman planned to take a train from Charing Cross to Orpington and hire a fly (a horse-drawn carriage used as a cab) from Orpington to Down House. There is no evidence that Bowman and Donders made the visit. The ‘imminent danger’ of Joseph Dalton Hooker’s resignation as director of the Royal Botanic Gardens if his dispute with Acton Smee Ayrton was not resolved had been mentioned in The Times, 8 July 1872, p. 11. See also letter from John Lubbock to W. E. Gladstone, 20 June 1872 and enclosure.

From J. J. Weir 31 July 1872

6 Haddo Villas | Blackheath SE 31 July 1872

My Dear Sir I have met with a singular case which illustrates our perfect ignorance of the cause of variegation in the leaves of plants.— A friend of mine at Eltham Mr. Dobell who lives in the house formerly inhabited by Sherard and Dillenius, has a large Acer pseudoplatanus with variegated leaves, this is an old tree perhaps even, planted by Sherard himself.—1 It seeds every year and an abundance of young trees are produced, but up to 1869 I cannot find that a single variegated leaved one has been found.— The seed of 1868 however produced in 1869 16 specimens most beautifully variegated, but not one has been found since.— Did the unusual heat of 1868 produce this effect?2 My friend has lived in the house some 20 years & therefore the observation is trustworthy, & I have personally taken the greatest interest in examing the spot from time to time Yours very truly | J Jenner Weir C Darwin Esqr DAR 181: 84 1

Henry William Dobell lived on the High Street, Eltham, Kent (Post Office directory of the six home counties 1870). James Sherard lived in Eltham from 1720; the garden he created there became renowned for its valuable and rare plants and its hothouses. Johann Jakob Dillenius, who had moved to England under the patronage of Sherard and who lived with him at Eltham, published an illustrated catalogue of the plants in Sherard’s garden (Dillenius 1732), in which he described several new genera (ODNB).

334

2

July 1872

The work does not mention Acer pseudoplatanus, the sycamore maple, which had been introduced into Britain from central Europe. See Correspondence vol. 16, letter to T. H. Huxley, 23 July [1868] and n. 4.

To J. J. Weir 31 July [1872]1

Down, Beckenham, Kent. July 31

My dear Sir Many thanks for the case which is quite new to me and a surprising one. 2 I am not very well, so will write no more. yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin. Copy DAR 148: 330 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. J. Weir, 31 July 1872. See letter from J. J. Weir, 31 July 1872.

From D. Appleton & Co. 1 August 1872 Statement of Sales of Origin of Species1 to Aug 1st, 1872, for account of Chas Darwin On hand last account,

645

Printed since,

1000

By D. Appleton & Co.

On hand this date, Given away, Sold to date,

1645 Sold 1123 Copies

@$2

522 1123 1645

Rate 5%

112

30

$

534

60

$

646

90

$

Descent of Man On hand last account,

2335

On hand this date,

Printed since,

2000

Given away, Sold to date,

4335 Sold 2673 Copies

@ 2$

2673 4335

Rate 10%

Value in Stg Exch 110 Gold 114

2

£ 116.1.5 Charles Darwin| Aug. 1/72

1662

August 1872

335

D DAR 159: 90 CD ANNOTATION End of document: ‘Last a/c rendered Febry’3 pencil 1

2 3

This statement gives sales figures for the US editions of Origin and Descent. D. Appleton & Co. had issued a new edition of Origin in 1870 based on the fifth English edition; another edition was printed in 1873, based on the sixth London edition (Freeman 1977). The value is given in sterling and gold. See letter from D. Appleton & Co., 23 February 1872.

From R. F. Cooke 1 August 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Augt. 1 1872

My dear Sir I was glad to receive yr letter & will now try to answer yr questions. 1 There will be no difficulty on the part of Messr. Clowes, keeping up the type, as long as is reasonable, as it is only one volume of 400 pages. 2 The cost of a set of stereotypes will be £30. The cost of composing the work is only about £40 & I should have thought it would have been better for Appleton to reset afresh from the printed sheets rather than pay carriage duty &c. They know best. What w d. you propose to charge them for stereotyplates of the letterpress above the £30.? 3 A set of Electros of the woodcuts I think we might charge £10, as Cooper’s account is £70.4 What say you? In regard to the right of translation. Is not each country to pay something for the privilege, besides paying for the electros & heliotypes? If so, are we to write to D r. Kowalevsky & Koch & what shall we ask or have you agreed to let them have it for love!!!5 We might safely print off above 5000 sets of Heliotypes, to save delay as we shd. require 3000 no doubt to begin with & the Americans, wd. most likely wish as many or more & Dr. Kowalevsky told Mr Mc Leod he wd. want 4000!!!6 I think it wd be better for all the transactions & orders for the heliotypes to pass through our hands & we charge a small percentage on the cost price & so does Mr Mc Leod. We shall publish early in Novr. I suppose. You are not ready yet to go to press I suppose. Are we to write to Koch & what am I to say. Mr Mc Leod says their own reputation is at stake & they will look carefully through all the plates before they are sent in.7 He cannot give me the cost for 5000 before tomorrow & you shall see the writing before any are printed off. Besides American—Russian & German, I suppose you expect a french, italian & dutch translation.8 We should think £6. 0. 0 enough for the Index, unless you prefer Mr Dallas & like to offer £8. 0. 09

336

August 1872

All your payments to artists shall be settled for whenever you like. Our cashier is away & so is Mr Murray (in Scotland) & I imagine yr cheque has been overlooked.10 I will see to it. I agree with you that all the Heliotypes supplied for foreign editions & Electros shd. be paid for in advance. I will write again after hearing from you. Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke Charles Darwin Esq DAR 171: 411 CD ANNOTATIONS 2.2 The cost of . . . above the £30.? 2.6] ‘(Does this include the Blocks)’ added ink End of letter: ‘(Cost of Heliotypes)’ pencil, del pencil ‘checking [ amt]. ’ ink, del pencil 1 2 3 4 5

6

7 8 9 10

See letter to R. F. Cooke, 29 July 1872. William Clowes & Sons were the printers of Expression. D. Appleton & Co. preferred to print the American edition of Expression using stereotypes (see letter from D. Appleton & Co., 23 February 1872, and letter to R. F. Cooke, 29 July 1872). James Davis Cooper engraved the woodcuts for Expression (Expression, p. 26). Vladimir Onufrievich Kovalevsky had requested permission to translate Expression into Russian (see letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 30 March 1872). Eduard Friedrich Koch of the Stuttgart publishing firm E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung had requested a formal authorisation for the German translation by Julius Victor Carus (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 29 July 1872). CD did not charge for translation rights, but he sometimes asked for a percentage of the profits (see, for example, letter to V. O. Kovalevsky, 10 August [1872]). McLeod was a representative of the London Heliotype Company, the firm that produced the photographic plates for Expression using a new process called heliotyping. McLeod has not been further identified. The Heliotype Company had only recently been formed; the plates for Expression may have been the company’s first large order (see Prodger 2009, pp. 108–10). The French translation of Expression was Pozzi and Benoît trans. 1874; the Italian translation was Canestrini and Bassani trans. 1878; the Dutch translation was Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen trans. 1873. William Sweetland Dallas had prepared the indexes for Variation and Descent (see Correspondence vols. 16 and 19). Cooke refers to John Murray. CD had enquired about a sum of £315 that was to be paid into his bank (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 29 July 1872).

To Francis Galton 1 August [1872]

Aug. 1.—

I have just heard that our carrier, Mr Snow (put his name on address. ie “to care of Mr. Snow”) has returned to his former period, & leaves the Nag’s Head every Thursday morning.—1 C. Darwin ApcS Postmark: AU 2 72 UCL Library Services, Special Collections (Galton 39 E)

August 1872 1

337

George Snow operated a weekly carrier service between Down and the Nag’s Head in London on Thursdays (Post Office directory of the six home counties 1870). Galton evidently wanted to send CD one of the rabbits on which he had been experimenting (see letters to Francis Galton, 23 January [1872] and n. 2, and 9 August [1872]).

From A. S. Packard Jr 1 August 1872 Salem, Mass, U.S.A. Aug. 1. 1872. My dear Sir: I had the honor of receiving your very pleasant letter of April 13th, inviting me to pay you a visit, but imagine my disappointment at not receiving it until my return from England a few days since—1 While in London during April last, I decided not to use Dr. Gray’s letter of introduction to you, hearing that the state of your health prevented your seeing strangers, and was thus afraid that I should be encroaching on your limited time given to personal friends—2 Had not some strange mishap befallen your letter, I could have arranged to delay my return home and gone to see you— as it was I had but a few hours to spend in London on my return from Norway to take the Boston steamer— Thanking you for your exceedingly kind invitation, and trusting that you may have the health & strength to complete to your full satisfaction the splendid series of works, to which I feel so much indebted as revolutionizing science, I remain, My dear Sir | with great esteem | Very truly & respectfully Yrs | A. S. Packard jr Charles Darwin Esq. | &c &c. DAR 174: 2 1 2

CD’s letter has not been found. He had written to Packard care of the editor of Nature (see letter to Asa Gray, 8 July [1872] and n. 9). See letter from Asa Gray, 7 March 1872.

To J. V. Carus 3 August [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug 3d My dear Sir As you wished for sheets as quickly as possible, I sent off this morning the 2 d & d 3 sheets; but these have been somewhat corrected & when I receive 2 d Revise I will send them;2 but you can translate them, if you like, as the last corrections will hardly take you 14 of an hour.— As soon as I know cost of stereotype & Heliotypes, I will write to you again.—3 My dear Sir | Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Slg. Darmstaedter Lc 1859 Darwin, Charles, Bl. 86/87

338 1 2

3

August 1872

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to J. V. Carus, 16 July 1872. Carus was translating Expression into German. No letter from Carus requesting sheets quickly has been found, but see the letter from J. V. Carus, 16 July 1872. CD was correcting proof-sheets of Expression until 22 August (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). See letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872.

To A. R. Wallace 3 August [1872]1 Down. | Beckenham, Kent. Aug 3. 1872 My dear Wallace I hate controversy, chiefly perhaps because I do it badly; but as D r Bree accuses you of “blundering”, I have thought myself bound to send the enclosed letter to Nature; that is if you in the least desire it. In this case please post it.— 2 If you do not at all wish it, I shd rather prefer not sending it, & in this case please to tear it up— And I beg you to do the same, if you intend answering D r Bree yourself, as you will do it incomparably better than I shd — Also please to tear it up if you don’t like the letter. My dear Wallace | yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin. LS(A) Waddington Auction ( 1 2

July 1998)

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to Nature, 3 August [1872]. Charles Robert Bree had defended his book (Bree 1872) against Wallace’s criticism (see letter to Nature, 3 August 1872 and nn. 2 and 3). CD’s letter appeared in Nature, 8 August 1872, p. 279.

To Nature 3 August [1872]1 Permit me to state— though the statement is almost superfluous— that Mr. Wallace, in his review of Dr. Bree’s work, gives with perfect correctness what I intended to express, and what I believe was expressed clearly, with respect to the probable position of man in the early part of his pedigree. 2 As I have not seen Dr. Bree’s recent work, and as his letter is unintelligible to me, I cannot even conjecture how he has so completely mistaken my meaning: but, perhaps, no one who has read Mr. Wallace’s article, or who has read a work formerly published by Dr. Bree on the same subject as his recent one, will be surprised at any amount of misunderstanding on his part. 3 Charles Darwin August 3 Nature, 8 August 1872, p. 279 1

The year is established by the date of publication of this letter in Nature.

August 1872 2

3

339

Alfred Russel Wallace’s review of Charles Robert Bree’s An exposition of fallacies in the hypothesis of Mr. Darwin (Bree 1872) appeared in Nature, 25 July 1872, pp. 237–9. According to Bree, CD had placed the origin of humans between marsupials and lemurs; however, Wallace stated that CD had positioned the origin of man after that of the catarrhine or Old-World monkeys. For CD’s discussion of human ancestry in relation to other primates, see Descent 1: 195–9. CD wrote: ‘There can . . . hardly be a doubt that man is an offshoot from the Old World Simian stem; and that under a genealogical point of view, he must be classed with the Catarhine division’ (ibid., p. 196). Bree had defended his interpretation of Descent in a letter in Nature, 1 August 1872, p. 260. For CD’s views on Bree, see also the letter to W. B. Tegetmeier, 14 May [1872].

To R. F. Cooke 4 August 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug 4 1872 My dear Sir I am particularly obliged for all your clear answers to my queries. 1 Do you agree to my telling Messrs Appleton that you will supply Cliches of the woodcuts for £10, & stereotypes of the text for 5£ above prior cost or £45 (i.e. £55 for the text & cuts)?2 I am aware that this gives us conjointly very small profit; but from what you tell me of the cost of setting up the book in type, it w d be no advantage to Messrs A. to offer them the plates at a much higher cost, & as they paid me so liberally for the Descent I wish to act liberally towards them.3 I can see that it is hard upon you, but then there wd be no profit if the book were set up in type.4 Please to let me hear as soon as you can in answer, & about the cost per 1000 of copies of the heliotype plates. I will then at once write to Mess rs A & make them the offer; & I will then write to all the foreign editors to know how many copies of the Heliotypes they will require, & that they must procure them by prepayment to you. I have advised Kowalewsky not to print so large an ed. as 4000, but know not what he will determine. I have spoken to him about payment to myself. 5 I think I shall make a present of the right of translation to Victor Carus, who is poor & whom I greatly respect.—6 Reinwald wished for a French translation some time ago, but I have not heard from him lately, & I am not much esteemed in France—7 I know nothing as yet about other translations. I do not suppose all the proofs will be finished before the end of the month, as I must soon have a week’s rest. As soon as I get clean sheets I will see about the index. I shd prefer Mr Dallas, & I shd think he wd esteem yr offer of £8 as very liberal.8 My dear Sir | yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS(A) National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 258–9) 1 2 3 4

See letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872 and n. 3. On CD’s profits for the US edition of Descent, see the letter to D. Appleton & Co., 16 March 1872. D. Appleton & Co. had specified that they could only pay CD ten per cent of the gross profits if CD could secure the ‘casts’, or stereotypes, of future publications from his London publisher (see letter from D. Appleton & Co., 23 February 1872).

340 5

6 7

8

August 1872

Vladimir Onufrievich Kovalevsky was preparing the Russian translation of Expression (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872 and n. 5). He had visited CD sometime before mid-July (Davitashvili 1951, p. 157). Julius Victor Carus was translating Expression into German. No letter from the French publisher Charles-Ferdinand Reinwald about Expression has been found before that of 13 September 1872; CD’s last letter from him was that of 1 February 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19); it concerned the French translation of Descent. CD refers to William Sweetland Dallas (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872 and n. 9).

To Oswald Heer 4 August [1872–4]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug. 4th

Dear Sir I am much indebted to you for your great kindness in having sent me your two memoirs with their admirable engravings on the fossil Flora of Bear Isl d & Spitzbergen.2 How much science owes to you! with the most sincere respect, | Yours faithfully & obliged | Ch. Darwin Zentralbibliothek Zürich (Nachlass Oswald Heer 213.2) 1 2

The year range is established by the printed stationery, with the address in the centre; CD used this type of notepaper from January 1872 until November 1874. CD’s annotated copy of Heer 1870 (on the fossil flora of Bear Island) is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL; his copy of Heer 1869 (on the Miocene flora and fauna of Spitzbergen) is in the Darwin Library–CUL.

To J. D. Hooker 4 August [1872]

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug. 4th

My dear Hooker I was very glad to see in the Times a sort of abstract of the minutes of the Lords of the Treasury;1 as I hope this will make your position more comfortable; but the Ministers have been immeasurably shabby in not having taken more active steps. 2 Everyone seems to think so. What a wretched life you must have led of late, my dear old friend. I cannot tell you how interested I have been in reading numberless articles on your case, & how indignant I have been with those wretched Lords. 3 But after all, as far as I understand things, nothing equals Owen’s conduct.— 4 I used to be ashamed of hating him so much, but now I will carefully cherish my hatred & contempt to the last day of my life.5 Farewell, excuse this rigmarole. Of course do not answer— Farewell | Your affectionate friend | Charles Darwin P.S I received safely the boxes, forwarded, I presume from Kew.— 6 Endorsement: ‘/72’ DAR 94: 225–6

August 1872 1

2 3

4

5 6

341

A discussion in the House of Lords regarding the dispute between Hooker and his superior, Acton Smee Ayrton, was reported in The Times, 30 July 1872, including an abstract of the minutes (p. 5), and an editorial (p. 9). The abstract of the minutes contained a quotation from the Treasury ministers dated 24 July 1872 that praised Hooker’s work at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, and stipulated, ‘no alteration in existing arrangements in the scientific branch of the department shall be made without the Director’s concurrence’. For more on the controversy, see the letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872 and n. 1. On the conduct of the Treasury ministers, see the letter from J. D. Hooker, 14 May 1872. Beginning in July 1872, a number of newspapers had taken up Hooker’s case, including The Times, the Daily News, and the Guardian (an Anglican weekly: North 1997). For details, see Drayton 2000, pp. 215 and 317 n. 257, and Endersby 2008, pp. 286–9. Richard Owen had written a report that was critical of Hooker and the Kew herbarium. Owen called for the transfer of the herbarium to the British Museum, where he was the director of the natural history collections (The Times, 30 July 1872, p. 5; see also the letter from Thomas Henry Huxley to the editor, The Times, 31 July 1872, p. 7). Owen’s report was part of a long-running dispute over the management of botanical collections, and also part of a larger controversy surrounding the creation of the new Natural History Museum at South Kensington (see Drayton 2000, pp. 215–18, and Endersby 2008, pp. 293–300). For Owen’s report, see Parliamentary Papers 1872 (335): Appendix III, pp. 169–75. CD had come to regard Owen as a bitter enemy after his anonymous review of Origin ([Owen] 1860; see Correspondence vol. 8). The boxes contained worm castings from India; see letter to John Scott, 12 August 1872.

From A. R. Wallace 4 August 1872

The Dell, Grays, Sussex. August 4th. 1872

Dear Darwin I have sent your letter to “Nature”, as I think it will settle that question far better than anything I can say.1 Many thanks for it. I have not seen Dr. Bree’s letter yet as I get “Nature” here very irregularly,—but as I was very careful to mention none but real errors in Dr. Bree’s book, I do not imagine there will be any necessity for my taking any notice of it.2 It was really entertaining to have such a book to review, the errors & misconceptions were so inexplicable & the self sufficiency of the man so amazing. Yet there is some excellent writing in the book, and to a half informed person it has all the appearance of being a most valuable and authoritative work. I am now reviewing a much more important book and one that, if I mistake not, will really compel you sooner or later to modify some of your views, though it will not at all affect the main doctrine of Natural Selection as applied to the higher animals. I allude of course to Bastian’s “Beginnings of Life”, which you have no doubt got. 3 It is hard reading, but intensely interesting. I am a thorough convert to his main results, & it seems to me that nothing more important has appeared since your “Origin”. It is a pity he is so awfully voluminous & diffusive. When you have thoroughly digested it I shall be glad to know what you are disposed to think. My first notice of it will I think appear in “Nature” next week,—but I have been hurried for it, & it is not so well written an article as I could wish. I sincerely hope your health is improving. Believe me | Yours very faithfully | Alfred R. Wallace—

342

August 1872

P.S. I fear Lubbock’s motion is being pushed off to the end of the Session & Hookers case will not be fairly considered.4 I hope the matter will not be allowed to drop. | A.R.W. DAR 106: B111–12 1 2 3

4

Wallace refers to CD’s letter to Nature, 3 August [1872] (see letter to A. R. Wallace, 3 August [1872]). Charles Robert Bree’s letter appeared in Nature, 1 August 1872, p. 260. Wallace’s review of Bree’s book (Bree 1872) was published in Nature, 25 July 1872, pp. 237–9. Wallace’s review of Henry Charlton Bastian’s The beginnings of life (H. C. Bastian 1872) appeared in Nature, 8 and 15 August 1872, pp. 284–7 and 299–303. Bastian advanced various evidence in support of a theory of the spontaneous generation of life from inanimate matter. John Lubbock had moved for the dispute between Joseph Dalton Hooker and Acton Smee Ayrton to be brought before the House of Commons (see letter from J. D. Hooker, 15 June 1872 and n. 2).

From R. F. Cooke 6 August 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Augt. 6 1872

My dear Sir Herewith I enclose you Mr. Murray’s cheque (£315) for last edition of “Descent.” 1 By all means write to Messrs. Appletons, as you propose. The stereotypes & Electros for £55.2 I wrote to their agent here to know if he had received any instructions & I enclose his reply.3 It is rather remiss of Mr Mc Leod.4 He has not sent me the price of the Heliotypes & he promised me that I should have it the following day. I will write him In regard to foreign editions, our only desire is to carry out your own wishes; It will be as well to say £10, to every one for a set of the Electros. I am My dear Sir | faithfully Yours | Robt. Cooke Charles Darwin Esq DAR 171: 412 1 2 3 4

Cooke refers to John Murray. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1871 and n. 10. Cooke refers to D. Appleton & Co., and the stereotypes and electrotypes of Expression (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 4 August [1871] and n. 4). The letter from D. Appleton & Co.’s agent, Charles Layton, has not been found. See, however, the letter from Charles Layton, 13 August 1872. Mr McLeod has not been further identified. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1871 and n. 6.

From J. T. Gulick 6 August 1872 Frindsbury Hill | Rochester Aug. 6th. 1872. Dear Sir I am sorry I did not think to take my paper “On Diversity of Evolution” with me

August 1872

343

when I visited you on Friday, I should then have been more ready to fall in with your kind suggestion to call the attention of Sir John Lubbock and the General Secretaries to the same.1 I have not yet heard from the Secretaries Dr. T. Thomson and Capt. Douglas Galton with whom the acceptance of papers rests; 2 A paper that deals so largely with theories is very liable to be thrown out, unless it is decided upon, or is recommended, by one who appreciates its bearing upon theories that have already awakened the greatest interest. That you may be able to judge something of the nature of my paper I give the heading of the sections and a few short extracts. In the “Origin of species” in the last sentence of the Introduction you say. “I am convinced that Natural Selection has been the most important but not the exclusive means of modification.”3 I have attempted to suggest some of the other conditions that have influence. Yours sincerely | John T. Gulick Address | Care of Mrs Delacour4 | Frindsbury Hill | Rochester [Enclosure]

Sinopsis of Paper On Diversity of Evolution under one set of External Conditions By Rev. J. T. Gulick Relations of the Subjects “The term Nat. Selection expresses a law which can act only where there is variation. What then is the effect of these variations where the external conditions remain the same? If the initiation of change in the organism is through change in the “Environment” by what law is the cessation of change determined? If change continues in the Organism long after the essential conditions of the “Environment” have become stationary, how do we know that it is not perpetual? Does the change whether transitory or continuous expend itself in producing from each species placed in the new “Environment just one new species completely fitted to the conditions, or may it produce from one stock many that are equally fitted? If the latter what is the law or condition that determines their number, their affinities, and the size & position of their respective areas as related to each other & to the whole available area? Separation & Variation correlative factors in the Evolution of Species Migration & Variation opposing factors in the Limitation of Areas. The Nat. Selection that prevents Variation. Stability of type in Island fauna impaired 1st. By freedom from the kind of Competition that limits Variation 2nd By Competition accelerating Variation 3rd By continual change in the character of the Nat. Selection

344

August 1872

Imaginary Cases illustrating Evolution Changes that would follow the introduction of hostile animals DAR 165: 240 1

2

3 4

Gulick had visited CD at Down House on 2 August 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). He hoped to present his paper at the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, which was held in Brighton from 14 to 21 August 1872. John Lubbock was a vice-president of the British Association, and the president of the biology section (Report of the 42d meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (1872), pp. xlvi–xlvii). Douglas Galton was one of the general secretaries of the British Association; the other was Michael Foster, not Thomas Thomson (Report of the 42d meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (1872), p. xlvii). Origin, p. 6. Anne De La Cour.

To R. F. Cooke 7 August 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug 7th 72

My dear Sir I enclose a Receipt.—1 Thinking over the cost of stereotype of text, I looked at your former note, & find that I made a very stupid mistake. I thought you had said that the stereotypes would cost £ 40, whereas the sum is £ 30, & cost of setting up type is £ 40.— On this scale I shd. have proposed £ 45, but now will you agree to £ 50, instead of £ 55 for stereotype of type & wood-blocks.— Mrs Appleton will then get only the advantage over setting up the type himself of the cost of the stereotype plates, less carriage.—2 When you inform me of the price of Heliotypes pray answer me this question.—3 I will then at once write to Mrs. Appleton. I will tell the Appletons that they cannot publish an hour before we do, but that we will supply the plates, so that they may publish very soon after us. My dear Sir | Yours sincerely | C. Darwin 10£ for cliches for all other foreign Editors.—4 National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 255–6) 1 2

3 4

Cooke had enclosed a cheque with his letter of 6 August 1872. CD had proposed charging D. Appleton & Co. £55 for stereotypes of the printed text and electrotypes of the engravings of Expression (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 4 August 1872). For Cooke’s estimate of the actual costs, see his letter of 1 August 1872. Expression included photographic plates that were reproduced as heliotypes (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872 and n. 6). On the translations of Expression, see the letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872, nn. 5 and 8.

From V. O. Kovalevsky [c. 7 August 1872]1

218 Euston Road | Gower Street. Dear Sir As You expressed a wish to have the proof sheets sent back I do so to day with excuses for having detained them perhaps too long a time. 2 As this is the only time

August 1872

345

when my brother is free from his lectures, 3 and I may too devote my evenings to the subject, I will be extremely grateful if You could send me, while I am staying in London, the second proofs of the following sheets of Your book on Expression; I have already translated the two first.4 I have called on Mr Murray on account of casts, and he said me, that he is ready to supply me with them on receiving a line from You expressing Your permission for him to do so.5 Pray excuse me for the trouble I give You and believe me | Yours very truly | W. Kowalevsky DAR 169: 58 1 2

3 4

5

The date is established by the reference to Kovalevsky’s visit to Murray and his returning of proof-sheets to CD (see nn. 4 and 5, below). Kovalevsky began receiving proof-sheets of Expression in July. He wrote to his brother Alexander Onufrievich Kovalevsky in a letter dated 26 July [1872], reporting that he had received and already translated the first two proof-sheets (Gaisinovich ed. 1988, p. 188). A. O. Kovalevsky was a lecturer at the University of St Vladimir, Kiev. In a letter to A. O. Kovalevsky of 7 August [1872], Kovalevsky reported that he had received six proofsheets of Expression, three of which he had sent back, and that he expected to have the others finished within six days (Gaisinovich ed. 1988, p. 190). In a letter written in mid-August, he reported he had sent back the six sheets to CD (Gaisinovich ed. 1988, p. 193). Kovalevsky visited Murray on 7 August 1872 or shortly before; he wrote to his brother on the evening of 7 August following his visit to Murray, informing him of his estimates of costs, including the cost of the heliotypes (Gaisinovich ed. 1988, p. 191).

From V. O. Kovalevsky [before 8 August 1872]1 218 Euston Road. Dear Sir I am very happy Dear Sir to share any profits that will come out of the Edition of Your new book and I hope profits will come out of it. 2 We had so much to talk over during my visit, that I could not fully explain to You how matter stands with Your other works.3 I would be extremely glad to share also any profits from Your former 4 vol. but unhappily till now I am a heavy loser by them. 4 You will appreciate this seemingly strange fact by my saying that besides my complete Edition of Your Descent of Man, we have in Russia two pirated abridged edition of the same work selling at a very low price.5 We are not protected by a treaty and every successful book printed in England is sure to be published in an abridged and bad translation, which by its low price cuts entirely all profits of a good and complete Edition. By publishing the work “on Expression” shortly after the original there is a hope of preventing competitive and bad Editions, but still I must be prepared that after the book is out in England it will be translated and printed in a cheap form with some of the woodcuts made in Russia, and the whole book sold at 2/6 or 3s. 6 However if profits will come, I and my brother will be very glad to share them. 7 If You will allow

346

August 1872

me, I’ll call one day of the ensuing week, for a short visit, on You, and try to arrange this matter to our mutual satisfaction Your very truly | W. Kowalevsky DAR 169: 56 1 2 3 4

5 6 7

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 8 August [1872]. Kovalevsky was translating Expression into Russian. On Kovalevsky’s visit, see the letter to R. F. Cooke, 4 August 1872 and n. 5. Kovalevsky had translated Variation in two volumes (Kovalevsky trans. 1868–9) and Descent in two volumes ([Kovalevsky] trans. 1871–2). Descent had been banned by the tsarist board of censors, but the ban was lifted after an appeal to the foreign censorship committee (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 14 March 1871 and n. 4). Two other Russian translations of Descent are listed in Freeman 1977. One was serialised in the journal Znanie in 1871; the other was published by A. Morigerovskii (St Petersburg, 1871–2). Kovalevsky’s translation of Expression ([Kovalevsky] trans. 1872) was the only one to appear in Russia until 1896 (Freeman 1977, p. 148). Alexander Onufrievich Kovalevsky was overseeing the Russian translation of Expression; his name appears in [Kovalevsky] trans. 1872 as the editorial director.

To R. F. Cooke 8 August [1872]1 I have just received your note of the 7th & one from Mr Edwards, which has quite astonished me.—2 I clearly see that I ought to have had a written estimate; but they gave me the enclosed printed paper as an estimate, & I presume that this will not be denied; & Mr Edwards agreed that as my 3 larger plates do not exceed in depth, 7’, the charge for these ought to be somewhat less than in the printed paper.— You will see in the paper that the charge for 5000 copies of the smaller Plate is only 1 d per copy!3 No doubt there ought to be some extra charge for making some new negatives & for cutting the negatives also I suppose; but this w d be very little when spread over so many copies.— I cannot conceive what they mean by the titling “requiring a great deal of extra trouble,” as the titling consists only solely of Pl. I, Pl. II, &c with simple figure 1, 2, & &c on each Plate.—4 One thing is clear that it will be extra charges on the foreign Edition, beyond what we pay & I cannot agree to this & for all you say in your note I am very far from supposing that you w d wish to do so.5 Pray take the printed paper to the Co & endeavour to come to some final understanding with them.— They are bound to calculate by the 1000 or ’5000 copies.— I enclose exact dimensions of my seven Plates, so that you may see what the charges ought to be by the estimate.—6 I am exceedingly sorry to cause you so much trouble, I think you might give a distinct [ hint] to the Company that Probably will be unwilling to have any [ Transaction with them without] they keep to the letter of the printed estimate Aug 8th ADraft DAR 96: 150–1

August 1872 1 2

3 4 5 6

347

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from R. F. Cooke, 6 August 1872. The letter from Cooke and the note from Ernest Edwards have not been found. They evidently contained estimates of the printing costs for the photographic plates for Expression (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 6 August 1872). The enclosure has not been found. Expression had seven photographic plates, three of which were foldouts. The plates were numbered in the top right hand corner. The plates all carried multiple images, with some carrying as many as six; these images were also numbered. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872. The enclosure has not been found.

To J. T. Gulick 8 August [1872]

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug. 8th

My dear Sir Our notes crossed on the road. On reflection I do not think I can do anything about your paper.1 The Secretarys act somewhat like judges & might properly demur to any suggestion being made to them.2 Moreover in this special case, they might say, with perfect truth, that I should prejudiced in favour of your subject.— I know so little about the proceedings of the B. Assoc. that I really cannot form any opinion, whether the Sec.s. would consider your paper too theoretical. I imagine that they do not decide what papers to read until each day arrives & they can see what time there is, & how many papers have been sent in.— 3 My dear Sir | Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin Postmark: AU 8 72 American Philosophical Society (423) 1 2 3

See letter from J. T. Gulick, 6 August 1872 and n. 1. See letter from J. T. Gulick, 6 August 1872 and n. 2. Gulick’s paper was presented in the biology section at the 1872 meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science; however, no abstract was printed (see Report of the 42d meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (1872), p. 136). The paper was later published in the Journal of the Linnean Society (Zoology) ( J. T. Gulick 1872b). CD’s annotated copy is in the Darwin Library–CUL (collection of unbound journals).

From V. O. Kovalevsky 8 August [1872]1

British Museum. 8 August.—

Dear Sir I wished to visit You only to save You the trouble writing long letters, what indeed must be very trying for a man as overworked as You are.2 I have written to my brother3 and after I shall know the price of the Heliotypes (as Mr Murray informed me that he cannot fix it now, not having made final arrangements with the Heliotype company)4 I’ll write or call in the day for an hour on You (at all events I shall

348

August 1872

write You then and wish for an answer); the best plan will be to go to Orpington by a morning walk over to Down, speak with You about the matter and immediately return, this will save You writing.— I remain in England perhaps five weeks more, and will go afterwards to France to go once more over the collections at Puy.5 I hope by that time You will be able to send me the greater part of the sheets, if You will be satisfied by the arrangement I could propose to You after having got the date for doing so from M r Murray.— I had a very sad news yesterday, the Russian gentleman who got into the interior of New Guinea died there of fever. 6 I have myself seen Mr Wallace and he strengthened my Borneo project, but certainly we could not start before two years, as I have at least to this time commenced work on hand.7 Believe me | very truly Yours | W. Kowalevsky P.S. If You have agreements, with Germany and France, ours could be shaped on them, if not we shall try and frame a new one, acceptable to both parties. 8 I should be extremely sorry to make You write letters, so please not to put Yourself to any inconvenience.— P.P.S.S. I am a little astonished at not finding in Your book any reference to Wündt “Menschen und Thierseele”,9 I dont think very much of it, but still it is a work bearing quite on Your subject, I hope You have seen it as it may furnish You with good materials. There is some mistake about the number of Heliotypes, I did no wish to have 4000 but provisionally only one thousand with a right to increase this till 3000.10 | W. K. DAR 169: 91 1 2 3 4

5

6

7

8 9 10

The year is established by the reference to the publication of Expression (see n. 4, below). Kovalevsky had suggested visiting CD in his letter of [before 8 August 1872]. Alexander Onufrievich Kovalevsky. CD’s publisher, John Murray, and Murray’s business partner, Robert Francis Cooke, had been trying to obtain an estimate of the cost of reproducing the photographic illustrations in Expression from the London Heliotype Company (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 6 August 1872). Kovalevsky left London for Paris between 20 and 29 October 1872 (Gaisinovich ed. 1988, pp. 210, 212). Le Puy-en-Velay is a town in south central France; zoological and palaeontological collections are held in the Crozatier museum (www.dentellieres.com/Musee/Crozatier/Lace-crozatier1.htm; accessed 26 May 2011). Kovalevsky had been consulting various collections in France for his research on Anchitherium, a member of the horse family (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 19 August [1871]). The Russian explorer and naturalist Nikolai Nikolaievich Miklucho-Maclay lived in New Guinea during 1871 and 1872 (GSE). He was reported to have died; however a letter was received from him in March 1873, stating that he had fallen ill (Nature, 22 May 1873, p. 75). Alfred Russel Wallace had lived in Borneo for about fifteen months during his travels in the Malay archipelago from 1854 to 1862 (Raby 2001, p. 101). Kovalevsky also mentioned his visit to Wallace and their discussion about Borneo in a letter to his brother, Alexander (Gaisinovich ed. 1988, p. 192). On the German and French translations of Expression, see the letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872 and nn. 5 and 8. Kovalevsky refers to Wilhelm Max Wundt’s Vorlesungen ueber die Menschen- und Thierseele (Lectures on human and animal psychology; Wundt 1863). CD had thought that Kovalevsky intended to print 4000 copies of the Russian translation of Expression

August 1872

349

(see letter to R. F. Cooke, 4 August 1872). In a letter to his brother in mid-August, Kovalevsky wrote that Murray would charge £75 for 1000 heliotypes (Gaisinovich ed. 1988, p. 194). In a further letter of mid-August, he mentioned that CD would receive twenty-five per cent of the profits (ibid., p. 195).

From R. F. Cooke 9 August 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Augt. 9 1872

My dear Sir By all means write out to Messr. Appletons & say for £50, they shall be supplied with stereotypes & Electros.1 I have been 3 times to the Heliotype Compy , but without finding any one there to explain to me their estimate.2 I cant help thinking, we misunderstand the matter that instead of impressions they mean negatives or plates but we shall see Yrs faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 413 1 2

See letter to R. F. Cooke, 7 August 1872. On CD’s concerns about the costs of the plates for Expression, see the letter to R. F. Cooke, 8 August [1872].

To Francis Galton 9 August [1872]1

Down 9 Aug

I telegraphed you this morning about the Rabbit. Our confounded carrier suddenly changed his mind & goes up to night, perhaps he will bring the rabbit tomorrow evening.2 If it does not then come I do not know how it had better be sent; if by Railway, I may not perhaps hear when it arrives at Orpington. Hudson Rogue (Cat. 5) 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to Francis Galton, 1 August [1872]. See letter to Francis Galton, 1 August [1872] and n. 1. In 1872, 9 August was a Friday; CD had told Galton that the carrier (George Snow) left London on Thursday morning.

To R. F. Cooke 10 August [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug 10th

My dear Sir The fair way for the H: Coy : would be (& we could probably compel them to do so legally) to charge us for making 7 or 8 new negatives according to the Printed

350

August 1872

paper (though they told me they shd. not, if we took many copies) & to charge us for cutting & fixing all the negatives & lettering the Plates; & then to charge per 1000 or 5000 copies for the copies, according to the printed paper which was distinctly given me as an Estimate.—2 Yours very faithfully | C. Darwin & we could spread the cost of negatives &c. over the copies supplied to Foreigners National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 f. 257) 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from R. F. Cooke, 9 August 1872. Cooke was attempting to get an explanation from the Heliotype Company of the price for printing the photographic plates of Expression (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 9 August 1872 and n. 2).

To V. O. Kovalevsky 10 August [1872] Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug 10th My dear Sir It is no trouble to me to write short notes. I sent off duplicates this morning of 2 finally corrected sheets; & shall soon be able to send more.— 1 There is a difficulty about the Heliotype Co y. as they want to charge far more than their printed estimate; & I do not know how we shall agree, but I will inform you as soon as I hear.2 We leave home for 8 days on Tuesday morning, as I am quite done up.— 3 My book will now be finished very soon.— 4 I am sorry to say that I have never even heard of the book to which you refer. 5 Before you leave England pray come & lunch or dine here; I shall be most happy to see you.—6 Yours very sincerely | C. Darwin P.S. I see I have forgotten to say, that the sole verbal agreement which I wish to make with you is that you shall give me some moderate percentage of any clear profits which you may make.— Postmarks: Au 11 72| AU 12 72 The National Library of Sweden, Manuscripts (accession 1996/31) 1 2 3 4 5 6

CD was sending Kovalevsky the proof-sheets of Expression for his Russian translation of the work (see letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 8 August [1872]). See letter to R. F. Cooke, 10 August [1872] and n. 2. CD was at Leith Hill Place in Surrey, the home of the Josiah Wedgwood III and Caroline Sarah Wedgwood, from 13 to 21 August 1872 (‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). CD finished correcting the proof-sheets of Expression on 22 August 1872 (‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Wundt 1863. See letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 8 August [1872]. Kovalevsky visited CD on 22 September 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)).

August 1872

351

From Francis Galton 11 August 1872 9. Royal Crescent | Marine Parade | Brighton Aug 11/72 My dear Darwin The buck is quite well— the enclosed note just received, explains everything 1 Now that Dr. Carter has returned, he will see that all is rightly done.—2 Will you kindly tell your servant to explain to the carrier.? 3 Very sincerely yours | Francis Galton Do not care to return the note. DAR 105: A71 1 2 3

See letters to Francis Galton, 23 January [1872] and n. 2, and 9 August [1872]. The enclosure has not been found. Charles Henry Carter was a physician whom Galton employed to assist in his rabbit experiments (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Francis Galton, 21 November 1871). The carrier was George Snow. The servant was probably William Jackson or Mark Ansell (see letter to Francis Galton, 27 May [1872] and n. 2).

From V. O. Kovalevsky [12–17 August 1872]1

218 Euston Road. Dear Sir! As it seems to me that You cannot possible omit in Your book to mention Wündt’s Thierseele, I wrote to day to my bookseller in Berlin to send me the volume immediately; it is the chief contribution to this subject in the last ten years and I think You will be greatly interested in it.—2 I hope you will be able to look over it at Your return to Down.—3 I see there will be no difficulty in our agreement, the number of copies sold in Russia could be controled by Mr. Murray by the number of Heliotypes he will supply.—4 I hope to see You before leaving England5 | Your very truly | W. Kowalevsky P.S. As German is very familiar to me I could, should You like it, spare You the wading trough the large volume and make notes on the sides of the pages for You, though I cannot hope that I could as finely pick out the grains from the chaff as You should certainly do. DAR 169: 57 1

2

3

The date range is established by the relationship between this letter, the letter to V. O. Kovalevsky, 10 August [1872], and the letter to V. O. Kovalevsky, 17 August 1872. The letter to V. O. Kovalevsky, 10 August [1872], carries postmarks of 11 and 12 August 1872. Kovalevsky had recommended that CD read Wundt 1863 for its relevance to Expression (see letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 8 August [1872]). No reference to the book appears in Expression; however, several later publications by Wilhelm Max Wundt are cited in notes added to the second edition, which was published by Francis Darwin after CD’s death (see Expression 2d. ed., pp. 52 and 386). CD stayed at Leith Hill Place in Surrey from 13 to 21 August 1872 (‘Journal’ (Appendix II)).

352 4

5

August 1872

There had been a misunderstanding between Kovalevsky and CD’s publisher, John Murray, about the number of heliotyped plates that Kovalevsky wished to order for the Russian translation (see letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 8 August [1872] and n. 10). Kovalevsky visited Down on 22 September 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)).

To John Scott 12 August 1872 Down, Beckenham, Kent, Aug. 12, 1872. My Dear Sir,— I received from Kew about a week ago some boxes with worm castings, no doubt sent by you; but I have found no memorandum enclosed. 1 Some of these castings from South India are quite gigantic, and others seem very extraordinary; but I have not as yet looked at all of them. There is also a bottle with worms in spirits. As on so many former occasions, you have taken infinite pains to oblige me, and the materials seem wonderfully complete. But I am very anxious for some information with respect to these specimens; and I hope no letter has miscarried, for this would be a very great loss to me. I have almost finished printing my volume on expression, which will not be published until November. I will then send you a copy, in which you will see how valuable your observations have been to me.2 With very sincere thanks,—Believe me, Yours truly, | Ch. Darwin. There is also a block of grey consolidated earth. Also a tin box with pellets like shot. Transactions of the Hawick Archæological Society (1908): 69 1

2

After receiving observations on worms from Scott, CD had requested further information specifically on castings and burrowing behaviour (see letter from John Scott, 22 March 1872, and letter to John Scott, 15 April [1872]). The box had been forwarded from the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 August [1872]). Expression was published on 26 November 1872 (Freeman 1977). Scott had supplied CD with extensive observations on emotional expression in India (see Correspondence vol. 16, letter from John Scott, 4 May 1868, and Correspondence vol. 17, letters from John Scott, 2 July 1869 and 21 December 1869). His name is on the presentation list for Expression (Appendix V).

From V. O. Kovalevsky [after 12 August 1872]1 British Museum Tuesday Dear Sir! I am very happy if I could be of any use to You with Wundt’s book, I am looking over the first volume now but find little interesting for You, still after having marked the point that may interest You I will send the vol. to Down. 2

August 1872

353

If Thursday is not inconvenient for You, and the day is fine (as I shall have to walk from Orpington), I will with Your permission call early in the afternoon, returning back by the evening train.—3 Very truly Yours W. Kowalevsky DAR 169: 59 CD ANNOTATIONS Top of letter: Ch. X 2. 35—

3. 11—

4. —

4. 49—

8. 20— from Orp.4 Bottom of letter: ‘6o 52 | 8o 24 ’ pencil; ‘Physic’ pencil, del pencil 1 2

3 4

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, [12–17 August 1872]. CD’s letter to Kovalevsky has not been found; he evidently agreed to Kovalevsky’s suggestion that he mark passages in Wundt 1863 for their possible relevance to Expression (see letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, [12–17 August 1872] and n. 2). Kovalevsky’s next recorded visit to Down was on 22 September 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). The numbers are train times between Charing Cross and Orpington stations.

From R. F. Cooke to G. H. Darwin 13 August 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Augt. 13 1872

My dear Sir I have been to the “Heliotype Company” & the result of the whole business is, that each plate will cost 2 14 d or a set 1s /4d in round numbers, including the Titling.1 The preliminary process amounts to the 14 Gs. The explanation is, that they never bargained for so many subjects on a plate & that most of the plates are on a much larger paper than the page of the work. 2 These prices now quoted are much lower (under these circumstances) than their scale & are almost cost price. What I have seen of them, everything is very straightforward & above board & the result comes to this that the price of the volume must be such as to cover the 1/4 extra for these plates. The titling is so much, because it is done by lithography & this is another printing & it costs them the 2/- p 100. The numbers ought to have been given at first & cd. then have been heliotyped in— it wd. cost more than 2/- p 100 or quite as much if done by hand. Your father must now make up his mind at once, as to the Nos being lithographed in so that we may get a head with the printing & begin with 5000.

354

August 1872

Are we to charge the American & other editions 1/4 a set or 1/5 or 1/6.? 3 As they sh . be informed at once. Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke I trust to your kindly informing yr father of all this. d

George Darwin Esq DAR 171: 414 1 2 3

Cooke had been trying to obtain the costs for printing the photographic plates for Expression (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 9 August 1872). On the size of the plates and the number of images per plate, see the letter to R. F. Cooke, 8 August [1872] and nn. 3 and 4. The American edition was published by D. Appleton & Co. On the translations of Expression, see the letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872, nn. 5 and 8.

From G. H. Darwin [13 August 1872]1 New University Club, | S.t James’s Street S.W. Tuesday afternoon My dear Father, After a most tremendous rummage I found the 2 Roy. Soc. books & took them back;2 I had almost given one of them up when I found it stuck away under a pile of papers in a cupboard. I have also been to see Mr. Cook3 & have discovered what you probably will have heard by telegraph (a useful exercise to Aunt C.) 4 that the Heliotype people put 2s 2 12 d by mistake for 1s.2 12 d — this correction makes the prints very cheap instead of very dear 1d a piece. I empressed on Cook that he was to get them to charge a lump sum for preparing plates &c including the titling & that as far as we can see it is absurd to charge per 100 for doing it. Cooke says that he does not consider them sharp-practitioners but v. liberal & thinks it all very satisfactory I met Pryor5 here this p.m & we are going down to Brighton together, wh will make it much more lively.— There had been an accident on the G.E.R this a.m a train ran off the lines on the viaduct near New Cross luckily it had run straight on & no harm was done.6 I shall prob. turn up on Sat.— I hope you have got thro’ the journey well7 Your affectionate Son | George Darwin DAR 210.2: 23 1

2 3 4

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from R. F. Cooke to G. H. Darwin, 13 August 1871, and by the reference to the train accident near New Cross (see n. 6, below). In 1872, 13 August was a Tuesday. George evidently refers to books borrowed from the library of the Royal Society of London. Robert Francis Cooke had been negotiating with the Heliotype Company over the price of printing the photographic plates for Expression (see letter from R. F. Cooke to G. H. Darwin, 13 August 1871). CD’s sister, Caroline Sarah Wedgwood.

August 1872 5 6 7

355

Marlborough Robert Pryor. The Great Eastern Railway accident on the Charing Cross to Dover line near New Cross took place on 13 August 1872 (The Times, 14 August 1872, p. 5). CD had travelled to Leith Hill Place in Surrey, where he stayed from 13 to 21 August (‘Journal’ (Appendix II)).

From Charles Layton 13 August 1872 Littlehampton— Sussex August 13/72 Dear Sir Staying here for a holiday, your favour of the 10 th. is just received—1 The arrangement you have made with Mr. Murray for Stereo Plates & clichés of 21 Wood blocks for the new book seems very satisfactory at £50—2 Mr. Cooke wrote me sometime since that it was arranged they should supply Impressions of the heliotype Plates, and asked what quantity would be required, as he wished to have an early reply, I ordered 5000 sets, and advised Mess rs. Appleton, nothing was said about the cost of these plates and I took it for granted, they would be charged at a fair & moderate price— I shall soon hear if Mess rs. Appletons think a larger quantity will be required, though they will most likely write direct to yourself, if not, you will hear again from | Yours Respectfully | Charles Layton | Agent D. Appleton & Co To | Charles Darwin Esq DAR 159: 91 1

2

CD’s letter to Layton has not been found. Layton, the agent of the US publisher D. Appleton & Co., had been in correspondence with Robert Francis Cooke about the US edition of Expression (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 6 August 1872). Layton refers to John Murray. See letter to R. F. Cooke, 7 August 1872.

To R. F. Cooke [14 August 1872]1 Leith Hill Place | Wotton | Dorking Wednesday My dear Sir I have heard from my son & it has been the greatest relief to me that the estimate was a mistake.2 I enclose lettered copies of the 7 plates, to you instead of direct to the company, as I do not quite understand what you have determined about the manner of lettering. I hope I shall now cause no more trouble, & I have only further to request you to let me hear, so that I may write at once to foreign editors & inform them of the cost per 1000 copies of the 7 plates paper included. 3 I think it wd be quite fair to distribute the cost of the negatives & of the 7 guineas which I have paid to M r Rejlander4 over all the copies, as well as some slight commission to yourselves for the trouble.

356

August 1872

You cannot imagine what a relief it has been to me to find that the H. company has wished to impose upon me. My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS(A) National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 253–4) 1 2

3 4

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from G. H. Darwin, [13 August 1872]. In 1872, the first Wednesday following 13 August was 14 August. See letter from G. H. Darwin, [13 August 1872]. George Howard Darwin had received from Cooke a revised estimate for printing the plates for Expression from the Heliotype Company (letter from R. F. Cooke to G. H. Darwin, 13 August 1872). On the translations of Expression, see the letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872, nn. 5 and 8. Oscar Gustaf Rejlander had supplied CD with a number of photographs for Expresssion (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from John Murray, 31 May [1871]).

From R. F. Cooke 14 August 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Augt. 14 1872

My dear Sir I send you on, one of these sets of plates to see the figures in case the H. Coy. have not done so.1 I wrote yesterday very fully to your son, all about the Plates. 2 We cant help ourselves now & had better make the best of the matter & we must put 12/- on the work instead of 10/6 or 14/- instead of 12/Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 415 1

2

Each of the photographic plates for Expression, as well as the individual images on each plate, had to have a separately printed number (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 8 August [1872]). The plates were being printed by the Heliotype Company. See letter from R. F. Cooke to G. H. Darwin, 13 August 1872.

From J. J. Weir 14 August 1872 Accountant and Controller General’s Office, | H. M. Customs. 14th August 1872 My Dear Sir I have thrown together an observation or two which may prove amusing, but I trust you will not deem it worth while even to acknowledge the receipt of this communication.— I have had a further illustration in my aviary of the objection male birds entertain towards any others, which in the nuptial plumage, are colored in the same manner.— as themselves.1

August 1872

357

The Spiza cyanea is in the breeding plumage a beautiful blue bird, The Spiza ciris has this color confined to the head only.—2 My Spiza cyanea, generally a very quiet bird, attacked the Spiza ciris, & completely scalped his blue head.—3 The Ciris however survived although it appears the skull is exposed, he even resumed his song after a few days, & afterwards remained unmolested I was at the Zoological Gardens several days lately, & saw what I believe you are aware of, six young of the New Zealand Shelldrake, Tadorna Variegata, 4 these all had the black head of the male bird, & were in all respects similar, they are however at this time beginning, at least the Incomplete DAR 88: 177–8 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 I have . . . communication.— 1.3] crossed pencil 4.1 My . . . head.— 4.2] double scored pencil 6.1 I was . . . similar, 6.3] crossed pencil Top of letter: ‘Descent of Man | J. Jenner Weir’ pencil 1 2 3 4

Weir and CD had corresponded at length on sexual selection in birds. For Weir’s previous observations on this point, see Correspondence vol. 16, letter from J. J. Weir, [before 3] March 1868. Spiza cyanea (now Passerina cyanea) is the indigo bunting; S. ciris (now P. ciris) is the painted bunting. CD added this information to Descent 2d ed., p. 412. Tadorna variegata, the paradise shelduck, is native to New Zealand. The female has a white head. Weir refers to the Zoological Gardens in Regent’s Park, London.

To R. F. Cooke 15 August 1872 Leith Hill Place | Wotton— Dorking Aug 15 1872 My dear Sir I have recd the plates, & I believe they are all numbered right; but as I sent you plates properly numbered yesterday I have here no means of comparison.1 Will you therefore be so kind as to compare the numbers carefully, & at once give the order for printing off. As I wrote yesterday it seems to me quite fair that the charge of the preliminary processes &c, say 21 guineas, should be distributed over 5000 or 6000 copies; & the charge to foreigners made accordingly. I do not understand whether the Company will allow you some discount as commission for yr trouble. As soon as you can decide what the charge per 1000 copies ought to be, please to inform me. I have heard from Mr Layton that he will want 5000; but perhaps when he hears the price, the number may be reduced.2 There is a mistake about Kowalewsky, as he wants at first only 1000. Koch writes that he will begin with 1000; but then he has not yet learnt the price.3 No doubt some will be wanted in France. 4 I hope the book will not be more than 12/ My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch Darwin

358

August 1872

P.S. Mr Layton thinks £50 very liberal for the stereotypes of text & blocks—5 P.S 2nd I did give the numbers for the plates at first to the H. Co. but it is not worth while reminding them of that.6 LS National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 260–1) 1 2 3

4 5 6

On the numbering of the photographic plates for Expression, see the letter to R. F. Cooke, [14 August 1872], and the letter from R. F. Cooke, 14 August 1872 and n. 1. On the order for the US edition of Expression, see the letter from Charles Layton, 13 August 1872. The Russian translation of Expression was being prepared by Vladimir Onufrievich Kovalevsky (see letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 8 August [1872] and n. 10). The letter from Eduard Friedrich Koch, the publisher of the German translation, has not been found. Arrangements for the French translation of Expression had not yet been made (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 4 August 1872 and n. 7). See letter from Charles Layton, 13 August 1872. The plates were being printed by the Heliotype Company.

From D. F. Tyler 15 August 1872

No. 35 East 36th. St. | New York August 15. 1872

Charles Darwin Esq. | M.A., F.R.S. &c. Dear Sir: I think you will pardon me the liberty, herewith taken, of imposing this long note upon you, on the broad principle that intelligent Scientists never reject trifling ideas or suggestions. The pleasure I experienced, this last week, in perusing your work: “The Descent of Man”, was heightened by your reviving, in my mind, an old idea in relation to the effect of the sun’s rays, through color, upon tender and delicate birds. Permit me to quote an item, from the works of my distinguished countryman, D r. Franklin. His experiment is undoubtedly known to you, being recorded in the Works of Benjn. Franklin by Jared Sparks1 — (10 Vols.)— Vol. 6— Page 237: “My experiment is this. I took a number of little square pieces of broad-cloth from a tailor’s pattern card, of various colors. There were black, deep-blue, lighter-blue, green, purple, red, yellow, white, and other colors, or shades of colors. I laid them all out upon the snow, in a bright sunshiny morning. In a few hours (I cannot now be exact as to time) the black being warmed most by the sun, was sunk so low as to be below the stroke of the sun’s rays; the dark blue almost as low, the lighter blue not quite so much as the dark, the other colors less as they were lighter; and the quite white remained on the surface of the snow, not having entered it at all. x x x x. It is the same before a fire; the heat of which sooner penetrates black stockings than white ones, and so it is apt sooner to burn a man’s shins. Also beer much sooner warms in a black mug set before the fire, than in a white one, or in a bright silver tankard. x x x x. What signifies philosophy that does not apply to some use? May we not learn

August 1872

359

from hence, that black clothes are not so fit to wear in a hot, sunny climate or season, as white ones; because in such clothes the body is more heated by the sun when we walk abroad, and are at the same time heated by the exercise, which double heat is apt to bring on putrid, dangerous fevers. That soldiers and seamen who must march and labor in the sun, should in the East or West Indies, have an uniform of white. That summer hats, for men or women, should be white, as repelling the heat which gives headache to many, and to some the fatal stroke that the French call “coup de soliel”—”2 &c. &c. &c. I now quote from your “Descent of Man”— Vol. 2— Page 218— (Appleton’s Edition)’3 As the latter breeds on the “barren-grounds”, when not covered with snow, and as it migrates southward during the winter, there is no reason to suppose that its snow-white adult plumage serves as a protection. 4 In the case of the Anastomus oscitans previously alluded to, we have still better evidence that the white plumage is a nuptial character, for it is developed only during the summer; the young in their immature state, and the adults in their winter dress, being gray and black”. 5 The thought naturally arises: that a bird being black in snow-clad regions, and changing to white on its migration to a hot climate—it would seem that Nature here takes cognizance of the power of color in drawing or attracting heat. For how could the black-feathered bird, accustomed to a cold climate, bear the heat of the sun, unless receiving from Nature a white feathery umbrella to shed the sun’s heat, in the hot climate to which it migrates? Color may be considered from another standpoint—that of light and darkness. White admits light. Black shuts it out. White is translucent. Black is opaque. Our phrenologists (Mess. Fowler & Wells)6 advised me not to wear dark-colored clothes, because my vocation being sedentary, my body craved light—and when I went abroad into the sunlight, dark clothes shut out the light from my skin. They illustrated the idea by two tents: one of black-cloth—the other of white. In the white tent, a man could see to read— in the black one, he could not. They evidenced it by a laboring man, seen in bathing, whose skin all over the body, was nearly nut-brown, excepting two narrow-crossed-lines on his back and shoulders, where dark-colored suspenders had shut out the sun’s rays, and kept the skin beneath them white. It may be that, with your close investigation of the whole subject, you have fully considered, and finally rejected the idea, that color of plumage is governed in the least by climate or seasons. But if the idea has escaped you, it certainly seems good that it should be placed under your critical analysis.7 Allow me one other observation, at which you may be amused: In the instances related of the retriever & ducks, and the retriever & partridges (Vol. 1— Page 46— of the “Descent of Man”) we should, I think, here in America, consider the latter retriever more intellectual than the former.8 Our national trait is to invent laborsaving machines; and the highest point is reached by him who accomplishes most, with the least work. As regards any respect for the bird’s life, the dog would follow his prototype master.

360

August 1872

So we should be apt to award the premium to the retriever who intellectually planned a mode to bring both birds, without going the ground twice over. It seems to me that Colonel Hutchinson’s retriever possessed a larger inventive brain (Mr. Pope’s criterion of human genius) than did Mr. Colquhoun’s. 9 I remain, dear Sir, | Respectfully Yours, | Daniel F. Tyler DAR 88: 181–2 CD ANNOTATIONS Top of letter: ‘Colour of Birds in winter | S Selection Birds’ blue crayon 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

8

9

The quotation is from The works of Benjamin Franklin (Sparks ed. 1836–40). Coupe de soleil: sunburn (French). The US edition of Descent was published by D. Appleton & Co.. In the quoted passage, CD described the plumage of the snow goose (Anser hyperboreus; now Chen caerulescens). See Descent 2: 228. Anastomus oscitans, the Asian openbill, is a large wading bird in the stork family. Lorenzo Niles Fowler and Orson Squire Fowler were American phrenologists and publishers; Samuel Roberts Wells was a partner in the publishing firm Fowlers & Wells, which produced phrenological texts, such as the American Phrenological Journal (Sterne 1971). In Descent 1: 116, CD briefly considered the effect of light and heat on skin and hair colour in humans, remarking: ‘almost all observers now agree that the effect has been very small, even after exposure during many ages’. In Descent 2d ed., pp. 422–3, CD added information about some species of birds in the United States becoming more strongly or lightly coloured as they migrated. In Descent 1: 48, CD gave two examples of reasoning power in dogs. One involved a retriever whose owner shot and injured two birds, which fell on opposite sides of a stream. The dog tried to bring over both at once and failed; then ‘deliberately killed one, brought over the other, and returned for the dead bird’. In the other, the hunter killed one bird and injured another. The dog caught the injured bird, then came upon the dead bird, and finding that it could not carry both, killed the injured bird so that it could bring the two together. CD had cited publications by John Colquhoun (Colquhoun 1840) and William Nelson Hutchinson (W. N. Hutchinson 1850) for the anecdotes about dogs (Descent 1: 48 n. 16). Tyler also refers to Alexander Pope’s preface to the Iliad: ‘It is the Invention that in different degrees distinguishes all great Genius’s’ (Pope trans. 1715–20, p. 1).

From R. F. Cooke 16 August 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Augt. 16 1872

My dear Sir The figuring seems to be all correct & so I will send them on to the Company. 1 I have this morning made out an estimate for your new work & the item of Heliotypes is indeed a large one, as every 1000 sets will cost us £66—& that is without counting in the preliminary expenses. I suppose you were convinced the expressions cd. not be portrayed on wood, or it wd have been much cheaper. I dont see how we can charge a set which costs us 0"1s "4d. without taking into consideration the preliminary expenses less than 0 "1"6 & this will bring it to £75— for 1000.!!! How will our American friends & foreign ones like this. 2

August 1872

361

It will make a terrible hole in the profits of each edition, much more I fear than you imagine. I write in haste today | Yrs faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 416 CD ANNOTATIONS Top of letter: ‘Answered’ pencil 1 2

CD had asked Cooke to check the numbering of the plates for Expression (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 15 August 1872). On the costs of the heliotype plates for Expression, see the letter from R. F. Cooke to G. H. Darwin, 13 August 1872, and the letter to R. F. Cooke, 15 August 1872.

To R. F. Cooke 17 August 1872 Leith Hill Place | Dorking Wotton Aug. 17 1872 (return home on Wed) My dear Sir I will tell all foreigners that you will supply them at £75 per 1000 copies. 1 This sounds large, but after all I think you take an exaggerated view of the subject, for 1s -6d added to the price of the book will entirely cover this outlay. I cd not possibly have given many of the expressions by wood-block but I wd not have given so many photos had I forseen the cost. I enclose a translation of M. Koch’s letter;2 & will you be so kind as to act accordingly. I will write by this post to him & tell him the price of the heliotypes. I am very much obliged for all the great trouble you have taken in assisting me— | My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 283–4) 1 2

See letter from R. F. Cooke, 16 August 1872 and n. 2. The letter from Eduard Friedrich Koch and the translation of it have not been found.

To V. O. Kovalevsky 17 August 1872 [Leith Hill Place, Surrey.] Aug 17. 1872 My dear Sir The cost of the 7 plates which will include 30 figures, is greater than I expected, viz £75 per 1000 copies, paper included. This will increase the price of yr tr. by 1 s /6d per copy. I have gone into details & Mr Murray has made a very small charge for commission.1

362

August 1872

Please to order from Mr. M. as many copies as you think fit— yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS The National Library of Sweden, Manuscripts (accession 1996/31) 1

CD had been corresponding with John Murray’s partner, Robert Francis Cooke, on the production costs of Expression. On the increased charges for the plates, see the letter from R. F. Cooke, 16 August 1872.

From K. M. Giuntsburg1 20 August 1872 Monsieur Votre admirable synthèse, qui a repandu tant de lumière sur l’origine des éspèces, tend aussi à eclaircir le domaine jusqu’ici obscur de la destruction inégale des individus par la mort.2 Dans le travail, que j’ai l’honneur de Vous soumettre j’ai, le premier, essayé d’appliquer la théorie de l’éléction naturelle à l’explication de la Mortalité si grande des enfants nouvaux-nés.3 Les principes de la variabilité individuelle et de l’hérédité m’ont servi de point de départ, pour en déduire les variations de la Mortalité, en ¯ començant du premier jour après la naissance jusqu’à la fin de la première semaine, puis jusqu’à la fin du premier mois et de là jusqu’à la fin de la première année. Je n’ai pas besoin de Vous dire, Monsieur, combien je me sentirais heureux, si mon travail méritait assez vos suffrages pour que Vous daigniez m’honorer d’une réponse. Veuillez bien, Monsieur, agréer l’expression de ma haute estime et de mon plus profond respect. | Charles Gunzbourg Dr. | Moscau, le 20 Août 1872. Mon Adresse | Dr. Charles Gunzbourg, | Conservateur du Musée Galitzin à Moscau. DAR 165: 239 1 2 3

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. CD had included information on infant mortality and on the comparative mortality of males and females in Descent 1: 264–5, 320. An annotated copy of Giuntsburg’s article, ‘Die Kindersterblichkeit im Allgemeinen und die in den Findelhäusern insbesondere im Lichte der Darwin’schen Theorie betrachtet’ (Child mortality in general and in orphanages, especially considered in light of Darwinian theory; Giuntsburg 1872), is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.

From Arthur Nicols 20 August 1872

11. Church Row | Hampstead | N.W August. 20th 1872.

Dear Sir. On one occasion you did me the honour to take notice of some observations I

August 1872

363

had made on the habits of the Koala under domestication; 1 and, since I understand that you are about to publish a work on the modes of Expression among animals,2 I submit the following to your notice as perhaps bearing upon one division of the subject. I saw this happen very frequently which perhaps give it additional interest— When in Australia I had two dogs, a pointer and retriever, who had been brought up together, and who often communicated with each other thus. One would lie upon the balcony of an upper story facing the street, and the other near my feet as I sat at the table within my room. The sentinal on the balcony kept a look out in the street, and on seeing a dog pass would jump up, come to his companion lying near me, touch the latter with his nose and wag his tail, when they would both hurry down into the street and “interview” the stranger. Sometimes they would both go to the balcony take a look at the stranger and lie down again without further notice of him. That there was direct communication in this I have no doubt, and whatever was expressed by the one animal was evidently understood by the other without mistake or hesitation. For a considerable period I acted as shepherd to a large flock of sheep in Australia and then employed myself in taking notes of their means of inter-communication which appeared to me to be well defined, and directed to certain ends which were foreseen by the animals, and attained. If it would be of any interest to you, I shall be happy to forward you a few of the prominent cases when I have picked them out from my note books. When the “Contents” page of your forthcoming work is ready I shall esteem it a great favour if you will obliged me with a copy— Dear Sir | Yours truly | Arthur Nicols. DAR 172: 58 1 2

Nicols had described koalas that had acquired a taste for tobacco and rum (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Arthur Nicols, 7 March 1871). CD used this information in Descent 2d ed., p. 7 n. Expression.

From R. F. Cooke 21 August 1872 50, Albemarle S.t | W. Augt. 21. 1872 My dear Sir I have desired the Heliotype people, to proceed with the printing off, of 2000 sets at once for ourselves.1 I have written to Appleton’s agent, to say the price of 1000 sets will be £75 . 0. 02 I also answered Mr Koch & told him neither the Electros or Heliotypes would be despatched unless paid for in advance.3 I have also made arrangements for the Index & I suppose all the Sheets, you have returned for press, may be considered safe to begin upon.

364

August 1872

Mr Murray4 returns from Scotland this week & I hope to get away, the end of next week. Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 417 1 2

3

4

The photographic plates for Expression were being printed by the London Heliotype Company. The agent of the US publisher, D. Appleton and Co., was Charles Layton; he had agreed to the price of £50 for stereotypes of the text and electrotypes of the woodcuts of Expression (see letter from Charles Layton, 13 August 1872). CD had forwarded a note from the German publisher Eduard Friedrich Koch, regarding the German translation of Expression (letter to R. F. Cooke, 17 August 1872). Electros: electrotypes of the woodcut illustrations. The photographs were reproduced as heliotypes. John Murray.

From Anton Dohrn 21 August 1872 Mountsfield. Lewisham. S.E. 21.8.1872. My dear Sir! As habitually I have assisted the Meeting of the British Association at Brighton, to deliver my Report as Secretary of the Committee for the Foundation of Zoological Stations.1 I came right on from Naples, taking just three days and three nights till London. I am very glad, that I could tell in my Report, that everything was going well with the Station at Naples, and that I hope, I may open it, to admit the Public in January next. There was a good deal of battles to be fought, but success was obtained everywhere, and my hope to get the Station into an effective working Institution is greater than ever.2 You will perhaps have noticed in one of the last numbers of Nature, that I told about large presents I had got from German Publishers for the library of the Station. 3 I alluded to that in my Report and asked the British Association to present the Library of the Station with a complete set of its publications and to recommend, that other British Societies might do the same. This has been agreed to, to my great satisfaction.4 But then You see, I am not yet at an end with all my beggary. I want single Naturalists to do something of the same kind. I have got already a good deal of such promises, and Agassiz has already sent most generously all he has published under his name.5 Will You think it immodest, if I beg leave to insert Your name equally in the list of those, who will send their publications on biological matters, either Zoological or botanical, to the Station? Williams & Norgate 6 are ready to act as Agent of the Station in this country and forward everything that is sent to them, down to Naples. I hope thus to get by and by a great and complete library which will assist mightily all those, that come to Naples to work with Marine Zoology or Botany.

August 1872

365

I have seen, that your new book is ready.7 I dare say, that I am very curious to see, what it contains. Poor Wallace completely drifts away, and now most unfortunately associates himself with such men as Bastian! His two articles in Nature are the worst thing, he ever did in his life,—and it becomes really difficult for his friends to speak with respect of him.8 I cannot say much of my own Scientific work; I had to put it aside for a six month. But then I have thought a good deal about it, and I hope, I may be capable next year, when I may return to England, to ask You an audience, to communicate strange but very consistent things. You know, I disbelieve in Ascidians as our ancestors. 9 I am sure, what I have to substitute will please You, as it is less open to principal objections, such as Mivart suggested about the incipient structures though they are quite wrong. 10 But I better wait, till I may tell all about it. May I nourish the hope of getting a short answer while I am still in this country? Lady Lubbock11 told me in Brighton Your health was at present not unsatisfactory,— I sincerely hope, You might state that to me and to all Your German followers and friends. Perhaps Mrs. Darwin and Your son recollect the time when I came as a Prussian invasion into Your frontier, and accept my kindest regards this time. 12 | Yours very sincerely | Anton Dohrn DAR 162: 209 CD ANNOTATIONS 7.1 I have . . . contains. 7.2] double scored ink 1

2

3 4 5 6 7 8

9

Dohrn attended the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in Brighton in August. He presented a scheme to help finance the running costs of the zoological station at Naples by charging scientific or government institutions annual fees for work space (see Report of the 42d meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (1872), p. 48, and Heuss 1991, pp. 129–30). The Committee for the foundation of zoological stations in different parts of the globe had been appointed by Section D (biology) at the 1870 meeting of the British Association (Dohrn 1872a, p. 278). On the difficulties experienced by Dohrn in building the zoological station at Naples, see Heuss 1991, pp. 115–20, 124–8. See also letter from Anton Dohrn, 15 February 1872. The station opened in October 1873. Works on biology were donated by the German publishing firms of Engelmann (Leipzig), Vieweg (Brunswick), and Fischer (Cassel) (Nature, 11 July 1872, p. 203). See Report of the 42d meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (1872), p. 48. Alexander Agassiz promised to donate publications by himself and his father, Louis Agassiz (Report of the 42d meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (1872), p. 48). Williams & Norgate was a London publishing firm. Expression. Alfred Russel Wallace had written a favourable review in Nature of Henry Charlton Bastian’s recent book on the origin of life (H. C. Bastian 1872; Wallace 1872d). See also letter from A. R. Wallace, 4 August 1872 and n. 3. Dohrn had previously criticised Wallace for his support of spiritualism (see letter to Anton Dohrn, 3 February 1872 and n. 4). CD had suggested that the most ancient progenitors of the vertebrates were marine animals that resembled the larvae of existing ascidians (sea squirts; see Descent 1: 205–6, 212, 2: 390). Dohrn had expressed his disagreement with CD’s view in his letter of 7 September 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19).

366 10 11 12

August 1872

CD had mentioned the criticisms of natural selection theory by St George Jackson Mivart in his letter to Dohrn of 3 February 1872. Ellen Frances Lubbock. It is not known which of CD’s sons Dohrn met on his previous visit to Down on 26 September 1870 (Correspondence vol. 18, letter to J. D. Hooker, 27 September [1870]). Dohrn had visited while on leave from service in the Prussian army during the Franco-Prussian war (see Heuss 1991, pp. 107–8).

From Johan IJkema 21 August 1872

Delft. 21. Augt. 72.

Mr. Charles Darwin. | Down— Beckenham. Sir! In “the Atheneum” of 17th. August I read: “Mr. Darwin’s new book on Expression in Animals is ready for publication”.1 I am very desirous to publish also this work of yours in Dutch, M r. Hartogh Heys van Zouteveen told me that he was willing to undertake the translation. 2 I hope you will be content of the dutch edition of your book on “Descent of man”, 3 And therefor confide to me the edition of your new work in the dutch language. In order to obtain the right of translation, it would be very agreeable to me, if you were so kind as to send me the book before its appearance in England: when it has appeared, another publisher may have asked the right before me. I hope, Sir, you will oblige me by sending it very soon. Within a week you may receive the last part of “The Descent of man”.— I am Sir | Your most obedient | Joh. Ijkema DAR 167: 1 1 2 3

The notice of Expression appeared the Athenæum, 17 August 1872, p. 215. The Dutch translation of Expression was made by Hermanus Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen (Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen trans. 1873). Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen trans. 1871–2. The book was published in instalments (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Hermanus Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen, 2 March 1871).

From Francis Darwin [before 22 August 1872]1

6 QA Dear Father Sutton says that the monkeys are often sick but he cannot say whether they do it voluntarily or not—2 But as they often do it when it good health it looks as if they could I think Yrs affec | F Darwin DAR 195.3: 67 CD note: This suspicion receives some slight support from the fact, of which I am assured by Mr S. that the m. in the z. Gardens often vomit [‘; & that [interl and del] they do so’ del] when in good health, which

August 1872

367

looks as if [‘this was effected’ del above del ‘they could vomit’] it was done voluntarily, [‘they’ del] we can see that with [ mankind] owing to *his power of teaching [pencil, after del pencil ‘handing down’, above del ‘the acquisition of language & the [interl] tradition’] knowledge, *by [ communicating] [pencil, above del ‘the power of voluntarily throwing up of ’] what food to avoid there would be less occasion *than with *some of [interl] the [ inferior] [del & restored] [ animals] to use the faculty [above del ‘power’] of voluntarily throwing up food from the [ stomach]; so that the power wd tend *through disuse [interl] to be lost.—3 1

2 3

The date is based on the day on which CD completed the proofs for Expression, 22 August 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). This was the last day on which he could have added the information contained in the letter. Seth Sutton was a keeper at the zoological gardens in Regent’s Park, London (Archives of the Zoological Society of London, Freeman 1978). CD used this information, with almost the same wording, in Expression, p. 259. He argued that the tendency to retch or vomit involuntarily at the thought of having eaten a particular food suggested that human ancestors once had the ability to vomit voluntarily. This suspicion receives support from the fact, of which I am assured by Mr. Sutton, that the monkeys in the Zoological Gardens often vomit whilst in perfect health, which looks as if the act were voluntary. We can see that as man is able to communicate by language to his children and others, the knowledge of the kinds of food to be avoided, he would have little occasion to use the faculty of voluntary rejection; so that this power would tend to be lost through disuse.

To R. F. Cooke 23 August 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug 23. 1872

My dear Sir Thanks for the enclosed.1 Herr Ijkema of Delft in Holland has applied to me for right of translation;2 but when he hears the cost of the plates he may change his mind. They generally publish, small edits in Holland, & I have ventured to tell him that you wd supply him with less than 1000 copies on the scale of £75. 3 So please to remember, if he applies to you, that he has my consent. My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 269–70) 1 2 3

The enclosure has not been found. See letter from Johan IJkema, 21 August 1872. Cooke had recommended charging £75 per 1000 copies for the plates of Expression, which were being printed by the Heliotype Company (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 16 August 1872).

From R. F. Cooke 23 August 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Augt. 23 1872

My dear Sir The expense of having to pay £66.0. 0 for every 1000 Impressions of the Heliotypes sticks in my gizzard.1 I have ordered 2000 sets for the 1st. edition for England.

368

August 1872

But do not think we might from a set of these heliotypes have them photographed on to wood & so secure the expression & then engraved. The 1st. expensive would be £100, but we should be able to print off the impression much cheaper. How does this occur to you? It is only an idea of mine just now. The Index is in hand2 Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq My chief is back again3 DAR 171: 418 1 2 3

On the costs for heliotypes of the photographic plates for Expression, see the letter from R. F. Cooke, 16 August 1872. The index to Expression was being prepared by William Sweetland Dallas (letter to R. F. Cooke, 4 August 1872). John Murray had been in Scotland (letter from R. F. Cooke, 21 August 1872).

From Arthur Nicols 23 August 1872

11 Church Row | Hampstead | N.W Aug. 23. 72—

Dear Sir. I am very much indebted to you for having taken so much trouble on my account, who have no manner of claim upon your courtesy. I have received the “Content” slips of your forthcoming work which I, among so many more, shall look for with pleasant anticipation. 1 With regard to the few observations I have made on some methods of intercommunication between animals, your suggestion that I should draw up a short paper on the subject is no doubt the best, and when I have a few days to spare I shall do my best to put my notes in order. Whatever I have to say will go further to strengthen the belief that animals do communicate (and that not merely simple ideas) than to explain the precise means of transmitting their mental impressions. I suppose there is no animal whatever possessed of a high organization which has not the power of communicating a simple mental impression such as alarm: but I think that something much more complex can be traced among such phlegmatic creatures even as sheep; amounting to the capacity to arrange a line of action, and convey to other individuals a general idea of it. When they are flurried, sheep justify the proverb relating to their “follow my leader” habits: but in the broken country and forests of Australia where their natural faculties have full play, they may be seen to possess a vast amount of intelligence. Should any-thing which I may be able to string together be accepted by one of the Magazines I shall do myself the honour of forwarding you a copy in case it may contain any thing of interest to you. With renewed thanks I am, | Dear Sir; | Yours very truly | Arthur Nicols Chas Darwin— Esq F.R.S etc, etc. DAR 172: 59

August 1872 1

369

Nicols had requested the table of contents for Expression (letter from Arthur Nicols, 20 August 1872). No letter from CD to Nicols has been found.

To Edward Vivian 23 August [1872]

Aug. 23d

One line to thank you for valuable information. The more I investigate the extreme amount of work effected, the more perplexed as yet I become.1 Thanks.— C. Darwin ApcS Postmark: 24 AU 72 Torquay Museum Society 1

The information may have related to CD’s research on worms. No letter from Vivian has been found.

From W. W. Baxter [after 23 August 1872?]1 Wm. W. Baxter begs his respects to C. Darwin Esqre & has sent two essential Oils— They are very sparingly soluble in water something like one part in 1000 or more. 2 W W B has sent some Opium by post which he hopes will be suitable3 &c &c &c AL DAR 60.2: 86 1

2

3

The date is conjectured from the fact that CD had evidently requested materials for his work on Drosera rotundifolia, the sundew. CD had worked on Drosera earlier (see Correspondence vol. 10, letter to J. D. Hooker, 26 September [1862] and n. 1), but he commenced another series of experiments on 23 August 1872, after finishing correcting the proofs of Expression (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). This letter is in the Darwin Archive–CUL among CD’s notes on Drosera; notes immediately before and after it are written on the back of corrected proof-sheets of Expression. CD’s research on Drosera was published in 1875 in Insectivorous plants. The two essential oils were probably oil of cloves and oil of caraway (Insectivorous plants, pp. 211–12). CD repeated Baxter’s information about their solubility in water in ibid., p. 211. ‘Sparingly soluble’ refers to solubilities of 0.5 grams per litre or lower. CD found in 1862 that opium placed on the glands of Drosera effectively put the plant to sleep; see Correspondence vol. 10, letter to Daniel Oliver, [17 September 1862]. In Insectivorous plants, he reported only on the results he achieved with acetate of morphia, a mixture of morphia (an extract of opium) and acetic acid (Insectivorous plants, p. 205).

To Hubert Airy 24 August 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug. 24 ’72

My dear Sir, I have thought that you would excuse my begging a favour of you; that is if you think it a proper one to grant, of which I am not at all sure.

370

August 1872

One of my sons Leonard Darwin of the Royal Engineers has sent me an application to Sir G. Airy to be one of the observers in the transit of Venus expedition. 1 I find that he has not mentioned any of his qualifications; and perhaps you could find an opportunity of mentioning the few following particulars to your father. In the preliminary examination for Woolwich he entered as 2 nd man, and he likewise passed out as Second.2 These examinations are well known to be very severe; and Success in them implies some knowledge & aptitude for mathematics. On this head I believe that Prof. Sylvester would speak in his favour. 3 At Woolwich & since he has been at Chatham he has worked hard at Surveying, drawing fortifications &c; 4 and he is very neat handed in making maps plans &c. I mention this as I suppose a steady hand & a good eye are important requisites for observation. I can speak from my own knowledge that he is energetic, industrious and accurate in details; & that he has a very clear intellect; so that I should think he would make a good observer; but I must add that he has had no experience in Astronomical observations. I hope that you will excuse me for thus troubling you, & do what you can to aid me. Yours very sincerely, | Ch. Darwin LS(A) CUL: Royal Greenwich Observatory archives 6/273 (section 3–4: 348–9) 1

2

3

4

Letter from Leonard Darwin to George Biddell Airy, 21 August 1872 (CUL: Royal Greenwich Observatory archives 6/273 (section 3–4: 347)). G. B. Airy was in charge of the British expeditions to observe the transit of Venus in different parts of the world (ODNB). Leonard was eventually appointed as a photographer and was stationed in New Zealand in 1874 (ODNB; Chauvin 2004, pp. 40–1). Leonard had been second in the preliminary examination at the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, in 1868, and second in the final examination in 1870. On Leonard’s success in 1868, see Correspondence vol. 16, letter to Horace Darwin, 26 [July 1868], and letter from Alfred Wrigley, 28 July 1868. James Joseph Sylvester was professor of mathematics at the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich. On his high regard for Leonard, see Correspondence vol. 18, Supplement, letter from E. A. Darwin, [September 1868 – August 1870]. After being commissioned in the Royal Engineers in 1871, Leonard worked at the School of Military Engineering at Chatham (ODNB).

To Anton Dohrn 24 August [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug 24th My dear Sir Very many thanks for your kind & pleasant letter.—2 I heartily rejoice at the success of your great Naples undertaking; & I fully believe that you have thus done a great service to science.3 I shall be proud & pleased to send to your Library, whenever you desire it, a complete set of my books.— 4 I do not know whether you will care at all about the little book, which I have just finished, but which will not be published till November; but I shall like to give you a copy & will send it to wherever I may hear that you are.—5 I suppose Jena will be the best place. I suppose from your letter that you will leave England immediately, &

August 1872

371

I did not know that you were now in England. Either now or when you next come to England, I hope that you will come & dine & sleep here; for though I cannot talk much with anyone, yet I shd thus be able to have several little talks with you, which I shd. much enjoy With every good wish, | Believe me | My dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München (Ana 525. Ba 700 & 700a) 1 2 3 4 5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Anton Dohrn, 21 August 1872. Letter from Anton Dohrn, 21 August 1872. On Dohrn’s efforts to establish a zoological station at Naples, see the letter from Anton Dohrn, 21 August 1872 and n. 2. Dohrn had requested scientific institutions and individual authors to donate their publications to the zoological station (see letter from Anton Dohrn, 21 August 1872). Dohrn’s name appears on the presentation list for Expression (Appendix V).

From R. F. Cooke 26 August 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Augt. 26 1872

My dear Sir So let it be. I have now ordered from the Heliotype Company 2000 Sets for ourselves & 3000 sets for Appleton to begin with.1 I have directed Clowes to send into Appleton’s agent here, a set of stereotype plates of the work, as you send it to press & the woodcuts. 2 Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 419 1

2

Charles Layton, the agent of the US publisher D. Appleton & Co., had originally asked for 5000 copies of the heliotypes for Expression (letter to R. F. Cooke, 15 August 1872). Cooke had written to Layton about the charges for the heliotypes (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 21 August 1872). William Clowes & Sons were the printers of Expression.

From Anton Dohrn 28 August 1872 Mountsfield. Lewisham. | Naples Address: Palazzo Torlonia. Mergellina. 28.8.72. My dear Sir! Many and sincere thanks for Your kind letter and the generous present You promise for the Library of the Station.1 Messrs. Williams & Norgate are ready to act as my Agents for this Country, 2 —so whenever You may be disposed to favour the Zoological Station with Your books, they will forward them to Naples. I have even got free transport for everything

372

August 1872

through the kindness of Admiral Tchichatchoff, the Director of the Russian Steamship-Line in Odessa.3 You see I use every opportunity, which offers itself. Meanwhile I have been paying a short visit to Scarborough, as there is an opportunity for getting up a Second Zoological Station, Mr. Woodall, a banker, being inclined to lay out some 3 or 4000£. for it, and content himself with a moderate return of the money, leaving the surplus to the Scientific work to be done there. 4 I hope the scheme may be carried, though I am sure the coals want still a little blowing for fear they might burn away. I don’t know whether Zephyrus or Boreas might be in his place there,—5 I shall try my powers at any rate. I got a letter from Prof. Huxley6 the other day, so full of good spirits and of his usual vigour that I hope, if he only would not work to hard he might restore himself completely. I thank You very heartily for Your kind invitation, which I will accept as soon, as I have to tell You anything settled about that Problem of homologies and genealogical relations between Annelids Arthropod and Vertebrates, which I, against the views of my Jena masters consider to be very close. 7 I hope, when returning to Your country next year after having carefully worked out the Embryology of Amphioxus, I may be able to prove, that this animal by no means is a primitive but in the contrary a very degraded and degenerate form of fish, and that the true ancestors of Vertebrates are Annelids. It is a long story to tell, but I believe that after all it is the true story of the past and will upset all the Ascidians, and reduce them to still further degraded forms than Amphioxus.8 Their relations to Vertebrates I don’t question at all, but instead of placing them at the root, I put them on one end of the tree, whose branches tend as well upright to the sky, as down to the lowest ranks. And I believe, that is very much the tendency in all the other tribes, or so-called types. 9 But I am talking to much. Once more, my dear Sir, my hearty thanks. Your kindness stirs me always mightily up, and I hope I may succeed in my ends, if I meet similar assistance in other quarters. Yours very sincerely | Anton Dohrn DAR 162: 210 1 2 3 4

5 6

CD had promised to send a complete set of his publications to the zoological station at Naples (see letter to Anton Dohrn, 24 August [1872]). Williams & Norgate was a London publisher. Admiral Tchichatchoff: Nikolai Matveevich Chikhachev, managing director of the Russian Steam Navigation and Trading Company. John Woodall Woodall was a banker in Scarborough, a seaside town in North Yorkshire. He had been a member of the British Association since 1863 (Report of the 42d meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (1872)). An aquarium was opened in Scarborough in 1877 as part of a popular entertainment complex that included a concert hall and reading room (Howard Norfolk, ‘Aquariums and public aquariums in mid-Victorian times’, www.aquarticles.com/articles/literature/Norfolk_Victorian _History.html (accessed 19 October 2011)). On Dohrn’s programme for establishing zoological stations around the world, see Dohrn 1872a and 1872b. Zephyros is the Greek god of the west wind; Boreas of the north wind. Thomas Henry Huxley.

August 1872 7 8

9

373

Dohrn had worked at the University of Jena under Ernst Haeckel and Carl Gegenbaur from 1866 to 1868 (Heuss 1991, pp. 58–60, 67–8). On Dohrn’s work on Amphioxus, his efforts to establish the Annelida (segmented worms) rather than the Ascidiacea (sea squirts) as the ancestral group of the vertebrates, and his disagreements with Haeckel and Gegenbaur, see Maienschein 1994. See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Anton Dohrn, 7 September 1871 and n. 17. The lancelet (formerly Amphioxus lanceolatus, now Branchiostoma lanceolatum) was initially classed as a primitive fish (subclass Acranii) but has now been moved to its own class, Cephalochordata. The terms amphioxus and lancelet are commonly used now to refer to all members of the class. Dohrn’s work on the origin of vertebrates was later published as Der Ursprung der Wirbelthiere und das Princip des Functionswechsels (The origin of vertebrates and the principle of functional change; Dohrn 1875).

From F. W. Harmer 28 August 1872 Heigham Grove, | Norwich. Aug 28/72 Sir/ I have unwisely undertaken a newspaper controversy with the Rev d. W. P. Lyon— the author of “Homo v. Darwin”—1 In one of his letters he quotes the following passage as if from yourself, “Mr. Darwin tells us that natural selection is a kind of god that never slumbers nor sleeps, that scrutinizes everything, is ever selecting what is useful” &c &c 2 May I ask whether you will kindly inform me—(if you can do so without giving yourself any trouble) yes or no, on the enclosed P. Card, whether I am right in supposing that the part of the sentence I have underlined is not yours at all, but added by Mr. Lyon. The only passage I can find in your writings to correspond is that in the “Origin of Species” (5th. Edtn ) chap 4 p 96,3 but I am afraid to charge him with the error without your confirmation The words added (as I suppose) seem to me to give a different & an unfair meaning to the sentence. apologizing very much for having to trouble you about such a matter, I am | Yours truly | F. W. Harmer C. Darwin Esq F.R.S. DAR 166: 102 1

2

3

William Penman Lyon’s book, Homo versus Darwin (Lyon [1871]), was written in the form of a judicial examination and included lengthy quotations from Descent and other publications by CD. The letters of Lyon and Harmer appeared in the Eastern Daily Press. The letter that Harmer quotes appeared in the Eastern Daily Press, 23 May 1872, p. 2, under the heading ‘Darwinism and the missing link’. The quotation continues, ‘and profitable in animal existence, and preserving it that it may be transmitted to future generations; and that through these accumulated and inherited useful variations in animal life new species are developed’. Lyon put quotation marks before ‘natural selection’ and after ‘developed’, and did not use any emphasis. The same sentence appeared in Lyon’s book; however it was not given as a direct quotation (Lyon [1871], pp. 138–9). Harmer refers to the passage: ‘It may metaphorically be said that natural selection is daily and hourly scrutinizing, throughout the world, the slightest variations; rejecting those that are bad, preserving and adding up all that are good; silently and insensibly working, whenever and wherever opportunity

374

August 1872

offers, at the improvement of each organic being in relation to its organic and inorganic conditions of life’ (Origin 5th ed., p. 96). CD had added the word ‘metaphorically’ to the second and later editions.

To A. R. Wallace 28 August [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug 28. My dear Wallace, I have at last finished the gigantic job of reading Dr. Bastian’s book, & have been deeply interested by it. You wished to hear my impression, but it is not worth sending.2 He seems to me an extremely able man, as indeed I thought when I read his first essay.3 His general argument in favour of Archebiosis 4 is wonderfully strong, tho’ I cannot think much of some few of his arguments. The result is that I am bewildered & astonished by his statements, but am not convinced; tho’ on the whole it seems to me probable that Archebiosis is true. I am not convinced partly I think owing to the deductive cast of much of his reasoning; & I know not why but I never feel convinced by deduction even in the case of H. Spencer’s writings. 5 If Dr. B’s book had been turned upside down, & he had begun with the various cases of Heterogenesis,6 & then gone on to organic & afterwards, to saline solutions, & had then given his general arguments, I shd. have been I believe much more influenced. I suspect however that my chief difficulty is the effect of old convictions being stereotyped on my brain. I must have more evidence that germs or the minutest fragments of the lowest forms are always killed by 212o of Fahrt. Perhaps the mere reiteration of the statements given by Dr. B, by other men whose judgment I respect & who have worked long on the lower organisms, w d. suffice to convince me.7 Here is a fine confession of intellectual weakness; but what an inexplicable frame of mind is that of belief. As for Rotifers & Tardigrades being spontaneously generated, my mind can no more digest such statements, whether true or false, than my stomach can digest a lump of lead. Dr. B. is always comparing Archebiosis as well as growth to crystallzation but on this view a Rotifer or Tardigrade is adapted to its humble conditions of life by a happy accident; & this I cannot believe.8 That observations of the above nature may easily be altogether wrong is well shewn by Dr. B. having declared to Huxley that he had watched the entire developement of a leaf of Sphagnum.9 He must have worked with very impure materials in some cases, as plenty of organisms appeared in a saline solution not containing an atom of Nitrogen. I wholly disagree with Dr. B. about many points in his latter chapters. Thus the frequency of generalised forms in the older strata seem to me clearly to indicate the common descent with divergence of more recent forms. 10 Notwithstanding all his sneers I do not strike my colours as yet about Pangenesis. 11 I shd. like to live to see

August 1872

375

Archebiosis proved true, for it wd. be a discovery of transcendent importance; or if false I shd like to see it disproved, & the facts otherwise explained; but I shall not live to see all this. If ever proved Dr. B. will have taken a prominent part in the work. How grand is the onward rush of Science; it is enough to console us for the many errors which we have committed & for our efforts being overlaid & forgotten in the mass of new facts & new views which are daily turning up. This is all I have to say about Dr B.’s book, & it certainly has not been worth saying. Nevertheless reward me whenever you can by giving me any news about your appointment to the Bethnal Green Museum 12 My dear Wallace | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin LS British Library (Add 46434) 1 2

3 4

5 6

7

8

9

10

11

12

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from A. R. Wallace, 4 August 1872. Wallace had praised Henry Charlton Bastian’s The beginning of life (H. C. Bastian 1872) in his letter of 4 August 1872. CD’s annotated copy of Bastian 1872 is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 34). CD refers to Bastian’s paper on Nematoids (nematode worms), ‘Monograph on the Anguillulidæ’ (H. C. Bastian 1864). On the favourable reception of Bastian’s early work, see Strick 2000, pp. 65–7. Bastian urged the rejection of the more common phrase ‘spontaneous generation’ and the adoption of the term archeobiosis to describe the origin of life ‘de novo owing to the occurrence of certain new molecular combinations’. The word derives from the Greek ‘arche’ (beginning) and ‘bios’ (life). See H. C. Bastian 1872, 1: 232, 243–4. Bastian cited Herbert Spencer’s Principles of biology (Spencer 1864–7) extensively in H. C. Bastian 1872. Bastian described three modes of ‘heterogenetic’ reproduction: 1. ‘from a portion of living matter of a pre-existing organism’ 2. ‘by a molecular metamorphosis of the matter of an entire organism’ and 3. ‘by the metamorphosis and fusion of many minute organisms’ (H. C. Bastian 1872, 1: 252). Bastian claimed that organisms appeared in closed flasks after they had been exposed to temperatures of 212 degrees Fahrenheit, the boiling point of water. He added that similar results had been obtained by other experimenters, such as Louis Pasteur and Jeffries Wyman (H. C. Bastian 1872, 1: vii). For CD’s earlier reservations about Bastian’s experiments, see Correspondence vol. 18, letter to J. D. Hooker, 12 July [1870]. Bastian compared the origins of the lowest organisms to the formation of crystals (H. C. Bastian 1872, 2: 72–85). He claimed that microscopic animals of the phyla Rotifera and Tardigrada evolved through the fusion of lower forms of life, independently of environmental conditions (see ibid., pp. 501–24, 570). Thomas Henry Huxley had identified as Sphagnum (peat moss) one of the organisms that Bastian claimed had been generated spontaneously in a test tube (see Correspondence vol. 18, letter to J. D. Hooker, 8 July [1870]). Bastian claimed that simpler, more generalised forms of life could generate more complex forms rapidly through ‘heterogenesis’ at any point in time (H. C. Bastian 1872, 2: 558–63, 568). Evolution was thus not necessarily a process of descent from ancient, simpler forms to more specialised organisms, but rather ‘a continual surging up through all geologic time of freshly evolved, lower forms of life’ (ibid., p. 620). Bastian described CD’s hypothesis of pangenesis (see Variation 2: 357–404) as ‘a relic of the old, rather than a fitting appendage of the new Evolution philosophy’ (H. C. Bastian 1872, 2: 98; see also 2: 603). For Bastian’s extended discussion of CD’s work, see ibid., pp. 572–604). The Bethnal Green Museum in east London, a branch of the South Kensington Museum, opened in June 1872 (Dickens 1879). Wallace had been hoping for a position at the Museum since 1869, when

376

August 1872

land was first acquired for the site. See Correspondence vol. 17, letter to A. R. Wallace, 25 June [1869] and n. 8.

To F. W. Harmer 29 August 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Augt. 29th. ’72

Dear Sir, I am sorry that you have become involved in a troublesome controversy on my part. The sentence given by Mr Lyon in inverted commas is an invention, & it is a most unjustifiable proceeding on his part. He might of course have given any interpretation which he pleased of my words, but he had no right to put the words in inverted commas.1 I may add that I have given in the later & more especially in the 6th. Ed. of the Origin many cases showing how Common generalised forms, (that is forms partaking of the characters of existing distinct groups) are in all the more ancient formations.2 I have always been curious to hear who wrote Homo v. Darwin. Mr. Lyon can hardly have the disposition of a gentleman, for in one place he states that I speak the truth solely because I should be found out if I lied.— 3 I hope that you will soon be able to bring your controversy to an end and I remain in haste | Dear Sir, | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin LS(A) Ipswich Museum (IPSMG: R.1924-134) 1 2 3

William Penman Lyon had misquoted CD. See letter from F. W. Harmer, 28 August 1872 and nn. 2 and 3. CD added material on the affinities between extinct and living species to Origin 5th ed., pp. 402–3, and Origin 6th ed., pp. 301–3. The passage alluded to in Lyon [1871] has not been identified. CD evidently owned a copy of the book; the Cambridge University Library copy of Lyon [1871] was ‘donated by the executors of the late Mrs Charles Darwin’.

To J. D. Hooker 29 August [1872]1

Down,| Beckenham, Kent. Aug. 29th

My dear Hooker I am delighted that you & Mrs. Hooker will be here soon.— Mrs H. speaks of Saturday the 8th , but it is the 7th & we shall then expect you.—2 I am now at work on Drosera, & my object is to ask whether you could lend me for about a week D. capensis or any other species, except. D. Spathulata & filimornis & the English species.—3 When I was at Kew, I saw D. capensis & you then thought, there wd be no objection to lending it to me.—4 In case you can, I would send my gardener Lettington, 5 (who wd like to see the Garden) to Kew, as the plant wd. thus come safest, but it wd. require packing up with much care, so that no particles shd fall on the leaves.— Yours affecty | C. Darwin

August 1872

377

DAR 94: 227–8 1 2 3 4 5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. D. Hooker, 2 September 1872. The note from Francis Harriet Hooker has not been found. Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) records that the Hookers visited on Saturday 7 September 1872. Drosera capensis, D. spatulata, and D. filiformis are described in Insectivorous plants, pp. 279–81; specimens of each were obtained from Hooker. CD evidently visited Kew during his last stay in London, from 16 February to 21 March 1872 (‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Henry Lettington.

From J. D. Hooker 29 August 1872 Royal Gardens Kew Aug 29/72 Dear Darwin I enclose letter & cheque from Scott.1 Pray do not think that I have dunned him for this. As you are aware, he wrote spontaneously on the subject to me many months ago2 —& he has frequently done so since—but I have not alluded to it to him since. I am counting the days till Saturday week.3 I am again in the very thick of it with Ayrton, & the good Tyndall is everything in the matter.4 After all he & Huxley are the only two men I know of who have shown themselves equal to the occasion, I mean in point of power & grasp of the subject & tenacity of purpose independent of good will 5 Ever yr affec | J D Hooker [Enclosure] Roy Bot Gardens | Howrah, 30th. July. Dear Sir, I had hoped to have sent you a first remittance (of the money which M r. Darwin so kindly advanced me) months ago.6 It has been a great grief to me that it should have been so long due, and very pleased should I have been to have been able at this time to have remitted the full amount. When I wrote to you first on the above, I had in view, Mr. Blechyndens duty, (for which I got very readily the Lieut. Governors sanction)7 and also the Gov. Generals Gardens. It was Lord Mayo’s intention that I should look after them, but Lord Northbrook made them over to the Public Works Department, as he found out they had been many years ago.8 Latterly they had been under the Private Secretary. I have been disappointed of both. I am thus sorry that I can only send you a bill for fifty pounds only. This is not half the amount which I had from Mr. Darwin. I think he gave me money on three different occasions amounting in all if I mistake not to £120. I have thus to remit you a balance of £70. I shall be very pleased when I can do this.

378

August 1872

You will have heard of Dr. Kings serious illness, and his leaving us for three months.9 I have just heard from him from Madras where he had recently arrived. He had suffered from sea sickness This has I suspect thrown him back, though he writes very hopefully. I do hope the Nilgiris 10 (where he goes) will put him all right again. But for Dr. Ewart he would have had to go home. 11 He ultimately swayed the others, and they all agreed that he should try the Nilgiris for three months. I was just afraid that we might have Mr. Clarke back again:12 though since he lost Sir Wm. Grey he does not appear to have much influence amongst the higher officials. For the three months I have to officiate, and though it is not likely to be of any pecuniary advantage to me for the present it will always be a step to a better appoint in the future. I have a letter long overdue to Mr. Darwin as to worm-casts which I enclosed in a box to you.13 This is partly through my time having been so much occupied during Dr. Kings illness, and that I have myself been suffering from fever and ague. Just now I am ill with a fever very prevalent here—dengue—and which though not dangerous is a very tiring one. I enclose the first bill of exchange in this letter and next week I shall send a second in case of any miscarriage. With very many thanks for the assistance you have given me, I remain gratefully obliged | Yours truly | John Scott DAR 103: 118–19; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew: DC 156 f. 1075 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

8 9 10 11 12 13

An annotation on the letter from John Scott reads: ‘With cheque for £50. for Darwin’. Hooker had previously sent CD a letter from Scott regarding the repayment of money that CD had given Scott in 1864 (see Correspondence vol. 19, enclosure to letter from J. D. Hooker, 31 October 1871). Hooker and his wife Francis Harriet Hooker visited Down on 7 September 1872 (see letter to J. D. Hooker, 29 August [1872] and n. 2). On Hooker’s dispute with Acton Smee Ayrton, see the letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 August [1872] and n. 1. Hooker also refers to John Tyndall. Thomas Henry Huxley had recently written to The Times supporting Hooker against the criticism of Richard Owen (see letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 August [1872], n. 4). CD and Hooker had helped Scott to obtain a position at a Cinchona plantation near Darjeeling in 1864; CD had given Scott a total of £115 to pay for his travel to India and other expenses (see Correspondence vol. 12, pp. xviii–xix, and letter from John Scott, 2 August 1864 and n. 2). CD had urged Scott not to repay the sum (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to John Scott, 1 November 1871). Arthur Henry Blechynden was secretary of the Agricultural and Horticultural Society of India. William Grey was the lieutenant governor of Bengal until February 1871; his successor was George Campbell (India list 1871–2). Richard Southwell Bourke, sixth earl of Mayo, was viceroy (governor-general) of India from 1869 to 1872; he was replaced by Thomas George Baring, first earl of Northbrook (ODNB). George King had been appointed superintendent of the botanic gardens in Calcutta in 1871 (ODNB). Nilgiri is a hill district, now part of Tamil Nadu state, south India. Joseph Ewart was a surgeon in the Bengal army and professor of anatomy at the Medical College, Calcutta (India list). Charles Baron Clarke was superintendent of the botanic gardens in Calcutta from 1868 to 1871 (ODNB). CD had asked for information on worms in his letter to Scott of 15 January 1872; he had received a box of worm castings in August, but without any accompanying letter (see letter to John Scott, 12 August 1872).

August 1872

379

From Chauncey Wright 29 August 1872 Tavistock Hotel, Covent Garden | London Aug. 29, 1872 My dear Sir, I hope to have the pleasure of calling on you within a few days and before leaving London for the continent.1 I have after a long but rapid journey with a party of American friends through Ireland and the North, been resting here for several weeks, or rather trying the anti-tourist plan of making acquaintance with London and its neighborhood; that is, taking time instead of doing it by rapid journeys. This seemed like idling at first, but now I am satisfied with the plan; since it takes time to see anything well, and especially so great a thing as London. I was much struck by the suggestive view you give in your last letter of the limits or definition of the effects that can properly be ascribed to “man’s agency” (or to the agency of free or intelligent wills, as the metaphysical moralists would name it)—namely, that intended consequences only are properly attributable to this cause. 2 This seems to me to simplify matters very much, and to be the common-sense view of the subject; and to be decisive with reference to the question of the origin of a language in any way essentially different, as Prof. Whitney holds, from the origin of other customs or powers or structures in men or in other living beings.3 A practical way of testing the matter would be to ask who are responsible or feel themselves to be responsible for the existence of any language; or who are to be personally credited with the invention or for any changes or improvements of a language?—(excepting, of course, the inventions and improvements of scientific nomenclatures and those schemes of philosophical language which have been proposed; but even in these credit is due for the proposition rather than the adoption or the actual existence and use among men of a form of speech.) The test of responsibility is all the more pertinent, since it is agreed on all hands that responsibility or the feeling of it is the evidence or at least the mark of so-called free, personal agency. There is however one apparently serious objection to this test as a substitute for your view. We are held by moralists, (not the metaphysical ones only,) to be responsible for more than we intend. Therefore personal agency extends beyond the intended consequences. We are responsible for consequences with which the non-existence of intentions can be charged, as well as for those which are intended. This happens when the existence of intentions which ought to have been ours would have altered the result. This objection together with the mystical doctrine of theologians regarding the nature of the moral sense gives rise, I am convinced to that view of free or intelligent human agency which represents it as a line of cause and effect arising in an absolute beginning, thus introducing a condition or an element of causation peculiar and non-natural into whatever effects may be dependent on it; and thus making these effects distinct from those that are strictly natural or due to unbroken lines of physical causation. I believe that this view is purely fanciful, or at best poetical; but that it is implicitly contained in, or lies at the bottom of such objections as Prof. Whitney’s to inquiries and positions, which are really

380

August 1872

dealing only with strictly scientific or physical problems and are not concerned with the truth or falsity of the mystic’s view of causation either in human or non-human agency. But to make this perfectly clear it is necessary to consider what is strictly true in the statements, that our responsibility extends beyond our intentions; that unintended consequences are therefore ours, and hence that our free agency concerns the beginnings rather than the ends of our actions. These statements which are taken by the metaphysical moralist as absolute premises, simpliciter, are properly in need of qualification or explanation, secundum quid. 4 They are concerned with the philosophy of moral or personal discipline, the question for what men as moral agents are rationally condemned or approved, punished or rewarded. Obviously it is for many consequences of their actions which they may not have contemplated or intended, provided discipline tends effectively to bring such consequences, whenever important, under the purview of foreseeing and intelligent agency; that is, whenever intention ought to have been present and efficacious, or can be made so by the requisite discipline. But here obviously the responsibility is a different thing from that sense of accountability that is appealed to as evidence of an absolute personal freedom, since responsibility is not really felt with reference to unforeseen consequences; or is not felt directly and specifically, but only through the obligation we feel to be better informed, more careful, or to submit ourselves to the guidance and hence to the correction of the better instructed, and to the ultimate authority on what is right or wrong. Hence the sphere of human freedom and responsibility, though extending beyond what is actually foreseen as the consequences of our actions is still within the limit of what might and ought to be known as the consequences of our actions; that is, either specifically foreseen, or implicitly contained in a moral principle, instinct, precept or commandment. In other words this sphere is limited to the objects and means of moral discipline. Its extension beyond the range of actually foreseen consequences has, therefore, nothing to do with strictly scientific or theoretical inquiries concerning that in which neither the foreseeing nor the obedient mind is an agent or factor; but of which the intellect is rather the recorder or mere accountant. If the question concerning the origin of languages were how men might or should be made better inventors, or apter followers of the best inventions, instead of being how these inventions have actually arisen and been adopted, there might be some pertinency in insisting on the peculiar character of the choice to which changes in language are due. Moreover an invention becomes or amounts to a change of language only when adopted by several speakers, or when it is more or less generally agreed to. It is this adoption with which selection is concerned. The inventions, which are, or may be, acts of individual or personal agents only, correspond to the variations in structures and habits from which selection is made in nature generally; and they survive and become customs of speech because they are liked by many speakers. They are thus, as you say, analogous to the variations in domestic animals and plants that are unintentionally converted by savages or semi-civilized peoples into permanent race differences. Their adoption by the many speakers who fancy them, or choose them for any definite reasons, such as the authority of an influential speaker or writer;

August 1872

381

ease in pronouncing them; distinctness from other words, already appropriated to other meanings; their anologies in sound and sense with other words, and similar reasons;—this adoption seems to me to correspond very closely to what you call “unconscious selection”.5 It appears to me probable that Prof. Whitney had in mind in denying that this is a case of “natural selection”, the narrower meaning of the word “natural” as distinguished not only from systematic, intended or artificial selection, but also from personal agency altogether; or was speaking from that view of natural phenomena, which “binding nature fast in fate, leaves free the human will”. 6 This was the idea of his objection which I expressed rather obscurely in a foot-note in my review of Mr. Wallace’s book nearly two years ago.7 I imagine that he was also actuated in giving emphasis to the contrast of “nature” and “man” by his opposition to theories of an original natural language, and especially to Prof. Max Müller’s theory of roots, “the ding-dong theory”, 8 or the idea that invention in speech is governed by certain linguistic instincts, different for different races or groups of races, which affix general meanings a priori to certain sounds; and that his object was to insist on the arbitrary character of all the elements of speech, the roots of etymology as well as their developments. 9 But perhaps I do him injustice by this supposition. Certainly if he had clearly understood the theory of natural selection he would have seen that the theory as it stands more nearly accords with the linguistic views which he favors than with those of Prof. Müller. But the theory as it stands is not, it seems to me, inconsistent even with Müller’s views, since it ascribes nothing and denies nothing to variations as a direct cause of changes in species or structures or habits or customs. It only attributes to them opportunities or the conditions for choice; and does not deny to them other forms of agency. 10 Whether linguistic instincts, responsive to certain root vocables, govern the inventions, or rather the adoption of inventions in any definable or general way, and independently of accidental associations, or do not; it is certain that these inventions have such a range as to afford the conditions for a kind of choice that accounts for the diversities and continuous changes in languages derived from a common origin; and for this kind of choice it is obvious that men are neither individually nor jointly responsible in any proper meaning of the term. Whether in such choice they are bound fast in fate, or not, is a metaphysical question; but unless we distinguish man’s proper agency from other causes in the way which you propose we must fall into the greatest confusion with respect to other matters besides the origin of languages. Thus man is a geological agent. He affects and alters unintentionally the physical forces and conditions of the globe. He changes climates even, and their consequences, by actions designed for other effects. Could there be any sense or true philosophy in attempting to establish in physical geology a clear line of distinction between such agency and that of other forms of living creatures like the coral animals, or that even of lifeless physical causes;—in distinguishing between quarrying, for example, and the agency of frosts and storms, or between the transfer of materials in ships and carts under the direction of seamen and carters and the transporting agency of other animals and of

382

August 1872

winds and water currents? These distinctions would be of the smallest importance in geology though they might be essential from a moral or legislative point of view. But I have written what reads more like an essay than the letter I intended, though I suppose I ought to be held responsible for its unintended length. 11 It will appear shorter, however, if we regard it as a brief of the case you have given me to work up; and a more reasonable letter in view of the advantage writing has over talk in continuous or consecutive discussion. Hoping to see you soon I am | Very sincerely yours | Chauncey Wright DAR 181: 169 1 2 3

4 5 6 7

8

9 10 11

Wright visited Down on 4 September 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). See letter to Chauncey Wright, 3 June [1872]. See letter to Chauncey Wright, 3 June [1872] and n 4. William Dwight Whitney had criticised the view that languages were natural organisms that developed according to fixed laws independent of human agency (Whitney 1871, pp. 37, 47–8). Secundum quid (Latin): ‘according to something’, or in a particular respect, as opposed to simpliciter: simply, unconditionally (OED). CD had suggested that changes in language were analogous to the modifications produced in organic structures through ‘unconscious selection’ (see letter to Chauncey Wright, 3 June [1872] and n. 5). The passage is from Alexander Pope’s ‘Universal prayer’: ‘And binding Nature fast in Fate, Left free the Human Will’ (Pope 1751, 3: 156). Wright had reviewed Alfred Russel Wallace’s Contributions to the theory of natural selection (Wallace 1870) in the North American Review (Wright 1870). In the note, Wright addressed the objection that ‘Natural Selection does not apply to the origin of languages, because language is an invention, and the work of human will’ (Wright 1870, pp. 293–4). CD’s annotated copy of Wright 1870 is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Friedrich Max Müller had promoted a theory that language originated in monosyllabic ‘roots’. He also proposed that the earliest words derived from a percussive response of the human brain to objects in the external environment; this was referred to by Müller’s critics as the ‘ding-dong’ theory of language. On Whitney’s disagreements with Müller on these points of language theory, see Alter 2005, pp. 85–90, and Radick 2007, pp. 43–9. Whitney opposed attempts to link language and racial theory, especially the view that racial characteristics determined language use (see Alter 2005, pp. 147–50). The role of human agency, intention, and will in Whitney’s theory of language is discussed in Alter 2005, pp. 202–6. Wright later published his views on language in relation to human agency in his article ‘On the evolution of self-consciousness’ (Wright 1873).

From Richard Harte 30 August 1872 To Charles Darwin Esqre | F.R.S. &c— Sir, Crossing a few days ago from Cork to Bristol I noticed a cat on board with enormous paws, and I found that it had six well formed claws on each of the hind feet and five on each of the fore feet on enquiry the steward informed me that the mother of this cat had an abnormal number of claws (he could not exactly say how many) and that most of her kittens had extra claws, one of them as many as seven on each hind paw. he further told me that he had at home a sister of the cat I saw on board which

August 1872

383

had six claws on both fore and hind feet and that this cat had some young ones with extra claws one of which I could have.1 one of these kittens I have brought with me to London a tom cat with six claws on the front paws and five on the hind, and as I find I shall have to leave London for some time it struck me that the case was a sufficiently interesting one, as illustrating the persistance of a variation, to warrant me in writing to offer you my pussy if you will be pleased to accept it. I should mention that the fore paws of this kitten are a singular travestie of a hand being in this form If you will kindly let me know whether you care for the kitten, I shall, in case you do, send or leave it at any address you mention yours obediently | Richard Harte P.S The stewards name is Curran2 (of the ship P. Adler.) | Cork and Bristol | S.S. Company. 30/8/72 | 2 Devonshire Terrace | W. Nottinghill Gate DAR 166: 110 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.8 one . . . have.] ‘—grandchildren’ added pencil Top of letter: ‘Cats 6 toes | 3 generations’ pencil 1 2

CD had briefly discussed the inheritance of polydactylism, including cases of six-toed cats, in Variation 2: 12–17. The steward has not been further identified.

To J. D. Hooker 30 August [1872]

Down Aug. 30th.

One line to acknowledge the cheque & your note. I shall not send it to the bank till I have talked over matter with you. 1 C. Darwin ApcS Postmark: AU 30 72 American Philosophical Society (424) 1

See letter from J. D. Hooker, 29 August 1872 and n. 6. The cheque from John Scott was evidently not paid in, as there is no record of the deposit in CD’s Account books–banking account (Down House MS).

To John Murray 30 August [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug. 30th

My dear Sir Please to send to Mess. Williams & Norgate, Henrietta St, a parcel marked outside for “Dr. Anton Dohrn, Naples” of all my books, viz, Journal of Researches The

384

August 1872

Origin, Descent of Man, Variation of Animals under domestication, Fertilisation of Orchids, & Facts for Darwin by Fritz Müller,—2 You will have heard from Koch3 that he requires 3000 copies of the Heliotype Plate; as there probably will be more wanted, I sh d. think you had better give order soon for an increased number beyond the 5000 ordered by M r Cooke.—4 My dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 267–8) 1 2

3 4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Anton Dohrn, 28 August 1872. CD had agreed to send copies of his publications to the library of the new zoological station at Naples, care of the London publisher Williams & Norgate (see letter to Anton Dohrn, 24 August [1872]). CD refers to Journal of researches 2d ed., Origin 6th ed., Descent, Variation, Orchids, and Facts and arguments for Darwin (Dallas trans. 1869). Eduard Friedrich Koch of E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung was arranging for the German translation of Expression. The photographic illustrations were being printed by the Heliotype Company; Robert Francis Cooke had been handling matters relating to the publication of Expression during Murray’s absence in August (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 23 August 1872).

From F. W. Harmer 31 August 1872 Heigham Grove, | Norwich. Aug 31/72 Dear Sir I trust you will allow me to thank you for your kind reply to my enquiry. 1 I should not have engaged in a controversy with M r. Lyon whose book seems to me abt. on a par with “Dame Europa’s School” had I not been almost forced into it. 2 Dr. Bateman, a medical man of this City, the author of a work on “Aphasia”, 3 read some time since, before the Victoria Institute in London, 4 a paper in which he claimed to prove the “fallacy of Darwinism”(!) by shewing that “speech could not be traced to a material centre”,5 & he published a letter in our “Daily Press” to the same effect.6 I was unwise enough to reply to the latter, that a theory was not disproved by a mere objection being urged against it, & also to attempt to explain that an argument which he rested great weight upon, viz. the non production of the missing link, was valueless, owing to the imperfection of the Geological record— 7 Dr. Bateman summoned Mr. Lyon to his assistance, with whom I at first declined to discuss the matter, but my refusal to do so was received so triumphantly by them as an acknowledgement of the collapse of my case that I felt unwilling to let the subject drop. I trust you will pardon my doing so— I fear it almost borders on the intrusive— but I venture to take the opportunity which your courteous reply has given me, as a religious man, on behalf of a rapidly increasing number of persons with whom I am associated, of assuring you how warmly we protest against the unfair & personal

August 1872

385

attacks to which you have been & still are subjected, in the name of religion & by its self constituted champions. Mr. Lyon is, I believe an Independent minister at Tunbridge Wells— Again thanking you | I am | Yours truly | F. W. Harmer Chas Darwin Esq F.R.S. &c DAR 166: 103 1 2

3

4

5

6 7

Letter to F. W. Harmer, 29 August 1872. William Penman Lyon’s book, Homo versus Darwin (Lyon [1871]), was written in the form of a judicial trial. The fight at Dame Europa’s school (Pullen [1871]), was a satire on the Franco-Prussian War, portraying the battles between European countries as fights between schoolchildren. Frederic Bateman had sent CD a copy of his book On aphasia, or loss of speech: and the localisation of the faculty of articulate language (Bateman 1870; see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Frederic Bateman, 31 March [1871] and n. 2). CD’s annotated copy is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 35). The work is cited in Expression, p. 357 n., and Descent 2d ed., p. 72 n. 14, and p. 88 n. 60. Bateman’s paper, ‘Darwinism tested by recent researches on language’, was delivered at a meeting of the Victoria Institute on 18 March 1872 (Bateman 1872). The Victoria Institute was founded in 1865 to investigate questions of philosophy and science for their bearing on Christianity. On the founding of the society, see Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, or Philosophical Society of Great Britain 1 (1866): 1–36. The quotations do not appear in Bateman’s published paper (Bateman 1872), which argued that no definite portion of the brain had yet been identified as the seat of language, and that human speech ought to be regarded as different in kind from that of animals. On Bateman’s theory of language in relation to cerebral localisation studies, see Radick 2007, pp. 58–64. For CD’s discussion of the origins of language, see Descent 1: 53–62. The controversy between Harmer, Lyon, and Bateman was conducted in the Eastern Daily Press. Bateman’s letter was in the issue of 25 April 1872, p. 2. Eastern Daily Press, 30 April 1872, p. 2.

From A. R. Wallace 31 August 1872 The Dell, Grays, Essex August 31st. 1872 Dear Darwin Many thanks for your long & interesting letter about Bastian’s book, though I always regret that my asking for your opinion sh d. have led you to give yourself so much trouble.1 I quite understand your frame of mind & think it quite a natural & proper one. You had hard work to hammer your views into peoples’ heads at first,—& if Bastian’s theory is true he will have still harder work, bacause the facts he appeals to are themselves so difficult to establish. Are not you mistaken about the Sphagnum? As I remember it Huxley detected a fragment of Sphagnum leaf in the same solution in which a fungoid growth had been developed. Bastian mistook the Sphagnum also for a vegetable growth,—& on account of this ignorance of the character of the sphagnum, & its presence in the solution Huxley rejected somewhat contemptuously (& I think very illogically) all Bastian’s

386

August 1872

observations.2 Again, as to the Saline solution without nitrogen, would not the air supply what was required?3 I quite agree that the book would have gained force by rearrangement in the way you suggest,—but perhaps he thought it necessary to begin with a general agreement in order to induce people to examine his new collection of facts. I am impressed most by the agreement of so many observers, some of whom struggle to explain away their own facts. What a wonderfully ingenious & suggestive paper that is by Galton, on “Blood Relationship”.4 It helps to render intelligible many of the excentricities of Heredity, Atavism, &c. Sir Chas. Lyell was good enough to write to Lord Ripon and Mr. Cole about me & the Bethnal Green Museum, & the answer he got was, that at present, no appointment of a director is Contemplated. 5 I suppose they see no way of making it a Natural History Museum, & it will have to be kept going by Loan Collections of miscellaneous works of Art,—in which case of course the S. Kensington people will manage it.6 It is a considerable disappointment to me, as I had almost calculated on getting something there. With best wishes for your health & happiness | Believe me Dr Darwin | Yours very faithfully | Alfred R Wallace P.S. I have just been reading Howorth’s paper in Journ. of Anthrop. Inst. How perverse it is. He throughout confounds “fertility” with “increase of population”— which seems to me to be the main cause of his errors.7 His elaborate accumulation of facts in other papers in “Nature” on subsidence & elevation of land, I believe to be equally full of error, & utterly untrustworthy as a whole. 8 | A.R.W. DAR 106: B113–14 1 2 3 4 5

6

7

8

Letter to A. R. Wallace, 28 August [1872]. Wallace refers to H. C. Bastian 1872. See letter to A. R. Wallace, 28 August [1872] and n. 9. For a discussion of Thomas Henry Huxley’s criticism of Henry Charlton Bastian’s experiments, see Strick 2000, pp. 84–7. See letter to A. R. Wallace, 28 August [1872]. CD had objected to Bastian’s claim to that living organisms had formed in saline solutions that contained no nitrogen. Galton 1872a. See letter from Francis Galton, 28 May 1872 and n. 5. See letter to A. R. Wallace, 28 August [1872] and n. 12. Henry Cole, as secretary of the Department of Science and Art, oversaw the South Kensington Museum and its new branch in east London, the Bethnal Green Museum. George Frederick Samuel Robinson, first marquess of Ripon, was president of the government’s council on education (ODNB). Wallace also refers to Charles Lyell. Wallace was informed by Cole that there were insufficient funds to pay for a separate director of the new museum (Raby 2001, p. 211). The Bethnal Green Museum opened in June 1872 with an exhibition of paintings and pottery from the collection of Richard Wallace; later exhibits featured loaned objects of fine art and anthropology, as well as a permanent display of food substances and processes (Dickens 1879). Henry Hoyle Howorth had sent CD a copy of the first part of his paper ‘Strictures on Darwinism’ (Howorth 1872c; see letter from H. H. Howorth, 30 July 1872 and n. 1). His views on sterility and fertility had previously been published in a letter to Nature (Howorth 1871a), prompting replies from both CD and Wallace (see letter from H. H. Howorth, 30 July 1872 and n. 2). See letter from H. H. Howorth, 30 July 1872 and n. 4.

August 1872

387

To Chauncey Wright 31 August [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Aug. 31st My dear Sir Very many thanks for your long & interesting letter. 2 I hope some time you will be able to utilise all the close thought you have applied to the subject, by bringing in your ideas into one of your essays.— I write now to say how very glad I shall be to see you here.— Any day next week except Saturday would suit us perfectly well. But if you are going to stay sometime longer in London, I would suggest any day in week beginning on Sept. 9 th — I make this suggestion solely on account of my son George whom you saw in America & who wd like to meet you here, & who will be away from home this coming week.—3 I trust that you will come & dine & sleep here; for the afternoon from 2 o to 4o is always my bad time when my head fails me; & indeed at no time can I converse long with anyone.— Your best plan will be to come by the train which leaves Charing Cross at 5o 5’ for Orpington Station (on the S.E. R y.)4 which is 4 miles from this house, & then you can return next morning to London.— We sh d. thus see each other much more pleasantly than by a mere call, as you propose.— My dear Sir | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin Please let me hear when you will come.— American Philosophical Society (Getz 8497) 1 2 3

4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Chauncey Wright, 29 August 1872. Letter from Chauncey Wright, 29 August 1872. Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) records that Wright visited Down on 4 September 1872. George Howard Darwin had met Wright in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in October 1871; he had travelled to America with Francis Darwin and several friends (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Chauncey Wright, 11 October 1871 and n. 8). South Eastern Railway.

From Francis Darwin [after August 1872?]1

6 Q. Anne St Wednesday

Dear Father I send you a quotation from Trousseau showing what a difference a very slight change in the conditions of life may make— “I stated at the beginning of this Lecture that it is a frequent occurence for young girls on arriving in Paris to have suppression of the catamenia. Change of residence is enough in itself to produce this result without there being any change in the manner of life. Young girls who have lived a number of years in a provincial boarding school, on moving to a similar institution in Paris where the régime is evidently the same; often experience an interruption of several months in their courses; and young girls

388

August 1872

removing from Paris to the country similarly suffer.” Lectures on Clinical Medicine by A. Trousseau— (New Sydenham Soc.) London. 1872— Vol V. p 213 2 Yrs affec | F D DAR 162: 54 1

2

The date is conjected by the reference to the last volume of Armand Trousseau’s translated lectures (Trousseau 1868–72), published by the New Sydenham Society. The last volume had not yet been published when the society met on 9 August 1872 (Birmingham Daily Post, 10 August 1872, p. 6). Francis refers to the last volume of Trousseau 1868–72. CD did not make use of this information in his publications.

From A. G. Nathorst [after August 1872]1 This paper is only my narrative to the Royal Academy of Stockholm of my researches in Skåne 1871 without any conclusions drawn from them. 2 I have had no time neither to this nor to determine all the species I have found in Sweden. I believe that their number will be about 30 and I also have some seeds and mosses. These later I believe will also give a number of about 30 species. Most of them are living now in whole Scandinavia as well as on Spitsbergen, but some are arctic species, for example Hypnum ochraceum.3 For my researches in Denmark Germany and Switzerland as well as in England I will as soon as possible give an account in an English journal.4 I think that Professor Steenstrup soon will—if he not already has—publish our researches in Denmark.5 I cannot publish anything of my researches in Europe this summer before I have given my narrative to the Royal Academy of Stockholm, but I will here mention that I in the peatmasses of Mecklenburg found Betula nana in the lowest strata. In Bavaria I also found it in a peatmass 8 feet deep and on this peatmass it once had grown.6 I found it namely in a stratum that with exception of some single leaves of Betula alba7 contained only the leaves of this plant. And I also found the boughs of it in great multitude with the leaves at their sides. What is the most interesting is that one could follow this stratum as far as one wished. It had evidently once grown in great multitude on this peatmass without leaving place for a single Salix. 8 The other leaves I found here were of Andromeda polifolia, Oxycoccus palustris and Myrtillus ugilinosa.9 It was on the lowland in Bavaria southerst from Munich.— On the lowland of Switzerland I found the arctic (alpine) plants under circumstances not different from them in Sweden or Denmark. It was between Zurich and Lac Constance under a peatmass. The peat itself contained upperit leaves and fruit of Quercus, and underit Pinus silvestris. 10 In the clay I found upperit Betula alba with some single leaves of Betula nana. Lower this was more common with a great number of Salices and Dryas, and on the greatest depth I also found Salix reticulata and S. polaris (according to the determination of Heer, but I think it worth of further examination).11 Also a single leaf of Azalea and Polygonum viviparum, 12 with some dubious fragments. I ought perhaps to remark that the little hills around the

September 1872

389

peatmass in Switzerland, where once Dryas etc had grown were now planted with grasses.— At Bovey Tracey in Devonshire I found Betula nana very common on a new locality, which also contained leaves of Betula alba, three different Salices Calluna, Potamageton, seeds.13 Most interesting was that I here also found three flowers of Arctostaphylos Uva Ursi—14 CUL, DAR Pamphlet Collection G779 1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

The date is established by the reference to Nathorst’s research in Mecklenburg, which was carried out in the summer of 1872 (Nathorst 1873, p. 227). Nathorst’s paper on Arctic plant beds in the freshwater aquifers of Scania appeared in the Öfversigt af Kongl. Vetenskaps-Akademiens Förhandlingar (Nathorst 1872). It was communicated to the Swedish Royal Academy on 14 February 1872. Hypnum ochraceum is now Hygrohyphum ochraceum. Nathorst’s paper on post-glacial Arctic plants appeared in the Journal of Botany (Nathorst 1873). His findings were based on research carried out between 1870 and the summer of 1872. Japetus Steenstrup did not publish on Danish Arctic plant beds, but Nathorst discussed their findings in a later article (Nathorst 1892). Nathorst discovered leaves of Betula nana (dwarf birch) near Oertzenhof in Mecklenburg and at Kolbermoor in southern Bavaria (Nathorst 1892, p. 274). Betula alba is the white birch. Salix is the genus of willows. Andromeda polifolia is bog-rosemary; Oxycoccus palustris (now Vaccinium oxycoccos) is the small cranberry; Myrtillus uliginosa (now Vaccinium uliginosum) is the bog bilberry. Quercus is the genus of oaks; Pinus sylvestris is the Scots pine (‘silvestris’ was a misspelling). Nathorst evidently refers to the uppermost (‘upperit’) and undermost (‘underit’) layers of peat. Dryas is a genus of dwarf herbaceous plants of the rose family. Salix reticulata is the net-leaved willow; S. polaris is the polar willow. Nathorst refers to Oswald Heer. Polygonum viviparum is alpine bistort. Calluna is a monospecific genus of heather. Potamogeton is the genus of pondweed. Arctostaphylos uva-ursi is bearberry.

From ? September 1872

Septr. 1872.

It is now some years since my attention was called to what appeared to me a noticeable peculiarity in the Domestic Cat.1 While conversing with a friend on Natural History, he remarked that Cats leave the houses in which dead bodies lie. Determined to find out the truth of his remark, I subsequently took notice of many cases that occurred during my Practice as a Medical man, and found the result was the same, viz, that the Cats appeared always to have deserted the house, or room, in which a dead body was placed, and invariably returned to their old quarters after it’s removal for interment. A few weeks ago my attention was drawn more particularly to the following facts: A person living near me owned several of these domestic Creatures, one amongst the number having given birth to a litter of kittens. These had been promised to me (as soon as old enough to be removed from the Mother) for toxological experiments.

390

September 1872

A day or two after, the person above referred to, was so unfortunate as to lose his Child. However before the interment took place I made enquiries concerning the promised kittens, which were being reared for the good of Science, and was informed that all the Cats had left the Premises, including the mother of the kittens, the day on which the child died. It was supposed from their disappearing so suddenly that they had been poisoned, the kittens, having been deserted by the mother, as a matter of course died, but what appears more strange is, that on the day following the removal of the dead body from the house, all the Cats (about seven) returned, including the mother of the young ones. I have subsequently noticed another similar case, which it will be needless to detail. AMem DAR 159: 141 1

CD had discussed the instinctive behaviours and mental powers of animals, including the domestic cat, in Descent 1: 34–106.

To Ernst Haeckel 2 September 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Sept 2. 1872 My dear Haeckel, Very many thanks for the 3rd. Edit. of your Schöpfungsgeschichte.1 I rejoice at the success of this book, and it proves how our ideas are spreading. One of my daughters has translated to me your new preface, which I have been particularly glad to hear, not only from the very kind manner in which you speak of my ‘Descent’, but from your criticisms on various books.2 I should much like to read Carneri but it is too great a job for my poor german knowledge.3 I did not know how weak a man Bastian was: you pitch into him with a vengeance.4 I thought that you never intended to write severely again about anyone! 5 It grieved me to read a year or two ago a review by Ruetimeyer on you. I am sorry that he is so retrograde, as I feel much respect for him.6 Our English Dr. Bastian has lately published a book on So-called Spontaneous Generation, which has perplexed me greatly. He has collected all the observations made by various naturalists, some of them good observers, on the protoplasm within the cells of dying plants & animals becoming converted into living organisms. He has also made many experiments with boiled infusions in closed flasks; but I believe he is not a very careful observer. Nevertheless the general argument in favour of living forms being now produced under favourable conditions seems to me strong; but I can form no final conclusion. 7 I have finished my little book on ‘Expression’, & when it is published in November I will of course send you a copy, in case you would like to read it for amusement. 8 I have resumed some old botanical work, & perhaps I shall never again attempt to discuss theoretical views.9 I am growing old & weak, & no man can tell when his intellectual powers begin to fail.

September 1872

391

Long life & happiness to you for your own sake & for that of Science | Believe me | Yours very sincerely | Charles Darwin LS Ernst-Haeckel-Haus (Bestand A-Abt. 1:1-52/27) 1

2

3

4

5 6

7 8 9

There is a copy of the third edition of Haeckel’s Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte (Natural history of creation; Haeckel 1872b) in the Darwin Library–Down. See also letter from Ernst Haeckel, 1 March 1872 and n. 8. The translation was probably by Henrietta Emma Litchfield, who had often assisted CD with his work; CD’s other daughter was Elizabeth Darwin. In the preface to Haeckel 1872b, pp. xxxi–xxxii, Haeckel praised Descent and identified his own views with CD’s. Haeckel defended himself against criticisms by Ludwig Rütimeyer, Wilhelm His, and Adolf Bastian, and showed how Bartholomäus von Carneri, Gustav Jäger, Wilhelm Spengel, and Alfred Kirchhoff had used CD’s theories of human descent to further their work. He also referred to Oskar Schmidt’s analysis of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s ideas on metamorphosis in relation to CD’s theory of descent (Schmidt 1871). Haeckel argued that Carneri’s work on ethics and Darwinism (Carneri 1871) had opened up new directions in moral philosophy by showing its foundations in evolutionary theory (Haeckel 1872b, pp. xxxix– xl). CD had received a copy of Carneri 1871 in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Bartholomäus von Carneri, 17 April [1871]; there is a copy in the Darwin Library–Down). See also letter from Georg von Seidlitz, 22 April 1872 and n. 7. For Carneri’s relationship with Haeckel, see Di Gregorio 2005, p. 387. Haeckel criticised Adolf Bastian’s reviews of Descent ([A. Bastian] 1871a and 1871b) for dismissing CD’s book as ‘Träume eines Mittagsschläfchens’ (dreams of a midday nap; Haeckel 1872b, pp. xxxviii–xxxix). CD’s lightly annotated copy of [A. Bastian] 1871a is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. CD rebuked Haeckel for the severity of his criticisms in 1867 (see Correspondence vol. 15, letter to Ernst Haeckel, 12 April [1867] and n. 6, and letter from Ernst Haeckel, 12 May 1867). CD refers to Rütimeyer 1868. See also letter from Ernst Haeckel, 12 October 1872 and n. 3. On CD’s respect for, and use of, Rütimeyer’s work, see Correspondence vol. 15, letter to Ludwig Rütimeyer, 4 May [1867] and nn. 2 and 3. CD refers to Henry Charlton Bastian and H. C. Bastian 1872. For CD’s views on Bastian, see the letters to A. R. Wallace, 28 August [1872] and [2 September 1872]. Expression was published on 27 November 1872 (Freeman 1977). Haeckel’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for the book (Appendix V). In his ‘Journal’ (Appendix II), CD noted that he began work on Drosera on 23 August 1872. He had also worked on Drosera between 1860 and 1862 (see Correspondence vols. 8, 9, and 10).

From J. D. Hooker 2 September 1872 Royal Gardens Kew Sept 2/72 Dear Darwin Our Drosera Capensis is quite at your service & we shall be glad to see Lettington whenever convenient—1 We have no other species— Have you asked Wilson Saunders or shall I.—2 My man who was there last week saw none there Ever yours affec | J D Hooker DAR 103: 120 1

See letter to J. D. Hooker, 29 August [1872]. Henry Lettington was CD’s gardener.

392 2

September 1872

William Wilson Saunders had a notable collection of exotic plant specimens at his home at Hillfield, Reigate, Surrey (ODNB).

To A. R. Wallace [2 September 1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. My dear Wallace I write a line to say that I understood, but I may of course have been mistaken, from Huxley that Bastian distinctly stated that he had watched the development of the scale of Sphagnum: I was astonished, as I knew the appearance of Sphagnum under a high power, & asked a second time; but I repeat that I may have been mistaken.—2 Busk told me that Sharpey had noticed the appearance of numerous infusoria in one of the solutions not containing any nitrogen; & I do not suppose that any physiologist wd. admit the possibility of infusoria absorbing nitrogen gas.— 3 Possibly I ought not to have mentioned statements made in private conversation, so please do not repeat them. I quite agree about the extreme importance of such men, as Cohn, Trecul & Carter having observed apparent cases of Heterogenesis.— 4 At present I shd. prefer any mad hypothesis, such as that every disintegrated molecule of the lowest forms can reproduce the parent-form; & that these molecules are universally distributed & that they do not lose their vital power until heated to such a temperature that they decompose like dead organic particles. I am extremely grieved to hear about the museum: it is a great misfortune.— 5 Yours most sincerely | C. Darwin I have taken up old Botanical work & have given up all theories.— 6 I quite agree about Howarth’s paper: he wrote to me & I told him that we differed so widely, it was of no use our discussing any point. 7 As for Galton’s paper, I have never yet been able fully to digest it: as far as I have, it has not cleared my ideas, & has only aided in bringing more prominently forwards the large proportion of the latent characters.—8 British Library (Add 46434) 1 2 3

4

5 6

The date is established by a note written at the top of the letter in an unknown hand referring to the postmark, and by the relationship between this letter and the letter from A. R. Wallace, 31 August 1872. CD refers to Henry Charlton Bastian and Thomas Henry Huxley. See letter from A. R. Wallace, 31 August 1872 and n. 2. CD refers to George Busk and William Sharpey. The unlikelihood of life arising in solutions without nitrogen was an important criticism of Bastian’s work (see for example, T. H. Huxley, ‘Dr Bastian and spontaneous generation’, Nature, 13 October 1870, p. 473). See also letter to A. R. Wallace, 28 August [1872]. For Ferdinand Julius Cohn’s and Auguste Adolphe Lucien Trécul’s contributions to the spontaneous generation debate, see Farley 1977, pp. 132–7 and pp. 111–14. On Henry John Carter’s work, see Carter 1856, H. C. Bastian 1872, 2: 441, and Wallace 1872d, p. 302. Wallace had hoped to be appointed director of the Bethnal Green Museum (see letter from A. R. Wallace, 31 August 1872 and n. 5). See also letter to Ernst Haeckel, 2 September 1872 and n. 9.

September 1872 7 8

393

See letter from A. R. Wallace, 31 August 1872 and n. 7. CD’s letter to Henry Hoyle Howorth has not been found, but see the letter from H. H. Howorth, 30 July 1872. Howorth’s paper was Howorth 1872c. In his letter of 31 August 1872, Wallace had praised Francis Galton’s article on blood-relationships (Galton 1872a). See also letter from Francis Galton, 28 May 1872 and n. 5.

From Chauncey Wright 2 September 1872 Tavistock Hotel Covent Garden | London Sept. 2 1872 My dear Sir Indolence, especially in making practicable future plans, being one of my besetting sins, (my speculative energies being expended for the most part in other directions,) I came abroad with hardly any scheme of travel at all. This is one of the chief causes of my long stay in London, (much longer than I thought it would be,) though not the best excuse that could be given for it. But I have from time to time taken advantage of other peoples’ plans and resolutions and followed the suggestions and guidance of friends, like a moral parasite. In accordance with this passive mode of motion I made an appointment with a friend, who left London for Paris yesterday morning, to meet him there near the end of this week.1 The engagement is not absolutely binding and was made mainly for my own benefit; but on the whole I think it best not to break it; although it would add much to the pleasure of my visit to you to meet your son again. I called at his rooms in Arlington St about a month ago and learned that he was gone on a journey.2 I shall be much better pleased with the little visit you suggest than by a mere call, especially as it better suits your convenience; and I will come on Wednesday P.M. by the train you suggest from Charing Cross 5h. 5m.3 Sincerely yours | Chauncey Wright DAR 181: 170 1 2

3

Wright’s friend was Samuel Worcester Rowse (see Thayer 1878, p. 247). CD had invited Wright to visit Down (see letter to Chauncey Wright, 31 August [1872]). George Howard Darwin lived at 14 Arlington Street, London, and was away in Homburg, Germany, and Switzerland until 6 August 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) and F. Darwin 1916, p. xiv). Wright arrived at Down on Wednesday 4 September 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). He wrote of his discussions with CD, ‘I was never so waked up in my life, and did not sleep many hours under the hospitable roof ’ (Thayer 1878, p. 248).

From John Murray 3 September [1872]1 50, Albemarle S.t | W. Sept. 3— My Dear Sir My Partner M Cooke before leaving home for his holiday had increased the order for Heliotypes to 8,000.!—2

394

September 1872

I have attended to the Dutch man— His plates must be on larger paper & will probably cost a little more—3 Mr Schweitzerbart has paid for his supply down.4 I have attended to your instructions touching Dr Anton Dohrn.5 I beg to enclose a cheque for £34. 2. 6—the sum expended by you on Artists—6 I agree to your proposal of £50—instead of £55—as the charge for Stereotype text & Cuts for Appleton7 I remain My Dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | John Murray Chas Darwin Esqr DAR 171: 420 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to R.F. Cooke, 23 August 1872. See letter to John Murray, 30 August [1872]. Murray refers to Robert Francis Cooke. The Dutch publisher Johan IJkema had asked for the right of translation of Expression (see letter from Johan IJkema, 21 August 1872, and letter to R. F. Cooke, 23 August 1872). CD’s books were published in German translation by the firm E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung under the directorship of Eduard Koch. See letter to John Murray, 30 August [1872] and n. 2. CD’s Account books–banking account (Down House MS) record that CD received a payment for this amount under the heading ‘Murray cheque for advance to artists’ on 4 September 1872. See also letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872. See letter to R.F. Cooke, 7 August 1872 and n. 2.

From N. Sobko 3 September 1872

Zagorodnoy, 58, St. Petersburg. 22 August/3 September 1872.1

Sir, Having recently learned that You have brought to a conclusion Your new work: Expressions of Animals, and being convinced that the russian public will impatiently expect the appearance of this book in russian language as it always used to expect the appearance of all Your productions, I take upon myself the liberty of disturbing You with my request: have the kindness of communicating to me whether I am to hope to receive from You by degrees the proof-sheets, so that I might translate into the russian language Your new work after those proof-sheets and publish my translation at the same time with the English original.2 I have, Sir, the honour to be respectfully | Your most obedient servant | N. Sobko. DAR 177: 215 CD note: Please return this, by return of Post— (C. Darwin) As I have not considered it. 3 1 2

The correspondent has not been identified. He or she gives both the Julian (22 August) and Gregorian (3 September) calendar dates. Expression was published in November 1872. The Russian translation of Expression was made by Vladimir Onufrievich Kovalevsky ([Kovalevsky] trans. 1872). No further correspondence with Sobko has been found.

September 1872 3

395

CD forwarded this letter to Vladimir Onufrievich Kovalevsky (see letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 10 September 1872), who thought that the author was a woman.

To W. W. Baxter 4 September [1872?]1 Down— Sept. 4th Dear Sir If you chance to have any of the following Salts I sh d. be much obliged if you would send me 12 oz of each, as I want to try a little experiment with some plants. Acetate of Ammonia Citrate of Ammonia Nitrate of Ammonia Sulphate of Ammonia Nitrate of Soda Nitrate of Lime I know that it is mere improbable chance whether you have any. The Nitrate & Sulp. of Ammonia I care most about; Could you obtain them for me, as I do not know where to apply to for a small quantity, & I in fact only require a few grains.— Pray excuse my troubling you.—2 Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | C. Darwin. P.S. | Please send 4 oz of Camphorated oil for friction of the abdomen. 3 McGill University Library Rare Books and Special Collections 1

2

3

The year is conjectured from the likelihood that CD wanted chemicals for his work on Drosera and other insectivorous plants, which he resumed on 23 August 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Baxter was CD’s usual chemist. Reports of CD’s experiments on Drosera with these chemicals and others appear in Insectivorous plants, pp. 136–73. The purpose was ‘to show how powerfully the salts of ammonia act on the leaves of Drosera, and more especially to show what an extraordinary small quantity suffices to excite inflection’ (p. 136). He concluded that all the eight salts of ammonia caused the inflection of the tentacles, and often of the blade of the leaf, with the citrate being the least powerful and the phosphate by far the most (p. 168). Camphorated oil was a mixture of camphor and olive oil (Milne 1869, pp. 47–9). It was used as a liniment to relieve pain and as a stimulant.

To Ernest Edwards 4 September 1872

Sept 4th. /72/

Dear Sir I first heard of the H. process, through a friend of my son, & went to Henrietta St for an estimate & received a very obliging answer.1 I also applied to the Woodbury & Autotype Cos.— When I came to London in Feb. of this Year I had not definitely made up my mind whether to employ any of them, Au or W Coy then or common wood-engraving; but I thought from all that I had heard that H. s wd suit me best.2

396

September 1872

On writing to the H. Coy. for more information, I saw you for the first time &, you called on me; many times & I was, largely guided by your information & advice in determining to have my photographs produced by your process. I must add that I invariably found you most obliging in giving me your aid in all ways, & that you took extreme trouble in removing all my objections & difficulties. You are at perfect liberty to show this letter to anyone, as to the best of my memory it gives a strictly accurate account of my connection with you & the Co y & with you.3 | C. Darwin ADraftS DAR 96: 148–9 1

2

3

Ernest Edwards was an owner of the photographic studio and printers Edwards and Kidd at 22 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London (Post Office London directory 1872). He patented the heliotype process for printing photographs (Prodger 2009, p. 109) and was probably seeking testimonials from famous clients for the recently formed Heliotype Company (photoLondon, www.photolondon.org.uk (accessed 17 June 2011)). The friend of CD’s son was probably one of Leonard Darwin’s contacts in the Royal Engineers, Claude Reignier Conder (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Leonard Darwin, [after 4 March 1871]). CD was in London from 16 February to 21 March 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). CD refers to the Woodburytype and autotype processes for printing photographs. In 1871, CD deliberated over which was the best process to use for reproducing the photographs in Expression (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to R. F. Cooke, 22 April [1871] and n. 2, and letter to John Murray, 10 May [1871] and n. 4). For more on the autotype process, see Kirby 1988, p. 9, and J. Moore 2005. The photographic plates for Expression may have been the Heliotype Company’s first large commercial order (see Prodger 2009, pp. 108–9, and Kirby 1988, p. 10).

From V. O. Kovalevsky 6 September [1872]1 Bournemouth 6 September Dear Sir I got Your letter only to day, the Brit. Museum is closed on the first week of September and therefore I got away from London to the sea side, and having much to do with tertiaries I selected Bournemouth, as the centre of the Hampshire basin. 2 On Monday I will be back to London, where I expect letters from Russia about the translation.3 I will be exceedingly glad to visit You some day after the 10 th Sept and will inform You of the day by letter.4 Your very truly | W. Kowalevsky DAR 169: 92 1 2

3 4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 10 September 1872. The letter from CD has not been found. The Hampshire Basin dates from sixty-five to twenty-three million years ago, during the Tertiary Period. For Kovalevsky’s work at the British Museum, see the letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, [after 8 June 1872] and n. 2. Kovalevsky was translating Expression into Russian ([Kovalevsky] trans. 1872). Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) records that Kovalevsky visited Down on 22 September 1872.

September 1872

397

To Chauncey Wright 6 September [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Sept 6th My dear Mr Wright I received this morning a very big book in 2 vols. from author, “Études sur les Facultés mentales des Animaux par J. C. Houzeau—membre de l’Acad. Belgique”— (A Travelling naturalist— “Paris Hachette & Co. 1872.”— 2 This would be probably worth your notice.— I hope that you will enjoy the rest of your tour.— I have been heartily glad to make your personal acquaintance— 3 In Haste | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin American Philosophical Society (B/D25.276) 1 2

3

The year is established by the reference to Wright’s meeting with CD (see n. 3, below). The reference is to Jean-Charles Houzeau’s Études sur les facultés mentales des animaux comparées à celles de l’homme (Observations on the mental faculties of animals compared with those of man; Houzeau 1872). CD cited it extensively in Descent 2d ed.. Wright visited CD on 4 and 5 September 1872 (see Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) and Thayer 1878, p. 248). He referred to his tour in his letter of 29 August 1872.

From W. W. Reade 7 September 1872

11 St. Mary Abbot’s | Terrace | Kensington Sept. 7. ’72

My dear Sir I find a passage in Andersson’s Lake Ngami p 435 about the tears in laughing which you may prefer to a verbal statement for purposes of quotation— The people in question are Bechuanas—a negro or negroid race. “The mirth became so outrageous as to throw the party into convulsions many casting themselves at full length on the ground with their hands tightly clasped across their stomachs as if in fear of bursting whilst their greasy cheeks became furrowed with tears trickling down in streams— At p 470 he says of the same people “Unless it forces tears into their eyes they look upon snuff as “worthless”.1 Emerson Tennant in his description of the elephants captured in a corral mentions their shedding tears.2 Gordon Cuming I think notices the same in a wounded giraffe—3 I have seen an African Pack-ass shed a tear on the bit being placed in its mouth for the first time. Do not trouble to acknowledge the receipt of this but pray mention any point of this kind you wish me to look out for in my reading. I remain | yours very truly | Winwood Reade DAR 176: 62 CD ANNOTATIONS 3.1 At p 470. . . tears. 4.2] crossed pencil

398

September 1872

4.2 Gordon . . . time. 4.4] scored pencil Verso of last page: ‘In a new Edit. I ought to explain why the wrinkling of lower eyelids *can hardly [above del ‘canno’] be explained, by trace of contraction of whole orbicular, *during loud laughter [interl] because the lower contracts so much more than upper— This may aid the tendency. [‘for soon’ del]’ 4 pencil 1

2

3

4

Reade refers to Charles John Andersson and Andersson 1856. He may have mentioned the book when he visited CD on 19 March 1872 (see letter from W. W. Reade, 18 March [1872]). CD discussed laughter accompanied by tears in different races in Expression, pp. 172 and 217–219; however, he did not cite Andersson. The Bechuanas (now known as Batswana) are members of the Bantu language peoples, and lived in Bechuanaland (now Botswana) and western South Africa (EB). Reade refers to James Emerson Tennent and Tennent 1861, pp. 190 and 204. The passages are quoted by CD in Expression, p. 167. On the question of whether elephants weep, see also Correspondence vol. 16, letter to G. H. K. Thwaites, 31 January [1868]. There are no references to a giraffe shedding tears in Roualeyn George Gordon-Cumming’s works; Reade may refer to William Cornwallis Harris’s description in an anthology that includes GordonCumming’s observations (see Frost 1853, p. 437). Expression 2d ed., p. 176 n. 25, refers to GordonCumming 1856, p. 227, for information on the African elephant shedding tears after being shot. In Expression 2d ed., p. 220 n. 20, Francis Darwin added: ‘It appears from a manuscript note of the author’s that his final opinion was that the contraction of the orbiculars in gentle laughter and smiling cannot be wholly explained as a “trace of the contraction” during loud laughter, for this does not explain the contraction chiefly “of the lower orbiculars” in smiling.’

From Chauncey Wright 9 September 1872 London Sept. 9 1872 My dear Mr Darwin Many thanks for your note; and for calling my attention to M. Houzeau’s volumes, which I will certainly look into before attempting anything in their line myself. 1 It must be a great advantage, particularly on such a subject as the mental powers and habits of animals to have gained the habits of independent observation which the position of the conscientious travelling naturalist tends to produce; who must stand for the first respectable authority on the matters of his observations. 2 Most of the books I have seen on the psychical side of natural history are with reference to the requirements of science so like semi-fabuous, or even mythical histories, (whose motive is to tell a good story,—the more surprising, within limits, the better;—) and their matters consist so obviously of selected cases, chosen a priori with reference to theoretical bearings, authenticity, or the probability of their accuracy, that they seem to me to be almost wholly worthless;—theoretical considerations are so inextricably mixed up with simple (or the soundest, most cautious) observation in such matters. But to make even the testimony of a conscientious travelling naturalist of much value (with reference to the requirements of mental science) he should be an equally able, independent and conscientious or accurate explorer in the microcosm; and as free from traditional and refutable reports about this world as he is of unauthentic or doubtful ones in the other. Preconceptions of the difference in the powers of the lower animals and those of men, founded solely on metaphysical theories of the latter, seem to me quite as likely to be misleading as the testimony of ignorant or inexpert

September 1872

399

witnesses about facts for which the traveller has to assume responsibility. At present I am inclined to the belief that the actions of domestic animals,—those even the most familiar to the actual observers of them,—would alone be quite sufficient to disprove, if rightly interpreted, the existence of impassable barriers, (credited on the report of metaphysical explorers,) which are supposed to separate the causes of similar actions in men and other animals; or to separate them more widely than mental powers are between any other parts of the animal series. No doubt the gulf seems formidable from a self-conscious, merely human point of view. But this pinnacle may be easily accessible from the lowest valley in a direction different from that on which the metaphysician fixes his amazed attention. I hope, therefore, that the book will be found to have undertaken the scientific definition of proper instincts as distinguished on one hand from simpler modes of action both in animals and plants, and on the other hand from the more complex ones of the higher animals.; and to have attempted the resolution of various metaphysical simples, such as reminiscence or voluntary acts of memory; abstraction, especially the supersensible sort; free or intelligent volitions, and self-consciousness; and more than all to determine what should be meant by that very vague and ambiguous word “reason”, when considered in contrast to instinct. If reason and self-consciousness are taken from the naturalist’s point of view to be the simple natures they are usually supposed to be, and instinct to be from the same point of view an elaborate mental device, serving as a substitute for them, then very little progress will, I believe, be made beyond the mere namings, assumptions and verbal definitions of which the prevalent philosophy of the subject appears to me to consist for the most part. I am convinced, and hope some day to make out more fully and clearly than has yet, so far as I know, been done, that the most important distinctions of man from animals next him in intelligence are referable through universal laws in mental and in external natures to the comparative vividness of his simplest inartificial memories and the correspondingly greater power he has of governing his perceptions, imaginations, associations and volitions from within, or with reference to his total and individual or personal experiences, and independently of external stimuli, and the organized and inherited effects of these in determining his actions. (Quantam memoriam, tantum ingenium.)3 I look back, My dear Sir, upon my little visit to you with very great satisfaction, and it will always be a bright and memorable incident of my trip in Europe. I have deferred my journey to Paris for a day and a half from being slightly under the weather and indisposed for so long a journey.4 Yours very sincerely | Chauncey Wright DAR 181: 171 1 2

See letter to Chauncey Wright, 6 September [1872]. Wright refers to Jean-Charles Houzeau and Houzeau 1872. Houzeau 1872 appeared with the subtitle par un voyageur naturaliste (by a traveller-naturalist). Houzeau was best known for his work in astronomy, but he also travelled extensively as a naturalist in the United States and Jamaica over a period of twenty years (see Popular Science Monthly 38 (1890–1): 544–52).

400 3 4

September 1872

Quantam memoriam, tantum ingenium: memory is proportional to innate character (Latin). Wright discussed these subjects in his article ‘The evolution of self-consciousness’ (Wright 1873). Wright visited Down House on 4 and 5 September 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) and Thayer 1878, p. 248).

From V. O. Kovalevsky 10 September 1872

London | 218 Euston Road. 10 Sept. 72.

Dear Sir As I expected I found letters from my brother stating that he is intent at all events to bring the Russian edition out, should You give Your permission for doing so; besides as a means for You to form an estimate as to the amount that may fall to our common profit and the share You will think fair he sends me the following estimate furnished to him by the printer.—1 Estimate for 2000 copies.— Printing 3£. p. sheet —

75.

Paper 100 reams at 12/ —

60

Corrections?? — —

15

Binding — —

25

2

Satinage of papers and sundries

10 £ 185

Besides the cost of printing we have: Translation 4s the page —

80

Casts from Murray —

103

Heliotypes 2000

150

Transport of casts & Heliot. to S Petersb. —

10 £ 250 185 £. 435.

The highest price that could be possible fixed for such a book in our country is 7s 6d; 33% is given to the booksellers the net price is 5s. per copy or £500 for the 2000.— Trying to make an edition of 3000, as he intents, we shall have 75£. per heliotypes more and £40 for paper and printing the cost will be £.550, but the return £750 or 200£. net profit.—4 This expected profit he is quite willing to share in the manner You will think fair.—

September 1872

401

The price of the book could not on any account be more than 7s. 6d and, even at this, comparatively high price for Russia, we may expect a pirated edition with bad woodcuts or without them at 3s. or so.5 Still dear Sir You are perfectly free to dispose of the translation as best You like if You find the given estimates unsatisfactory, if not I will call on You one morning and settle this affair finally.6 I looked over Wund’s book but did not find much that would be of any immediate use for You, still I marked in the second volume some points page 1–40 and more from page 320 to the end.7 There is still less in the first vol., but I will look it over and send to You one of these days.— Your very truly | W. Kowalevsky P.S. The letter You received seems to me to come from a lady, she wishes certainly, having the proof-sheets, to offer the translation to some editor. 8 DAR 169: 93 1

2 3 4

5 6 7 8

Kovalevsky’s brother was Alexander Onufrievich Kovalevsky. CD had already agreed that V. O. Kovalevsky would translate Expression into Russian and had discussed the costs and distribution of profits in general terms (see letter to V. O. Kovalevsky, 10 August [1872]). Satinage is the German term for calendering, that is, finishing or glazing the surface of paper using moisture, heat, and pressure (Chambers s.v. calender). In his letter of 6 August 1872, Robert Francis Cooke proposed a £10 charge for electrotypes of the woodcuts for all the translations of Expression. Kovalevsky had originally planned to publish 1000 copies, with the possibility of increasing this to 3000. The production costs were partly determined by the number of copies of the photographic plates, which were being printed by the Heliotype Company. See letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 8 August [1872]. Kovalevsky had informed CD that two cheap pirated editions of Descent had appeared in Russia besides his own translation (Kovalevsky trans. 1871–2; see letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, [before 8 August 1872]). CD had received another request for a Russian translation of Expression (see letter from N. Sobko, 3 September 1872). Kovalevsky had recommended that CD read Wundt 1863 for its relevance to Expression (see letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 8 August [1872] and n. 9). Letter from N. Sobko, 3 September 1872. In a letter to his brother A. O. Kovalevsky of 19 September [1872], Kovalevsky reported that CD ‘had received a letter from a Russian about the translation and passed it on to me and told me he answered that he had given the translation and the rights to me’ (Gaisinovich ed. 1988, p. 199). CD’s letter to Sobko has not been found.

To the Linnean Society 12 September 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Sep. 12. 72 Dear Sir, Will you be so kind as to send me the parcel & likewise any parts of your transactions now due to me addressed to “C Darwin Esq. Orpington Stn. South Eastern Railway.” (not adding any other address)1 My dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin LS Linnean Society of London (Darwin Misc. Letters 9)

402 1

September 1872

There is a note on the letter reading, ‘Answerd. req for him to retn. authorisn. to Jas. West to sign for Trans. R.K.’ R.K.: Richard Kippist, librarian of the Linnean Society. See also letter to the Linnean Society, [after 12] September 1872. CD’s copies of the Transactions of the Linnean Society of London are in the Darwin Archive–CUL. Orpington was the nearest station to Down House.

From W. W. Reade 12 September [1872]1

11 St. Mary Abbot’s Terrace | Kensington Sept. 12.

My dear Sir I have no doubt entire change of work will be a relief to you; it must be the greatest of blessings to be able to work without being obliged to read or write books—a blessing literary men may not enjoy— I am quite done up for the time being, having dyspepsia & all its attendant woes & start to day on a short pedestrian trip— On my return to London I shall take lodgings near the British Museum & try to finish off my travels.2 Very many thanks for your kind inquiries respecting my book. It is a failure but not a discouraging one.3 I use certain parts relating to Africa in my forthcoming work. When I come back to London I will send you my new address— with some little hesitation for I really do not deserve the rather lavish enconiums therein contained I send you a critique from a Yorkshire paper— It may however interest you as showing what the ladies of the present age are capable of in the way of free thinking. The writer is the wife of a [ commoner] so I am told.— & likes the book because she is such an enthusiast for the Cause.4 I remain yours very truly Winwood Reade DAR 176: 63 1 2 3 4

The year is established by the reference to Reade 1872, which was published in April 1872, and Reade 1873 (see nn. 2 and 3, below). Reade refers to his African sketch-book (Reade 1873). Martyrdom of man (Reade 1872) was published in May 1872 (Publishers’ Circular). The enclosure has not been found.

From C. L. Sutherland 12 September 1872 West Market Place | Cirencester. 12th. September 72.

Dear Mr. Darwin. According to promise I sent for a copy of my friend Ayraults book on Mule Breeding in the Poitou.1 By careful selection a most extraordinary—in fact an almost abnormal race of Asses has been produced, which are kept solely for breeding Mules. I shall be shortly writing to Ayrault & I know he will be delighted to hear that you are the recipient of one of his books, a few of which he gave me for distribution when I was at Niort in May last.2

September 1872

403

I hope you are as well as when I had the pleasure of seeing you in June last & with my compliments to Mrs. Darwin3 | I remain | Yours very truly | Charles L Sutherland I have thought that possibly the enclosed photograph of our mutual friend Tegetmeier & myself examining a pigeon Voyageur Belge, might amuse you. 4 DAR 177: 320 1 2 3 4

There is a lightly annotated copy of Ayrault 1867 in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 24). Eugène Ayrault lived in Niort, a town in Western France. Sutherland visited Down in June 1872 (see letter from C. L. Sutherland, [9–19 June 1872] and n. 2). The photograph of Sutherland with William Bernhard Tegetmeier appears in Correspondence vol. 6, facing p. 193 (see also Richardson 1916, facing p. 63). Pigeon voyageur: carrier pigeon (French).

To the Linnean Society [after 12] September 18721 I hereby authorize Mr. Jas. West, Messenger to the Linnean Society, to receive on my behalf such parts of the Transactions of that Society as may now be due to me. 2 Charles Darwin Septr. 1872 With my Thanks— LS(A) Linnean Society of London (Darwin Misc. Letters 8) 1 2

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to the Linnean Society, 12 September 1872. In 1872, James West succeeded his deceased uncle Thomas West as the Linnean Society’s porter, messenger, collector, and housekeeper (Gage and Stearn 1988, p. 67). CD’s copies of the Transactions of the Linnean Society of London are in the Darwin Archive–CUL.

From C.-F. Reinwald1 13 September 1872 Genève 13 Sept 1872 Monsieur Ch Darwin Cher Monsieur Je vous écris de Genève où m’a appelé la maladie de M. Moulinié, 2 le traducteur de vos ouvrages. Le pauvre M. Moulinié est bien malade et le sera malheureusement encore pur quelque temps. J’ai pu pourtant m’arranger avec lui pour pouvoir faire acheverl’impression du second Volume de la Descendance de l’homme, et celle de l’Origine des Espèces, qui l’une et l’autre étaient arrivées jusqu’à la composition des Tables de Matière.3

404

September 1872

M. Moulinié m’a également remis votre lettre du 18 Aoüt, dont il n’avait pu me donner connaissance et qui a trait au nouvel ouvrage sur l Expression des Emotions chez lhomme et les Animaux.4 J’aurai lhonneur de repondre à votre lettre dès que je serai de retour a Paris, ce qui aura lieu lundi ou mardi prochain Veuillez bien agréer en attendant | cher Monsieur, l’expression de mes sentiments les plus distingués | C Reinwald & Ce To Ch. Darwin Esq. Down, Kent DAR 176: 94 1 2 3

4

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Jean Jacques Moulinié. Reinwald refers to Moulinié’s translations of Descent (Moulinié trans. 1872) and the sixth edition of Origin (Moulinié trans. 1873). The two volumes of the French translation of Descent were published separately on 19 February and 18 November 1872 (see Journal général de l’imprimerie et de la librarie, 2 March 1872, p. 91, and 30 November 1872, p. 563). CD’s letter to Moulinié has not been found.

To W. W. Baxter 17 September [1872?]1 Mr 



Please send me about 12 oz of Sulphuric Œther & about 12 oz of Nitric Œther, both as pure as possible, for experimental purposes, in bottles with corks, as I shall use them immediately2 C. Darwin Down | Sept 17th.— Also about a drachm of Chloroform (I have some at Home but it has been kept long & I am afraid of its purity) Also about a drachm of Prussic Acid of Pharmacopœa (please mark proportion of Prussic acid to water on Label) Also 20 or 30 drops of pure, concentrated Prussic Acid. 3 C.D. Cleveland Health Sciences Library (Robert M. Stecher collection) 1

2 3

The year is conjectured from the likelihood that the letter was written after the resumption of CD’s work on Drosera on 23 August 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)), and from the relationship between this letter and the letter to W. W. Baxter, 4 September [1872?]. In Insectivorous plants, pp. 219 and 220, CD recorded his experiments on the action of sulphuric ether and nitric ether (now known as ethyl sulfate and ethyl nitrate) on Drosera. Ethyl nitrate is highly volatile. In Insectivorous plants, pp. 217, 304, and 305, CD recorded his experiments on the action of chloroform on Drosera and Dionaea, and the action of hydrocyanic acid (another name for prussic acid, now more commonly known as hydrogen cyanide) on Dionaea.

September 1872 From C.-F. Reinwald 17 September 1872

405 Paris. Rue des Saints Pères 15 Sept. 17th. 1872

Dear Sir I suppose my letter from Geneva has duely reached you.1 Arriving lately in that place I found M. Moulinié2 very ill. His mental faculties being much weakened, all literary work or trouble had already been forbidden by his doctors and a longer stage at Aix les Bains, or Annecy in Savoy being lately decided, 3 I arrived in time to secure all materials for the achievement of the translation of the Descent of man, and Origin of Species. Both the translations were already composed in the printing office some months ago, with the sole exception of the Indexes; my exertion therefore is to get these Indexes ready and to publish the books, which no doubt will be done on the beginning of October. 4 I found at Mr Moulinié’s your kind letter of Aug. 18 th., concerning your new book “On the Expression of the Emotions.’5 We assume with pleasure the care of having this work translated into french, and to publish it here in Paris; for which purpose we want however another translator, as Mr. Moulinié is now, and for the next time quite out of question. If you have a preference for one of our french translators, we should be happy to try to conclude with him for the literary part of the enterprize; if not, we should be able to propose another translator.6 As for the material part of the work, we write to M. Murray that we accept his proposal for the casts of the Wood-cuts, but that for the Heliotype Plates we wish to be not engaged for 1000 copies at once. We propose to get immediately 500 copies and to be authorized to require other 500 copies as soon as the first number will be sold.— We do not know, whether there will be necessity of printing a french text on the Plates and would be much obliged, if your editor could communicate us one of the said Heliotype Plates in order to form an opinion on the subject 7 We write to day to Mr Murray and should be much obliged if he would accept our proposal concerning the said plates, enabling us thus to publish promptly also this new and important work of your’s. Waiting for your kind reply, we remain | Dear Sir | your’s most obediently | C Reinwald & Co To Ch. Darwin Esq. Down, Kent DAR 176: 95 1 2 3 4 5

See letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 13 September 1872. Jean Jacques Moulinié. Aix-les-Bains is a small town in south-eastern France, famous for its hot sulphur springs. Annecy is a town in the same region on the northern tip of Lac d’Annecy between Geneva and Chambéry. Reinwald refers to Moulinié’s French translation of Descent (Moulinié trans. 1872) and of the sixth edition of Origin (Moulinié trans. 1873). See letter from C. F. Reinwald, 13 September 1872 and n. 3. CD’s letter has not been found.

406 6 7

September 1872

Expression was translated into French by Samuel Pozzi and René Benoît (Pozzi and Benoît trans. 1874). Reinwald refers to CD’s publisher, John Murray. The photographic plates were printed by the Heliotype Company and carried no text.

From H. A. Head 18 September 1872 Duluth | Lake Superior Septr 18th 1872. Dr Darwin— Down, Kent. Dear Sir, Do you remember some one walking from Breckenridge to see you, and though ill you were so kind as to leave your room to see me— 1 well I am back again in America and about in the centre of the continent, and thinking that a note from so out of the way a place may not be uninteresting to you, as well as to remind you that you are not forgotten by one of your disciples; and also to know if I may be of use to the cause of Natural Science, and how I may devote myself to what I consisider the “Truth” in contradistinction to the hypothesis of Moses— 2 I am camped on a block of land that I bought last year; in a small shantie with my cousin, situated at the corner of eight street and fourth avenue, of one third acre extent— we have grubbed it and sown grass seed— next week I am going to work at a lumber mill the other side of the town. This is the chosen site for the terminus of the Northern Pacific Railway, and is a fast increasing city and very beautifully situated on two long boulder banks thrown up by the heavy seas of the Lake at the mouth of the River St Louis and on a gentle slope of granitic hills at the back. Autumn has not yet colored the landscape by changing the poplars and birch green to orange and red but the maple shows sign of coming winter by tinting its keys red and a few leaves yellow, and the passenger pigeons are daily passing South round the lake end reminds me of the cold time coming. The country all round is one vast forest except where water covers the ground— and there is very little life to be seen in it considering the immense extent of unoccupied country.— Oak Ash Birch Maple Poplar Bass Willow Tamrack3 —Hemlock— Pine Cedar and Hazel are the principle woods— Of birds there are the Raven, Crow, Hawks Gulls—Woodpeckers—Starlings—Grouse Jay.— Some four kinds of small birds I have seen—a bluish bird and a Wren—and one with a whitish bill—but I have not been out with a gun to seek for specimens yet and have not been far in the country. There are the Red Squirrel and Grey and the Chipmunk or ground Squirrel— Bears are sometimes seen but seldom and in winter wolves and foxes—the musk rat and beavers are common in some parts—and also the minx4 skunk and others etc. The Sting Nettle here has no stings on the leaf but all on the stalk and stem both of leaf and bloom—which is different from the British being more like a branched coronet the New Zealand Nettle is quite a large shrub and though like yet different from either having large but few stings on them.5

September 1872

407

The Passenger Pigeon must know where he is going to and for why— no doubt winter has already set in away to the Nor’wd, and the most northerly located Pigeons are the first to move South. Before or during a Storm Ravens fly round and round on steady out spread wings every now and then turning right up on their sides and uttering their hoarse croaks; as I have seen here and in the Rocky Mountains.— On the small lakes scattered about in the woods there are various species of ducks and divers, and in the waters pike and pickerel— in streams trout & cat fish—but I have not yet learned the various scarce organic forms of either vegetal or animal life of this part of the world.— Cooper’s Rush or The flag rush or flat rush seems to be an universal plant. I have seen it in New Zealand all over the country where it is named by the Maories “Raupo” and used by them for side thatching their houses 6 —and here it is used for the very same purpose by the Ojibway Indians 7 —being made into a portable thatch so as to be hung round their lodges.— It is common in Britain and Tahiti and Honolulu and Australia From the Maple the Ojibways get their sugar—they bore a hole and drive in a plug for a spout chop out a dish or double up a piece of birch bark—to catch the sap and then boil down and let cake— Of Birch Bark they make their Canoes and cover their lodges—of cedar the ribs and thwarts and gunwalls— And now I will come to what mostly occupies my thoughts and that is— With the basis of a developed creation, a certainty of our individual existence, a remembrance of half of sorrow and half of pleasure of our past lives What hope have you to give me of some sort of continuation of my own characteristics after this body is dead and rotten— That I am related to the quadrumana and quadrupeda I feel quite sure yes even that my mind or soul if you like is some how developed from the lower mamalia— All organic life is to me a subject of study and every one kind to me is a fact— Now life must be a something, and we know that mind exists— Why should not God be material and our souls also, and why can he not preserve to himself some few or many, of us his creatures, not made of nothing or created directly by will—but made of preexisting matter by law of developement—specifically as well as individually Nothing could be such a miserable calamity to our race as the disbelief of an unseen world—not that by any means it can be proved—one way or the other I am not a Christian. I am a philosopher— Jesus Christ is a myth—for no atonement is possible— a deed done is done for ever, and can not be cancelled— You wrote and caused to be printed your far famed work—Origin of Species—and God can not alter it— it is a deed done and no one can undo it. At Central Park New York I saw the lion and it is spotted all up the inside of the legs8 I have asked many to account to me for those corns on horses legs and no one could I long thought that they were the inside third toe of the tritoed ancestor of the horse and at Clifton I saw the Guanaca or Alpaca 9 that it had them on outside as well as in which to me was proof sufficient but the seven neck vertebra in all the

408

September 1872

mammalia is to me uncontestable proof that we are all kin—or else that our Maker had a very queer whim in his head that he obstinately persisted in even when it was an obstacle in his work— Ours noses too all sorts of shapes gaping hiccoughs stretching—kissing a mother’s trying to bite her child for joy— Women’s cuteness in deed every thing about us testifies to the Great Truth—that we are a “developed Animal—both mind and body being descended from an animal not “worthy to be called man”— Not that my saying so constitutes it a truth—nor you nor Huxley 10 — no more than if I say 2 × 2 = 4 make that a truth, and so if you say there is no life for us in another state does that constitute the truth We live or we do not—if we live—so are there many living though we see them not— it is possible that some may live and some not by the Will of a Great Being or Existence who has made us as we are by means of a long series of organisms with passions strong and wild which with our canine teeth we inherit from the carnivora and though a Darwinite, I yet hope that this God will do for me something bye and bye and even that he looks after me now as one of his chosen ones. With Wallace I agree that in many cases the Glacial Periods have many times changed the organisms of this world alternately North and South 11 —and is a reason why animals do not change in our times to those who ask that absurd question— With best respects and kind wishes both to you and your son12 hoping that your health is again good, and that we may meet again if not in these bodies in better ones in another State to talk over this wondrous little great world of ours If you will send me a line or two I shall be very pleased and shall esteem it a great favor—from Your’s very sincerely | Henry A Head c/o Post Office Duluth—Minnesota | United States DAR 166: 126 1

2 3 4 5

6

7 8 9 10

Head probably refers to the village of Beckenham (not Breckenridge), which is about seven miles from Down House. His visit was not recorded in Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) and he has not been further identified. Head presumably refers to the Mosaic account of creation in Genesis. Tamarack, a species of larch native to North America. Mink. Urtica dioica var. procera is the most common stinging nettle in North America; it has stinging hairs on the leaves as well as stems, but far fewer than does Urtica dioica (stinging nettle or common nettle), the most common species in Europe. Urtica ferox (ongoonga or tree nettle), native to New Zealand, has large stinging spines. Juncus cooperi (Cooper’s rush) is native to the south-western United States and northern Mexico. However, Head probably refers rather to Typha, a genus of bullrush found widely in the northern hemisphere and also in Australia and New Zealand. Raupo is the Maori word for bullrush. Species in New Zealand are Typha orientalis and T. muelleri. The Objibwe (or Ojibway) are a First Nation people in the north-central United States and central Canada. The zoo in Central Park, New York City, New York, opened in 1870. CD discussed spots and stripes in mammals in Descent 2: 299–306. The guanaco (Lama guanicoe) and alpaca (Vicugna pacos) are camelids native to South America. Thomas Henry Huxley.

September 1872 11

12

409

Alfred Russel Wallace discussed the effects of glaciation on the distribution of animals briefly in his Malay archipelago (Wallace 1869) and at greater length later in The geographical distribution of animals (Wallace 1876). CD discussed the effects of glaciation on the distribution of species, and the theory that glacial epochs had occurred separately in the northern and southern hemispheres in Origin (see Origin 6th ed., pp. 330–42). It is not known which of CD’s sons Head met.

To V. O. Kovalevsky 18 September [1872]

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Sept. 18

My dear Sir Thursday (tomorrow) will suit me excellently.— As my head always fails me in the afternoon (when I have to lie down) will you be so kind as to come by the Train which leaves Charing X at 2o. 35 & reaches Orpington at 3o 11. There is a return train which leaves Orpington at 6o 52 , & we can send you to the Station, so that you wd. have to leave this house at 6o , 5 or 10 .— There is another train at 8o. 24 but then you wd not have time to eat your dinner here.—1 Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Postmark: SP 18 72 The National Library of Sweden, Manuscripts, Stockholm (Acc. 1996/31) 1

Kovalevsky delayed his visit to Down House until Sunday 22 September 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). See letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 20 September [1872].

From Hubert Airy 20 September 1872

Flamstead House, | Greenwich S.E. 1872. Sept. 20.

My dear Sir A process of self-eviction from Eliot Place has contributed to delay my writing to thank you for the notice you kindly sent me of M r. Meehan’s observations in regard to the office of bud-scales.1 I confess to feeling combative on the point, but must not trouble you with my notions beyond remarking that the hardihood of those naked ash-buds was not proved, for it does not appear that they were allowed to grow to maturity and put forth leaves and become useful members of twig-society, and it is open to conjecture that the effects of early exposure would have been seen in premature decay of the grown leaves.—2 Again, the unclothed ear of “corn” (which I take to be Indian corn, maize,) was altogether abnormal, being formed “on the end of a male panicle,” and its hardihood does not appear to have been tested by experimental sowing. 3 Turning from these rare and inconclusive instances to my favourite oak-buds with their imbricate armour of scale over scale, and watching how these armour-plates are all thrown aside, to right and left, by the swelling leaves in spring, and hang or fall, dry brown stipules, no longer needed, on either side of the leaf-stalk they belong to,—I find myself unable to believe that the office of those scales is not protection of

410

September 1872

the bud-leaves from all outward dangers, from cold and heat, birds’ beaks, beetles’ and caterpillars’ jaws, and such chance violence as the chafing of twig against twig in the winds of winter. They are on duty a whole year, within a day or two,—from spring to spring. While speaking of buds, let me thank you for your suggestion ( July 25 th.)4 of extensive bud-dissection under a simple microscope as important for the study of Phyllotaxy— I have practised it lately, and ten or eleven years ago, though often without the lens.— Perhaps the enclosed pages, extracted from some old notes, will interest you, in spite of their doubts and blunders. I will ask permission to take them away again when I have the honour of calling upon you, as they have place among consecutive pages.5 Perhaps you remember what I regard as the fundamental principle of my theory,— that the operation of the causes which have determined the complex orders of Phyllotaxy is to be looked for, not in the mature twig but in the bud.— 6 I must now draw the distinction more precisely, and say that the operation of the causes in question is to be looked for, not in the mature twig with long internodes and distant leaves, but in the bud, in the bulb, in the radical rosette, in the involucre, in the receptacle, in the catkin, in the cone, in the spike,—in short wherever the leaves or scales or bracts, with their axillary shoots, are crowded into close contact. The radical rosette is well exemplified in the different species of Plantain which struggle successfully, by the aid of condensed leaf-order, against the difficulties of existence on the parched and padded gravel of Blackheath. A section at the base of the leaves of Plantago Coronopus, in comparison with P. Major, is a capital study. 7 The receptacle of the sunflower exhibits the highest degree of condensation that I have yet seen— Taking a seed near the margin to start from, those in contact with it are the 34th. on one side, the 55th. on the other, the 89th. near the 34th., and even the 144th between the 55th. and the 89th.. (I mean the 34th. &c. in order of growth from the starting-point.)— The bald head of a dandelion, when the seeds have all gone to the winds, offers a similar study on a smaller scale, with less condensation. These examples are useful in teaching us to pay attention to the spirals and not to look for vertical ranks, for the rank that has a vertical (or rather radial) look near the centre of the receptacle, is seen to curve away into a decided spiral near the margin. I have not yet felt able,—and now I can only make a first attempt,—to give an answer to your question of July 15th.,8 — would not the mutual pressure of the nascent leaves within the bud be different towards the extremity and base of the small growing axis, so as to account for the different Phyllotaxy on the upper and lower parts of the same shoot? It seems to me that as long as the growth of the bud-axis bears the same proportion to the growth of the embryo leaves, in different parts of the bud, there will be no difference of pressure in different parts, and therefore no cause for difference of arrangement;— Supposing the order to be 12 , and supposing the lower part of the bud-axis to grow

September 1872

411

in a certain proportion to the growth of the lower leaves, while the upper part grows in exactly the same proportion to the diminished growth of the upper leaves, then I see no reason for expecting a condensed order at one end more than at the other: if all the leaves grow faster than the axis which carries them, and the axis gets a twist, then the whole bud will get the same change of order; but if the axis remains straight, growing as fast as the leaves, then the bud will keep the order 12 throughout. But if we suppose the growth of the bud-axis to be checked in its upper part,—the upper leaves continuing to grow,—while the lower part of the axis grows in proportion to the growth of the lower leaves; then there will be greater mutual pressure among the upper leaves than among the lower, and the need will arise of a twist in the upper part of the axis, to allow the upper embryo-leaves to fall into a more economical order and fulfil their development in spite of the temporary check to the development of the axis from which they spring.— And this is exactly what I suppose to be the case with the buds of the Spanish Chestnut,—not a contraction of the individual bud in the course of its single life-time, but a contraction of the top of the bud-axis relative to the bottom, taking effect in the course of ages from generation to generation, showing itself in the individual as a stunting of the top of the bud-axis without proportionate stunting of the embryo-leaves that spring from that part.— We often see instances of shoots stunted at their tips by a cold season, and it seems reasonable to think that in process of time the same agency may have produced a like effect on the tips of the spanish chestnut buds. 9 In these remarks I have assumed that the embryo leaf is organically tied, rooted, to a certain point on the bud-axis, and is not free to shift up or down or to either side without a corresponding growth or stunt or twist of the part of the axis from which it springs. If this assumption is incorrect, the reasoning fails. The opposite assumption would be, that the embryo-leaves enjoy complete and independent mobility; and what this would lead to, I have not yet considered. I had hoped by this time to have brought my arguments into better order, and to have made my bits of illustrative mechanism more fit to exhibit to you; but I find that it will need a long and patient collection of facts for the former object, and a long course of trial and error for the latter; so I must be content to show you what I have, if I may; and now make bold to remind you of the invitation you kindly gave me to pay you a visit some time in the early autumn— May I come one day next week?— Or will you kindly tell me when my call will be least inconvenient to you?— Do not let me come if your health forbids, but let me wait for another opportunity— 10 Believe me, my dear Sir, | With great respect, yours very sincerely | Hubert Airy DAR 159: 21 1

2

Thirteen Eliot Place, Blackheath was Airy’s previous residence (see letter from Hubert Airy, 24 July 1872). CD evidently sent Airy notices of Thomas Meehan’s observations on buds; these were presented at the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia on 2 May 1871 and 3 October 1871 (Meehan 1871). See also letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872 and n. 18. Meehan had disputed the common belief that bud scales were protective after observing that Fagus quadrangulata (the blue ash) had only naked buds (Meehan 1871).

412 3

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

September 1872

Meehan had exhibited a perfect ear of corn (maize) that was produced with no husk, and claimed that this showed the lack of importance of the husk for protection (Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia 23 (1871): 245). CD’s letter of 25 July 1872 has not been found. The enclosure has not been found. The notes probably related to Airy’s paper ‘On leaf arrangement’ (Airy 1873). See letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872. Plantago cornopus is buck’s horn plantain; P. major is common or greater plantain. CD’s letter of 15 July 1872 has not been found, but see the letter from Hubert Airy, 16 July 1872. The Spanish chestnut Castanea sativa is prone to shoot-tip necrosis and stunting. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Airy visited CD on 1 October 1872.

From V. O. Kovalevsky 20 September [1872]1

British Museum 20 Sept. Friday.

Dear Sir I beg Your pardon of not being able to come yesterday, but You were treatened with a foreign invasion and to save You the bother of two separate visits I sacrificed the pleasure of having You all to myself and intended to join the invaders. However there is no more danger now and if You will allow me I’ll call at Down on Sunday by the 2o 30 train returning at 9 or, if the morning hours are more comfortable to You, I will come by a morning train and return in the afternoon. 2 Your very truly | W. Kowalevsky P.S. To save You writing a letter I will take the liberty to consider Your silence as a sign of approval. DAR 169: 67 CD ANNOTATION 1.5 the 2o . . . 9 ] ‘3o. 9 — Here at 1 2

1 4

to 4’ pencil

The year is established by the reference to Kovalevsky’s visit to Down, which took place on 22 September 1872 (see n. 3, below). Kovalevsky visited Down on 22 September 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)).

From William Cooper 21 September 1872 7. Theobald street | New Kent road | London S. E. | c/o Mr. Stevens1 21/9/72 To C. Darwin Esq:— Hond. Sir, I have recently had an interview with Drs. Denny & Kellock, at Stamford Hill, Stoke Newington,2 upon the subject of a discovery I made some years since, but which has never been ventilated: it relates to horticulture immediately, & remotely to palæontology & geology, & will explain many difficulties in connexion with these sciences, which have hitherto been considered insuperable, & will also furnish a key to the knowledge of facts, now occult, that will materially tend to the confirmation of your grand exposition,—“The Origin of Species”. We have yet to learn the causes

September 1872

413

& agencies concerned in the production of the monstrous organisms, both animal & vegetable, of byegone ages:— my theory will elucidate them. Relative to artificial cultivation, this discovery promises the development of tropical productions, in excess of their natural condition, in a similar ratio to that realized in the pansy, fuschia, pelargonium, &c. Such is my programme, & to what other great discoveries mine may lead, time & talent only can make manifest. Dr. Denny kindly gave me your address, & I take the liberty of appealing, with some hope of success, to one who has dared so much for truth & science, feeling a strong conviction that you will, if in your power, promote my views, which are as follows:— I am 53 years of age, & want occupation, which, if I could obtain, & retain for 12 months, would enable me to thoroughly carry out my plans at my own expense; but I find that younger men are everywhere preferred before me, & therefore my future is very precarious. I ask only a moderate return for my services, & am capable of engaging in various pursuits, having been fairly educated, can revise & correct M.S.S., keep accounts, am a good copyist, have studied medicine for more than 30 years, & have originated some important features in this science, but hold no legal qualification. I am acquainted with gardening, & have been very successful with succulents, am familiar with the use of most ordinary workmen’s tools, can turn my hand in many ways to manual labour, & am willing to make myself useful as might be required, so that the work be not too laborious, nor involve too much endurance in reference to time: in short, I am anxious for the opportunity of giving my discovery to the world, so soon as I shall have proved it incontrovertibly; I have done so partially, & am perfectly satisfied as to ultimate results, but occasion has not served to carry it thro’ entirely. This discovery was made unexpectedly, & arose from a soure foreign to the associations with which I have connected it, & as my own idiosyncrasy is not likely to be exactly repeated, it is probable that the same train of thought which led to its origination will not occur in another mind in any definite period. As to character, my testimonials, extending over the last 30 years, will bear me out in every way. My proposition is a bold one, & will doubtless be ridiculed by some; however, I wish to meet with some Gentleman, who, upon the basis of my readily proved integrity, & for the sake of science, will place faith in my ipse dixit3 to the extent of either giving or introducing me to some employment, as before referred to. I am not willing to impart my knowledge of this discovery until I can do so triumphantly with a “q.e.d.”. If you will honour the foregoing with your consideration, I shall be happy to wait upon you, at your instance, as you may please to appoint, & apologizing for this intrusion, I remain, | Hond. Sir, | Yrs. respectfy , | Wm. Cooper. “Palmam qui meruit ferat”!4 DAR 161: 223 1

John Stevens was a doorplate engraver and metal worker at 7 Theobald Street, London (Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/535/103/41)). William Cooper has not been further identified.

414 2

3 4

September 1872

John Denny and William Berry Kellock were both medical practitioners at the Stamford Hill and Stoke Newington Medical Dispensary, London (Medical directory, Plarr 1930). CD had recently corresponded with Denny about crossing experiments with Pelargonium (see letter to John Denny, 22 July 1872). Ipse dixit (Latin): he himself said it; i.e. a dogmatic pronouncement or dictum (Chambers). Palmam qui meruit ferat (Latin): let he who merits the palm possess it.

To J. V. Carus 23 September 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Sep 23 1872 My dear Sir I recd yesterday your History of Zoology, & I thank you very sincerely for this present. I consider the title of your book one of the greatest honours which has ever been paid me.1 What enormous labour it must have cost you— I wish it was in English for I then could read the whole; but I hope soon to read portions of it. You will have recd. some time ago the last of the proof-sheets of my book on expression— I have no idea whether it will be successful & interest many persons; but I hear that Herr Koch has ordered 2000 plates. 2 The Americans have ordered 3000— The Russians 2000; the French 500 & I believe the Dutch 500. I hope that you have made a favorable arrangement with Herr Koch, for it is to you & not to him that I give the right of translation.3 I most sincerely hope that the mountain-air & rest have done your health some good;4 & if at any time you feel so inclined, it wd be a real pleasure to me to hear how you are | My dear Sir | yours very sincerely | Charles Darwin LS Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Slg. Darmstaedter Lc 1859 Darwin, Charles, Bl. 88/89 1 2

3 4

CD refers to Geschichte der Zoologie bis auf Joh. Müller und Charl. Darwin (History of zoology up to Johannes Müller and Charles Darwin; Carus 1872a). CD’s copy is the Darwin Library–Down. Eduard Koch was arranging for the German translation of Expression (Carus trans. 1872b) to be published by E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung. The photographic plates were being produced by the Heliotype Company. In his letter to John Murray of 30 August [1872], CD stated that Koch had ordered 3000 plates. CD made a gift of the right of translation to Carus (see letter to R. F. Cooke 4 August 1872). On Carus’s illness, see his letter to CD of 14 July 1872.

To J. J. Moulinié 23 September 1872 To M. le Colonel Moulinié1 My dear Sir, Permit me to state the circumstances under which I have requested you to do me the favour to translate the fifth edition of my Origin of Species into French. 2

September 1872

415

When Mademoiselle Clémence Royer published the second French edition, I looked over the proof-sheets and gave her all the corrections and additions which it was then in my power to contribute. Therefore I never doubted she would have informed me if at any time a new French edition was required. But a third edition appeared some time ago, and this is imperfect as it contains very few of the additions by which the fourth English edition was increased to the extent of fifty four pages. 3 A fifth thoroughly revised English edition was published in the spring of 1869, and now a sixth edition has appeared, by which you will be able to correct the latter half of your translation.4 As the current French edition is imperfect, owing to no fault on my part, I feel fully justified in authorizing your present translation; and I naturally desire that my work should circulate in France in as perfect a condition as I can make it. In order that my motives in supporting your new edition may not be misunderstood, permit me to add that I have declined to receive the remuneration which was kindly offered to me by your publisher for the right of translation. Nor am I bound in honour, by having received any remuneration from the publisher of M lle Royer’s translation, to refrain from giving you all the support in my power. Pray believe me, my dear Sir, with high consideration | Your’s very faithfully | Charles Darwin. Down. Beckenham, Kent, | September 23d 1872. Moulinié trans. 1873, pp. ix–x 1

2

3 4

‘M. le Colonel’ is taken from an incomplete draft of this letter in DAR 69: A27–8. It is inserted in place of ‘Mr. the Colonel’, which appears in the published version of the letter in Moulinié trans. 1873, pp. ix–x. CD had written a similar letter to Moulinié on 31 January 1872, which was intended ‘to be translated & prefixed’ to Moulinié’s French translation of Origin (see enclosure to letter to J. J. Moulinié, 1 February 1872 and n. 1). On Clémence Auguste Royer’s translations of Origin (Royer trans. 1862, 1866, and 1870), see Correspondence vols. 10 and 17. Moulinié trans. 1873 was based on both the fifth and sixth editions of Origin (see letter from J. J. Moulinié, 1 January 1872).

From Hubert Airy 24 September 1872 Flamsteed House. | Greenwich. S. E. 1872. Sept. 24. My dear Sir Thank you for your very kind letter. It is a great satisfaction to me to find that my views gain ground with you.1 If I have really found the secret, I shall owe my success to your writings which have given the key to the whole book of animal and vegetable life.2

416

September 1872

Some acacia-twigs which I have been examining have a very curious disposition of their leaves, unintelligible to me except as a distortion of an original 2-ranked order. Let me copy the records of a few specimens from my notes:—

Fig. I shows the order usually found in the acacia, viz. 5 nearly vertical (in my diagram, nearly radial) ranks:—phyllotactic order, nearly 25 .

Fig. II shows the same 5-ranked order prevailing in the first 23 members, but disturbed by a dislocation of 24 and 25. If we join by a dotted line all the even N os. (which are the successive members of one of the supposed original two ranks), and by another dotted line all the odd nos. (which make the other rank), we see in the last two leaves (24 & 25) the beginning of a reverse twist.

September 1872

417

Fig. III shows a series of reverse twists, alternately to right and left, with 2, or 3, members in each twist. But take away the dotted line, and all is confusion.

In Fig. IV the zigzags contain alternately 1 and 2 members, and are so regular that they produce radial ranks with an evident cycle of 6 leaves between successive members of each rank. (The series 1, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 25 has to be resolved into two, 1, 7, 13, 19, 25, and 5, 11, 17, 23; and these two with the remaining four evident ranks give a system of 6 ranks in which the 6-cycle prevails.) But a 6-cycle is at variance with any regular spiral arrangement. The only evident interpretation of this most curious phenomenon is, that we have here the result of a zigzag, plicate condensation of two originally vertical ranks. This is just what we might have expected à priori. I had previously noticed the same kind of behaviour in my imitative mechanism. 3 When I prevented it from twisting in a uniform spiral, it effected its condensation by a zigzag corrugation of each of the two vertical ranks. In the diagram it may be noticed that all the even nos. lie to one side, and all the odds to the other.

418

September 1872

Fig. V exhibits a simpler form of zigzag, with one member in each ‘lap’ (except the lap containing no. 9, where there are two). This specimen seemed at first sight to have its two ranks accurately vertical, but close examination showed that they were in zigzag. From this to perfect accuracy the transition would be easy; but I have not yet found a specimen of acacia-twig with perfectly vertical ranks, like those of elm. I may remark that, in making these diagrammatic records, I used my best care to determine the relative positions of the leaves, near and far, by tracing the ridges and furrows of the bark; and it was only towards the end of the series that I had the zigzag interpretation forced upon me by a discussion of the records already obtained. I think you will be pleased with this new piece of evidence, and will agree with me that a theory which will account for these anomalous varieties, as well as for the normal types, and bring them all into harmony with one another, has a good claim to acceptance.— At the same time I must apologize for thus taking advantage of your kindness, when I know your time is so fully occupied with other subjects. Thank you very much for allowing me to look forward to an early visit to you— 4 I am just about to make another change of abode, but shall not allow it to interfere with your invitation. Let me repeat that I am most anxious my call should not be troublesome I am much obliged to you for the notice of Keoner’s(?) Alpine observations.5 Believe me, my dear Sir, | With great respect. Yours very sincerely | Hubert Airy Charles Darwin Esqr. M.A., F.R.S. &c &c DAR 159: 22 1 2

3 4 5

CD’s letter to Airy has not been found. For Airy’s most recent views on phyllotaxy, see the letter from Hubert Airy, 20 September 1872. In his paper ‘On leaf-arrangement’ Airy wrote: ‘Mr. Darwin has taught us to regard the different species of plants as descended from some common ancestor; and therefore we must suppose that the different leaf-orders now existing have been derived by different degrees of modification from some common ancestral leaf-order’ (Airy 1873, p. 176). Airy refers to his experiments of packing hard spheres by attaching oak galls to India rubber bands. See letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872 and n. 16. Airy visited Down on 1 October 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). Anton Kerner von Marilaun discussed the cultivation of Alpine plants in different habitats in Kerner von Marilaun 1864. CD’s annotated copy is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 445).

September 1872

419

To V. O. Kovalevsky 24 September [1872]

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Sept. 24th

My dear Sir I have written to the Printers to send you to Euston Rd. the 2 first sheets;1 & I thought that I had sent you finally corrected copies.— 2 I returned yesterday by Book-Post the Work, about which you were so very kind.—3 I regretted extremely that I saw so little of you that evening, for there were many points on which I shd. have liked to have talked with you; 4 but such is my fate: I kept very unwell all yesterday & now my wife insists that I must stop work & leave home for a time & I suppose I must.5 In fact there is not much more work left in me.— Farewell, I wish you all success.— | Yours very sincerely | Ch Darwin Postmark: SP 24 72 The National Library of Sweden, Manuscripts, Stockholm (Acc. 1996/31) 1 2 3 4 5

Kovalevsky was using the proof-sheets of Expression for his Russian translation ([Kovalevsky] trans. 1872). He was staying at 218 Euston Road, London (letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, 10 September 1872). CD had evidently given Kovalevsky an earlier version of the first two proof-sheets. See letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, [c. 7 August 1872], and letter to V. O. Kovalevsky, 10 August [1872]. CD refers to Wundt 1863. See letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, [12–17 August 1872] and n. 2. Kovalevsky had visited Down on 22 September 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). CD stayed at Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II) and letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 October [1872]).

From John Scott 25 September 1872

Calcutta | Roy. Bot. Gardens 25th. Sept. 1872

Dear Sir, I had fully intended sending you some notes on the worm casts (enclosed in a Kew case) shortly after their despatch, I delayed in hopes to accompany them with others from Dr. King on the casts marked S. India.1 I am indebted to him for these. He was taken very ill however and has had to leave us altogether for a year or so at home. 2 Since he left I have been in charge here; but I am scarcely I fear likely to keep it until his return: the appointment is one that the medical faculty claim and I believe they are doing all they can to get one of their body installed. Dr. King wrote strongly in my favour and I believe the Lieut. Governor is also very favourable to me and not a few others high in office.3 I cannot hear what the Lieut Govr. intends doing; anyhow he has kept many in anxiety for the last two months and I in the meantime hold the appointment. I am thus kept very busy attending alike to my own duties and those of the Superintendent.— I shall not however delay longer in affording you the few observations I have been able to make here on worm workings.— I am very pleased to hear the two notes previously sent are of interest to you. 4 But I must first correct one on the worms in the Rice fields. I know not how I could have made the slip to say that worms exist even in the flooded rice-fields. 5 This is

420

September 1872

a serious mistake. As soon as the rains set in and the fields begin to get flooded all the worms betake themselves to the higher surrounding grounds: at least such places are greatly infested with them during the rains while in the subsequent cold and hot seasons (especially the latter) you will scarcely find one. I do not think they can live in the flooded rice-fields. I have been often surprised by them with their quick return   the latter after the rains have ceased, when the crops are flattened and the lands dry. It is indeed wonderful to see so quickly the grounds studded with their Castings. One would almost be inclined to believe that they hybernate therein throughout the rains even as during the dry and parching weather the Land leeches and some of the smaller fish do. This however they can never do in lands full of water. This they possibly may do however: at no great depth in most of our ricefields here occurs an impervious layer of clay. Can it be that these penetrate and remain more or less dormant in this throughout the rains. It is indeed difficult to understand how they can all reach the very limited tracts of dry land as the rains set in and so quickly as the low lands dry spread themselves so numerously over such extensive tracts. The eggs of worms are scarcely likely to survive three or four months submergence, and even should they do we have still the difficulty that full grown worms are abundant as well as those of smaller sizes. 1. With regard to the washing down of casts.— 6 In the hot season, it is only in very moist and shady places as under trees and by the sides of tanks & watercourses that we find any Casts here. During the close of the rains and in the early part of the cold season you will find our lands very generally covered with them: especially so are sun lawns. They are I think on these far more serious pests than ever I saw them on lawns in Britain. About the close of the rains when they are working almost amongst plastic mud: the casts harden during the day and are very slowly denuded by rain. They are in general only rounded off and long stand up in little Knolls. On undisturbed ground you will find them thus standing until the hot season sets in when they crack and disintegrate more or less by the dry heat. Showers (which we not unfrequently have) at this season wash them much: smoothing at least all their rough surfaces and indeed unless of a very clayey nature completely disintegrating them and then we have them as a more or less rounded disc. During the cold season when the subsoil in which the worms work is but slightly moist every shower washes down—more or less—the casts. If very heavy you will find them quite levelled, when lighter as rounded discs. In the former case I have seen a more or less circular space five inches in diameter coated over: Casts reduced to discs I have frequently measured from three to four inches across. With regard to the washing of casts on slopes: This is very evident on any of the low banks we have here. It may be well to give you measurements of these: the following will illustrate. On a slightly inclined bank in the gardens here I marked and measured several casts and had them protected or rather enclosed. One was 2 12 in. high by 5 12 in circumf. (these I ought to tell you are rainy season observations on large grass-clad artificial mounds & consisting of a loamy-clay) and when washed down after several hours rain found an extended oval disc 6 21 in. by 3 12 inches: the latter being across where the cast originally stood and consisted chiefly of the rounded remains, with a very

September 1872

421

slight deposit on the three sides: all being carried down. I give you two more cases.— 1st. of one 2 in. high by 4 12 in circumference disc extended downwards 5 inches from the site of cast scarcely at all above. 2d. cast 2 in. high by 3 12 in circumference: soil carried downwards 6 inches below original cast. Dr. King also tells me that the big casts sent you from South India are soon washed wholly down from the mountain sides during the rains. You will observe how those (which I sent you) are rounded off. These were collected during the hot season and had been chiefly disintegrated by the sun and rounded by light showers. This leads to your second query and indeed partly answers it. I refer to the disintegration of the casts during the dry season. On fully exposed lands this is very marked and I have over and over again observed casts largely disintegrated and quite in a condition for dispersion by wind. In the hills in South India, Dr. King also observed those big casts in a similar state during the dry season. I am sure this is also the case in the mountains of Sikkim and indeed I suppose it must be so everywhere unless on exceedingly tenacious clays: seeing that it occurs in the strong clays of Lower Bengal. 3. I have oft during the last hot season when our worms apparently bore deepest (unless indeed they as I hinted might reside during the rains in the impervious layer of our rice-fields) and I have in no instance found them at more than 2 21 feet. The soil there is quite moist [illeg] Bengal soil all through the hot season. I do not think the worms there however are at all active; as nearly every one which I have turned up had itself coiled up in the way one often finds those at home.— I may here note that some of the worm casts which I have measured this rain are much larger than any of those of which I sent you specimens: the following are examples:— 6 inches high by 4 21 in circumf. 2d. 5 inches high by 6 12 in circumf. 3d. 5 in. high by 8 in circumf. Generally they are from 3–4 or 5 inches high by 4 in girth. These are evidently cast up in a single night and those of the largest size noted above could not from the appearance of the clay be more than the work of two nights and this from a single worm. They are thus by no means mean agents in the transposition of matter. They also swarm everywhere almost in Bengal, and I presume elsewhere in India. The casts sent you with the exception of those marked S. India are all from Lower Bengal. You will observe the little pellets: these take the place generally speaking of casts in dryish grounds. Thus on our walks and under trees where the soil is dry and loose you will find the ground around the worm holes strewed with pellets of various sizes: very rarely do you observe casts as on wet grounds. In forests here generally speaking worms are less abundant than on open grounds. They affect them the most during the hot weather as might be expected. These pelled are washed away with every shower and disintegrate readily in the dry season. They vary as you will see by the specimens sent greatly in size. 4. The only query that remains I think regards worms drawing leaves into the mouths of their burrows. This they do here even as in temperate climates. This is chiefly however in the cold weather: in the mornings you everywhere meet with worm holes with leaves and twigs filling their mouth. During the rainy season I have rarely observed this. Pebbles I have never seen but I have had no opportunity of

422

September 1872

observing their habits in districts where these occur and here they would search in vain for such. I do not think that I can give you any more information regarding these, but should anything have escaped me, or there be any other observations that you should like made it shall be a great pleasure to me to hear them. It is highly gratifying to me to hear from you that any little observations of mine are of value. I am just now getting up a paper (very fully illustrated) on palm-stem structure. I have also one nearly finished on the structure of the stem of the Common Papaya— Carica papaya—I have also some interesting matter on sexual changes and reproduction of varieties in it.7 I am getting a bisexual race of it established. I am exceedingly sorry to see by the papers that Dr. Hooker should have been so tyrannised over by Mr. Ayrton! it is pleasing to see however the general sympathy his case has evoked.8 I am | your obliged & faithful svt | John Scott. DAR 177: 121 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 I had . . . doing all they 1.7] crossed blue crayon 2.2 in the Rice fields] scored blue crayon; ‘  in flooded field’ blue crayon 2.8 in the flooded rice-fields.] closing square bracket blue crayon 2.21 as well] underl blue crayon 6.1 This leads] after opening square bracket, red crayon 7.6 I may here note . . . girth. 7.10] crossed pencil 10.1 4.] ‘4’ blue crayon, circled blue crayon 11.2 or . . . evoked 13.3] crossed blue crayon On cover: ‘John Scott | Habits & action’ pencil On CD note: 3.1 Error . . . dry. 3.6] crossed pencil 3.2 very soon] double underl blue ink 5.3 Harden . . . disc.— 5.6] double scored red crayon 5.4 Crumble . . . Heat] underl red crayon 5.4 Showers . . . wash 5.5] underl red crayon 5.5 less rounded disc.— 5.6] underl red crayon 8.1 Second . . . Sikkim 8.2] scored red crayon 9.1 p. 3 (b) . . . done— 13.2] crossed blue crayon CD note: Abstract of J. Scott on Worms. Sept 25/72/9 p. (1) Error in last letter. *Very soon [interl] After the water has disappeared from the Rice field, the surface is studded with full-sized [interl] castings. Also very soon after the Rice-fields *are dry [blue ink above del ‘are flooded’] the *surface studded with [interl blue ink] castings [‘appear, but being [illeg] than before,’ del] in very [interl] large numbers on any small [above del illeg] tract which remains dry. M r Scott does not know whether the worms migrate from the flooded tracts, or penetrate deep into the underlying clay & there become dormant, & reappear as soon as the surface becomes dry. (The castings from S. India collected by Dr King) [square brackets in MS] p. 2. No castings during Hot-season *except shady places & near tanks [interl].— at close of wet season & dry cold season the land covered with castings, especially on Lawns— thinks more abundant or numerous— Harden during day & are very slowly denuded— generally only rounded off & long stand up as little Knolls.— afterwards [interl] Crumble & disintegrate more or less by dry Heat.— Showers at

September 1872

423

this season wash them much & if not of very clayey nature quite disintegrate them, & form more or less rounded disc.— During cold-season when the castings are rather dry, every shower washes them down more or less— if showers are [interl] very heavy they are quite levelled, if less Heavy they are formed into a rounded disc.— Have seen in former case *(ie after Heavy showers [interl] a space of 5 inches in diameter coated over.— Has often measured others 3– to 4 in diameter.— It is very evident the washing down of the castings on *such low banks as they have in Gardens [interl, pencil] slopes.— (see p. 2.[interl] C) *actual measurements given [added above]— Also D r King (p. 3) on the washing down of the big-castings *disintegrated by the sun & rounded by light showers [interl blue ink]. Washed down the mountain-sides during rains.— Second-query p. 3. disintegration of casts during dry season— this is very marked. & ready for dispersal by wind.— do also Dr King. saw them in similar state during dry season— do in Sikkim p. 3 measurements of casts p. 3. (b) has never seen worms below 2 12 feet deep, where it is damp all through the hot season. & worms then seem torpid. p. 3 (c) size of great castings — many measurements. *(Have I used these measurements, I could work them in at end of ch 1.) [interl blue ink; square brackets in MS]— in single night.! or 2 nights.— swarm everywhere in Bengal. All the castings sent from Lower Bengal.— Pellets on dry ground.— — In forests less abundant than on open ground— Most in former sites during hot weather.— These pellets washed away every shower, & *disintegrate readily [underl red crayon] during dry season.— [double scored blue crayon] p. 4. Worms draw leaves *and twigs [interl] into Holes, as in temperate climate.— chiefly during the cold *& dry [interl] season. During rainy season rarely done— 1

2

3 4

5 6 7 8 9

The worm castings collected by Scott and George King had arrived at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, without an accompanying letter (see letter to John Scott, 12 August 1872 and n. 1, and enclosure to letter from J. D. Hooker, 29 August 1872). King, the superintendent of the botanic gardens in Calcutta, had returned to England on medical leave (see enclosure to letter from J. D. Hooker, 29 August 1872, and letter from J. D. Hooker, 26 October 1872). The lieutenant-governor of Bengal was George Campbell (India list 1872). Only one previous letter from Scott on worms has been found (see letter from John Scott, 22 March 1872). CD acknowledged this and requested more information in his letter of 15 April [1872]. Scott’s observations are reported in Earthworms, pp. 123–6. See letter from John Scott, 22 March 1872, and letter to John Scott, 15 April [1872]. See letter to John Scott, 15 April [1872]. No papers by Scott on these topics have been found. For more on the dispute between Joseph Dalton Hooker and Acton Smee Ayrton, see the letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 August [1872] and n. 1. The abstract of Scott’s letter was evidently made because CD had difficulty reading the original (see letter to John Scott, 26 October 1872).

From C.-F. Reinwald 26 September 1872

Paris. 15 Rue du Sts Pères 26 Sept. 1872

Dear Sir We duely received your kind letter of Sept. 18th., as well as another letter adressed to Col. Moulinié, to be printed at the beginning of our translation of the Origin of Species.1 We return with book post the heliotype Plates of your new work “on the

424

September 1872

Expression of the Emotions”, as Mess Murray had the kindness to send another set of it.2 Mess Murray accepted in the same time our proposal for supplying us with 500 copies of the Heliotype Plates and the wood-cuts, so that we could begin translating if we had in hands the sheets already printed. We ask to-day Mess Murray to send them at an early conveniance. It is important to find now a good and capable translator, as M Moulinié is to ill to be thought of.—3 We will not make a choice without your consent. We remain dear Sir | yours’ most obediently | C Reinwald & Co DAR 176: 96 1 2 3

CD’s letter to Reinwald has not been found. See letter to J. J. Moulinié 23 September 1872. Reinwald was making arrangements with CD’s publisher, John Murray, for the French translation of Expression (see letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 17 September 1872). On Jean Jacques Moulinié’s illness and the translators of Expression, see the letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 17 September 1872 and n. 6.

To Henri de Lacaze-Duthiers 28 September 1872

Down | Beckenham, Kent. Sep 28 1872

Dear Sir, I must trouble you with a few lines to thank you for sending me the two papers on the Embryology & Relationship of the Ascidians. I read them with the greatest interest in the Archives to which I am a Subscriber.1 Some of the expressions in your paper made me believe that you accepted the principles of evolution, & I rejoiced at this.2 And now the quotation from Bacon, & the few words in M.S with which you have honoured me, have pleased me in a still higher degree. 3 With much respect | I remain Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Charles Darwin LS Académie des sciences - Institut de France (Fonds Lacaze-Duthiers) 1

2

3

CD refers to Giard 1872a and 1872b. The papers were published in Archives de zoologie expérimentale et générale, of which Lacaze-Duthiers was the editor. CD’s copies of the journal have not been found; however, there is a copy of Giard 1872b in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Lacaze-Duthiers’s article, ‘Direction des etudes zoologiques’, argued that purely descriptive zoology needed to be complemented by studies of ‘l’Evolution’, which included ‘l’origine des êtres, les transformations et la variabilité des types, l’enchaînement et la succession des formes variées, les rapports des formes avec les conditions biologiques’ (the origin of forms, the transformations and variability of types, the sequence and succession of various forms, the relations between forms and their biological conditions; Lacaze-Duthiers 1872, pp. 62 and 64). On the copy of Giard 1872b that he sent to CD, Lacaze-Duthiers wrote the following quotation from Roger Bacon’s Opus majus (Bridges ed. 1900, p. 20): renovantes studium semper receperunt contradictionem et impedimenta et tamen veritas invalescit et invalescet usque ad dies Antichristi (Renewing their effort, they have always encountered contradiction and hindrances; however, truth grows stronger, and will grow stronger until the day of the Antichrist.)

October 1872

425

On the copy of Giard 1872b, Lucaze-Duthiers also wrote: ‘L’Academie en corps a beau te censurer La jeunesse Darwin s’obstine à t’admirer’ (The Academy as a body may have censored you, but the young, Darwin, insist on admiring you). CD’s work had been widely criticised by members of the Académie des sciences in Paris (see Correspondence vol. 18, p. xxi).

From R. F. Cooke 2 October 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Octr. 2 1872

My dear Sir This morning we receive a letter from Mr Koch of Stuttgart, about the Heliotypes & he encloses now for the first time the size of the page on which he is printing your new work & you will see that instead of small 8vo. like our edition, it is a regular demy 8vo. page, like yr work on “Variation of Animals & Plants”. 1 I will of course go to the Hel: Compy. & see what can be done.2 I have been away a month & find no copies of the 7 Plates delivered here, according to promise. They were to send in, as fast as they finished them 1000 sets, at a time. 3 I hope they are not going to throw us over & I think it might be as well if you wrote a rather strong letter on the point to them. Your’s faithfully | Robt. Cooke Chas. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 421 1

2 3

The paper size of the English edition of Expression was small or crown octavo (190mm x 126mm); that of Variation was demy octavo (221mm x 142mm). The heliotype plates of the photographs for Expression had been designed to fit the smaller size page. Eduard Koch was the head of E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, CD’s German publisher. The firm had ordered 2000 plates (see letter to J. V. Carus, 23 September 1872). The Heliotype Company Limited had premises at 22 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London (Post Office London directory 1872). John Murray had agreed to supply plates for all the foreign editions as well as the English edition of Expression. Cooke had ordered 8000 plates in total (see letter from John Murray, 3 September [1872]) For more on CD’s use of the heliotype process, see Prodger 2009, pp. 108–10.

To R. F. Cooke 3 October 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Oct 3 72 My dear Sir, I am much obliged for all this great trouble which you are taking for me. The foreign editions which you mention are all right.1 Clean sheets need be sent only to M. Reinwald in Paris & M. Ijkema in Holland; for I have sent corrected revises to the German & Russian.2 It is very troublesome about the large size of the paper for M. Koch & Ijkema;3 they must of course pay the extra charge, but this I hope cannot be large. I think you are quite right about prepayment. I will write strongly by this

426

October 1872

post to the Heliotype Compy. & urge them on.4 It will be most provoking if we are delayed, after I had taken such pains to give the Compy plenty of time. My dear Sir | Yours sincerely | Charles Darwin LS National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 f. 262) 1 2

3 4

See letter from R. F. Cooke, 2 October 1872 and n. 1. Charles Reinwald published the French edition of Expression; Johan IJkema published the Dutch edition (Pozzi and Benoît trans. 1874; Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen trans. 1873). E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung published the German edition and F. S. Sushchinskii published the Russian edition (Carus trans. 1872b; [Kovalevsky] trans. 1872). CD sent corrected sheets for the two last editions directly to the translators (see letter to J. V. Carus, 23 September 1872, and letter to V. O. Kovalevsky, 24 September [1872]). Both the German and Dutch editions had a larger page size (see letter from John Murray, 3 September [1872], and letter from R. F. Cooke, 2 October 1872). See letter from R. F. Cooke, 2 October 1872 and n. 2.

From R. F. Cooke 4 October 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Octr. 4 1872

My dear Sir I have seen Mr Wright the manager of the Hel: Coy. & he assures me that by the end of next week, we shall have delivered here the whole of the 8000 sets of the 7 Plates. 1 I am to hear tomorrow from him, what increase in price the enlarged size papers will make pr. 100 sets.2 Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 422 1 2

See letter from R. F. Cooke, 2 October 1872 and n. 3. Mr Wright has not been further identified. The German and Dutch editions of Expression used a larger paper size than the English edition (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 3 October 1872 and n. 3).

To George Harris 4 October [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Oct. 4th

Dear Sir I am much obliged for your very courteous letter & kind present of your Theory of the Arts.—2 I hope soon to read it, but the part about Expression cannot aid me in my work, as my book has been printed some months, though it will not be published until Mr Murray’s season in November.3 I shall feel it my duty & an honour to give you any zoological information in my power, whenever you may think fit to write; but I must mention that I have very little spare strength, from being much out of health. I am compelled to leave home tomorrow morning for 3 weeks in order to get some rest.4

October 1872

427

I thank you for your kind offer of books. I have read long ago White’s Gradation, 5 & I doubt whether the others would be worth my reading, as my reading powers are now very limited. When my little book on Expression is published, I will do myself the pleasure of sending you a copy;6 but whether the manner in which I have treated the subject, will at all interest you—I really do not know.— With my best thanks | Dear Sir | Yours faithfully Ch. Darwin Biomedical Library, University of California Los Angeles 1 2 3 4 5

6

The year is established by the reference to the publication of Expression (see n. 3, below). Harris’s letter has not been found, but CD’s copy of the first volume of G. Harris 1869 is in the Darwin Library–Down. Expression was published by John Murray on 26 November 1872 (Freeman 1977). CD stayed at Miss Ann Woodington’s, the Common, Sevenoaks, from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II) and letter to J. D. Hooker, 10 October [1872]). CD recorded having read Charles White’s An account of the regular gradation in man, and in different animals and vegetables; and from the former to the latter (White 1799) in his reading notebook for 26 May 1844 (see Correspondence vol. 4, Appendix IV). Harris’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V).

To J. D. Hooker 4 October [1872] Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Oct. 4th My dear Hooker George1 will take up to London tomorrow morning & despatch by Rail the 2 Droseras. D. filiformis after being in very good health has suddenly failed. Perhaps it dies down in winter. D. Capensis has improved wonderfully, & now seems to require more warmth than a cool greenhouse.—2 I return also by Book-Post, the curious Kerguelen book, which Leonard & I have both read.3 Leonard has heard nothing as yet about his expedition. 4 Drosera has almost been the death of me: indeed all work of all sorts now-a-days half kills me, but idleness kills me still more cruelly. But rest, my head must have; so that we have taken a house for 3 weeks near Sevenoaks, & are off early tomorrow morning. 5 I hope the world goes on smoothly with you, & that the accursed man does not give you any more trouble.—6 Ever yours affectly | C. Darwin Endorsement: ‘/72’ DAR 94: 229–30 1 2

George Howard Darwin. CD had obtained the specimens of Drosera filiformis (the threadleaf sundew, a native of North America) and D. capensis (the Cape sundew, a native to the Cape in South Africa) for his experimental work on insectivorous plants. Drosera filiformis dies back during winter. He resumed his work on Drosera in August 1872 after a break (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II) and letter from W. W. Baxter, [after 23 August 1872?], n. 1). For more on his recent experiments with D. filiformis, see letter to Asa Gray, 22 October 1872.

428 3

4 5 6

October 1872

Hooker mentioned John Nunn’s Narrative of the wreck of the ‘Favorite’ on the island of Desolation (Nunn 1850) in a letter to CD of 20 January 1867 (Correspondence vol. 15). Desolation or Kerguelen Island (which is in fact an archipelago) is now part of French territory. Leonard Darwin had applied to be one of the observers of the transit of Venus (see letter to Hubert Airy, 24 August [1872] and n. 1). CD stayed at Miss Ann Woodington’s, the Common, Sevenoaks, from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II) and letter to J. D. Hooker, 10 October [1872]). For Hooker’s ongoing dispute with Acton Smee Ayrton, see the letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872 and n. 1.

From Asa Gray 6 October 1872

Botanic Garden, Cambridge, Mass. Oct. 6 1872

My Dear Mr. Darwin Having been at home now 4 weeks, it is full time I wrote to you,—but we are hardly settled yet, and many arrears of correspondence and affairs are to be brought up 1 Your kind favor of July 8 (my last from you) reached San Francisco just after we left it, and, being consigned to the care of a friend who was then also away, found its way to me here only 3 weeks ago.2 You write most kindly of my little book, so little worthy of your notice. 3 Do not mistake—as I fear you may, my remark about publishing more fully about Plantmovements, etc. I meant only that—when I bring out a new & much needed edition of my “Structural & Physiological Botany”,—(for which I wrote two chapters 2 years ago, & there was stopped) I mean of course to treat of this topic in its place—I hope rather fully.4 I alluded to it as I did in my little preface as apology or explanation of the absence of all allusion to those whose ideas and discoveries I was making free use of without acknowledgement. But as you are the only person almost to whom I am so indebted, and whose ideas I was appropriating, I might have simply explained to you by letter. You delight me by your promise to take up Dionæa & Drosera now; and I imagine you as now about it.5 Good. And I am so glad you will take that opportunity to collect your botanical & quasi-botanical papers. These, with the Dionæa &c—will make a nice and most welcome volume.6 In answer to your query—I think I can “support the idea”, or the probability of it, “that tendrils become spiral after clasping an object from the stimulus from contact running down them”. For tho’ some “tendrils do become spiral when they have clasped nothing”, others do not.7 The adjustment of the unstable equilibrium is more delicate in the former, so that it starts under some inappreciable cause or stimulus. That the stimulus may be so propagated downward is clear in the Sensitive Plant, where the closing of the leaflets in succession will follow the closing of the ultimate pair under slight & local irritation.— And in the tendril the coiling below is just a continuation of the same movement or same change as that which incurved the tip in clasping, i.e. a relative shortening of concave or lengthening of the convex side of the tendril. Would you not infer that the action was propagated downward?

October 1872

429

I posted to you a copy of my little Dubuque discourse. 8 That in Youmans Pop. Sci. Rev. was reprinted from newspaper, & full of slips and blunders. Had I thought he or any one cared to reprint it, I would have revised it for the purpose, as I did for the Amer. Naturalist.9 The Braces are returned,10 I believe, but we have not yet heard from them. So you were astonished at Mrs. Gray’s audacity,— well, “toujours l’audace”—she is all the better for it.11 She was miserable enough when we set off for California, and she has not for years been so well as now. I did not count upon the rail-road transit being very trying. Perhaps it was as much so as any part of the journey, although she slept well in the car births. Some horse back work in getting to and into Yosemite Valley was severe, but she bore it so well that I ventured, when we made our detour into the Colorado Rocky Mountains, to take her up to the summit of Gray’s Peak— 14300 feet, or thereabouts, where she acquitted herself nobly. 12 The day was perfect, the success complete, and the memory of it one of the most delightful of the many pleasant memories of the whole journey. The only drawback to the whole thing was that Hooker13 was not with us, according to our original programme. We had a day at Niagara, another in burnt-out Chicago, 14 —then after 3 nights and days of interesting rail-road travel a day and two nights at Salt Lake. Two more such landed us in San Francisco,—whence our great trip was the round from S. F. to Mariposa Grove, Yosemite Valley, entering over Glacier Point, from which (tell your sons)15 is a new trail down the 4000 feet into the Valley,—made excursions from the Valley during several days,—and returned by a long sweep thru. the little Tuolumne grove, round foot-hills to Murphy’s and the Calaveras Grove, and so back to San Fr. Afterwards Mrs. Gray & I went to Santa Cruz & up the San Lorenzo Valley among noble Redwoods, rivalling the Sequoia gigantea. On return we made one stretch to the E. base of the Rocky Mountains, then down to Denver, & up into the Mts. to 8400 feet, where we had a pleasant week or more—just the climate to give strength to an invalid—whence I climbed a high mountain or two, among them Gray’s Peak, the highest, as already mentioned. Thence we came down to Dubuque & hot weather on the Missisippi, stayed 8 or 9 days, then took a steamer up the Missisippi to St. Paul & St. Anthony &c—& then home by rail—having been 12 busy weeks away. Well, we are longing to do it again, and more! But I am settling down to my work as well as I may,—well content with the summer’s holiday. My wife sends kind regards & joins in those to Mrs. Darwin &c from | Yours sincerely | Asa Gray DAR 165: 181 CD ANNOTATIONS 5.8 And in the . . . downward? 5.11] scored pencil Foot of 4th page: ‘Gray’ pencil 1 2 3

Gray travelled overland to California at the end of June 1872 ( J. L. Gray 1893, 2: 625–31). See letter to Asa Gray, 8 July [1872]. Gray sent CD a copy of Botany for young people (A. Gray 1872) through Charles Loring Brace (see letter from Asa Gray, 31 May 1872).

430 4

5 6 7 8

9

10 11 12 13 14 15

October 1872

See letter to Asa Gray, 8 July 1872 and n. 2. The last edition of Gray’s textbook on structural botany and vegetable physiology had appeared in 1858. The next edition appeared in 1879 (A. Gray 1879), but it covered only structural botany and was described as the first part of a projected four-volume work (see A. Gray 1879, pp. iii–iv). Only one further volume was published. See letter to Asa Gray, 8 July [1872]. See also letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 October [1872] and n. 2. See letter to Asa Gray, 8 July [1872]. CD did not publish his earlier botanical papers in a collection; his book Insectivorous plants was published in 1875. See letter to Asa Gray, 8 July [1872] and n. 3. Gray made his presidential address, about Sequoia, to the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Dubuque, Iowa, in August 1872. CD’s annotated copy of a published version (A. Gray 1872b) is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Gray’s address had been printed in Popular Science Monthly, a journal founded in May 1872 by Edward Livingston Youmans (Gray 1872c). Aside from minor typographical errors, the text appears to be complete. The address also appeared in the October 1872 issue of American Naturalist (Gray 1872d). Charles Loring Brace had visited Down with his wife, Letitia Brace, on 11 July 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). Jane Loring Gray had accompanied Gray on the trip to California. See letter to Asa Gray, 8 July [1872] and n. 6. Toujours l’audace: always audacity (French). Grays Peak, named for Asa Gray, is the highest mountain in the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains in Colorado (Columbia gazetteer of the world). Joseph Dalton Hooker. Gray alludes to the great Chicago fire of October 1871 (for more on the fire, see Bales 2002). George Howard Darwin and Francis Darwin had probably visited Yosemite Valley, California, during their American tour in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to S. R. S. Norton, 23 November [1871]).

From J. T. Moggridge 6 October 1872 2 Montague Villas | Richmond | (Surrey) 6 Oct. | 1872 My dear Sir I am now on the point of leaving England for Mentone (we start on Wednesday next), & I am anxious before going to ask your permission to be allowed to send you a copy of a little book, which I have been engaged during the past summer in preparing, on the Habits & dwellings of the Harvesting Ants & Trap-door spiders of the Riviera.1 You were so good as to express some interest in my observations, reported to you in a letter last year, on these seed-carrying ants, which are, contrary to the general belief of naturalists, common objects in the south— 2 If you will accept this little publication you will see that I have been able to collect several details as to the manner in which these creatures cut, carry & store their harvest, their manner of life & relations to other ants. The true harvesting ants are, as far as I have yet seen, easily known by their habits; but there are other species of ant which, though clearly dependent in the main upon sweet secretions & animal matter for their living, do occasionally collect a few seeds & thus shew a trace of this instinct.

October 1872

431

The great majority of species in the neighbourhood of Cannes & Mentone are not collectors of seed, &, indeed, there are but three species to which the name of harvester can properly apply— These three species are however very common, & two of them may frequently be seen by the road side or crossing the paths in long lines, & are very familiar objects.—3 The trap-door spiders have been forced upon my attention by my attention by a friend, & I am now most deeply interested in their structure & habits— 4 Up to the present time only one type of nest has been described in Europe, namely that in which the cylindrical silk-lined tube is closed by a solid door composed of layers of earth & silk & which fits into the aperture of the tube much as a cork does into the neck of a bottle (Fig. A). To this type I am now able to add two others, & these posess two doors, one at the surface of the ground & one some inches below (Fig s. B & C.).

432

October 1872

In these nests the surface door is always thin & wafer-like & merely serves to conceal the aperture of the tube upon which it is laid, while the lower door is solid & capable of offering mechanical resistance. I will not however trouble you with further details, as I hope to explain these fully in the book which should appear in the end of next month.— I have drawn the plates & nearly completed the MS., but am anxious to make a few additional observations at Mentone before going to print. I am indebted to Mr. Pickard Cambridge for the names & descriptions of the four species of Trap-door spider found on the Riviera, & Prof. Ausserer has also been so good as to give his opinion as to their proper naming.— 5 I greatly regret however that I have hitherto been unable to discover the males of any one of these spiders & it would seem that they are either very scarce or exceptionally well concealed— 6 This letter need not require an answer; at least if I do not receive one I shall take it for granted that I may send my book— | Believe me | Yrs. very sincerely | J. Traherne Moggridge. DAR 171: 216 1

2 3 4

5

6

Owing to chronic ill health, Moggridge spent most winters at Mentone (now Menton), a town on the French Riviera near the Italian border (R. Desmond 1994). CD’s annotated copy of Harvesting ants and trap-door spiders (Moggridge 1873) is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 589). See Correspondence vol. 19, letter from J. T. Moggridge, [before 22] June 1871, and letter to J. T. Moggridge, 22 June [1871]. In Moggridge 1873, pp. 15–16, Moggridge named the three harvester ant species, Atta barbara (now Messor barbarus, the Mediterranean harvester ant), A. structor (now Messor structor), and Pheidole megacephala. In Moggridge 1873, p. 79 n., Moggridge wrote, ‘This priority [of new observations on the habits of trap-door spiders] belongs to the Hon. Mrs. Richard Boyle, to whom I owe it that I ever took up the subject.’ He refers to Eleanor Vere Boyle. The species descriptions in Moggridge 1873, pp. 89–90, 92–4, 101–3, and 108–11, were written by Octavius Pickard-Cambridge. Moggridge also included an appendix of species of Territelariae of Europe and the Mediterranean region identified by Anton Ausserer (ibid., pp. 143–4). The Territelariae spiders described in the appendix are now classified within the families Ctenizidae, Nemesiidae, Atypidae, Idiopidae, Hexathelidae, Barychelidae, and Theraphosidae within the suborder Orthognatha, mygalomorph spiders. Moggridge later discovered the male of a species first identified by him, Nemesia eleanora (see Moggridge 1873, pp. 109–10).

From J. V. Carus 7 October 1872

Leipzig, Oct. 7. 1872

My dear Sir, First of all I must beg your pardon that I write so very late to thank you for your kind and sympathizing letter, which reached Gersau when I had left already. 1 I had been hoping that I might get over the worst of our climate by coming back before October, so that some warm weeks might aid me in acclimatising. But I had the bad luck to travel just in those days when the temperature fell suddenly almost twelve degrees (C.). So I caught a new cold; on the whole, however, I feel much stronger

October 1872

433

and better. I had left Leipzig still with some daily feverish excitement and not quite recovered. This is all gone and I hope to be able again to work hard. I was not able to work in Gersaw; I read some proof sheets, that was all. I am here a fortnight, and yet I couldn’t find a spare hour to write letters. Herr Koch wishes the translation of your Expression to come out at the same time with the Original.2 Now I have done about half of it and the printing has begun. I am delighted with the book; and if I venture to make some remarks on it, I trust you will not mistake the really great interest I take in it. P. 41. you say: “the iris is not known to be under the conscious control of the will in any animal.” To make the statement correct you ought to say “in any mammal.” For the muscles of the Iris and the Tensor chorioideae in Birds and Reptiles are striped, therefore, according to the generally accepted notion, voluntary. 3 Page 102, 103. “The reversed transition (viz. that the arrectores pili 4 might have been primordially unstriped and have become voluntary) would not have presented any great difficulty.” It may be so; but I rather doubt that you are right in basing this conclusion, as you seem inclined to do, on the fact that “the voluntary muscles are in an unstriped condition in the embryos of the higher animals.” Most likely both forms are connected in some way, taking the evolution of the animal kingdom at large; but just in the higher animals they have become distinct morphological elements with different development, so that we are not entitled to say in any way, that the unstriped muscles of the higher animals are developmental stages of the striped ones. On the whole I should rather think that the arrectores pili are parts or remnants of the large system of cutaneous muscles, which were primordially, as parts of the muscular system of the trunk, striped But as they lost gradually the connection with the nervous centres of the will, their histological form changed and with this of course also the form of their development. On pages 34, 64 and 142 you mention some actions, all of which seem to me to belong to one great principle, although I am unable to state it with precise words. P. 34. you say that “some actions are due to imitation or some sort of sympathy”. I think the imitation is the most important element, but not only the imitation of an action performed by some one else; any other movement, also one’s own, is imitated, or accompanied by a similar one, especially if a person wishes to enforce or secure a certain movement. Here that comes in what you call the association of our intentions and movements, but besides this also the symmetry of our whole structure and the sense of rhythm. I think one and the same principle of imitation, with the tendence to enforce, is to be seen: in the billard-player (p 64), in the child learning to write (p 34. I twisted my tongue when I was learning to play the violin, my daughters do it in writing, drawing, playing the piano), in a person trying to thread a needle (p 142.). Here the mouth is closed and generally pointed as if one could help the thread to go through the eye But try to break a hard biscuit with your hands; then you bite your teeth hard upon each other and open the mouth a little on one side as if to help the cracking. When a nervous lady sees that some one (f. i. one dancing on a rope) is

434

October 1872

about to fall, she gets hold of the next object, may it be her neighbours arm, imitating as it were that action which the falling person ought to or will perform. Whenever I go in a street and some other men goes close before or behind me, so that I hear or see his footsteps, I cannot help to fall unconsciously into the same time or rhythm of his steps, so that I keep pace with him Of course I get aware of it immediately and am vexed about it, but then I must make some effort to have my own ‘tempo’. I knew a nice little intelligent girl, the daughter of an eminent embryologist, now, may be, an elderly lady. When her father told her a little story, however simple and childish it might have been, as soon as he began to open his mouth, to frown, and exaggerate his expessions of anger, astonishment, terror or laughter, without their being connected in the least with the tale, the intensely attending girl imitated all these expressions most ludicrously and quite unconsciously. Persons listening to music are always very apt to nod in the rhythm of the piece. p. 275. I never noticed with the common Sicilians and Neapolitans any other sign used as a negative than a “throwing back of the head with a cluck of the tongue”, just so as you say it is used by the modern Greeks and Turcs. I always thought that these forms, nodding and throwing back of the head were the expressions which the Romans called adnuere and abnuere.5 I beg your pardon for offering you these trifles. There are some more formal questions, which you would oblige me to answer by and by occasionally. P. 121 in the quotation from Somerville; must it not be ‘sloe-black’ instead of ‘sloeback’, the meaning of which I cannot guess.6 On p. 79 you give some passages from Shakespeare.7 I read Hamlet, Othello, Macbeth, the Richards, Taming the Shrew, but could not find them Have you the places or can you at least tell me the play? As we have an “authorized version” so to say, I should like to give the quotation in the words of this.8 But don’t trouble about it. p. 149. note 3, line 5. Wouldn’t it be better to put the I referring to a special muscle, outside the brackets? As it stands there within “(I. p. 24)”, it looks just like a Roman numeral9 You need not send me clean sheets, unless they do contain new alterations, not contained in the second revise. Perhaps you will send me afterwards a clean copy of the book when it is out.10 I am now hard at work with the concluding part of my Handbook of Zoology.11 When this is done I had a great mind to get at the Geographical Distribution of Animals, for which we have only special treatises and nothing very comprehensive But before I can think of this, I shall try to see you at last. As I am asked to give the course of lectures in Edinburgh as substitute for Professor Wyville Thomson, I come through London next April.12 With the best wishes for your health, believe me, | My dear Sir, | Yours very sincerely, | J. Victor Carus DAR 161: 84 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 First . . . in it. 1.14] crossed blue crayon

October 1872

435

2.1 P. 41. . . . conscious] scored blue crayon 8.1 P. 121 . . . guess. 8.2] double scored blue crayon; crossed blue crayon; ‘V. Carus’ blue crayon 9.1 On p. 79] ‘p 79 for Spencer read Spenser’13 blue crayon 9.1 On p. 79 . . . it is out. 11.3] double scored blue crayon; crossed blue crayon 12.4 As I am . . . April. 12.6] double scored blue crayon Top of first page: ‘Answer about Shakespeare | when I get home’ blue crayon, del blue crayon 1 2

3

4 5 6

7

8 9

10 11

12

13

See letter to J. V. Carus, 23 September 1872. Carus and his family had gone to Gersau, a Swiss resort on Lake Lucerne (Vierwaldstätter See), to recuperate after illness (see letter from J. V. Carus, 14 July 1872). Eduard Koch was the head of E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, CD’s German publisher. Carus was translating Expression into German. Expression was published by John Murray on 26 November 1872 (Freeman 1977). The German translation (Carus trans. 1872b) appeared in December. CD did not make the change Carus suggested. The term ‘tensor chorioideae’ (choroid tensor) was used to describe the muscle in the ciliary body of the eye by Ernst Wilhelm von Brücke (Brücke 1847, p. 54). While the muscle in mammals is smooth, it is striped or striated in birds and structurally similar to skeletal muscle (Tedesco et al. 2005, p. 545). The arrector pili is the small smooth muscle attached to the hair follicle in mammals. Nuere: nod; ab: away; ad: toward (Latin). CD corrected the word to ‘black’ in the second printing of Expression (for more on the printings of Expression, see Freeman 1977). CD had quoted four lines from the poem The Chace, published in 1735 by William Somervile. In Expression p. 79, CD referred to Shakespeare’s description of envy: ‘as lean-faced in her loathsome case’. The line, from Henry VI Part 2, 3.2, is, ‘As lean-faced Envy in her loathsome cave’. Carus translated the phrase as it appears in Expression, using the German word Hülle for ‘case’ (Carus trans. 1872b, p. 80). CD also quoted a line from Henry VIII, 2.1, ‘no black envy shall make my grave’. In most modern editions the line reads, ‘no black envy shall mark my grave’, but many nineteenth-century editions agree with CD’s reading. The final Shakespearean passage CD mentioned was from Titus Andronicus, 2.1, ‘above pale envy’s threatening reach’. Carus probably refers to the translations of Shakespeare plays made by August Wilhelm von Schlegel and Ludwig Tieck (Schlegel and Tieck 1825–33; for more on this edition, see K. E. Larson 1987). In the note Carus mentions, CD referred to a diagram of the muscles of the human face, labelled with letters A to L, on page 24 of Expression. CD did not make the change Carus suggested. In Carus trans. 1872b, p. 150 n. 3, Carus left out the letter ‘I’ before the page number. Carus’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). The first part of volume one of Handbuch der Zoologie (Carus and Gerstaecker 1863–75) was published in 1868. Carus completed the second half in 1875. Volume two had been published in 1863 (see Carus and Gerstaecker 1863–75, 1: v–vi). Charles Wyville Thomson was professor of natural history at the university of Edinburgh and was scientific director on the Challenger expedition of 1872 to 1876 (ODNB). Carus gave lectures at Edinburgh in the summers of 1873 and 1874 (DSB). The name Spenser, referring to the poet Edmund Spenser, is spelled correctly in Expression, p. 79.

From J. D. Hooker 7 October 1872 Royal Gardens Kew October 7/72 Dear Darwin Your groom informed me that Parslow often knew of a horse to be bought— 1 Would you let me ask him or will you if he is with you, whether he knows of any thing that would meet the enclosed conditions

436

October 1872

The Droseras arrived, but I am sorry to say knocked to pieces, the soil not having been secured— It is a matter of no moment— we shall bring them round or kill them—which latter we should probably have done ere this had they not gone to you.2 I am distressed to hear of your bad health & move to Seven Oaks—3 I hope that you will see the lovely place that Spottiswoode has taken. 4 What do you think of Mallette’s Earthquaque theory— Will it not account for the strata dipping inwards at the base of ranges of mountains? 5 All quiet here at present | Ever yours affec J D Hooker [Enclosure] Wanted a Nag (not a Filly) for Cart & throwing machine—say 6 years old—15-2 to 16 hands high—clean legs—good action—Sound & quiet in harness & chains. Blindness no objection. Price £40. 0. 0. Two may be wanted. If Mr Parslow should hear of any to let Dr Hooker know when & where it may be seen. DAR 103: 121–3 1 2 3 4 5

CD’s groom was Mark Ansell; Joseph Parslow was his butler. See letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 October [1872] and n. 2. See letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 October [1872] and n. 5. William Spottiswoode bought Combe Bank, a house in Sundridge, a village near Sevenoaks, Kent, in December 1871 (London Gazette, 29 December 1871, pp. 5893–4). Robert Mallet’s paper on volcanic energy was read in June 1872 (Mallet 1872). Mallet noted that earthquakes occurred ‘within the area of great seismic bands which follow and extend at either side of the mountain-chains of the world’ (Mallet 1872, p. 148; for more on Mallet’s theory of the dynamics of earthquakes, see Dean 1991). CD had theorised about the action of earthquakes and the elevation of mountain chains in ‘Volcanic phenomena and the formation of mountain chains’.

From R. F. Cooke 9 October 1872 50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Octr. 9 1872 My dear Sir Your work now is almost ready I find, as it merely wants the return of the Index, Title & Contents to the printer. (sent you Sepr. 23.)1 I think if so, we shd. let the binder have copies to go on with so as to have the work bound up in good time. I name this, because with these 7 plates it will require great care & time to fold & place them properly in the copies.2

October 1872

437

Have you any wishes or instructions as to the folding of the plates—the color of the binding & as to the edges being cut & uncut? I hope to have at least 3000 sets of plates ready for Appleton by the end of this week, which we may send off, giving them instructions not to publish until the 12 th. of November.3 What do you think of this? Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke Chas. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 423 1 2 3

Cooke refers to Expression. The seven heliotype plates included in Expression had to be tipped in; three of them were on fold-out pages. D. Appleton & Co. was CD’s US publisher. Expression was published on 26 November 1872 (Freeman 1977). The US edition was published in December 1872 but has the date 1873 on the title page (Freeman 1977).

To J. T. Moggridge 9 October [1872]1 Sevenoaks Oct. 9

My dear Mr. Moggridge I have just received your note, forwarded to me from my home. I thank you very truly for your intended present, and I am sure that your book will interest me greatly. 2 I am delighted that you have taken up the very difficult and most interesting subject of the habits of insects, on which Englishmen have done so little. How incomparably more valuable are such researches than the mere description of a thousand species.— I dare say you have thought of experimenting on the mental powers of the spiders, by fixing their trapdoors open in different ways and at different angles, and observing what they will do.3 We have been here some days and intend staying some weeks, for I was quite worn out with work and cannot be idle at home.4 I sincerely hope that your health is not worse.5 Believe me | Your’s very truly | Ch. Darwin Copy DAR 146: 378 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. T. Moggridge, 6 October 1872. See letter from J. T. Moggridge, 6 October 1872. CD refers to Moggridge’s book, Harvesting ants and trap-door spiders (Moggridge 1873). Moggridge performed experiments in which he tried to force open the trapdoor and described how the spider resisted, holding the door shut with the claws attached to the tarsi of its legs (see Moggridge 1873, pp. 94–6). He also described the door-building and repairing activities of captive spiders (ibid., pp. 118– 21).

438 4 5

October 1872

CD stayed in Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). See letter from J. T. Moggridge, 6 October 1872 and n. 1.

To J. V. Carus 10 October [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. [Sevenoaks, Kent.] Oct 10th My dear Sir I am sincerely glad to hear that your health is improved.— 2 Many thanks for your letter & all the remarks, which shall be carefully considered, whenever I have an opportunity of correcting a new edition.3 I felt very doubtful about the very points which you criticise. viz about the degree to which imitation has come into play, & about the “arrectores pili”.— 4 I knew about the striped muscles in the iris of Birds; but then as the muscles of the heart are striped, I did not know what to conclude.—5 I am very much pleased to hear that you like my book, & I really could form no opinion on its merits. No one else has read it.— It is a misprint “sloe-back” for “sloe-black”.—6 Please alter the I in reference at p. 149.—7 I am writing this away from home; as I am knocked up & want rest. On my return home in about 20 days, I will endeavour to find reference to words quoted from Shaspeare.—8 I have no copy of proof-sheets with me.— I sent lately the German title, index &c & clean copies of 2 first sheets, in which I am not sure, whether there were any corrections; but all the other sheets were finally corrected.— I will of course send you a copy of my book, when published.— 9 Whenever you come to England I shall be delighted to see you.— A work on geographical distribution wd. be a most arduous undertaking; but you seem to fear no amount of labour.10 My dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Slg. Darmstaedter Lc 1859 Darwin, Charles, Bl. 92/93 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872. See letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and n. 1. CD refers to Expression. See letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and n. 4. See letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and n. 3. The heart is the only involuntary muscle that is striated or striped, but myocardial muscle fibres are smaller and shorter than those of skeletal muscles. See letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and n. 6. See letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and n. 9. CD stayed in Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). For the Shakespeare quotations, see the letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and n. 7. See letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and n. 10.

October 1872 10

439

See letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872. Carus’s projected work on geographical distribution was not realised.

To J. D. Hooker 10 October [1872]1 Miss Woodington’s | The Common | Sevenoaks Oct 10— My dear Hooker I am very much vexed about the Droseras. I am sure it was an oversight of Lettington’s & not carelessness, as he was very proud of the state of D. Capensis. 2 I will send your mem–to Parslow today, but I am very doubtful whether he will be able to aid you.3 I was very much struck with Mallet’s paper, but do not remember it enough to see how it bears on the inward dipping of mountain basal strata. 4 In none of the theories founded on secular refrigeration can I understand how the same area should have been repeatedly lifted up & down.5 The admission of water to the heated rocks seems now universally accepted as the immediate cause of volcanic outbursts; but the moon, now destitute of aquieous(!) vapour, & yet so studded with craters seems to me difficult to reconcile with this theory. 6 I forgot in my last note to thank you & Prof. Dyer for his paper, which interested me immensely; by its aid & my own reflections I have managed to shake off pretty well Dr Bastian; but I never did for a moment admit his extreme cases— 7 He seems to me a very able man & I think spontaneous gen. to a confined extent will some day be proved—8 yours affectionately | Ch Darwin LS Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (Darwin: Letters to Thiselton-Dyer, 1873–81: 31–2) 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. D. Hooker, 7 October 1872. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 7 October 1872. Henry Lettington was CD’s gardener. CD refers to Drosera capensis. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 7 October 1872. Hooker hoped that CD’s butler, Joseph Parslow, could assist him in finding a horse to buy. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 7 October 1872 and n. 5. CD refers to Robert Mallet and Mallet 1872. Secular refrigeration theories accounted for the formation of mountains as a result of the contraction of the earth’s crust due to cycles of cooling (see Mallet 1872, pp. 153–7). George Poulett Scrope first attributed the fluidity of magmas to water in 1825; this view later gained support from other prominent geologists, notably Charles Lyell (see Scrope 1825 and C. Lyell 1872, 2: 230–1). For more on nineteenth-century theories on the role of water in volcanic activity, see Sigurdsson 1999, pp. 219–24. Lunar craters were at this time generally believed to be the result of volcanic action (see Koeberl 2001 for a review of theories of the origin of craters). William Turner Thiselton-Dyer, in his paper ‘On spontaneous generation and evolution’ (ThiseltonDyer 1870), criticised Henry Charlton Bastian’s theory and experiments on spontaneous generation. CD had commented briefly on the paper in his letter to J. D. Hooker, 1 February [1871] (Correspondence vol. 19). CD’s annotated offprint of the article is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. CD discussed Bastian’s theory in more detail in his letter to A. R. Wallace, 28 August [1872].

440 8

October 1872

For more on Bastian’s theory and other contemporary theories of spontaneous generation, see Strick 1999 and Strick 2000.

To Alpheus Hyatt 10 October [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. [Sevenoaks, Kent.] Oct. 10th Dear Sir I am very much obliged to you for your kindness in having sent me your valuable memoir on the embryology of the extinct cephalopods. 2 The work must have been one of immense labour & the results are extremely interesting.— Permit me to take this opportunity to express my sincere regret at having committed two grave errors in the last edition of my Origin of Species, in my allusion to your & Prof. Cope’s views on the acceleration & retardation of development. 3 I had thought that Prof. Cope had preceded you; but I now well remember having formerly read with lively interest & marked a paper by you (somewhere in my Library) on fossil Cephalopods with remarks on the subject.4 It seems, also, that I have quite misrepresented your joint view.5 This has vexed me much. I confess that I have never been able fully to grasp what you wish to show, & I presume this must be owing to some dullness on my part.— I assumed, though I had no right to make any such assumption, that the kind of explanation which I have given, was what you intended. As the case stands, the law of acceleration & retardation seems to me to be a simple statement of facts; but the statement, if fully established, would no doubt be an important step in our knowledge. But I had better say nothing more on the subject, otherwise I shall perhaps blunder again. I assure you that I regret much that I have fallen into two such grave errors, & with much respect, I remain Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin Manuscripts Division, Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, Princeton University Library (Hyett and Mayer Collection) 1 2 3 4

5

The year is established by the reference to Hyatt’s article (see n. 2, below). The reference is to Hyatt’s ‘Fossil cephalopods of the Museum of Comparative Zoology. Embryology’ (Hyatt 1872). CD’s annotated presentation copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. In Origin 6th ed., p. 149, CD discussed the acceleration and retardation of development and mentioned Edward Drinker Cope, but not Hyatt, as a proponent of the theory (see n. 5, below). CD’s annotated copy of Hyatt’s earlier paper, ‘On the parallelism between the different stages of life in the individual and those in the entire group of the molluscous order Tetrabranchiata’ (Hyatt 1866) is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Hyatt and Cope independently developed similar theories at about the same time, but Hyatt published his views earlier (see Pfeifer 1965, p. 157 and n. 5). In Origin 6th ed., p. 149, CD had explained acceleration and retardation as the loss of certain characteristics in progeny when animals reproduced before they had acquired these characters, and he expressed doubt as to whether species had ever been modified in this way. Hyatt and Cope regarded acceleration as a process by which an animal’s growth speeded up, so that in reproduction more advanced traits would be passed on. Retardation was characterised by growth slowing and degraded characteristics being passed on. See Pfeifer 1965, p. 160.

October 1872

441

From J. V. Carus 11 October 1872 Leipzig, Oct 11. 1872 My dear Sir, If your 12th. sheet (N) is not yet printed off, you might perhaps still be able to alter a misprint, which puzzled me a great deal On p 184 line 6 from the bottom you mention a statue (besides the Laocoon) called the Arretino. In all probability you were thinking of that kneeling statue in Florence, which we generally call the “Grinder”. This is the Arrotino.1 If it was not for the double r one might think (as it occurred to me) of some one from Arezzo. In this moment I cannot find out a figure of the Arrotino full “en face”, but according to an outline drawing “en profile”, he exhibits the action of the grief muscles. Believe me | My dear Sir | Yours very sincerely, | Prof J. Victor Carus In haste! DAR 161: 85 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Keep. | Correction | Expression | see to Duchenne’ 2 ink 1

2

The Arrotino (blade-sharpener: Italian) is a first century bce sculpture in the Uffizi Gallery, Florence. It depicts a man crouching to sharpen a knife on a whetstone. The other sculpture referred to is Laocoön and his sons in the Vatican Museums, Vatican City. It shows the three figures being strangled by sea serpents. CD corrected the spelling of ‘Arrotino’ in the second printing of Expression. In Expression, p. 184, CD also referred to Guillaume Benjamin Amand Duchenne’s discussion of the depiction of grief muscles by ancient sculptors (see Duchenne 1862, p. 20 and pl. 7 figs. 66–73).

From R. F. Cooke 11 October 1872 50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Octr. 11 1872 My dear Sir I have written to Clowes to say if they have not already sent off some of the Stereotypes to Appleton’s to do so forthwith & I have written to their agent here, to look after Messrs. Clowes & have sent him this day 3000 sets of the Heliotypes & said I hope the remaining 2000 will be with him next week.1 You ought to have received a letter from me about the Title &c of y r work, but from what I hear, they have now all been returned for press. Our Annual Trade Sale is fixed for Nov. 8th. & I therefore hope we may publish your work on the 12th.2 I have written to ask yr wishes as to binding.3 Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke Chas. Darwin Esqr. DAR 171: 424

442 1

2 3

October 1872

William Clowes & Sons was the printing firm employed by CD’s publisher, John Murray. D. Appleton & Co., CD’s US publisher, had requested stereotypes of the text and woodcuts of Expression and copies of the heliotype plates; Charles Layton was the firm’s agent in London (see letter from Charles Layton, 13 August 1872). Expression was published on 26 November 1872 (Freeman 1977). See letter from R. F. Cooke, 9 October 1872.

To R. F. Cooke [after 11 October 1872]1 at Miss Woddington’s | The Common | Sevenoaks. My dear Sir I remember the proofs of Title, Index &c. reaching me, and I thought I had returned one set to Messrs Clowes, for I certainly sent off the duplicates to Germany and Russia.2 Perhaps I forgot to send them to Messrs. Clowes, and am sorry if this was the case. There was nothing to correct and you may bind the vols. as soon as you like. I think a smooth green cover would be best, but I do not care. I should greatly prefer the pages being cut. About the lettering on the back, I hardly know what to say: would Expression of the Emotions Darwin this be too long? If so On Expression Darwin Or what you think best.3 I thank you sincerely for anticipating my note of yesterday about the Messrs Appletons: please remember that the Hel: Plates without the stereotypes of text and blocks would be of no use to them.4 They fear other publishers getting into the market before them: I should have thought this impossible from the Heliotypes; but Kowalovsky tells me that there were two pirated editions of my Descent of Man published in Russia, with a few new woodcuts, and much of text omitted, and yet that these injured greatly the sale of his Translation;—and he fears the same for present Book.5 I forgot to say that I have no special intentions about folding the Plates, except so as to avoid the folds crossing the faces: There are printed instructions about their situation.6 Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin. Copy DAR 143: 284

October 1872 1 2

3 4 5 6

443

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from R. F. Cooke, 11 October 1872. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 11 October 1872. CD refers to William Clowes & Sons, printers. German and Russian translations of Expression (Carus trans. 1872 and [Kovalevsky] trans. 1872) appeared shortly after the English version. The first of CD’s recommendations for the lettering on the spine of Expression was adopted. For CD’s preference for cut pages, see also the letter to John Murray, 27 January [1872] and n. 3. CD’s letter has not been found, but see the letter from R. F. Cooke, 11 October 1872 and n. 1. Vladimir Onufrievich Kovalevsky was CD’s Russian translator. See letter from V. O. Kovalevsky, [before 8 August 1872]. The printed instructions are given in Expression, p. vi. Plates 1, 2, and 6 were folded; the first two have a single fold and the last has a double fold. All the folds are placed along blank spaces between the images.

From Ernst Haeckel1 12 October 1872 Jena 12 Oct. 72. Hochverehrter theurer Freund! Ihr lieber letzter Brief, durch den Sie mich sehr erfreut haben, war insofern allzu gütig, als Sie den geringen Antheil, welchen ich an der Foerderung und Verbreitung Ihrer Ideen habe, gewiss überschätzen und der “Natürlichen Schöpfungsgeschichte einen Werth zuschreiben, den sie nicht besitzt.2 Diese und ähnliche Bücher sind doch nur weitere Ausführungen der mächtigen Anregung, welche Sie gegeben haben, und das Verdienst, welches ich und ähnliche “Darwinisten” uns im besten Falle erwerben können, ist nicht zu vergleichen mit dem unschätzbaren Verdienste des Meisters, der zuerst unserer Wissenschaft freie Bahn gebrochen hat. Die Polemik gegen Rütimeyer, welche ich in die Vorrede der III. Auflage aufgenommen habe, ist mir durch die unaufhörlichen Angriffe dieses Pseudo-Darwinisten abgedrungen, welcher bei jeder Gelegenheit meine Arbeiten als “unwissenschaftlich” verleumdet und sich ähnlich wie ein bellender Hund beträgt, der sich über den raschen Lauf eines schnellen Pferdes ärgert.3 Ich würd ihm übrigens nicht so hart die Wahrheit gesagt haben, wenn ich nicht wüsste, dass hinter seiner Polemik die elendesten Motive verborgen sind. Professor Rütimeyer ist ein echter Schweizer, und das alte Sprichwort sagt: “Kein Geld kein Schweizer”. Seine Baseler Landsleute, von denen er besoldet wird, sind sehr kirchlich fromm, und da er sich bei ihnen durch seine trefflichen Arbeiten in den Ruf eines halben Darwinisten gesetzt hat, sucht er dies dadurch wieder auszugleichen, dass er andere Darwinisten verleumdet. Die Untersuchungen des Englischen Dr. Bastian über spontane Generation, von denen Sie mir schreiben, habe ich auch im Auszuge gelesen. 4 Es sind darin sehr interessante Angaben. Doch gestehe ich, dass ich in die Qualität des Dr. Bastian als Beobachter und Kritiker kein grosses Vertrauen setze. Es wird noch mit viel mehr Sorgfalt und Kritik über die Urzeugung beobachtet und experimentirt werden müssen, ehe diese fundamentale Frage von der empirischen Seite wirklich gefördert wird. Von der philosophischen Seite ist sie hinlaenglich klar. Besonders durch die

444

October 1872

Entdeckung der Moneren scheinen mir hier die meisten Schwierigkeiten gehoben zu sein.5 Eine andere Schwierigkeit hat die phylogenetische Frage, wie sich die die durch Urzeugung entstandenen und etwa jetzt noch entstehenden Formen vom Moneren zu den Wurzel-Formen des Thierreichen Protisten-reichs und Pflanzenreichs verhalten. Meine Monographie der Calcispongien ist nun nahezu fertig und ich hoffe, sie Ihnen im November senden zu können.6 Ich hoffe, dass Manches darin Sie interessiren wird, vor Allen der wunderbare Grad von Variabilitaet und Anpassungsfähigkeit den diese merkwürdigen Thiere besitzen. Der gewöhnliche Grad von Variabilitaet wird hier weit überschritten, und die gewöhnlichen Vorstellungen von “Species” hören hier ganz auf. In dieser Beziehung sind die Spongien vielleicht die interessantesten von allen Organismen. Mit den besten Wünschen für Ihre Gesundheit, und mit der Hoffnung dass Sie uns noch recht lange als Hauptführer und “Feldmarschall” im “Kampfe um die Wahrheit” vorangehen, bleibe ich, hochverehrter Freund, Ihr treuer, von Herzen ergebener | Ernst Haeckel DAR 166: 58 1 2 3

4 5

6

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. See letter to Ernst Haeckel, 2 September 1872. Haeckel had sent a copy of the third edition of his popular book on the natural history of creation (Haeckel 1872b). Ludwig Rütimeyer had written a review of the first edition of Haeckel’s book (Haeckel 1868), in which he noted that Haeckel had described his work as both popular and scientific. Rütimeyer observed that while no one could argue against Haeckel’s first claim, he could hardly expect the second to be taken seriously (Rütimeyer 1868, p. 301). Rütimeyer took issue with Haeckel’s illustrations of early stages of dog, chick, and turtle embryos (Haeckel 1868, p. 248), stating that the three illustrations were clearly from one and the same woodcut and that this could be described as nothing other than trifling with both the public and science (Rütimeyer 1868, p. 302; for more on the criticism of Haeckel’s illustrations, see Hopwood 2006). See letter to Ernst Haeckel, 2 September 1872. For CD’s view of Henry Charlton Bastian’s book, The beginnings of life (H. C. Bastian 1872), see the letter to A. R. Wallace, 28 August [1872]. Haeckel believed he had discovered organisms lacking both nucleus and organelles, and formed of undifferentiated protoplasm, and had classified them within a group he termed Monera, a subdivision of his kingdom Protista, single-celled organisms (Haeckel 1866, 1: 135). According to Haeckel they were the ancestors of all animals (see S. J. Gould 1977, p. 170). Haeckel 1872a was published in December 1872 or January 1873 (letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 December 1872).

To T. H. Farrer 13 October [1872]1 at Miss Woodington’s | The Common | Sevenoaks Oct 13th r My dear M Farrer I must send you a line to say how extremely good your article appears to me to be.2 It is even better than I thought, & I remember thinking it very good. 3 I am

October 1872

445

particularly glad of the excellent summary of evidence about the common pea, as it will do for me hereafter to quote.4 Nocturnal insects will not do.5 I suspect that the aboriginal parent had bluish flowers. I have seen several times Bees visiting common & Sweet peas, & yet vars., purposely grown close together, hardly ever intercross. This is a point which for years has half driven me mad, & I have discussed it in my Var. of Animals & Plants under Dom:.—6 I now suspect (& I wish I had strength to experimentise next Spring) that from changed climate both species are prematurely fertilised & 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 working at fertilisation instead of so insignificant a subject as the commerce of the country! 7 You pay me a very pretty compliment at the beginning of your paper.8 | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin. Have you read the very curious article on Instinct in the same Nature? 9 That on parthenogenesis is also very good.—10 It is a wonderful number.— Linnean Society of London (Farrer 18) 1 2

3

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The year is established by the address. CD stayed in Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). CD refers to the first part of Farrer’s article ‘On the fertilisation of a few common papilionaceous flowers’, which appeared in Nature, 10 and 17 October 1872 (Farrer 1872). CD’s annotated copy of the second part of the article is in DAR 77: 175–7. Farrer had sent a manuscript version of his paper to CD in 1869, but CD informed him that many of his observations had already been published by Federico Delpino (see Correspondence vol. 17, letter from T. H. Farrer, 18 September 1869 and n. 3, and letter to T. H. Farrer, 10 October [1869]). See Farrer 1872, pp. 478–80. See Farrer 1872, p. 480. Farrer had not seen bees or other insects visiting common pea (Pisum sativum) flowers and wondered whether white pea-blossoms might attract night-flying insects. See Variation 1: 329–30. Farrer was permanent secretary of the Board of Trade (ODNB). See Farrer 1872, p. 478. Farrer had referred to CD’s kindness and encouragement in advising him on his work. The article was ‘On instinct’ by Douglas Alexander Spalding (Spalding 1872). CD refers to the first part of an article, ‘Siebold’s new researches in parthenogenesis’, by Edwin Ray Lankester (Lankester 1872).

From W. W. Reade 14 October [1872]1

13 Alfred Place | Bedford Square | W.C. Oct. 14

My dear Sir This is now my address— I applied for the reviewal of your book on Expression at the Pall Mall Gazette. The Editor told me he means to ask Huxley to do it. 2 If anything prevents him from reviewing it then I shall have it. I did not know Huxley wrote for the paper— of course he wd. be competent to criticise it & hope he will. All that I cd. do wd. be to make a clear statement of your theory— There was a review

446

October 1872

in the “Saturday” last Saturday on the Mdm. of Man3 —about the first real critique I have had. Hoping you are in good health | I remain | Yours very truly | Winwood Reade DAR 176: 64 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘ | Copy’ pencil 1 2 3

The year is established by the reference to Expression, which was published in November 1872 (Freeman 1977). Reade refers to Frederick Greenwood and Thomas Henry Huxley. An anonymous review of Expression was published in the Pall Mall Gazette, 23 April 1873, pp. 11–12. The author has not been identified. An anonymous review of The martyrdom of man (Reade 1872) had appeared in the Saturday Review, 12 October 1872, pp. 474–5.

To J. V. Carus 15 October [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Oct 15th My dear Sir Many thanks. It is too late until more copies are printed off.— I saw a cast of the statue in Cambridge & copied the name with the greatest care! 2 Yet, as on many other occasions, I have blundered.— No Frenchman has a greater tendency to spell all proper names wrongly than I have.— Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Slg. Darmstaedter Lc 1859 Darwin, Charles, Bl. 94/95 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. V. Carus, 11 October 1872. See letter from J. V. Carus, 11 October 1872 and n. 1. The reference is to the sculpture Arrotino.

From William Marshall1 15 October 1872 Weimar 15 Oct. 1872. Hochgeehrter Herr! Die grösste Satisfaction die mir für meine schwachen Leistungen im Gebiete der Zoologie bis jetzt zu Theil wurde, war als ich Ihr Schreiben vom 6 Juny dieses Jahres erhielt.2 Früher war ich, auch noch zur Zeit als ich in Jena unter Haeckel studirte, ein Gegner der Evolutions-Theorie, was man einem kenntnisslosen Anfänger, der noch einen grossen Autoritäten-Glauben und eine starke Anhänglichkeit an seinen ersten Lehrer, den Goettinger Professor Keferstein hatte, nicht so übel nehmen darf.3 Erst in meiner Stellung als Assistent am Reichsmuseum zu Leiden überwältigte mich die Natur selbst, und ich wurde, trotz meines Chefs Schlegels,

October 1872

447

zu einem begeisterten Anhänger Ihrer Theorie, und halte jetzt nur das Forschen in diesem Sinne für fruchtbar und lohnend.4 Wenn man nun stets in seinem Geiste die Sätze Ihrer Theorie verarbeitet stösst man oft auf Thatsachen, die an und für sich zu klein sind, dieselben besonders in irgend einer Zeitschrift bekannt zu machen, die aber doch verdienen bekannt zu werden. Da ich nun voraussetze dass entweder Sie selbst, hoch verehrter Herr, oder einer Ihrer wissenschaftlichen Freunde, mit neuen Arbeiten beschäftigt sind, so erlaube ich mir Ihnen eine kleine Mittheilung zu machen. Es ist eine bekannte Sache dass unser gemeines schwarzes Wasserhuhn (Fulica atra) nur in ganz gewissen Gewässern einer Gegend brütet, in andern aber, die dasselbe Futter etc. bieten, nicht vorkommt. Nun habe ich gefunden dass in den bevorzugten Gewässern, auch immer eine Rohrart vorkömmt, ich glaube es ist Phragmites arundinacea.5 Die Eier des Wasserhuhns sind auf gelblich-grauem Grunde schwarz getupft und gefleckt, und so sind stets die abgestorbnen Blätter der Rohrpflanze von derselben Farbe gelblich-grau und durch kleine parasitische Pilze aus der Uredo-Gruppe schwarz getupft,6 und diese Blätter bilden ausnahmslose die Unterlage, auf der Fulica atra brütet, und ich kann versichern dass es schwer hält diese Eier aus einiger Entfernung zu entdecken. Ich lege Ihnen Bruchstücke eines schon etwas entfärbten Eies und Theile der bewussten Pflanze bei, so dass Sie sich selbst überzeugen können.7 In der Hoffnung Ihnen nicht zu sehr lästig geworden zu sein nenne ich mich | mit vorzüglichster Hochachtung | Ihren ergebnen Diener | D r. William Marshall DAR 171: 47 1 2 3

4

5 6 7

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. See letter to William Marshall, 6 June [1872]. Marshall studied zoology at both Jena and Göttingen, but received his doctorate from the latter institution with a work on the bony cranial protuberances in birds (Professorenkatalog der Universität Leipzig; www.uni-leipzig.de/unigeschichte/professorenkatalog/leipzig/Marshall_913 (accessed 14 March 2011)). Marshall refers to Ernst Haeckel and Wilhelm Moritz Keferstein. Marshall was an assistant at the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie (National museum of natural history) in Leiden, the Netherlands, from 1867 to 1872 (Daum 1998, p. 500). Hermann Schlegel was the museum director from 1858 to 1884. Phragmites arundinacea is now Phalaris arundinacea, reed canary grass. Marshall refers to rust fungi (order Uredinales). The enclosures have not been found, but CD evidently sent the specimens to Alfred Russel Wallace (see letter to A. R. Wallace, 20 October [1872]).

To H. A. Huxley 16 October [1872]1 at Miss Woodington’s | The Common | Sevenoaks Oct. 16th rs My dear M . Huxley Every man has a right to give a friend a marriage present; & going into a new house is nearly as serious & dangerous an affair as marriage.— Therefore I have a full right to enjoy the pleasure of making you a marriage present. I defy your

448

October 1872

husband, with all his sharpness, to pick a hole in this logic. But here comes my difficulty: I want to give something useful & not poetical, & I thought of asking to be allowed to furnish your dining room; but then I know not what furniture you already have. Now will you not allow me to treat you, as I have treated some of my near relations (& I am sure that I feel like a near relation to you all) & ask you to buy something with the enclosed for your self.— 2 Do grant me this favour.— I was very sorry to hear so poor an account of your husband’s state, both for my own sake, & you must know what admiration & affection I feel for him, & for the sake of the whole world.— I hope that he may soon improve, & there is at least one comfort in indigestion, with all its miseries, that there is always a good chance of a prompt cure.—3 Pray believe me, my dear | Mrs Huxley.— | Yours affectionately | Charles Darwin Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine Archives (Huxley 5: 291) 1 2

3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from H. A. Huxley and T. H. Huxley, 17 October 1872. CD enclosed a cheque for £100; it is recorded in his Account books–cash account (Down House MS) under the heading ‘Huxley present’ for 16 October 1872. Thomas Henry Huxley had bought a house at 4 Marlborough Place, London in June 1872 (A. Desmond 1994–7, 2: 43). Huxley had been suffering ill health since the summer (A. Desmond 1994–7, 2: 43).

From T. H. Farrer 17 October 1872 Abinger Hall, | Reigate. (Post Town) | Gomshall (Station) S.E.R. 17 Oct /72 My dear Mr Darwin Many thanks for your very kind note. 1 It would need very little to set me again on flowers— But I am afraid of it; it is so fascinating.— What with Railway Reports: Shipping Laws; housebuilding; guests; & perhaps above all—children who now depend wholly on me, I have a thoroughly occupied life, and can scarcely find time or brains for what would be a very great pleasure.2 Still I should like to see if one might not do something with Pisum & Lathyrus in the way of experiments— I must come to you for some hints before next spring. Might not a comparison of Lathyrus Odoratus, with L. sylvestris, (of which in its natural state I have some seeds) be interesting. The latter must have survived here in a natural way. How strange if after all the generations of L. odor. & of Pisum this now useless apparatus should survive in its original elaborate form— 3 Before I had your note I had read the two articles you speak of twice over, with great interest.4 That doctrine of inherited qualities—mental & corporeal—is surely one of the most fertile, both in the region of physiology & in that of mental & moral philosophy—5 It brings together so many different & primâfacie opposite truths Sincerely Yours | T H Farrer

October 1872

449

DAR 164: 73 1 2 3

4 5

See letter to T. H. Farrer, 13 October [1872]. See letter to T. H. Farrer, 13 October [1872] and n. 7. Farrer’s wife, Frances Farrer, had died in 1870, leaving four children (ODNB). For Farrer’s observations on Lathyrus odoratus (sweetpea) and L. sylvestris, see Farrer 1872, p. 480. In his paper, Farrer referred to ‘Lathyrus sylvestris or latifolius’ as the everlasting pea; they are now considered to be separate species. Farrer had discussed the floral morphology of different peas, noting how the structure promoted fertilisation by insects. Sweetpeas were known to be self-fertile, however, so Farrer evidently wondered why the floral adaptations for crossing remained. CD had also considered the problem (see, for example, Correspondence vol. 14, letter to J. T. Moggridge, 13 November [1866] and n. 3). See letter to T. H. Farrer, 13 October [1872] and nn. 9 and 10. In his article on instinct, Douglas Alexander Spalding had proposed a theory of ‘inherited association’, arguing that frequently repeated actions would establish nervous connections in the brain that could be inherited by offspring as instincts (Spalding 1872, p. 486).

From H. A. Huxley and T. H. Huxley 17 October 1872 26 Abbey Place | St. Johns Wood 17th. Oct./ 72 Dear Mr. Darwin Your letter and its enclosure took us by surprise.1 You talk of being allowed to treat us as relatives—but it is rarely that relatives are so magnificent in their gifts— We can but accept yours, with a thousand tender feelings, which thanks would coldly represent. & that which makes us so easily able to do so—in the knowledge of your and your dear wife’s love for us—and ours for you.— You disclaim all feeling for poetry—& cry out—with wonder when others admire it but you are like the man—who had been all his life talking prose without knowing it and in this more than brotherly kindness—& many another make poetry of your life. With our united love to your two selves | Ever | Yours affectionately | Henrietta Huxley. Hal says—that there now only remains for him to buy up all the “Origin of Species”, & to paper the new walls with them! Seen & approved by me Commander in chief (T. H. H.) only not so well expressed as I should have put it I don’t know whether I ought to be dignified or not but I am not going to be—on the contrary I have only to say how much pleasure your kind thought of us has given me & how heartily I subscribe myself One of the family DAR 166: 285 1

See letter to H. A. Huxley, 16 October [1872].

450

October 1872

To Emil Lehmann 18 October [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. [Sevenoaks, Kent.] Oct 18th

Dear Sir I shd. consider it an honour & privilege to have my forthcoming work translated by you; but Prof. Victor Carus, who has translated all my books has already half finished the present one.—2 If you have any communication with Mrs. Dowie, will you be so kind as to thank her for her obliging letter which accompanied yours.— 3 Pray believe me Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin James Lowe Autographs, Catalogue 37 1 2

3

The year is established by a contemporary note on the verso of the letter (see n. 2, below). Lehmann’s letter has not been found, but a note on the verso of the letter, written by his wife, Amalie Lehmann, explains that he had offered to translate Expression into German. Julius Victor Carus’s translation (Carus trans. 1872b) was probably published in December 1872 (letter to J. V. Carus, 12 December 1872). Annie Dowie’s letter has not been found. She was related to Lehmann by marriage.

From C. I. F. Major1 18 October 1872

Pisa, 18 Oct. 1872.

Hochgeehrter Herr, Zweck Dieses ist die ergebene Bitte, mir Unterzeichnetem die Autorisation zur Übersetzung in Deutscher Sprache Ihres binnen kurzem erscheinenden neuen Werkes, Expression in Man & Animals zu ertheilen.—2 Von einer englischen Familie abstammend, bin ich Deutscher von Geburt & habe auch in Deutschland & in der deutschen Schweiz meine Studien gemacht. 3 Dies zu meiner Legitimation; ich bin übrigens selbstverständlich bereit, vor einer entgültigen Entscheidung Ihrerseits, eine Probeübersetzung vorzulegen.— Sodann erlaube ich mir, Sie in Betreff einer italienischen Ubersetzung des erwähnten Werkes anzufragen. Ich habe mich nämlich mit einem italienischen Freunde Dottor Cavanna, “Ajuto alla Cattedra di Zoologia et Anatomia Comp.”, 4 an der Universitaet Pisa, verständigt, mit Ihrer Erlaubniss, gemeinschaftlich eine italienische Ubersetzung zu veröffentlichen: für getreue Wiedergabe des Originals wäre ich verantwortlich, für den Styl Herr C.— Um geneigte Berucksichtigung dieser meiner Bitten ersuche ich Sie ehrerbietigst.— —Bei diesem Anlass kann ich mir nicht versagen Ihnen, hochverehrter Herr, jetzt schon einige Thatsachen mitzutheilen, die in glänzender Weise einiges in Ihrem wundervollen Buche: “The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex” (Vol. II Ch. XVII) enthaltene Voraussetzungen bestätigen.— Im Museum von Florenz befindet sich nämlich ein vollständig conservierter, ausgewachsener Schädel eines Wiederkauers aus dem Pliocaen des Val d’Arno,5 der sich nach einer von mir vorgenommenen Untersuchung, nur durch den absoluten Mangel der Hörner von den gleichfalls vollständigen, schon von Rütimeyer beschriebenen & abgebildeten Schädel des Bos

October 1872

451

etruscus Falc, aus der gleichen Localitaet, unterscheidet. 6 Ich weiss keine andere Deutung, als dass der erstgenannte Schädel von einem weiblichen Individuum des Bos etruscus stammt; sodass also bei dem ältesten bisher bekannten Vertreter des Genus Bos das weibliche Geschlecht unbewaffnet, hornlos erscheint. —Ein Beispiel verwandter Natur bietet das Genus Sus: Bei einer Anzahl fossiler, meist miocaener Species (Sus antiquus von Eppelsheim, S. provincialis v. Montpellier, S. erymanthius von Pikermi, S. choeroides von Monte Bamboli, etc) 7 scheinen beide Geschlechter nur kleine, keineswegs zu Waffen geeignete Caninen besessen zu haben. Namentlich von den beiden letztgenannten Arten sind die Überreste von Dutzenden von Individuen aufgefunden worden: die Caninen waren stets klein & überragten kaum das Niveau der übrigen Zahnen.— Eine auf diese Thatsachen sich beziehende Publication werde ich nächstens Ihnen zuzusenden die Ehre haben.8 Ich bitte Sie, die Versicherung meiner vorzüglichen Hochachtung & Ehrerbietung entgegenzunehmen. C. J. Forsyth Major. No. 11, Via Solferino. | Pisa DAR 88: 123–4 CD ANNOTATIONS 5.1 Ein . . . Zahnen.— 5.7] ‘small canines did not overtop other teeth’ added pencil Top of letter: ‘Keep for address & answer when I know about Italian | Teeth | & Descent of Man’ blue crayon 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Expression was published in November 1872 (Freeman 1977). The German translation was made by Julius Victor Carus (Carus trans. 1872b). Major studied at Basel, Tübingen, and Göttingen (Stehlin 1925). Guelfo Cavanna was assistant to Sebastino Richiardi, professor of zoology and comparative anatomy at Pisa (Balducci 1921). Major refers to the valley of the river Arno in Tuscany. Ludwig Rütimeyer described a skull of Bos etruscus at the natural history museum, Florence, in Rütimeyer 1867, pp. 71–7, and table 1 figs. 3–5. Sus antiquus is now Microstonyx antiquus; S. provincialis is now Propotamochoerus provincialis; S. erymanthius is now Microstonyx major erymanthius; S. choeroides is now Eumaiochoerus etruscus. Major later sent CD an offprint of his article on the vertebrate fauna of Monte Bamboli, in which he argued that the absence of large canines in the fossil pigs he had studied was evidence in favour of sexual selection, since only males later developed large canines (Major 1873, p. 295). CD scored these passages in his separately paginated offprint, now in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.

From J. D. Hooker to Emma Darwin 19 October 1872 Kew Octr. 19/72 My dear Mrs Darwin The papers will probably have told you of our loss—1 & I hope this accounted for, (though so late) my not having answered your kind note about the horse. 2

452

October 1872

We have so much road work & carting over gravelly paths, that a tendency to footsoreness would be a fatal objection in a horse for our work, or else we should have jumped at the offer. Our Horses have to go sometimes 25 miles, to bring things from the opposite side of London, & they have to do cart work in London as well, not unfrequently. My dear Mother died very tranquilly after about 12 days of great distress, but hardly of pain— the long recumbent position had brought on excessive weakness, & thickening of the lungs, that impeded her breathing—& was very trying to bear. My sister from Scotland arrived too late to be recognized; my younger sister was with her Mother.3 I cannot tell you how severely we feel the blow— It sounds odd that a man of 55 should feel as if orphaned, but so it is— No one but a Mother retains a life-long interest in the members of her family, & one that strengthens with their numbers & their age. It may be true enough that a man shall leave father & Mother & cleave to his wife; but his Mother never leaves him till death. He may divide his affections, she never does.— I do not think that both accumulate affections, whatever one may do. But what I chiefly feel is, the stimulus withdrawn— my prosperity was her chief joy—& my great joy in prosperity was the pleasure it gave her— for her sake I could put up with personal distinction— at least I feel as if it was for her pleasure that I did so, far more than for all other motives put together. I return to Torquay on Monday for the funeral on Tuesday. Ever my dear Mrs Darwin | most sincerely Yours | J D Hooker DAR 103: 124–5 1 2 3

Maria Hooker, Hooker’s mother, died on 16 October 1872. Her death was reported in The Times, 19 October 1872, p. 1. Emma Darwin’s letter to Hooker has not been found, but see the enclosure to the letter from J. D. Hooker, 7 October 1872. Hooker wanted to buy a cart-horse. Hooker refers to Maria McGilvray and Elizabeth Evans-Lombe, who lived in Torquay (Allan 1967, p. 224).

To A. R. Wallace 20 October [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. [Sevenoaks, Kent.] Oct. 20th. My dear Wallace I have thought that you wd. perhaps like to see enclosed specimen & extract from letter (translated from German by my son) from Dr. W. Marshall, Zoological Assistant to Schlegel at Leyden.—2 Neither the specimens, nor extract. need be returned; & you need not acknowledge the receipt.— The resemblance is not so close, now that the fragments are gummed on card, as I at first thought. 3 Your review of Houzeau was very good: I skimmed through the whole gigantic book, but you managed to

October 1872

453

pick at the places much better than I did for myself.— You are a born critic. What an admirable number that was of Nature.—4 I am writing this at Sevenoaks where we have taken a house for 3 weeks & have one more week to stay.5 We came here that I may get a little rest, of which I stood in much need.— Ever yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin With respect to what you say about certain instincts of Ants having been acquired by experience or sense, have you kept in mind that the neuters, have no progeny.— 6 I wish I knew whether the fertile females, or queen, do the same work, (viz placing the eggs in warm places &c) as the neuters do afterwards: If so the case w d. be comparatively simple; but I believe this is not the case, & I am driven to selection of varying preexisting instincts.— British Library (Add 46434) 1 2

3

4

5 6

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from William Marshall, 15 October 1872. The enclosure has not been found, but CD evidently enclosed an English translation of part of the letter from William Marshall, 15 October 1872, along with some fragments of the shell of a coot and pieces of reed canary grass. It is not known which of CD’s sons made the translation, but according to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), George, Francis, and Leonard all arrived at Sevenoaks, where the Darwins were staying, on 19 October 1872. Marshall had been assistant to Hermann Schlegel, but by this time had evidently taken up a new post as secretary to the grand duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, Carl Alexander. See letter from William Marshall, 15 October 1872. Marshall had suggested that coots only nested in places where reed grass speckled with a type of rust fungus grew because it was hard to spot their eggs in such habitat. Wallace had written an essay review of Jean-Charles Houzeau’s comparative study on the mental faculties of animals and humans (Wallace 1872c; Houzeau 1872) in the 10 October 1872 issue of Nature. CD had commented on other articles from the same issue in his letter to T. H. Farrer, 13 October [1872]. CD stayed at Miss Ann Woodington’s, the Common, Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II) and letter to J. D. Hooker, 10 October [1872]). See Wallace 1872c, p. 470. CD had considered neuter insects to be one of the difficulties in his theory of natural selection of instincts (see Origin, pp. 236–42; see also R. J. Richards 1987, pp.142– 52).

From R. F. Cooke 22 October 1872 50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Octr. 22 1872 My dear Sir The binder is now busy on your new work & I hope your own presentation copies may be ready next week, if you like to send them out— 1 no copies must go as yet to America, but we could be getting them packed up & addressed. So please to send me your instructions.

454

October 1872

I have ordered only 250 copies to have cut edges as we find the trade generally to prefer the uncut edges.2 Messr. Appleton’s agent, has had all the plates &c3 Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke Chas. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 425 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Ask for list of all sales’ blue crayon 1 2 3

Cooke refers to Expression. For CD’s presentation list, see Appendix V. CD had advised Cooke to have the pages cut (see letter to John Murray, [after 11 October 1872]). D. Appleton & Co. was CD’s US publisher; Charles Layton was the firm’s agent in London.

To Asa Gray 22 October 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. [Sevenoaks, Kent.] Oct 22d

My dear Gray It was very good of you to write me your long letter of Oct. 6 th , telling me of your & Mrs Gray’s wonderful doings, about which I was very glad to hear.— Alas I never received your Dubuque address, but I have seen a short extract from it on Sequoia.—1 One word more about Tendrils: I would gladly accept your view to account for the spiral winding of a tendril, which has clasped nothing, had it not been for the fact of the same tendril, when it has clasped an object, contracting in opposite directions, in equally close spiral curvatures.— The concave side of the lower part, in this latter case, can hardly have contracted. I think I have explained the proximate cause of the reversed spiral curvature, but I cannot understand the more remote cause.2 I have worked pretty hard for 4 or 5 weeks on Drosera & then broke down; so that we took a house near Sevenoaks for 3 weeks (where I now am) to get complete rest.—3 I have very little power of working now & must put off the rest of work on Drosera till next spring, as our plants are dying. 4 It is an endless subject, & I must cut it short & for this reason shall not do much on Dionæa.— The point which has interested me most is tracing the nerves!!! which follow the vascular bundles. By a prick with a sharp lancet at a certain point, I can paralyse 12 the leaf, so that a stimulus to the other half causes no movement. 5 It is just like dividing the spinal marrow of a Frog:—no stimulus can be sent from the Brain or anterior part of spine to the hind legs; but if these latter are stimulated, they move by reflex actions. I find my old results about the astonishing sensitiveness of the nervous system(!?) of Drosera to various stimulants fully confirmed & extended.— 6 I want to beg you to make for me next spring two observations on D. filiformis, when growing vigorously & on a warm day.— I had the Kew specimens to experimentise upon; but am afraid of trusting to my results on 2 points. 7

October 1872

455

I write on next page the 2 experiments, (not difficult), & will you please keep the paper & try them for me next spring.— Ever yours most sincerely | Ch. Darwin My wife sends kindest remembrances to you both.— Drosera Filiformis (1) Put small atom of crushed fly on leaf near apex, & observe whether the solid leaf itself, after 24o or so, curls over the fly. This has nothing to do with the movement of the glands or hairs. (2) Rub roughly with point of fine needle half a dozen times a few glands & observe whether they become inflected after a few minutes, or more probably after a few hours. My results were negative on both these points, but I think it likely that they were so owing to want of vigour in the plant Ch. Darwin Oct. 22/72 Gray Herbarium of Harvard University (100) 1 2

3 4 5 6

7

See letter from Asa Gray, 6 October 1872 and nn. 8 and 9. CD evidently received the pamphlet (A. Gray 1872b) later. CD refers to Jane Loring Gray. In his letter of 6 October 1872, Gray had argued that the coiling motion in tendrils was always propagated downward and that coiling in tendrils that had not grasped anything started ‘under some inappreciable cause or stimulus’. In Climbing plants, pp. 95–8, CD explained how free tendrils turned round at the tip as many times as the number of spires (coils) formed, while caught tendrils curved spirally in opposite directions from both ends, in both cases to avoid self-twisting. CD stayed at Miss Ann Woodington’s, the Common, Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II) and letter to J. D. Hooker, 10 October [1872])). Many temperate species of Drosera (sundew) die back in autumn. Dionaea (Venus fly trap) is native to America. CD’s experiments in paralysing leaves were made on Drosera rotundifolia (see Insectivorous plants, pp. 247–50). CD first researched Drosera from 1860 until 1862 and then intermittently while he was engaged in other research (see Correspondence vols. 8–10). He recommenced experimenting on Drosera in August 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Drosera filiformis (the threadleaf sundew) is native to parts of the east coast of North America, including Massachusetts.

To J. D. Hooker 22 October [1872] Sevenoaks Oct 22d My dear Hooker This note will reach you on your return from your melancholy journey.— I lost my mother during infancy & therefore know not what the loss is, but I can well believe, that with the exception of ones wife, it is the greatest that a man can suffer;—though God knows the loss of a child is bitter enough & overwhelming.—1

456

October 1872

You have sometimes spoken to me as if you felt growing old: I have never seen any signs of this, & I am certain that in the affections, which form incomparably the noblest part of a man’s nature, you are one of the youngest men that I know.— My wife sends her affectionate regards to you.— With respect to the Horse, my wife, I believe, erred in saying that his feet are tender, but he stumbles very badly, & as far as my experience goes a horse stumbles as much on the road or more, when walking as in trotting. So he would not suit: we thought that you wanted him for turf alone, & then he wd. have suited very well.—2 We return home next Saturday, & that will complete my 3 weeks of rest.3 I have been as dull as anyone could desire, & I daresay it will do me some good.— On your return home you will be compelled to work hard, & that will be your best cure.— Believe me | yours ever affectionately | Ch. Darwin I fear Huxley keeps very poorly.—4 Endorsement: ‘/72’ DAR 94: 231–2 1

2 3 4

CD’s mother, Susannah Darwin, died when CD was eight years old. Maria Hooker died on 16 October 1872 (see letter from J. D. Hooker to Emma Darwin, 19 October 1872). Both CD and Hooker had lost young children to illness (see Correspondence vols. 5 and 11). Hooker wanted to buy a cart-horse (see letters from J. D. Hooker, 7 October 1872 and 19 October 1872). CD stayed in Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Thomas Henry Huxley had been suffering ill health since the summer (A. Desmond 1994–7, 2: 43).

To T. H. Huxley 22 October [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. [Sevenoaks, Kent.] Oct 22d My dear H. I have been glad to sign & forward the paper, for I have very long thought it a sin that the immense funds of the Universities shd. be wasted in fellowships, except a few for paying for education.2 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 went in for Honours. You speak of another resolution “in the interest of the anti-letter-writing association”—but alas this never arrived!3 I shd. like a Society formed so that everyone might receive pleasant letters & never answer them.— Ever yours | C. Darwin We return home on Saturday after 3 weeks of the most astounding dullness, doing nothing & thinking of nothing.—4 I hope my Brain likes it—as for myself it is dreadful doing nothing. Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine Archives (Huxley 5: 301)

October 1872 1 2

3 4

457

The year is established by the reference to the petition against prize fellowships (see n. 2, below). CD had signed a petition supporting the abolition of prize fellowships at universities (ML 2: 442). Huxley attended a meeting of educators on 16 November 1872 at the Freemasons’ Tavern in London. A resolution was passed stating, ‘That the present mode of awarding Fellowships as prizes has been found unsuccessful as a means of promoting mature study and original research, and that it is, therefore, desirable that it should be discontinued’ (The Times, 23 November 1872, p. 4). For more on the system of fellowships and the movement for educational reform, see MacLeod 1971. Huxley’s letter has not been found. CD stayed in Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)).

From C.-F. Reinwald 22 October 1872

Paris. 15 Rue des Saints Pères October 22d 1872

Dear Sir We are very sorry to tell you that the state of mental health of our friend M Moulinié is in no means satisfactory, and that we were to look after another translator for your new work “on the Emotions”1 We propose now, Monsieur le docteur Pozzi, aide anatomiste et physiologiste à l’Ecole de Médecine, recommended by our friends MM Charles Martins of Montpellier and Professor Broca at Paris. 2 M. Pozzi is ready to translate your work, and we are sure that he will give satisfaction in his work both to the author and the editor. We should therefore be much obliged by giving your agreement to our choice, or in proposing yourself any person of your acquaintance with whom we could make an agreement— You know that since twelve months M. Moulinié delayed the publication of the 2d Volume of the Descent of Man, and the Origin of Species. By our best exertions these two volumes are now nearly ready and we hope to send you the 2 d Volume of the Descent before the end of this month. The Origin requires yet a month more, and will not be ready before the end of November next. 3 The first volume of Descent has been sold till now at nearly 1200 copies, we hope that at the issue of the second volume the sale will still be more considerable. Waiting for your kind reply, we remain | Dear Sir, | Your’s most obediently | C Reinwald & Co To Charles Darwin, Esquire— Down DAR 176: 97 1

2 3

Jean Jacques Moulinié had been CD’s French translator since 1867, when he had been recommended to CD by Carl Vogt (see Correspondence vol. 15, letter from Carl Vogt, 23 April 1867). CD had evidently written to Moulinié on 18 August 1872 to ask whether he could translate Expression (see letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 13 September 1872). Samuel Jean Pozzi was a student of medicine at Paris, as well as assistant in anatomy to Paul Broca (BLHA). Reinwald also refers to Charles Frédéric Martins. Moulinié’s translation of Descent was published in 1872, the first volume in February and the second in November (Moulinié trans. 1872; see Journal général de l’imprimerie et de la librairie, 2 March 1872, p. 91, and 30 November 1872, p. 563, and letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 23 November 1872). For more on the

458

October 1872

reasons for the delay in publishing the translation of Origin 6th ed. (Moulinié trans. 1873), see letter from J. J. Moulinié, 1 January 1872 and nn. 1–3.

To R. F. Cooke 23 October [1872]1 Sevenoaks Oct. 23rd My dear Sir I am delighted at your news. I return home on Saturday, and on Monday or Tuesday will send you a list of presentation copies for London and vicinity and will have a lot of copies sent to Down for presentation abroad. 2 I shall want a good many copies how many I do not yet know. I hope Mr. Murray will charge me, as if I were a bookseller purchasing at your sale, and that he will give me some copies as heretofore. I will not transmit any copies to America till the day of your sale. Very many thanks about the Appletons.3 Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin I hope the books will sell fairly well for all our sakes. Copy DAR 143: 286 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from R. F. Cooke, 22 October 1872. CD refers to Expression. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 22 October 1872 and n. 1. CD stayed in Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). See letter from R. F. Cooke, 22 October 1872 and n. 3.

From J. V. Carus 24 October 1872 Leipzig, Oct. 24. 1872. My dear Sir, I beg your pardon for troubling you again, but after a serious consideration I think it my duty to let you know my doubts. On two places you quote the Bible, first (p 316) to prove that the Semitic races do blush, and then (p 322) to give an instance of the movements which accompany the blushing In this latter place the term “blush” occurs again Of course I was about to give these two places in Luther’s words, but I was struck that he did not mention the “blushing”, i.e the reddening of the face. 1 On turning to the original hebrew text I saw that it did not know any more this blushing In both places the same verb is used (kalam), which means ferire, vulnerare, also morally used: verbis perforare and struck with shame, but there is not the slightest hint to colour in it.2 Then I found out that in the whole Bible there is not one place, where the “blushing” is mentioned, nor does exist a word in Hebrew, which means blushing or reddening of the face, whilst the Arabs know it; they possess a verb absolutely synonymous with our blushing and “Erröthen”. Now I think you cannot

October 1872

459

prove the blushing of the old Hebrews by quoting a wrong translation (p 316). That it occurs in Esra3 (s. p 322), is irrelevant in this respect. My second doubt is about note 28 on p 307. You say, that the movements which are performed in feeling horror lead to sounds which may be expressed by words like “uh” or “ugh”. Of course these sounds must be the same in all men with similarly organized throats, whenever the same movements occur. Now Mr Wedgwood ‘shows (as you quote in the note) by intermediate forms that the sounds here referred to have probably given rise to many words, such as “ugly”, “huge” etc.’ Why then, I ask, have not these same movements led to similar words with the other Arian nations? 4 There are still some words in our modern languages, which have originated from such interjections or which are onomatopoetic, but extremely few. But with regard to “ugly”, it has its definite etymology and is the result of an organic development as are most of our modern words. You will find in Max Müller’s Lectures on the Science of Language, 6. edit. 1871. Vol. I. p 426, a short notice of the etymology of ugly.5 I am not of Müller’s opinion that language will remain “our Rubicon”; but in cases like this, where the history of the word can be traced, we are not allowed to neglect the intermediate stages of the development of the word and to take the quite accidental similarity of it with an interjection as a proof of their genealogical identity. Therefore I think you better leave out the last two lines of the note 28. 6 In a second print, will you kindly notice the following mistakes or misprints: p. 243, you mention the Kafirs of South America of course you mean Africa (l. 14 from top p 245 you spell Dr Brown without the e (l. 11, fr. t.)7 p 79. you spell Spencer, p 262 Spenser, the old English poet. For ought I know Spencer is correct.8 p 295. l. 5 from top: “Kafir, Gaika says”, dele the stop. 9 p 285. R. Brough Smith (l. 6 from bottom); in other places the name is spelt Smyth, also in the Index.10 Pray don’t be angry about my remarks. The places, which induced me to make them, struck me too much. If you will kindly ask a better Hebrew scholar than I am, I dare say he will give you still better information. Ask Will Wright in Cambridge, a most obliging man and dear friend of mine.11 Three sheets of the translation are printed and it goes on rapidly. With respect of the above mentioned places, I don’t know what to do. The deepest heartfelt reverence and the scientific conscience comes to a sad conflict. Believe me, | My dear Sir, | Yours most sincerely, | J. Victor Carus DAR 161: 86 CD ANNOTATIONS 2.1 My second . . . the note 28. 2.17] crossed blue crayon; enclosed in square brackets blue crayon 2.17 Therefore . . . note 28.] double scored blue crayon 6.1 Spenser] double underl blue crayon; two crosses in margin blue crayon 8.2 Smyth] double underl blue crayon; ‘right—’ added blue crayon Top of letter: ‘To be returned.’ blue crayon

460 1

2 3 4

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

October 1872

In Expression, p. 316, CD quoted Jeremiah 6:15, ‘Nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush’. The translation is from the King James Bible. The Martin Luther 1545 translation of the same passage reads, ‘wiewohl sie wollen ungeschändet sein und wollen sich nicht schämen’ (however they would not be shamed and would not be ashamed). In Expression, p. 322, CD quoted Ezra 9:6, ‘O, my God! I am ashamed, and blush to lift up my head to thee, my God’. The Luther version reads, ‘Mein Gott, ich schäme mich und scheue mich, meine Augen aufzuheben zu dir, mein Gott’ (My God, I am ashamed and dread to lift up my eyes to you, my God). Kalam: shame (Hebrew); ferire, vulnerare: injure, wound (Latin); verbis perforare: pierce with words (Latin). ‘Esra’ is the German spelling of ‘Ezra’. In the first printing of Expression, p. 307, the note reads, ‘See remarks to this effect by Mr. Wedgwood, in the Introduction to his “Dictionary of English Etymology,” 2nd edit. 1872, p. xxxvii. He shows by intermediate forms that the sounds here referred to have probably given rise to many words, such as ugly, huge, &c.’ In the second printing, the last sentence was omitted. The reference is to Hensleigh Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1872. Carus refers to Friedrich Max Müller and Max Müller 1871. Carus refers to Max Müller’s statement, in his lecture ‘The theoretical stage, and the origin of language’: ‘Language is our Rubicon, and no brute will dare to cross it’ (Max Müller 1861, p. 340). The errors on pp. 243 and 245 are corrected in the second printing of Expression. The spelling of ‘Spenser’ is correct in the first printing of Expression (see letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and n. 13). There is a comma following ‘Gaika’ in the first printing of Expression. The correction was made in the second printing of Expression. The reference is to Robert Brough Smyth. William Wright was the Sir Thomas Adams Professor of Arabic at the University of Cambridge (ODNB). In Expression 2d ed., p. 335, a note was added following the quotation from Jeremiah 6:15: ‘According to Professor Robertson Smith, these words do not imply blushing. It seems possible that pallor is meant. There is, however, a word haphar occurring in Psalm xxxiv. 5, which probably means to blush.’ William Robertson Smith succeeded Wright as Adams Professor of Arabic at Cambridge in 1889. The second edition of Expression was edited by Francis Darwin and published after CD’s death.

To J. D. Hooker 24 October [1872]1 Down. [Sevenoaks, Kent.] Oct. 24 My dear Hooker I heard from Scott that Dr. King (the superintendent, I suppose, at Calcutta) is now at home on sick-leave.2 Can you give me his address, & tell me whether he is well enough to answer queries about the worm-castings, which he kindly sent me from S. India.— I have just received a splendid letter from Scott on worms.— 3 Secondly, can you tell me where I can buy Dionæa,—but I do not know certainly whether I shall go on with Dionæa this Autumn or next Spring4 If you are overwhelmed with work, I daresay Mrs Hooker5 wd. be so very kind as to answer my two queries.— Ever yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin DAR 94: 233–4

October 1872 1 2 3 4

5

461

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. D. Hooker, 26 October 1872. See letter from John Scott, 25 September 1872. George King was superintendent of the Royal Botanic Garden, Calcutta. See letter from John Scott, 25 September 1872. Scott had sent worm castings collected by King in south India along with castings he collected himself for CD. CD had resumed his research on insectivorous plants in August 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). He reported to Asa Gray that he had to put off further research because his plants were dying (see letter to Asa Gray, 22 October 1872 and n. 4). Dionaea muscipula (Venus fly trap) is native to North America. It dies back and remains dormant during the winter. Frances Harriet Hooker.

From R. F. Cooke 25 October 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Octr. 25 1872

My dear Sir Mr Murray will allow you 18 copies of your new work as he did with the “Descent”, the edition of that work being 2500 Copies & this is only 2000 1 Of course all other copies shall be charged you at our lowest trade price. Mr Murray has never settled with you yet for the cheap edition of “Origin” but it has not been forgotten, & shall be looked at after our trade sale when we hope to sell some. Unfortunately we have 50 copies remaining of the old edition, which wont move off !!!2 Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke Chas. Darwin Esq All the foreigners have paid for the Heliotypes & Electros except our Delft friend, 3 who has had a copy of the book but nothing else DAR 171: 426 1 2 3

See letter to R. F. Cooke, 23 October [1872]. Cooke refers to Expression and Descent, and to John Murray. At CD’s request, Origin 6th ed. was a cheaper edition than previous ones (see letter to John Murray, 8 January [1872] and n. 3). Hermanus Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen (of Delft) translated Expression into Dutch. The publisher was Johan IJkema, also of Delft.

To R. F. Cooke [25 October 1872]1 Sevenoaks. Friday My dear Sir Will you be so kind as to send on my account tomorrow (if possible) a set of clean sheets, with a set of Heliotypes, to M. Reinwald, 15 Rue des Saints Peres, Paris, so that he may see the nature of the work. M. Reinwald wants to bring out a Translation, and asks me “to propose any person with whom he can make an agreement.” 2 My

462

October 1872

books sell much less in France than in any other country, still I think I ought to receive some small payment for the right of Translation. Mr Murray kindly offered once to negotiate for me, and I have ventured to tell M. Reinwald that I would authorise Mr. Murray to enter into an agreement with him.3 I hope he will thus far oblige me, and I shall be content with moderate terms. I have no idea what I ought to accept and put myself absolutely into Mr. Murray’s Hands. My dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Thank Heaven I shall be at home tomorrow4 I have told M. Reinwald cost of Blocks and Heliotype plates. 5 Copy DAR 143: 285 1 2 3 4 5

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 22 October 1872. The Friday following 22 October 1872 was 25 October. See letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 22 October 1872. CD’s letter to Reinwald has not been found. CD refers to John Murray. CD stayed in Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Initially, CD had estimated the cost of heliotypes for 1000 copies at £50 (see letter to J. V. Carus, 16 July 1872). Later, a charge of £75 for all foreign editions was agreed (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 17 August 1872). There is no record in the Murray Archive (National Library of Scotland) of the cost charged by John Murray for plates for the French edition of Expression.

From W. D. Fox 25 October [1872]1 Broadlands | Sandown | I. Wight Oct 25 My dear Darwin I am always glad of an excuse to ask how you and yours are, but the present one is one that will amuse you. A very nice old Lady here will have it that you and M rs Darwin are at the present time in an unknown part of America somewhere by the Yellow River. 2 That Mrs Darwin was the only lady except a Mrs Blackmore (I think) who unfortunately died just when the Expedition had got too far for her husband to return without having his throat cut, so he wisely buried his poor wife & went on his way. Can you unravel this very cock & Bull story. It is so long since I have heard of you, that I cannot deny the truth of the above acct —and can only say, that I believe you are safe at Down.3 We are in our Winter Quarters, much enjoying the delicious healthy air of this place—I believe the very healthiest in England—and I have every reason at present to speak well of it, as I came here three weeks since a regular Invalid—& tho’ not yet strong, am in a most comfortable state of health whereas I was the reverse4 I shall rejoice if you can give a good account of your own health & that of M rs Darwin & your family. What an age it is since we have met. I should so much enjoy seeing you again. It is above a Quarter of a Century since I & my wife were at Down.5

October 1872

463

I wish you & Mrs Darwin wd now repay the visit by coming to us. With our united kindest regards to Mrs Darwin | Believe me my dear old Darwin | Ever yours | W. Darwin Fox DAR 164: 196 1 2 3 4

5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to W. D. Fox, 29 October [1872]. There are seven rivers in the United States called Yellow River; four of them are in Wisconsin, the other three in Alabama and Florida, Georgia, and Indiana (Columbia gazetteer of the world). CD’s last known letter to Fox was that of 16 July 1872. Sandown is a seaside town on the south-east coast of the Isle of Wight. Fox lived in Northwich, Cheshire, where he was vicar of Delamere until his retirement in 1873. From 1873, Sandown was his permanent home. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Fox visited Down on 2 November 1849, but there is no mention of his wife, Ellen Sophia Fox, having accompanied him.

From R. F. Cooke 26 October 1872 50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Octr. 26 1872 My dear Sir I dont quite understand about M. Reinwald. He has had a perfect set of the sheets of your new work & acknowledged them & he has paid for 500 sets of Heliotypes & the Electros & we hope to despatch them to him next week.1 I dont know what they cd. afford to give for an edition of only 500 Copies!!! which is what he said his edition wd. consist of.2 I send you one copy of your book by post. We have 100 Copies here now. Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 427 1 2

See letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 26 September 1871, and letter to R. F. Cooke, [25 October 1872]. CD had asked for proof-sheets of Expression to be sent to Charles-Ferdinand Reinwald. No correspondence between Reinwald and Cooke or John Murray regarding payment for plates has been found in the John Murray Archive (National Library of Scotland).

From J. D. Hooker 26 October 1872 Oct 26/72 Dear Darwin I trust that this will find you back & better. 1 I have set on foot enquiries about Dionæa, I asked at Veitches the other day both for it & Drosera for you, but they had lost all—2 I am sure that they & we keep things

464

October 1872

far too hot & grow them too long a season— they become glaucous plants in a few weeks & then die off. If I had time I would attend to them myself. I can’t persuade gardener to be moderate with heat and water & if I interfere the plants die directly! I have a stock of Dionæa coming from America & shall not forget you. Dr King3 is at home his address is 83 Hereford Road Westbourne Grove Bayswater | W. He is better, but consumptive & is off soon for Mentone4 so write at once. Ever yrs affec | J D Hooker DAR 103: 126–7 1 2

3 4

CD had stayed in Sevenoaks from 5 to 26 October 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). See letter to J. D. Hooker, 22 October [1872]. See letter to J. D. Hooker, 24 October [1872] and n. 4. CD was interested in Dionaea muscipula (Venus fly trap: Dionaea is a monospecific genus) and Drosera filiformis (threadleaf sundew; see letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 October [1872]). Veitch & Sons was a London firm of nurserymen. George King. See letter to J. D. Hooker, 24 October [1872] and n. 2. Mentone (now Menton) is a town on the French Riviera near the Italian border (Columbia gazetteer of the world).

To John Scott 26 October 1872 Down, Beckenham, Kent, October 26, 1872. My Dear Sir,— I thank you very sincerely for your letter of September 25th, which is excellent, and, to use a homely phrase, is as full of information as an egg is of meat. 1 It will be of much value to me, and you answer all my queries much more fully than I thought possible. I have written to Dr Hooker for Dr King’s address, to enquire whether he has any notes; but I doubt whether he can tell me more than you have done. 2 In the latter part of your letter you describe some gigantic castings, and state that they are so many inches in circumference, and then state that after heavy rain, they extended to many inches down the slope. I will assume, if I do not hear to the contrary, that they were nearly circular when you first measured them before the rain. I thank you for telling me a little about your present position. It seems like a piece of jobbery that a medical man should always have the place of superintendent. 3 I am glad to hear that you have been doing some anatomical work, and Dr Hooker alluded to some most elaborate drawings which you had sent home. 4 I hope you will be cautious and not be tempted to work too hard. In about a week’s time I hope to send you my little book on expression.5 With hearty thanks for your kindness, believe me, | Yours sincerely, | Charles Darwin.

October 1872

465

P.S.—Perhaps you are not aware that owing to the climate, and to your writing on thin paper, the ink on one side often renders the words on the other side quite illegible, though your handwriting is very distinct. None of us could decipher some very important words in your letter. I am sure that you will excuse my mentioning this to you, as your letters are so very valuable. Transactions of the Hawick Archæological Society (1908): 69 1 2 3 4 5

See letter from John Scott, 25 September 1872. See letter to J. D. Hooker, 24 October [1872], and letter from J. D. Hooker, 26 October 1872. George King, the superintendent of the Royal Botanic Garden, Calcutta, was in England on medical leave. See letter from John Scott, 25 September 1872. No letter from Hooker referring to Scott’s drawings has been found, but Hooker may have mentioned the subject during his visit to CD from 7 to 11 September 1872 (see Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). Expression was published on 26 November 1872 (Freeman 1977), but CD’s publisher had already received 100 copies of the book (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 26 October 1872). Scott’s name appears on the presentation list for it (Appendix V).

To J. V. Carus 27 October [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Oct 27th My dear Sir I thank you very sincerely for your criticisms.— I am always blundering. I entreat you to send me any more corrections.— Pray alter your Translation, in all the places as I will in any future edition.— About “blushing” I will say though the word blushing is used in our English Translation, but that there is no sufficient evidence of true blushing.—2 I will ask Mr. Wedgwood whether he can justify about “ugly”—: please leave out the end of note.3 It is Spenser—(no doubt my familiarity with Herbert Spencer led to my stupid blunder).—4 It is Mr. R. B. Smyth.—5 I enclose what you wanted about the words from Shaspeare at p. 79: my daughter has looked out passages in the Index or Concordance, but she has not verified all the references: they seem, however, always right.—6 Again I thank you heartily.— | In Haste | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin How I admire & envy your wonderfully accurate mind & eye!— Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Slg. Darmstaedter Lc 1859 Darwin, Charles, Bl. 96/97 1 2 3 4 5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. V. Carus, 24 October 1872. See letter from J. V. Carus, 24 October 1872 and n. 1. See letter from J. V. Carus, 24 October 1872 and n. 4. CD refers to Hensleigh Wedgwood. See letter from J. V. Carus, 24 October 1872 and n. 8. See letter from J. V. Carus, 24 October 1872 and n. 10.

466 6

October 1872

See letter from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and nn. 7 and 8. Henrietta Emma Litchfield often assisted CD by reading and commenting on his work before publication (see, for example, Correspondence vol. 19, letter to H. E. Darwin, 20 March 1871). Alternatively, CD may be referring to Elizabeth Darwin, who still lived at home. The enclosure has not been found.

To R. F. Cooke 27 October [1872]1 Down, Beckenham, Kent Oct. 27th. My dear Sir Many thanks for the copy of my book, of which the appearance pleases me much. I wrote about M. Reinwald, when away from home and quite forgot how few copies he was going to print and that a clean copy had been sent him. 2 I have now written to him again and told him that I would give him the right of Translation for nothing.3 I am sorry to have troubled you by my blunder. In fact I was quite confused about the foreign editions, not having any memoranda with me. I enclose list of 55 copies for London and England, and should be greatly obliged if you would distribute them, by Porter and Post, marking each “from Author.” 4 Also please send me 30 copies (not marked for author) addressed to “C. Darwin, Esq.” “Orpington Station Kent” “S. E. Railway” I will assume that you will be able to send these 30 copies off on Tuesday. Altogether I take 85 copies, (paying for 67 copies) and am very much obliged for the 18 copies.5 I thank you sincerely for all the great trouble you have taken for me, and I hope to Heaven I shall cause no more. Soon after your sale, I should much like to know what the sale is of all my books at this sale.6 My dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin P. S. If you have to print more than the 2000, please let me hear at once, as a few trifling errata, such as dropped letters, have been detected, and I will then write to Messrs Clowes.7 I would recommend copies to be sent to “Nature” “Pop. Science Review”, the “Academy”, “Spectator”. But you know all this far better than I do. Would it be worth sending a copy to any Art Journals, as artists have to consider expression.8 Copy DAR 143: 287 1

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from R. F. Cooke, 26 October 1872.

October 1872 2 3 4 5 6

7

8

467

See letter from R. F. Cooke, 26 October 1872 and n. 1. Cooke had sent CD one copy of Expression. Charles-Ferdinand Reinwald published the French edition of Expression (Pozzi and Benoît trans. 1874). CD’s letter to Reinwald has not been found. For CD’s presentation list for Expression, see Appendix V. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 25 October 1872. Of 7000 copies printed of the first edition of Expression, 6200 were sold in John Murray’s autumn sale, along with 1100 copies of Origin 6th ed. (Nature, 14 November 1872, p. 35). On Murray’s customary November ‘sale dinners’, see Murray 1908–9, p. 540. For some of the corrections made to the first printing of Expression, see letters from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872, 11 October 1872, and 24 October 1872. William Clowes & Sons were printers to John Murray. Although Murray evidently sent a copy to Nature (Nature, 7 November 1872, p. 20), no review of Expression was published. Expression was reviewed in Popular Science Review, January 1873, pp. 71–3, and in the Academy, 2 June 1873, pp. 209–12. A review published in the Graphic, 16 November 1872, pp. 462–3, commented favourably on the illustrations, mentioning the use of the heliotype process. A short but positive review appeared in the Art-Journal, January 1873, p. 31.

To J. D. Hooker 27 October [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Oct. 27 My dear Hooker I thank you much for your answers; & now I want to beg one other address, if you know it, viz Mrs. Barber somewhere in S. Africa: she gave me information on Expression: write address on Post card, & if I do not hear, I shall understand you do not know it.—2 Your letter printed in Nature seems to me excellent & how you could have written so quietly is wonderful to me.—3 Owen’s conduct makes me grind my teeth: I long to meet him to have the pleasure of cutting him dead. Did mortal man ever read such a sentence as the last: it is quite unintelligible, except that it implies a base insinuation against you, that you have defrauded the Government.4 It makes it, if possible, worse coming from him, who notoriously did so little public work at the College of Surgeons.—5 What an utter blackguard he is.— Yours affectionately | Ch. Darwin DAR 94: 235–6 1 2

3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. D. Hooker, 26 October 1872. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 26 October 1872. Mary Elizabeth Barber had responded to CD’s queries on expression, but her responses had been sent by James Philip Mansel Weale (see Correspondence vol. 15, letter from M. E. Barber, [after February 1867] and n. 4). Barber’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). Hooker’s letter was his reply of 6 August 1872 to a report by Richard Owen addressed to Acton Smee Ayrton concerning the management and control of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (for the text of the report, dated 16 May 1872, see Parliamentary Papers 1872 (335) XLVII.527, pp. 169–75). The reply had been printed by order of the House of Commons (Parliamentary Papers 1872 (427) XLVII.707) and reprinted in Nature, 24 October 1872, pp. 516–17.

468 4

October 1872

In his report, Owen had argued that the herbarium at Kew was an ‘additional establishment for the same end as the Botanical Department of the British Museum’ and that it would be cost effective to transfer its collections to the new Museum of Natural History. Owen concluded (Parliamentary Papers 1872 (335) XLVII.527, p. 175): To the extent or proportion in which the Director’s time has been diverted from the immediate aims of the Royal Gardens to this foundation of his scientific fame, the proportion of his salary of 800 l. per annum must also be placed to the credit of the superaddition of the dead plants to “the Botanical Department under the Board of Works,” competing with the “Botanical Department under the Trustees of the British Museum.”

5

Hooker quoted this sentence, with minor changes in punctuation, in full in his letter of 6 August 1872, published in Nature, 24 October 1872, pp. 516–17. See also letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 August [1872] and n. 4. Owen was Hunterian Professor of comparative anatomy and physiology at the Royal College of Surgeons from 1836 and curator of the Hunterian Museum from 1842 until 1856 (ODNB). For a discussion of Owen’s work at the museum, see Rupke 1994, pp. 12–29.

To A. R. Wallace 27 October [1872] Down, Beckenham, Kent Oct. 27 Can you tell me Mr Fr. Geach’s address? I want soon to send him my book.—1 C. Darwin ApcS Postmark: OC 27 72 DAR 249: 117 (photocopy) 1

Frederick F. Geach had responded to CD’s queries on expression (see Correspondence vol. 15, letter from F. F. Geach, June 1867, and Correspondence vol. 16, letter from F. F. Geach, April 1868). Geach’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V).

To George King 28 October 1872 Down | Beckenham, Kent October 28 1872. Dear Sir, I received some time ago from Mr. Scott in Calcutta a large parcel of wormcastings from S. India.1 These are of extreme interest to me. Mr. Scott informs me that you were so kind as to collect these specimens, & that you had some notes respecting them. I have heard with much regret that you have come home on account of your health, & therefore I scruple to trouble you. But if you are well enough to send me these notes, I shd feel grateful. Otherwise, I beg that you will not acknowledge this note, & in any case, accept my cordial thanks for your kindness.

October 1872

469

Hoping that your health may improve, I remain | Dear Sir | yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin Copy DAR 146: 12 1

See letter from John Scott, 25 September 1872.

To W. D. Fox 29 October [1872] Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Oct. 29th My dear Fox Your old Lady might just as well have said we were gone visiting to the moon. 1 We have, however, been away from home & returned only on Saturday from a villa which we took for 3 weeks at Sevenoaks, close to the magnificent Knole Park; as I had been working at the microscope & my head had failed. 2 Three weeks of extreme dullness have done me some good; but my strength fails more & more, & I find I require a rest every 6 weeks or so.— I really have no news to tell about myself, except that I finished some two months ago a small book on Expression, & which will be published at Murray’s sale early in November. I shall soon receive copies & will send you one.3 Whether you or anyone will care much about it, I know not.— How I wish I could accept your invitation & pay you a visit at Sandown; 4 but I have long found it impossible to visit anywhere; the novelty & excitement would annihilate me.— I am heartily glad to hear that you are better. You mentioned when you wrote last, that before leaving the Isle of Wight you had been bad.—5 I cannot give much of an account of my children. Three of my sons are ailing more or less, & have inherited my poor constitution.6 It is a fearful misfortune Farewell | My dear old Friend | Ch. Darwin Postmark: OC 29 72 Christ’s College Library, Cambridge (Fox 151) 1 2 3

4 5 6

See letter from W. D. Fox, 25 October [1872] and n. 2. See letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 October [1872] and n. 5. Knole Park, in Sevenoaks, is a deer-park that dates from the fifteenth century. Expression was published by John Murray in November 1872 (Freeman 1977; on the sale dinner, see the letter to R. F. Cooke, 27 October [1872] and n. 6). Fox’s name is on CD’s presentation list (see Appendix V). See letter from W. D. Fox, 25 October [1872] and n. 4. See letter from W. D. Fox, 13 July [1872]. CD may refer to William Erasmus Darwin, George Howard Darwin, and Horace Darwin. George had been to a German spa in the summer, probably with Horace (see letter to W. D. Fox, 16 July [1872] and n. 3). William’s ill health is mentioned in a letter from Emma Darwin to Leonard Darwin, [22 August 1873] (DAR 239.23: 1.13).

470

October 1872

From J. D. Hooker 29 October 1872 Kew Oct 29/72 Dear Darwin Mrs Barber’s address “The Highlands Graham’s town.— Cape of Good Hope”. She is a great correspondent of mine, & her two brothers, the Bowker’s, are most intelligent people.1 I am greatly gratified by your hatred of Owen for me.2 How different our contempts are— I so despise him, that I feel I could afford to converse with him across a neighbour’s table tomorrow—& yet I should be confoundedly angry if any friend of mine did so at the same table!— I was very glad to see my letter in Nature & only hope that he won’t answer it, & drag me into a controversy.3 The fun of the thing is, that Owen never intended his letter to be made use of — it was professedly intended to be used by Ayrton, when the question of removal of the Brit. Mus: contents to S. Kensington was to be discussed, that is some years hence. 4 When that time should come, Owen would withdraw this letter, on the plea of circumstances having altered, & have substituted a very different one— Meanwhile this would have done its work, of poisoning Ayrton’s mind— It’s premature appearance must have horrified Owen— It is case of the biter bit. Owen, Ayrton & Robinson, the Editor of a paper called ‘the Garden”, are all at work against Kew. D. Galton has taken alarm.5 Ever Yr affec | J D Hooker I am not easy about Huxley—though he says he is slowly bettering.— 6 Did I tell you that I have put my Willy7 into a Ship-brokers office in London to learn the business; & that he likes it much DAR 103: 128–9 1

2 3 4

5 6

CD had asked for Mary Elizabeth Barber’s address in his letter to Hooker of 27 October [1872]. Barber’s brother James Henry Bowker had corresponded with Hooker on archaeological finds; Thomas Holden Bowker had sent palaeolithic implements to England, notably to the British Museum (Cohen 1999). See letter to J. D. Hooker, 27 October [1872]. Hooker refers to Richard Owen. See letter to J. D. Hooker, 27 October [1872] and n. 3. Richard Owen’s report to Acton Smee Ayrton, the first commissioner of works, was written on 16 May 1872, and printed on 25 July, by order of the House of Commons. In it Owen had argued that the herbarium at Kew should be moved to the botanical department of the British Museum and that the only objection to such a move was the current lack of space, which would be remedied by the transfer of the natural history collections in the British Museum to the new Natural History Museum in South Kensington (Parliamentary Papers 1872 (335) XLVII.527, p. 175). Ayrton had reduced the original design of the planned building in 1870, so that two side wings were never built. Building began on the new museum in 1873 and it was opened to the public in 1881 (Stearn 1981, pp. 46–7). William Robinson had founded the journal Garden in 1871 (ODNB). Douglas Strutt Galton was the director of public works and buildings (ODNB). Thomas Henry Huxley’s ill health had been a cause for concern amongst his friends (see letter to J. D. Hooker, 22 October [1872] and n. 4).

October 1872

Acton Smee Ayrton by Faustin Betbeder (‘Faustin’), 1874. ©National Portrait Gallery, London.

471

472 7

October 1872

William Henslow Hooker.

To G. H. Kinahan and M. H. Close 29 October 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Oct 29 1872 Gentlemen I am very much obliged for your kind note & present of your memoir on the General glaciation of part of Ireland.1 Hardly any subject interests me more, & I shall have great pleasure in reading your memoir— I beg leave to remain | yours faithfully & obliged | Ch. Darwin LS Cleveland Health Sciences Library (Robert M. Stecher collection) 1

CD’s presentation copy of Kinahan and Close 1872 is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.

From J. V. Carus 31 October 1872 Leipzig, Oct 31st. 1872 My dear Sir, Many thanks for your kind,—almost too kind letter. 1 There is another etymological point, on which I beg to draw your attention. p. 104 you say: “This action (viz. the inflation of the body with toads”) must have been observed during the most ancient times, as, according to Mr. H. Wedgwood, the word toad expresses in all(!) the languages of Europe the habit of swelling” Now looking to the old languages “φρνη’ refers to colour and has nothing to do with swelling the same is the case with “rubeta”, akin to ruber. Bufo is doubtful, but cannot be brought into genetic connection with any other word, meaning to swell or inflate. The other greek word φσαλος or φσαλις does not occur before the second century after Chr. (Lukianos). 2 Again, all the Germanic or Teutonic languages have words, (meaning a toad), which are derived from a root signifying to tread, (the latin gradi) or walk clumsily: so in German Kröte, so in Swedish, Danish and Dutch (padde).3 The dialectic form “Protze” (for Kröte) reminds of the Italian botta;4 and in the same way ‘toad’ may be connected with the danish ‘tudse’ and the dialectical form ‘trote’. As far as I can see there is only the French ‘crapaud’ which leads to ‘crepare’.5 I think therefore it might be safer to say in the above passage: ‘in some languages of Europe’ instead of “in all”. Unluckily I did not notice it while I was translating the sheet containing the passage Now I have it before me in proof, so that I cannot ask you for permission to alter it. However I beg your pardon for having done so. I corrected: “in some languages.” 6 Just now I got the 8th. sheet in proof, so that I hope to get the book out in the middle of November.

October 1872

473

Pray don’t trouble yourself by writing expressly for this. Perhaps some other occasion will come where you might give me absolution. | Believe me | My dear Sir | Yours ever sincerely | J. Victor Carus DAR 161: 87 1 2

3 4 5 6

See letter to J. V. Carus, 27 October [1872]. φρνη: toad; φυσαλος: windy; φυσαλλς: bladder, bubble (Greek). The Latin word rubeta is derived from the word rubus (bramble; a reference to the habitat of the poisonous toad to which rubeta referred); bufo is the more common Latin term for toad. Ruber: red (Latin). Carus also refers to Lucian of Samosata. Kröte: toad (German). The word for toad is padda in Swedish, tudse in Danish, and pad in Dutch. It is padde in Norwegian. In Bavarian German, Protz is a dialect word for Kröte; botta is a Tuscan dialect word for the Italian rospo (toad). The French word crapaud is of Germanic origin, from the Old High German krapo (hook; because of the appearance of the feet). The Latin crepare is a verb meaning to crack or burst. Carus was translating Expression into German; in his translation ‘all’ has been replaced with viele (many; Carus trans. 1872b, p. 105). In CD’s own copy of Expression in the Rare Books Collection–CUL, the word ‘all’ has been circled and ‘some of ’ pencilled in the lower margin. In Expression 2d ed., p. 110, ‘all’ has been changed to ‘several of ’.

To J. D. Hooker 31 October [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Oct 31 My dear Hooker You have been very very good & I have been very very troublesome. Unfortunately you addressed the Dionæa to Bromley, instead of Orpington & I sent to Orpington in vain for them & heard only to day that they were at Bromley. 2 I sent for them at once. They look rather pale after 3 days in darkness, but I think they will recover, if we can but get some more light. I wish I knew anything about their treatment, but we must feel our way & try slightly different methods on different plants. I doubt whether I can do all that I wish to do with them till next Spring & they can grow stronger & fully sensitive. Please tell me what you have paid for them that I may repay you.— I shall soon kill them by my experiments in all probability.— I thank you particularly for sending them, as I am just ready to observe some few points in their structure.—3 Ever yours | C. Darwin I have of course told Murray to send you my expression Book, but you will not have time to read it, & do not acknowledge it.—4 Your particulars about Ayrton Owen & Co (a nice Firm) amused me much.— 5 DAR 94: 237–8 1

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. D. Hooker, 29 October 1872.

474 2 3 4 5

October 1872

See letter from J. D. Hooker, 26 October 1872 and n. 2. CD’s home was three miles from the railway station at Orpington, but six miles from Bromley station. See letter to J. D. Hooker, 24 October [1872] and n. 4. CD refers to John Murray. Hooker’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). See letter from J. D. Hooker, 29 October 1872 and nn. 4 and 5. CD refers to Acton Smee Ayrton and Richard Owen.

From John Scott to J. D. Hooker1 31 October 1872 Roy. Bot. Gardens 31st. Oct. 1872 Dear Sir, I thank you much for your kind letter of the 8th. ult. It has always been my wish to refund the sum Mr. Darwin so kindly gave me to enable me to come to India. He indeed very kindly told me that he wished me to regard it as a gift. 2 I could not think of doing this, and I only hope I may soon be able to remit the full amount to you. I really know not what to say in reply to your suggestions regarding the disposal of the money seeing that Mr. Darwin would have you dispose of it again all and wholly to my advantage and that in a way which had my means afforded I should have very heartily been at the necessary expense. As it is these I have had to forgo and now as Mr. Darwin and yourself will it I can only say that I should feel very gratefully indebted by your proposing me as a fellow of the Linn. Soc ty.3 For the rest I should indeed be very pleased to hear that some other should similarly share with me M r. Darwins bounty. You have no doubt those under you who need such gifts more than I now do and who are more worthy of such. I make this suggestion because you have asked me in Mr. Darwins name to mention any other modes in which I would wish the amount disposed in the interests of Science. I shall indeed be very glad to hear that Mr. Darwin will assent to this. In the meantime I can but ill express my deep sense of gratefulness to Mr. Darwin and yourself. I am | Dear Sir | Yours truly| John Scott Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (DC Vol. 156, Indian letters, Calcutta Botanic Garden II 1860–1900, f. 1087) 1 2 3

Hooker probably enclosed this letter in a letter to CD which has not been found; see the letter to J. D. Hooker, 3 [December 1872]. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to John Scott, 1 November 1871, and this volume, enclosure to letter from J. D. Hooker, 29 August 1872 and n. 6. Scott was nominated as a fellow of the Linnean Society on 5 December 1872 and elected on 20 February 1873 (Proceedings of the Linnean Society of London (1872–3): v).

To George King November 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. November | 1872

Dear Sir I am very much obliged for your letter, which has interested me much. I intend

November 1872

475

to put together my notes this winter or next summer, so that I fear any future observations in India would be too late.—1 As far as I know no one has ever attended in any way the worm-castings except myself; and I did not even know before hearing from Mr. Scott, whether the worms thus acted in Tropical countries:—2 I hear from Professor Asa Gray that worms are as troublesome in lawns in the united states as with us.—3 I hope that your residence in south Europe will suit you & be pleasant. 4 Perhaps you will be so kind as just to observe & inform me—whether there are many worm-castings there. I now remember your having written to me about the abnormal tree;5 though I had forgotten it when I wrote to you, as I receive a large number of letters from persons with whom I am personally unacquainted. Pray believe me | My dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin Copy DAR 146: 13 1

2 3 4 5

King’s letter has not been found, but see the letter to George King, 28 October 1872. Earthworms was not published until 1881, and it contained observations by King on worm castings in both India and the south of France. See letters from John Scott, 22 March 1872 and 25 September 1872. See letter from Asa Gray, 2 February 1872. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 26 October 1872. King had sent CD specimens of Paritium tricuspis (now Talipariti hastatum) that produced flowers and leaves resembling those of another species (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to George King, 27 January [1871]).

To S. H. Haliburton 1 November [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. November 1st.

My dear Mrs. Haliburton I daresay you will be surprised to hear from me. My object in writing now is to say that I have just published a book on the “Expression of the Emotions in Man & Animals”; & it has occurred to me that you might possibly like to read some parts of it; & I can hardly think that this would have been the case with any of the books which I have already published.2 So I send by this post my present book. Although I have had no communication with you or the other members of your family for so long a time, no scenes in my whole life pass so frequently or so vividly before my mind, as those which relate to happy old days spent at Woodhouse. 3 I should very much like to hear a little news about yourself & the other members of your family, if you will take the trouble to write to me. Formerly I used to glean some news about you from my sisters.4 I have had many years of bad health & have not been able to visit anywhere; & now I feel very old. As long as I pass a perfectly uniform life, I am able to do some daily work in Natural History, which is still my passion, as it was in old days, when you used to laugh at me for collecting beetles with such zeal at Woodhouse. Excepting from my continued ill-health, which has excluded me from society, my life

476

November 1872

has been a very happy one;—the greatest drawback being that several of my children have inherited from me feeble health. I hope with all my heart that you retain, at least to a large extent, the famous “Owen constitution”.— With sincere feelings of gratitude & affection for all bearing the name of Owen, I venture to sign myself | Yours affectionately | Charles Darwin My wife desires me to send her very kind regards to you.— DAR 185: 22 1 2 3 4

The year is established by the reference to Expression, which was published in November 1872 (Freeman 1977). Haliburton was an old family friend of CD’s (see Correspondence vol. 1, s.v. Owen, Sarah Harriet Mostyn). Her name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). Woodhouse in Rednal (West Felton), in Shropshire, was the estate of Haliburton’s father, William Mostyn Owen Sr; on CD’s visits there before the Beagle voyage, see J. Browne 1995, pp. 111–16. Marianne Parker, Caroline Sarah Wedgwood, Susan Elizabeth Darwin, and Emily Catherine Langton. CD’s only surviving sister was Caroline.

To Amy Ruck [1 November 1872]

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. My dear Amy I have told Mr Murray to send by tomorrow’s Post (if possible) a copy of my book on Expression &c to you, as a little mark of my affectionate regard. 1 My dear Amy | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Some people like pasting an authors hand-writing at beginning so I send the same on next Page2 Postmark: NO 1 72 DAR 185: 48 1

2

John Murray was the publisher of Expression. Ruck was engaged to Francis Darwin (see letter to G. H. Darwin, 3 May [1872] and n. 5); she had also helped CD with his work on earthworms (see letters from Amy Ruck to Horace Darwin, [20 January 1872] and [1 February 1872]). Ruck’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). A section of the second page of the letter has been excised.

To Alphonse de Candolle 2 November [1872]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov. 2d

My dear Sir I am much obliged for your great kindness in having sent me your “Histoire des Sciences &c”.2 From what I see of the contents I look forward with real eagerness to read it; but I shall not be able to begin for a week or two. I have just published a small book on Expression, which I did not suppose you would care to see; but from the nature of your recent studies, parts may possibly interest you, so I have told my Publisher to send you a copy.3

November 1872

477

My health keeps very weak & I dread the exertion of grappling with the fearful subject of variation; so I am now employed in working up some observations in Botanical physiology made twelve years ago, which I intend publishing with some other new matter & some of my old papers on Climbing Plants, Dimorphism &c in a volume.—4 With cordial thanks & sincere respect, Pray | believe me | Yours very faithfully | Charles Darwin Archives de la famille de Candolle 1 2 3 4

The year is established by the reference to Expression, which was published in November 1872 (Freeman 1977). CD refers to A. de Candolle 1873; there is an annotated copy in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 153). Candolle’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). CD’s publisher was John Murray. In the introduction to Variation, CD had written that he planned future works on variation in nature and on the difficulties opposed to the theory of natural selection. His next book, after Descent and Expression, was Insectivorous plants. CD had begun work on the insectivorous genera Drosera and Dionaea in 1860 (see Correspondence vol. 8). CD’s papers ‘Dimorphic condition in Primula’, ‘Two forms in species of Linum’, ‘Three forms of Lythrum salicaria’, ‘Illegitimate offspring of dimorphic and trimorphic plants’, and ‘Specific difference in Primula’, were republished with corrections in Forms of flowers. A second edition of Climbing plants was published in 1875.

From S. H. Haliburton 3 November [1872]1 Bridge House | Richmond | S. W. Novr 3d. My dear Charles Darwin If I was to try & express to you, the extreme pleasure your letter had given me, to say nothing of the Book that accompanied it, I might be accused of flattery, or “soft Sawder”—2 Still, I may, (& I will) with truth declare that few letters, & few gifts have afforded me the gratification of yours yesterday— To know that I was still remembered by you, after such a lapse of years, is in itself a satisfaction That remembrance has indeed been reciprocal, & often & often have I lamented that I never had a chance of seeing you— I have made enquiries from various friends of your’s, & have always been told, that even the excitement of meeting an old friend, was usually more than you could bear— Spite of this, I will still indulge the hope of once more shaking hands with one of the best & most valued friends of my youth— How many sad changes have befallen us both, since we met, & how many of those we most loved, have been taken from us,—to me, especially Life is but a shadow, a remembrance, of happy bygone days— I have, like you, a most vivid remembrance of the bright old Woodhouse times, in which you stand first & foremost3 I can recall the Beetle, & the Fungus hunting, & above all, the glee with which “Charles Darwin” used to be descried, cantering up to the house, it being a received opinion, that any frowns of the poor governor 4 would

478

November 1872

be at once dispelled, you being always the most influential favourite— I have now in my possession a letter you wrote to me from “Terra del Fuego”, at my particular request, & I can often laugh at your boyish assertion, that the highest pitch of your ambition would be to be favourably alluded to, in Eddowe’s Journal!— 5 I think that ambition has been attained, & something more— I live a very quiet, solitary life, only associating with a few old, & kind friends, my house is pretty enough, actually on Richmond Bridge, with small garden sloping down to the River— My old passion for Animals still continues, but alas, I have no room for Poultry here, I have tried Pigeons, but they & the Cats were incompatible, so my live stock is now reduced to two tiny Maltese dogs, two very large persian Cats, & an old Cockatoo that I have had since 1848— I am certain your book will very much interest & amuse me— When one lives as I do, alone with Animals, their habits & manners become doubly interesting & familiar— My health is but indifferent, I fancy there is something amiss with my heart & the famed “Owen Constitution” is not what it was, in days of Yore. Time, & Sorrow, have much tried me— You ask after the Family, poor Fanny, as you perhaps know, became a Widow 6 months ago, & now lives in London, with two unmarried daughters— 6 Caroline Lister is settled in Yorkshire, Sobie lives alone at Cirencester, Arthur now reigns at poor old Woodhouse, Francis lives on his small property near Overton, & Charles is Chief Constable of Oxfordshire,7 with a Wife & 5 Children— Of your Children, I have from time to time heard, that many of them inherit the Family talents, & I think you have one Daughter married,8 if not more— When Summer returns, if we live till then, may I look forward to our meeting somehow & somewhere, I often go to London, & would meet you anywhere you might appoint though I must not run the risk of affecting your health— Once more, thanking you from my heart, for the pleasure you have given me, believe me, always, most truly & affectionately Yours | S. H. Haliburton Why did you address me so formally?— DAR 166: 85 1 2 3 4 5

6

7

8

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to S. H. Haliburton, 1 November [1872]. CD had sent Haliburton a copy of Expression (see letter to S. H. Haliburton, 1 November [1872]). See letter to S. H. Haliburton, 1 November [1872] and n. 3. William Mostyn Owen Sr, Haliburton’s father. The letter has not been found; Haliburton probably made the request before CD left on the Beagle voyage (see Correspondence vol. 1, letter from Sarah Williams, 26[–31] August 1832; Williams was Haliburton’s first married name). Eddowes’s Journal was a weekly regional newspaper (North 1997, s.v. Salopian Journal and Courier of Wales). Fanny Myddelton Biddulph was Haliburton’s sister and an intimate correspondent of CD’s before the Beagle voyage; her husband, Robert Myddelton Biddulph, died in 1872. Her unmarried daughters were Fanny Charlotte and Alice Myddelton Biddulph. Caroline Lister and Sobieski Mostyn Owen were Haliburton’s sisters. Arthur Mostyn Owen, Haliburton’s brother, was the eldest surviving son of William Mostyn Owen Sr, and had inherited the family property at Woodhouse. Haliburton also refers to Francis and Charles Mostyn Owen. Henrietta Emma Darwin married Richard Buckley Litchfield in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19).

November 1872

479

From L. H. Jeitteles 3 November 1872 Salzburg (Austrian Empire), 3. November 1872. Sir! A long space of time has elapsed, since I had the last time the honor to send you a scientific paper. Sorrowful years, years full of adversity have passed over me after my publication in 1867 at St. Pölten on Myoxus dryas and other little mammalia of Austria.1 Notwithstanding I have not quite lost the joy of investigating zoological objects, and particularly the prehistoric antiquities of Olmütz in Moravia, discovered by me in 1864, formed incessantly the theme of my studies. In 1869 and 1870 I have been with all the found objects during more than eight months in the Switzerland, of which six months were passed at Basel in the nearness of Prof. Rütimeyer, and in 1871 I published the first part of a little preliminary labour on Olmütz in the “Mittheilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien”, the second half of which I have the honor to present you now. Of the first part, containing a short description of the implements of stone and bone, the pottery etc, I have got only a very little number of copies; I do not know, whether I have taken occasion to send you a copy or not.2 I may hope, that the second prevailingly zoological half, although not at all free from errors and great imperfections, as I feel it the best myself, will notwithstanding not be quite unworthy of a fugitive revision by yourself. The dates on the cock, the daim, the rabbit and perhaps also on the horse are, as I think, partially new. 3 And as for the dog, I believe that the descendence of the Canis palustris of the stone-time from the little Shacal, the Sacalius of Ham. Smith, of Africa, the total difference of the dog of the bronze-age from the dog of the earlier period (named by me Canis matris optimæ in honor to my dear mother buried at Olmütz) and the great affinity of this dog of the bronze-period with the Canis latrans Say of North-America are not ill prooved.4 Other discussions are, it is true, more hypothetical and request still more materials of comparative objects. Begging a kind reception of this labour and an indulgent judgment, I have the honor to be | your | most obedient | L. H. Jeitteles. Pfarrgasse 229. DAR 184: 7 1 2

3 4

There is an annotated copy of Jeitteles 1867 in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL, as well as two earlier papers by him. Myoxus dryas (now Dryomys nitedula) is the forest dormouse. There is an annotated copy of the second part of Jeitteles 1871–2 in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection– CUL. Ludwig Rütimeyer was professor of zoology and comparative anatomy at the University of Basel. The town of Olmütz, in Moravia (an Austrian crown land between 1849 and 1918), is now Olomouc, in the Czech Republic (Columbia gazetteer of the world). CD cited Jeitteles’s discoveries of remains of fowl associated with extinct animals and prehistoric remains in Variation 2d ed. 1: 258 and n. 33. Daim: fallow deer, Cervus dama. Canis palustris: i.e. Canis familiaris palustris. Shacal: i.e. Schakal (German); jackal. Charles Hamilton Smith, in his Natural history of dogs (C. H. Smith 1839–40, 1: 206–21), discussed jackals under the genus

480

November 1872

name Sacalius; other authorities considered them a member of the genus Canis, as do present-day authorities. Canis matris optimae: literally, dog of the best mother (Latin). CD referred to Jeitteles’s discussion of dogs in Variation 2d ed. 1: 15 n. 1. Canis latrans: coyote.

From J. S. Craig 4 November 1872

University of Aberdeen 4th. November 1872

Sir I am commissioned by a number of the students of this University who are desirous of nominating you as Lord Rector, to enquire whether the state of your health, as currently reported, is such as to prevent your coming forward as a candidate for that office.1 I am | Sir | your obedient servant | John S Craig Charles Darwin Esqr. DAR 96: 112 1

The lord rector of the University of Aberdeen is the students’ representative and chairman of the University Court; the rector is elected by the students and serves a three-year term. In 1872, Thomas Henry Huxley replaced Mountstuart Elphinstone Grant Duff as rector (ODNB).

From Auguste Houzeau de Lehaie1 4 November 1872 Hyon 4 novembre | 1872 Monsieur, J’ai bien reçu hier un exemplaire de votre nouvel ouvrage “Expression of the Emotions” Je l’adresserai à mon frère par la prochaine malle des Indes occidentales le 16 de ce mois.2 Je n’ai pu m’empecher d’en commencer immediatement la lecture. Mon opinion je le sais n’a que bien peu de valeur ce n’est donc qu’avec une extrème reserve que j’ose exprimer toute l’admiration que ces nouvelles recherches me font éprouver. J’ai été absent pendant quelques semaines ce qui m’avait empeché de repondre à votre lettre du 14 Septembre3 Je suis vraiment honteux de toute la peine qu’une erreur d’employé vous donne. Si vous avez encore le dernier exemplaire des “Facultés des Animaux”, qui vous a été envoyé Je vous prierais de vouloir bien le faire adresser à Sir John Lubbock; J’ai des raisons de croire que l’exemplaire qui lui était destiné vous a ete adressé par erreur. En vous priant d’excuser la peine que je vous donne, veuillez agréer Monsieur l’assurance de ma respectueuse consideration | C A Houzeau de Lehaie DAR 166: 274 1

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I.

November 1872 2

3

481

Jean-Charles Houzeau’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). He was Auguste’s brother, and lived on Jamaica at this time. CD had been sent a copy of Jean-Charles’s book on the mental faculties of animals (Houzeau 1872); see letter to Chauncey Wright, 6 September [1872]; see also letter to A. R. Wallace, 20 October [1872]. The letter has not been found. Evidently CD had been sent two copies of Houzeau 1872 (see n. 2, above).

From M. T. Masters 4 November 1872 Gardeners’ Chronicle | & Agricultural Gazette Office, | 41, Wellington Street, Strand, W.C. November 4 1872 My dear Sir/ I am much obliged to you for so kindly forwarding me the abnormal pear w h. is interesting as showing the true morphological nature of the fruit of the Pear— 1 The condition is relatively not very uncommon and is sometimes much more marked than that you sent. As I am still collecting morphological memoranda normal or abnormal I am glad to have any opportunity of seeing anything that may at all bear on the subject of my researches. If it be uninstructive the fault is in my obtuseness if it be commonplace it at least gives one a juster idea of the relative frequency of occurrence. —Referring to the paper you mention of Mr Bert’s I regret very much that I cannot help you.—2 My attention, if I recollect rightly, was drawn to it by the Editor of Pop. Science Review3 —and I read the memoir in the Library of the College of Surgeons I think the Transcs. in question are in the Linnean Soc. Library— if not I shall be pleased to make an abstract in Coll of Surgeons for you if you do not tie me down to time faithfully yrs. | Maxwell. T. Masters. What do you think of Dr. Denny’s notion as to the superior transmitting power of the | among plants—4 Wiegmann & others say the reverse—5 I presume it all depends on circumstances DAR 171: 83 1 2

3 4 5

No letter from CD to Masters on this subject has been found. Masters discussed malformations of pears in his Vegetable teratology (Masters 1869). Masters probably refers to the French physiologist Paul Bert. The paper that CD asked about may have been one on the movements of Mimosa first published in the Mémoires de la Société des sciences physiques et naturelles de Bordeaux and republished in part in Comptes rendus hebdomadaires de l’Academie des sciences de Paris and in full in Journal de l’anatomie et de la physiologie (Bert 1867–72). CD later cited a remark by Bert in this paper, without giving a bibliographic source (Climbing plants 2d ed., p. 180; see Bert 1867–72, p. 551). The editor of the Popular Science Review was Henry Lawson. See letter to John Denny, 9 July 1872 and n. 2. Arend Friedrich Wiegmann argued that hybrids always resembled their parents and generally the mother more than the father (Wiegmann 1828, p. 22).

482

November 1872

From W. W. Reade 5 November 1872

13 Alfred Place | Bedford Square Nov. 5. 72

My dear Sir I am very much obliged to you for sending me a copy of the new book & of mentioning my name in it, which I scarcely deserved.1 I have read hastily through it as I must postpone my study of it till I have got out of Africa which I hope will be by Christmas.2 I venture to offer a remark or two, merely observing on the book as a whole that it has quite taken me by surprise. I had no idea that so much could have been done with the subject even by you. I do not know whether you have noticed that cats often raise the forepaw like a pointer—3 As a singular exception to a rule I knew a young cat that used to like to paddle its feet in water—4 I have known a woman gnash her teeth when excited (sexually).5 Query— are not the expressions produced by intense physical pleasure much like those produced by pain?— Human beings sometimes close their eyes from pleasure: so do cats when caressed.— Puppies (p. 44) are fond of eating dung— 6 You ought I think to mention that kissing is unknown throughout West Africa. It is probably the largest non-kissing region on the globe.7 I have seen negroes shrug their shoulders—8 item in a little girl the open mouth as a sign of fright & horror—9 However I do not think any one will deny your theory respecting the unity of expression in the dift. races. I had the Post sent to you as it properly mentioned my work as resulting from yours.10 I wish it had been more worthy of its parent—& more like. It has not done me any harm in a market sense for I have disposed of my African travels 11 on excellent terms to Smith & Elder without showing a specimen. It will go to press in January. I told them there wd. be nothing theological in it, but some matter proDarwinian, and received the reply Oh we are all for Darwin here. The Daily News & Telegraph review your book this morning as I presume you will have heard. 12 I think I mentioned that Huxley is to do it for the Pall Mall Gazette.13 I shall mention in my travels the general impression made upon my mind that facial expression is the same among the negroes as with us.14 If it had not been so I shd. have noticed it— I remember by the way a negro paddling & giving a grin at every stroke so that his teeth showed at a considerable distance in a very curious way. Please do not trouble to answer this. | I remain | Yours very truly | Winwood Reade DAR 176: 65 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 I am . . . by you. 1.6] crossed blue crayon 2.1 I do . . . pointer— 2.2] ‘Dogs raise & keep raised their legs—Polly’ 15 blue crayon 2.2 As . . . pain?— 2.5] crossed blue crayon 2.5 Human . . . caressed.— 2.6] enclosed in square brackets blue crayon 2.7 kissing] ‘Kissing’ added blue crayon

November 1872

483

2.7 Africa.] ‘Africa’ added blue crayon 2.8 I have . . . fright 2.9] underl blue crayon 2.9 item] ‘I’ over ‘i’ blue crayon 3.1 I had . . . yours. 3.2] ‘Saturday R.’16 added blue crayon 3.1 I had . . . this. 5.1] crossed blue crayon 3.3 I have . . . specimen. 3.4] scored blue crayon 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11 12 13 14 15 16

Reade’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V); CD mentioned Reade’s assistance with information about Africans on page 21. Reade was working on his African sketch-book (Reade 1873). See Expression, p. 43. See Expression, p. 46. CD associated gnashing of the teeth with anger and pain (Expression, pp. 9, 70, 113). In Expression, p. 44, CD mentioned that dogs rolled in carrion but did not eat it. See Expression, p. 216, and Reade 1873, 1: 41–3. Reade was cited for his information on kissing in Expression 2d ed., p. 226 n. 27. In Expression, p. 269, CD reported that two observers in Africa had not observed shrugging in Africans. Reade was cited for his information on shrugging in Expression 2d ed., p. 282 n. 23. CD discussed expressions of fear and horror in Expression, pp. 289–307. Reade’s Martyrdom of man (Reade 1872) was reviewed in the Morning Post, 16 October 1872, p. 3. The reviewer noted that Reade was a ‘devoted and confessed follower of Mr. Darwin’, and called his book, ‘the application of Darwin’s philosophy to human history’. African sketch-book (Reade 1873). Expression was reviewed in the Daily News, 5 November 1872, p. 2, and the Daily Telegraph, 5 November 1872, p. 5. There are copies in DAR 226.2: 122, 124–5. The author of the review of Expression in the Pall Mall Gazette, 23 April 1873, pp. 11–12, has not been identified. See also letter from W. W. Reade, 14 October [1872]. Reade refers to Thomas Henry Huxley. In Reade 1873, Reade did not discuss expression in general, but did mention the similarity of the expression of fear in one particular instance (Reade 1873, 2: 111). Polly, a rough-haired fox-terrier, had been Henrietta Emma Litchfield’s dog, and became CD’s when Henrietta married (Atkins 1974, pp. 78–9). Martyrdom of man was reviewed in the Saturday Review, 12 October 1872, pp. 474–5.

To S. H. Haliburton 6 November [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov. 6th. My dear Sarah I have been very much pleased by your letter, which I must call charming.— 2 I hardly ventured to think that you would have retained a friendly recollection of me for so many years. Yet I ought to have felt assured that you would remain as warmhearted & as true-hearted as you have ever been from my earliest recollection.— I know well how many grievous sorrows you have gone through; but I am very sorry to hear that your health is not good. In the Spring or summer, when the weather is better, if you can summon up courage to pay us a visit here, both my wife, as she desires me to say, & myself would be truly glad to see you, & I know that you would not care about being rather dull here. It would be a real pleasure to me to see you.— Thank you much for telling about your family,—much of which was new to me. How

484

November 1872

kind you all were to me as a boy, & you especially, & how much happiness I owe to you.3 Believe me | Your affectionate & obliged Friend | Charles Darwin Perhaps you would like to see a Photograph of me now that I am old.— DAR 185: 23 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from S. H. Haliburton, 3 November [1872]. See letter from S. H. Haliburton, 3 November [1872]. See letter to S. H. Haliburton, 1 November [1872] and n. 3.

From Henry Holland 6 November [1872]1

72 Brook Street Nov 6th

My dear Charles, Having now reached the last Chapter of the volume, for which I am indebted to your kindness, I may fairly speak of the interest with which I have read it throughout. 2 It perhaps adds somewhat less than I expected, to the evidence of the derivation of Man; but this you allude to yourself in the last sentence of the volume; 3 & I am much disposed to think with you, that the confirmation was hardly needed. Some detached comments I may make, when I have the pleasure of seeing you. I have myself had a somewhat busy autumn of travel; going round the North Cape,4 under the light of the midnight sun, & 200 miles beyond, to the borders of Russian Lapland—reaching 71"30 of Latitude. Since that time I have been to Lord Rosse’s great Reflectors in Ireland,5 and still-more lately, have passed three weeks in the delicious Island of Madeira, warming myself there after the Arctic Seas: This is tolerable work for a gentleman in his 85th year. Let me see you when you come to Town. Ever my dear Charles, your’s | affec ly | H Holland DAR 166: 254 1 2

3

The year is established by Holland’s reference to his age; his 84th birthday was on 27 October 1872. Holland had received a copy of Descent in February 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Henry Holland, 19 February [1871]). Holland’s name also appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V); it is possible that Holland refers to Expression, although the last sentence of Expression fits his description less well than the last sentence of Descent (see n. 3, below). Descent 2: 405: I have given the evidence to the best of my ability; and we must acknowledge, as it seems to me, that man with all his noble qualities, with sympathy which feels for the most debased, with benevolence which extends not only to other men but to the humblest living creature, with his god-like intellect which has penetrated into the movements and constitution of the solar system—with all these exalted powers—Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin.

4

The North Cape is on an island off the north coast of Norway.

November 1872 5

485

The late William Parsons, third earl of Rosse, had built two large reflecting telescopes on his estate in Ireland. The title and estate were inherited by his son Laurence, who was also an astronomer.

From Henry Maudsley 6 November 1872

9, Hanover Square, W. November 6th. 1872

My dear Sir— I have to thank you most sincerely for kindly sending me your just published work, which I have read with very great pleasure and profit. 1 To me the facts, and arguments brought forward open up quite new regions for reflection, and I shall certainly owe a very large intellectual obligation to the book— I have ventured to send you by post a copy of a Journal containing an address which I had occasion to deliver at a medical meeting. It is extremely sketchy, but as it touches briefly on a question which I had the pleasure of speaking with you upon, I thought you might not be unwilling to glance through it— 2 Believe me, | With greatest esteem, | Yours faithfully | H Maudsley DAR 171: 94 1 2

Maudsley’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). Maudsley’s address on medical psychology, delivered at the opening of the psychological section at the annual meeting of the British Medical Association, was printed in the British Medical Journal, 10 August 1871, pp. 163–7. Maudsley reprinted it under the title ‘Conscience and organisation’ in the second edition of his Body and mind (Maudsley 1873). In this paper, Maudsley argued that the moral sense (or its lack) were inherited, and that it was not to be exempted from physiological research on the brain and mind. Maudsley visited Down on 17 April 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)).

From John Murray 6 November [1872]1

50, Albemarle S.t | W. Nov 6

My Dear Sir I feel convinced that such a reception is awaiting your new book, that the number we have printed will not suffice—& that I must throw off at once 2000 more copies.2 It is of great consequence to the interests of the work that the demand shd be met without delay. I write therefore to beg you to send your corrections at once, to Clowes3 —or at least that you wd send him all those sheets wch do not require correction My sale—as you probably know is fixed for Friday & your Book is one of the most attractive dishes in my Literary Banquet—4 I am | My Dear Sir | Yours very sincerely | John Murray Chas Darwin Esq DAR 171: 428 1

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to John Murray, 7 November [1872].

486 2

3 4

November 1872

Murray had originally planned to print 5000 copies of Expression (see letter from R. F. Cooke to G. H. Darwin, 13 August 1872). According to Freeman 1977, 7000 were published on 26 November 1872, but two different issues of the text are detectable. William Clowes & Sons were Murray’s printers. Murray’s trade sale took place on Friday 8 November 1872 (letter from R. F. Cooke, 11 October 1872). On publishers’ customary November ‘sale dinners’, see Murray 1908–9, p. 540.

To J. S. Craig 7 November 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. November 7th. 1872

Sir I request that you will be so good as to inform the students to whom you refer, how truly I feel the great honour which they have conferred on me, by wishing to nominate me as Lord Rector of your University. But I am sorry to say that the state of my health renders it quite impossible for me to accept this honour. 1 With my sincere thanks to your fellow-students & to yourself, I remain | Sir | Your obliged & obedient servant | Charles Darwin University of Aberdeen Library 1

See letter from J. S. Craig, 4 November 1872.

From Francis Galton 7 November 1872

42 Rutland Gate Nov 7/72

My dear Darwin Accept very best thanks for ‘Expression’ which I have been devouring 1 You will, I am sure, receive numberless letters of hints corroborative of the points you make,— even I could & will send some—2 But I write especially to say that if you care to send any more printed circulars of queries I can dispose of three this very month most excellently for you One by an expedition up the Congo, another by a man from the Zanzibar side into Africa and a third by a very intelligent German (English speaking) head of a missionary college, on his way to my old county in Africa. 3 Would you have a short note sent me,—pray do not write yourself—about the rabbits.4 Ever sincerely yours | Francis Galton PS. 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.5 What a curious custom hand-shaking is & how rapidly savages take to it, in their intercourse with Europeans. I have a pamphlet of yours to send back DAR 105: A67–8

November 1872 1 2 3

4 5

487

Galton’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). No further comments by Galton on Expression have been found. Two expeditions set out to support David Livingstone’s expedition in Africa in late 1872; the Livingstone Congo expedition led by William John Grandy and the Zanzibar expedition led by Verney Lovett Cameron (Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society 17 (1872–3): 12–14; meeting of 11 November 1872). Galton had travelled in south-west Africa in 1850 (ODNB). CD was looking after rabbits on which Galton had made transfusion experiments (see letters to Francis Galton, 23 January [1872] and 8 November [1872]). In Expression, pp. 158–62, CD recounted the view of Charles Bell and Frans Cornelis Donders that in weeping the orbicularis muscle around the eye was contracted in order to protect the eye from the effects of increased blood pressure in the area.

To L. H. Jeitteles 7 November 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov. 7th 1872

Dear Sir I am much obliged for your very kind letter & present of your memoir, which I hope soon to read.1 The points to which you refer are of great interest to me; but I am sorry to say that I read German with much difficulty. I am grieved to hear that the latter years have been sorrowful & full of adversity.— As for myself, my health remains very feeble & my strength with advancing old age grows very small. With good wishes for your future happiness & with my respect, I remain | Dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin Knox College Seymour Library, Special Collections and Archives (Bookfellow Foundation Scrapbooks, p.47) 1

See letter from L. H. Jeitteles, 3 November 1872. The memoir was the second part of Jeitteles 1871–2; there is an annotated copy in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.

To John Murray 7 November [1872]

Nov 7th

I have by this same post sent off the few & trifling errata to Mr Clowes.—1 Have you given orders about the Heliotypes?2 I am very glad of your news.—3 Let me hear sale of all my books,— In Haste | C. Darwin ApcS Postmark: NO 7 | 72 Private collection 1

2 3

Murray had asked for corrections to Expression (letter from John Murray, 6 November [1872]). William Clowes was Murray’s printer. See letters from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and n. 6, 11 October 1872 and n. 1, and 24 October 1872 and nn. 4, 7, and 10. The orders referred to have not been identified. The photographs in Expression were reproduced using the heliotype process. See letter from John Murray, 6 November [1872].

488

November 1872

To W. W. Baxter? 8 November [1872–4]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov. 8th

Dear Sir Please to send me in a Box a vulcanised Indian-Rubber Enema of medium size.— The one which I had from you & which suits me, is 4 41 inches in height from the base to the upper part of the wooden rim which receives the bone nozzle.—2 Dear Sir | yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin American Philosophical Society (410) 1 2

The year range is established by the printed stationery, with the address in the centre; CD used this type of notepaper from January 1872 until November 1874. Baxter was CD’s chemist. On CD’s health, see J. Browne 1998.

From A. J. Cupples to Emma Darwin 8 November [1872]1 The Cottage | Guard Bridge | Fifeshire 8th Nov My dear Mrs. Darwin Please thank Mr Darwin for sending me his book, it was very kind indeed of him. 2 I have not been able to do more than look at the plates, because Mr Cupples 3 walked it off, and a minister here has got the promise of it after him, all without my leave in the matter. I have written to Aberfoyle to make inquiries about the dog who howls to the music4 Miss Glen5 is a person to be relied upon, and I have given her instructions, and told her to be very particular. I cannot say for certain about the puckering up of the eyes or face my impression is it simply winked its eye lids very fast, as one would do if hammering was going on, and that the eyes ran with or, were filled with moisture like a person crying, but Miss Glen will be able to tell us. After your letter came I remembered a young lady having told me their dog howled when particular tunes were played so I went off to see it, but after walking three miles I was told it was a dog they once had and that it was in Campbelton. 6 She told me their ministers wife said their dog howled so off we set to get the dog, for in this case the minister had no piano, but we were told she ment her dog at home, her mothers dog in fact at Stirling.7 Then the minister who is a great wag began to tell me about a wonderful dog in St Andrews who used to pull the bell, and not only howl to music but played the piano and howled to his own playing. So I set off another day to find this wonderful animal. I found all he said about the dog was true, but he had been the property of Proffr Macgill and the gentleman is dead8 and the dog is away And now the Minister keeps teazing me about my novel hunt never failing to ask every time I meet him “Well have you caught the howling dog yet” He has told several of the gentlemen in the neighbourhood too, who say “Oh by the way I have heard of a wonderful dog who howls, but he’s in Sky.”9 or some eaqually far away place. However though it has been a great amusement to them, it has been very useful to me for the stories I have heard about dogs, is something extraordinary throwing my poor dog quite into the shade, and I shall be able to tell my friends in Edinburgh

November 1872

489

who doubt my story. We have both been ill with severe coughs but are getting better now the season is very trying and it does not appear to be getting any better either. With my kind regards to Mr Darwin and many thanks once more | I remain | Yours very truly | A J Cupples. Please remember me to your daughter I have a feeling she is married now, so I cannot say Miss Darwin10 DAR 161: 281 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The year is established by the reference to Expression, which was published in November 1872 (Freeman 1977). Cupples’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). George Cupples. No other mention of the dog has been found; there is no other letter from A. J. Cupples to Emma Darwin in the Darwin Archive–CUL. CD mentioned dogs’ howling to music in Descent 2: 333. Catherine Glen lived in Aberfoyle, a village in Stirling, Scotland. Campbeltown is on the peninsula of Kintyre, western Scotland. Stirling is presumably here the Scottish town, not the county. John McGill, professor of Hebrew, died in 1871. Skye is an island in the Hebrides. Henrietta Emma Litchfield was married in August 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19).

To Francis Galton 8 November [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov. 8th My dear Galton I was going in a day or two to have written to you about the Rabbits. 2 Those which you saw when here (the last lot) & which were then in the transition mottled condition have now all got their perfect coats, & are perfectly true in character.— 3 They are now ready to breed, or soon will be; do you want one more generation? If the next one is as true as all the others, it seems to me quite superfluous to go on trying.— Many thanks for your note & 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, & cannot explain it. As far as my memory serves, they do not do so whilst roaring, in which case compression wd. be of use. I think it is at the close of a 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 & crying.— 4 I am rejoiced that your sister is recovering so well: when you next see pray give her my very kindest remembrances.—5 My dear Galton | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin What a tremendous stir-up your excellent article on prayer has made in England & America.6 UCL Library Services, Special Collections (Galton 39 E)

490 1 2 3 4 5 6

November 1872

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Francis Galton, 7 November 1872. CD was looking after rabbits on which Galton had made transfusion experiments (see letter to Francis Galton, 23 January [1872] and n. 2). That is, the baby rabbits had not acquired the colours of the rabbits whose blood their parents had been transfused with. See letter from Francis Galton, 7 November 1872 and n. 5. Galton had not mentioned his sister Emma Sophia Galton in his letter of 7 November 1872, but see the letter from Francis Galton, 15 November 1872. In June, John Tyndall had published in the Contemporary Review an anonymous letter proposing a test for the power of prayer: to arrange special prayers for one particular ward of a hospital and assess the results over three to five years. Galton published an article in the Fortnightly Review (Galton 1872b) suggesting that the test was unnecessary, since the inefficacy of prayer could be proved by existing statistics. Galton’s article was the subject of correspondence in the Spectator between 3 August and 7 September 1872. Tyndall’s and Galton’s articles were discussed in the Independent (a periodical published in New York), 29 August 1872, p. 4, and 26 September 1872, p. 1, and in Harper’s Bazaar, 14 September 1872, p. 610.

From S. H. Haliburton 8 November [1872]1

Bridge House | Richmond | S. W. Novr 8th.—

My dear Charles Darwin Indeed, (at the risk of being thought troublesome) I must thank you most sincerely for your kind & flattering letter, & also for the Photograph, which certainly recalls to me the Charles Darwin of olden days, I prize it extremely, & have affixed it in the title page of your Book—2 And if we are spared to see another Summer’s Sunshine, I shall look forward to visiting you,3 which will indeed be a real pleasure to | Your’s very affectionately | S. H. Haliburton P S. | Your book interests me so much, there are many subjects in it, that I should like to talk to you about— DAR 166: 86 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to S. H. Haliburton, 6 November [1872]. CD sent a photograph of himself with his letter of 6 November [1872]; he had sent a copy of Expression with his letter of 1 November [1872]. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Haliburton lunched at Down on 24 April 1874.

From J. D. Hooker 8 November 1872

Kew Novr 8th /72

Dear Darwin I am asked to take shares in the Artizans &c Dwelling Cy, Limited—, in which you are a shareholder.1 I do not care about the profits, but if it is really a project for public good, I would be glad to have my name associated with it.

November 1872

491

I am trying hard to bear myself after my favorite Motto of “Servate animam aequam”.2 I have heard of Owen’s last, but have not looked at it, though Mr Bennett, the subeditor of “Nature” came to me last night, & put a copy in my hands, expressing his profound regret that the Editor had admitted such an article into the paper, & his assurances that he was no party to it.3 I say I have not looked at it, because I have been for some time suffering from sleeplessness, palpitations & pain under the left clavicle—a return of old ailments that I thought I had got rid of for ever, many years ago.4 As it is, I suppose I must now answer Owen—which I am led to believe requires nothing but to show the falsity of his assertions. 5 Is it not strange that an officer in my position, should serve under a Govt., which (through its’ own Minister, Ayrton) hounds on a man (Owen) as to attack a subordinate official character & labors, such is literally the fact—6 I have not yet thanked you for your book, nor I regret to say have I opened it.— Harriette is deep in it— Berkely was also charmed with it.7 Please do not allude to my pains (corporal) in writing to me— they will all pass off I doubt not. I am otherwise robust. We had a long letter from Tyndall, read at the x. last night, he writes in great spirits & very picturesquely—delighted with the country, views & people.— 8 I hear that an American paper describing his Lecture says that “he speaks with a slight English accent”— I think this is charming—9 Ever yr affect | J. D. Hooker With regard to Dionæa, I would keep it cool—& damp—during the winter, that is if you do not want to examine it at once—if you do, give it very gentle heat, (green house) & cover it, with a bell glass with a hole in the top, allowing plenty of air to get under the glass & out of the top, & raise it close up to the glass of your green house. 10

DAR 103: 130–2 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 shares] cross in margin blue crayon 2.8 I suppose] cross in margin blue crayon 7.1 With . . . house. 7.4] ‘(Payment)’11 blue crayon

492 1

2 3

4 5 6

7

8

9

10 11

November 1872

CD became a shareholder in the Artizans, Labourers, and General Dwellings Company in 1871 (see letter from J. R. Martin, 27 March 1872 and n. 4). The company was founded in 1867 to build affordable housing for the working classes (Artizans’ & General Properties Company Ltd [1967], pp. 6–7). See letter from J. D. Hooker, 15 June 1872 and n. 6. Hooker refers to a letter by Richard Owen, headed ‘The national herbarium’, in Nature, 7 November 1872, pp. 5–7. Owen argued that staff at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, were neglecting the experimental work they should be doing because of their ‘low ambition’ of maintaining their own herbarium, rather than using one kept at the British Museum of Natural History. For more on the dispute between Owen and Hooker on the ideal location of the national herbarium, see the letter to J. D. Hooker, 27 October [1872] and nn. 3 and 4. Alfred William Bennett was the subeditor of Nature; the editor was Joseph Norman Lockyer. Hooker had suffered from rheumatic fever in 1839 and 1864 (Allan 1967, pp. 115, 209). Hooker replied in Nature, 21 November 1872, pp. 45–6. Acton Smee Ayrton, first commissioner of the office of works, under whose supervision came the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, had undermined Hooker’s authority at Kew (see letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872 and n. 1). Hooker’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). Harriet Anne Hooker was Hooker’s daughter; Miles Joseph Berkeley was a botanist and expert in fungi who had collaborated with Hooker on his publications. John Tyndall was lecturing on light in the United States in the winter of 1872 and 1873; his lectures were published in Tyndall 1873. Hooker and Tyndall were both members of the X Club, a dining club of scientific men founded in 1864 (see Barton 1998). The Boston Globe, 16 October 1872, p. 8, commented of Tyndall: ‘He has just a little of the English accent, which is forgotten after he is speaking a short time.’ Tyndall lived in Ireland until he was 22 (ODNB), and probably had an Irish accent, at least to English ears. Hooker had sent CD specimens of Dionaea muscipula (Venus fly trap) for his work on insectivorous plants (see letter to J. D. Hooker, 31 October [1872]). CD’s annotation is a note for his letter to Hooker of 9 November [1872].

From J. D. Hooker 8 November 1872

Kew Nov 8/72

P.S. Dear Darwin Oliver, Bentham, Bates & others, urge me not to answer Owen; on the grounds that I should feel such an attack to be beneath my notice— 1 I have written to Huxley2 for his advice, informing him that I have not read the article. Some think that “Nature” owes me an apology for inserting it considering the terms of the Treasury minutes, which calls me worthy of the gratitude of the country.—& more especially as ‘Nature” was the only paper, except the Athenæum, which never expound my cause in the fight with—Ayrton—abstaining altogether from an opinion,—or all but: & that hence if I insist on answering, it should not be in “Nature”.3 Incomplete4 DAR 103: 133–4 CD ANNOTATION 2.3 except . . . “Nature”. 2.6] ‘Published the Mem’ 5 blue crayon

November 1872 1 2 3

4 5

493

Hooker refers to Daniel Oliver, George Bentham, Henry Walter Bates, and Richard Owen. See the first letter from J. D. Hooker, 8 November 1872 and nn. 3 and 5. Thomas Henry Huxley. For a quotation from the relevant part of the Treasury minutes, see The Times, 30 July 1872, p. 5. A memorial in support of Hooker in his dispute with Acton Smee Ayrton (see letter from John Lubbock to W. E. Gladstone, 20 June 1872) was, however, reproduced in Nature, 11 July 1872, pp. 211–16. The signature of the letter has been excised. CD’s annotation is a note for his letter to Hooker of 9 November [1872].

From R. H. Blair 9 November 1872 St. Martin’s Rectory | Worcester Nov 9. ’72 My dear Sir, I have to thank you very much for the handsome work you have sent me. As I feel somewhat ashamed to have done so little to help your enquiries to a solution I should like to explain to you how it happened—whilst thanking you for courteously mentioning me notwithstanding my shortcomings. 1 When you asked me questions respecting the expression of the Blind, I replied that my ignorance of facial anatomy placed almost insuperable difficulties in my way. You then recommended me to read Sir Charles Bell’s work, which I accordingly did with great pleasure & interest.2 After that I prepared for you a careful account of various peculiarities of the Born-Blind, so far as expression is concerned. The most startling conclusion I came to, of all the rest was that Born-Blind have no command over the muscle corrugator-supercilii.3 I tested it in various ways. But alas! one evening in Evening-Chapel, I observed two youths, both born Blind, one about 14 the other over 20, decidedly frowning at the same moment, and I put my paper in the fire as worthless. I am sorry for it, for it contained a good deal that was true & perhaps curious. I am convinced now that the Born Blind, at least those that we have, cannot command that muscle. They use it however (that is one or two of them—two at least) involuntarily, and just when in deep thought. But whilst able to smile, or to look serious at the word of command, they can no more frown at command than I could move my ears.4 (I think I have seen one man or boy move his ears voluntarily) We have now several good cases for experimenting, and if it will interest you, I shall be glad when there is a little more chemical activity in the light to have photograms 5 taken of all the expressions I can get at. One Born Blind, aged about 20, with an enormous head & thick hair, turns ashy pale when in a scrape, & moves the skin of the forehead up & down quickly in thick wrinkles. He cannot & does not frown so far as I can make out. But in all cases the expression of the mouth is perfect and often very lively.

494

November 1872

If you still care for it I will feel much pleasure in dotting down observations. I did not expect your work out so soon, & was procrastinating through press of other work. I am studying yr valuable & masterly work carefully. yrs faithfully | R. H. Blair C. Darwin Esqre F.R.S. &c. DAR 160: 197 CD ANNOTATIONS 2.7 one . . . worthless. 2.10] scored blue crayon Top of letter: ‘Is all expression [illeg] then with the Blind’ red crayon 1

2

3 4 5

Blair’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V); CD had cited him for information on the expressions of the blind. Blair was principal of the Worcester College for the Blind Sons of Gentlemen. See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to R. H. Blair, [before 16 March 1871], and letters from R. H. Blair, 16 March 1871 and 11 July 1871. CD had recommended Bell’s Anatomy and philosophy of expression, the latest edition of which was the fifth (Bell 1865), although his letter has not been found. The corrugator supercilii muscles are muscles of the forehead that draw the eyebrows down; they are involved in frowning. This information was included in the second edition of Expression, p. 237 n. 6. The second edition was edited by Francis Darwin and published after CD’s death. The word photogram now refers to images made by placing objects directly on photographic paper and exposing them to light, but in the nineteenth century it was also used for images produced using a camera (OED).

To J. D. Hooker 9 November [1872] Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov. 9th My dear old Friend I feel much difficulty in deciding what to advise about answering Owen; & I very much doubt whether my advice on any such point is worth much. In the first place, Owen’s recent letter is so obscurely expressed that only a few persons will try to understand it (my wife failed to do so) & no one can fully understand it, without having the Blue Book at his elbow, which I have not.—.—1 Again all those, whose opinion you most value, know that Owen cannot in the least be relied on, when he gives a reference, or even when he quotes a passage, as he will alter it.— All this goes to show that an answer on your part is not necessary, & the less controversy the better in every case. On the other hand if you can briefly show that you have not intentionally or in an unjustifiable manner hurt the feelings of the officers of the B. Museum, I am inclined to think a brief answer would be adviseable. 2 You might commence by stating that you had already showed the falseness of many of his former assertions & that most of his present remarks were not worthy of an answer.— What rubbish about Welwitschia!3 I wish I knew the date of the Prodromus N. Hollandiæ.—4 I differ from your friends in thinking decidedly that if you answer it ought to be in “Nature”. It wd be beneath you to show that you were huffed at a paper; & Nature did publish

November 1872

495

the Memorial of the Scientific Men.—5 This is all that I can say, & it is hardly worth saying. I grieve deeply that you shd. thus be bothered by so odious a blackguard as Owen.—6 With respect to the “Artizan’s Dewellings Coy Limited,” I know nothing except from their own printed statements & the kind of men who have supported it.— 7 They make too much use by a great deal of the names of those who have subscribed; but the object seems to me excellent.— I have looked at it from the first as lost money as far investment is concerned.— Very many thanks about Dionæa.— My plants look sickly.— I have kept them too warm. I have, however, got some good out of them, & I must try & get at any price some older specimens next spring.— You have not yet told me what I owe you for the four plants.8 My dear old friend | Yours affectionately | Ch. Darwin Endorsement: ‘/72’ DAR 94: 239–42 1

2

3

4

5 6 7 8

See the two letters from J. D. Hooker, 8 November 1872. In his letter in Nature, 7 November 1872, pp. 5– 7, Richard Owen had referred to question 6661 of the Minutes of Evidence of the Royal Commission on Scientific Instruction and Hooker’s answer to it without saying what either the question or the answer were. In his reply to Owen in Nature, 21 November 1872, pp. 45–6, Hooker rejected Owen’s charge that his answer to question 6661 (see n. 1, above) had inflicted pain on fellow servants of the state (staff at the British Museum). He wrote that question 6661 was: ‘Has there been insufficient space in the British Museum for the enlargement of its herbaria, or has any other obstacle interfered?’, to which Hooker’s answer was: ‘With regard to the British Museum I do not think any person can answer that except the officers of the establishment. I do not think that the nature and extent of its botanical collections or their condition is well known except to its officers.’ In his letter to Nature (see n. 1, above), Owen had implied that the failure to cultivate Welwitschia mirabilis at Kew was due to inattention on the part of the staff. In his reply (see n. 2, above), Hooker pointed out that the plant material received at Kew was not viable. In his letter to Nature (see n. 1, above), Owen had mentioned the Prodromus floræ Novæ Hollandiæ et insulæ Van-Diemen (Introduction to the flora of Australia and Tasmania; Brown 1810) as an example of a scientific work not produced at Kew. Though commercially unsuccessful and never completed, the Prodromus was highly regarded by botanists (ODNB s.v. Brown, Robert (1773–1858)). See second letter from J. D. Hooker, 8 November 1872 and n. 3. CD himself had fallen out with Owen following Owen’s anonymous review of Origin ([Owen] 1860; see Correspondence vols. 8 and 9). See first letter from J. D. Hooker, 8 November 1872 and n. 1. Hooker had sent CD some plants of Dionaea muscipula (Venus fly trap) for his work on insectivorous plants (see letter to J. D. Hooker, 31 October [1872]).

From John Murray 9 November 1872

50, Albemarle S.t | W. Nov 9/72

Dear Mr Darwin I write under pressure of much business, to let you know that the reception of your Expression by the Booksellers yesterday even exceeded my expectations— not

496

November 1872

less than 6000 have been taken1 I have not yet had time to ascertain the precise numbers.— The Printers are hard at work but I fear we cannot publish till the week after next Your other Works have done fairly well 2 The modest way in wch you introduced to me your new work on Expression a little misled me as to its probable reception— I had not made allowance for the immense popularity of its author— Long may it last & long may he be able to enjoy it is the hearty wish of his very faithful servt & | publisher | John Murray Before closing this I am enabled to send you a tolerably correct return of the Sale. To the 5267 of Expression must be added the demands for my Country agents & 150 copies sent out for Author & to Reviewers & Newspapers. Chas Darwin Esqr DAR 171: 429 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Academy’3 pencil 1 2 3

Murray’s ‘sale dinner’ took place on 8 November 1872 (see letter from John Murray, 6 November [1872] and n. 4). See letter to John Murray, 7 November [1872]. CD’s annotation is for his letter to Murray of 11 November 1872.

To W. W. Baxter? 10 November [1872–4]1 Down. Nov 10th Dear Sir I am sorry to cause you trouble, but I shd. greatly prefer an enema with shorter nozzle, viz 2 inches or 2 inches & 41 , measured from the top of the ivory collar to the extremity of the nozzle.— I find also I shd. like the whole enema a little larger, viz about 14 of an inch higher, but if you have none such, the size of the one returned would do.—2 Dear Sir | yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin American Philosophical Society (Getz 13774) 1 2

The date range and recipient are established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to W. W. Baxter?, 8 November [1872–4]. See letter to W. W. Baxter?, 8 November [1872–4]. On CD’s health, see J. Browne 1998.

From Federico Delpino1 10 November 1872 Napoli addì 10. 9bre 1872. Uomo illustre! Sul punto di partire per un viaggio di navigazione intorno al mondo sulla R. Pirocorvetta italiana Garibaldi, io mando un saluto al mio illustre predecessore. 2

November 1872

497

Non mai tanto come ora ho ragione di lamentare la scarsità della mia istruzione scientifica. Potessi avere soltanto la decima parte di quella posseduta dal chiaro autore del Journal of researches into the natural history and geology of the countries visited during the voyage of H.M.S. Beagle round the world! 3 Se Ella ha raccomandazioni e istruzioni a darmi, favorisca indirizzarle a Prof. Federico Delpino Genova per Chiavari. La mia famiglia curerà l’ulteriore ricapito. Io mi sono provveduto della opera succitata, e sarà la mia costante guida e maestra. | Suo devotissimo ammiratore | Fed. Delpino DAR 162: 150 1 2 3

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Owing to illness, Delpino had to leave the Garibaldi at Rio de Janeiro and return to Italy (Penzig 1905, p. 296). He alludes to CD’s circumnavigation of the globe on HMS Beagle (see Correspondence vol. 1). Journal of researches.

To J. V. Carus 11 November [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Novr 11th My dear Sir If the success (as far as sale is concerned, & very favourable newspaper criticisms) in England is any guide of success in Germany, it may cheer you in the tedious labour of Translation to hear that my book has been wonderfully successful. On last Friday, (the first day of its sale) 5267 copies were sold to the London booksellers alone.— 2 This will cause some delay in distributing copies to the public for M r. Murray had not enough copies of text or Plates ready.— Fortunately M r M. agreed with Printers to keep the type sets up.— Would it not be worth while for Mr Koch to do the same in Germany?3 The Heliotype Coy. can print off very quickly, but as soon as ever M r. K. thinks the sale wd. exceed 3000 he had better give the order & send the money to Mr. Murray.—4 I despatched a copy of the book to you about a week ago.— 5 Very many thanks for your last letter, with its remarks.— 6 I am now hard at work on some old Botanical observations, which interest me greatly, & afford a very pleasant change from speculations on Expression.—7 Believe me | My dear Sir | Yours vy sincerely | Ch. Darwin Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Slg. Darmstaedter Lc 1859 Darwin, Charles, Bl. 98/99 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from John Murray, 9 November 1872. Carus was translating Expression into German (Carus trans. 1872b). See letter from John Murray, 9 November 1872.

498 3 4

5 6 7

November 1872

Eduard Koch was the director of E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung, Carus’s publisher. In his letter to John Murray, 30 August [1872], CD reported that Koch had ordered 3000 sets of plates. The photographs in Expression were reproduced using the heliotype process (see Ekman 1998 and Prodger 2009). Carus’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). See letter from J. V. Carus, 31 October 1872. CD was working on the insectivorous plant genera Drosera and Dionaea (see also letter to Alphonse de Candolle, 2 November [1872]).

From George Cupples 11 November 1872 The Cottage, | Guard Bridge | Fifeshire N. B. Novr. 11/72. My Dear Mr Darwin, I take the opportunity of my wife’s sending a note to Mrs Darwin, to write a line or two and say with what interest I have read your new book.1 In the first place I was delighted beforehand to see that it was not simply a short Essay, in slim form—but a volume which in appearance might rank with those of “The Descent of Man &c.” 2 And the feeling of satisfaction was thoroughly borne out by finding that instead of an Excursus or episode—as I had supposed from your previous announcement 3 —it is really a carrying out of the great discussion into a quarter whence important lights are shed upon the main theme. This “breaking out in a new place” comes by surprise upon one—and will be so felt by the public—just when the subject seemed to have been for a time exhausted. Here have you been quietly accumulating a whole flood of fact from aside, when it might have been thought you were sufficiently occupied with the rest of it—and this you let out now to swell the general effect. It seems to me that the treatment of the difficult and complicated topic is successful in a high degree—that the principles laid down and brought to bear on it are adequate for the purpose, and have been so made clear as to leave definitely conceivable what was before inarticulated and blank. Most people, I daresay, like myself, had no notion at all that so much had been done in the way of gathering facts about Expression—and the book presents such an encyclopædia of these, as to require a second reading before one can well recover oneself from the bewilderment of being instructed in them. How far, for instance, may an approach have been begun to be pushed towards the line of defensive argument which orthodoxists (I suppose) found upon Man’s possession of the faculty of speech? Or has this nothing to do with the question? I wish I could have supplied some little notes of observation about animals. I may mention that it struck me, in going along, that you by no means push your inferences too far on any occasion that I am aware of. At page 230. you say “it is by no means clear why the hand should be raised to the mouth or face &c” when endeavouring to assist reflection by a movement. Is this not an involuntary movement of the most natural kind? There is a natural tendency to

November 1872

499

support the head when thinking—because its muscles tend to be relaxed. The bodily powers are unconsciously wanted to assist—&c. In regard to the sounds uttered by dogs, I have noticed that they can and do purr when pleased, or desirous to attract attention, or to show pleasure. The burrowing tendency of dogs is frequently shown. Female dogs are regularly in the habit of vomiting up their food to their young, after the young reach a certain age.4 This, many of them can do at pleasure, hours after they have been fed. It has often bothered me greatly. I mention such things merely by the way. I trust you have been in better health of late. It gives me great pleasure to have had this opportunity of communicating with you, though to so little purpose in the way of remark upon the book you so very kindly sent. With very kind regards I remain, | Dear Mr Darwin | ever truly yours | George Cupples Charles Darwin, Esqr. DAR 161: 297 1 2 3 4

See letter from A. J. Cupples to Emma Darwin, 8 November [1872]. The ‘new book’ was Expression. CD had frequently referred to his book as ‘an essay on expression’; he had originally planned to publish it as part of Descent (see Correspondence vol. 18, letter to F. C. Donders, 21 June 1870). No letters from CD to Cupples on this subject survive. Cupples was cited for this observation in Expression 2d ed., p. 271 n. 11. The second edition of Expression was edited by Francis Darwin and published after CD’s death.

To John Murray 11 November 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov 11. 1872

My dear Sir I am quite delighted & more astonished than you can be at the sale of the Expression book.1 I am also well contented at the sale of my other books, excepting of that of the Descent of Man. I fear that a new ed. of it will never be required, & I sh d have liked to have brought out one thoroughly revised.2 I imagine that you will soon have to print some more copies of the origin, of which I believe 3000 were printed. 3 By the way; I have never yet heard what is the price of the “Expression”, & at your leisure I shd like to hear.4 I am much obliged for yr two very kind & pleasant notes. That is a curious fact about the toes of the Hindoos, given on such high authority, & it is a good joke about the commotion in d’Israeli’s boots, when Gladstone speaks. 5 I am particularly obliged for the 3 newspapers sent, & shd be grateful for any others, if not giving you too much trouble. I suppose the Athen., as usual will, pitch into me. 6 Mr Appleton has written to ask for a copy of the Expression Book for the Academy; & if you object to sending one, as publisher; be so kind as to send a copy at once to the Academy “From the author”. The Academy has always treated me very well, &

500

November 1872

sometimes publishes reviews of real value to an author, but I suppose its circulation is very small.7 Believe me | my dear Mr Murray | yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin P.S. I have got into some confusion with 2 men who want to bring out an Italian Translation: if you have heard from either, please inform me at once: if I do not hear I shall understand that you have not heard, & I do not suppose that they have written to you.—8 LS(A) National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 276–7) 1 2 3 4 5

6

7

8

See letter from John Murray, 9 November 1872. Seven thousand copies of Descent had been printed in 1871; a second edition was published in 1874. Murray may have given CD exact sale figures in a missing enclosure to his letter of 9 November 1872. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 12 February 1872. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 14 August 1872. The price of Expression was 12s. The notes have not been found, but see Expression 2d ed., p. 275 n. 17: ‘According to Sir Henry Maine, the natives of India when giving evidence are able to control the expression of their faces so that no indication is given as to whether they are speaking the truth or not; but they cannot control the toes, the contortions of which often reveal the fact that the witness is lying.’ The reference is to Henry James Sumner Maine. Benjamin Disraeli and William Ewart Gladstone were political rivals. The newspapers have not been identified. The Athenæum reviewed Expression on 9 November 1872, p. 591, and 16 November 1872, pp. 631–2. The Athenæum had given bad reviews of Variation (see Correspondence vol. 16, letter from J. E. Gray, 15 February 1868), and Descent (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to John Murray, 8 March [1871]); CD thought it was generally hostile to his views (Correspondence vol. 17, letter to Fritz Müller, 18 July [1869]). Charles Edward Cutts Birchall Appleton founded the Academy in 1869; it was published by Murray, and CD thought of it as a rival to the Athenæum (see Correspondence vol. 17, letter to John Murray, [after 18 September 1869]). Alfred Russel Wallace had reviewed Descent for the Academy (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to H. E. Darwin, 20 March 1871 and n. 3). Anton Dohrn reviewed Expression in Academy, 2 June 1873, pp. 209–12. Expression was translated into Italian by Giovanni Canestrini and Francesco Bassani (Canestrini and Bassani trans. 1878); no correspondence with them before this date has been found. See also letter from C. I. F. Major, 18 October 1872.

From John Murray 12 November [1872]1

50, Albemarle S.t | W. Novr 12

My Dear Sir The price of your book on Expression is s 12/- not a dear one considering the cost of the Illustrations—2 In a week or two I shall be prepared to make you an offer for the Edition of this work— Meanwhile, it may be proper to clear off my debt for the 3000 Copies printed last month of the Origin of Species, & by my Sale now nearly exhausted—3 I find that the amount of profit when all are sold, will be £310—& I have the pleasure to enclose you a cheque for Two Hundred Guineas— I have taken no steps about the Italian Translation. 4

November 1872

501

Mr Appleton of the Academy was furnished with a copy of your book by me on the 4th of November5 I remain | My Dear Sir | Yours very faithfully | John Murray Charles Darwin Esq DAR 171: 430 1 2 3 4 5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to John Murray, 11 November 1872. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 14 August 1872. The photographic illustrations in Expression raised the price of the book (see Ekman 1998 and Prodger 2009). Murray refers to the sixth edition of Origin; see letter to R. F. Cooke, 27 October [1872] and n. 6. See letter to John Murray, 11 November 1872 and n. 8. See letter to John Murray, 11 November 1872 and n. 7. Murray refers to Charles Edward Cutts Birchall Appleton, founder of the journal Academy.

From Anton Dohrn 13 November 1872 Napoli. Palazzo Torlonia. 13. Nov. 1872. My dear Sir! Yesterday I got Your new book, sent to me from Jena. I most sincerely thank You for Your kindness of thinking on me again, and with pride I have marked it in the new Catalogue of my Library, which will shortly be published, as a Donum Autoris. 1 I am amazed on its contents. It contains again, as Your former works, the material and the principles of a new Science which cannot fail to influence mightily upon our general thoughts. I am very curious to read the judgments of some critics, and whether they will go once more to fight fierce battles. They might as well catch hold of Mont Blanc and Dhawelagiri2 to arrest the turning round of the Globe! I hope to get one or two holidays next to go to Capri, and there I think to read the whole book with minute attention and care. I have to thank You also for the books, You have kindly sent for the Library of the Zoological Station. They are not yet here, but Messrs. Williams & Norgate told me in a letter, that they had got works from You.3 The Station proceeds steadily and is now a very fine building. I have great hope, that I may find considerable assistance with the German as well as the Prussian Governments. When last time at Berlin, I spoke both the Minister of the Empire Dr. Delbrück, and the Prussian Minister of Public Instruction Dr. Falk, and both promised to help me. The Empire will, I hope, pay a subvention of 1500£, and the Prussian Government take two tables of the Laboratory for the annual sum of 150£. 4 This depends still from a vote of the Berlin Academy, but since DuBois Reymond and Helmholtz are greatly in favour of my undertaking there is no fear of not getting a strong vote for me.5 And as soon as the Prussian Government hires two tables, I hope to let several others to the other Governments,—thus getting a new and stable income to the Station.—

502

November 1872

Such are the news, I could give You from this practical quarter of Biology,—very far off from such quarters as Your new books treats of,—but nevertheless greatly influenced by the wish of serving those, who may add to the facts and theory of Natural Selection. Believe me ever, my dear Sir, | Yours very faithfully | Anton Dohrn My kindest regards to Mrs. Darwin and to Your son. 6 DAR 162: 211 1

2 3 4

5 6

Dohrn’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). Dohrn’s catalogue of the Zoological Station at Naples was published in 1874 and included as an insert to the Zeitschrift für Wissenschaftliche Zoologie for 1875 (Groeben 1982, pp. 99–100 n. 74). Donum auctoris: gift of the author (Latin). Mont Blanc, the highest peak in Europe west of the Caucasus, is on the French–Swiss and French– Italian border; Dhaulagiri is one of the highest peaks in Nepal. CD often used the booksellers Williams & Norgate; however, no correspondence with them on this subject has been found. See letter to Anton Dohrn, 24 August [1872]. The German empire (consisting of the German states with the exception of Austria) had been formed when Wilhelm I of Prussia was declared German emperor in 1871. For an account of Dohrn’s conversations with Rudolf Delbrück and Adalbert von Falk, and Dohrn’s plan of renting out workspace (tables) at the Zoological Station, see Heuss 1991, pp. 129–32. Dohrn refers to the Berlin Academy of Sciences, Emil Heinrich Du Bois-Reymond, and Hermann von Helmholtz. See Heuss 1991, pp. 132–4. Dohrn had visited Down on 26 September 1870 (see Heuss 1991, pp. 108–9). It is not known which of CD’s sons he had met on this occasion.

To John Murray 13 November 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov 13th 1872

My dear Mr Murray Many thanks for the 210£ for the last reprint of the Origin. The next thousand, as there will be much less outlay, will give us both larger proportional profit.— 1 I am heartily glad it has gone off so well, & will I hope sell moderately for some years to come. With respect to the Expression Book, I am not short of money, & it will be fairer for me, & I hope quite convenient to yourself to defer paying me till you actually receive payment from the Bookseller for half or 32 of the copies printed, & then let me have the 23 of profit whatever it may amount to.— I am extremely pleased at the success of the book, as far as sale is concerned, & as far as I hear of the opinion of my friends. At some time hence please let me hear how many copies are struck off— My dear Mr. Murray | Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin To | J. Murray Esq National Library of Scotland ( John Murray Archive) (Ms. 42152 ff. 291–2) 1

See letter from John Murray, 12 November [1872]. The sixth edition of Origin, first published in 1872, was reprinted in 1873 (Freeman 1977).

November 1872

503

From Albert Günther 14 November 1872 Surbiton 14.11.72 My dear Sir For some time past I have had the intention of writing to you, not because I had anything particular to say, but merely because I cannot afford to drop out of the mind of one of the few men, for whom my esteem has ever been growing since I have had the pleasure of becoming personally acquainted with them. I did not carry out that intention because I knew that I should soon have an opportunity in thanking you for a copy of your new work which I knew would soon appear. It arrived last Friday, and I have read it, not without a feeling of shame (being by myself I did not blush), because I found here a field of enquiry opened before my eyes, of the existence and bearings of which I had been hitherto entirely ignorant. 1 In reading it not a few facts which I formerly observed, recurred to my memory, & now only I have found an explanation. How often have I watched my gulls in the garden patting the ground in a ludicrous manner, and I never fancied that they were begging for food.2 In my boy the soles of the feet were indifferent to tickling, until he was nearly 2 12 years old.3 I have seen at that age his face reddening, not from anger, but before crying when reproved. I then thought, this reddening must be blushing from shame. 4 My two dogs (a Scotch Terrier and a Black & Tan) have ticklish feet; especially the web between the toes appears to be the seat of sensitiveness. When I gently rub or work it, both dogs commence to lick the hand most vigourously, although one of them is not at all given to licking. I was surprised that you have scarcely alluded to what by courtesy is called “dancing’ of savage people. I believe it is the almost universal expression of joy or elation among savages; if it were not innate, or not one of the most tenacious emotional expressions, I could hardly understand that the “wheeling-round” of modern times, to which the savage “dancing” has degenerated, could hold its own among civilized nations. I have had twice an opportunity of observing this expression in its primitive form under very similar circumstances, both times after medical examinations (at Tübingen & at the College of Surgeons),5 where two candidates who did not think of having the shadow of a chance of passing, did pass nevertheless. When hearing of their good luck they jumped higher than decency permitted. My new post gives me so much administrative work that I consider it a good day, on which I can get two hours for scientific work. 6 Among other things I went through Dr. Gray’s correspondence and pamphlets, some of which brought me back some 50 years (selecting according to his wish for preservation those documents which are of interest to the history of our department).7 I derived great benefit & comfort from this labour hurtful as it was to my eyes. I saw that the quarrels between the men of science of our days are tame when compared to those of the preceding generation. I say this was a comfort to me because I had commenced to lose heart under the

504

November 1872

infliction of the Kew-affair & other matters arising out of the R. Commission of Science.8 I trust you will be able to tell me that you are in a better state of health, than when I last heard of you in the summer. With kindest regards to Mrs Darwin | Yours most truly | A Günther DAR 165: 253 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Günther’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). He alludes to CD’s remarks on blushing in Expression, pp. 336–7. See Expression, pp. 47–8. In Expression, p. 201, CD had written that one of his children reacted to a touch on the sole of the foot at the age of seven days. Günther’s son was Robert William Theodore Gunther. On blushing due to guilt, see Expression, pp. 333–4. Tübingen University in Germany and the Royal College of Surgeons, London. Günther had been appointed assistant keeper in the zoological department at the British Museum (letter from Albert Günther, 19 June 1872). John Edward Gray was keeper of the zoological collections at the British Museum; he had suffered a stroke in 1869 (ODNB). Acton Smee Ayrton and Joseph Dalton Hooker had been in dispute over the running of the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew since 1869. Ayrton was also involved in the dispute between Hooker and Richard Owen over the future location of the herbaria at Kew and at the British Museum; this matter was discussed by the Royal Commission on Scientific Instruction. (See letter from J. D. Hooker, 1 January 1872 and n. 1, and letter to J. D. Hooker, 9 November [1872].)

From Francis Galton 15 November l872 42 Rutland Gate Nov 15/72 My dear Darwin I have left your kind letter of ten days since unanswered. having some possible rabbit combinations in view which have ended in nothing: 1 The experiments have, I quite agree, been carried on long enough. It would be a crowning point to them if your groom2 could get a prize at some show for those he has reared up so carefully, as it would attest their purity of breed. There in such a show, I believe, impending at the Xtal Palace3 Enclosed is a £2 cheque. Will you kindly tip him with it for me assuring him how indebted I feel for his attention. I dont know how I can repay you! Would it not be worth while before abandoning the whole affair, to get a litter from each of the available does, not with a view of keeping the young but simply of seeing whether any are born mottled. & if not of then killing them.? The reason being, that the mixed breed are so very apt to take wholly after one or the other ancestor. & one might get no other evidence of impure blood than a rare instance of a decidedly mongrel birth However I leave this quite in your hands, knowing that it means 5 or 6 weeks more trouble with the rabbits.

November 1872

505

I read and re read your “Expression” with infinite instruction & pleasure. & feel sure that its influence will soon be seen, at the Royal Academy. 4 Enclosed, is a small addition to the note about the Butler family in p. 34. My sister Emma, I am rejoiced to say, is now at the sea side steadily mending in perfect quiet & in full hopes of complete restoration to health.— I wish most heartily that your’s was better.5 Ever sincerely yrs. Francis Galton [Enclosure] not to be printed— It is evidently written in a joking strain— F Galton— 6 For Darwin Last evening, Novr. 10th., the undersigned having preached two Sermons, including a drive to London & back, fell asleep in his drawing-room between 10 and 11 o’clock. He awoke by finding that he had brought his hand suddenly down over the nose, & considerably lacerated the latter with his nail. 7 This morning the aforesaid “latter” bears pathetic witness to the truth of the above statement. The same was done not infrequently in bed by the father of the Undersigned, as his widow8 was in the habit of relating. H. Montague Butler, D.D. Harrow on the Hill | Novr. 11th. 1872 DAR 105: A50–1, A69–70 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8

See letter to Francis Galton, 8 November [1872] and n. 2. Galton was experimenting on transfusing and breeding from rabbits of different colours. See letter to Francis Galton, 27 May [1872] and n. 2. Rabbits were included in the Crystal Palace Poultry Show, which opened on 19 November 1872 (The Times, 20 November 1872, p. 9). See letter from Francis Galton, 7 November 1872 and n. 1. Galton refers to the Royal Academy of Arts. Galton refers to Emma Sophia Galton; see letter to Francis Galton, 8 November [1872]. CD’s only surviving sister was Caroline Sarah Wedgwood. The rest of the note was written by Henry Montagu Butler. Galton had sent CD an account of this habit of his father-in-law, H. M. Butler, in December 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letters from Francis Galton, 22 December 1871 and [after 22 December 1871]). CD quoted Galton’s account (which also related to H. M. Butler’s father, George Butler, and his daughter Agnes Isabel) in Expression, pp. 33–4 n. 8. Sarah Maria Butler.

From Jules Michelet1 15 November 1872 Monsieur On dit que l’on va faire un passage sous-marin, que le Détroit sera supprimé, et que les deux paÿs reconnaîtront enfin leur voisinage, et disons mieux, leur unité antique.2

506

November 1872

Personne plus que vous, et les savans illustres qui vous suivent, n’aura contribué à créer ce passage, à rappeler notre voisinage et notre parenté de race et d’esprit Cette dernière consiste surtout, selon moi, non seulement dans une observation plus exacte que celle des Allemands, mais dans une simplicité vigoureuse qui affranchit les grands esprits Anglais et Français des scolastiques qui retardent et souvent égarent l’Allemagne en mille choses. Vous et nous, nous allons au but. Voilà pourquoi les vôtres et les nôtres ont frayé la voie à l’Europe. Pour moi, quoique porté par mes études sur des voies differentes, je n’en admire pas moins votre méthode, et suis ravi de découvrir tant de liens entre les sciences de la nature et celles de l’homme Je vous serre la main avec une admiration bien affecteuse. | J. Michelet 15 n. 72 DAR 171: 174 1 2

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. The Channel Tunnel Company was formed in January 1872 (The Times, 18 January 1872, p. 4). On the failure of this venture, see Gourvish 2006, pp. 4–7.

From A. R. Wallace 15 November 1872 The Dell, Grays, Essex Novr. 15th. 1872 Dear Darwin I should have written earlier to thank you for your book, but was hoping to be able to read more of it before doing so.1 I have not however found time to get beyond the first 3 chapters, but that is quite sufficient to shew me how exceedingly interesting you have made the subject & how completely & admirably you have worked it out. I expect it will be one of the most popular of your works. I have just been asked to write a review of it for the “Quarterly Journal of Science”,— for which purpose I shall be in duty bound to seek out some deficiencies, however minute, so as to give my notice some flavour of criticism.2 The cuts & photos. are admirable, and my little boy & girl 3 seized it at once to look at the naughty babies. With best wishes | Believe me | Yours very faithfully | Alfred R. Wallace Charles Darwin Esq. P.S. I will take the opportunity of asking you if you know of any book that will give me a complete catalogue of vertebrate fossils with some indication of their affinities. 4 | A.R.W. DAR 106: B115–16 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Enigmas of Life’5 pencil 1

Wallace’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V).

November 1872 2 3 4 5

507

Wallace reviewed Expression in the January 1873 issue of the Quarterly Journal of Science. Herbert Spencer Wallace, aged 5, and Violet Wallace, aged 3. Wallace presumably wanted a catalogue of fossils for his work on The geographical distribution of animals (Wallace 1876). CD refers to William Rathbone Greg’s Enigmas of life (Greg 1872), which was published in November (Publishers’ Circular 1872).

From William Bowman 16 November 1872

5 Clifford St Nov. 16. 72

My dear Darwin, I ought ere this to have thanked you very much for your new book— I find it most interesting—but the material for thought in it so abundant that I can’t get on with it as fast as I could wish—1 I am reading it at all spare moments— Your bunch of 3 keys is wonderfully efficacious in the penetration of the dark problems you work upon2 —and I am certain that through the avenues you open to us can these secrets become alone gradually understood. Thank you for some kind expressions— I feel that you appreciate too highly any little aid I may have supplied— 3 most truly yrs | W Bowman our good Donders has had on the 15th of Oct. the ‘Jubilium’ of his 25th year as Professor at Utrecht & a perfect ovation from his many friends & pupils 4 He writes “I have been accumulated with kindness by my pupils & old pupils by my colleagues & many friends— The pupils presented me with most beautiful marble busts of Helmholtz (who had been kind enough to give his time for sittings) and of Johannes Muller sculptured by Drake in Berlin the first artist of Germany I think. 5 I could not have had such a happy idea as they had had for myself. There was a great banquet to which 115 united & I was the only guest. In a word every one did all he could for making a happy day of the 15 Octr which brought at the same time so cruel souvenirs Poor fellow alluding to the loss of his only child & daughter in her confinement of twins 2 yrs ago— They are both living & in Utrecht with their father Engelmann—6 I thought you might like the above extract—as I am sure you feel an attachment towards my old friend whose head & heart are alike great. WB. American Philosophical Society (B/D25.311) 1 2

3 4

Bowman’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). CD argued that most of the expressions involuntarily used by humans and lower animals were accounted for by three principles: the principle of serviceable associated habits; the principle of antithesis; and the principle of the direct action of the nervous system (see Expression, pp. 27–9). CD cited Bowman in Expression for information on the human eye; he gave particular thanks to him in Expression, p. 160 n. 14. Bowman had introduced CD to Frans Cornelis Donders, professor of physiology at the University of Utrecht (Correspondence vol. 17, letter from William Bowman, 3 September [1869]). Donders had

508

5 6

November 1872

been appointed professor extraordinarius at Utrecht in 1847 (Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 49 (1890–1): xiv). Hermann von Helmholtz and Johannes Peter Müller were prominent German physiologists. Donders also referred to Friedrich Drake. Donders’s daughter, Marie Engelmann, died on 5 March 1871 after giving birth to twins. The children, Frans and Paula Engelmann (Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 49 (1890–1): xxii), were brought up by their father, Theodor Wilhelm Engelmann. See Correspondence vol. 18, letter from F. C. Donders, 17 May 1870.

From Henry MacKay 16 November 1872 Brady’s Bend. | Armstrong Co. | Pennsylvania. | U.S. America. Novr 16th. 1872. Sir:— These many years I have been measurably familiar with your works on the “Origin of Species” and “Descent of Man”. I had not, however, read these books until quite recently. I am a Clergyman of the Amn. Prot. Epis. Church. I have read your books with intense interest. And because of this interest, I am desirous to obtain information on a few more points, which are inseparable from the questions at issue. I feel how intrusive I am in addressing you— I am painfully sensible of my own littleness and ignorance, which, perhaps, is my quickest stimulus, I hope, therefore, that you may hold me excused, and grant my request. Your treatment of the Descent of Man must impress your readers with, at least, the supposableness of your arguments. If we grant you to be correct in the Origin of man, And if your very ably presented arguments on Sympathy and Morals 1 be even approximately correct, then thereout spring questions and issues which are vital to those calling themselves Christians. If your moral theory be true, as I understand it, then morals are resultants of sympathy and experience, as inventions are results of other Causes. The moral standard of enlightened Christian peoples differs in toto from those of our forefathers, the ancient anglo saxons even. For we were, no doubt, once as low as Papuans or Fuegians. If our moral nature, so called, has not been a Creation, then, reversion to immorality, should not be a marvel, though much to be regretted and resisted. Cases of atavism are not responsible for the reversionary processes which produced them, no more than we are for the rudiments you have so ably referred to in other families or varieties of mammals, as in man. My difficulty is one which will evoke your sympathy and pity, rather than the opposite. If my understanding of your theories be correct, and the theories too be correct, then I would like to know your answers to the following question. 1. Has man what Christians and others entitle, a soul? 2. Is man morally responsible to his Creative Cause or force?

November 1872

509

3. Does he live in an intelligent state after death? I do not ask, does man go to heaven and to hell, as fitted by his life and desires. I wish to know your opinion as to whether or not he lives at all, hereafter, as an animal? Again hoping for your kind indulgence for the temerity which has prompted this letter, and with very respectful assurances of thankfulness for your able treatment of so unpopular and delicate a subject. I am, sir, | With profound respect. | Your obedient Servant. | (Rev) H: Mackay DAR 171: 4 1

See Descent 1: 70–106.

From Athénaïs Michelet1 16 November 1872 Paris 16 Nov 72 Monsieur Après la lettre de mon mari, que depuis si longtemp il désirait vous écrire,2 je ne me sens le droit de prendre la plume que pour vous remercier du bon souvenir que vous m’avez gardé et de l’envoi de la petite brochure.— 3 Mes bons amis, les chats ne sont pas contents. C’est la seconde fois que je les quitte et sans savoir quand je les retrouverai.—4 Mon mari qui a pris toutes ses forces pour vous écrire, a été tout le mois d’octobre profondément malade. J’ai veillé, j’ai lutté contre la nature qui semble aimer autant à détruire qu’à créer.— Aujourd’hui, je garde cette amélioration acquise si péniblement avec un soin jaloux; j’y mets tous mes instans.— Cela fait tomber la plume des doigts. Je ne sais la reprendre que pour vous dire encore ma respectueuse et vive sympathie | A Michelet. DAR 171: 172 1 2 3 4

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. See letter from Jules Michelet, 15 November 1872. The pamphlet has not been identified, but may have concerned cats (see letter to Athénaïs Michelet, 23 May 1872; see also letter from Athénaïs Michelet, 26 June 1872). Michelet was working on a book on cats (see letter from Athénaïs Michelet, 17 May 1872).

From Herbert Spencer 16 November 1872

37 Queen’s Gardens, | Bayswater, W. Nov. 16th. 1872.

Dear Darwin, I have delayed somewhat longer than I intended, acknowledging the copy of your new volume, which you have been kind enough to send me. 1 I delayed partly in the hope of being able to read more of it before writing to you; but my reading powers are so small, and they are at present so much employed in getting up materials for

510

November 1872

work in hand, that I have been unable to get on far with it. I have, however, read quite enough to see what an immense mass of evidence you have brought to bear in proof of your propositions. I will comment only on one point on which I see you differ from me; namely the explanation of musical expression, in respect of which you quote Mr. Litchfield. 2 I think if you would trace up the genesis of melody, beginning with the cadences of slightly emotional speech and passing through recitative, you would see that melody is quite comprehensible on the principles I have pointed out. The fact that melody proper, has been evolved in comparatively recent times, is strong evidence of this. That recitative is a natural expression of emotion, is abundantly proved. I remember having read of Australians, who used a kind of recitative in talking to themselves when walking along about things that interested them; and I have heard children, when engaged in any play that interested them, or such occupations as gathering flowers, talk to themselves in recitative. Join this with the fact that many inferior races have never risen above recitative (as the Chinese and Hindoos) and that there is reason for believing that even among the Greeks, melody had not become so markedly different from recitative as now—add, too, the fact that even now in the Highlands you may hear Gaelic songs that retain very much of the recitative character; and I think you will see that melody is, as I have contended, an idealised form of the natural cadences of emotion.3 Indeed I could point out musical phrases which would, I think, clearly prove this to you. Ask your daughter to play to you “Robert toi que j’aime,” and you will I think see this.4 I do not mean to say that this is all; for there are other elements of effect in melody. But this is, I think, the cardinal element. Very truly yours | L inc5 DAR 177: 231 1 2

3 4 5

Spencer’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). Spencer thought that all music was based on the impulse to muscular movement caused by emotion (Spencer 1858–74, 1: 362–3). In Expression, p. 90, CD had quoted Richard Buckley Litchfield’s opinion that Spencer’s view did not explain the emotional effect of pure melody. See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from R. B. Litchfield, [before 2 December 1871]. See Spencer 1858–74, 1: 364. ‘Robert, toi que j’aime’ is an aria from Giacomo Meyerbeer’s opera Robert le diable, first produced in 1831. The signature has been excised.

From W. D. Crotch 17 November 1872 Richmond Green | Surrey Nov. 17/72 My dear Sir, I have returned from Norway after four delightful months but without being able to solve the problem of the horns of the ~ Rendeer.—1 All that one man—a hunter who lived among them—could say was that he never saw the hinds when dropping

November 1872

511

their calves, but that on their reappearance after a month’s absence or concealment the horns are renewed—2 I have however offered a reward which will probably clear up the matter next spring.3 We had a most unusual migration of Lemmings this year— They must have come in the winter as there were none in Octr. last year, & in the spring of this year they swarmed— I cannot comprehend their aimless habit of swimming out on the lakes— unless it should be to clean themselves of fleas—with which they were all infested— or is it merely the migratory impulse— there were at least 4 broods this summer, & it seems incomprehensible that this army should ever vanish (as it doubtless will) next year. Nearly all the older specimens were denuded of hair on the rump & sore, but I could not find out the cause, but strongly suspect it arose from their unreasonable ferocity— the approach of even a fancied enemy makes them yell & dance with rage, while keeping the back against some favoring stone, & as their real enemies are legion I fancy the abrasion is caused by their perpetually putting their “backs up”— They are however most unpalateable, to me & my dogs— the foxes don’t seem to eat many of those they kill but it is confidently believed that Rendeer & even Cows eat them.—4 I hear from my Brother at Philadelphia—en route for everywhere—he is collecting most vigorously & I should much like to join him—5 I have, however, taken a house here for 7 years & cannot well be away the whole year— I am sorry to have failed this time when I thought myself secure of the information but still hope—& am | ever yours sincerely | W D Crotch DAR 88: 116a–b CD ANNOTATIONS 1.4 but that . . . renewed— 1.5] double scored blue crayon 2.1 We had . . . year. 2.7] crossed blue crayon Top of letter: ‘W D. Crotch’ blue crayon; ‘(2)’ pencil 1

2 3 4 5

In Descent 2: 243–4, CD argued that the antlers of female reindeer were of no use to them. Crotch had written to him suggesting that they were used by the pregnant females to drive off the males once the males had cleared snow from the grass with their forefeet (Correspondence vol. 19, letter from W. D. Crotch, 24 October 1871). CD cited Crotch for this information in Descent 2d ed., p. 503. Crotch sent CD his findings in his letter of 14 November 1873 (Correspondence vol. 21). Crotch published his findings on the lemmings, the product of ten consecutive summers spent in Norway, in Crotch 1876. George Robert Crotch was an entomologist; the brothers had travelled together on collecting expeditions. George had provided CD with information on stridulation in beetles for Descent.

From C. I. F. Major1 17 November 1872 Pisa, ce 17 Nov. 1872. Très honoré Monsieur, Je Vous suis sincèrement obligé pour les deux lettres dont Vous m’avez honoré et de l’offre que Vous avez bien voulu me faire dans Votre dernière de 11 ct. 2 En

512

November 1872

réponse je déclare que je suis résolu de faire tout mon possible pour acheminer une traduction italienne de Votre dernier ouvrage, 3 et je me suis déjà mis en rapport avec un éditeur de Florence. Après ce que Vous m’avez dit des conditions de Votre éditeur, M. Murray, je ne me cache nullement les difficultés qu’il faudra vaincre. 4 Cependant j’éspère qu’en réduisant pour ma part les exigences autant que possible, je trouverai bien un éditeur. Je serai fier de pouvoir contribuer un peu à faire apprécier Votre génie en Italie et à divulguer les nouvelles idées dont Vous enrichissez sans cesse les sciences naturelles. J’accepte Votre amiable offre de me faire parvenir un exemplaire de Votre ouvrage, dans le but aussi de pouvoir le faire voir à l’éditeur. Agréez, très honoré Monsieur, mes expressions de la plus haute estime. | C. I. Forsyth Major No 11 Via Solferino | Pisa. DAR 171: 29 1 2 3 4

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. CD’s letters to Major have not been found. Major refers to Expression (see letter from C. I. F. Major, 18 October 1872). CD may have warned that John Murray would charge for the heliotypes and for electrotypes of the woodcuts; there might also have been a charge for translation rights (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872).

From D. T. Smith 19 November 1872

Louisville Ky Nov 19th 1872.

Mr Charles Darwin Dear Sir; I have mailed you three numbers of the Louisville Courier-Journal containing an abstract of a series of lectures given by myself upon the theory of the descent of man, of which you are the author and which is everywhere known by your name. 1 Together with your own I have reviewed the theory of Mivart2 and others, and attempted to substitute for them a new and different theory Owing to press of matters of local interest, the paper could not publish a full report of the lectures, and they therefore appear in a very fragmentary form, and beside contain a large number of typographical errors. However, to you this will matter little, as with a bare suggestion of any theory on this subject, you would of course, perceive at once the full bearing of it, and recognize all the facts that might rightly be ranged under it. There are a few features however which I hope it may not be trespassing upon your time for me to be a little more explicit upon. The explanation of the closer resemblance of ancient and melanian3 skeletons to those of apes than is borne by recent ones, which is barely mentioned in the reports, rests upon the supposition, that the body and mind are twin effects of the soul, produced by it whilst working with the common force as an instrument, and

November 1872

513

that when either of these or any department of either of them receives undue force or attention from the soul, the other or the rest must suffer to that degree. It is also supposed that the power of the soul is definite and limited within a certain slightly varying degree. Now ununited sutures, and abundant cartiliaginous structures are found in children, while advanced ossification is characteristic of age. 4 The one then may be taken as evidence of weaknesses of developing force, the other a strength. Low and savage races, neglect the cultivation of mental capacity, consequently in them the soul is caused to devote its energies to the development of the parts of vegetable instead of those of animal life. The soul I conceive to be the agent in the parent, that by means of the instrumentalities already mentioned, modifies the essential atoms and forces of lower beings, that is frees them from lower impressions, and places them together rightly in the germ and directs each to it proper task If in the parent the development of vegetable life is excessive, an excess of energy will be given to such atoms of the germ as are destined to the building up of the body, possibly resulting in the selection of an excess in that department, but more likely in devoting to that work such atoms as have for their proper office the production of the parts involved in mental capacity. Thus an excess of work being undertaken, of a kind removed as far as possible from the standard laid down for the species, that work in as far as it is unusual to the vital energies of the species will be imperfectly performed. Therefore although in an individual or germ thus produced, more than the average development of the atoms and forces of lower beings may have been accomplished, even in the direction of vegetable life, by the forces of the parent organism, yet too much having been undertaken in that direction by the parent energies, some of the essential atoms and forces, possibly diverted from their office of building up parts essential to the production of mental capacity, will not be properly modified, and will thus go on to build up in the human body, such structures as they had been building up in the bodies of lower beings. And in this way the proper correlations of growth will be interfered with. If the effort were pushed beyond this, I take it, reproduction would fail. On the other hand if the reproductive effort should fall short of the proper standard, we should have a case of reversion from arrested development, the tendencies of the essential atoms or forces of the lower beings from which the new germ must be made, not having been sufficient changed. Or we might have reversion from another cause and by another kind, still however depending on a misdirection of forces in the formation of the germ. This theory assumes that man is the resultant of all the life streams found in organic beings. The line even in that case, would be nearly direct through the species named by yourself; consequently in the embryo we should always have traits of the fish, the reptile and the ape, but rarely of the ruminant on the one side, or of the rodent on the other side of that line.5 Ordinarily the organizing atoms of these two classes in entering into the formation of the embryonic molecule would balance each other in their tendencies, and in the fashioning of the human embryo, they will exert their force to cause it to

514

November 1872

proceed along the nearly direct way through the forms named. But at times through some fault of the constitution of the germ, this might not take place, and we should then have a reversion in the direction of one or the other of these classes. The whole case is something like what would occur with a number of men starting to migrate by successive advances across a wide, trackless and unknown wilderness. From a given point they would start out in many directions, and each division at certain distances would tarry for a while and form a station. Likely no station would be in the line of shortest distance; but at the next advance, a part would go in the direction of such a line, and in the course of time nearly all the travel would be withdrawn from the various diverging lines at first taken, and turned into the route nearest to a direct line The stations however at first made even by those traveling most directly, would be a little off the line, and in subsequent travel, a shorter road would be taken, cutting off the angles at first made, and leaving such stations in view on one or the other side. The travel with this exception however, would still be along the old path, even after they had reached their destination, because that way had been learned and it would be less labor to continue it than to make a direct one. Yet sometimes a traveler who had previously been journeying to some off-station, would mistake the way, and go to that station again; though his equipment would prove that he had started out to go farther. Thus it is the embryo never goes through the exact type of lower animals, and that we can have no complete reversions. Sexual rudiments I suppose to be formed in another way. I suppose the molecule which is to become the new being, to be made up of both male and female atoms, but having an excess of one or the other. If the excess be male, the molecule will go on to the formation of a male; but the female atoms will at the same time exert their tendencies to form a female, and their product will bear to that of the majority the relation of rudiments. And conversely when the majority are female. If we may further suppose that such atoms are equal in number, an excessive production, say of males, for a time, would be disturbing the balance, produce a subsequent tendency to the excessive production of females, and thus in the outcome equality would be maintained. The fact that there is generally born an excess of males, I would explain upon the hypothesis that it requires a higher degree of energy to fecundate the female than the male ovule, and that such energy remains expressed in the greater vitality of the female. In accordance with this view I venture the opinion that if it could be ascertained, a majority of blighted ovules would be found to be females and also the prediction—for I am without statistics on that point—that a majority of congenital idiots, and of reversions from incomplete development are also female. I am unable to see, as you essay to show, how natural selection could equalize the sexes. 6 Your argument seems to me to imply that if one mother were to produce female offspring, and another male, and these were to unite in pairs—which you fail to show that do not.—the mother of the females would have the largest number of descendents. But I may not comprehend your position.

November 1872

515

Nearly a year since I should have published a work on the subject, but I had not the means and publishers were unwilling to issue it except at my risk. There are many other questions connected with this subject of which I should like to write, but I fear that if you have read even this, I have trespassed too much upon your valuable time. Still however, hoping that I shall have the honor to hear from you who have already afforded me so much entertainment and instruction | I remain with the highest respect | Truly yours | David T Smith M.D. DAR 177: 189 1 2 3 4 5 6

Cuttings of the lectures are in DAR 226.2: 34–5. St George Jackson Mivart was the author of Genesis of species (Mivart 1871a), a critique of CD’s theories. Melanian: negrito or negroid (OED). See Descent 1: 124–5 for CD’s discussion of the sutures in the skulls of children and early humans. In his first lecture, Smith put forward as an argument against CD’s theory of descent examples of apparent human reversion to geese, sheep, and rodents. CD discussed reversion in Descent 1: 122–30. See Descent 1: 316–17.

To D. T. Smith [after 19 November 1872]1 I am much obliged by your kind & very courteous letter When I receive the Report of Jn Lou it will be duly [ examined] but I am now out of health & have no strength to spare, so I hope you will excuse this being a [ short] letter & I remain | Dear Sir Yours most sincerely Draft DAR 177: 189r 1

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from D. T. Smith, 19 Novem ber 1872.

From R. F. Cooke 20 November 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Nov 20 1872

My dear Sir We are in a precious quondary with these Heliotype Plates for yr new work. At present I dont know what we are to do. We have advertised the work for Tuesday next & we have 7000 Books & only 3000 sets of Plates. 1 It is impossible to make even a partial delivery with so small a number, we sh d. satisfy no one & dissatisfy hundreds. Daily & hourly do we communicate with the Manager & I enclose his letter of yesterday afternoon.2 I need not say, that we did not & have not received the promised 500.!!!

516

November 1872

I have just returned from the office & find out now the real truth, there has been & is a conspiracy or a strike at the Works & they have been obliged to dismiss & not able to replace competent men. The Manager still tells me that he feels almost sure we shall get the 500 today & he hopes 1000 tomorrow & all the rest the day following, but as this is what has been told me for the last week I have no confidence in the result. The nuisance is great & the fact of the book having been reviewed so long before publication is annoying to the public & may be prejudicial to the work. We have supplied all the foreign markets & have not taken care of ourselves. 3 Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 431 1 2 3

On the problems with supplying heliotype plates for Expression, see the letters from R. F. Cooke, 2 October 1872 and 4 October 1872. ‘Tuesday next’ was 26 November. The manager was a Mr Wright (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 4 October 1872); the enclosed letter has not been found. Mr Wright has not been identified. CD’s US publishers, Appleton, had been sent at least 3000 sets of heliotypes in October (see letters from R. F. Cooke, 9 October 1872, 11 October 1872, and 22 October 1872).

To R. F. Cooke 20 November [1872]1

Nov. 20. My dear Sir It is a very bad job about the Heliotypes and will I fear cause us loss; but it is obvious that the Coy must be almost as anxious as we are, and therefore I earnestly hope the difficulty will soon be overcome. It will be necessary to have a look at the Plates, to see that they do not palm off poor copies owing to the employment of incompetent workmen; and it would be very bad if customers were to return copies as defective This book2 has been a sore trouble to you. My dear Sir | Yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin Copy DAR 143: 288 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from R. F. Cooke, 20 November 1872. Expression.

From E. A. Darwin 20 November [1872]1

Nov 20 Dear Charles I have received the Bankers receipts for £1116 Midland. 2 The Etruria money Jos

November 1872

517

has paid to your account & he says he can’t say anything whether it ought to go to Emma’s settlement or not.3 F. gave me this letter of Lady Bells4 the other day to be burnt when read, & I send it on for the chance of your liking to see what a devoted wife she is. I found the Book very interesting, but I have not been in the way of hearing public opinion about it except indeed Sir Henry5 who of course could have given you some additional facts. ever yours | ED [Enclosure] 47 Albany Street N. W. Monday 4th. Novr.—

My dear Mrs. Wedgwood— I could say much to you of my thanks to Mr. Darwin, and of my interest in his Book, and especially for the—Restoration of the old fashioned Anaty of Expression, with his gratifying words of the Author. How I wish they had been acquainted! 6 The last book that C. B read, (leaning on the Bedroom Chimneypiece at Hallow Park) on Thursday Evg. 28th of April 1842, was Darwins Voyage in the Beagle.7 and—he knew the love of Dogs so well.— Poor Striach jumped as usual into the phaeton, the day we drove to Granton Steamboat—and his Master had to put him— (for the last time) into No 6 Ainslie Place.—8 His eyes showed how much he was affected They used both to contemplate, as if they were very loving friends. We left Edinr on the 16th. April, intending to be for some Months in a Cottage in Wales, for rest after the Session,9 and for Fishing. His restorative Work, in the Portmanteau was the Anaty of Expression, with the many notes, and additions, and emendations,—strewed in, among the cut leaves of the old Edition.— At that sad period—the whole got into confusion, and my B r. Alexander said that I must come to him to aid in what had been intended. 10 I long to lend Mr Darwins book to Alex. when he comes home tomorrow, I have nearly finished it. In the spirit of a woman, I am wedded to the Respiratory Theory! 11 Alexr. has more extended views— C. Bell felt deeply that there was still much to be done on the subjects he delighted in. But, he had to live by his Profession; and he longed for leisure. He saw the blanks that were to be filled. I like M. Lemoine’s notice.12 In the depths of difficulties—I sometimes remember Chas Shaw’s reply to a young soldier,—“Sir, why are we all to begin our march—with the left foot foremost”?— “Because it is the Command of His Majesty”.13 I am far behind in the race of today, with a deep respect for those who love, and humbly search for truth. Do tell Mr Darwin of my gratitude and Believe me, dear friend, | Yours affectionately Marion Bell DAR 105: B82–3, DAR 160: 126

518 1 2

3

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

12

13

November 1872

The year is established by the references to Expression, which was published in November 1872 (Freeman 1977). Erasmus presumably refers to the Midland Railway Company; there is no record of CD’s having shares in the Midland in his Investment book (Down House MS), but see Correspondence vol. 17, letter from W. E. Darwin, [January 1869]. Etruria (the Wedgwood factory in Staffordshire), which had been the property of Josiah Wedgwood II, and from which Emma Darwin (his daughter) had received rents as part of her marriage settlement, was bought by Godfrey, Clement Francis, and Laurence Wedgwood (who had been renting it) for £17,000 (Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1983, pp. 36, 304; CD’s Investment book (Down House MS)). In his Account books–banking account (Down House MS), CD recorded a payment of £1833 6s. 8d. on 20 November 1872, ‘From sale of Etruria’. Jos: Josiah Wedgwood III, Emma’s brother. F: Frances Emma Elizabeth Wedgwood. Lady Bell: Marion Bell. Henry Holland. Marion Bell’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). CD had praised the Essays on the anatomy and philosophy of expression (Bell 1844) of her husband, Charles Bell, in Expression, p. 2. Hallow Park, near Worcester, was the home of a friend of the Bells; Bell died 29 April 1842 (GordonTaylor and Walls 1958, pp. 169–70). Marion Bell refers to Journal of researches. Striach was a Skye-terrier (Bell 1870, p. 416). Granton is a seaport on the Firth of Forth, near Edinburgh. Ainslie Place was the Bells’ Edinburgh address. Charles Bell was professor of surgery at Edinburgh University (ODNB). After Charles Bell’s death, Marion Bell lived with her brother Alexander Shaw. Shaw published the third edition of Charles Bell’s Anatomy and philosophy of expression (Bell 1844). Charles Bell believed that the ‘respiratory organ’ became progressively more complicated in animals as it came to be used not just for breathing but for communication and (in humans) articulate language. In humans, he identified ‘respiratory nerves’ associated with the respiratory apparatus; he believed these nerves were affected by emotion and responsible for the phenomena of expression. See Bell 1844, pp. 231–2. In Expression, p. 2, CD quoted Albert Lemoine’s comment on Charles Bell’s Anatomy and philosophy of expression, which may be translated, ‘Ch. Bell’s book should be pondered by anyone who attempts to talk of the human face, by philosophers as well as by artists, since, despite its light tone and aesthetic pretext, it is one of the finest monuments of the science of the relations between the physical and the moral.’ Marion Bell refers to her brother Charles Shaw.

To J. M. Herbert 21 November 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov 21. 1872 My dear Herbert I have just published a book on Expression, & I have told my publisher to send you a copy, as I have thought that you might like to read it. 1 Any how I should very much like to recall to you some remembrance of your old friend. When I think, as I sometimes do with mournful pleasure, of the old jolly days at Barmouth & Cambridge, I feel as if I were some other individual— 2 Do you remember giving me anonymously a microscope?3 I can hardly call to mind any event in my life which surprised & gratified me more. I should very much like to hear a little news about yourself & Mrs Herbert 4 & your doings & how your health is.

November 1872

519

I am one of those wretched beings who ought to be exterminated, namely a confirmed invalid; but as long as I live a quite uniform life I am able to do some daily work in natural history; & this is all that I am good for in this world. My wife joins in very kind remembrances to yourself & Mrs Herbert. I beg you to let me hear a little news of yourself & believe me | dear old friend | yours very sincerely | Charles Darwin Can you tell me any thing about Whitley? I have lately seen S. Butler, the author of that clever book Erewhon, & the son of Tom Butler. The latter, as far as I can gather, has become a very unpleasant old man—5 P.S. My wife commands me to say, & I can say with perfect truth that this letter gives a false impression if it implies that I am not a happy man— LS American Philosophical Society (425) 1 2 3 4 5

Herbert’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). Herbert and CD had been students at Cambridge together and had visited Barmouth, in north Wales, in the summer of 1828 (see Correspondence vol. 1). See Correspondence vol. 1, letter from [J. M. Herbert], [early May 1831]. On CD’s microscopes, see Burnett 1992. Mary Ann Herbert. Charles Thomas Whitley was a schoolfellow of CD’s and a contemporary of his and Herbert’s at Cambridge. Samuel Butler (1835–1902), who visited Down on 19 May 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)), was the grandson of CD’s headmaster at Shrewsbury School, Samuel Butler (1774–1839). Thomas Butler was also a schoolfellow and Cambridge contemporary of CD’s, and had made the trip to Barmouth with Herbert and CD (n. 2, above; see Correspondence vol. 1). Erewhon: [S. Butler] 1872a.

From A. W. Bennett 22 November 1872 6, Park Village East, | Regent’s Park, | London N.W. Nov. 22nd 1872 My dear Sir I hope you will excuse my troubling you with a matter which is occupying my thoughts just now. It has long appeared to me that it would be a great advantage to have a medium, in the form of a Quarterly Journal, for the publication of articles bearing on Natural Science that are now dispersed through a great number of magazines, the Proceedings of Learned Societies; &c; I mean especially articles recording new researches, articles of a more popular character, & sterling reviews of works on Natural History. Such a magazine, could, I am satisfied, tend to spread a love for & knowledge of natural science among the educated public; &, to add to its attractiveness, it should be well illustrated. In order to induce any publisher to support such a scheme, it would of course be necessary to show that it had the support of the leading scientific men in the country: & I venture to ask you, whether, in the event of such an idea being floated, I might

520

November 1872

calculate on your being able to contribute some short essay or the yet unpublished record of some series of observations that would be of the character I have named. 1 I need not say how great an encouragement to me would be your approval of the idea and promise of co-operation. The idea of course would be as a medium for longer articles than can appear in a weekly journal like “Nature”. 2 Believe me, | very truly yrs. | Alfred W. Bennett C. Darwin Esq. F.RS. I shall be obliged if you will kindly consider this communication as at present strictly confidential. P.S. You kindly gave me permission some time since to use some of your cuts from your Essay on Climbing Plants for an article I am preparing for “Nature”; may I consider the sanction as also extended to the “Fertilisation of Orchids”, Mr. Murray’s sanction having been first obtained? 3 The “Quarterly Journal of Science” is now exclusively physical. 4 DAR 160: 138 1 2 3

4

No reply to this letter has been found, but Bennett’s planned journal was never started. Bennett was the subeditor of Nature. No earlier correspondence on the subject has been found, but CD had probably already sent Bennett the blocks for the woodcuts in Climbing plants (see Correspondence vol. 21, letter to A. W. Bennett, 11 March [1873]). Bennett abandoned his plans for a paper in Nature (ibid., letter from A. W. Bennett, 16 March 1873). John Murray was the publisher of Orchids. Physical: i.e. not biological. From 1871 to 1878 the full title of the journal was the Quarterly Journal of Science and Annals of Mining, Metallurgy, Engineering, Industrial Arts, Manufactures, and Technology.

From Briton Riviere 22 November 1872 16 Addison Road | Kensington W Nov 22/72 My dear Sir You must have thought me very remiss for not writing to thank you for your kindness in sending me your book, but I have only just returned home after a nearly six months absence & from some mistake the book was never forwarded to me. 1 Please accept my best thanks for it now & believe me Dear Sir | Yours very truly | Briton Riviere Charles Darwin Esq DAR 176: 182 1

Riviere’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V); Riviere had made two of the illustrations (see Correspondence vol. 19, and this volume).

November 1872

521

To Albert Günther 23 November 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov 23— 1872 My dear Dr Günther Many thanks for the Pop. Sc. Review; but I am a subscriber & read yr article with the greatest interest some time ago.1 Therefore I return it, as you might like to give it to some one else, erasing my name— I have to thank you for a most kind letter received a little time ago, & which pleased me much2 But I did not answer it as I hope to be in London before very long & shall then see you— 3 Believe me | yours very sincerely | Ch Darwin LS Shrewsbury School 1

2 3

Günther published an article on Ceratodus, a newly discovered fish from Queensland, Australia, in Popular Science Review (Günther 1872). For his other publications on the subject, see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Albert Günther, 1 October 1871 and n. 5. The Queensland Ceratodus, a lungfish, is now known as Neoceratodus forsteri, the name Ceratodus being reserved for its extinct relatives. See letter from Albert Günther, 14 November 1872. CD was in London from 17 to 22 or 23 December 1872 (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II); Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)); he had planned to go earlier (letter to R. F. Cooke, 7 December [1872]).

From J. M. Herbert 23 November 1872 Rocklands, | Ross1 23 Nov. 1872 My dear Darwin, I was just on the point of writing to my Bookseller an order for the Book, when I received your most kind & cheery letter—2 I say “cheery”, notwithstanding what you say about being a Confirmed invalid, for it reminds me so pleasantly of our youthful friendly relations and speaks so contentedly in the suggested Postscript of Mrs. Darwin, that it gave me the greatest pleasure to read it. Very many thanks for the new book, which I doubt not will be as interesting and convincing, as any of the former ones, by which your world-wide reputation has been established. Mrs. Herbert3 & I have not long since returned from a Continental trip of 5 weeks. We went through Belgium, Holland, & North Germany, & back by the Rhine. We were most delighted with Amsterdam, Dresden, & Nürnberg— The rest from work has given me fresh vigour, for I feel again equal to the work of my laborious Circuit, although I have nearly completed my 26th. year of Judicial life—4 You ask about Whitley—5 he is well & hearty, &, I think, as happy in his domestic life, as a man can be. I heard from him only yesterday, & I have told him that you enquired after him. I am not surprised at what you say of Tom Butler; there was always a certain “fretchedness” in him, which would not be improved by old age, or the pastoral cares of his Nottinghamshire living.6 Until you mentioned it, I had no idea that Erewhon was written by his Son.7 I have little doubt that the Son does consider his Father a

522

November 1872

very unpleasant old man, for I am told the relations between them are anything but friendly.8 Did your 3d (?) Son tell you of my making his acquaintance in a Railway Carriage? He was on his way from Archdeacon Crawleys’, & the Archdeacon was with him, & having addressed him by name, my attention was roused, & I was at once satisfied from the strong likeness that he was your Son—& so it proved, on my challenging him.9 I shd. be very glad to see him here, when he next pays the Archdeacon a visit— We live only 16 miles apart—10 My wife joins me in kindest regards to Mrs. Darwin & yourself & I am always | yours truly attached | J. M. Herbert Charles Darwin Esq P.S. I send you my Photogr. taken last summer, that you may see how old I look. My wife thinks it is the least-vicious looking of two by the same Artist. DAR 166: 186 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9 10

Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire. See letter to J. M. Herbert, 21 November 1872. The book was Expression. Mary Ann Herbert. Herbert was a county court judge in South Wales. Charles Thomas Whitley. See letter to J. M. Herbert, 21 November 1872 and n. 5. A fretchard is a fretful or peevish person (OED), but ‘fretchedness’ may be a coinage of Herbert’s own, or a dialect word from the Welsh borders (‘fretched’ is used in Mary Webb’s Gone to earth (G. M. Webb 1930, p. 163), first published in 1917). Thomas Butler was rector of Langar with Barnston, Nottinghamshire. Herbert refers to Samuel Butler (1835–1902) and [S. Butler] 1872a. Samuel Butler analysed his relations with his family in his posthumously published semi-autobiographical novel The way of all flesh (S. Butler 1903); see also Raby 1991 and ODNB. Francis Darwin was a friend of archdeacon William Crawley’s son Charles (letter to Charles Crawley, 19 April [1872]). The Crawleys lived in Bryngwyn Rectory, Newport, South Wales.

From C.-F. Reinwald 23 November 1872

Paris, Rue des Saints Pères No 15 23d November 1872

To Charles Darwin, Esq. Down, Beckenham. Kent Dear Sir It is only to-day we could send you the Second Volume of the french translation of your Descent of Man. Other copies of this volume have likewise been sent to Mess. Saporta, Charles Martins, and Prof Dareste. 1 The heavy illness of your appointed translator Mr Moulinié gave us much trouble, as the manuscript of the second volume was not at all ready, when he failed. We had to work over again half of the Second volume, and in spite of all haste it was not possible to get faster on as we did—2

November 1872

523

Our trouble was still greater with the Origin of Species, which we begun it is nearly 3 years ago, and the printing of which was not only delayed by the war, but also by the publication of your sixth english edition and finally by the illness of the translator.3 We did our best to complete the book in the absence of the latter, and hope we will encounter your approval when the work will be ready for sale, what probably will be before the end of December, as we are about printing the end of the volume, the indexes and the historical introduction. 4 If we succeed to sell speedily this our edition of the Origin of Species, we propose to get the book then published in a definite form as you did with the sixth english edition.5 We therefore intend then to get our translation revised by a man of authority in France, as perhaps Mr. Charles Martins or any of your personnal friends in this country. But it is of first necessity that then our desire will be backed by your personnal influence. It is however a great deal too early to speak of this now, as the book is not only not out but very likely not very soon out of print. We arranged with Dr Pozzi for the translation of your new work On the Emotions and are sure that his labor will be highly recommendable as for the french style and accuracy.6 Nevertheless we should be much obliged if you would take the pain to receive the sheets when ready, and give your personnal consent to their printing. The author is no doubt more able as any one else to judge of the accuracy and truthfullness of the translation, and our first care above all is to give translation “agréées par l’auteur.”7 We should be happy to have the author of these books going with us in a percentage of the benefits, but we dare say that the interference of your hitherto appointed translator M. J. J. Moulinié was not to our mutual advantage. Col. Moulinié, by your largeness,8 was the legal proprietor of the copy right for french translation, and his labor was paid by us in consequence.— As soon as it will be possible to settle business with himself, or if he should henceforth be incapable of this care, with his legal representatives, we will inform you of the fact and agree with you for any new edition of your celebrated books which as we hope, are to be needed in future. If you were in want of some copies of the french translation of the Descent of Man, we shall be happy to send them without delay. We shall feel much satisfaction if the publication of our Second volume of the Descendance de l’Homme meets your approval, and hoping that it will be so, we remain | Dear Sir | your’s most obediently | C Reinwald & Co DAR 176: 98 CD ANNOTATIONS 5.4 The author . . . l’auteur.” 5.7] scored red crayon End of letter: ‘Gaudry’9 red crayon 1

Jean Jacques Moulinié, the translator of the French edition of Descent (Moulinié trans. 1872), had written that he hoped the first volume would be published early in 1872 (letter from J. J. Moulinié, 1 January 1872). Reinwald refers to Gaston de Saporta, Charles Frédéric Martins, and Camille Dareste.

524 2

3

4 5

6 7 8 9

November 1872

In his letter of 3 March 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19), Moulinié had told CD that his translation of Descent was complete except for the index. On Moulinié’s illness, see also the letters from C.-F. Reinwald, 13 September 1872 and 17 September 1872. Moulinié’s translation of the fifth edition of Origin was half done when CD began work on the sixth edition; CD had asked Moulinié to adapt his work to incorporate the changes (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to J. J. Moulinié, 28 June [1871], and this volume, letter from J. J. Moulinié, 1 January 1872). Reinwald also refers to the Franco-Prussian War, which ended in May 1871. Reinwald sent CD a copy of the French translation of Origin 6th ed. (Moulinié trans. 1873) in January 1873 (Correspondence vol. 21, letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 4 March 1873). Moulinié trans. 1873 was a composite of the fifth and sixth English editions of Origin, with the new seventh chapter of the sixth edition added as an appendix. Reinwald was in addition dissatisfied with Moulinié’s work (see Correspondence vol. 21, letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 4 March 1873). Reinwald published a new translation, by Edmond Barbier, in 1876. Reinwald refers to Samuel Jean Pozzi and Expression. See also letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 22 October 1872 and n. 2. Approved by the author. Largeness: i.e. largesse, generosity. CD probably wanted a copy of the French translation of Descent or Origin or both sent to the French palaeontologist Albert Gaudry; CD cited Gaudry in both Descent and Origin 5th and 6th eds.

From R. F. Cooke 25 November 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Nov 25 1872

My dear Sir We must publish yr work tomorrow & have only 4000 instead of 7000 to do so. 1 The Trade & public will be dissatisfied, but we must defy them & it may be advisable to get 6 Policemen to defend this house. Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 432 1

The publication of Expression was limited by the number of heliotype plates available (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 20 November 1872).

From J. T. Rothrock 25 November 1872

Wilkes-Barre Penna. Nov. 25, 1872

Mr Charles Darwin Dr Sir— Through the kindness of Prof Asa Gray I have received your last—on Expression of Emotions.1 I hastily prepared the enclosed notice of the book for one of our local papers.2 We have in this City of 20000. inhabitants more intelligent readers of your works than in any city of similar size in the state. I need not say that I am under obligations to you for the volume, which I value not more for its real importance to me as a physician than as a token from you. In one

November 1872

525

word I am delighted with it. My practice leaves me not a moment of time now for anything but medicine and I am clear outside all scientific work and scientific circles. Reading the paragraph on pp. 34 & 5. calls up to mind—this—that when a boy I used to see my father drawing teeth and the moment the patient opened his mouth mine too was as widely opened as the patients.3 I have observed the same thing repeatedly since when giving chloroform for some of my dental friends, in other persons. In this case with me habit of seeing teeth extracted has destroyed the propensity, which I still find in others not so habituated to the sight. Another singular freak I have not yet learned to abandon— In attending an obstetrical case—after the true expulsive pains of the patient have become severe—and the child is about being born, if especially anxious to have the patient hasten through her labor, I find the moment she begins to bear down I (unconsciously until my attention is arrested by the effort) am doing the same— Certainly in my case this cant be explained from habit. If you have occasion to refer to these little peculiarities—it will not hurt my feelings to have my name omitted as the subject.4 An Unconscious sympathy is of course sufficient to explain them, but I have so often noted these two facts that I have no hesitancy in mentioning them more particularly as they are somewhat striking illustrations Doubtless some of your Medical friends can confirm my statements. Thanks again my dear Sir for the volume—and if any facts are in my possession which might be of service to you I would cheerfully turn them into your hands Yours sincerely | J. T. Rothrock M.D. | Wilkes-Barre Penna | Box. 1 2 To | Chas Darwin FRS. etc DAR 176: 220 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 Through . . . circles. 3.4] crossed pencil 1 2 3 4

Rothrock’s name, ‘care of Prof. Asa Gray, Cambridge Mass.’, appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression. CD had cited Rothrock for information on the expressions of Native Americans. The notice has not been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. The passage referred to discusses actions undertaken in unconscious sympathy with other intentional or observed actions. Rothrock’s father was Abraham Rothrock. In Expression 2d ed., p. 36, a note was added: ‘An American physician states, in a letter to the author, that while attending women in labour he sometimes finds himself imitating the muscular efforts of the patient. This case is of interest because habit is necessarily excluded.’

From F. P. Cobbe [26 November 1872]1

26. Hereford Sq | S.W Dear Mr. Darwin I cannot say how much I am gratified by your kind gift of your book. 2 I had been trying in vain to purchase it—no copy being in the market—& I need not say how very much more valuable it is as coming from you— Miss Lloyd3 & I are deep in it already— She is meanly rejoicing that I am going out to dinner that she may read it all the evening!—

526

November 1872

Hoping that your health is pretty good & that we may have the pleasure of catching a glimpse of you in Queen Anne St 4 ere very long, Believe me dear Mr Darwin heartily yr. obliged | Frances Power Cobbe Murray of course sends you the Quarterly— I sh d. be very curious to know if you thought I had done anything towards explaining the “Consciousness of Dogs”—? 5 I have just written another set of (rather childish!) doggie stories for the Cornhill— They have only the merit of strictly veracious biographies 6 Tuesday night DAR 161: 188 1 2 3 4 5 6

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to F. P. Cobbe, 28 November 1872. The Tuesday before 28 November 1872 was 26 November. Cobbe’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). Mary Charlotte Lloyd. Six Queen Anne Street was the address of CD’s brother, Erasmus. Cobbe had written an article on the emotion and psychology of dogs for the October issue of the Quarterly Review, which was published by CD’s publisher, John Murray ([Cobbe] 1872a). Cobbe’s article appeared in the December issue of the Cornhill Magazine ([Cobbe] 1872b).

From William Main 26 November 1872 New Ferry Park | Birkenhead 26th. Novr. 1872 Dear Sir On reading a short review of your new work on Expression in Man & Animals last night, I was struck by your remarks on Antithesis. At one place,—after describing the energy of the dog in a hostile mood, & the reverse movements when the dog discovers the supposed enemy to be his own master,—you remark “not one of the above mentioned movements, so clearly expressive of affection, are of the least direct service to the animal & c. and are only explicable on the ground of antithesis &c.”1 Now Sir, it may appear presumption in me attempting to correct so distinguished an observer as yourself, but I cannot help thinking that a much more satisfactory explanation can be given for the change in the dogs movements. You are doubtless aware of the fact, well known in Art, that Lines tending upwards indicate energy, power, joy &c. while Lines tending downwards indicate the reverse or weakness, sadness, horror &c. Horizontal Lines again showing repose. Here lies, I suspect, the true explanation. The Lines in the case of the dog about to fight, so well described by you, clearly point to the truth of the first statement; while the second law is as clearly pointed out by your description of the dog when he finds out his mistake. The explanation, to my mind, is that the dog is ashamed of his mistake. He therefore first expresses his sorrow by changing his Lines & giving them all a downward direction— When the Master is reconciled, as discovered by his face or voice, then the dog expresses his affection by leaping up &c.

November 1872

527

In the case of the angry Cat,2 also mentioned by the Reviewer, the only down tending lines are the ears— All the others are uptending, such as the arched back, erect tail, hair both on back & tail all bristling— In this case I read that the up lines give energy to the hate expressed by the ears forced back; for the ear muscles are not at rest, on the contrary they are active for the superior edge of the ear is actually flattened. These considerations regarding Lines appear to afford a more rational explanation than the ground of Antithesis. Allow me to mention a curious case of incongruity of lines, which always looks absurd even to a child—unless indeed there be enough of energy to cause fear. When a dog is let off the chain for a run, we not unfrequently see him dart off with his tail down, & his hind quarters crouching; while his head & ears are in the attitude of repose! In this curious fashion he describes a few curves with great energy & then becomes himself again. Is this same incongruity of lines not the true meaning of the shrugging of the shoulders observed by you as so general in Man? 3 It is however in the human face & in Ladies’ dress where the effect of Lines can be best observed— For instance—depress the outer angles of the eyes & mouth; then elevate these; then turn the one up & the other down & mark the difference in expression— Again take a Widow with her peculiar cap & let her hair be curled— how unpleasant the effect? Now let her hair be braided & how harmonious is the result?4 &c. &c. Observing the effects of the direction of lines has been a favourite amusement of mine for years & I am forced to the conclusion that the expression in the direction of Lines is the only universal language of Man & the higher Animals, & I do not doubt but you will come to the same conclusion if you can spare time to attend to the subject— My time for reading is very limited and I am only now engaged with your work on the Origin of Species— Allow me to thank you sincerely for the instruction & pleasure which that book is giving me, & for the glorious glimpses it gives us of the vast scheme of creation. The “several creations” theory is perhaps as far as man could grasp in earlier times, & still is enough for many—5 But how vastly greater must we conceive the Power to be, who calls forth organic life & gives it laws to adapt itself to all time & all circumstances! You Sir have opened out a new & wonderful truth which will ere long, in my humble opinion, do more to exalt our thoughts of the Almighty than any ideas started since the time of Newton. 6 I beg you to excuse me troubling you, but to one who is so humble & earnest a student after truth as you evidently are, I thought that my theory of Lines would probably be neither insignificant nor uninteresting— I am | Yours very respectfully | Wm. Main To | Charles Darwin Esqr. | Down | Bromley— Kent DAR 171: 27 1 2

Expression, p. 52. Expression, p. 56.

528 3 4 5

6

November 1872

Expression, p. 269. Widows’ caps had streamers that hung down. Main probably alludes to the theory of Georges Cuvier and others that there had been successive creations, and that there was no hereditary relationship between fossil and modern organisms (Cuvier 1812). Isaac Newton.

From Isaac Markens 27 November 1872

New York, Novbr 27 1872

Chas Darwin Esq etc | London Sir. I shall be under many obligations to you, for a copy of your new work on the Expression in Animals &c, “Voyage of a naturalist” 1 &c with autograph on fly leaves, for my library. If you will inform me of the cost, I shall remit the money. I am Sir, | With the most profound respect | Your most obedient Servant | Isaac Markens 324 East 78th. Street | New York City | U.S. DAR 201: 26 1

Expression, Journal of researches.

To F. P. Cobbe 28 November 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov 28. 1872

My dear Miss Cobbe I have been greatly interested by your article in the Quarterly. 1 It seems to me the best analysis of the mind of an animal which I have ever read, & I agree with you on most points. I have been particularly glad to read what you say about the reasoning power of dogs & about that rather vague matter, their self-consciousness. 2 I dare say however that you wd prefer criticisms to admiration. I regret that you quote Jesse so often: I made enquiries about one case (which quite broke down) from a man who certainly ought to have known Mr Jesse well, & I was cautioned that he had not written in a scientific spirit.3 I regret also that you quote old writers;4 it may be very illiberal but their statements go for nothing with me, & I suspect with many others. It passes my powers of belief that dogs ever commit suicide; assuming the statements to be true, I shd think it more probable that they were distraught & did not know what they were doing; nor am I able to credit about fetishes. 5 One of the most interesting subjects in yr article seems to me to be about the moral sense.6 Since publishing the Descent of Man I have got to believe rather more than I did in dog’s having what may be called a conscience. When an honourable dog has committed an undiscovered offence he certainly seems ashamed (& this is the term naturally & often used) rather than afraid to meet his master. 7 My dog, the beloved & beautiful Polly, is at such times extremely affectionate towards me; & this leads me

November 1872

529

to mention a little anecdote. When I was a very little boy, I had committed some offence, so that my conscience troubled me; & when I met my father, 8 I lavished so much affection on him, that he at once asked me what I had done, & told me to confess. I was so utterly confounded at his suspecting any thing, that I remember the scene clearly to the present day; & it seems to me that Polly’s frame of mind on such occasions is much the same as was mine, for I was not then at all afraid of my father. This note is not worth sending, but I have nothing better to write & I remain with kind regards to Miss Lloyd9 | yours very sincerely | Charles Darwin LS The Huntington Library (CB 386) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

See letter from F. P. Cobbe, [26 November 1872]. CD refers to [Cobbe] 1872a. Cobbe discussed the reasoning power of dogs and their lack of self-consciousness in [Cobbe] 1872a, pp. 442–5, 447–8. CD probably refers to Edward Jesse: Cobbe cited Edward Jesse twice in [Cobbe] 1872a (pp. 429, 445), and George Richard Jesse once (p. 446). CD himself cited G. R. Jesse in Variation 2d ed. 1: 30, 44, 45. In [Cobbe] 1872a, pp. 443–4, Cobbe used anecdotes from the medieval Life of St Hugo and from Plutarch. Cobbe related anecdotes of dogs committing suicide in [Cobbe] 1872a, pp. 445–6, and fetishes (and a fear of the uncanny) in ibid., pp. 437–8 Cobbe argued that dogs had noble impulses, but were powerless to make a moral choice between them and lower ones ([Cobbe] 1872a, pp. 438–9). Cobbe had written: ‘Shame, after transgressing any of the arbitrary rules imposed on him, a dog displays with ludicrous simplicity’ ([Cobbe] 1872a, p. 429). Robert Waring Darwin. Mary Charlotte Lloyd.

From F. P. Cobbe 28 November [1872]1

26. Hereford Sq. | S W My dear Mr Darwin You will know how pleased & proud your letter has made me.—2 I do not write to draw from you any more words, valuable though they be either as praise or as criticism, but just to say I have sent you the Cornhill just published to shew you another instance of what seems to me genuine superstition in dogs. Of course I rather turned the matter to jest in calling a stump a fetish—but the sentiment of vague awe at the incomprehensible is surely, I think, to be traced both in such freaks of dogs & in the shying of horses; & is very nearly akin to human superstition if not quite the same feeling.3 Your own & your dog’s similar behaviour after the commission of guilt, form delicious counterparts! Do you think the phenomenon can at all explain the exceeding religiosity of a great many arrant moral offenders? Miss Lloyd entering agrees with you about the suicide of dogs & wished me not to insert the stories in my article—4 I did so in truth only hypothetically. Is there not some sort of radiate creature which casts off its own limbs, and strictly speaking causes its own dissolution when captured?—

530

November 1872

I am sorry to hear of Jesse’s untrustworthiness.5 No doubt old stories of natural history are little to be relied on for scientific purposes. They only shew what men then thought their beasts might do—Would that those cruel old Jews had one such anecdote as that of Ulysses’ dog in all their literature6 It would have stopped a thousand Christian atrocities We have just returned from the zoos where we paid a domiciliary visit to the Chimpanzee in his private study. The poor dear little beast took a fancy to me & stroked my dress & face affectionately. I must say the grasp of his strong warm hand,—gentle and cordial as any human handshaking, was quite awful to me. I should consider it every bit as much murder to kill him as an idiot— The nearer one feels in pity & sympathy to an ape or an idiot the more I think the vague sense presses on us that some positive thing—(a thing we may as well call a “soul” as anything else,—) is missing; & not that it is merely a rudimentary stage of development which we behold— This impression does not come from any theory—indeed it does not fit any theories at all—but it is one which comes to me with very vivid insistence With many apologies for troubling you with this long letter & with my (very childish) article in the Cornhill, | believe me dear Mr Darwin | most truly yrs | Frances P Cobbe Nov. 28 DAR 161: 187 1 2 3

4 5 6

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to F. P. Cobbe, 28 November 1872. See letter to F. P. Cobbe, 28 November 1872. In [Cobbe] 1872b, pp. 673–4, Cobbe described Nip, a dog of great physical courage who was nonetheless ‘abjectly superstitious and ready to grovel with terror in the presence of anything inexplicable to her mind’, such as an rubber cushion inflated or deflated in her presence, a monkey skin hung on a wall, or a garden hose. In [Cobbe] 1872a, pp. 437–8, Cobbe had described the behaviour of her own dog towards a stump that she was fearful of until Cobbe beat it (the stump) with her umbrella; Cobbe described the stump as a fetish. Cobbe refers to Mary Charlotte Lloyd. See letter to F. P. Cobbe, 28 November 1872 and n. 5. See letter to F. P. Cobbe, 28 November 1872 and n. 3. In book 17 of the Odyssey, Odysseus (or Ulysses) returns home after twenty years to find his dog Argos dying on a dung-heap. The dog recognises Odysseus and wags his tail, then dies. Cobbe later wrote, ‘Had it but been recorded of any eminent canonical Prophet or Apostle, as of the virtuous (but alas! apocryphal) Tobit, that he had had a Dog which followed him on his pious journeying, the fate of all the dogs in Christendom would have been improved’ (Cobbe 1889, p. 39).

From J. D. Hooker 28 November 1872 Kew Nov 28/72 Dear Darwin My boys wish me to send you enclosed scrap which I think delightful, for humour.— The face, the outstretched arm & hand, & the raised leg, are worthy of a place in “Expression”1

November 1872

531

I have never yet thanked you for that book; & must own with sorrow that I have not half read it,—though the boys & girls have & like it extremely—: 2 My only reason is, as you will I hope believe, want of time— Gregs “Enigmas” get the start of you; in my reading.— & I want to finish it before I take up “Expression”— I have been a fortnight over this & find it fascinating; it is one of the most eloquent books I ever read & some passages are of astonishing beauty.—3 I hope to goodness that Owen will drop his communications— He is doing incalculable mischief to Science in the eyes of Govt: officials & the department generally. The direct attacks on myself I can well afford; but no establishment can afford to be directly libelled without suffering in the opinion of this ignorant careless & unobservant Government.4 I see Ayrton has allowed his Organ, the Echo, to state that I have satisfied him with an apology!— I suppose this is to save his sinking credit— I thought of contradicting it, but my friends say no— except the Standard, no paper took any notice of it, & in the present unsettled state of matters I had best not raise any superfluous questions.—5 I long for peace, meanwhile I expect a fine row is breeding between the Editor & Subeditor of Nature, Lockyer & Bennett, each owning that a letter with such personalities as Owens should not have been inserted; & each blaming the other for it—6 I am throwing it upon the troubled waters—having spent my rage on the unlucky publisher! who asked me for my name to help to advertize with that of the other Naturalists. I had a long talk with Huxley, who is in great spirits in regard to his classes &c, but who looks wretchedly— No one can compare him with the picture or photograph of 18 months ago, without being struck with the change. I do not quite like the Aberdeen Rectorship for him; yet why should he not culminate? 7 it is so fitting an honor for him Ever yours affec | J D Hooker Harriett begs that Punch cutting may be returned— Have you seen Lord Lytton’s splendid article on Ayrton? in the “Conservative.”8 DAR 103: 135–7 1

2 3

4

5

Hooker probably refers to a cartoon, ‘Valour in the field’, in Punch, 23 November 1872, p. 217. See plate on p. 532. Hooker had four sons: William Henslow, Charles Paget, Brian Harvey Hodgson, and Reginald Hawthorn Hooker. Hooker’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (Appendix V). Hooker’s daughters were Harriet Anne and Grace Ellen Hooker. William Rathbone Greg’s Enigmas of life (Greg 1872) contained chapters titled, ‘Malthus notwithstanding’, ‘Non-survival of the fittest’, ‘Limits and directions of human development’, and ‘The significance of life’. Hooker refers to Richard Owen and probably to the Board (or Department) of Works, under whose authority the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, came. See letter from J. D. Hooker, 8 November 1872 and n. 3. The report of Hooker’s apology was probably in the 19 November 1872 issue of the Echo. The Echo was not unfailingly favourable to Ayrton, reporting criticism of him on 20 November 1872. The Standard, 20 November 1872, p. 4, commented with heavy irony, ‘The report that the difficulty between

532

November 1872

Punch, 23 November 1872, p. 217. By permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library.

November 1872

6 7

8

533

Dr. Hooker and the First Commissioner of Public Works has been “arranged” by an apology from the former to Mr. Ayrton will be easily credited by those who have studied the new Ministerial method of arranging difficulties. . . . The apology in these days must be made by the victim.’ See letter from J. D. Hooker, 8 November 1872. Hooker refers to Joseph Norman Lockyer and Alfred William Bennett. Thomas Henry Huxley taught in the biological department of the Royal School of Mines; in 1872 the department transferred to new buildings in South Kensington, where for the first time there were laboratories (L. Huxley ed. 1900, 1: 381). CD himself had been asked to allow the students to nominate him for the rectorship of Aberdeen University (see letter from J. S. Craig, 4 November 1872 and n. 1). Huxley was elected to the post. Hooker refers to Edward George Earle Lytton Bulwer-Lytton and Acton Smee Ayrton. The Conservative was a short-lived weekly periodical (North 1997).

To William Main 29 November [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov. 29th Dear Sir I am much obliged for your very courteous letter. If you ever have time & inclination to read my book,2 I think that you will see that all the cases, referred to, will not be easily explained through your principle of the lines. And even if they could be so explained, there would remain the solution why perpendicular & inclined lines should express what you believe they do.— Dear Sir | Yours faithfully & obliged | Ch. Darwin Wellcome Library (MS.7781/10) 1 2

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from William Main, 26 November 1872. Expression.

From M. I. Snow 29 [November 1872 or later]1 The Down Wood, | Blandford.  mber 29th. Dear Sir. When I am playing on the piano, and anyone comes, and looks over me; I am afraid they will look at my hands, and I am so afraid of their being red that they blush, though they—were not red [before.] 2 When my governess spoke of my hands   being long or able to stretch, or drew attention to them, they blushed. I once said this to   I forget who, I think one of my governesses, she said “Oh yes, of course everyone blushes in their hands.” I hope you will not think I am trying to hoax you because I could not do such a thing, and would be disgusted at anyone who did. Yr. truly | Maria Isabella Snow.

534

November 1872

I used to feel my hands getting redder and redder, the more they were looked at I say they “used”  ise since I left the  room, I never play  , so I have not seen it lately— DAR 177: 213 1

2

The date is established by the fact that this letter is quoted in the second edition of Expression, published in 1890, but not in the first edition (see n. 2, below), and by the likelihood that this letter was inspired by Expression, which was published in November 1872 (Freeman 1977). In Expression, pp. 314–15, CD remarked that blushing did not normally affect more than the face, neck, and upper part of the chest; he gave one instance of a woman’s hands blushing. The first two sentences of this letter were quoted in Expression 2d ed., p. 333 n. 10, as being from ‘a young lady’. Parts of the damaged text have been restored from his quotation.

From Alpheus Hyatt [late] November 18721 Cannstatt bei Stuttgart Nov 1872 Charles Darwin Dear Sir The letter with which you have honoured me bearing the date of Oct 10 has just reached here after a voyage to America and back.2 I have long had it in mind to write you upon the subject of which you speak, but have been prevented by a very natural feeling of distrust in the worthiness and truth of the views which I had to present There is certainly no occasion to apologize for not having quoted my paper. The law of acceleration and retardation of development was therein used to explain the appearance of other phenomena and might, as it did in nearly all cases, easily escape notice.3 My relations with Prof. Cope are of the most friendly character; and although fortunate in publishing a few months ahead, I consider, that this gives me no right to claim anything beyond such an amount of participation in the discovery, if it may be so called as the thoroughness and worth of my work entitles me to. 4 Prof Agassiz5 some thirteen years back introduced me to the study of the Ammonites and entrusted to my care his truly immense collection of these fossils the value of which I appreciate more highly now that I have seen those of Wurtenburg. 6 Your time is doubtless very valuable and therefore I have taken the liberty of reducing four pages of irrelevant matter to this one half sheet, for which I beg to apologize. 7 My letter will doubtless prove long and tedious, nor am I at all satisfied with the way in which the explanations are given but it is the best I can give at present without delaying my reply until the next week. The collections which I have studied, it will be remembered are fossils collected without special reference to the very minute subdivisions such as the subdivisions of the Lower or Middle Lias as made by the German authors especially Quenstedt and Oppel,8 but pretty well defined for the larger divisions in which the species are

November 1872

535

also well defined. The condition of the collections as regards names etc was chaotic, localities alone, with some few exceptions, accurate. To put this in order they were first arranged according to their adult characteristics. This proving unsatisfactory I determined to test thoroughly the theory of evolution by following out the developmental history of each species and placing, them within their formations, Middle or Upper lias Oolite9 or so, according to the extent to which they represented each others characteristics. Thus an adult of simple structure being taken as the starting point which we will call -a- another species which was -a- in its young stage and became -b- in the adult was placed above it in the zoological series. By this process I presently found that -a- then -ab- and -abc-, c representing the adult stage, were very often found; but that practically after passing these two or three stages it did not often happen that species was found which was abc in the young and then became d in the adult. But on the other hand I very frequently found one in which, while it was -a- in the young, skipped the stages -b- or -c- and became d while still quite young. Then sometimes, though more rarely, a species would be found belonging to the same series which would be -a- in the young and with a very faint and fleeting resemblance to -d- at a later stage pass immediately while still quite young to the more advanced characteristics represented by -e-, and hold these as its specific characteristics until old age destroyed them. This skipping is the highest exemplification or rather manifestation of acceleration in development.10 In alluding to the history of diseases and inheritance of characteristics, you in your Origin of Species allude to the ordinary manifestation of acceleration, when you speak of the tendency of diseases or characteristics to appear at younger periods in the life of the child than of it’s parents. 11 This according to my observations is a law or rather mode of development which is applicable to all characteristics, and in this way it is possible to explain why the young of later occurring animals are like the adult stages of those which preceded them in time. If I am not mistaken you have intimated something of this sort also in your first edition, but I have not been able to find it lately. 12 Of course this is a very normal condition of affairs when a series can be followed in this way beginning with species a, then going through species ab to abc, then abd or acd and then ade or simply ae as it sometimes comes. Very often the acceleration takes place in two closely connected series thus.

in which one series goes on very regularly while another lateral offshoot of a- becomes d in the adult. This is an actual case which can be plainly shown with the specimens in hand and has been verified in the collections here. Retardation is entirely Prof Cope’s idea but I think also easily traceable.13 It is the opponent of acceleration so to speak on the opposite or negative of that mode of development. Thus series may occur in which either in size or characteristics they return to former characteristics, but a better discussion of this point you will find in the little treatise which

536

November 1872

I send by the same mail as this letter, “On Reversions among the Ammonites” 14 Since coming here I have been endeavouring to verify the series which I have made and have found that, though mistakes are many and often very serious, still in the main the parallelism of a series made up according to the development of the species alone and of series made up according to development and chronological sequence is exact whenever the material is sufficient. You will be doubtless pleased to learn also that the deficiencies in the Geological Record are as apparent between the smaller beds such as the Tuberculatusbett, Bucklandibett, et al of Oppel as between the larger formations.15 Neverthless this record is much more complete and reliable than there was any reason to expect theoretically and often with the aid of development we can bridge over the gaps and make complete series. In my paper in the Memoirs Bot. Soc. Nat. Hist I used the accelerated inheritance of characteristics to explain the degradation of series or abnormal forms or degraded forms rather which often cap series which pass through several formations. 16 These forms are often like those with which a given series begins thus the Baculite is like the Orthoceratite or the species Collenotic or pseudostellare (a new species) in many of it’s characteristics resemble the species psilonotus, the former ending the series of Arietidæ and the latter beginning the same, the former in the Obtususbett and the latter in the Psilonotubett of the Lower Lias.17 Everywhere in complete series which develop according the accelerated mode this is found and also in others. This resemblance is a double one. These terminal forms are at the same time the highest of their series in their organization and development and yet like the most immature in many characteristics. Again these terminal forms have not only these resemblances but they also resemble the old age of earlier species of their own series. Here for example we have in the first rank three forms adult, second young of the same and in the third the extreme old age of each, all in the Arietidæ and though diagrams in the main strictly correct sections tranversely through the whorls. The first thing to be observed is that the first is psilonotus occurring lowest the next is the Bucklandi (of Germans not English) or Brookii of Germans and the third is either the new species pseudostellare or the older one Collenotii of D’Orbigny.18 The first is lowest the next about the middle and the third higher up chronologically in the Lower Lias. Oppen and Fraas19 and Quenstedt all agree upon this point and the collections here show that they are right. The development of the form the form of the adult, and the smoothness of the shell in Nos 1 & 3 and the great difference shown by the middle form no 2 which is keeled on the abdomen with deep channels and has tuberculated ribs on the sides. Compare this with the development of No 2 and we find that the adult of No 3 is like the old of No 2. Thus not only is adult No 3

November 1872

537

like adult of no 1 but it is also like the old of no 2. I have found, or thought I have, that this resemblance was due to the direct inheritance of degradational characteristics, not as an unusual but as a usual mode of development, among the higher or rather later occurring species of different series. Thus between 2 and three, there are a number of species and in these we find that if we represent the characteristics of No 2 by letters thus a=young d=adult and x=old age characteristics of shell that the series may be thus given in a rough way. adx=No 2. adex–aex–ax. Thus the series as a whole would thus be given.

From a to ad we have a series steadily increasing or adding in each adult something new to the series and then we have at the same time another series arising later which begins a step in advance of where the first ended but in which the acceleration of the development of the characteristics take place differently. Thus it is first regular repeating the adult, a-d-characteristics of adx in the young of adex and adding e for the adult stage, then the characteristics are still farther accelerated and e appears in the young of aex, but x here no longer represents the old age as formerly. It represents the adult and finally we have a species which is only a x. One in which even e is eliminated or skipped in the development. There are many serious questions which ought to be answered here but they would complicate my statements too much. One however is too important to pass by. Of course I do not mean to claim that old age characteristics are inherited but merely that there is an exact parallelism between degradational characteristics of all kinds and that the degradation which occurs in an old individual taken from the middle of a series may be compared precisely with the degradational characteristics which usually characterize the terminal as later occurring members of complete series. To carry this a little farther. The Orthoceratite in the adult differs but little from it’s own young and however large it may grow has no observable old or degradational characteristics. The ornamented Ammonites and Nautili alone have an adult which is very distinct from the young and they alone, also, have observable degradational senile metamorphoses. Again the Baculite is like the Orthoceratite but little changed by growth either in form external ornaments, or septa, the latter having only six lobes as in the young. Compare this with 1, 2, 3, here we have the same, homogeneity in the beginning, heterogeneity in the middle, and homogeneity again at the end. Does not this compare in the most remarkable manner with the development of any one individual taken from the middle of the series such as No 2. Homogeneous or simple in the young, heterogeneous with ornaments etc in the adult and again homogeneous or devoid of ornaments and smooth again

538

November 1872

in the old. D Orbigny has noticed this resemblance of the old age of the ammonite shell to it’s own young and in some of them it is most remarkably close. Therefore I did not hesitate to draw a parallel between the life of an individual and the life of the group to which it belongs. The whole series of Ammonoid forms beginning with their Orthoceratitic ancestors mount to the zenith of their development as the Jura and die out in the Cretaceous jus as an individual from the ornamented Jura forms grows to the adult condition and then dies by a series of retrograde, degradational metamorphoses in old age. This exceeding rough statement needs hundreds of qualifications, since I have here expressed myself as if the Cephalopods were one series whereas they are divisible into a great many and these again into others. Tracing out these is a most difficult task. One illustration I believe will carry my meaning better than any other that of a large wave covered with an inexplicable entanglment of smaller waves and yet all setting one way with the wind mounting up on one side of the great wave only to fall again on the other. And now I come to what is most interesting to me. How does all this agree with the Theory of Natural Selection? For years past I have been of the opinion that the regularity with which these series followed out a given line of characteristics in their progress was irreconcilable with your law and, though much more doubtful now, cannot get a clear idea of how Natural Selection can bring about such a series of phenomena or on the other hand how these, as I formerly thought, show some higher and more comprehensive law. They seem to me as you intimate in your letter to be not very fitly expressed by the word “law” 20 I think we ought to use the word mode and call it the mode of development through the acceleration and retardation of development. It appears to me that I have made a slight step forward in my paper on Reversions but you are the only judge of this. How can Natural Selection account for the fact, for fact it is according to observations a hundred times repeated upon the Arietidæ and other Amm. that the last of the series have these peculiar degradational characteristics and yet are in other respects the highest of their series? How can it also account for the limitation of the forms which seems to be implied by these observations. Thus we can say with great assurance what will be the coming forms of a series from the first two or three, especially if the old age is shown in one of them? Twice I have been able to verify this. Once in a series

when none other followed I wrote in my manuscript that the next step must be

and a short time after found it in a specimen, which I had always supposed must belong to another series but upon changing thoroughly and examining young and septa traced it to this one. Another was in the case of the German Bucklandi whose old age I had never seen but predicted what this must be from the adult characteristics of pseudostellare

November 1872

539

and Collenotii. It does not follow that a series is regular, it may be reversionary or apparently stationary but the result of the whole is normal and symmetrical. Thus among the Arietidæ

they must succeed each other so as long as the series develops normally and then

so if they continue to live longer. Nothing else seems possible. Follow up from the Arietidæ through the Falciferi and Clyperform and others, it is the same. 21 Take other large series and the same symmetry prevails with different forms. Take an individual out of the middle of the series and again in a complete life we have

the same formula when in the Arietidæ etc. Can Natural Selection explain this?. This question is perpetually arising in my mind and sometimes it seems as if the solution was attainable. Thus; lately I have visited the famous Steinheim locality which Hilgendorf has so thoroughly worked up. Doubtless you have remarked this paper since it has such an important bearing upon the theory of evolution. 22 The formations in the sand pits containing Paludina multiformis 23 are merely the successive layers formed at the bottom of a freshwater lake, evidently continuous or nearly continuous deposits, with only such interruptions in the zoological record as might have been occasioned by the migrations of the shells from one point to another according as the deposits were favorable or unfavorable for their life. These interruptions are mostly found where clay has been heavily cast down from the water above but even in these shells are occasionally present. Thus the record is as complete probably as we shall ever find it and the different varieties are nearly all traceable from one to another without break. If you consult Hildendorfs plates you will remark here the same law which characterizes the Ammonites. 24 Namely the resemblances which exist between the first and last forms of the large central series and the peculiar degradational characteristics also of the last or upper members of this series, or as revertions especially. Variety Trochiformis has an old age, that much I have seen already but have not yet studied the relations of this stage to the reverters and supremus varieties.25 I think however that in this locality it is possible to find something definite something which may possibly lead to the reconciliation of the facts, which I present above, to the law of Natural Selection. Thus it may be easily seen in the pits that the surrounding circumstances were continually growing more and more favorable up to the Trochiformis bed and then that they became less and less favorable subsequently. The prevalence of clay underneath and above the Trochiformis appears to indicate this and to account for the gradual increase and diminution in

540

November 1872

the size of the varieties. The inheritance of degradational characteristics on the part of reverters etc can thus be accounted for through the loss of favorable conditions but how by Natural Selection? This puzzles me and yet it seems all the while as if an answer was near by. The great difficulty seems to lie in this. That Trochiformis begins to show degradational characteristics in the very bed where this variety is most numerous and has the largest individuals. This also occurs among the Ammonites and Nautiloids. I cannot deny the continual action of Natural and Sexual Selection among animals as I see them in the present fauna of the earths surface and this law must be applicable here. But, how is it possible to apply it when a whole series of species seem to run through a given cycle of changes; a cycle which may be predicted, when it is normal, and be explained by unfavorable conditions, which retard, or interfere with the regular accelerated mode of the inheritance of characteristics, when it is abnormal? I shall work upon these Steinheim shells a portion of this winter and try to provide material for thorough study of the locality. Hilgendorf has made it possible to go much farther and I only regret that the weather prevents me from going there for several months, and am only fearful that I may be obliged to leave this part of the country before my collections and notes are complete. You will permit me to thank you for the gratifying notice of my paper on Embryology of Fossil Cephalopods.26 I beg also that, if the length of this letter wearies you, my long silence and the earnest desire I have long entertained of presenting my views to you, may be taken into consideration. I have written very openly, and frankly stated my difficulties with the hope that you will not find them entirely unworthy of your attention and any advice with regard to my future studies which they may show to be necessary would be most gratefully received by me. With the highest respect I remain | Your Humble Servt | Alpheus Hyatt P.O. Address is Cannstatt bei Stuttgart | No 256 Hoffner Strasse | or simply—Stuttgart | Poste Restante. DAR 99: 48–55 CD ANNOTATIONS 4.1 Prof . . . week. 6.3] crossed pencil 7.11 Thus] blue crayon line in margin 8.20 series thus.] ‘[ progression] of embryonic or larval stages.’ blue crayon, line blue crayon to diagram 8.41 I used . . . several formations. 8.43] ‘—But [ is much degraded]’ blue crayon 10.3 extreme old age] ‘do the old Breed?’ pencil 12.1 Thus . . . given.] ‘Acceleration of development = origin of development or embryonic character.’ pencil 12.13 exact . . . series. 12.17] scored blue crayon 12.27 heterogeneous . . . close. 12.31] scored blue crayon 12.34 forms . . . age. 12.36] scored blue crayon 12.44 regularity . . . law. 12.48] scored blue crayon 13.7 How can it] after opening square brackets, pencil; pencil cross in margin

November 1872

541

14.14 Doubtless . . . lake, 14.18] scored blue crayon; ‘Weismann’ 27 blue crayon 14.32 Thus it may . . . subsequently. 14.35] scored blue crayon 14.37 part of reverters . . . Selection? 14.39] scored blue crayon 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8

9 10

11

12

13 14 15

16

17

The letter is dated late in November since CD’s letter of 10 October [1872], to which it is a reply, would probably have taken at least six weeks to reach Hyatt via America. Letter to Alpheus Hyatt, 10 October [1872]. See letter to Alpheus Hyatt, 10 October [1872] and n. 4. Hyatt refers to Hyatt 1866. Hyatt refers to Edward Drinker Cope. See letter to Alpheus Hyatt, 10 October [1872] and n. 3. Louis Agassiz. Stuttgart (the address from which Hyatt writes) was the capital of the state of Württemberg. (Bad Cannstatt is an outer district of the city.) The first two pages of Hyatt’s letter are written on two sides of a half sheet of notepaper (a full sheet being a folded piece of paper that gave four sides to write on). The rest of the letter consists of three full sheets and another half sheet, the verso of which is blank. The first half sheet ends at the end of the sixth paragraph (‘until the next week.’). Albert Oppel was a student of the German palaeontologist Friedrich August Quenstedt. Quenstedt divided each of the three existing divisions of the Jurassic period into six zones in Germany using both palaeontological and geological evidence. Oppel divided the Jurassic formation into thirty-three zones characterised by particular animal species, mostly ammonites, allowing Jurassic deposits to be correlated across different countries. (DSB.) The Lias is the lower Jurassic; the Oolite the upper (more recent). In Hyatt 1866, p. 203, Hyatt had described the young of higher species as ‘constantly accelerating their development, and reducing to a more and more embryonic condition or passing entirely over the stages of growth corresponding to the adult periods of preceding or lower species’. Hyatt probably refers to CD’s ‘rule’ that ‘at whatever period of life a peculiarity first appears, it tends to re-appear in the offspring at a corresponding age, though sometimes earlier’ (Origin 6th ed., p. 10). CD continued, ‘But hereditary diseases and some other facts make me believe that the rule has a wider extension, and that, when there is no apparent reason why a peculiarity should appear at any particular age, yet that it does tend to appear in the offspring at the same period at which it first appeared in the parent’ (ibid.). CD believed that he had misrepresented Hyatt’s and Cope’s views (see letter to Alpheus Hyatt, 10 October [1872] and n. 5). For Hyatt’s view, see n. 10, above. In Origin, p. 449, CD had maintained, ‘As the embryonic state of each species and group of species partially shows us the structure of their less modified ancient progenitors, we can clearly see why ancient and extinct forms of life should resemble the embryos of their descendants,—our existing species.’ Although a similar passage appears in the sixth edition, it is in the new chapter seven, ‘Miscellaneous objections to the theory of natural selection’, rather than in the chapter on embryology (chapter thirteen in the first edition). CD had written, ‘Hence it is that existing species during the early stages of their development so often resemble ancient and extinct forms belonging to the same class’ (Origin 6th ed., p. 203). For Cope’s concept of retardation, see Cope 1871, pp. 230–1. Cope had sent an offprint of this paper; CD’s annotated copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Hyatt 1870. CD’s annotated copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. The Tuberculatusbett and Bucklandibett were adjoining zones or divisions of strata within the lower Lias specified by Oppel in his study of the Jurassic formations of England, France, and south-west Germany (Oppel 1856–8, p. 14). See Hyatt 1870, pp. 31–2. Hyatt argued that some shells entered the old age or senile period of growth before attaining the fullest adult condition and concluded, ‘They may be said to be arrested in development as far as size is concerned, and retrogressive in development when the reversionary characteristics are considered.’ The Obtususbett was a division immediately above the Tuberculatusbett in Oppel’s system (see n. 15, above). Oppel did not specify a ‘Psilonotubett’ but did refer to the ‘Bett des A. planorbis’ (the lowest

542

18

19 20 21

22

23

24 25

26 27

December 1872

division of eight of the lower Lias; see Oppel 1856–8, p. 14). Ammonites planorbis and Psiloceras psilonotum are synonyms of Psiloceras planorbis. Hyatt probably refers to Ammonites collenoti (now Oxynoticeras collenoti), which Oppel identified in the Oxynotusbett, the division above the Obtususbett (ibid., p. 59). No species with the epithet ‘pseudostellare’ has been identified. The Arietitidae is a family of ammonites. Baculites and Orthoceras are two superficially similar but not closely related extinct genera of cephalopods, the former from the late Cretaceous period, the latter from the middle Ordovician. In Hyatt 1866, pp. 197–201, Hyatt discussed what he referred to as the ‘morphological polarity’ of the Ammonoid and Nautiloid series and used the terms ‘Baculite’ and ‘Orthoceratite’ as descriptive terms referring to morphological characteristics of ammonites. According to Oppel 1856–8, p. 35, the strata associated with Ammonites bucklandi (Bucklandibett) was equivalent to the English ‘blue Lias’. Oppel associated A. brooki (now Caenisites brooki) with the Obtususbett, two levels above the Bucklandibett (ibid., p. 14). Hyatt refers to Alcide Charles Victor Dessalines d’Orbigny. Oscar Fraas. See letter to Alpheus Hyatt, 10 October [1872]. In early classificatory systems Ammonites was divided into fourteen families, including Falciferi (for more on early classification of ammonites, see Donovan 1994). The taxon Clyperformae has not been identified. Franz Hilgendorf had discovered a series of fossil snails in the Steinheim crater in Heidenheim, Germany; these were described in Hilgendorf 1866. Two annotated copies of Hilgendorf 1866 are in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL; CD cited it in Origin 5th ed., p. 362. Hyatt probably meant Palustris; P. multiformis was the name Hilgendorf applied to the series of Miocene fossil snails from Steinheim (see letter to August Weismann, 5 April 1872 and nn. 5 and 6). He identified ten stratigraphic zones, each associated with one or more varieties of P. multiformis (Hilgendorf 1866, pp. 478–9). Hilgendorf 1866 contains a plate that shows the gradations of form of the different varieties of Palustris multiformis and includes a phylogenetic tree. Palustris multiformis trochiformis was a large variety that occurred in zone six of Hilgendorf ’s system. Palustris multiformis revertens was in zone nine and P. multiformis supremus in zone ten (Hilgendorf 1866, p. 479). Hyatt refers to Hyatt 1872 (see letter to Alpheus Hyatt, 10 October [1872] and n. 2). See n. 23, above.

To W. W. Baxter 2 [ December 1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Nov 2d Dear Sir You supplied me some little time ago with extract of Belladonna, & many years ago I procured in Bournemouth from a good shop some extract of Digitalis. Both these extracts act on my experimental plants, as if they contained gelatine, or albumen, or some animal matter.—2 In preparing these extracts is any sort of animal matter ever used? I shd. be very much obliged for an answer & remain | Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin Extract of Hyosciamus & of Colchicum does not act in this manner.— 3 American Philosophical Society (B/D25.270)

December 1872 1 2

3

543

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from W. W. Baxter, 4 December 1872. CD wrote ‘Nov’ in error. CD was using belladonna and digitalis in his experiments on insectivorous plants (see Insectivorous plants, especially p. 84). The Darwin family had stayed in Bournemouth in September 1862 (see Correspondence vol. 10). Hyoscyamus is henbane. Colchicum is the autumn crocus.

From Asa Gray 2 December 1872

Cambridge. Mass, Dec, 2. | 1872

My Dear Darwin My good wife duly received the new book you so kindly addressed to her, and she is delighted with the compliment.1 I have read 20 or 30 pages— I doubt if she has got so far—for we have both been very much occupied, with visits of friends and a good many cares. I know she means to write her thanks—but how soon she may get about it is a question. I was much interested with the few pages I have read. I sent forward the copy to Dr. Rothrock, and he has sent thro’ me his response.2 He is in full medical practice, in the centre of Pennsylvania—in the town which was the original “Wyoming”3 Well, it is wonderful—your finding the nervous system of Dionæa!!! 4 Pray take your time next spring, and do up both Drosera & Dionæa. I will endeavor next spring to get hold of Drosera filiformis & make the observations—5 I will, also, do better, by sending your note on to Mr. Canby, who lives near its habitat—& has done something already in such observations 6 As to coiling of tendril. I think your idea is that in the coiling of a fixed tendril, one coil has its concave side the opposite of the part that has coiled the other way. Now, take a piece of tape say a span long; black one side, let some one hold the two ends while you twist in the middle. The two halves are coiled in opposite directions, just as a tendril which has caught does.— The same color will be on the outside of the coil all the length. Blacken with a stroke of paint a line along the whole length of a caught tendril. On straightening it out the black will be all on one side.— I have not had time to follow it up, and need not—since you are sure to do it. But I think it clear that one & the same side is concave—i.e. the relatively shortened side—the whole length of the caught tendril. Do not you? 7 Mrs. Gray is absent while I write, or she would add her best regards & best wishes to my own for a happy New Year to you all. Sincerely Yours | A. Gray DAR 165: 182 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Tendrils’ pencil

544 1

2 3 4 5

6 7

December 1872

Jane Loring Gray’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). She had provided information on Arab expressions observed when she was travelling in Egypt with Asa Gray (see Expression, pp. 22, 268, 275, 316–17). Her remarks on Fra Angelico’s painting ‘Descent from the Cross’ are also reported in Expression, p. 185 (see Correspondence vol. 17, letter from Asa Gray and J. L. Gray, 8 and 9 May 1869). See letter from J. T. Rothrock, 25 November 1872. Wyoming was a small settlement on the Susquehanna River in the Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania (S. R. Smith 1892), after which Wyoming Territory (a state from 1890) was named (T. A. Larson 1978, p. 67). See letter to Asa Gray, 22 October 1872 and n. 5. CD’s plants of Drosera filiformis (the threadleaf sundew, which dies back in winter), had suddenly failed in early October. See letter to J. D. Hooker, 4 October [1872] and n. 2. For details of the observations CD wanted Gray to make on Drosera filiformis, see letter to Asa Gray, 22 October 1872. Gray had communicated William Marriott Canby’s earlier observations on Dionaea (Venus fly trap) to CD (see Correspondence vol. 15, letter from Asa Gray to J. D. Hooker, [after 6 July 1867]). See letter to Asa Gray, 22 October 1872 and n. 2.

From Hubert Airy 3 December 1872

27. Dacre Park. Lee. S. E. 1872. Dec. 3.

My dear Sir I am ashamed to have kept the books and papers you lent me, for such a length of time, and I fear my delay may have inconvenienced you— 1 I have only just done with them, for I found so much to study and take notes of, esply. in the tough Teuton tongue, that the perusal took much longer time than I expected— Moreover I have had but little spare time lately, and am likely to have still less in the future, for I have recently been appointed a medical inspector under the Local Gov t.2 Board, which is a capital thing in itself but unfavourable to the study of Phyllotaxy. I don’t know when I shall be able to write and publish what I have to say. 3 De Candolle has done well in demonstrating geometrically the numerical relations between leaves that successively approximate to the vertical through one taken as startg. point, when certain conditions are granted, but his general conclusions rest on a very partial and imperfect survey of the facts of leaf-arrangement, ignoring any distinction between leaf-orders so different as those of elm and Scotch fir. (not that he mentions those or any others, but that is the upshot of his argument.) 4 Kerner’s Alpine studies are delightful— How beautifully he accounts for the rarity of Alpine Annuals! I say Amen to his “Vorwort.”5 Braun’s “Rejuvenescence” gave me great pleasure. I was so glad to meet with a good discussion of vine growth.6 But it made my heart beat when I saw Fig. 144 in Sachs’ “Lehrbuch der Botanik,” and still more when I read “Auf den ersten Blick erscheinen solche Stellungsverhältnisse wie zweizeilige, die durch Drehung des Stammes verändert worden sind,”—my own idea, exactly, and I cannot conceive how he could leave hold of it, as he does in the next words—“was in diesem Falle kaum annehmbar scheint.” I have taken the liberty to mark the relevant passages in Sachs, in case you might care to look at them—7 —But that figure 144 is worth a Jew’s eye:8 some of my

December 1872

545

diagrams of ivy are exactly like it; and it would fairly represent the leaf order in a lateral twig of Sp. Chestnut or Portugal laurel. Among your own MS. notes, which you were so kind as to trust to my care, I found some words which interested me very much as showing that you yourself were disposed to regard the relative positions of leaves as determined by conditions of mutual pressure. The fragment is dated June 11,/63, concerning Euphorbia amygdaloides, and the words (if I read them aright) are these:—“Now I can no more believe there is special law than for marbles shaking together, standing in intervals on others so as to pack closest.”9 My own ‘marble’ experiments have had rest of late, but I hope to carry them out some day, though I do not regard them as of primary importance— I think the oak galls suffice for ocular demonstration.10 I wish, if I have time, to offer an essay on this subject to the Royal Society, though I fear my views are too crude, and I do not see how I can devote time and study enough to bring them to maturity.11 Your books are packed, and shall be sent by rail to Orpington tomorrow— Accept my best thanks for your kindness in lending them to me, and believe me with kind regards to Mrs. Darwin and your family, | Yours very sincerely Hubert Airy Chas. Darwin Esqre. MA., FRS. DAR 159: 23 1

2 3 4 5

6

7

CD had lent Kerner von Marilaun 1864 to Airy (see letter from Hubert Airy, 24 September 1872). The other books and papers have not been identified but are possibly the items mentioned in this letter. Airy may have borrowed these when he visited CD at Down on 1 October 1872 (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). The Local Government Board, which had the power to appoint inspectors and other officers, had been created by Parliament in 1871 to oversee public health and local government responsibilities (EB). Airy had been discussing phyllotaxy with CD since 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19 and this volume); see also n. 11, below. Airy refers to Casimir de Candolle’s paper ‘Théorie de l’angle unique en phyllotaxie’ (C. de Candolle 1865), a copy of which is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. There is no explicit reference to the rarity of Alpine annuals in Anton Kerner von Marilaun’s work on Alpine plants (Kerner von Marilaun 1864), but Airy may have inferred this from Kerner von Marilaun’s description of the unusual conditions of the Alpine environment (ibid., pp. 10–29). In the preface (Vorwort) to his book (Kerner von Marilaun 1864, pp. iii–vi), Kerner von Marilaun discussed his love of Alpine plants, his aim of making their cultivation more popular, and the challenges of cultivating them in a garden setting. There is an annotated copy of Kerner von Marilaun 1864 in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 445). Alexander Carl Heinrich Braun’s Considerations on the phenomenon of rejuvenescence in nature, especially in the life and development of plants (Braun 1853) was translated from the German into English by Arthur Henfrey as part of his Botanical and physiological memoirs (Henfrey ed. 1853). There is a copy of Henfrey ed. 1853 in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 366–7); the translation of Braun’s paper is annotated. The phyllotaxy and budding of the vine (Vitis) is described in Braun 1853, pp. 46–51. The figure and quotations appear in Sachs 1870, p. 170. Airy agreed with Julius Sachs’s statement, ‘At first sight such kinds of phyllotaxy appear as if the leaves were placed in two lines that have become changed by the torsion of the stem’, but disagreed with Sachs’s conclusion, ‘this hypothesis seems

546

8 9 10 11

December 1872

in this case scarcely admissible’. CD’s annotated copy of Sachs 1870, which includes marginal scoring (presumably by Airy) against the sentence quoted, is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 728). Jew’s eye: a proverbial expression for something valued highly (OED). These notes are now in DAR 45: 148; the sentence that Airy quoted is underlined in brown crayon. Airy had produced physical models using oak galls attached to an india-rubber band to demonstrate the orders of phyllotaxy (see letter from Hubert Airy, [before 15] July 1872). In the event, Airy did manage to complete a short paper (Airy 1873) that was communicated by CD to Royal Society of London, and read on 27 February 1873 .

To J. D. Hooker 3 [ December 1872]1 It is a very nice letter. Please do as you think fit about proposing him & about all other matters. 2 C. Darwin Nov. 3d. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (DC vol. 156, Indian Letters, Calcutta Botanic Garden II 1860–1900, f. 1086) 1

2

The month and year are established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from John Scott to J. D. Hooker, 31 October 1872, which could not have reached England until the second half of November 1872. CD dated the letter 3 November in error. Hooker had suggested nominating Scott for fellowship of the Linnean Society, and using some of the money that Scott had sent as remittance of a debt to CD to pay the membership fees (see letter from John Scott to J. D. Hooker, 31 October 1872 and n. 3).

From Frédéric Baudry1 4 December 1872

Paris, 4 Xbre2 72

Monsieur Mme Michelet a bien voulu me prêter votre livre sur l’Expression des émotions. 3 Je l’ai lu avec l’ardeur que je mets à lire tous vos ouvrages, mais étant inconnu de vous, je ne me serais pas permis de vous écrire si je n’avais tenu à vous communiquer un petit fait de nature à vous intéresser et à compléter un de vos chapitres. C’est un passage du Râmâyana, où une mère, retrouvant le cadavre de son fils, lèche “avec sa langue le visage du mort en gémissant comme une vache privée de son veau” (Si vous voulez vérifier, voici le texte sanscrit: m¯at¯a ca asya mr˘ıtasya api jihvay¯a nihatam mukham vilatapa ati karunam g¯aur vivats¯a ïva vatsal¯a mater que ejus mortui etiam linguâ caesum vultum ingemuit flebiliter vacca sine-vitulo quasi tenera (épisode de la mort de Yajnadatta, [ II], 26)) Voilà une expression de douleur et de tendresse tout à la fois, qui ressemble terriblement à ce que ferait une chienne sur la cadavre de son petit. Serait-ce l’origine du baiser?4

December 1872

547

Un autre fait encore: vous mentionnez quelque part, sans en expliquer l’origine, le geste des chiens qui se couchent sur le dos et gesticulent des quatre pattes pour jouer ou se faire caresser. Il est à ma connaissance que le blaireau (ursus meles) 5 se met en cette posture pour se défendre contre les chiens, parce qu’elle lui permet de se servir à la fois contre eux de sa gueule et de toutes ses griffes. Ne serait-ce pas l’origine de l’attitude analogue chez le chien! La posture de combat aurait dégénéré en   offensif.6   j’ai pris la liberté de vous écrire, me pardonnerez-vous de vous indiquer deux points que je crois pouvoir expliquer autrement que vous ne faites. Il s’agit d’abord du geste de l’impuissance, lever les épaules, abaisser les bras et ouvrir les mains. Vous l’interprétez par un mouvement d’antithèse. Je verrais plutôt dans les épaules levées le geste de celui qui s’apprête à recevoir un coup sans résistance. Essayez de menacer un enfant d’un soufflet, vous le verrez aussitôt lever les épaules comme pour y faire rentrer son cou et sa tête. Le lèvement d’épaules serait, selon moi, cette attitude primordiale affaiblie, et l’on comprend très bien comment elle se serait transformée en signe de résignation. Quant aux bras abaissés et aux mains ouvertes, j’y verrais un symbole comme vous en avez admis un pour les mains jointes de la prière chrétienne. Ce serait le signe qu’on est désarmé, qu’on n’a rien dans les mains et qu’on ne se défendra pas, complément tout naturel des épaules soulevées. Dans les bras élevés et les mains ouvertes de la surprise, je ne verrais pas non plus une antithèse, mais plutôt un reste de l’attitude effrayée, avec les bras et les mains en avant comme pour parer un coup. Au point de vue psychologique, la surprise chez l’homme procède de la peur chez les animaux. 7 Enfin, Monsieur, excusez-moi si, étant linguiste de profession et appartenant à l’école de Bopp, de   Müller et de Whitney, j’ai un peu frémi devant les citations que vous tirez d’un livre de M. Wedgwood sur l’origine du langage. 8 Si j’en pouvais juger par ces extraits, cet ouvrage serait une rêverie peu digne de figurer dans vos livres qui sont toujours régis par la méthode expérimentale la plus rigoureuse. Il faut renvoyer au Cratyle de Platon les théories cent fois réfutées sur l’affectation spéciale des sons à exprimer certaines idées; et c’est encore une circonstance aggravante que d’en chercher la preuve dans les mots de la langue anglaise, sans tenir compte des mille modifications phonétiques qu’ils ont subies depuis l’origine 9 J’espère, Monsieur, que vous admettrez ces critiques avec plus de bonté que si je vous envoyais des complimens. D’ailleurs si j’entreprenais de vous énumérer tout ce que j’approuve et ce qui m’instruit dans votre livre, je m’exposerais à le copier en entier. Enfin nous allons pouvoir lire ici le second volume de votre Descent of Man. Mais quelle  le traduction que celle du 1er volume par M. Moulinier!10 Tradut11 tore=traditore! Elle est en plus de cent endroits inintelligible pour ceux qui ne devinent pas la phrase anglaise sous son français ou plutôt sous son patois. Je ne sais comment on nous traduit chez vous, mais en général, je plains les auteurs anglais qui tombent sous la patte de nos traducteurs.

548

December 1872

Encore une fois, Monsieur, pardonnez moi, et croyez moi | Votre sincère admirateur | F Baudry | conservateur à la bibliothèque de l’Arsenal. | 76, rue Bonaparte— Paris. DAR 160: 95, 95/1 CD note:   —curious Sanskrit  about licking the dead— after [ Dog attitude] Give same notes   English Review that shrugging shoulders in   of defence or rather  t re  injury passively with as little heed to self as possible.— Moreover [ hardly] agrees with shrugging shoulders being so often done when a person says he cannot prevent action by another person.— I doubt about women— Hands & arms often thrown vertically over head, with no trace of pushing away [interl] action.— Perhaps put note to that effect.— Weed out reference to H. Wedgwood—12 1 2 3

4

5 6 7

8

9

10

11 12

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. ‘Xbre ’, signifying the tenth month, was a common French abbreviation that drew on the Latin meaning of December and its place in the ancient Roman calendar (OED). Athénaïs Michelet’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). Michelet had supplied CD with information about crossing in cats, and had offered to send him a copy of her book, Les chats (see letter from Athénaïs Michelet, 17 May 1872). The Ramayana is an ancient Sanskrit epic that presents the teachings of Hindu sages in allegorical form. The section describing the death of the hermit boy Yajnadatta had been translated into Latin by Jean Louis Burnouf and published with the transliterated Sanskrit (Chézy 1826, appendix, verse 69); however, Baudry’s translation appears to be his own. For a contemporary English version, see Milman trans. 1835, p. 96. In Baudry’s letter, the Latin equivalent is written above each Sanskrit word. Baudry’s reference was added to the second edition of Expression, edited by Francis Darwin (Expression, 2d ed., p. 126 n. 4). The European badger is now Meles meles. See Expression, p. 120. There are no additions to this passage in the second edition of Expression. For CD’s explanation of these gestures, see Expression, pp. 271, 287–8. In Expression 2d ed., p. 285 n. 7, Baudry’s challenge to the principle of unconscious antithesis is mentioned but qualified by the comment that the protective shrug of a schoolboy threatened with a box on the ears differs from the apologetic shrug. Franz Bopp and his students Friedrich Max Müller and William Dwight Whitney had pioneered a new approach in linguistics that demonstrated the affiliations between the Indo-European languages through a comparative study of verbal inflections and an emphasis on the genealogies of languages. Hensleigh Wedgwood, although instrumental in introducing Bopp’s work into England, had disagreed with the German school over the development of language in his Origin of language (H. Wedgwood 1866). For more on these debates, see Alter 1999, pp. 11, 52–3, 79–90. CD referred to H. Wedgwood 1866 several times in Expression in relation to the development of language as a consequence of instinctive actions (see Expression, pp. 273–4, 285–6). Plato’s dialogue Cratylus is a debate about three theories of language: the conventional, the rational, and the natural. Wedgwood had quoted from Cratylus in support of an imitative origin of language, and argued against Max Müller’s claim that this notion of the origin of language could not be ‘scientifically’ determined ‘until some progess has been made in tracing the principal roots not of Sanscrit only, but of Chinese, Bask, and the Turanian and Semitic languages, back to the cries or imitated sounds of nature’ (see H. Wedgwood 1866, pp. 10–11, 14). Jean Jacques Moulinié translated both volumes of Descent (Moulinié trans. 1872) into French. The first volume had been published on 19 February 1872; the second was published on 18 November (see Journal général de l’imprimerie et de la librarie, 2 March 1872, p. 91, and 30 November 1872, p. 563). Traduttore=traditore (Italian): ‘a translator is a traitor’. CD’s references to H. Wedgwood 1866 on the imitative origin of language remained in Expression 2d ed.

December 1872

549

From W. W. Baxter 4 December 1872 Bromley Kent Dec 4. 72 Sir There is no sort of animal matter used in preparing the Extract of Belladonna, it is prepared exactly in the same way as Ext Hyoscyamus & neither ought to contain albumen, tho’ albumen is present in the juices of both plants, but they should be heated before being evaporated to form an extract, so as to coagulate the albumen, which should be filtered out,—1 The process for both these extracts is identical namely—leaves bruised, juice slightly heated so as to separate chlorophyll, (which is set aside) heated nearly to boiling point to coagulate the albumen which is filtered out, the filtrate is then evaporated partly, the chlorophyll added & the evaporation continued to finish. I shall be happy to get you some extract from Apoths. Hall, Morton’s or other special place if you desire it, as I cannot make any at this time of year— 2 Might I presume to suggest the use of Atropia the active principle of the Belladonna plant, if that is the reason of its use, as it wd. be chemically pure in the form of Sulphate of Atropia it is soluble in water.3 With respects | I remain | Yrs obedly. | Wm. W. Baxter C. Darwin Esqre. P.S. I do not find albumen in our Ext. Belladonna DAR 58.1: 21–2 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Belladonna juices with albumen removed.— says I ought to try Atropia.’ ink 1

2

3

See letter to W. W. Baxter, 2 [ December 1872]. Atropa belladonna (deadly nightshade) and Hyoscyamus, a genus of plants of the nightshade family (Solanaceae), were used by CD in his experiments on the carnivorous plant genus Drosera. CD wanted to determine whether it was albumen, rather than the nightshade poison (atropine), that affected the leaves of Drosera (see Insectivorous plants, pp. 84, 206). Atropa belladonna is a herbaceous plant that dies down in the winter. The Society of Apothecaries manufactured and sold medicinal and pharmaceutical products at the Apothecaries’ Hall, London. Morton’s may be a reference to Henry Morton, chemist, in Ramsgate, Kent (Post Office directory of the six home counties 1870). CD, following Baxter’s suggestion, showed that atropine was ‘quite powerless’ when applied to the leaves of Drosera (see Insectivorous plants, p. 84). Sulphate of atropia was commonly used in opthalmic practice to dilate the pupil of the eye (see W. G. Smith 1869, pp. 197–8).

To Alpheus Hyatt 4 December [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec. 4th. My dear Sir I thank you sincerely for yr most interesting letter. 2 You refer much too modestly to yr own knowledge & judgement, as you are much better fitted to throw light on

550

December 1872

your own difficult problems than I am. It has quite annoyed me that I cd not clearly understand your Prof. Cope’s views; & the fault lies in some slight degree, I think, with Prof. Cope, who does not write very clearly. 3 I think I now understand the terms “acceleration & retardation”; but will you grudge the trouble of telling me, by the aid of the following illustration, whether I do understand rightly? When a freshwater, decapod crustacean is born with an almost mature structure, & therefore does not pass, like other decapods, though the Zoea stage, 4 is this not a case of acceleration? Again, if an imaginary decapod retained when adult many Zoea characters, wd this not be a case of retardation? If these illustrations are correct I can perceive why I have been so dull in understanding your views: I looked for something else, being familiar with such cases, & classing them in my own mind as simply due to the obliteration of certain larval or embryonic stages. This obliteration I imagined resulted somestimes entirely from that law of inheritance to which you allude; 5 but that in many cases it was aided by natural selection, as I inferred from such cases occurring so frequently in terrestrial & fresh-water members of groups, which retain their several embryonic stages in the sea, as long as fitting conditions are present. Another cause of my misunderstanding was the assumption that in your series

the differences between the successive species, expressed by the terminal letters, were due to “acceleration”: now if I understand rightly, this is not the case; & such characters must have been independently acquired by some means. 6 The two newest & most interesting points in your letter (& in as far as I remember your former paper) seem to me to be about senile characters in one species appearing in succeeding species, during maturity; & secondly about certain degraded characters appearing in the last species of a series.— You ask for my opinion; but I can send only the conjectured impressions which have occurred to me, & which are at most worth nothing. (It ought to be known whether the senile characters appear before or after the period of active reproduction) I shd be inclined to attribute the characters in both your cases to the laws of growth & quite secondarily to natural selection.— 7 It has been an error on my part & a misfortune to me, that I did not largely discuss what I mean by laws of growth at an early period in some of my books. I have said something on this head in the new Chapt. in the last Edit. of the Origin.8 I shd. be happy to send you a copy of this Edit, if you do not possess it & care to have it. A man in extreme old age differs much from a young man, & I presume every one would account for this by failing powers of growth. On the other hand the skulls of some mammals go on altering during maturity with advancing years,—as do the horns of stags, the tail-feathers of some birds, the size of fishes &c; & all such differences I sh d attribute simply to the laws of growth, as long as full vigour was retained. Endless other changes of structure in successive species may I believe be accounted for by various complex laws of growth. Now any change of character thus induced with advancing years in the individual might easily be inherited at an earlier age than

December 1872

551

that at which it first supervened, & thus become characteristic of the mature species; or again, such changes wd be apt to follow from variation, independently of inheritance, under proper conditions. Therefore I shd expect that characters of this kind wd often appear in later-formed species without the aid of natural selection, or with its aid if the characters were of any advantage. The longer I live the more I become convinced how ignorant we are of the extent to which all sorts of structures are serviceable to each species. But that characters supervening during maturity in one species shd appear so regularly, as you state to be the case, in succeeding species seems to me very surprising & inexplicable. With respect to degradation in species towards the close of a series, I have nothing to say, except that before I arrived at the end of yr letter, it occurred to me that the earlier & simpler ammonites must have been well adapted to their conditions, & that when the species were verging towards extinction (owing probably to the presence of some more successful competitors) they w d naturally become readapted to simpler conditions. Before I had read yr final remarks I thought also that unfavourable conditions might cause, thro’ the laws of growth, aided perhaps by reversion, degradation of character. 9 No doubt many new laws remain to be discovered. Permit me to add that I have never been so foolish as to imagine that I have succeeded in doing more than to lay down some of the broad outlines of the origin of species. After long reflection I cannot avoid the conviction that no innate tendency to progressive development exists, as is now held by so many able naturalists, & perhaps by yourself. It is curious how seldom writers define what they mean by progressive development; but this is a point which I have briefly discussed in the Origin.10 I earnestly hope that you may visit Hilgendorf ’s famous deposit.11 Have you seen Weismann’s pamphlet “Einfluss der Isolirung” Leipzig 1872 He makes splendid use of Hilgendorf ’s admirable observations. 12 I have no strength to spare, being much out of health; otherwise I wd have endeavoured to have made this letter better worth sending. I most sincerely wish you success in yr valuable & difficult researches & I remain | my dear Sir | yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin P.S I have received & thank you for yr 3 pamphlets.13 As far as I can judge, yr views seem very probable; but what a fearfully intricate subject is this of the succession of Ammonites. LS(A) Maryland Historical Society: The Alpheus Hyatt Papers 1859–1928 (MS 1007) 1 2 3 4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Alpheus Hyatt, [late] November 1872. See letter from Alpheus Hyatt, [late] November 1872. See letter to to Alpheus Hyatt, 10 October [1872] and nn. 3 and 5. CD refers to Edward Drinker Cope. The zoea is the first true larval stage in most marine crabs (order Decapoda, infraorder Brachyura); the earlier nauplius stages, which occur in larva of many other crustaceans, occur in the egg. Marine crabs typically pass through up to six zoeal stages followed by a final larval stage, the megalopa.

552

5 6 7

8

9

10

11 12

13

December 1872

Freshwater crabs lack free-living larval forms (zoea and megalopa), but pass through these stages during a prolonged embryonic period. See letter from Alpheus Hyatt, [late] November 1872 and nn. 11 and 12. See letter from Alpheus Hyatt, [late] November 1872 and n. 10. See letter from Alpheus Hyatt, [late] November 1872 and n. 16. Hyatt had asked how natural selection could account for the appearance of ‘degradational characteristics’ in species which were in other respects ‘the highest of their series’. CD also refers to Hyatt 1870. For CD’s discussion of the possible influence of laws of growth on morphological structure, independent of natural selection, see Origin 6th ed., pp. 171–6. It was part of a new chapter, ‘Miscellaneous objections to the theory of natural selection’ (ibid., pp. 168–204). In his letter of [late] November 1872, Hyatt had pointed out that while degradational characteristics might be accounted for by a loss of favourable conditions, in the fossil beds he had studied, the onset of appearance of these characteristics happened when variety and size of individuals was greatest. In Origin 6th ed., p. 98, CD wrote: ‘natural selection, or the survival of the fittest, does not necessarily include progressive development—it only takes advantage of such variations as arise and are beneficial to each creature under its complex relations of life.’ See letter from Alpheus Hyatt, [late] November 1872 and n. 22. The reference is to Franz Hilgendorf. In his essay on the influence of isolation on the formation of species (Weismann 1872), August Weismann argued that new species could form without being isolated from the parent species; for evidence, he drew on Hilgendorf ’s discovery of several related snail species at successive levels in the Steinheim beds (Hilgendorf 1866, pp. 478–9). Hyatt 1866, 1870, and 1872.

From F. A. Nussbaumer and Rudolf Hoernes 4 December 1872 Acad. Verein | der Naturhistoriker | Wien Honoured Sir! The committe appointed by the academical Verein der Naturhistoriker of the University in Vienna has the honour to acknowledge the receipt of Your valuable works.1 The committe at the sametime desire to express their full appreciation of the distinction thus accorded to them and to record their warmest thanks for this very important addition to their library. In conclusion they venture to express the hope, that You will continue Your good will and sympathy to the young society,2 which now rejoices in such an unequivocal proov of Your favour. Again thanking You for Your kindness they beg to offer You the expression of their highest consideration and respect and are honoured Sir Your faithfully | for the committe the vice president R. Hörnes Vienna 4. 12. 1872

the president F Nussbaumer3

DAR 181: 96 1 2

CD probably sent copies of Origin 6th ed. and Expression. The Akademischer Verein der Naturhistoriker (university natural history society) in Vienna had been established in 1870.

December 1872 3

553

Nussbaumer and Hoernes were students at the University of Vienna.

To W. W. Baxter [after 4 December 1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dear Sir I am extremely obliged to you for your great kindness in writing to me at such length.2 I wish I had known of the Atropia; & perhaps I shall have time. to try it next summer. But as I have tried several extracts & as they are prepared apparently in the same way, without the use of any animal matter, the trial, as far as it goes, is fair. 3 With my thanks | Yours very faithfully | Ch. Darwin DAR 249: 70 1 2 3

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from W. W. Baxter, 4 December 1872. See letter from W. W. Baxter, 4 December 1872. See letter from W. W. Baxter, 4 December 1872 and n. 3.

From Mr Topham 5 December 1872 [Mr. Topham suggests (letter, Dec. 5, 1872) that Shakespeare meant that the blush was unseen, not that it was absent.]1 Incomplete Expression 2d ed., p. 355 n. 38 1

The reference to Topham’s letter was added as a note to the second edition of Expression, edited by Francis Darwin and published after CD’s death; the note refers to CD’s claim that Shakespeare erred in Romeo and Juliet when he gave Juliet a speech that implied she did not blush in the dark (Expression, p. 336; Expression 2d ed., p. 355, n. 38). Topham has not been further identified.

To ? 5 December 1872 Down,| Beckenham, Kent. Dec 5. ’72 Dear Sir, I am much obliged for Your note & reference, but hardly know what to think of this statement about the Watering mouth.1 Dear Sir | Yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin Joseph R. Sakmyster, ADS Autographs 1

In Expression, pp. 75, 341, 344, CD had referred to increased salivation in the case of a hungry man faced with tempting food, and by the thought and taste of sour fruit.

554

December 1872

From R. F. Cooke 6 December 1872

50A, Albemarle Street, London, W. Decr. 6 1872

My dear Sir Your last work is very much like our Gas, nearly exhausted. 1 Will you therefore send to Clowes any corrections you may have & I will order paper & see after the Heliotypes2 Mr Murray3 thinks we may throw off 2000.? Yours faithfully | Robt. Cooke C. Darwin Esq DAR 171: 433 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter ‘as a Puff 9th Thousandth’4 pencil 1

2 3 4

The supply of gas to households and streetlamps was disrupted by a gas strike from 29 November to the evening of 10 December 1872 (see The Times, 6 December 1872, p. 10, and Illustrated London News, 14 December 1872, p. 570). The first print run of Expression was seven thousand copies (Freeman 1977). William Clowes was the printer of Expression, which contained seven heliotype plates (see letter to J. V. Carus, 16 July 1872 and n. 3). John Murray. CD made this note to remind himself to ask Cooke whether the total number of copies of Expression published should be advertised in the second issue (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 7 December [1872]).

To F. J. Furnivall 6 December [1872–3]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec 6

Mr C. Darwin presents his compliments to Mr Furnivall & as he has never attended to the subject of the proposed Society, he does not wish for the honour of being one of the Vice-Presidents. 2 LS The Huntington Library (FU 257) 1 2

The year range is established by the printed stationery, with the address in the centre; CD used this type of notepaper from January 1872 until November 1874. Furnivall founded a series of literary and philological societies; the proposed society was probably the New Shakspere Society, which he founded in 1873 (ODNB).

To R. F. Cooke 7 December [1872]1

Down, Beckenham, Kent Dec. 7th.

My dear Sir I have no more errata, so print off what you think fit.2 If in a year’s time, or so, a new edit. is required, I would then thoroughly revise it. 3 I was to have started for London to-day, but have been prevented by being too unwell: I hope, however, to see you next week.4 One of my sons saw a copy of “Expressions” the other day with very

December 1872

555

poor Heliotypes. Would it not be well to caution the Coy that they will lose credit if they distribute poor copies?5 Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin. P.S Would it be worth while as a puff to give on Title, the last Thousandth?? Do as you think fit.6 Copy DAR 143: 289 1 2

3 4 5

6

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from R. F. Cooke, 6 December 1872. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 6 December 1872. Evidently CD had already sent Cooke the corrections to errors pointed out by Julius Victor Carus (see letters from J. V. Carus, 7 October 1872 and n. 6, 11 October 1872 and n. 1, and 24 October 1872, nn. 7 and 10); these corrections appear in the second printing of Expression, pp. 121, 184, 243, 245, and 285. Expression 2d ed. was not published until 1890, after CD’s death. It included material collected by CD as well as information added by Francis Darwin, who edited the work (Expression 2d ed., p. iii). In the event, CD’s visit took place between 17 and 22 or 23 December (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Just days before the publication of Expression the Heliotype Company had supplied only 3000 of the required 7000 sets of heliotypes (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 20 November 1872). The last 4000 sets presumably were of poorer quality as CD had feared (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 20 November [1872]). The number of copies published was not added to the title page of the second issue of Expression. To puff: to promote or publicise in a laudatory or extravagant way (OED).

To C. J. Maynard 7 December [1872–3]1

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec. 7th

Mr Darwin begs leave to send a better photograph & one somewhat less ugly, & hopes that Mr Maynard will tear up the one sent. & now returned.2 Barbara and Robert Pincus (private collection) 1 2

The year range is established by the printed stationery, with the address in the centre; CD used this type of notepaper from January 1872 until November 1874. The photograph that CD sent has not been identified, but he sat for Oscar Gustaf Rejlander in April 1871 and probably ordered some of the photographs in August 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Elliott & Fry, 23 April [1871]; CD’s Classed account books (Down House MS)). Prior to this, he had been sending out a very poor photograph of himself (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Hinrich Nitsche, 25 April [1871]). In Descent 2: 28, CD had drawn on Maynard’s observations on the mud-turtle (Chrysemys picta) of the United States. Both the letter and photograph are pasted into a copy of Descent.

From Alpheus Hyatt 8 December 1872

Cannstadtt bei Stuttgart Dec. 8th, 1872

Charles Darwin Dear Sir The quickness and earnestness of your reply to my letter gives me the greatest encouragement, and I am much delighted at the unexpected interest, which your

556

December 1872

questions and comments display. What you say about Prof. Cope’s style has been often before said to me, and I have remarked in his writings an unsatisfactory treatment of our common theory.1 This, I think, perhaps is largely due to the complete absorption of his mind in the contemplation of his subject, this seems to lead him to be careless about the methods in which it may be best explained. He has, however, a more extended knowledge than I have, and has in many ways a more powerful grasp of the subject, and, for that very reason perhaps is liable to run into extremes. You ask about the skipping of the Zoea stage in fresh-water decapods, is this an illustration of acceleration? It most assuredly is, if acceleration means anything at all. 2 Again, another and more general illustration would be, if, among the Marine decapods, a series could be formed in which the Zoea stage became less and less important in the development and was relegated to younger and younger stages of the development, and finally disappeared in those to which you refer. This is the usual way in which the accelerated mode of development manifests itself, though near the lowest or earliest occurring species it is also to be looked for. Perhaps this to which you allude is an illustration somewhat similar to the one which I have spoken of in my series

which like “ad” comes from the earliest of a series though I should think from the entire skipping of the Zoea stage that it must be like “ae” the result of a long line of ancestors. In fact the essential point of our theory is, that characteristics are ever inherited by the young at earlier periods than they are assumed in due course of growth by the parents, and that this must eventually lead to the extinction or skipping of these characteristics altogether. Such considerations as these and the fact that near the heads of series or near the latest members of series, and not at the beginning were usually found the accelerated types, which skipped lower characteristics and developed very suddenly to a higher and more complex standpoint in structure, led both Cope and [myself] 3 into what may be a great error. I see that it has led you at least into the difficulty of which you very rightly complain, & which I am sorry to see has cost you some of your valuable time.4 We presumed that because characteristics were perpetually inherited at earlier stages, that this very concentration of the developed characteristics made room for the production of differences in the adult descendants of any given pair. Further that in the room thus made other different characteristics must be produced, and that these would necessarily appear earlier in proportion as the species was more or less accelerated and be greater or less in the same proportion. Finally that in the most accelerated such as “ac” or “ad” the difference would be (sheet 3) so great as to constitute distinct genera.5 Cope & I have differed very much, while he acknowledged the action of the accumulated mode of development only when generic characteristics or greater differences were produced, I saw the same mode of development to

December 1872

557

be applicable in all cases and to all characteristics, even to diseases. So far the facts bore us out, but when we assumed that the adult differences were the result of the accelerated mode of development, we were perhaps upon rather insecure ground. It is evidently this assumption which has led you to misunderstand the theory. Cope founded his belief, that the adult characteristics were also the result of acceleration, if I rightly remember it mainly upon the class of facts spoken of above in man where a sudden change in two organs may produce entirely new and unexpected differences in the whole organisation, and upon the changes which acceleration appeared to produce in the development of each succeeding species. Your difficulty in understanding the theory and the observations you have made show me at once what my own difficulties have been, but of these I will not speak at present as my letter is spinning itself out to a fearful length [After speaking of Cope’s comparison of acceleration & retardn in evolution to the force of gravity in physical matters he goes on:—] Now it [acceleration] seems to me to explain less and less the origin of adult progressive characteristics or simply differences, and perhaps now I shall get on faster with my work. Copy DAR 145: 365 1 2 3 4

5

See letter to Alpheus Hyatt, 4 December [1872] and n. 3. Hyatt refers to Edward Drinker Cope. See letter to Alpheus Hyatt, 4 December [1872] and n. 4. All the square brackets in the letter are in the copy from which this transcription is taken. In his letter to Hyatt of 4 December [1872], CD wrote that one reason for his misunderstanding of acceleration was that he wrongly assumed it was the cause of the differences between successive species. The notion that acceleration made room for the production of new differences in successive generations was central to Cope’s theory of the ‘origin of genera’, which posited a largely non-adaptive explanation of the course of evolution (see Cope 1868).

From Alexander Agassiz 9 December 1872 Cambridge. Dec. 9, 1872. I have to thank you for the trouble you have taken in sending me a copy of your “Expression of the Emotions,” which has duly come to hand.1 I have not had a moment to look into it, in part on account of the work of distributing some collections which have lately arrived, and in part owing to the great fire which has devastated Boston, and which has affected us all more or less seriously. 2 I have been hit pretty hard, not in a money way, but what is worse infinitely, I have lost a year’s work by the destruction of six Plates of anatomy with the original drawings, of which I have not even a sketch. They had been sent to Boston the morning of the fire to be lettered preparatory to printing. In addition I lost all the stones of the first parts of

558

December 1872

the “Revision of the Echini;” fortunately about three fifths of the edition of the Plates had been struck off and was safely housed at the Museum. This leaves us with rather a short supply, but the remainder of the book, which I hoped to get out before spring, must be delayed a long time, as I feel neither heart nor have I the time to start fresh and do all this again just as it was completed.3 I have sent to the Zoölogical Society a package for you, which please claim from Mr. Sclater. 4 I presume it should arrive a few days after this letter. I have made pretty extensive use of the new processes of photographic printing in my book, and from what I have succeeded in obtaining trust it will hereafter be possible to supersede the old lithographic processes, which are wasteful in time and money, and not half as accurate. 5 G. R. Agassiz ed. 1913, pp. 120–1 1 2 3

4 5

Agassiz’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). The fire, which blazed on 9 and 10 November 1872, had destroyed most of the business area of the city including numerous warehouses (see Sammarco 1997). Agassiz’s Revision of the Echini was published in parts in 1872 and 1874; it included a separate atlas of plates published in 1872 and 1873. Some of the plates were lithographs, produced by drawing on stone. Agassiz also refers to the Museum of Comparative Anatony at Harvard University. Philip Lutley Sclater was secretary of the Zoological Society of London. As well as lithographs and woodcuts, the atlas of A. Agassiz 1872–4 included plates made from photographic negatives by the Woodburytype and Albertype processes (A. Agassiz 1872–4, 1: xi).

From E. A. Darwin to Emma Darwin 9 December [1872]1 Dec 9 Dear Emma I cant say exactly till I have seen Cumbd what is the latest time they can put off their coming here. I think myself that they could stay in their house as long as they like as all the girls will be away & Barret could begin the dismantling without disturbing them2 This is for Charles Charles Landseer was saying to me yesterday that he had asked M r Wood to enquire from you if dogs had the orbicularis but had heard nothing from him. 3 It was in reference to Sir C. B. & he said that he was unable to make out the muscle in the dog himself & wanted to know if it existed.4 I referred him to p. 222 in your book but looking at it again I see it does not refer to animals generally as I thought it did when I was talking to him. 5 Have you any information you can give him. I hav’nt seen the dark horses letter in the spec. 6 If you dont come tomorrow Wm will come to Down—7 ED Tithes enclosed8 DAR 105: B124–5

December 1872 1 2

3

4 5

6

7

8

559

The year is established by the reference to the Hensleigh Wedgwoods’ move and to CD’s plan to visit Erasmus Darwin on 10 December (see nn. 2 and 7, below). ‘Cumbd ’ is a reference to 34 Cumberland Place, home of Hensleigh and Fanny Wedgwood and their daughters Frances Julia, Katherine Euphemia, and Hope Elizabeth Wedgwood. In 1872, the Hensleigh Wedgwoods decided to leave London and move to a house near Down (Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980, p. 301); it is possible that the ‘dismantling’ was connected with their move. Barret has not been identified. John Wood was professor of surgery at King’s College, London. In Expression, p. 181 n. 3, CD stated that his view of the movement of the facial muscles, including the orbicularis, was confirmed by Mr. J. Wood. There is no evidence that Wood had contacted CD with regard to Landseer’s question. The orbicularis muscle serves to close the eyelids. In Expression, pp. 163–71, CD had discussed its protective purpose; he also noted that cats and monkeys closed their eyelids when sneezing but that dogs did not do so when barking loudly (p. 171). Landseer referred to Charles Bell and his work on expression (Bell 1844). CD had discussed Bell’s explanation of the action of the orbicularis in Expression, pp. 158–62. In Expression, p. 222, CD challenged Bell’s view that the corrugator muscles that draw the eyebrows together to produce a frown were peculiar to humans, and argued that the corrugators and the orbicularis were more developed in humans and the anthropoid apes through incessant use (ibid., n. 1). Erasmus may refer to ‘Mr. Darwin on expression’, a letter from ‘L. D.’ to the editor, in the Spectator, 7 December 1872, p. 1553. The letter raised objections to the review of Expression (‘Mr. Darwin on animal expression’ and ‘Mr. Darwin on involuntary expression and blushing’, Spectator, 23 and 30 November 1872, pp. 1485–6, 1519–20), in which it was suggested that the term ‘expression’ be reserved for voluntary movements only. CD did not visit London on 10 December. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), William Erasmus Darwin went to Down that day. CD had originally planned to travel to London on 7 December, but was prevented from doing so by illness (see letter to R. F. Cooke, 7 December [1872]). He eventually stayed with Erasmus from 17 to 22 or 23 December and was ‘unwell all time’ (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). An entry in CD’s Account books–banking account (Down House MS) for 10 December 1872 records a payment of £17 11s. under the heading ‘Tithe Erasmus’. This probably refers to the ‘Castle Morton Tithes’ listed in CD’s Investment books (Down House MSS). CD and each of his five siblings inherited one sixth of a ‘Castle Morton trust’ from their father, Robert Waring Darwin, in 1837. The trust was evidently related to a property of CD’s grandfather, Josiah Wedgwood I, in the parish of Castle Morton, Worcestershire. (Robert Waring Darwin’s Investment book, Down House MS.)

From A. J. Munby 9 December 1872 [Mr. A. J. Munby has given in a letter (Dec. 9, 1872) a graphic description of terror:—1 “It was at Tabley Old Hall, in Cheshire, a mediæval house, unoccupied except by a housekeeper who lives in the kitchens, but fully furnished with its ancient furniture, and preserved in statu quo by the family, as a memorial and museum. 2 On one side of the great hall of the house is a noble oriel window, full of shields of arms: a balcony, overlooking the hall, runs round the other three sides, and into this balcony the doors of the first floor chambers open. I was in one of these chambers, an antique bedroom. I stood in the middle of the floor, with the window of the room behind me, and in front of me the open doorway, through which I was looking at the sunlight tinting the oriel window across the hall. Being in mourning, I wore a dark suit—shooting coat, knickerbockers, and leggings; and had on a black Louis

560

December 1872

XI. wideawake, the very shape of hat which Mephistopheles wears at the opera. 3 The window behind me of course made my whole figure seem black to a spectator in front, and I was standing perfectly still, being absorbed in watching the sunlight on the oriel. Steps came shuffling along the balcony, and an old woman (she was, I believe, the housekeeper’s sister) appeared crossing the doorway. Surprised at seeing the door open, she stopped and looked towards the room, and in looking round, she of course saw me, standing as I have described. In an instant, with a sort of galvanic jerk,4 she faced me, bringing her whole figure round so that it stood parallel to mine; immediately afterwards, as if she had now realized all my horrors, she rose to her full height (she was stooping before), and stood literally on the tips of her toes, and at the same moment she threw out both her arms, placing the upper-arm nearly at right angles to her body, and the forearm at right angles to the upper-arm, so that the forearms were vertical. Her hands, with the palms towards me, were spread wide, the thumbs and every finger stiff and standing apart. Her head was slightly thrown back, her eyes dilated and rounded, and her mouth wide open. She had a cap on, and I am not sure whether there was any visible erection of her hair. 5 In opening her mouth she uttered a wild and piercing scream, which continued during the time (perhaps two or three seconds) that she stood on her toes, and long after that; for the moment she recovered herself somewhat, she turned and fled, still screaming. She had taken me either for the devil or for a ghost, I forget which. All these details of her conduct were impressed on me, as you may suppose, most vividly, for I never saw anything so strange, of the kind, before or since. For myself, I stood gazing at her, and rooted to the spot: the reaction from my previous mood of quiet contemplation was so sudden, and her appearance so strange, that I half fancied her a thing ‘uncanny,’ being in a house so old and lonesome, and I felt my own eyes dilating and mouth opening, though I did not utter a sound until she had fled; and then I realized the oddity of the situation and ran after her to reassure her.”] Incomplete Expression 2d ed., pp. 306–7 n. 21 1

2

3

4 5

The text of the letter is quoted in a note added to the second edition of Expression, edited by Francis Darwin and published after CD’s death; the note refers to CD’s description of the eyes and mouth being widely opened in expressions of fear and terror (Expression, p. 290; Expression 2d ed., pp. 306–7 n. 21). Tabley Old Hall, built on an island in Nether Tabley Mere, Cheshire, dated from the late fourteenth century. It was abandoned as the main residence of the Leicester family when a new house was constructed on the Tabley estate between 1761 and 1769. See Emery 1996–2006, 1: 580–2. A wideawake hat has a low crown and a wide upturned brim. Louis XI, king of France from 1461, was renowned for wearing an old hat and dressing poorly (see Mosher 1925, pp. 179–80). His character had been made familiar to the English-speaking world by Walter Scott’s novel Quentin Durward (1823), in which the king was compared to Mephistopheles from Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s Faust (Mosher 1925, pp. 226–7). In 1859, Charles Gounod had composed an opera based on Goethe’s play; the opera was first performed in London in 1863 (see Northcott 1918, pp. 14, 18). Galvanism was medical treatment by electric currents. CD had discussed cases of apparent bristling of the hair under the influence of terror in Expression pp. 295–8.

December 1872 From J. V. Carus 10 December 1872

561 Leipzig Decbr 10th. 1872

My dear Sir, Herr Koch lets me know that he wishes to print a new edition of the “Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication” in the beginning of next year 1 Before I begin to revise the first edition and to make it ready, I take the liberty to ask you, if you have anything to add or to alter or if you have some particular wish with which I of course should be happy to comply. Believe me, | My dear Sir, | Yours ever sincerely | J. Victor Carus DAR 161: 88 1

Eduard Friedrich Koch of the firm E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung was the German publisher of Variation, translated from the English by Carus (Carus trans. 1868). The second German edition was published in 1873 (Carus trans. 1873).

To C. L. Dodgson 10 December 1872

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec 10 1872

My dear Sir I am much obliged for your kind note & offer.1 If you are quite sure that you can spare the unmounted photo., I shd very much like to possess it, although I am doubtful whether I shall ever make any actual use of it.2 I half scruple accepting your very kind offer & I remain | yours very faithfully | Charles Darwin LS Houghton Library, Harvard University (Harcourt Amory collection of Lewis Carroll (MS Eng 718.12 (2))) 1 2

Dodgson’s note has not been found. Dodgson had photographed Flora Rankin with a wide smile (see Taylor and Wakeling 2002, p. 89 and p. 91 plate 63). CD’s copy of this photograph is in DAR 53.1: C98; see plate on p. 562.

From Ernst Haeckel1 10 December 1872

Jena 10 Decbr 72

Mein theurer hochverehrter Freund! Verzeihen Sie, dass ich Ihnen erst heute für das gütigst übersandte Explr. Ihres sehr interessanten Werkes über “Expression of the emotions etc” meinen freundlichsten Dank sage.2 Ich war aber in den letzten Monaten völlig absorbirt von der Vollendung meiner “Monographie der Kalkschwämme” (Calcispongien oder Grantien). 3 Um das Werk fertig zu machen noch in diesem Jahr, musste ich Tag und Nacht schreiben, und in den letzten Wochen täglich einen ganzen Druckbogen corrigiren. Eine schreckliche Arbeit, welche mich zu keiner Lectüre kommen liess. Ich habe daher

562

December 1872

Flora Rankin, 1863. Photograph by C. L. Dodgson. On verso: ‘By the Rev C. L. Dodgson girl about 10 years old, made to smile by being asked whether she wd not like never to have more lessons—’, in CD’s hand. By permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library.

December 1872

563

Ihr Buch on “Expression” etc. nur erst flüchtig durchlesen können und hoffe jetzt, nach meiner Befreiung von den Spongien, es in ganzer Musse lesen zu können. Meine Monographie der Kalk-Spongien (2 Bände Text und 1 Atlas mit 60 Tafeln) werden Sie in den nächsten Wochen direct von meinem Verleger erhalten, welchen ich beauftragt habe, Ihnen ein Exemplar zu schicken.4 Vorläufig sende ich Ihnen beifolgend die beiden letzten Bogen des ersten Bandes und das Titel-Blatt mit Vorrede.5 Ich hoffe, dass die generellen Resultate im 7 und 8 Capitel Sie interessiren werden, besonders das “biogenetische Grundgesetz, die generischen und spezifischen, connexiven und transitorischen Varietäten, und die “Ursachen der Formbildung” (p. 479, 481).6 In dem III Capitel (Morphologie) wird das Intercanal-System für Sie von Interesse sein (p. 275–290), im IV. Capitel die Parallele zwischen Ontogenie und Phylogenie des Olynthus (p. 347), im V. Capitel die Anpassung (p. 381–391), die sich hier ausgezeichnet verfolgen lässt, und die Vererbung (p. 399). 7 Das Resultat für die generelle Zoologie ist insofern wichtig, als der Species-Begriff in gewöhnlichem Sinne bei den Spongien gar nicht zu fassen ist; die Variabilität übersteigt alle Grenzen. Ich musste daher im speciellen Theile (im II. Bande) 2 Systeme machen, ein natürliches und ein künstliches.8 Zur Vergleichung beider bitte ich Sie, die Formen von Ascetta primordialis auf Taf. 2 anzusehen, ferner Ascaltis Darwinii (Taf. 10, Fig. 3) mit ihren generischen und specifischen Varietäten (A. Erasmi und A. Caroli), ferner Leucetta primiginenia (Taf. 21) und Sycandra compressa (Taf. 57). 9 Die Polymorphose dieser und anderer Arten ist für die Descendenz-Theorie höchst lehrreich Von besonderer Wichtigkeit scheint mir der Olynthus zu sein, die einfachste Form der Kalkschwämme, weil dieser sich unmittelbar aus der Gastrula ableiten lässt, die als Larve oder Embryonal-Form auch bei den höheren Thierstämmen vorkommt. (p. 466, 467). Ich glaube, dass dadurch der Stammbaum des Thierreichs auf S. 465, und besonders die Descendenz aller Thiere (exclus. Protozoen) von der Gastraea an Sicherheit ausserordentlich gewinnt. Die beiden Lamellen, aus denen die Magenwand des Olynthus besteht, sind identisch mit den beiden Keimblättern der höheren Thiere. Die primordiale Phylogenie der höheren Thiere wird dadurch ausserordentlich klar; zumal dieselbe Gastrula auch bei Amphioxus und den Ascidien sich findet.10 Die Bedeutung der Calcispongien scheint mir vorzüglich darin zu gipfeln, dass sie einerseit eng an die Polypen (Hydra, Cordylophora) sich anschliessen, anderseits viel einfacher als die übrigen Spongien in dem Ascon-Typus sich offenbaren. Die Homologie des Olynthus und der Hydra erscheint mir unzweifelhaft, und somit auch der morphologische Werth ihrer inneren Höhle als Darmhöhle 11 Durch die Gastrula entfernen sie sich zugleich weit von den Protozoen. 12 Wenn Sie die Gastrula der Calcispongien (Atlas Taf. 13, Taf. 30, Taf. 44) vergleichen mit der entsprechenden Larvenform der Würmer und Echinodermen, der Ascidien und des Amphioxus (wie ich sie z. B. auf Taf. X, Fig. A4, B4 in meiner “natürlichen Schöpfungsgeschichte 13 abgebildet habe) so werden Sie die morphologische Identität zugestehen müssen. Ich sende Ihnen noch ein zweites Exemplar der beiden letzten Capitel, mit der Bitte, es an Sir John Lubbock gelangen zu lassen, dessen Adresse ich nicht kenne.

564

December 1872

Wenn Sie Sir Lubbock sprechen sollten, bitte ich ihm zu sagen, dass seine “Prehistoric Times jetzt in das Deutsche übersetzt werden. Ich habe Virchow gebeten, eine Vorrede dazu zu schreiben.14 Haben Sie die englische Übersetzung meiner Schöpfungsgeschichte schon erhalten? Oder ist sie noch nicht fertig?15 Ich hoffe, mein theurer Freund, dass Sie mit Ihrer Gesundheit zufrieden sind! Indem ich meinen Dank für Übersendung Ihres Buchs wiederhole, bleibe ich mit der bekannten Verehrung Ihr von ganzem Herzen | ergebener | Ernst Haeckel

December 1872

565

Grosses Aufsehen in Germany erregt jetzt ein Buch unseres geistvollen Theologen David Strauss: “Alter und neuer Glaube”. Der Verfasser des “Lebens Jesu” zeigt sich hier als überzeugter Darwinist, und entwickelt eine philosophische Religion auf dem Boden des Darwinismus!!16 Es geht vorwärts!! DAR 166: 34, 59 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

8 9

10

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Haeckel’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). Haeckel refers to his monograph on calcareous sponges (Haeckel 1872a). CD’s annotated copy of Haeckel 1872a is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 357–8). Haeckel’s publisher was Georg Ernst Reimer. The enclosure has not been found. For the section on the biogenetic law (ontogeny is the rapid recapitulation of phylogeny), see Haeckel 1872a 1: 471–3; on the generic and specific, connective and transitory varieties, see ibid., pp. 479–80; on causes of structure, see ibid., pp. 481–3. Chapter 3 of Haeckel 1872a contains a section (2A) on the canal-system with a subsection on the intercanal or intervascular system (Haeckel 1872a 1: 275–92). Haeckel included a table linking stages in the ontogeny of Olynthus (now Leucosolenia) with phylogenetic stages (ibid., p. 347; see also Di Gregorio 2005, pp. 208–11). For Haeckel’s description of the classificatory systems and the criteria used for each system, see Haeckel 1872a 1: 79–83. The tables Haeckel refers to are in the Atlas to Haeckel 1872a. The species names are part of his ‘natural’ system of classification. Ascetta primordialis is now Clathrina primordialis; Ascaltis darwinii and the varieties A. erasmi and A. caroli are now Clathrina darwini. Haeckel equated specific ontogenetic stages such as the gastrula (the first invagination of the ball of embryonic cells) with corresponding hypothetical ancestral organisms (in this case, Gastraea). Amphioxus (the lancelet; now Branchiostoma lanceolatum) was initially classed as a primitive fish (subclass Acranii) but has now been moved to its own class, Cephalochordata. Ascidiacea is a class in the subphylum Tunicata. Both are in the phylum Chordata.

566 11

12

13

14 15

16

December 1872

Hydra is a genus of the family Hydridae; Cordylophora is in the family Cordylophoridae. Both now belong to the order Anthoathecata within the class Hydrozoa. The Ascones was the most primitive family in Haeckel’s ‘natural’ system of classification and Olynthus was the most primitive genus within the ‘artificial’ system (Haeckel 1872a 1: 482). In Haeckel’s classificatory system, sponges were first placed in the kingdom Protista along with singlecelled Protozoa (see Haeckel 1866, 2: Table I). Haeckel later reassigned sponges to his kingdom Animalia and further developed his ‘Gastraea theory’, which held that the ancestral mode of gastrulation in all animals was by invagination to produce a functional gut (Haeckel 1872a). Haeckel had sent CD the third edition of his Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte (Natural history of creation; Haeckel 1872b) earlier in the year (see letter to Ernst Haeckel, 2 September 1872). For the table and description of the figures, see Haeckel 1872b, facing p. 486 and p. 671. The German translation of Lubbock’s Prehistoric times (Lubbock 1865) appeared in 1874 and had an introduction by Rudolf Virchow (Lubbock 1874). The first English translation of Haeckel’s Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte was published in 1876 (Haeckel 1876a). The translation was revised by Edwin Ray Lankester from an original translation made by ‘a young lady’ (Haeckel 1876a, 1: note facing p. 1). David Friedrich Strauss’s ‘new faith’ (neue Glaube) was based on natural science, particularly on evolution and CD’s theory of human evolution (see Strauss 1872, pp. 174–97). For more on the reception of the book, see Weikart 1993, pp. 483–4. Haeckel also refers to Strauss 1836 (Das Leben Jesu).

To Alphonse de Candolle 11 December 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec 11. 1872 My dear Sir I began reading yr new book sooner than I intended, & when I once began, I c d not stop; & now you must allow me to thank you for the very great pleasure which it has given me.1 I have hardly ever read any thing more original & interesting than your treatment of the causes which favour the development of scientific men. 2 The whole was quite new to me, & most curious. When I began yr essay I was afraid that you were going to attack the principle of inheritance in relation to mind; but I soon found myself fully content to follow you & accept your limitations. 3 I have felt, of course, special interest in the latter part of your work; but there was here less novelty to me. In many parts you do me much honour, & every where more than justice.4 Authors generally like to hear what points most strike different readers; so I will mention that of your shorter essays, that on the future prevalence of languages & on vaccination interested me the most, as indeed did that on statistics & free-will. Great liability to certain diseases being probably liable to atavism is quite a new idea to me.5 At p. 322 you suggest that a young swallow ought to be separated & then let loose in order to test the power of instinct; but nature annually performs this experiment, as old cuckoos migrate in England, & I presume elswhere, some weeks before the young birds of the same year. By the way I have just used the forbidden word “nature,” which after reading your essay I almost determined never to use again.6 There are very few remarks in yr book to which I demur; but when you back up Asa Gray in saying that all instincts are congenital habits, I must protest. 7 Finally, will you permit me to ask you a question: have you yourself, or some one who can be

December 1872

567

quite trusted, observed (p. 322) that the butterflies on the Alps are tamer than those on the lowlands? Do they belong to the same species? Has this fact been observed with more than one species? Are they brightly coloured kinds? I am especially curious about their alighting on the brightly coloured parts of ladies’ dresses—more especially because I have been more than once assured that butterflies like bright colours, for instance in India the scarlett leaves of Pointsettia.8 Once again allow me thank you for having sent me your work, & for the very unusual amount of pleasure which I have received in reading it. With much respect I remain, my dear Sir | yours very sincerely | Charles Darwin LS(A) Archives de la famille de Candolle 1

2 3

4 5 6

7

8

CD was sent an advance copy of A. Candolle 1873 (Histoire des sciences et des savants depuis deux siècles: suivie d’autres études sur des sujets scientifiques en particulier sur la sélection dans l’espèce humaine). See letter to Alphonse de Candolle, 2 November [1872]. CD’s annotated copy is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 153). See A. Candolle 1873, 1: 70–183. Candolle noted the early development of memory, attention, and observation over other faculties in the sons of scientific fathers. He argued that education, desire to emulate the father, religion, and social context were important in developing a predisposion for science, but went on to claim that the main effect of these non-hereditary factors was to bring out inherited traits (A. Candolle 1873, 1: 102–7). There are several references in A. Candolle 1873 to the importance of CD’s theories. The latter part of Candolle’s work dealt with heredity, variation, and selection. CD refers to chapters 7, 6, and 8 of A. Candolle 1873 (pp. 432–6, 427–31, 437–44, respectively). Atavism and predisposition to certain diseases was discussed in A. Candolle 1873, pp. 428–9. The seventh section of A. Candolle 1873 (pp. 432–6) comprised a discussion of the different senses of the word nature (‘Sur les différents sens du mot nature et par conséquent des mots naturel, surnaturel, etc.’), including CD’s use of the word in Origin 5th ed., p. 117. Candolle rejected the word as used by naturalists, claiming that it was ambiguous (ibid., p. 436). Candolle had praised Gray’s definition of instinct as ‘congenital habit’, and referred to a review in the American Journal of Science and Arts 50 (1870): 278 as the source of the statement (A. Candolle 1873, p. 321 and n.1). Candolle had stated that there were insufficient observations to determine whether it was the experience of individual animals with respect to the presence of humans that made them more timid, or whether their timidity was a hereditary instinct produced by selection favouring caution (A. Candolle 1873, p. 322). CD had discussed the attraction of butterflies to brightly coloured plants in Descent 1: 399–400.

From E. A. Darwin 11 December [1872]1 11 Dec. (no hurry) Dear Charles Read Mr Salts letter & return it as I want to show it to George.2 Mr Salt has not quite understood us I think. The will as it stands is all right and the contingency we want to guard against is that I should survive you & from any cause I should not be

568

December 1872

able to make a fresh will. Now in this case I should be intestate as regards real estate & the personalty would be equally divided among the children. 3 My wish is to leave it (in case I survive) exactly as you would have left it if it had come into your possession. Think over it at your leizure & let me know, & till then I shall let my present will stand: Lincoln Estate £240 to £250 per ann. Marks cottage say £100 Lease of Queen Anne now £2000 share of residue. 4 Mr Salt is coming up to town soon when I shall have a talk with him. I have proposed to him to leave my present will and make a codicil contingent on my survival & in it leaving the property just as you wish but I dont know what he will say to that ED DAR 105: B84–5 1 2 3 4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from E. A. Darwin, 13 December [1872]. The letter from George Moultrie Salt, of the law firm Salt & Sons in Shrewsbury, has not been found. George Howard Darwin had studied law in London and was called to the bar in 1872. The two classes of property, realty or real estate (immovable assets) and personalty (goods, money, and other moveables), were subject to different inheritance laws. Presumably Erasmus, like CD, owned property in Lincolnshire (see Correspondence vol. 5, letter to John Higgins, 7 June 1851 and n. 1); Mark’s Cottage was a cottage near The Mount in Shrewsbury in which the Darwin family coachman, Mark Briggs, lived rent-free (see Correspondence vol. 15, letter from E. A. Darwin, 3 March 1867 and n. 1); Queen Anne Street was the address of Erasmus’s London home.

To Henri de Lacaze-Duthiers 11 December 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec 11. 1872 Dear Sir I am very much obliged for yr kind note & present of yr photograph, which I shall be particularly glad to add to my collection, as that of a naturalist whom I have long honoured—1 I have taken in the Revue from its commencement, & shall continue to do so, for I have profitted much by many of the articles.2 In case you wd like to possess my photograph, I enclose a copy—& remain with the greatest respect | Dear Sir | yours faithfully | Ch. Darwin LS Académie des sciences–Institut de France, Paris (Fonds Lacaze-Duthiers) 1 2

Lacaze-Duthiers’s note and photograph have not been found. The Revue des cours scientifiques de la France et de l’étranger changed its name to Revue scientifique de la France et de l’étranger in 1871 (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Emile Alglave, 17 March 1871 and n. 3). CD probably took the Revue from this date rather than from the founding of the Revue des cours scientifiques in 1863. A review of Expression by Léon Dumont (Dumont 1873) was published in the Revue scientifique in May 1873; Lacaze-Duthiers’s note may have given CD notice of this. There is a lightly annotated copy of Dumont 1873 in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.

December 1872

569

To J. V. Carus 12 December [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec 12th My dear Sir There is much which I shd like to alter & improve in the Variation; but I have not strength or time; so your Translation must appear with all its sins on its head.— 2 I hope that your edit. of the Expression book will soon appear: the first edition here now consists of 9000 copies, which is a wonderful number. 3 Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Slg. Darmstaedter Lc 1859 Darwin, Charles, Bl. 90/91 1 2 3

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from J. V. Carus, 10 December 1872. A second edition of Carus’s German translation of Variation (Carus trans. 1873) was being prepared for publication (see letter from J. V. Carus, 10 December 1872). Carus’s German translation of Expression was published in 1872 (Carus trans. 1872b). CD’s publisher, John Murray, had recently decided to print 2000 more copies of Expression (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 6 December 1872).

From E. A. Darwin 13 December [1872]1

Dec 13 Dear Charles I hope your visit wont break down altogether especially as I shall like to have a little talk which does better than writing.2 George told me I think that you had directed all your real estate to be sold so as to convert it into personalty and in that case I will do the same.3 This could then be added to the personalty which will be a good deal more than the realty & divided in some proportion among the children. Have you estimated what the proportion is in which you have left your own. I should be rather inclined to leave 65 to the boys & 16 to the girls & I think they i.e. girls will have as much as is good for them. Yours E. D. Review in the Times today 4 12 Columns. Have you got it?4 DAR 105: B86–7 CD ANNOTATION Verso of letter: ‘12,000 to each child’ pencil 1 2

3

The year is established by the reference to the review of Expression in The Times (see n. 4, below). Illness prevented CD from travelling to London on 10 December as he had intended (see letter from E. A. Darwin to Emma Darwin, 9 December [1872]), but he did visit Erasmus from 17 to 22 or 23 December (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). George Howard Darwin, who had just completed his training in law, had been advising Erasmus on writing his will (see letter from E. A. Darwin, 11 December [1872] and n. 2).

570 4

December 1872

The Times, 13 December 1872, p. 4, carried a review of Expression, a copy of which is in CD’s collection of reviews (DAR 226.2: 142–4).

From Mary Treat 13 December 1872 Vineland, New Jersey, Dec. 13, 1872. Mr. Darwin: Dear Sir, Prof. Gray writes me that you have found the nerves in Dionæa. 1 Good! And he asks me, in connection with himself, to make observations on Drosera filiformis, which I will gladly do.2 As far as my observations extend, I do not consider this species so interesting as D. longifolia, or D. rotundifolia, although fully as carnivorous as the two latter, yet it captures only small insects which do not require any movement of the leaves to help confine them. For some reason my plants did not work so well last season as the year before. Whether they were weakened by the unusually dry spring, or whether the locality from which I obtained them was not so good, or whether the fault may not have been somewhat with myself, I cannot say. For two months, commencing in early summer, almost my whole time and thought were concentrated on butterflies in the effort to control sex. The result of my experiments will appear in the American Naturalist. 3 My observations and experiments with butterflies, lead me to think that the theory of the Hive bee is not correct. I know that I shall meet with opposition, so the only way is to experiment.4 I have already engaged a Langstroth observing hive for rearing queens,5 and shall carry on these observations, as well as continue my experiments with butterflies the coming season. Your theory is steadily gaining ground among the masses and thinking people of this country, Prof. Agassiz to the contrary notwithstanding. 6 It is boldly advocated from an Orthodox pulpit in this place, and from the Unitarian pulpit we have had a series of discourses teaching the people your theory. Nothing brings out a crowd on Sunday, like the announcement that Darwinism is to be the theme. Surely the world moves!7 Command me in whatever way you may wish observations made, on birds, insects, or plants, and I shall only be too glad to render assistance as far as in my power. Accept my thanks for your courteous reply to my former letter, 8 and believe me | Yours most sincerely, | Mary Treat. DAR 58.1: 23–4 CD ANNOTATIONS 2.2 yet . . . insects 2.3] scored blue crayon Top of letter: ‘Dionæa Catches large insects?’ blue crayon 1

For CD’s discovery, see the letter to Asa Gray, 22 October 1872, and the letter from Asa Gray, 2 December 1872.

December 1872 2 3

4 5 6 7

8

571

Asa Gray had told CD that he would ask William Marriott Canby to make observations on Drosera filiformis, the thread-leaved sundew (see letter from Asa Gray, 2 December 1872 and n. 5). Treat’s article ‘Controlling sex in butterflies’ (Treat 1873) was published in March 1873. She concluded from her experiments that the sex of butterflies was not determined in the egg but by how much nourishment the larvae received, females being produced when food was plentiful and males when it was scarce. See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Mary Treat, 20 December 1871, and this volume, letter to Mary Treat, 5 January 1872. The sex of bees was generally thought to be determined in the egg; however, this had recently been challenged by Hartshorne 1872. Lorenzo Lorraine Langstroth had introduced ‘observing hives’, in which glass walls allowed a continuous view of bees’ behaviour (see Langstroth 1863, pp. 23, 332–3). For Louis Agassiz’s opposition to evolution, see Lurie 1959. Treat alludes to the statement ‘Eppur si muove’ (still it moves) said to have been made by Galileo Galilei following his forced recantation before the Inquisition that the earth moved around the sun. It is unlikely that Galileo uttered these words; they were attributed to him only after his death. See Heilbron 2010, p. 327. See letter to Mary Treat, 5 January 1872, and Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Mary Treat, 20 December 1871.

From James Dickson 14 December 1872 “The Northern Whig” Offices, | Belfast, 14th. Dec. 1872 Sir, I have not yet had an opportunity of reading your recent work: “The Expression of the emotions in man and animals,” but in a review of it in the Times of 13 th. inst.1 I notice this extract: “Therefore the suspicion arises that our progenitors must formerly have had the power of voluntarily rejecting food which disagreed with them.” 2 Your use of the word “suscipion,” with the reviewer’s insinuation about “the use of the imagination in science,”3 lead me to infer you have not given, and may not have, any instances of this power, and I have therefore much pleasure in giving you the following case:— One of my Father’s male servants, a strong, healthy Scotch lad of about 18 years of age, possessed this power in an extraordinary degree. I never saw him “throw up” (our lowland Scotch phrase for vomit, and the action in question) food because it disagreed with him, but I have seen him do it many times for our amusement. I have given him many a pocketful of fruit on the condition that he would “throw up” a portion of it. It was always done with apparent ease, and he assured us it caused him no pain or uneasiness—his only objection being that of parting with the food. On one occasion he was with us in a search for wild raspberries; and, while I was telling the other boys of this singular power of his he joined us. We were standing on a bridge, and I remember distinctly that the very moment I asked him to do it before my companions, he bent down toward the ledge and performed it. It was done instantaneously; and I believe he could do it at any moment after eating. This youth, therefore, assuredly possessed the power of voluntarily rejecting food.

572

December 1872

You have this on the authority of | Yours very truly | James Dickson, | Manager of the Northern Whig Newspaper, Belfast. DAR 162: 179 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.5 “suscipion,”] underl pencil Top of letter: ‘Expression’4 pencil 1 2 3

4

The review of Expression appeared in The Times, 13 December 1872, p. 4. This is an abbreviated quotation from Expression, p. 259. According to the reviewer, CD’s argument that the actions of our early progenitors shaped present behaviour was an example of the use of the imagination in science; the reviewer claimed, ‘whenever Mr. Darwin is in a great difficulty he brings in an early progenitor to cut the knot’ (The Times, 13 December 1872, p. 4). In Expression 2d ed., p. 271 n. 11, Francis Darwin, drawing on materials collected by CD, noted three cases of voluntary regurgitation, including this ‘apparently trustworthy’ example.

To C. L. Dodgson 14 December [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec. 14th My dear Sir I thank you most sincerely for the excellent photograph & your very kind note. 2 I am now employed on another subject & do not think that I shall continue my observations on expression; but I will not forget your obliging offer, should occasion occur.—3 I am at present far from well,4 so pray excuse brevity & believe me | yours faithfully & obliged | Ch. Darwin A Dodgson family member (private collection) 1 2 3 4

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to C. L. Dodgson, 10 December 1872. For details of the photograph, see the letter to C. L. Dodgson, 10 December 1872, n. 2. Dodgson’s note has not been found. CD had begun work on insectivorous plants, and on Drosera in particular, on 23 August 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) records that on 15 December 1872 CD was ill in bed.

To Alpheus Hyatt 14 December [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec 14th Dear Sir Notwithstanding the kind consideration shown in your last sentence I must thank you for your interesting & clearly-expressed letter.—2 I have directed my publisher to send you a copy of the last Edit. of the Origin3 & you can, if you like, paste in the “From the author”, on next page—

December 1872

573

In relation to your & Profr. Cope’s view on “acceleration” causing the development of new characters, it wd , I think, be well if you were to compare the Decapods which pass & do not pass through the Zoea stage, & the one group which does (according to Fritz Müller) pass through the still earlier Nauplius stage, & see if they present any marked differences.—4 You will I believe find that this is not the case.— I wish it were, for I have often been perplexed at the omission of embryonic stages (, as well as the acquirement of peculiar stages) appearing to produce no special result on the mature form.— I have been very unwell since writing to you before, & must leave home for a  .—5 Believe me   Incomplete Maryland Historical Society: The Alpheus Hyatt Papers 1859–1928 (MS 1007) 1 2

3 4

5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Alpheus Hyatt, 8 December 1872. See letter from Alpheus Hyatt, 8 December 1872 (the copy is incomplete). Hyatt had acknowledged that his theory of acceleration was inadequate as an explanation of the origin of differences in succeeding species. Origin 6th ed. See letter to Alpheus Hyatt, 4 December [1872] and n. 4, and letter from Alpheus Hyatt, 8 December 1872 and n. 4. CD refers to Edward Drinker Cope. Fritz Müller had discovered that one family of Decapoda, the Penaeidae, had a free-living nauplius stage (F. Müller 1863 and 1864b; see also F. Müller 1864a, pp. 8–9 and 86, and Dallas trans. 1869, pp. 17 and 98). CD visited Erasmus Alvey Darwin in London from 17 to 22 to 23 December 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)).

To A. R. Wallace 14 December [1872?]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec. 14th.— My dear Wallace We go today to “6. Queen Anne St. W.” for one week. 2 If you chance to be in London during this week, & have time to spare, will you come & lunch with us, at 1 oclock.— It wd. be a great pleasure to see you.—3 Ever yours sincerely | Ch. Darwin P.S. I have had a deal of ill-health of late & had to put off starting for London.— 4 Cleveland Health Sciences Library (Robert M. Stecher collection) 1 2 3 4

The year is conjectured from CD’s proposed trip to London (see n. 2, below). CD did not set off for Erasmus Alvey Darwin’s house in London on 14 December 1872 but, after spending two days ill in bed, made the journey on 17 December (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). According CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II), he stayed with Erasmus Darwin until the 23 December and was ‘unwell all time’. There is no evidence of his having seen Wallace during this visit to London. See letter to R. F. Cooke, 7 December [1872], and letter from E. A. Darwin to Emma Darwin, 9 December [1872].

574

December 1872

From Julius Althaus 16 December 1872

18, Bryanston Street, | Portman Square. W. Dec. 16. 1872.

Dear Sir. Having just read your admirable work on expression, it has struck me that you have left out the influence which the sensitive fibres of the fifth pair of cerebral nerves, which are dispersed in the facial muscles, have in conveying the influence of the mind to the portio dura and the muscles animated by it. Perhaps you will allow me to call your attention to a paper which appeared in the 52d volume of the Transactions of the Royal Medical and Chirurgical Society of London, for the year 1869 (published by Longmans)—(p.27). It is entitled: ‘on certain points in the physiology and pathology of the fifth pair of cerebral nerves’— I have described a case of disease in it, in which the influence of this fifth nerve was withdrawn, without any affection of the portio dura or the facial muscles being present. Nevertheless, there were striking changes in the physiognomy of the patient (p. 30).1 I regret I have no copy of the paper, otherwise I should send it to you. Hoping that your time will allow you to read the paper, I remain, with great respect, | Yours truly | J Althaus. Ch. Darwin Esq. DAR 159: 56 1

Althaus described the case of a man who had damaged his fifth cerebral nerve but in whom the portio dura (an obsolete term for the facial nerve, or seventh cranial nerve, that controls the muscles of facial expression) was not affected. This individual was able to produce expressions at will, although ‘the effect made was more like that of an automaton than the natural appearance of sentient and animated features’ (Althaus 1868, p. 30). CD did not discuss these nerves explicitly in Expression.

From Julius Herschel1 17 December 1872

2, Montague Place, | Russell Square. W.C. le 17 Decbre 1872.

Monsieur, Je viens de recevoir de mon correspondant, de Rio de Janeiro, une réponse à la question que je lui fis, au mois de Décembre de l’année dernière, au sujet de la mortalité des singes atteints de la fièvre jaune— Voici cette réponse qui, cela va sans dire, ne tranche nullement la question—at issue—qui, probablement, ne saurait être résolue que par l’expérimentation directe sur les intéressans bipèdes— Anglo-Brazilian Times, Rio de Janeiro, Nov. 22–1872. “Monkeys and Yellow fever”. “A statement has appeared in some Engl. scientific periodicals, to the effect that the monkeys of Brazil have been dying of yellow fever. We have made inquiries from a number of the most eminent scientific gentlemen of Rio who should be most likely

December 1872

575

informed in such a matter, and they all agree that they are not aware of any grounds existing for such an assertion, and that, although deaths from consumption (sic) are not unfrequent among the monkeys of Brazil, no case of death from yellow fever has ever come to their knowledge—” “Moreover, a little consideration would show that, as yellow fever is a disease whose local is a few populated seasides, and its attacks are nearly confined to unacclimated foreigners, the probabilities of a yellow fever epidemic breaking out amongst the monkeys of Brazil are extremely small”—2 Mon correspondant, vous le voyez, Monsieur, n’est point un savant. 3 C’est un journaliste et la réponse à ma question, il me l’a donnée dans son journal que je m’empresserai de vous envoyer sous peu.— Agréez, Monsieur, l’expression de mes sentimens les plus distingués. D r. J. Herschel [Enclosure] Rio de Janeiro 22 Nor 1872 My dear Sir I regret that I have not been able until now to give a definite reply to your enquiry respecting the alleged death from yellow fever of Monkeys in Brazil I have recently had communications on the subject from different parts of the interior and in no single instance have I learned that death has resulted from this cause. I refer you to a paragraph in the “Anglo Brazilian Times’ of this day which I have caused to be inserted—a copy of which paper I take the liberty of sending to your address. Please remember me very   to Mrs. & Miss Herschel4 And   Yours very truly   DAR 166: 190, DAR 181: 102 1 2 3 4

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Herschel’s interest in the deaths of Brazilian monkeys from yellow fever may relate to CD’s claim in Descent 1: 11–12 that humans and animals are liable to the same diseases. Herschel’s correspondent has not been identified. Mrs and Miss Herschel have not been identified.

To T. H. Huxley [17] December [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec. 16 My dear Huxley We have both been bad & trying for a week to come to London, & start today. 2 I had intended being in London on a Sunday so as to pay you my morning visit, but this is now doubtful.—3 I have nothing particular to say, but shd. very much like to see you for 14 of hour.— Will you therefore let me have a Post card, soon telling me at

576

December 1872

what hour you generally reach Jermyn St,4 & let me call there some early day at an early hour. Ever yours | Very misanthropically | Ch. Darwin If tomorrow would suit you, I wd try & call.— But if tomorrow inconvenient I wd call another early day. Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine Archives (Huxley 5: 308) 1

2

3 4

The day and year are established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from T. H. Huxley, 20 December 1872, and by CD’s arrival in London on 17 December 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). CD mistakenly dated the letter 16 December. For CD’s attempts to get to London, see the letter to A. R. Wallace, 14 December [1872?] and n. 4. Emma Darwin recorded that she was ill with a cold from 8 December and that CD’s cough and cold were very bad from 12 December (Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242)). Although CD’s journal (Appendix II) records that he was in London until 23 December, Emma Darwin noted in her diary (DAR 242) that she and CD came home on Sunday 22 December. Huxley was lecturer in natural history and palaeontology at the Government School of Mines on Jermyn Street, Piccadilly.

From Dora Roberts 17 December [1872 or later]1 The Greenways | Leamington Decr. 17th.

Charles Darwin Esqr. Sir— May I trespass on your time while I try to relate a curious instance of misdirected maternal instinct which occured in our Hen House here? A cat came to the cook mewing piteously and expressing both grief & excitement— The woman allowed her to pull her gown & then followed her to the Hen House where a hen—which had been very indignant because not provided with eggs to sit upon for some time past—was found in possession of two small & starving kittens— These she defended by beak & wings until fairly beaten off with a stick— She flew with fury at the mother cat especially— Some hours after the supposed restoration of the kittens the mother again came to her friend the cook exhibiting even greater despair—& on yielding to her entreaties once more the cook found that the hen had managed to convey the kittens to the very highest shelf of the Hen House—when a ladder had to be fetched in order to release the kittens again How they had been carried to such a height we never knew— The instinct which drew the cat to the cook was odd as the woman disliked cats & had never treated her kindly— It seemed her sense of justice to which the creature appealed2 With regard to the almost human scream of a horse in agony having heard it once I can never forget it In a crowd in London the horse fell & got under the wheel of a carriage the sounds rang in our ears for days after as the most expressive of agony we had ever heard— 3 The cat & hen adventure occurred at Collin House six miles from Belfast— 4 Yours obedly — | Dora Roberts.

December 1872

577

A friend of ours was pursued by a pig once with wide open mouth Her description made the animal seem very terrible— A niece of mine can distinctly move her ears & draw them forward she cannot explain how it is done— 5 DAR 176: 184 CD ANNOTATION Top of letter: ‘Keep | Horse—screaming | Maternal Instinct misled’ pencil 1

2

3 4 5

The year is established on the assumption that Roberts’ letter was written in response to Expression, which was published in November 1872 (see CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Dora Roberts has not been identified. In Decent 1: 41, CD had reported the case of a female baboon who stole young dogs and cats and then carried them about. In Expression, p. 120, he mentioned a dog who had lost her puppies and transferred her maternal affection to licking her master’s hand. This description of a horse screaming was added to Expression 2d ed., p. 89 n. 2. Collin House, five miles south-west of Belfast, no longer exists; it was built between 1790 and 1810 (Parks and Gardens Data Services 2007, www.parksandgardens.ac.uk (accessed 1 March 2012)). In Descent 1: 20–1, CD discussed the rudimentary ability of humans to move their ears.

From A. Smither1 19 December 1872

2 Doughty St. W.C. 19 Decr 1872

Dear Sir In reading your new book, an idea with regard to the erection of its feathers by a bird, & of its hair by a beast, has occurred to me, which I have thought I might dare to communicate to you.2 Please pardon me if my suggestion is [1 or 2 words illeg] It seems to me that this habit must be of real use for defence. Surely a hen with its feathers ruffled, (and its head drawn back to its body) is to a great extent defended against the attack of a dog.3 Similarly the bristling mane of a lion is a great protection against the teeth of an other animal. His enemy would hardly know ‘where to have him’, & would perhaps get merely a mouthful of hair instead of a grip of the lion’s throat. Even in the case of the monkey & snake, the snake would have greater difficulty in fixing its fangs if the hair of the monkey were erected. 4 This defence-theory seems to me so obvious, to have so strong a primâ facie probability on its side that I cannot but think that you have rejected it with very good reason for the expression-theory.5 I therefore beg again that you pardon me for troubling you with this letter. Your obedt Servant | A. Smither Chas Darwin. Esq. M.A. &c. DAR 177: 203 1 2

Smither has not been identified. In Expression, pp. 95–104, CD had discussed the raising of hair and feathers.

578 3 4 5

December 1872

In Expression, p. 97, CD had stated that ruffled feathers or raised neck-hackles in angry or frightened birds served no defensive function. Smither refers to examples that CD used in Expression, pp. 96–7. CD acknowledged that the erection of the dermal appendages such as hair or feathers did made an animal ‘appear larger and more frightful to its enemies or rivals’, but he doubted that the power of raising them was ‘primarily acquired for this special purpose’ (see Expression, p. 95). He argued that it was a reflex action produced by fear, which, through force of habit, could become a voluntary action for defensive purposes (ibid., pp. 101–2).

To Ernst Haeckel 20 December 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. [6 Queen Anne Street, London.] Dec 20 1872 My dear Häckel It was very good of you to write me so interesting a letter, & to tell me what points to attend to in your new book, as you know how poor a German scholar I am. 1 Your diagram of Olynthus is very striking, & I can see how readily it c d be converted into a multitude of other forms, but it is too generous of you to send me the work in full when published, for, from the number of plates, it must be very expensive.2 From what you say about correcting the proof sheets, I fear that you have been working much too hard. You will break down unless you moderate y r labour; just reflect how much you have published & observed during the last few years. I have seen an advertisement of your Hist of Creation, but I do not believe it is actually published.3 I shall be glad when it appears; for I have never yet done it justice in the way of full reading. I have recd the latter sheets of yr book on sponges: I thought that I wd keep them for a few days so as to read a part, before forwarding them to Sir J Lubbock. 4 I then became very unwell & left home for a week, & forgot all about them. On my return home in a few days time I will forward them with yr message about yr “Vorrede”.5 With respect to my book on expression, do not trouble yourself to read it, unless the subject happens to interest you. It has been very successful in England as far as sale goes.6 Farewell my good friend, & remember that no one can keep up such a strain on his mind as you put on yours— | yours most sincerely | Ch. Darwin PS I have got Strauss’s new book, but the German is too difficult for me so I hope it may be translated7 LS Ernst-Haeckel-Haus (Bestand A-Abt. 1:1-52/28) 1 2

See letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 December 1872. Haeckel had instructed his publisher to send CD a copy of his monograph on calcareous sponges (Haeckel 1872a). Haeckel included a diagram of Olynthus, showing a mature individual as well as the gastrula stage, in his letter of 10 December 1872. Haeckel’s monograph consisted of three volumes including an atlas of 60 plates (Haeckel 1872a, 3).

December 1872 3 4 5

6

7

579

See letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 December 1872 and n. 13. The source of the advertisement for Haeckel 1876a, an English translation of Haeckel 1872b, has not been identified. See letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 December 1872. CD visited his brother Erasmus Alvey Darwin in London from 17 to 22 or 23 December 1872 (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). Haeckel arranged for Rudolf Virchow to write an introduction to the German translation of Lubbock 1865a (see letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 December 1872 and n. 14). In his letter of 10 December 1872, Haeckel had apologised for only having skimmed Expression, but promised to read it. CD’s publisher, John Murray, had decided to print an additional 2000 copies of Expression (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 6 December 1872). See letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 December 1872 and n. 16. CD refers to David Friedrich Strauss. CD’s copy of Strauss 1872 is in the Darwin Library–Down. An English translation appeared in 1873 (Strauss 1873).

From S. J. Housley 20 December 1872

70 Boundary Road. N.W. 20th. December 1872.

Sir, For a whole year I have delayed communicating to you a variation which has occurred in the ear of one of my children, because not being an anatomist I did not know whether the form was important or not— About this time last year I had a son born to me and my first observation on seeing him was, “Why, he has the primeval point to his right ear!” I had previously read in your Descent of Man of this point being more or less developed in ears and was astonished to find not merely the rudiment but the actual point itself fully developed. 1 The edge of the ear folds over all round; therefore at this point, the cartilage of the ear gives the appearance of something having been placed under the fold to force the top of the ear out— I felt doubtful whether this really was a reversion to the Ancestral form; but when reading your “Expressions” I found the drawing of the ear of the Cynopithecus niger so closely represent the ear of my child that I could no longer be in doubt.2 Another fact which impelled me to write to you was, that I see that Mr. Bree denies the existence of what he calls the “Woolner Ear”—3 The accompanying sketch will give some idea of the form— It possesses the characteristics but does not pretend to acccuracy— The red lines give the forms in the left ear of the same child—4 I am, Sir, | Yours faithfully | Samuel John Housley C. Darwin Esqre — DAR 87: 54–5 1 2

CD had discussed this ‘primeval’ or Woolnerian point in Descent 1: 22. See Expression, p. 136 fig. 16.

580 3 4

December 1872

This claim was made by Charles Robert Bree in his An exposition of fallacies in the hypothesis of Mr. Darwin (Bree 1872, p. 122). For CD’s view of Bree, see the letter to Nature, 3 August [1872]. The red lines in the diagram are represented here by dotted lines.

From T. H. Huxley 20 December 1872 Athenæum Club | Pall Mall S.W. Dec. 20. 1872 My dear Darwin, I am utterly disgusted at having only just received your note of Tuesday— 1 But the fact is there is a certain inconvenience about having four addresses as has been my case for the most part of this week—in consequence of our moving—and as I have not been in Jermyn St. before today I have missed your note—2 I should run round to Queen Anne St. now on the chance of catching you but I am bound here by an appointment3 However, it just occurs to me that Mrs Litchfield said something last Tuesday about you coming to stay with her—& I shall send this note to her address 4 Please send me a post card to 4 Marlborough Place Abbey Road N.W. to say what time tomorrow I may call & have a chat with you My lectures are out today & I am free— You may judge what a joy moving has been in this weather—5 Ever yours very faithfully | T. H. Huxley DAR 166: 327 1 2

3 4 5

See letter to T. H. Huxley, [17] December [1872]. In 1872, 17 December was a Tuesday. Huxley’s four addresses included the residence he moved from at 26 Abbey Place, St John’s Wood; his new residence at 4 Marlborough Place, Abbey Road, St John’s Wood; the Athenaeum Club, where he wrote this letter; and the Government School of Mines on Jermyn Street, where he was lecturer in natural history and palaeontology. CD was staying at Erasmus Alvey Darwin’s house at 6 Queen Anne Street, London. Henrietta Litchfield’s address was 9 Devonshire Street, Portland Place. CD, however, stayed with Erasmus Darwin for the entire time he was in London (see ‘Journal’ (Appendix II)). The Huxleys moved house ‘amid endless rain and mud’ (L. Huxley ed. 1900, 1: 384).

To F. C. Donders 21 December 1872 Down. | Beckenham. Kent. Decr. 21. 1872. My dear Professor Donders You will have received some little time ago, my book on expression, in writing which, I was so deeply indebted to your kindness.—1 I want to beg a favour of you, if you have the means to grant it— A Clergyman, the Head of an Institution for the Blind in England, has been observing the expression of those born blind, & he informs

November 1872

581

me that they never or very rarely frown. He kept a record of several cases, but at last observed a frown on 2 of the children who he thought never frowned; & then in a foolish manner tore up his notes. & did not write to me until my book was published. 2 He may be a bad observer & altogether mistaken; but I think it would be worth while to ascertain whether those born blind, when young, & whilst screaming violently, contract the muscles—round the eyes like ordinary infants— 3 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 my asking this favour & pray believe me— | Yours very sincerely | Charles Darwin.— P.S. I saw Bowman some little time ago. & was pleased to hear of the great success of your anniversary—4 Copy DAR 143: 416 1

2 3

4

Donders’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). He had carried out investigations in order to answer specific questions from CD; see, for example, Expression, pp. 229, 304. He had also offered to read the proofs of the parts of Expression that related to physiology (see letter from F. C. Donders, 17 April 1872). Robert Hugh Blair reported having seen two blind youths frown (see letter from R. H. Blair, 9 November 1872). CD asked William Bowman to make the same observations (see letter to William Bowman, [after 21 December 1872]). In Expression p. 161–2, CD had relied on Donders’s conclusions regarding the protective role of the firm closure of the eyes in screaming infants; see also letter to William Bowman, 25 January 1872 and n. 2. See letter from William Bowman, 16 November 1872.

To William Bowman [after 21 December 1872]1 My dear B.— I am going to beg a favour of you.– Mr Blair, principal of the Blind In. at Worcester, informs me that those persons born blind, very rarely frown: indeed he thought at one time that they never frowned; but having found 2 exceptions in the case of children did not write to me till my book was published.—2 He may of course, be quite mistaken; but the point seems worth attending to.— Would you have the great kindness to observe any children born blind whom you may see;, & could you get any intelligent person, who has charge of an asylum to observe.? The points which seem worth attending to are (1) do infants born blind, contract all the muscles round their

582

December 1872

eyes whilst screaming violently like ordinary infants.? (2) whether or not—these muscles are contracted during screaming, do children born blind in after years rarely or never frown;—a frown being [ recognising] by Vertical furrows between eyebrows.— (3) If there is any difference between children born blind & others in frowning or in contracting all the muscles round the eyes, do they weep as copiously as other children. (4) If of children born blind, some frown & contract the other muscles, & others do not act in this manner, would it not be worth while to consider the cause or nature of the congenital blindness? Forgive me for begging this great favour & | believe me yrs very sincerely C. D. I have asked Donders if he has any opportunities to observe the same facts 3 Draft DAR 96: 152 1 2

3

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to F. C. Donders, 21 December 1872. Robert Hugh Blair was principal of the Worcester College for the Blind Sons of Gentlemen. See letter from R. H. Blair, 9 November 1872. Expression was published on 26 November 1872 (Freeman 1977), but binding of the copies began in October 1872 (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 22 October 1872). See letter to F. C. Donders, 21 December 1872.

To D. H. Tuke 22 December 1872 Down | Beckenham | Kent Dec 22. 1872. Dear Sir, I have now finished yr book & have read it with great interest. 1 Many of yr cases are very striking. As I felt sure wd. be the case 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 yr. work before my publication. I always felt, and said so a year ago to Professor Donders, that I had not sufficient knowledge of Physiology to treat my subject in a proper way2 With many thanks for the interest which I have felt in reading your work | I remain | dear Sir | Yours faithfully Charles Darwin Dr. D. H. Tuke Copy DAR 148: 149 1

2

There is an annotated copy of Tuke’s Illustrations of the influence of the mind upon the body (Tuke 1872) in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 809). Several references to Tuke 1872 were added to the second edition of Expression (Expression 2d ed., p. 81 n. 17, p. 252 n. 7, p. 271 n. 12). See letter to F. C. Donders, 8 April 1872.

December 1872 From H. Henry1 23 December 1872

583 3 Cliffords Inn, Fleet Street 23 December 1872

Sir/ Upon reading your recent Book upon Expressions, I am led to write to you on two subjects of which you treat. I make my apology for addressing you, as we are strangers, and trust my good will may be my excuse. With regard to the gestures of the body in surprise, the raising of the open hands. 2 I suggest that when you are surprised at a thing, you throw your body back from it, so that your body is off its balance. When you step on a piece of orange peel in the street, and your foot slips forward so as to throw your body off its balance backward, you throw your arms violently up, with the fingers open, and so recover your balance, and walk on. So, when your body is off its balance from being thrown back from the object surprising you, you recover your balance by throwing up your hands with the fingers widely stretched, because you obtain the resistance of the air better so, and so recover your balance. When education has given you self command, surprise does not cause you to start back, or to raise your hands, but the power of association remains, and when you unbend, such as to listen to a child telling you some simple piece of wonderfulness, you naturally raise your hands to express, to please the child, surprise you do not feel. As to the heart beating quickly and violently, and the exudation of perspiration from a cold skin, in fear. It might be suggested that, when you were part of your ancestors, you ran from what you were afraid of, and the exertion made your heart to beat, and your perspiration to run, and now, although you may not run from what you may fear, from an educated self command or other means, the power of association makes the heart beat quickly and violently, and the perspiration exude. 3 The last four pages of your chapter on weeping might be applied, I venture to suggest, to the sudorific as well as the lachrymal glands, and it would appear natural that the involuntary habits of the body should be very tenacious, because they can not be overlaid by personal peculiarities and affectations. 4 Again apologising for troubling you with what is loosely expressed, and has probably been already fully considered by you, I remain | Sir | Your obedient servant | H Henry Chs Darwin Esqre. M A. FRS | Royal Society DAR 166: 144 CD ANNOTATIONS 5.1 and . . . up, 5.2] scored pencil 6.1 when . . . you, 6.2] scored pencil 8.1 As to . . . affectations 10.4] crossed pencil

584 1 2 3 4

December 1872

H. Henry has not been identified; his is not one of the names listed in the Post Office London directory 1872 for this address. In Expression, pp. 287–8, CD discussed this gesture of surprise. CD discussed the effects of fear on the heart and the sudorific glands in Expression, pp. 77–8, 290. In Expression, pp. 173–7, CD discussed weeping as a result of the reflex action of internal parts of the eye on the lachrymal glands.

From Paolo Mantegazza1 23 December 1872 Florence 23 Décembre 1872. Illustre ami. Oh, laissez moi vous appeler mon ami, quoique je n’en aie pas le droit.— Je vous estime, je vous venère et je vous aime. Puisse la nature vous conserver un siecle à le science et à vos admirateurs! Vous devez vivre au moins comme Fontenelle et plus encore: vous en êtes digne, mille fois digne.2 Votre dernier livre m’a ravi;3 vous avez fait de la physiognomonie une nouvelle science: c’était jusqu’à aujourdhui une alchimie, qu’ avait Lavater pour son fondateur, vous en êtes le Lavoisier;—4 J’en ferai un long examen dans notre première Revue, et je vous en enverrai un exemplaire sous peu de jours. 5 Je sais, qu’on en fera une traduction italienne,6 et s’il n’y avait pas des traducteurs, j’aurais été moi-même votre traducteur. Je vous ai adressé, il y a déjà quelques jours deux brochures sur la douleur, 7 où vous trouverez mes observations sur l’expression respiratoire de la douleur, et qui vont parfaitement d’accord avec ce que vous dites dans votre admirable ouvrage, qui a toute le verdeur d’un homme de vingt ans.— Je viens décrire à mon éditeur de vous envoyer un exemplaire de ma Physiologie du plaisir, qui a eu cinq éditions, dont la dernière stereotype. C’est un travail d’observation psychologique qui est très imparfait, car je l’ai écrit à 22 ans, mais vous trouverez à chaque chapitre la description de la physionomie de tous les plaisirs physiques et moraux. 8 Depuis longtemps je m’occupe d’un travail sur la physionomie de la douleur et je vous demande la permission de vous le dedier.—9 Je vous communique quelques observations que j’ai fait dans mes voyages en Amerique10 et dans mon laboratoire. 1) J’ai vu deux fois dans le Paraguay le Mycetes carayá 11 lâcher ses selles par épouvante, quand on tirait sur lui. C’est ce qui a donné occasion à la fable que quelques singes jettent sur le voyageur leurs excrements. 2) Je suis très persuadé que dans les plus fortes douleurs physiques l’homme ferme la bouche et retient l’haleine, car en produisant un leger degré d’asphyxie, la sensibilité générale est diminuée et la souffrance est soulagée.—12 3) Les offenses de l’amour propre, quand elles ne peuvent pas être demontrées par dehors obligent l’homme à une immobilité absolue des muscles de la face, et on avale de la salive, précisement comme quand on savoure des choses très amères. La physionomie prise par la photographie d’un homme qui a dans sa bouche de l’aloes est identique à l’expression que prend involontairement un homme quand il est humilié.

December 1872

585

J’ai trouvé d’autres analogies frappantes entre des douleurs physiques et des douleurs d’un ordre superieur, comme vous verrez dans mon album de photographies prises d’après nature.—13 Aimez moi un peu, en échange de la profonde affection que j ai pour vous et de la haute veneration que m’inspirent votre génie. | Votre | Devoué | Mantegazza L’étude des langues demontre que ma théorie sur l’expression des douleurs de l’amour propre est juste. En espagnol, en italien et en français on dit trajar, ingoiare et avaler pour exprimer l’humiliation qui suit une offense. 14 DAR 171: 39 CD ANNOTATIONS 5.2 C’est . . . soulagée.— 6.3] scored blue crayon 9.1 L’étude . . . offense. 9.3] scored blue crayon CD note: Dedication Translation [ Most Honour] & [ flattering] letter pleased me greatly Very interesting letter got your pamphlets posted I had no idea that you had attended to subject— but clearly [ case] as our minds agree so closely I am the more pleased, as I feel that I am growing old & all letters are fatigue to me. 15 1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Bernard le Bouvier de Fontenelle, the French writer, died a month before his hundredth birthday. Mantegazza’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). Mantegazza implies that Johann Kaspar Lavater’s work on physiognomy (Lavater [1781]–1803) bore the same relation to Expression as alchemy did to chemistry. Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier was considered to be the founder of modern chemistry. A lightly annotated copy of Mantegazza’s review of Expression in the December 1872 issue of Nuova Antologia (Mantegazza 1872b) is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. CD had received a request from two men for an Italian translation of Expression (see letter to John Murray, 11 November 1872 and n. 8). Mantegazza 1866 and 1867b. There are annotated copies of these articles in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Mantegazza’s work on the physiology of pleasure (Fisiologia del piacere) was first published in 1854 (Mantegazza 1854). There is a lightly annotated copy of the fifth edition (Mantegazza 1870b) in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 563). Mantegazza’s publisher was Giuseppe Bernardoni, who has not been further identified. Mantegazza’s work on the physiology of pain (Fisiologia del dolore) was not published until 1880 (Mantegazza 1880). The book was dedicated to Tullo Massarani. Mantegazza had published an account of his travels in South America in Mantegazza 1867a. Mycetes caraya, the black howler monkey, is now known as Alouatta caraya. In Expression, p. 146, CD had mentioned that monkey sometimes voided their excretions from fear. In Expression, pp. 69–70, CD had stated that humans in agony compressed their lips and might hold their breath. Mantegazza’s Atlante della espressioni del dolore (Mantegazza 1876) is an atlas of photographs showing expressions of pain. The words mean ‘to swallow’, as in the English saying ‘to swallow an insult’. CD’s note is for the letter to Paolo Mantegazza, 28 December 1872.

586

December 1872

From M. D. Conway 24 December 1872 51, Notting Hill Square, | Bayswater. W. Dec. 24 ’72 Dear Sir, Some years ago Dr Erasmus Darwin whom I met at the house of Hensleigh Wedgwood Esq. promised me an introduction to you when I should ask it; but I have never asked it, much as I desired to see you, because I heard that your working-time (so important to the world) was limited by ill health. 1 It has been my desire, and it has been increased by reading your latest work, to lay before you certain observations which I have carefully made upon the noises uttered by my children before they learned to talk. 2 My first child was born in Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1859, and I have had three born since.3 Of these the first noise made has invariably been hissing (that is, of course, next to crying). They cried when suffering, but satisfaction was expressed by continued hissing, with a kind of moist sputter. Then they all had a kind of whimper or whining, like an anxious puppy. Two of them after this had a kind of bray, made by vigorous inspiration and expiration, accompanied by movements up and down of the upper body. The braying stage was in the other two cases preceded by cooing, though all brayed at one time or another, and all cooed. Each of them also bleated. I was struck also with the great ease with which they could be taught to imitate with exactness animal sounds, as crowing and ‘mooing’. —One or two other things came to my memory on reading your book. The closing of the eyes when thinking or listening deeply, which gave the Greeks their μεσις (our mystic), I have often seen represented.4 I was once a critic writing on Dwight’s Journal of Music (Boston, N. E.),5 and remember that most of the art-critics and lovers of instrumental music were in the habit of listening to the severer music, such as symphonies &c., with eyes shut. In conversation on theological and metaphysical subjects with eminent German scholars, I have observed them shut their eyes,—and rub them hard sometimes. The late Horace Greeley, when listening to a speech or sermon in which he was much interested, was often laughed at for at once going to sleep, and even nodding: yet he was always prepared to write ably in the Tribune about what had been said.6 —This has struck me as curious: I was never very fond of dogs, but have actually (no doubt, unreasonably) disliked them since near 14 years ago I was bitten by a strange dog, and suffered some mental apprehension for a year afterward. A son of mine born nearly seven years afterward screams and weeps if a dog comes near. I am not conscious of having taught him at any time to avoid dogs; at any rate I have tried to educate him out of his horror—vainly. His fear is excited by the smallest lap-dog. —I suppose you aware that a strong pressure by the finger midway between the upper lip & nose (in centre) will generally stop a sneeze which is coming on. 7 —(p. 220.) I have observed that Mahommedans in praying generally fix their eyes on the mosque-floor: which is accordance with Islam (submission.) 8

December 1872

587

—(p. 230.) I used to observe that when my dear master R. W. Emerson was trying hard to recollect or solve he would put his forefinger on his Wellingtonian, 9 and have observed the same since in one or two other great men. One, an eloquent preacher, if perplexed would take hold of the bridge of his nose & cover the rest with his hand. —(p. 251) You give the derivation of sneer:10 have you also noticed that sarcasm is from σαρκζω, defined in Liddell & Scott as ‘to tear flesh like dogs’? 11 p 74 * With regard to expressions of rage blended with vindictive excitement,—I was, during the late Franco-Prussian War, travelling with the Prussian King’s Headquarters for the purpose of writing the history of what I saw in English and American Magazines.12 One day on straying beyond the protection of the German soldiery to take a view from Chateau Mousson, I was in the old ruin encountered by two French peasants, who held small sickles, and were evidently determined to make way with me in that lonely spot, as they often did with Germans whom they found unprotected. I could at once detect the rising of their resolution to attack by the increasing hardness and shortness of their breathing. I took out my American passport, and spent twenty minutes in explaining to them what they were slow to believe, that I was an American and a neutral, as ready to Chronicle a French as a German victory. They did not for a long time believe my story. But I had taken along a luncheon wrapped in an English newspaper. One of them, who was an Alsacian & spoke German, asked to see it: instead of opening it he closely inspected the paper wrapping; as he did so his breathing diminished in intensity, and its quickness diminished, until his murderous purpose passed with a long drawn breath away. I recognised that I was safe (I was unarmed) a minute before I heard him say to his companion “Pas allemand”.13 In a poem of Nizami (Persian) A.D. 1157, a very keen observer, I find the wrath of a King, a cruel tyrant against a sage who had spoken plainly of him, described in the following verse. When he beheld the sage, “the dark-minded monarch clapped his hands together; and from a desire of revenge, his eye was bent back towards the heel of his foot.”14 I remember Emerson describing in a conversation the anger of the late Secretary Seward which he witnessed, by saying, “His voice became corvine, and his nose fairly twisted.”15 —(p. 269) I have noticed shrugging among among the (lately) negro slaves of the United States, and have fancied that it might have been a natural development among any people fond of talking &c., but whose freedom of speech is restrained by fear or the habit of deference.16 —With regard to dare manus,17 — Prince Bismark told me before the battle of Gravelotte that I must “bear no arms whatever, and if overtaken by the French must throw up my hands, holding them open. Everybody understands that.” 18 Having thus brought my little budget of coals to Newcastle, I beg to subscribe myself as one of your admirers, and a disciple of many years. | Moncure D. Conway DAR 161: 219

588 1

2 3

4

5 6 7 8 9

10

11 12 13 14

15

16 17

18

December 1872

Conway had asked Erasmus Alvey Darwin for an introduction to CD in 1863, but was unable to visit Down because of CD’s ill health (see Correspondence vol. 11, letter from E. A. Darwin, 9 November 1863, and letters from E. A. Darwin to M. D. Conway, 9 November 1863 and 11 November 1863). In Expression, p. 86, CD had discussed the modulation of sounds made by babies before they could talk. Conway had been a preacher in Ohio before settling in London in 1863. His eldest child was 12 years old in 1872; his two other surviving children were aged 6 and 3 (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/34/27/47)). Conway’s second child had died in Brighton in 1864 at the age of 3 (Conway 1904, pp. 10–11). The movement of eyelids during reflection or meditation was described by CD in Expression, pp. 228–9. μω (ancient Greek): close, be shut. From this is derived the word μησις, initiation into the mysteries, that is, the things about which one keeps one’s mouth shut. Dwight’s Journal of Music was edited by John Sullivan Dwight, who had founded the journal in Boston in 1852. Horace Greeley had been the editor of the New York Tribune; he died on 29 November 1872 (ANB). In Expression, pp. 36, 40, CD had described sneezing as a reflex action. In Expression, p. 220, CD stated that devotion was ‘chiefly expressed by the face being directed towards the heavens, with the eyeballs upturned’. Conway was a follower of the American transcendentalist Ralph Waldo Emerson. By ‘Wellingtonian’ he probably meant nose, in a reference to Arthur Wellesley, duke of Wellington, who was renowned for the size of his nose. In Expression, p. 251, CD described the exposure of the canine tooth in a ferocious sneer as similar to the muscular contraction of a snarling dog, and noted that the words sneer and snarl derived from the same root. See Liddell and Scott comps. 1996; the Greek–English lexicon was first published in 1843. Conway had been a war correspondent during the Franco-Prussian war of 1870 to 1871 (see Conway 1904, 2: 198–222). Conway repeated this story in his autobiography (Conway 1904, 2: 212–13), but omitted any mention of the labourers’ breathing as a measure of their hostile feelings. Pas allemand (French): not German. The lines come from the poem Makhzan al-asrar (Treasure house of mysteries) written around 1165 by the poet Nizami Ganjavi (see Talattof and Clinton eds. 2000, p. 3). Conway may have read the translation made by William Jones, who had dated the poem 1157 (W. Jones 1807, 4: 383); the quotation occurs in section fourteen of the poem, ‘On truth: the tyrant and the sage’ (ibid., p. 418). The US secretary of state was William Henry Seward. Conway later altered Ralph Waldo Emerson’s statement about the effect of anger on Seward’s face to ‘his nose appeared twisted and almost corvine’ (Conway 1904, 1: 311). In Expression, p. 269, CD considered the evidence of shrugging among different peoples and concluded that it was ‘a gesture natural to mankind’. Dare manus: surrender (Latin). CD had suggested in Expression, p. 221, that the devotional gestures of kneeling while holding up the hands with the palms joined were derived from the action of captives who offered up their hands to be bound. Otto von Bismarck was present at the battle near Gravelotte, France, on 18 August 1870; it was the largest battle of the Franco-Prussian war (Wawro 2003, pp. 169–86).

From F. C. Donders1 24 December 1872 Utrecht, 24 Décembre | 1872. My dear Mister Darwin, Après la reception de votre lettre du 21 Décembre, je ne veux plus différer à vous remercier de l’envoi de votre livre “on the Expression of the emotions”.— 2 et surtout

December 1872

589

de l’unique honneur que vous m’avez fait en mentionnant d’une manière trop flatteur pour moi les humbles services que j’aie pu vous rendre. 3 De mon côté, permettez moi de le répéter, je ne saurais que vous être reconnaissant de la suggestion des questions intéressantes que vous avez bien voulu soumettre à mon examen. J’avoue franchement que je n’en avais pas compris toute la portée avant que d’être entré dans l’esprit de votre livre. Quel beau complement forme-t-il de cette longue série d’études, que le monde a suivi avec un interet toujours croissant! Quant aux questions que vous me faites l’honneur de m’adresser dans votre lettre, je ferai attention aux faits qui s’y rapportent: Il s’agira surtout d’observer les jeunes enfants nés aveugles, comme ils s’en présentent de temps à autre à notre consultation.4 Peut-être Monsieur Bowman en aura plus souvent encore l’occasion que moi.5 Pour l’observation de personnes plus âgées, l’opportunité se présentera dans les Instituts pour les aveugles. À Amsterdam il y a un pareil Institut, 6 et je ne manquerai pas de le visiter aussitôt que j’en aurai le temps. Quant aux jeunes enfants, qui ne sont pas admis à l’Institut, il faudra attendre les cas. Je ne saurais donc vous promettre une prompte reponse. J’espère que vous et tous les vôtres se trouvent bien. | Votre bien affectionné | Donders DAR 162: 234 1 2 3 4 5 6

For a translation of this letter, see Appendix I. Letter to F. C. Donders, 21 December 1872. CD had acknowledged his indebtedness to Donders’s research and kindness in Expression, pp. 160 and 229–330. CD had asked whether those born blind contracted the muscles around the eye when screaming, or frowned (see letter to F. C. Donders, 21 December 1872). William Bowman was an ophthalmic surgeon at the Royal Ophthalmic Hospital in Moorfields, London. See letter to F. C. Donders, 21 December 1872, n. 3. The Instituut tot Onderwijs van Blinden was founded in 1808 in Amsterdam (Grote Winkler Prins, s.v. Blindenverzorging).

From F. P. Cobbe 25 December [1872]1

26, Hereford Sq Xmas

Dear Mr. Darwin, I think the enclosed story of a dog-suicide will interest you. It seems to be better authenticated than any I had heard of when I wrote my article.2 It is sent to me by Revd. C. Conybeare of Itchen Stoke.3 Perhaps some of your party will kindly return it to me when you have read it— Miss Lloyd4 & I have come to Brighton for Xmas but intend to return to Hereford Sq in a day or two— A friend of mine begs me to tell you that she has twice seen an Ourang Outang stare a baboon out of countenance:—the baboon retreating before the fixed & threatening gaze of the Ourang. tho’ there was no minatory action whatever Very truly yrs. | Frances P. Cobbe

590

December 1872

The animal my friend believes to have been an Ourang was kept in the Crystal Palace5 DAR 161: 189 1 2

3 4 5

The year is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter to F. P. Cobbe, 28 November 1872. In the letter to F. P. Cobbe, 28 November 1872, CD had doubted Cobbe’s claim that dogs committed suicide ([Cobbe] 1872a, pp. 445–6). Cobbe’s enclosure, presumably returned to her as requested, has not been found. Charles Ranken Conybeare. Mary Charlotte Lloyd. There is no record of an orang-utan being kept at the Crystal Palace (the glass structure erected in Hyde Park for the Great Exhibition in 1851, and later moved to Sydenham). It is possible that one was exhibited at the Crystal Palace; in 1864, for example, Wombwell’s Menagerie displayed wild animals there (see Piggott 2004, p. 184).

To Paolo Mantegazza 28 December 1872 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec 28 1872 My dear Sir I thank you cordially for your most kind letter, with its high commendation of my book on Expression.1 I am must own that it has pleased me greatly, as you have already carefully attended to the subject, and as you possess so profound a knowledge of physiology. Your letter has pleased me all the more, as I feel that I am growing old, and I was not at all sure that the work was worth publishing. When I sent you the copy, I was not in the least aware that you had studied the subject; and I sent it simply because I thought that our minds were of a kindred nature, and that whatever interested me, would probably interest you. I have received the pamphlets which you have been so good as to send me,2 and I will soon get my wife to translate them to me. I accept with gratitude the high honour which you propose to confer upon me by your dedication.3 With respect to the translation of my book, if the possibility had ever occurred to me that you would have been willing to undertake it, I would assuredly have refused every other proposal; but as it is, two Gentlemen have applied to me, and I am pledged to one of them.4 With my best thanks and highest esteem, | Pray believe me, | My dear Sir, | Yours faithfully and obliged, | Charles Darwin P.S. Since the above was written I have received your very kind gift of your Physiology of Pleasure.5 LS(A) Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, University of Toronto 1 2

See letter from Paolo Mantegazza, 23 December 1872. See letter from Paolo Mantegazza, 23 December 1872 and n. 7.

December 1872 3 4 5

591

Mantegazza had asked whether he might dedicate his work on the physiology of pain to CD (see letter from Paolo Mantegazza, 23 December 1872 and n. 9). Giovanni Canestrini and Francesco Bassani’s Italian translation of Expression was published in 1878. See letter from Paolo Mantegazza, 23 December 1872 and n. 8.

To Francis Galton 30 December [1872]1 Down, | Beckenham, Kent. Dec 30th My dear Galton A young Mr. Balfour, a friend of my sons, is staying here.2 He is very clever & full of zeal for Nat. Hist.— He has been transplanting bits of skins between brown & white Rats, in relation to Pangenesis!3 He wants to try for several successive generations the same experiment with Rabbits.4 Hence he wants to know which colours breed truest. I have, of course, recommended Silver-greys.— What other colour breeds true? Can you tell me? I think white or albinoes had better be avoided. Do any grey breeds, of nearly the colour of the wild kind, breed true? Will you be so very kind as to let me hear. I much enjoyed my short glimpse of you in London.5 Ever yours | C. Darwin UCL Library Services, Special Collections (Galton 39 E) 1 2 3 4 5

The year is established by the reference to Francis Maitland Balfour’s visit (see n. 2, below). Balfour was a student of natural sciences at Cambridge, where Francis Darwin had also studied. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), Balfour arrived on 27 December 1872. Galton had performed similar experiments with rats but had given up this line of research (see letter from Francis Galton, 1 February 1872 and n. 3). Galton had done experiments in which he transfused blood between different coloured rabbits in order to test CD’s hypothesis of pangenesis (see letter from Francis Galton, 1 February 1872 and n. 4). CD visited London from 17 to 22 or 23 December 1872 (‘Journal’ (Appendix II)).

From Gerard Krefft 30 December 1872 Australian Museum | Sydney December 30 1872 My dear Mr Darwin This is a great year for Cicadas & for all kinds of insects the first singing with such energy that people otherwise hard of hearing take notice of them I drove to Lane Cove (north shore) a few days ago but I assure you that there was no possibility of conversing with my companions except by raising the voice considerably—all in consequence of the “Locusts” as people call them here.—1 Many rare Buprestidæ2 are out also, in fact we have not had so rich a year for some time I think just 10 years ago the insects were as plentiful, but then the native vegetation remained which now has greatly disappeared, from our immediate neighbourhood at least.— I have read your last book and shall read it again and again,

592

December 1872

noting down such observations as may be of interest to you 3 It will be impossible for me to say much today but what little I can remember is at your disposal.— First we have a small monkey in the Botanical Gardens who is in the habit of throwing stones I did not know it & having favoured his next neighbour with a few Cicada’s & cake wrapped in paper this little fellow danced about clapped his hands at the other monkey & did all a child would do to get a share of the spoil but the other ape took no notice so monkey No 1 picked up an empty sardine tin lying close to him & threw it at the second monkey’s head cutting it considerably.— The keeper told me that he was constantly throwing all sorts of things & Dr Bennett tells me the same.—4 I remember you said something about our natives not being able to count more than 4 I think,5 but they do this in the following manner. Say rangul means two and meta one then rangul, rangul, rangul, rangul, rangul, meta would be nine. I know they do 20 on their fingers or on a stick, in this manner, by notching it. I have many notes relating to our blacks & will look them up & forward them to you. Today I only want to send you some Photographs which I know you will like. I enclose 3 Views (on different scales though), of a northern black fellow’s skull and of another found at Bondi near Sydney with a regular “Neanderthal” superc. ridge!— 6 I shall send side views of this skull also. I also enclose the palate & teeth of a Lane Cove (Sydney) black a tribe long died out; the Photo being just a shade larger than nat. size.— Notice how the teeth are worn by chewing fibre.— I have been looking for specimens in which the last grinder is the largest but have only found one or two jaws in which the last tooth is almost as large as the second molar.— I shall report again if you do not consider me troublesome & if I can photo. anything for you please let me know.— I have many new things to describe but so little time to do it, being constantly disturbed by visitors, the museum being open every day from 12 till 5 and I have only one Assistant7 Our collection is in splendid order but grows beyond our power & all we get from our enlightened Government is £1700 a year—one ministers’ salary. Twelve years ago when the Museum was a dirty Curiosity shop we had over 2000£.— I have just obtained another Euphysetes for the Brit Museum which will delight poor old Dr Gray I know.8 & I now close with my best wishes & all the compliments of the season | dear Sir | yours very sincerely | Gerard Krefft Charles Darwin Esq | F.R.S. &c DAR 169: 117 CD ANNOTATIONS 3.4 but the other ape . . . considerably.— 3.6] scored pencil, blue and red crayon 6.1 Today . . . know.— 6.10] enclosed in square brackets, blue crayon Top of letter ‘[ Red only part]’ red crayon 1

Lane Cove is a suburb of Sydney, Australia. Krefft probably refers to a particularly loud species of cicada, now known as Cyclochila australasiae (the green grocer or great green cicada), which is common

December 1872

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

593

in urban areas. Calls of males can reach 150 decibels, enough to cause pain and damage hearing (Gerhardt and Huber 2002, p. 33). Buprestidae is a family of Coleoptera, whose members are commonly known as jewel beetles. Krefft refers to Descent; copies of Expression would not yet have reached Australia. George Bennett was the first secretary and later director of the Australian Museum (Aust. dict. biog.). The keeper at the Botanic Gardens has not been identified. See Descent 1: 62. CD forwarded the photographs to George Busk, who was president of the Anthropological Institute in 1873 (see Correspondence vol. 21, letter to Gerard Krefft, 17 February 1873). Krefft’s assistant was George Masters. Krefft probably refers to a specimen of the pygmy sperm whale he called Euphysetes macleayi (now Kogia breviceps). John Edward Gray, the keeper of zoological collections at the British Museum, had described the whale specimens collected on the voyage of the Erebus and Terror and was the author of the genus name Kogia (Richardson and Gray 1844–75, 1 (Mammalia): 22).

EXPRESSION SUPPLEMENT

This supplement contains thirteen undated letters that seem to relate to Darwin’s work on Expression of the emotions. Since they cannot be assigned to a particular year, they would normally be published in the next general supplement of letters or a later one, depending on their likely date range, but since they are relevant to Expression, which was published in 1872, it has been decided to publish them as a special supplement to this volume.

From Mary Lubbock to H. E. Darwin [8 May 1866 – 29 August 1871] 1 Goringes, | Farnborough, | Kent. Dear Miss Darwin We hope to have a few friends here to play croquet on Thursday between 4 & 7 oClock & shall be very glad if you & your sister 2 will join us, if it should be fine. Àpropos of the conversation we had with Mr. Darwin the day I was at yr. house—I have heard since that Babies vary very much as to the age when tears begin to show in their eyes—as my sister in law told me, one of hers, a very forward child at a few days old had tears in her eyes from her efforts to talk & coo! 3 With kind regards to Mr & Mrs Darwin | I am yours very sincerely | Mary Lubbock. Tuesday DAR 170: 19 1

2 3

The date range is established by the date of Mary’s marriage to Henry James Lubbock (Tuesday 8 May 1866: Burke’s peerage), and the date of Henrietta Emma Darwin’s marriage (Thursday 31 August 1871: Freeman 1978). However, the Lubbocks probably left Goringes, except for winter visits, at the end of 1869 (see Correspondence vol. 17, letter to J. B. Innes, 18 October 1869). Elizabeth Darwin. Mary probably refers to Ellen Frances Lubbock; she and John Lubbock had six children by 1866, three of them girls (Howard and Crisp eds. 1893–1921, 12: 65–7). CD discussed the age at which babies first cried tears in Expression, pp. 153–4.

From F. J. Wedgwood [1867–72]1

1, Cumberland Place, N.W. My dear Uncle Charles I enclose you the extract from Charma,2 on the origin of nodding & shaking the

Expression supplement

595

head, which I promised so long ago. I have marked so X the passage itself, what goes before is merely to make it clearer. I at first omitted the clause of the sentence about “sa faible tête” as I thought it was truer without any reference to the repetition of the signs however what he means is clearer written at length. He does not seem to have made the same mistake (of supposing the action to be several times repeated at once) with reference to shaking the head, where however it would curiously be much nearer the truth, as one nod is enough both for the baby & the Yes but one movement from right to left wd be insufficient for the No. Of course you will not answer this. I am so glad to hear you are to be in town next week. Georgina Tollet is exceeding anxious At Emma shd have a sight of Gem, but she is candid enough to say she is not pretty. Ever yr affec Niece. FJW.

[Enclosure]3 (—Charma was summoned in 1831 to the vacant chair of Philosophy at Caen, a dignity which entailed the preparation of 2 theses before the position could be regularly taken. The 2nd of these was his Essai sur le Langage, which was published at once, & the 1st. edition being soon exhausted a 2nd., much revised, was issued in 1846, from which my Extracts are taken.4 It is a work of much interest & thought, but hardly touches the problem of Language) “Dans L’invention du langage comme en toute chose la nature nous donne l’exemple et opère devant nous. Mais les signes que nous lui devons gardent éternellement leur premiers caractères, que les races à peu près stationaires s’en arrangent, à la bonne heure. Essentiellement progressive notre espèce en sentit bientôt l’insufficance. De nouveaux moyens d’expression etaient necessaires, ils furent. L’homme alors pour rendre sa pensée que les symboles primitifs ne pouvaient plus traduire, transforme et en les transformant s’appropria les signes que la nature lui avait fournis. Ce langage ultérieur, fils de l’humanité, non plus par adoption seulement, mais par une génération veritable, fruit de l’industrie ou de l’art, c’est le langage artificiel. Le langage artificiel met donc a contribution, en les modifiant pour les accomoder aux besoins nouveaux de la pensée, les symboles primitifs. (The following note on this passage contains the explanation of nodding & of shaking the head.) J’ai surpris à leur naissance en moment même de leur formation quelques-uns de ces signes. Nous hochons la tête en avant et verticalement pour dire oui, horizontalement et à gauche pour dire non. Voyez l’enfant se jetant avec avidité sur un aliment qui lui plait, il porte en avant la bouche pour saisir l’objet qui’l convoite, mais sa faible tête, vivement agitée, et ne pouvant soutenir la secousse qu’elle se donne, tombe pour se relever aussitot, se relêve pour retomber encore, elle oscille tendant toujoursvers l’objet, et par consequent de haut en bas . . . ce signe dit Je veux, ce

596

Expression supplement

signe dit Oui. Qu’un aliment, au contraire, qui déplait à l’enfant lui soit présenté, qu’arrive-t-il?— Il écarte sa bouche autant qu’il est en lui tournant la tête de droit a gauche, ou de gauch à droit, voila le non dans son principe et son origine. DAR 181: 47, DAR 195.1: 52 CD ANNOTATIONS Enclosure: 1.5 1846] underl pencil 5.1 J’ai surpris] cross in margin ink 5.1 J’ai surpris . . . non. 5.3] double scored pencil Top of enclosure: ‘note only important part’ pencil 1

2 3 4

The date range is established from the fact that the content of the letter relates to CD’s work on expression (see n. 4, below). CD was working on expression with a view to publishing between 1867 and 1872. Antoine Charma. For a translation of the enclosure, see Appendix I. CD cited Charma 1846 on the origin of nodding and shaking the head in Expression, p. 273 and n. 17, thanking ‘Miss Wedgwood’ for having given him the information. The extract is from Charma 1846, p. 23, and pp. 187–8 n. 14. Wedgwood makes a number of omissions.

From F. J. Wedgwood [1867–72]1 A passage from Seneca’s Letters, which seems to me to establish the fact that hiding the face, as a sign of shame, was not a classical gesture. (Translation) “Players who imitate the effect of various passions, imitate shame in this manner— they hang their heads lower their words, fix their eyes on the ground & keep them lowered, but they are unable to blush—this can neither be prevented, nor done at will” Sen. Ep. 11. 52 Artifices scenici, qui imitantur affectus—hoc indicio imitantur verecundiam, dejiciunt vultam, verba submittunt, figunt in terram oculos, et deprimunt, ruborem sibi exprimere non possunt;— nec prohibetur hic, nec adducitur. DAR 195.1: 53 CD ANNOTATIONS 3.2 hang their heads . . . at will” 3.4] scored pencil Top of letter: ‘Hanging down Head’ pencil 1

2

The date range is established from the fact that the content of the letter relates to CD’s work on expression (see n. 2, below). CD was working on expression with a view to publishing between 1867 and 1872. CD cited this passage in Expression, p. 323. See also the letters from F. J. Wedgwood to H. E. Darwin, [1867–72] (in this Supplement). The passage is from Ad Lucilium epistulae morales 11: 7, with some words omitted.

Expression supplement

597

From F. J. Wedgwood to H. E. Darwin [1867–72]1 Dear Harroty I have been meaning to write to you before yours arrived to Ho e, & tho I have not much to say on the subject of Shame yet the small contribution derived from that source together with the original matter in my brain    enough to    1d worth,   you must take it in pencil as my tiresome head does not like stooping forward to I cannot remember any ancient or even any but quite modern descriptions of people hiding their faces for shame. Indeed I don’t think a Greek or Roman wd have known the feeling we meant by shame. The nearest approach to it I can remember is Paris’s answer to Hector’s reproach but that is a mere half confession that he is not so manly as might be & has not the faintest approach to emotion in it.2 Thersites weeps when Ulysses taunts him but he does not cover his face. 3 I think the emotion of shame is wrapped up with our modern sense of personal dignity of which the ancients had no conception— the 2 things seem to me poles of the same magnet. Milton has no face hiding, though he quite depicts shame Adam & Eve hide themselves when God calls them, but there is nothing about covering the face when they are discovered, & in the description of Dalilah before Samson “with head declined Like a fair flower surcharged with dew she weeps” but does not hide her face. 4 The only passage I can remember is Guinevere when Arthur finds her & “prone off her seat she fell And grovelled with her face against the floor: There with her milk white arms & shadowy hair She made her face a darkness from the King.” which rather bears out my idea that it is a nineteenth century bit of picturesqueness.5 On the other hand (but I dont know whether it is to the point when Uncle Ch asks for quotations to give facts, & of course Uncle Ch cannot care for so very obvious a fact as that people do cover their faces for shame)— Miss Gourlay 6 told me when I was asking her if her girls ever went wrong of one of them (they are all the lowest of the low) who had gone to the bad & when she (Miss G) found her in a hospital ran away from her & hid her face & cd not be persuaded to look up till Miss G had to go away.7 Of course she was not one to reproach the wretched creature. I do not remember the Dante quotation I will look for it & Wordsworth 8 Goodbye dear Harroty | yr affec cousin FJW DAR 181: 46, DAR 189: 140 CD ANNOTATIONS 3.3 in . . . declined] scored red crayon 5.3 Miss . . . bad 5.5] double scored red crayon; ‘(p. 13) Did they blush?’ red crayon 1 2 3

The date range is established from the fact that the content of the letter relates to CD’s work on expression. CD was working on expression with a view to publishing between 1867 and 1872. Homer, Iliad 3: 58–66. Homer, Iliad 2: 266.

598 4 5 6 7 8

Expression supplement

John Milton, Paradise lost (Milton 1667), book 10, and Samson Agonistes (Milton 1671), p. 47. The quotation is from Alfred Tennyson’s Idylls of the king (Tennyson 1859, p. 387). Jane Gourlay. See also the second letter from F. J. Wedgwood to H. E. Darwin, [1867–72]. The Dante and William Wordsworth quotations have not been identified.

From F. J. Wedgwood to H. E. Darwin [1867–72]1 Friday night My dear Harrot Miss Gourlay answers me about that case of face hiding Uncle Ch wanted in detail, but there is almost nothing to say. She does not specially look after that class of women but had a little school for the lowest class of children & of course some of these fall into that way of life.2 This was a case of this kind. it was at the Lock Hospital she saw the girl, or rather did not see her, for she was in bed & as Miss G approached pulled the clothes over her face, & in spite of all her efforts to draw them off, would not allow her to do so,—so she cd not see any part of her face nor get any answer from her.3 Afterwards on coming out she came to Miss G for help & counsel, but took offence because she gave her too thick & coarse a pair of boots. That fact is irrelevant but I mention it to shew it was only shame made her hide her face. I am writing on the sofa, after a bad day. I am so glad to hear of the departure from Tromers.4 I think Caroline is more of a person than R. but as you say it is a great subtraction to have to do without eyes.5 My head is   stupid I wont try to write any more Ever yr dr Harrot | FJW DAR 181: 45 1

2 3 4 5

The date range is established from the fact that the content of the letter relates to CD’s work on expression (see n. 3, below). CD was working on expression with a view to publishing between 1867 and 1872. Jane Gourlay had been a schoolteacher in Edinburgh (B. Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980, p. 288). See also the first letter from F. J. Wedgwood to H. E. Darwin, [1867–72]. CD described this case in Expression, p. 323. The Lock Hospitals were developed for the treatment of syphilis. Tromer Lodge in Down was purchased by Emma Darwin’s sister Elizabeth Wedgwood in 1868 (see Correspondence vol. 16, letter to J. B. Innes, 20 January [1868] and n. 6). Wedgwood may refer to Caroline Sarah Wedgwood and Erasmus Alvey (Ras) Darwin, Henrietta’s aunt and uncle.

From F. J. Wedgwood to H. E. Darwin? [1867–72]1 Macrobius. Saturnalia Bk VII. c. 11 (He lived in the 5th. century AD) “What is the reason that the sense of shame in the mind produces redness in the

Expression supplement

599

body? When anything happens worthy of shame nature seeks the blood from its lowest recesses, with which she suffuses the skin & thence arises redness. Natural philosophers say that nature being moved by shame spreads the blood before herself as a veil, as we, see any one blushing often put his hands before his face” 2 This is a scrap I copied for Uncle Chas because I remember saying I thought there was no passage about hiding the face in ancient literature. 3 This however hardly contradicts it DAR 181: 48 CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1 Macrobius] pencil line down to ‘He’ 3.1 3.1 (He] ‘who’ above pencil 3.1 century] comma added after, pencil 3.1 AD] del pencil 4.1 “What] ‘(Satur [after ‘who says’ pencil del pencil] B VII.c.11’ above pencil 5.1 say] del pencil; ‘assert’ above pencil 5.2 put] altered to ‘puts’ pencil 1

2 3

The date range is established from the fact that the content of the letter relates to CD’s work on expression (see n. 3, below). CD was working on expression with a view to publishing between 1867 and 1872. CD cited this passage in Expression, p. 323. Wedgwood refers to Macrobius’s Saturnalia. See first letter from F. J. Wedgwood to H. E. Darwin, [1867–72].

From Hensleigh Wedgwood [1867–72]1

1 Cumberland Place, | Regent’s Park. N.W. My dear Charles I am afraid I can throw no light on any of your queries A brown study sounds like a modern expression. It has an odd coincidence with the old French embruns or embrun, which signifies exactly the same thing, absorbed in thought. 2 I should think that shaking hands is not so much a rudimentary embrace as a remnant of giving the hand in token of good faith, “Theres my hand upon it”. A bet according to boys tradition requires the sanction of shaking hands. This explains handfestning (in Old Swedish) the promise of fidelity which a subject makes to her prince, or an engagement of marriage with the hand given in token of fidelity Old Norse handa band, the joining of hands as solemn confirmation of a concluded agreement; handfesta, to confirm in such a manner, to assure by joining hands. I do not know the paper to which you refer and am much obliged for the reference Ever yours | HW.

DAR 181: 53 1

2

The date range is established from the fact that the content of the letter relates to CD’s work on expression (see n. 2, below). CD was working on expression with a view to publishing between 1867 and 1872. CD used the phrase ‘in a brown study’ for abstraction and meditation in Expression, p. 228. See also second letter from Hensleigh Wedgwood, [1867–72].

600

Expression supplement

From Hensleigh Wedgwood [1867–72]1 I think that a brown study is merely another version of the same metaphor which speaks of a sombre countenance, ein düsteres gesicht2 Heiter and düster express chearful and moody as being open to light and external influences or closed and shut up within itself.3 DAR 181: 54 1 2 3

The date range is established from the relationship between this letter and the first letter from Hensleigh Wedgwood, [1867–72]. CD used the phrase ‘in a brown study’ for abstraction and meditation in Expression, p. 228. Wedgwood was a philologist: the italicised words (except for ‘sombre’) are German.

From Hensleigh Wedgwood [1867–72?]1 is also a sign of de     fence a way   a g  the oath   er stories?   the na , but might ea , be confounded with  H. W.





Incomplete DAR 181: 53v CD ANNOTATIONS 1.1  fence] two crosses below ink Bottom of letter: ‘Laughter | silence’ ink; two crosses ink 1

The date range is conjectured from the fact that this fragment of a letter is stuck to the back of the first letter from Hensleigh Wedgwood, [1867–72], and from the likelihood that the subject of this letter has something to do with that of the first letter. There are some loose fragments at DAR 181: 55 that may belong with this letter.

From S. E. Wedgwood [1867–72?]1 Jessie found the other day that driving in the sun without a parasol made one of her eyes, which is weak, water decidedly, so that she had to wipe it. 2 Incomplete DAR 195.4: 104 1

2

The correspondent is identified as Sarah Elizabeth (Elizabeth) Wedgwood, Emma Darwin’s sister, from the handwriting. The date range is conjectured from the likelihood that the content of the scrap related to CD’s work on expression. CD was working on expression with a view to publishing between 1867 and 1872. DAR 195 contains CD’s notes on expression. Jessie Wedgwood was Elizabeth Wedgwood’s cousin and sister-in-law. CD discussed the watering of eyes in bright light in Expression, p. 171.

Expression supplement

601

To L. C. Wedgwood 8 June [1867–72]1 Down June 8th My dear Lucy I hear that your Dog is a barker: please observe for me whether the (upper) lips are at all retracted or everted when he barks & just before he barks. My impression is that if you open a dog’s mouth lips almost hide teeth; but that they are much more exposed, when he barks, which implies some contraction or eversion. You are so good an observer that I know I can trust your conclusion. The Bark ought not to be a savage one, as that wd give tendency to snarl— a joyful bark or bark of good spirits wd. be best.—2 Think of any fact about expression of any emotion in any of your birds.— 3 Yours affect. | C. Darwin Our Polly4 will not bark except as she rushes away to some supposed enemy in forest. CUL (Add 4251: 334) 1

2

3 4

The date range is established from the fact that the content of the letter relates to CD’s work on expression (see n. 2, below). CD was working on expression with a view to publishing between 1867 and 1872. CD discussed the movement of the lips in dogs’ barking for joy and play biting in Expression, p. 121. Wedgwood sent some information on her dog’s snarling in her letter of [25 April 1870] (Correspondence vol. 18). Wedgwood sent CD information on turkeys in her letter to 20 November [1871] (Correspondence vol. 19). Polly was a rough-haired fox terrier (Atkins 1974, p. 78).

From S. P. Engleheart [October 1869 or later]1 in hand, the first time I can see him I will find out all particulars & let you know. “Blushing” commences quite as early as 5 yrs. as I have two fine little Blushers of this age on show at Chesham School.2 Believe me | Yours very truly | Stephen P Engleheart DAR 163: 19 CD ANNOTATION 1.1 in hand, . . . know.] crossed red crayon 1 2

The date is established by the fact that Engleheart, the Down surgeon, left Down in or before October 1869 (Correspondence vol. 17, letter to J. B. Innes, 18 October 1869). Presumably Engleheart refers to the infant school in Chesham, Buckinghamshire. He is not recorded as resident in Buckinghamshire in Medical directory, the Post Office directory of Northamptonshire etc., or the national censuses. CD discussed the age at which blushing began in Expression, p. 311.

602

Expression supplement

To ? [1872 or later?]1 Does the same infant young child cry or scream all the time & on successive occasions, on approximately the same note? . . . Do different infants or young children cry on the same note relatively to their usual voice . . . The same questions about laughter . . . When young children are impatient & call louder & louder for anything, does its pitch change? . . . If the pitch changes during crying or laughter . . . I shd be vy glad of any remarks on the nature of change . . . Is the pitch higher in crying or screaming than in laughing? . . .2 Remember that I am as ignorant as a pig all about pitches & tones & such things. C. Darwin Adraft3 Bonhams, 13 March 2002 1 2

3

The date is conjectured from the fact that CD was writing on the voice as a means of expression at the end of 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19, letter to H. E. Litchfield, [before 2 December 1871]). CD discussed the pitch of children’s speech in Expression, p. 86, and the possible relationship between the shape of children’s mouths when crying and the sound resulting in Expression, pp. 91–2. CD had circulated a questionnaire about expression from 1867 onwards, but there is no evidence that these questions were circulated. This draft may be connected with the letter to E. F. Talbot, 19 July 1881 (Calendar no. 13249). In that letter CD suggests that it may be worth investigating uniformity of pitch in the voices of young children under various frames of mind. His letter was published with other items in a section of the Journal of Social Science 15 (1882): 1–52 on infant development. The section concludes with a questionnaire for parents, although it doesn’t include any of the questions CD asks here. The text transcribed here is from the sale catalogue description, not a facsimile. According to the catalogue, the text has been corrected in pencil by another hand, with revisions by CD in ink over the pencil corrections, and the questions are enclosed in square brackets.

APPENDIX I Translations of letters From Henri Apatowsky1 11 January 1872

43 Talbot Road | Bayswater W. 11 January 1872

Sir, In 1870 I wrote (in Paris) a memoir on the question: “Is the human species a genus sui generis?”. I sided with Mr. Vogt2 in supporting your Doctrine, and was even bolder. Unfortunately, I finished that work at the moment when war broke out between France and Germany, during which time no-one was concerned with Science any more.3 I myself was chief physician of an ambulance.4 Then the civil war arose, and although I had cared for their sick and injured, the barbarians; for atrocities unrivalled in modern history were committed on both sides, while I was caring for their sick and injured, as I say, the barbarians destroyed everything I owned. I soon quitted France. Sadly, I am not familiar with the English language in order to translate my work, written in French. I dare to ask you Sir, if possible, to recommend my work to someone who can translate and publish it. I shall ask nothing for the time being, and shall appeal to the probity of whoever concerns himself with it. If, Sir, you wish to consult my manuscript, please write to me and I shall hasten to place it at your disposal.5 I have the honour of being, Sir | your most respectful servant | Dr. Apatowsky DAR 159: 77 1 2 3 4 5

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see p. 18. Carl Vogt. The Franco-Prussian War broke out in July 1870. Ambulance: i.e. a mobile field hospital (Chambers). No reply from CD to this letter has been found. The manuscript has not been found and was apparently never published.

From Armand de Quatrefages1 12 January 1872

Paris 12 January 72

Dear Sir The struggle for your existence, as Correspondent to our Academy, is to begin again soon. But it will take place under slightly different conditions. Our colleague Longet, who has died since the first battles, has been replaced by M r Lacaze du

604

Translations

Thiers, who without hesitating has pronounced for you. The majority of the section is thus very much decided in your favour.2 It has charged me with making the Report. I have just finished it and don’t need to tell you its conclusions. I have always done you justice as an eminent naturalist and an ingenious and profound thinker. While combating your doctrine, I have always said that it would perform a great service by turning attention back towards the morphological Variability of the species, which is no less real than its physiological fixity. So it is with a double pleasure that I shall defend the Merits of my adversary before the Academy.3 I am grateful to have received your latest work.4 It is pretty much as I thought it might be, and your conclusions have not surprised me. However, it seems to me that—even from your point of view—you are lumping man a little too much together within evolutionary time. He is a Walker; the monkeys of the new, as of the old continent are Climbers. Once this latter type had been but roughly developed, it could not give rise to a being built on a different plan. Were it otherwise your doctrine would lose one of its most seductive aspects, for then it would not give an account of affinities, and would no longer allow one to pursue even the most closely-related genealogies. Anyway, I submit this objection to you without claiming to make a final judgement. That claim would be less appropriate for me than for anyone else, since I have the regret of not being one of your disciples. So please excuse me for having involved myself in something which at bottom does not concern me, and believe me, in spite of my scientific dissensions, your devoted colleague | De Quatrefages DAR 175: 9 1 2

3 4

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 20–1. In 1872, CD was nominated for election to the anatomy and zoology sections of the Académie des sciences in Paris; he had also been nominated in 1870 (see Correspondence vol. 18). He was not elected to the académie until 1878, and then it was to the botanical section. See Stebbins 1988, pp. 147–9. Quatrefages refers to François-Achille Longet and Félix Joseph Henri de Lacaze-Duthiers. On Quatrefages’s agreements and disagreements with CD, see Stebbins 1988, p. 132. Quatrefages’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Descent (see Correspondence vol. 19, Appendix IV).

From C. F. Martins1 3 February 1872 Montpellier 3. Feb. 1872. Dear Master Your letter has given me the greatest pleasure, for it proves to me that I was reasonably successful in expounding your ideas. 2 The future belongs to them, but it is only with the aid of time that they will be able to replace the old ones and overcome the prejudices of all kinds which still reign among Naturalists. A refutation by M r. Joachim Barrande, an excellent French naturalist living in Prague and known for his work on the Silurian formations of Bohemia, has been drawn to my attention. 3 I have

Translations

605

not read it, but the author is not in the state of impartiality required for the search for truth. As the former Tutor to the Duke of Bordeaux, 4 he is strongly Catholic, and does not separate science from religion as one should. His good faith is complete; his independence is not. Many of our younger naturalists share your ideas, but do not dare avow them openly for fear of harming their progress in their teaching careers. My colleague Rouget,5 Professor of Physiology at the Faculty, has been reprimanded and officially warned. We both continue nonetheless to teach what we believe to be the truth. Dear Master, please believe me yours sincerely and with admiration | Ch: Martins DAR 171: 60 1 2

3

4

5

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 63–4. CD’s letter has not been found, but probably discussed Martins’s article in the 15 December 1871 issue of Revue des deux mondes on the creation of the organised world according to English and German naturalists of the new school (Martins 1871). CD’s offprint of the article is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection– CUL. Martins refers to Barrande’s work on trilobites (Barrande 1871). Barrande’s multi-volume work on the Silurian system of Bohemia (Barrande et al. 1852–1911) consisted of eight parts in twenty-eight volumes, twenty-one of which were published during Barrande’s lifetime. Eleven volumes had appeared by 1872. In the introduction to Barrande 1871, pp. v–vi, Barrande explained that the book was essentially drawn from his larger work, but with the purpose of showing that the facts did not support theories of transmutation. Henri Charles Ferdinand Marie Dieudonné, comte de Chambord, had been given the title duc de Bordeaux at birth (DBF ). Barrande had been his tutor from 1830 to 1833, and from 1841 became administrator of his lands (Tort 1996). Charles Marie Benjamin Rouget.

From Alfred Espinas1 March 1872 Sir, After reading your works attentively, I am taking the liberty of submitting the following two observations to you. I shall be grateful if you can tell me what value you place on them. 1o. I did not find, in the statement of your theory, an explanation for the fact that species have tended to vary with progressive complexity from the lowest to the highest forms. That new species form, is very sufficiently explained by the fact of individual variation, preserved and developed by selection, and by the struggle for existence. But what I cannot understand is the reason why cases of retrogradation are not as numerous as cases of progression, the reason why selection and vital competition do not preserve as many inferior characters as superior characters. On the one hand, indeed, selection often attaches itself to characters that are unfavourable in the struggle, such as a small wingspan in birds, brilliant colours in insects, an exaggerated development of horns in mammals . . . etc. You confirm this yourself. So in such cases there would be a diminution of strength, a sinking, a retrogradation at least as often as there is an advantage and a perfection. 2 On the other hand,

606

Translations

the struggle for existence is often maintained advantageously by lower animal forms against higher ones. Thus, in central Africa, the tsetse, a mere fly, easily destroys all the horses and cattle which are brought into those regions. 3 You will certainly have in mind a host of analogous examples. It is precisely the most elusive animals (miasmas, microderms)4 which are the most formidable through the diseases they engender and whose cause most often remains unknown. So why do the higher forms triumph, as poorly armed as they are in relation to the lower forms? There would then be retrogradations rather than progress and your genealogical tree, even allowing that it bears several branches, would soon wither, like a plant sown in the desert or on a mountain-top. You will reply that this would occur if the struggle were taking place in a defined area and as if in an enclosed space: But that the ability of hunted species to take refuge in new environments leaves the field free for perfected creations. But does it suffice that the fact may occur, and yet only occurs by chance? Isn’t it necessary for it to occur inevitably and normally by virtue of a positive law? For, all other things being equal, it might occur whenever the environment causes a diminution in organic perfection by necessitating adaptation, as in the case of seals, mammals which have degenerated under the action of the environment, 5 —even, as is at any rate conceivable, should this transition, which is always difficult, from one environment to another not entirely destroy the species on which the chances of progress rest! So here we have, if I have understood you right, a lacuna in your theory. A positive, natural law would be required to transmit a definite direction to the selective power, and for the direction in question to be that of progressive organic complication, or perfection. Here is how the explanation I am asking for seems possible to me. Individual variation can sustain beings that are exceptionally gifted, not with a special character such as strength or speed or beauty, but with all advantageous characters at once. I think that this starting point is undeniable and very consistent with your views. Now such beings would necessarily prevail, 1o. over their own kind 2o. over neighbouring species. Indeed, as regards hereditary transmission, they will have far more chances to reproduce, since when it is a matter of fighting, they will be the strongest, when it is a matter of running, they will be the most agile, when it is a matter of pleasing, they will be the most seductive. Whatever the female’s whim, they would always be able to respond to it, whilst others, having, as the French proverb says, but a single string to their bow, will only succeed through an unexpected combination of circumstances. As for the neighbouring species, such individuals will struggle against them to advantage, making use of all the weapons that the constitution of their organism contains in succession against each of their enemies, opposing strength to one, running to another, invulnerability to a third, cunning to yet another. But it will be above all in the aptitude they possess to adapt to the demands of different environments that such beings will demonstrate their superiority. Consider the amphibian; what resources does it not gain in the search for food, the flight from peril, and the protection against

Translations

607

excessive drought or inundation from the mere fact that it is fitted to moving in two environments instead of a single one? And yet it only acquires this advantage from a new and totally fortuitous complication of its organism, which has rendered it able to breathe pure air for longer, providing that the air is sufficiently moist! So it is that man, whose organism is the most perfect or most complex (which comes to the same thing), is the one among all the animals who is most fitted to changing environments, and who does so with most impunity. Hence he has the resource of emigration, which is so advantageous for England and Germany, etc. Such that the nation most probably destined for victory in the European concert is not the most artistic, nor the most fertile, nor the most commercial, nor the most learned, nor the most military, but the one that by means of a phenomenon of original variation unites these diverse qualities in the largest number and to the highest degree. (Its fertility is of little use to China) Let us now admit what you have so abundantly proven, that species can vary; it will accordingly happen that a transformation from forms which are less rich in complexity to those which are richer in complexity, that is to say from less perfect to more perfect forms, will take place necessarily and naturally, and that selection, (without requiring the divinity to intervene ex machinâ)6 will take a progressive direction. Man in particular, who was the first to display reflective thought, and in that way had at his disposal the instrument par excellence of varied adaptation, (Spencer) 7 will adapt to all conditions of all environments, will find cold below the equator and heat amidst the ice, will fish on coasts, hunt on mountains, farm on the plain, add wings to his arrow to reach the bird, will be ever richer in varied powers, and will unite the faculties of all living nature in himself. Our ships in fact make us amphibians; our balloons, birds; our horses, runners; and no limit can be assigned to this complexity of the human organism. It is this alone which has made us victorious over the other living forms. In sum, I propose to add to your principle of natural selection, in my view an indifferent agent of transformation, a principle of progressive organic complication, which directs the selective force towards growing perfection. I shall be grateful for a word on your thoughts about all this. It is no more, indeed, than a development of your doctrine. 2o. You acknowledge somewhere that you cannot understand why sterile individuals or even neuters imprint their individual characters upon the descendents of their congeners.8 Here is a hypothesis which I submit to your judgement. As long as these sterile individuals are considered as absolutely distinct individuals, the transmission of their characters is incomprehensible. But consider the kin group of which they are a part as an indivisible organic whole; then the heredity even of the characters belonging to the neuters is easily understood. But how and why can we consider a family or a hive as a living indivisible whole? That is the question. Firstly I shall observe that since the work of Virchow and Claude Bernard, life can only be regarded as an association of individual elements and I suspect that this fact,

608

Translations

universally applicable to the structure of individuals, must also throw some light on the external relations between individuals.9 If on the other hand I consider humanity as a compendium of lower nature, following the principle stated on the previous page, I see three principal functions realised in it through association 1o. nutrition, (individual life), realised by a group of cells, 2o. generation (domestic life), realised by a group of sexed individuals, 3 o. civilisation (political life, πολιτικν ζον)10 realised by a group of families and subsequently tribes. I therefore ask myself whether nature does not include, in the form of partial sketches, that complex organisation which has earned us victory in what you call the most decisive of tests, the battle for existence. Now I find indeed at the base of the scale 1o. polypidoms which are, according to Vogt, associations in regard to nutrition, with multiple organs and a single life, but weakly concentrated.11 Each polyp absorbs nourishment (coral, Lacaze Duthiers) and begins its digestion; but circulation is allocated to the polypidom. 12 Elsewhere it is digestion that is shared, or excretion, or capture, or locomotion, but this is of little importance, the goal is always the nutritive life, and that function is always the proper task of the whole composite individual. 2o. The family, founded on a communication of vessels and vital liquids that is not permanent but transitory, and that nevertheless forces the two sexes, almost all across the scale, to unite physically like the polyp. The genealogical tree can only be represented, besides, in the form of a polypidom. The family is made up of different types, the lowest of which is that of the fish, and the highest that of mammals, types among which one can distinguish three principal plans: firstly an absence of relations between the sexes, next a relation between the sexes that accords predominance to the feminine element (bees, ants, termites etc) lastly a relation between the sexes founded on the predominance of the male element. Here we reach the limit of a constant progression, marked by, among other characters, a diminution in the number of mated individuals and descendants, and on the other hand, by the ever greater importance accorded to intelligence in the protection of the young (wherever the male plays a significant role in the family, education is its capital function)— 3 o. Lastly, the city or tribe, prepared in the animal kingdom by the pack, herd, flock, Tribe, whatever name one gives to the animal association that no longer exclusively has reproduction or education as its goal. In your last work, you analysed this phenomenon and were the first to see the importance of the social instincts in vital preservation.13 This function, as crucial as that of nutrition though higher, rests on harmonic relations or movements of the nerve centres and sensory organs. I repeat: life, in its strictest sense, is no less interested in these coordinated movements than in those of the viscera and reproductive apparatus. Apart, individuals must perish. This being so, every polypidom, every hive, every anthill, every natural family or herd, every tribe or nation, must be seen as a vast individual animal, filled with a single life, cooperating through its multiple elements towards a common function. Should we now be astonished if the members of one of these organisms, even the

Translations

609

sterile and neuter ones, communicate certain characters specific to themselves to the descendants of the total organism? The heredity of neuters is explained. For my part, I am no more astonished to see the characters of neuter ants perpetuated through heredity than to see a peculiarity of the breast in one woman transmitted to her daughter; the neuter ant being no more, in my eyes, than a sort of teat of the queen, endowed with individual life and charged with a nutritional role, a rearing role which the queen cannot accomplish alone. Here, dear Sir, you have the very dry skeleton of two ideas that you will be able to cover with muscles and supply with the life they lack, thanks to the rich supply of facts at your disposal. With these additions, it seems to me that your hypothesis would respond to a larger number of objections and explain a larger number of facts. Now, (to return again to my principle of selection through organic complexity) the hypothesis which offers the most varied points of view, which adapts to a greater number of cases, is the one which will certainly triumph in the battle of systems, and grow into a vigorous new branch on the tree of science. Be assured of my respectful admiration, Alfred Espinas | professor of philosophy March 1872 3 Place Richelieu, Le Hâvre. DAR 163: 33 1 2 3

4 5

6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 90–3. On retrogression, see Origin 5th ed., p. 144, and Descent 1: 206, 2: 368. CD thought that retrogression might occur when external conditions made greater complexity unnecessary. Tsetse are flies in the genus Glossina; they were believed to cause the horse and cattle disease nagana. For the history of the relationship between the tsetse and both animal and human disease, see Steverding 2008. The belief that miasmas or bad air were agents of contagious disease was popular until the last decades of the nineteenth century (Hannaway 1993). Espinas probably refers to the development (or degeneration) of seals’ flippers from a five-toed foot, as CD described in Origin, p. 200. Espinas’s use of the term degeneration is reminiscent of earlier typetheory (see Sloan 2010). For CD, the reduction of an organ was simply an environmental response (Descent 1: 32). Ex machina: from a device (Latin). The deus ex machina was a Greek theatrical convention (gods were brought on-stage by a sort of crane); the phrase had come to refer to a contrived or inartistic solution to a difficulty in the plot. Espinas was translating Herbert Spencer’s Principles of psychology into French (Spencer 1870–2 and Espinas and Ribot trans. 1874–5). The passage Espinas refers to has not been identified. In Origin 6th ed., p. 230, CD argued that the inheritance of characteristics of sterile organisms could be explained by the fact that natural selection operated on the family (that is, groups of related individuals) as well as on the individual. Espinas refers to Rudolf Carl Virchow and Claude Bernard. πολιτικν ζ ον: political animal (Greek); a reference to Aristotle’s Politics (see 1.2.1253a 1–4, 7–18). Espinas probably refers to a description of corals in Carl Vogt’s Altes und neues aus Thier- und Menschenleben (Vogt 1859, 2: 245–6). Félix Joseph Henri Lacaze-Duthiers described the circulation and nourishment of polyps and polypidoms in Histoire naturelle du corail (Lacaze-Duthiers 1864, pp. 76–83). See Descent 1: 74–86.

610

Translations

From Ernst Haeckel1 1 March 1872 Jena 1 March 72 Most honoured, dear friend! For your last kind letter and for sending me the 6th edition of your “Origin” I thank you most kindly.2 I was glad that another few thousand copies of your great reforming work have again gone out into the world, to light up the road to truth with the beacon of the theory of evolution, for a mankind that is lost in darkness. May again just as many editions of your work come out as have already appeared! The news that your health is giving you so much trouble again gives me much concern, and I hope that the summer may bring improvement and renewed energy. 3 I myself am not content either this winter. Too much work is piling up, and some days I literally hardly know where to start. In addition, January brought me major unrest, for I received the very flattering offer, under extremely favourable conditions, of the chair for zoology at the newly founded university of Strasburg (in the reclaimed territory of Alsace). 4 Still, I turned down the promotion, bearing in mind your approval as a fatherly friend a year ago, after I turned down the tempting offer of the chair at Vienna. 5 I am convinced that I’ll be able to serve science better here in little Jena, where in any case I can work and write with far fewer interruptions, where I can think and judge with greater harmony than in a restless large university. In the recognition of the world and the greater fame that the latter would guarantee I am not at all interested. I shall be occupied with my work on Sponges for a further few months. 6 The views of Clark and Carter, namely that the Sponges are Protozoa and specifically Flagellata, I shall refute in detail. Rather, they are related closest to hydroid zoophytes and corals. 7 Their evolutionary history is very simple but very interesting. In the new edition of my “Nat. Schöpfungsgeschichte”, I wanted to include a separate chapter on your theory of Pangenesis, but I left it because my publisher did not wish the new edition enlarged.8 Still, I hope to discuss the theory of heredity in connection with pangenesis on another occasion. I do not believe, however, that the theory of pangenesis fully explains the extraordinarily complex phenomena of heredity, but it certainly contains the core of a good idea. It is just that I believe that here we should rather consult comparative histology and above all the ontogenesis of tissues. To learn to understand the complex processes of heredity in multicellular organisms, we must always start from the simplest phenomena of heredity in cell-division. To me above all the Monera and Rhizopodes, in particular the Polythalamids, seem eminently important for this task.9 I hope very much to come to London again and to see you this year or the next. How Much I shall have to tell you about! With the most respectful greetings to Miss Darwin10 and with the best wishes for your health | always your devoted | Ernst Haeckel DAR 166: 57

Translations 1 2 3 4

5 6 7

8 9

10

611

For a transcription of the letter in its original German, see pp. 96–7. See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Ernst Haeckel, 27 December 1871. Haeckel’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for the sixth edition of Origin (see Appendix IV). See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Ernst Haeckel, 27 December 1871. Alsace (now part of France) was ceded to Germany by France in 1871, at the end of the Franco-Prussian War (Wawro 2003, p. 304). The Alsatian University of Strasbourg was re-founded in 1872 under the auspices of the Prussian government (Craig 1984). See Correspondence vol. 19, letter to Ernst Haeckel, 3 March 1871. Die Kalkschwämme (Haeckel 1872a) was published in December 1872 or early 1873 (see letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 December 1872). In a letter of 27 December 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19), CD had asked Haeckel for his opinion of Henry James Clark’s view that sponges were flagellate infusoria. Haeckel outlined both Clark’s and Henry John Carter’s views on the nature and structure of sponges in Haeckel 1872a, 1: 28–31. While Carter had agreed with Clark that sponges were related to protozoans, he differed in likening them to rhizopods rather than flagellated infusoria (for more on the history of protozoan classification, see Corliss 2001). Both Carter and Clark opposed Haeckel’s view that sponges, along with corals, belonged to the Coelenterata (Carter 1871, p. 10; see also H. J. Clark 1871 and Haeckel 1870). The term infusoria referred to a variety of single-celled aquatic protozoans, but is no longer in scientific use; rhizopods were amoeba-like protozoans that used pseudopodia to move (modern Rhizopoda is a class within the phylum Protozoa). Coelenterata is a former taxon, roughly equal to the modern phyla Ctenophora (comb jellies) and Cnidaria (corals, sea anemones, true jellyfish, etc.). Hydroid zoophytes belong to a class within Cnidaria, the Hydrozoa. In modern classification, sponges belong to the phylum Porifera and are thought to be related to choanoflagellates, single-celled creatures that resemble the choanocytes, or collar cells of sponges. The third edition of Haeckel’s Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte (Natural history of creation; Haeckel 1872b) was published in 1872. For CD’s hypothesis of pangenesis, see Variation 2: 357–404. Haeckel later published a pamphlet, Die Perigenesis der Plastidule, oder die Wellenzeugung der Lebenstheilchen (Haeckel 1876b), discussing the process of heredity in very simple organisms, such as Monera. CD’s copy is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Monera is an obsolete kingdom consisting of what are now the domains Archaea and Bacteria. Polythalamids are multi-chambered forms of Foraminifera, single-celled animals with shells perforated with holes. Haeckel may refer to Elizabeth Darwin, or to Henrietta Emma Litchfield, who had married in 1871 (Correspondence vol. 19).

From Gaston de Saporta1 18 March 1872 Aix 18 March 1872 Sir, I have put off thanking you for so kindly sending your book on the descent of man until I had finished reading it through once, but before returning to it in a little while, because your works demand to be re-read if one really wants to grasp the sequence of your ideas.2 This time there are parts of your work that have particularly struck me, everything that is philosophical, especially the exposition of moral and intellectual phenomena in man and the animals, the relations and passages from thought to instinct, the generation of conscience etc.— You have deployed, in examining these difficult and most complex questions, a power of analysis of the rarest kind, and I was often able, by reflecting on my own conduct, to convince myself of the truth of your

612

Translations

deductions. I am wholly of your opinion when you insist on the indisputable place of man as an integral part of the mammals. The close links that tie man to that class are so little susceptible of being misunderstood, that even to prove that tie seems singular in itself, and one can hardly conceive that one would be in a position to demonstrate it to naturalists by accumulating proof after proof in support of a truth of that kind. That man is an animal in body is constantly avowed by all philosophers and even all religions; that he has risen above the other animals through a development of his mental faculties that is prodigious, yet very unevenly distributed, even though those faculties are founded on the same common basis: this is a reality for which you report superabundant proof with your ordinary power, abundance and logic. But you insist too much, and it is on this point that I want to share my objections with you, you insist too much to my mind, and uselessly so, since it is not demonstrable hic et nunc, on the descent of man from a Simian and climbing prototype, whether anthropomorphic or deriving from some other detached branch of the same family. 3 In my view, your doctrine does not imply this outcome, merely descent from a prototype closer to animality, properly understood, than the current human type, and therefore deprived of part at least of the mental faculties and physical organisation that are the lot of the most inferior human races. Among the serious signs of direct Simian descent, I observe only the following, whose significance is indeed far from contemptible: The character drawn from dentition, which must be accorded primary importance, since it seems to denote an exclusive link with the Monkeys of the old continent; next, female menstruation and, as a corollary, the odour that makes women attractive to many monkeys.4 These are weighty presumptions, which can nonetheless be explained by the hypothesis of descent from a prototype that is the common stock of both groups, with mutual and progressive divergence. In all monkeys, there is evident adaptation to the climbing state. Even in the Anthropomorphs, this adaptation remains visible, although it tends to be modified somewhat so as to produce incomplete walking, at any rate differing in its mechanism from the walking proper to man. In lower man, there is no tendency to revert, no transition to the climbing lifestyle, and you are only able to quote in that regard, the importance of which cannot escape you, the inclination which leads children to climb trees. 5 Indeed, as one follows man back to his primeval cradle, he shows himself to be a troglodyte, or in other words a walker, using his feet and hands to help himself climb and stand up, and doubtless making use of this faculty, which is so rare among the larger animals, in order to procure a special lifestyle for himself. I completely and wholly share your view that man had acquired the beginnings of intelligence and articulate language, and had probably invented fire, before the dispersal that led him to multiply his tribes and spread them to the limits of the large continents, in an epoch that is probably very remote. Physically, man was then about what he is now, and already had been for a long time; for an invariable and universal law in palaeontology holds that groups in the past behaved over time, as they now behave when considered over distance. 6 That faculty particular to man of only producing races, of varying widely and easily, but within narrow limits, so as never to diverge beyond a certain point, while

Translations

613

preserving the mutual fecundity of the races between themselves, must have characterised the human species for a very long time, probably from the very epoch in which it detached itself from the prototypical stock and took on the characters of the group it represents, just as the Simians on their side detached themselves from the same stock and increasingly accentuated the organisation proper to their group, in many regards manifesting characters that are the opposite of those of the human group. Indeed, a multiplicity of tribes and genera, a plurality of species, and a physical impossibility of sexual relations between the highest forms, as one sees in the case of the Anthropomorphs, constitute characters proper to the Simians, and there are other such characters too. But I wanted to address the question from a different perspective.— I have always thought that the question of origins, far less insoluble than one is led to believe, would nonetheless only be resolved with the aid of the agreement of current facts with ancient facts and by a comparative study of these two orders of phenomena. I still believe this and I also allow that in this order of ideas, the same laws and signs or perceptions are more or less applicable to all organised beings, man not excepted. So I have applied myself to discovering the laws or beginnings of laws, or yet the rules, that result from the examination of fossil genera, and in particular of those, such as the plants, which, as they are fixed to the soil and naturally immobile, must provide the most illumination about the course that beings have followed in the past, in their modes of distribution and development. In this way I have arrived at a certain number of general notions which seem to me applicable to the very origin of man himself. The generic types, as you know, are sometimes astonishingly stable; even those that are the result of a long series of successive modifications appear as we see them today, into the very distant past. It was Mr. Lartet’s opinion regarding the Reindeer, the red deer and the Horse, that for these types, even in their current form, one had to go back to the Miocene before observing changes capable of being manifested in the skeleton.7 And yet in such cases the types must have undergone a most complex elaboration in physical terms, since they only took on their definitive characters by dint of distancing themselves from prototypes constructed quite differently from themselves, and in consequence of a very rigorous adaptation. In man, that adaptation was far from having required in his physique the same organic work of union or imperfect development in the bony parts, and the tendency towards bipedal walking may have existed in the human prototype, as it is exhibited by some rodents. The simian adaptation to the functions of a climbing animal is at least as exclusive as that of man to walking, and there is no way of saying whether one of these states preceded the other, as far as the prototype of the two groups is concerned; or whether this prototype, as must most often have occurred, was not some sort of vague term that was equally capable of producing either of the two states. So I am led to believe that the current physical form of man is very ancient, and that it could be found far back in time with little alteration, except perhaps for the brain development that must have accompanied the development in mental faculties. I was struck by the

614

Translations

likelihood of this fact on seeing the human remains found at Denyse, near Puy-enVelay, which I consider to be the oldest known to date, even though very little noise has been made about the discovery; the owner of these remains, a man of little sense, clinging out of whimsical-mindedness to a suspicion of their authenticity, which is nevertheless unimpeachable.8 On one of the heads, where the crown of the cranium is detached from the matrix, one can see an enormous depression of the parts of the forehead that correspond to pure intelligence, but few bony crests and nothing that recalls anything other than contemporary man with an imbecile cast. Primitive man, though not yet, it is true, entirely prototypical, ought to resemble the cretin more or less; this is, I believe, a genuine reversion to an earlier state, without the resources of instinct, which have doubtless been increasingly obliterated. To go on, however, I find the following.— Taking fossil plants as a point of departure, I deduce two laws or signs of laws from my observation of them.— The first is that many genera observed in ancient Tertiary vegetation are still today found arranged in accordance with a mode of distribution related to the lie of individual land masses and seas in the period to which they belong. Thus, the characteristic genera of the Flora of the Aix Gypsum (Upper Eocene) today inhabit regions that were dry land at the time of the nummulitic sea, which shows that their modern distribution is related to their primitive area of spread, and that these genera, in consequence, are nothing more than the continuation of an earlier order. Clearly those genera which, being purely cosmopolitan, could not give rise to any genuine indication, are not at issue here, but rather genera which have either diminished or persisted only in warm countries: or in some extra-European spots. The second principle I have confirmed is as follows: there is a parallelism and a balancing between one hemisphere and another, between one continent and another, and even from genus to genus and species to species between one region and another, such that the groups that have developed widely in one part of the globe may have remained weak or rudimentary in the opposite spot or have only produced a very unequal development. In this way, the corresponding two rival groups may each reign in one of the hemispheres and yet possess isolated and poorly characterised representatives in the other. It is so in the Proteaceae, which seem to have been replaced in Tertiary Europe by the Myricaceae, even while a small group of insignificant European Tertiary Proteaceae must have existed alongside these numerous Myricaceae, just as in Australia and at the Cape a few rare Myricaceae appear alongside the host of predominant Proteaceae.9 The Antarctic Fagus compared to the rich Quercinaceae of the boreal hemisphere make visible the effects of the same inequality of parallelism, and one could multiply examples of this law, another case of which is the Australian Marsupials persisting, as against those of Europe which were so promptly eliminated.10 I have often been struck by the fact that the principal human races were distributed across the surface of the ancient continent in a manner in keeping with the ancient division of Tertiary land masses and seas. To verify that fact, one needs to make an abstraction of the changes and mixtures that historical traditions permit one to grasp.

Translations

615

Under such conditions, if one restores the great interior sea, of which the Mediterranean is no more than a residue, and which persisted by varying very little within these principal limits up to the end of the Miocene, to its situation, dividing the whole of the ancient continent; if one causes that sea to extend once more up to the Indian Ocean on one side and as far as the centre of Asia, even to China, on the other, one can easily recognise the extent to which the principal human races are grouped naturally along its shores. In this way the Malays from the islands of Africa to South Asia are associated with lands which were once continuous and are now partly submerged. The Negroes do not exceed the limits of the Sahara to the north and have as their natal region the primitive soil of Central Africa, the ancient coastline of the Saharan sea. The Canaries, whose role was once so great, had the Guanches. 11 The Yellow race was penned to the North-east of the great interior Asiatic sea. To the north, in Europe as in Siberia, this sea had the Uralians, Turanians, 12 Finns, Lapps, the troglodyte races of the Stone Age— On the opposite shore, in Upper Asia, is the birthplace of the Aryans and Semites, who must only have begun to disperse and spread in several different directions after the retreat of the great Centro-Asiatic Mediterranean. Not even the existence of the Eskimos is unrelated to what plant palaeontology teaches us of the past of the countries they inhabit. These peoples feel themselves to be in decline. They certainly have not penetrated the arctic countries under the sway of current conditions; but we know that there was a great continent there during the Miocene Age, continuous with the old and the new continents, and richly populated with plants and animals. Man doubtless spread there at a time when the climate still retained something of its primitive gentleness. Since that time, he has remained there, perforce struggling against the unfavourable changes and adapting to them little by little. The Eskimos are in my opinion an excellent example, and the foremost among all, of what man must have been immediately after his faculties permitted him to spread through all the large land areas. The Eskimo is still what he originally was, and once they are stationary, races never change again. Like the Sequoia of California, the Eskimo is a type which became permanent after a certain epoch, and which might vanish, but will never again be modified. This distribution of humans, conforming to that of the plant genera observed in the fossil state and relative to the ancient configuration of land and sea, evidently supports the belief that man, qua physical man, dates back to a very remote antiquity and that his material characters have not varied for a long time, a circumstance that also wonderfully explains the mutual fecundity of the races. The second law is no less applicable to man, and far from seeing in him a lateral deviation from the simian type, I recognise in him characters of an order that has long been its parallel, and finally become its superior, whose development is very far from having followed the same course, and this sort of antagonism between the two groups makes me understand perfectly the divergent route each of them has followed. In man I see the characters of an adaptation wholly opposed to that of the monkeys. The simian type, climbing, tree-dwelling, fecund in varied tribes, genera and species, rapidly diverging and multiplying secondary types in such a way as to give rise to a

616

Translations

complex ramification, and to result in a certain number of heads of series without direct interrelations, develops exclusively in the tropical zone; it necessarily requires heat and is promptly eliminated if that element is lacking; most commonly it displays an abrupt halt to intelligence around adulthood, cries and nothing which resembles the articulation of words or a voice; then if one dwells on what is secondary: an abundance of coarse hair, few distinctions between the hair on the limbs and that on the head— Man’s tendencies are the opposite: a walker and troglodyte, he only produces superficial diversity, even when he has penetrated everywhere, which never alters physical fitness enough to render reciprocal unions sterile. Thus he must have diverged slowly and have distanced himself but little, except in intellectual development, from the prototype from which he derives. Contrary to what is the case for Monkeys, man is also cosmopolitan; he has only developed fully under the influence of cold or temperate climates and in the epoch when that sort of climate prevailed. That which eliminated the simian type from the boreal hemisphere, evidently favoured man. His expansion dates precisely from the time when the temperature gradually declined. He has little muscular force, but tends rather to the development of the faculties of intelligence— Savages, it should be noted, have no greater muscular development than ourselves, and in addition they are generally glabrous although naked. There too, divergence is very marked. So it seems that man was originally a type proper to the boreal hemisphere, just as the simian type is an equatorial and torrid product that advanced into our latitudes while our zone was hot, and withdrew from it once it cooled. Everything proclaims that man must have been constituted towards the north; this even explains that first invention of fire. He would later have sent tribes in other directions, even into the South, just as the Simians once had them in the north. But I believe that these events, that is to say the progressive detachment of man from his prototype, whatever it may be, and the probable affinity of the latter with a still more primitive stock, take man back immensely far into the past. Before his diffusion, man must have lived hidden away, in the depths of the woods, within reach of caves, where thanks to his mode of progression he must have withdrawn and amassed provisions— He must have been timid, fearful, living in couples or isolated families, and the necessity he was in of procuring weapons proves this— Before possessing fire, man would have experienced many problems in feeding himself; he doubtless lived exclusively on certain fruits, perhaps roots and eggs. What you say of the probable prior separation of the simian type of America from that of the old continent has appearances and probability on its side;13 yet how can one know? Man tends to lose his wisdom teeth, it’s true; 14 he may formerly have lost others. The dental formula may have varied more or less in the prototype and have fixed itself definitively once the three types had already diverged. . . . What? It’s impossible to know that and you say so yourself; but the more I reflect, the more I am led to allow that divergence from a prototypical stock can only be very remote. And when we see the type Vespertilio15 already completely constituted since the Eocene and not having varied since, we are quite forced to avow that from the physical point of view, with all the effort of adaptation having borne

Translations

617

on the purely intellectual side, man may perhaps well have been approximately what he still is materially from an age excessively remote from the Eocene. I offer you these reflections thrown haphazardly from my pen, dear Sir, which come besides from one of the most convinced transformists, a sincere admirer of your work— I had offered to review your latest work for the Revue des deux mondes, but I have not yet learnt the editors’ wishes in that regard.— Besides, I am so absorbed in my work on the Jurassic and Eocene flora of the Aix Gypsums at the moment that I shan’t press the matter, but shall save myself for the summer months when I have more free time.16 Please excuse such a long letter and believe me yours obediently | C t G. de Saporta DAR 177: 32 1 2

3

4

5 6 7 8

9 10 11

12 13 14 15 16

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 111–17. Saporta had evidently received a copy of the first volume of the French edition of Descent (Moulinié trans. 1872). The second volume was not published until November 1872 (see letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 23 November 1872). Hic et nunc: here and now (Latin). In Descent 1: 185–213, CD discussed evidence for a simian ancestor of humans. He wrote: ‘There can consequently hardly be a doubt that man is an offshoot from the Old World Simian stem; and that under a genealogical point of view, he must be classed with the Catarhine division’ (ibid., p. 196). CD had pointed out the similarity in human and Old World monkey dentition in Descent 1: 196. CD did not discuss menstruation in humans and Old World apes and monkeys in Descent. For more on the attractiveness of human females to apes, see Ritvo 1990, p. 33, and Schaik 2004, pp. 88–9. CD discussed tree-climbing in children in Descent 1: 122, and bipedalism in humans in ibid., pp. 141–4. In Descent 2: 390, CD concluded that the development of human intellect including language and tool use occurred in the remote past. Edouard Lartet had described Miocene fossils at Sansan, including those of extinct deer (see Lartet 1851). The remains found at Denise formed part of the collection of M. Pichot-Dumazel, who has not been further identified, but who was described by Charles Lyell as ‘an advocate of Le Puy’ (C. Lyell 1863, p. 196). The authenticity of the remains was discussed at the twenty-second scientific congress of France in 1855 (see Congrès scientifique de France. Vingt-deuxième session, tenue au Puy, en Septembre 1855, pp. 299–303, and C. Lyell 1863, pp. 194–200). Myricaceae (sweet gale) is a family in the subclass Hamamelidae; Proteaceae (proteas) is a family in the subclass Rosidae. Antarctic or southern beeches are now in the genus Nothofagus in the family Nothofagaceae; the former family Quercinaceae is now subsumed within the family Fagaceae (beeches, chestnuts, and oaks). The Guanches were the original inhabitants of the Canary Islands. Although their origins were not known for certain, from remnants of their language they were believed to be related to the Berbers of northern Africa (Humboldt 1814–29, 1: 279–82). ‘Turanian’ was broadly used to refer to languages of Asiatic origin, except the Aryan and Semitic, and similarly applied to the speakers of these languages (OED). See Descent 1: 198–202. See Descent 1: 26. Vespertilio is a genus of bats. Saporta refers to his work on the classification of plant fossils found in gypsum beds of Aix. His ‘Révision de la flore des gypses d’Aix’ was published in parts between 1872 and 1874 (Saporta 1872–4).

618

Translations

From F. C. Donders1 17 April 1872 Utrecht, 17 April | 1872, My dear and most honoured Sir,— I feel the need to reply again with a few words to your last letter, and I would have done so immediately, had I not been indisposed. You speak of “strike out a good deal, and only give some facts and quote what you have told me”.— 2 I should never forgive myself for having been the unwitting cause of some suppression on your part. We specialists are happy to place our knowledge at your disposal. Everyone did the same for Alexander von Humboldt. It is just information.— If you believe that it suffices to be a physiologist in order to write a book on expression that can make Science advance a single step, you are wrong: we are expecting it of you, according to your conception, which is peculiar to you and allied to the spirit that has dictated all your work. Rest assured that, if we have the happiness of receiving a book from your hand, it is the great qualities that strike one and—suffice. Who could have such a narrow and limited mind as to pay attention to or take pleasure in some slight inaccuracy in matters of physiology or some other subordinate science?— So allow me to beg you not to delete anything that you have written other than the strictly necessary. If you care greatly about not rendering yourself culpable of the least sin against physiology, and if you continue to honour me with your confidence, simply send me the proofs of the parts which concern physiology specifically; I shall examine them directly and send them back to you; I am no longer occupied to the same degree as formerly.— It is very probable that I shall pay you a visit towards the end of July, if you allow me.3 With the greatest respect, I am | Yours sincerely | Donders DAR 162: 231 1 2 3

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 162–3. See letter to F. C. Donders, 8 April 1872. Donders quotes verbatim from CD’s letter. In the event, Donders probably did not visit (see letter from F. C. Donders, 14 July 1872 and n. 3).

From F. C. Donders1 26 April 1872 Amsterdam, 26 April | 1872. My dear and most honoured Mr. Darwin,— It is not to reply to your last letter—to which besides I have nothing else to say— that I am sending you a few more lines.2 It is merely to announce that the Royal Academy of Sciences at Amsterdam has just conferred the title of Foreign Member upon you. I know only too well that you cannot prize the homage due to such eminent merit as yours; but I dare to hope that you might receive the proof that the great majority of Dutch naturalists and physiologists has adopted the doctrine established by your laborious studies and research, with some satisfaction.— A few

Translations

619

days hence, when the King has given his approval, our secretary will have the honour of communicating the Academy’s decision officially. 3 So we hope that you will deign to give him a favourable reply. Please believe me, My dear and very honoured Sir, | Yours sincerely, with affection and respect | Donders DAR 162: 232 1 2 3

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see p. 173. See letter to F. C. Donders, 20 April 1872. Donders refers to the Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen. CD was officially made a foreign member on 11 May 1872, but no letter from the secretary or diploma has been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL (KNAW, Past members: www.dwc.knaw.nl/english/academy/past-members (accessed 27 January 2011)). In 1872, the king of the Netherlands was Willem III.

From G. H. Darwin 2 May 1872 [Enclosure]1 Helmholtz p 277 In the major chords, tones of the first order, and even the deepest of the second order, those symbolised by quavers can only repeat tones of the chord an octave lower. In the minor chords, on the contrary, tones of the first order, easily discernible, already contain perturbations. They are not, it is true, close enough to each other to resonate but they are outside the harmony x x x. In compensation, sounds of the second order, those symbolised by quavers, are near enough, whether they are tones of the same order or primary tones of the chord and tones of the first order, so that the pulsations can arise; in major chords, on the contrary, tones of this category are still totally included in the chord x x x x x x . This disturbing action of tones of the second order on the minor chord is too weak however to give it the character of dissonance; but it augments the harshness of the chord compared to the major chord in a perceptible way on the right instrument; that is to say in accord with mathematical intervals. In our ordinary tempered instruments, however, this harshness, produced by the resulting tones is relatively hardly noticed next to the much greater roughness produced by the imperfection of the consonances. In practice, the influence of the deeper, more powerful tones of the first order, seem to me to be much more important; they do not, it is true, increase the roughness, but they introduce foreign elements to the chord, which for the C minor chord belongs to the major chord of A and of E. Also the minor chord produces something foreign which is not distinct enough to entirely destroy the sensation of consonnance but which is enough to give a mysterious, obscure effect for which the listener is unable to account, because the weak combinatorial tones on which it depends are concealed by other louder tones and can only be perceived by a trained ear. This is what makes minor chords suitable

620

Translations

for expressing mysterious obscure or austere sentiments. Vischer in his Esthetics 2 (part three, § 772) has examined very well the character of the minor mode and shown that it suits, as a matter of fact the many nuances of joy and sorrow, but that the general character of feeling expressed by the minor mode consists in something veiled and obscure.— DAR 89: 131–2 1 2

For a transcription of this enclosure in its original French, and the letter it was enclosed with, see pp. 176–7. Helmholtz refers to Friedrich Theodor von Vischer’s Aesthetik, oder Wissenschaft des Schönen (Aesthetics, or science of the beautiful; Vischer 1846–57).

From Paolo Mantegazza1 4 May 1872 Florence 4 May 1872— Most renowned Sir. I have the honour of informing you that in one of its recent sessions the Italian Society of Anthropology and Ethnology has proclaimed you an Honorary member, and that you will shortly be receiving its diploma.2 I have received the latest edition of your immortal work on the origin of species. 3 A thousand thanks for the honour you have done me. I shall keep it as one of my dearest souvenirs. You will be receiving some of my anthropological pamphlets: may I draw your attention to the two cases of supernumerary teeth I have observed, one of which was in a negro. (The green pamphlet. pag. 23).4 In the study on my cephalospinal and cephalorbital index, that is to say on the relations between the volume of the spinal cord and orbits and cranial capacity, you will find singular resemblances between monkeys and man I am now occupying myself with the measurement of the nasal fossae, which has just been made possible for me by an ingenious instrument invented by Mr Broca. By adding the volume of the nasal fossae to that of the orbits, I hope to establish a prosopocephalic index, that is to say the relation between the sensory cavities and the cranial cavity; and I think I will thereby have a more scientific means of establishing the hierarchy of a skull than with the facial angle and the sphenoidal angle.5 For your sexual selection, I beg you will read my memoir on the Sexual characteristics of the human skull, in which I attempt to show that the development of the supraciliary arches is the most masculine character of the human skull. I have just found a skull from a Dinka negro with a single nasal bone. 6 In two other skulls from the same race there is a great tendency for the two bones to be fused and in one of them one would say that one of the bones is vestigial. I have observed the same fact in a very simian skull from Sardinia.— In three skulls from New Zealand, the intermaxillary bone is well defined, and separated from the maxillary bone by a genuine incomplete suture. I shall publish these facts, but I wanted to announce

Translations

621

them to the great pontiff of the new science.7 I hope that you will be able to add them to other similar ones in a second edition of your latest work. 8 Your ideas are progressing in Italy, and quickly too. Only your sexual selection is being opposed, to which I have not been able to convert even after your last letter.— 9 Love me as I love you.— Your admirer and friend | Prof. Paul Mantegazza | President of the Italian Society of Anthropology etc. .

DAR 171: 38 1 2 3 4

5

6 7 8 9

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 181–2. For the diploma, see Appendix III. Origin 6th ed. There are three essays by Mantegazza, printed continuously and bound in green paper, in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL; their titles are: ‘Dei caratteri sessuali del cranio umano’ (Sexual characteristics of the human skull), ‘Il cranio di una donna microcefala e quello di una donna imbecile’ (The skull of a microcephalous woman and an imbecile woman), and ‘Due casi di denti sopranumerarii nell’uomo’ (Two cases of supernumerary teeth in humans). The pages are not all cut, but there is an annotation by CD on page 16 (the conclusion) of the first article and another on the outside cover. The articles were originally published in Archivio per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia 2 (1872): 11–34. No other 1872 articles by Mantegazza have been found in the Darwin Archive–CUL. Paul Broca invented at least twenty-seven instruments for the study of craniology (DSB). In Revue d’anthropologie 1 (1872): 3–4 and 35 Broca describes and provides an illustration of a sliding calliper that he used for measuring the nose. Mantegazza’s publications on this subject were Mantegazza 1870a, 1871, 1872a, and 1873. The Dinka are the largest ethnic group in South Sudan (Appiah and Gates 2005). Mantegazza published his research in Mantegazza 1873. Mantegazza refers to Descent: a second edition was published in 1874, but it did not cite Mantegazza’s new work on human skulls. CD’s letter to Mantegazza has not been found.

To Hermann Müller [before 5 May 1872]1 [Enclosure]2 On the routes of the males of Bombus.3 On 8 September 1854 one of my sons saw a few humble-bees going into a hollow at the foot of a tall ash tree (see the diagram).4 Hoping to find a humble-bee nest inside, I looked in, but could not see any chamber. Meanwhile another humble-bee came out again almost immediately, climbed up the trunk about a yard and flew through a crutch between two tall branches. I removed all the grass and plants growing in the hollow, but there was no nest inside. After a minute or two another humble-bee arrived and buzzed over the ground which was now stripped of plants, flew forward and followed the other humble-bee through the crutch. Afterwards I saw many,

622

Translations

which entered every time after a couple of minutes, all of whom came in the same direction and behaved in exactly the same way, except for some that flew around the trunk of the tall ash rather than through the crutch. I later confirmed that they were all males of the garden humble-bee (Bombus hortorum). On several of the following days I observed similar facts. I followed the humble-bees from the tall ash up to a bare patch on the side of a ditch where they always buzzed, then further on to an ivy leaf about a couple of yards away, where they again buzzed. I will now refer to these places, where they stopped for a few seconds, as “buzzing places”. From the ivy leaf they climbed into the dry ditch, in which a thick hedge grew, and flew through slowly along the ground between the thickly overgrown briars. I could follow them along this ditch only by having several of my children crawl in and lie on their stomachs, but in this way I followed their trail for around 25 yards. They always came out of the hedge through the same opening into the open field and here I recorded three widely followed routes (indicated on the diagram by broken lines) that diverged as I followed the humble-bees. They buzzed a lot and always in those same places a few yards distant from one another on all of their routes. One of the buzzing places was very curious, for the humble-bees penetrated a couple of feet deep into the base of a very thick hedge, buzzed over a decayed leaf and directly turned back again. I then followed the flight path for a distance of about 150 yards, until it arrived at the tall ash; the humble-bees buzzed at fixed spots along this route. At the farther end, near the “pollard oak” the route divided in two as indicated in the diagram. Some days all the bees flew in the direction just described, other days some came from the opposite direction. Based on the large number observed on favorable days, when all flew in the same direction, they must, I think, fly in a wide circle. They stop at times on their trip to suck at flowers. I confirmed that while in flight they moved at about ten English miles an hour, but they lose a lot of time at their buzzing places. The routes remain the same for a considerable time and the buzzing places are exactly the same to within an inch. In order to test this, I should mention, that I repeatedly stationed five or six of my children, each close to a buzzing place, and told the one farthest away to shout as soon a bee buzzed there: “here is a bee”, and so on with the other children one after another, the words “here is a bee” were passed on from child to child without interruption, until the bees reached the buzzing place where I myself was standing. After a few days the routes changed slightly; the bees began to buzz at the base of a tall slender thorn tree in a hedge opposite the tall ash; they then flew slowly upwards, close to the trunk of the thorn tree, up to a considerable height, crossed over a large branch of the ash, where they buzzed, and were lost from view as they flew up higher over the ash tree. I saw scores of bees flying up this particular thorn tree, but never saw even one come down again. These circumstances were observed from the middle of July until the end of September for several years. The middle of a warm day is the best time for observation. I have only to add the strangest part of the whole business. For many successive years the males followed almost the same routes and buzzed at some of the exact

Translations

623

same places, e.g. in the hole at the foot of the tall ash, and afterwards always flew away through the same crutch. The also travelled along the same dry ditches and came out or went in through exactly the same small opening at the end of the hedge, although many similar openings were available, which could have served the purpose just as well. In the first year I saw scores of bees entering this particular opening and flying along the bottom of the ditch to the tall ash. Whereas in the second year the bees visited the the thorn tree mentioned above and flew up from there, but in another year they visited a thorn tree growing nearby. At first I was perplexed by these facts and could not understand how these bees, born in successive years, could apparently learn the same habits. But they seem to prefer to fly along hedges and paths and they love to buzz at the foot of trees, so that I assume the same routes and the same buzzing places are in some way preferred by this species: but I cannot understand in what this attraction consists. In many buzzing places there is nothing particularly noteworthy. When one of these has been frequently visited, its appearance can be completely changed without interrupting the visits. So I sprinkled one spot with white flour and pulled up all the grass and plants at the foot of the ash, without any change at all in the visits being made. Actually nothing is more difficult to understand than how the bees in successive years choose the same routes and the same buzzing places, or than how the males from the same nest or a different nest in the same area follow the same routes and buzz in the same places, for I believe that males always hatch out one after another and I have never seen two travelling together. Also I have never been in a position to discover the purpose of this habit of going along the same route and buzzing in the same places, by which they lose a lot of time. I have looked out for females, but never seen one on the routes. The males of Bombus pratorum have buzzing places and behave in many ways like those of Bombus hortorum; but their manner of travelling appears somewhat different. While I was staying in Devonshire, I confirmed that males of Bombus lucorum visit buzzing places in the same way.5 Mr J. Smith6 at the British Museum knew nothing about this habit, but he referred me to a short notice on the subject by Col. Newman in the “Transact. Entomol. Soc. of London (New Series Vol. I. part 6, 1851, p. 67).7 I have always been sorry that I did not stick a bit of cotton wool or down on the bees, for it would have been much easier to track them. Krause ed. 1885–6, 2: 84–8 1 2 3 4 5

The date is established by the relationship between this letter and the letter from Hermann Müller, 5 May 1872. For a transcription of this enclosure in the German of its printed source, and the letter that the original enclosure (now lost) was enclosed in, see pp. 182–5. Bombus are humble-bees (bumble-bees). For the diagram, see p. 186, and letter to Hermann Müller, [before 5 May 1872], n. 10 (p. 187). Bombus pratorum is the early bumblebee; B. lucorum is the white-tailed bumblebee.

624 6 7

Translations

The reference is to Frederick Smith (the ‘J.’ was evidently an error in transcription). Henry Wenman Newman’s report on the habits of humble-bees was read at a meeting of the Entomological Society of London, 2 June 1851, and published the same year (Newman 1851). Newman wrote that each species had ‘its own peculiar mode of going its round, some near the ground, others through hedges, trees, shrubs, &c.’ (p. 88). He noted that males made a round of visits to particular spots during the day (p. 91).

From Athénaïs Michelet1 17 May 1872

Paris | rue d’assas | 76— 17 May 1872

Sir As my husband’s name is known to you, I hope, through his great historical books, and our admiration for your genius is frequently expressed in several of his works, I come as a humble disciple to request the support of your counsel for a book on which I am occupied at the moment.2 It concerns cats, my guests and favourites since my earliest childhood. 3 Brought up in the country, in a sort of Noah’s ark, I spent my solitary youth observing and noting the impressions I received from my habitual companions. My book has no scientific pretensions, however. It is to be a brother volume to the Bird, the Insect, etc., in which we tried together to give society people a taste for natural history and to develop their desire to familiarise themselves with it from the masters of the science.4 I have read the chapter on cats in your book on variations most attentively, and much regretted its brevity.5 I can confirm, sir, that half-Angora crossbreeds do reproduce with one another and with common cats.—6 In connection with this fact, perhaps I can interest you by giving you some details.— Some years ago I received a pair of cats. The male, a magnificent black and white Angora, nevertheless seemed to show slight intermixture. The female was a true gutter cat, meagre, short-haired, and slender. In the spring, contemplating a family, the spouses discreetly withdrew to the bottom of my garden. But a smoky black cat came prowling about, and had the customary duels with the husband.— Three kittens were born from that union. I kept them all. These were their markings:— Though black and white like his father, the eldest had short hair and a look of his mother.— The second, a female kitten, had by contrast a coat entirely of her mother’s colouring, but with her father’s long silky fur, which later developed the warmest and most delicate glints. I called her: The blonde. The third, was a totally black male, not the jet black of his father, but the dull black of the outsider. The singularity was that his fur, more woolly than silky, had at the same time the length and volume of an Angora cat. I named him Pluto. I kept him for 5 years. He died of a gunshot.—7

Translations

625

From his first year he and his sister were mated. But she, suffering from the excessively precocious union, had a bad litter. In her weakened state, she showed no maternal instinct. The kittens died almost at birth.— But after this sort of miscarriage, her health regained the upper hand; she became remarkably beautiful; yet preserved some indefinable moral grace in her attitudes and movements from those early trials. She might have been a person. The year after, at the moment when she was about to give us kittens by Pluto, (the father and the elder brother had already met an accidental death,) she was caught in a snare, and strangled.— This proves the fecundity of crossbreeds, and also proves that intentional selection is not so difficult as one thinks. In Paris, where one keeps cats to which one is attached indoors, the couple, where there is a pair, seems to be completely uninterested in looking elsewhere. I have even confirmed that the spouses display signs of reciprocal attachment in the calm seasons. I have seen the female becoming irritated and boxing the ears of a husband whom she thought flighty. The indomitable independence of cats and their pressing need to roam at night will always be an obstacle to the longevity of individuals in towns; but, by keeping the couple sedentary at the desired time, one can modify a breed up to a certain point. Since your book was published before the two exhibitions held at London, you were not able to speak of them.8 May I dare to enquire, sir, whether reports worth dwelling upon have been written? I should also like to know whether there are any biographies or partial studies by amateurs written in English on domestic cats and big cats, lions, tigers etc. Everything must reach you, sir, as if in tribute, and I am sure that you have this information which is so precious to me at hand.— With our highest consideration, I remain yours faithfully | A Michelet P S. I shall be honoured to send you my little book, requesting all your indulgence towards it in advance. That is a generous currency which great minds cannot withhold. DAR 171: 170 1 2 3

4 5 6

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 212–13. Jules Michelet, Athénaïs’s husband, was a well-known French historian; Athénaïs collaborated with him on many works. In January 1872, Michelet had resumed work she began in 1868 on a book on the history and behaviour of cats; her original intention, first conceived in 1861, had been to write a fictionalised account of her own cats. Her incomplete manuscript was published after her death (A. Michelet [1904]). (A. Michelet 1978, pp. i–xx.) Michelet refers to J. Michelet 1856 and 1858. Michelet refers to Variation 1: 43–8. In Variation 1: 45, CD wrote, ‘In England half-bred Angora cats are perfectly fertile with the common cat; I do not know whether the half-breeds are fertile one with another; but as they are common in some parts of Europe, any marked degree of sterility could hardly fail to have been noticed.’ In Variation 2d ed. 1: 47, CD omitted the text after ‘common cat’.

626 7 8

Translations

The cats mentioned are discussed in A. Michelet [1904]. The first official London cat show was held at the Crystal Palace on 13 July 1871 (Era, 16 July 1871, p. 4); a second was held at the Crystal Palace on 2 and 4 December 1871 (The Times, 4 December 1871, p. 12). See also Correspondence vol. 19, letter from George Grove, 15 July 1871, and letter to George Grove, 17 July [1871].

From Friedrich Tiemann1 16 June 1872 Breslau2 16 June 1872 Dear most honourable Sir! Almost 3 months ago an animal was born here in Breslau which may perhaps become the progenitor of a new, hitherto unknown race. Due to this circumstance I thought that you, dear sir, would welcome the communication of this fact. The state of affairs is as follows: A mother goat, Capra hircus. L.3 ~, gave birth to three young, two of whom hardly differ from typical goats as concerns their coat, the third of whom, however, was born without hair, totally nude, and it will also remain hairless; only on its head and ears there are a few hairs. In its outer appearance the skin of this animal corresponds exactly to that of the naked Turkish dogs, the colouring is absolutely identical. 4 The similarity is so great that if one placed the skin of the goat next to that of a naked dog, one would hardly be able to tell one from the other, aside from the characteristics of the species. The individual in question is male, of exceptionally beautiful form, and already has horns several inches long. Perhaps you will be interested to hear more about this family of goats: the mother goat is about 7 years old, the he-goat which covered her was her own son and only seven months old; neither of them differ in any respect from other goats. Mating took place on only one occasion, and from that resulted the three individuals described above, including the naked one. Soon after the birth of the latter, the mother displayed a decided aversion to it, such as has already been observed in other species when the offspring turns out not completely akin, so that it had to be separated. 5 The naked little kid is creating quite a stir here and the number of competitors to acquire it grows by the day. Permit me, dear sir, to assure you of my sincerest respect, with which I sign | Your Honour | very truly | Fr. Tiemann | Curator at the Zoological Museum | of the Royal University. | P.S. I chose to write in my native tongue, for I believed to be able to express myself more precisely in it than in English, although I am familiar with that language. | the above. DAR 178: 127 1 2 3

For a transcription of this letter in its original German, see pp. 260–1. Breslau is now Wrocław, Poland; it was formerly in Prussia (Germany). Capra hircus: the domestic goat.

Translations 4 5

627

CD mentioned hairless Turkish dogs in Variation as examples of domesticated breeds with characteristics that made them unfit to survive in the wild (Variation 1: 34, 37; 2: 227). Tiemann also published a note about the hairless goat (Der Zoologische Garten 13 (1872): 186–7).

From Athénaïs Michelet1 26 June 1872

Paris | rue d’assas 76 26 June 72—

Sir, My excuse for having waited so long to thank you, lies entirely in my husband’s state of health.— The heart disease from which he has suffered since our horrifying events has worsened.2 I am absorbed and broken, I live in terror of the future.— Work under such conditions is nearly impossible. Life is too disrupted.— I am trying to regain my self-control during the brief respites that his illness allows me; but there is no freedom of mind.— If I can get back to the subject, I shall profit from your counsel, and endeavour to state my impressions as they came to me when I was not thinking at all about writing a book.3 What almost always impairs our judgement is that we do not keep a sufficiently close eye on our instinctive tendencies.— In the case of cats, for example, there is no middle ground; no-one can be indifferent to them. Cats are loved or hated—a consequence of temperament?— That provokes a priori affirmations.— From that point onwards, everything is compromised. I don’t conceal from myself the sort of ardour I have for them. Being myself a nervous creature, I can perhaps sense more and better what predominates or rather dominates almost entirely in them— In the order of affections, one might say that the dog loves with all its heart, the cat with all its nerves.— An infinity of detail in feelings.— This fact, particular to the feline race, does not rule out individual uniqueness and character differences, just as in humanity.— thus, I am writing one chapter with the following title: “There are cats and cats.”4 Thank you again Sir for your excellent and encouraging letter, as well as for the pamphlets.—5 Now I shall make a request of you. I should like to have a photograph of the man who has gripped me so much with his writing. If you sign it, dear Sir, you will be doubling its value. With admiration and profound esteem, | A Michelet DAR 171: 171 1 2

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 282–3. See letter to Athénaïs Michelet, 23 May 1872. The Michelets had returned to Paris in April 1872 from Italy, where they had spent several months, both for the sake of Jules Michelet’s health, and to escape the siege of Paris by the Prussians and the subsequent upheaval of the Commune; they supported the French army while in Italy, and supported amnesty for the Communards on their return ( J. Michelet 1959–76, 4: 531; BDWS).

628 3 4 5

Translations

See letter from Athénaïs Michelet, 17 May 1872 and n. 3. See A. Michelet 1978, pp. 224–31. See letter to Athénaïs Michelet, 23 May 1872; the pamphlets have not been identified.

From Dr von Gloeden1 1 July 1872

Anholt (Rheinpreussen) 1st. July 1872.

Highly honoured Sir! I really need not describe the interest with which I have followed the publication of your works from the “Origin of Species” down to the most recent one, “The Descent of Man”, for the establishment of your theory is sure of the high regard of every thinking person, and all the more of one who, like myself, is wholly devoted to the natural sciences.2 Still, I must beg forgiveness for writing to you at all, nevertheless, the dormant sympathy that you awakened within me will not get back on an even course until I have approached the reformer of our former views on the most important processes of organic life, and until I have discussed a few, even if rather insignificant, points that struck me while working through your book, for I felt I had to deny them my approval. Permit me to point out, from your latest work, the Descent of Man, in its German translation by V. Carus, a passage which astonished me most of all. In vol. I page 233 I find the expression “mysteriös”. The translator has obviously chosen an inappropriate term, for mysteries surely are least at home in the realm of natural science. 3 On p. 267 it is then shown that in extramarital unions proportionally more girls than boys are born. The natural process of reproduction cannot be controlled by a purely social institution such as marriage, and yet it cannot be denied that the reproducing individuals, and particularly the female part, in an illegitimate union are influenced by a situation which to others is almost mortifying, that is in regard to the possible consequences, and hence marriage may manifest an indirect influence on the results of reproduction. For this reason it is natural that the girl submits to an illegitimate relationship far less easily than a legitimate one; and, from the male perspective a far greater attraction must be exerted to conquer her resistance, viz. the fear of the consequences. In this manner, the female element because more affected, also could come more to the fore. As a rule, illegitimate unions are of a very transient nature, but when they develop into a lasting (illegitimate) relationship, I find, and this is of course based only on the cases known to me, that the sex of the offspring in no manner provides a measure for the nature of the relationship; the female side has done away with and forgotten fear and shame. The significantly greater number of male births in Jews, as compared to Christians, may be explained by their conscientious observance of the rules of chastity during and after menstruation. In animals mating (and fertilization) happens during the season of oestrus, and humans alone constitute an exception to this, an anomaly with which the female part alone must be charged, and hence it is perfectly understandable that the female part comes all the less to the fore the longer it has been

Translations

629

since this period. True, Joh. Müller claims (Physiology, II p. 613) that “human menstruation is wholly different and has nothing in common with oestrus”, but I still believe the former may be considered to be analogous to the latter. 4 Here I would like to direct attention to an original treatise in Halle’s fortgesetzte Magie vol. VII on “die Ausartung der organisirten Körper”.5 When I consider the marriages known to me, it would seem that female births predominate at the beginning of the union. With respect to this, I asked a mayor with whom I am on friendly terms for a summary from marriage and birth certificates, in order to be able to subject my hypothesis to a statistical examination before long. If it turns out to be correct, these sexual proportions could possibly be explained by the fact that the period of fertility in females is much shorter than in males, and that therefore their power of heredity transmission of sex is initally stronger. Apart from individual exceptions the male sex passes on its other characteristics more strongly than the female, it is thus incomprehensible that the sexual character should be an exception, and since the male sex, due to its longer fertility, presumably leaves more offspring than the female, male births ultimately must predominate. Still, the difference would be greater than it in fact is, if the normally later marriages of men and bachelordom did not serve as regulators. It can certainly be assumed that the sex of an embryo is determined in the act of reproduction, at least, it would be difficult to understand these dark processes in another way; the sex of the embryo, then, may be the product of various combinations between the male and the female elements, or the male sperm cells may be disposed to produce one sex today and another tomorrow, or the same may be the case with the female egg. What then happens in the case of twin births, which frequently show different gender, when (in the second case) they are not the product of different acts of procreation? In domestic birds the sex is occasionally linked to the colour, and so, p.e.6 , isabelline canaries are almost without exception female; if one pairs white and yellow ringneck doves,7 their offspring is either white or yellow, the former almost always female, the latter likewise always male, independently of whether they get the colouring from the father or from the mother; and if just as an exception both young are yellow, they usually are male, if on the other hand they are both white, it is a pair. A twofold drive is common in all organic beings, that is, preservation of the individual and preservation of the species, and it seems as though the chief purpose of existence consisted in achieving both of them; at least, a number of organisms perish after they have achieved the latter. One circumstance in this connection is strange, namely that the two goals are incompatible in that the preservation of the species is injurious to the individual; so, we observe that women waste away far sooner through sexual relations than through chastity. That unmarried men as a rule do not reach as old an age as married ones cannot be explained by abstinence,— the reason is not so much bachelordom as bachelor lifestyle. Canaries that breed last at the most 8–12 years, those who do not 20 and more years. The unusually old age that is frequently reached by hybrids is notorious; the more unproductive an animal is, the longer its life.

630

Translations

Characteristically in doves, the first egg laid as a rule yields a male; if from both eggs only one offspring is reared, it is as a rule also male, and the egg that perished is commonly unfertilized, which makes it look as though the act during which the second egg was to be fertilized had occurred too late, that is, after the formation of the whites of the egg had already started; or it looks as if each egg required a separate act of mating for its fertilization, so that it is most peculiar that just the second egg almost without exception meets with this misfortune. According to Joh. Müller (Physiologie II. 637) no sperm was found in the male of the mule; Brehm, Illustrirtes Thierleben II. 373, however, reports of a number of cases when female mules were fertile;8 in a hybrid of goldfinch and canary ( Joh. Müller) sperm was found which, however, differed from that of both parents, that is, was imperfect.9 When hybrids are not completely infertile, to what circumstance should their reproductive power be attributed, and what is it that deprives the healthy hybrid-organism of the secretion of fertile sperm? With this I will break off for now. Please let me to assure you of my highest respect, with which I have the honour of calling myself Yours most devoted | Dr. von Gloeden. DAR 165: 57 1 2 3

4 5

6 7 8 9

For a transcription of this letter in its original German, see pp. 286–8. Gloeden refers to Origin and Descent. Julius Victor Carus, who made the German translation of Descent (Carus trans. 1871), had, in fact, been faithful to CD’s statement in Descent 1: 264 that the proportion of male and female births was ‘mysteriously affected’ by whether the births were legitimate or illegitimate. Gloeden quotes from Johannes Müller’s Handbuch der Physiologie des Menschen ( J. P. Müller 1833–7, 2: 640). The treatise in volume seven of Johann Samuel Halle’s Fortgesetzte Magie, oder, die Zauberkräfte der Natur, so auf den Nutzen und die Belustigung angewandt worden (Continuous magic, or, the magical powers of nature applied for profit and entertainment; Halle 1788–1801), considered ‘the degeneration of the organised body’. p.e: presumably ‘par example’, although p.e. is not a German abbreviation. The Lachtaube or ringneck dove is Streptopelia risoria. Gloeden refers to Alfred Edmund Brehm and Brehm et al. 1864–9. J. P. Müller 1833–7, 2: 637–8.

From Armand de Quatrefages1 23 July 1872

Paris 23 July 1872

Dear Sir and colleague, I deeply regret having to inform you that despite all my efforts I have failed and your candidature was unsuccessful.2 After three long meetings for discussion we went to the ballot yesterday. Just 19 votes rallied around your name. Loëven had 32. 3 A good number of members, as you see, abstained from voting.— As you had foreseen, your latest book accounted for much of this result.4 Several speakers said very clearly that but for that publication they would have voted for you.

Translations

631

I regret very deeply that things have turned out this way. But I am not giving up hope of counting you as one of our colleagues at a later date. There is one vacant position left and I shall make renewed efforts towards that end. Dear Sir, please believe that doctrinal disagreements will never prevent me from rendering justice to your merits and that I shall do what I can to ensure that the Academy acts likewise5 Very truly yours | De Quatrefages DAR 175: 10 1 2

3

4 5

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 318–19. CD had failed to be elected as correspondent to the anatomy and zoology section of the Académie des sciences, Paris. For Quatrefages’s earler attempts to get CD elected, see letter from Armand de Quatrefrages, 12 January 1872 and n. 2. Sven Lovén was elected correspondent to the section for anatomy and zoology on 22 July 1872 (Comptes rendus hebdomadaires des séances de l’Académie des sciences 75 (1872): 194). The record states that forty-eight members were in attendance and the votes numbered thirty-two for Lovén, fifteen for CD, and one blank paper. Quatrefages refers to Descent. For Quatrefages’s reservations about CD’s theories, see Quatrefages 1870.

From K. M. Giuntsburg1 20 August 1872 Sir, Your admirable synthesis, which has shed so much light on the origin of species, also tends to illuminate the hitherto obscure domain of the unequal destruction of individuals by death.2 In the work that I have the honour of submitting to you, I have been the first to attempt to apply the theory of natural selection to the explanation of the very great Mortality of newborn infants.3 The principles of individual variation and heredity have served me as a point of departure from which I have deduced variations in Mortality, beginning with the first day after birth up to the end of the first week, then up to the end of the first month, and from there up to the end of the first year. I do not need to tell you, Sir, how happy I should feel, if my work deserved your approval to the extent that you might deign to honour me with a reply. Please accept, Sir, the expression of my great esteem and most deep respect. | Charles Gunzbourg Dr. | Moscow, 20 August 1872. My Address | Dr. Charles Gunzbourg, | Curator of the Galitzin Museum, Moscow. DAR 165: 239 1 2

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see p. 362. CD had included information on infant mortality and on the comparative mortality of males and females in Descent 1: 264–5, 320.

632 3

Translations

An annotated copy of Giuntsburg’s article, ‘Die Kindersterblichkeit im Allgemeinen und die in den Findelhäusern insbesondere im Lichte der Darwin’schen Theorie betrachtet’ (Child mortality in general and in orphanages, especially considered in light of Darwinian theory; Giuntsburg 1872), is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.

From C.-F. Reinwald1 13 September 1872

Geneva 13 Sept 1872

Mr Ch Darwin Dear Sir I am writing from Geneva, where I have been called by the illness of Mr. Moulinié,2 the translator of your work. Poor Mr. Moulinié is very ill and unfortunately will continue to be so for some time. However, I have been able to reach an agreement with him in order to finish the printing of the second Volume of Descent of man, and that of Origin of Species, both of which had reached the composition of the Indexes. 3 Mr. Moulinié has also given me your letter of 18 August, which he had not been able to communicate to me and which makes reference to the new work on the Expression of the Emotions in man and the Animals.4 I shall have the honour of replying to your letter as soon as I have returned to Paris, which will be next Monday or Tuesday In the meantime, I remain | Dear Sir, yours faithfully | C Reinwald & C o To Ch. Darwin Esq. Down, Kent DAR 176: 94 1 2 3

4

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 403–4. Jean Jacques Moulinié. Reinwald refers to Moulinié’s translations of Descent (Moulinié trans. 1872) and the sixth edition of Origin (Moulinié trans. 1873). The two volumes of the French translation of Descent were published separately on 19 February and 18 November 1872 (see Journal général de l’imprimerie et de la librarie, 2 March 1872, p. 91, and 30 November 1872, p. 563). CD’s letter to Moulinié has not been found.

From Ernst Haeckel1 12 October 1872

Jena 12 Oct. 72.

Highly honoured friend! Your recent kind letter, which pleased me greatly, was too kind in that you certainly overestimate the limited role that I play in supporting and spreading your ideas and you assign “Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte an importance it does not possess. 2 This and similar books surely are mere expositions of the powerful impulse that you have given, and the recognition that I myself and similar “Darwinists” can, at best, deserve is not to be compared to the inestimable achievement of the master who first blazed a trail for our science.

Translations

633

The polemic against Rütimeyer, which I included in my preface to the III. edition, I was forced to engage in because of the continuous attacks of this pseudo-Darwinist, who at every opportunity slanders my work by calling it “unscientific” and who behaves like a barking dog angered by the swift progress of a fast horse. 3 I would, moreover, not have told the truth quite so harshly, had I not known that behind his polemic the most miserable motives are concealed. Professor Rütimeyer is a true Swiss, and an old saying goes: “Where there’s no money, there are no Swiss”. His fellow-countrymen of Basel, who pay his salary, are very sanctimoniously pious, and since his excellent works have earned him the reputation of being half Darwinist, he seeks to make up for this by slandering other Darwinists. I have read an abstract of the researches of the English Dr. Bastian on spontaneous generation, about which you write to me.4 It contains some very interesting data. However I confess that I don’t have much faith in the quality of Dr. Bastian as an observer and critic. It will require much greater care and review in observation and experimentation on abiogenesis before this fundamental question can be truly advanced on the empirical side. From the philosophical side, it is already sufficiently clear. Particularly through the discovery of the Monera, it seems to me, most of the difficulties in this respect have been overcome.5 The phylogenetic question has another difficulty, how the forms of Monera that originated through spontaneous generation and that perhaps are still arising, are related to the root-forms of the animal, protist, and plant kingdoms. My monograph on the calcareous sponges is now nearing completion and I hope to be able to send it to you in November.6 I hope that quite a few things in it will be of interest to you, particularly the marvellous degree of variability and adaptability of these peculiar animals. They exceed the common degree of variability by far, and the usual notions of “species” totally cease to apply. In this respect sponges are perhaps the most interesting organisms of all. With the best wishes for your health, and in the hope that you may for quite some time yet continue to lead us as our principal guide and “field marshal” in the “struggle for truth”, I remain, much venerated friend, your faithful, wholly devoted | Ernst Haeckel. DAR 166: 58 1 2 3

4

For a transcription of this letter in its original German, see pp. 443–4. See letter to Ernst Haeckel, 2 September 1872. Haeckel had sent a copy of the third edition of his popular book on the natural history of creation (Haeckel 1872b). Ludwig Rütimeyer had written a review of the first edition of Haeckel’s book (Haeckel 1868), in which he noted that Haeckel had described his work as both popular and scientific. Rütimeyer observed that while no one could argue against Haeckel’s first claim, he could hardly expect the second to be taken seriously (Rütimeyer 1868, p. 301). Rütimeyer took issue with Haeckel’s illustrations of early stages of dog, chick, and turtle embryos (Haeckel 1868, p. 248), stating that the three illustrations were clearly from one and the same woodcut and that this could be described as nothing other than trifling with both the public and science (Rütimeyer 1868, p. 302; for more on the criticism of Haeckel’s illustrations, see Hopwood 2006). See letter to Ernst Haeckel, 2 September 1872. For CD’s view of Henry Charlton Bastian’s book, The beginnings of life (H. C. Bastian 1872), see the letter to A. R. Wallace, 28 August [1872].

634 5

6

Translations

Haeckel believed he had discovered organisms lacking both nucleus and organelles, and formed of undifferentiated protoplasm, and had classified them within a group he termed Monera, a subdivision of his kingdom Protista, single-celled organisms (Haeckel 1866, 1: 135). According to Haeckel they were the ancestors of all animals (see S. J. Gould 1977, p. 170). Haeckel 1872a was published in December 1872 or January 1873 (letter from Ernst Haeckel, 10 December 1872).

From William Marshall1 15 October 1872 Weimar 15 Oct. 1872. Highly honoured Sir! The greatest satisfaction for me so far for my slight achievements in the field of zoology was when I received your letter of 6 June this year. 2 Formerly, even when I was studying in Jena under Haeckel, I was an opponent of evolution-theory—an error that should not be held against an ignorant beginner with great trust in authorities and a strong attachment to his first teacher, Professor Keferstein in Goettingen. 3 Only in my position as assistant at the National Museum at Leiden did nature herself overcome me, and I became an enthusiastic supporter of your theory, despite my superior, Schlegel, and now I only consider investigations carried out in this spirit to be fruitful and worthwhile.4 Now, if one always keeps in mind the tenets of your theory, one often comes across facts that in themselves are too minor to be noted in some journal, but that still deserve to be made known. Since I assume that either you yourself, most honourable Sir, or one of your scientific friends is busy with a new work, I permit myself to make you a small communication. It is universally known that our common black coot (Fulica atra) breeds only in particular stretches of water of one region, and it does not occur in other ones that provide the same nourishment etc. Now, I have found that in the preferred stretches of water there also occurs a particular kind of reed, I think it is Phragmites arundinacea. 5 The eggs of the coot are yellowish-grey with black speckles, and the dead leaves of the reed are always of the same yellowish-grey colour, speckled black by tiny parasitic fungi of the Uredo group,6 and these leaves invariably form the base on which Fulica atra breeds, and I can assure you that it is difficult to spot the eggs from some distance away. I enclose some fragments of an already slightly discoloured egg and also of the plant in question, so you can examine them for yourself.7 In the hope not to have bothered you too much I take leave with the highest respect | Your devoted servant | Dr. William Marshall. DAR 171: 47 1 2 3

For a transcription of this letter in its original German, see pp. 446–7. See letter to William Marshall, 6 June [1872]. Marshall studied zoology at both Jena and Göttingen, but received his doctorate from the latter institution with a work on the bony cranial protuberances in birds (Professorenkatalog der Universität Leipzig; www.uni-leipzig.de/unigeschichte/professorenkatalog/leipzig/Marshall_913 (accessed 14 March 2011)). Marshall refers to Ernst Haeckel and Wilhelm Moritz Keferstein.

Translations 4

5 6 7

635

Marshall was an assistant at the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie (National museum of natural history) in Leiden, the Netherlands, from 1867 to 1872 (Daum 1998, p. 500). Hermann Schlegel was the museum director from 1858 to 1884. Phragmites arundinacea is now Phalaris arundinacea, reed canary grass. Marshall refers to rust fungi (order Uredinales). The enclosures have not been found, but CD evidently sent the specimens to Alfred Russel Wallace (see letter to A. R. Wallace, 20 October [1872]).

From C. I. F. Major1 18 October 1872 Pisa, 18 Oct. 1872. Highly honoured Sir, The purpose of this is the humble request that you grant me authorisation to translate into German your new work, Expression in Man & Animals, which will shortly appear.—2 Descended from an English family, I am German by birth & I have studied both in Germany & in German Switzerland.3 This to establish my credentials; moreover, I am of course ready to produce a sample translation prior to a final decision on your part.— Furthermore, I venture to inquire about an Italian translation of the aforementioned work. For I already have an agreement with an Italian friend, Dr Cavanna, the “Ajuto alla Cattedra di Zoologia et Anatomia Comp.” 4 at the university of Pisa, to collaborate, with your permission, in a translation of your work. I would be responsible for a faithful rendering of the original text, and Mr. C. for the style— I most respectfully ask you to consider my requests.— Given this opportunity, I cannot fail to communicate to you, most respected Sir, a few facts that confirm in a brilliant way some things in your wonderful book: “The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex” (vol. II, ch. XVII).— For in the museum at Florence there is a completely preserved adult skull of a ruminant from the Pliocene of the Val d’Arno,5 which, according to an examination made by me, differs only by the absolute absence of horns from a likewise complete skull of Bos etruscus Falc from the same location, already described and reproduced by Rütimeyer. 6 I know no other interpretation than that the former skull comes from a female individual of Bos etruscus; so therefore in the oldest representative known till now of the genus Bos, the female sex appears unarmed, hornless. An example of a similar sort is found in the genus Sus: in a number of fossilised, mostly Miocene species (Sus antiquus of Eppelsheim, S. provincialis of Montpellier, S. erymanthius of Pikermi, S. choeroides of Monte Bamboli, etc) 7 both sexes appear to have had only small canines, which could by no means serve as weapons. Of the last two species in particular, the remains of dozens of individuals have been found: the canines were always tiny & barely stood out above the level of the other teeth.— I shall have the honour of sending you a publication referring to these facts in the near future.8

636

Translations

Please accept the assurance of my highest respect & veneration. C.J. Forsyth Major. No. 11, Via Solferino. | Pisa. DAR 88: 123–4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

For a transcription of this letter in its original German, see pp. 450–1. Expression was published in November 1872 (Freeman 1977). The German translation was made by Julius Victor Carus (Carus trans. 1872b). Major studied at Basel, Tübingen, and Göttingen (Stehlin 1925). Guelfo Cavanna was assistant to Sebastino Richiardi, professor of zoology and comparative anatomy at Pisa (Balducci 1921). Major refers to the valley of the river Arno in Tuscany. Ludwig Rütimeyer described a skull of Bos etruscus at the natural history museum, Florence, in Rütimeyer 1867, pp. 71–7, and table 1 figs. 3–5. Sus antiquus is now Microstonyx antiquus; S. provincialis is now Propotamochoerus provincialis; S. erymanthius is now Microstonyx major erymanthius; S. choeroides is now Eumaiochoerus etruscus. Major later sent CD an offprint of his article on the vertebrate fauna of Monte Bamboli, in which he argued that the absence of large canines in the fossil pigs he had studied was evidence in favour of sexual selection, since only males later developed large canines (Major 1873, p. 295). CD scored these passages in his separately paginated offprint, now in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL.

From Auguste Houzeau de Lehaie1 4 November 1872 Hyon 4 November | 1872 Sir, Yesterday I received a copy of your new work “Expression of the Emotions”. I shall send it to my brother by the next mail-boat to the West Indies on 16th of this month.2 I have not been able to prevent myself from starting to read it straight away. My opinion I know has little value so it is only with extreme reserve that I dare express all the admiration I feel for this new research. I was away for some weeks, which prevented me from replying to your letter of September 14.3 I am truly sorry for all the trouble caused you by a clerical error. If you still have the last copy of “Facultés des Animaux” that was sent to you, I would ask you to be so good as to direct it to Sir John Lubbock; I have reason to believe that the copy meant for him was directed to you by mistake. With apologies for the trouble I am giving, please believe me yours respectfully | C A Houzeau de Lehaie DAR 166: 274 1 2

3

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see p. 480. Jean-Charles Houzeau’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). He was Auguste’s brother, and lived on Jamaica at this time. CD had been sent a copy of Jean-Charles’s book on the mental faculties of animals (Houzeau 1872); see letter to Chauncey Wright, 6 September [1872]; see also letter to A. R. Wallace, 20 October [1872]. The letter has not been found. Evidently CD had been sent two copies of Houzeau 1872 (see n. 2, above).

Translations

637

From Federico Delpino1 10 November 1872 Naples 10 November 1872. Distinguished man! On the verge of departing on a journey around the world on the Italian R. Steam Corvette Garibaldi, I extend a greeting to my illustrious predecessor. 2 Never have I had reason to lament the scantiness of my scientific training more than at this moment. If only I had just the tenth part of the knowledge of the celebrated author of the Journal of researches into the natural history and geology of the countries visited during the voyage of H.M.S. Beagle round the world! 3 If you should have advice or instructions for me, kindly address them to Prof. Federico Delpino Genoa via Chiavari. My family will take care of sending them on. I have availed myself of the abovementioned work, which will be my constant guide and teacher. | Your most devoted admirer | Fed. Delpino DAR 162: 150 1 2 3

For a transcription of this letter in its original Italian, see pp. 496–7. Owing to illness, Delpino had to leave the Garibaldi at Rio de Janeiro and return to Italy (Penzig 1905, p. 296). He alludes to CD’s circumnavigation of the globe on HMS Beagle (see Correspondence vol. 1). Journal of researches.

From Jules Michelet1 15 November 1872 Sir It is said that they are going to make a submarine passage, that the Channel will be eliminated, and that the two countries will at last acknowledge their proximity; let us put it better, their ancient unity.2 No-one will have contributed more to the creation of this passage, and to recalling our proximity and our kinship of race and of mind, than yourself and the famous men of science who follow you. The latter kinship, in my opinion, principally consists both in a power of observation which is more precise than that of the Germans, and in a vigorous simplicity which liberates the great English and French minds from the scholastics who hold Germany back in a thousand ways, and often lead her astray. You and I get to the point. That is why the likes of ourselves have beaten a new path for Europe. For my part, even though I am led in other directions by my studies, I nonetheless admire your method, and am delighted to discover so many links between the sciences of nature and those of man I shake your hand with most affectionate admiration. | J. Michelet 15 N. 72 DAR 171: 174

638 1 2

Translations

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 505–6. The Channel Tunnel Company was formed in January 1872 (The Times, 18 January 1872, p. 4). On the failure of this venture, see Gourvish 2006, pp. 4–7.

From Athénaïs Michelet1 16 November 1872

Paris 16 Nov 72

Sir After my husband’s letter to you, which he has wanted to write for so long, 2 I feel I only have the right to take up the pen in order to thank you for remembering me so kindly and for sending the little pamphlet.—3 My good friends the cats are not happy. This is the second time I have left them without knowing when I shall return to them again.—4 My husband, who used up all his strength writing to you, has been seriously ill all through the month of October. I have stood by, I have struggled against nature who seems to enjoy destruction as much as creation.— Today I am guarding that improvement, gained with such difficulty, with jealous care; I am devoting my every moment to it.— That makes the pen fall from one’s fingers. I am only able to take it up again in order to reiterate my respectful and lively sympathy | A Michelet. DAR 171: 172 1 2 3 4

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see p. 509. See letter from Jules Michelet, 15 November 1872. The pamphlet has not been identified, but may have concerned cats (see letter to Athénaïs Michelet, 23 May 1872; see also letter from Athénaïs Michelet, 26 June 1872). Michelet was working on a book on cats (see letter from Athénaïs Michelet, 17 May 1872).

From C. I. F. Major1 17 November 1872

Pisa, 17 Nov. 1872.

Most honoured Sir, I am sincerely obliged to You for the two letters with which You have honoured me and for the offer You kindly made me in Your last letter of 11 inst. 2 In reply I declare that I am resolved to do all I can to proceed with an Italian translation of Your latest work,3 and I have already been in touch with a publisher in Florence. After what you have told me about the terms of your publisher, Mr. Murray, I shall make no secret of the difficulties that will need to be overcome. 4 However, I hope that by limiting my own demands as far as possible, I shall find a publisher. I shall be proud if I can contribute a little towards the appreciation of your genius in Italy and to revealing the new ideas with which you constantly enrich the natural sciences. I accept Your amiable offer to send me a copy of Your work, with a view to being able to show it to the publisher as well. Most honoured Sir, I remain yours faithfully. | C. I. Forsyth Major No 11 Via Solferino | Pisa.

639

Translations DAR 171: 29 1 2 3 4

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 511–12. CD’s letters to Major have not been found. Major refers to Expression (see letter from C. I. F. Major, 18 October 1872). CD may have warned that John Murray would charge for the heliotypes and for electrotypes of the woodcuts; there might also have been a charge for translation rights (see letter from R. F. Cooke, 1 August 1872).

From Frédéric Baudry1 4 December 1872

Paris, 4 Xber2 72

Sir Mme Michelet has been so kind as to lend me your book on the Expression of the emotions.3 I have read it with the eagerness that I apply to reading all your work, but being unknown to you, I would not have permitted myself to write to you if I were not bent on communicating a small fact of nature to interest you and to complete one of your chapters. It is a passage from the Râmâyana, where a mother, on discovering the body of her son, licks “the face of the dead man with her tongue while moaning like a cow deprived of her calf ” (If you want to verify this, here is the Sanskrit text: m¯at¯a ca asya mr˘ıtasya api jihvay¯a nihatam mukham vilatapa ati karunam g¯aur vivats¯a ïva vatsal¯a mater que ejus mortui etiam linguâ caesum vultum ingemuit flebiliter vacca sine–vitulo quasi tenera

(the episode of the death of Yajnadatta, [ II], 26))4 Here is an expression of pain and tenderness together, which frightfully resembles what a bitch does to the corpse of her whelp. Might this be the origin of the kiss? Yet another fact: you mention somewhere, without explaining its origin, the gesture of dogs in throwing themselves onto their backs and gesticulating with all four paws for play or caresses. It is to my knowledge that the badger (ursus meles) 5 puts itself in this position to defend itself against dogs, because this allows it to make use of its muzzle and all its claws against them at the same time. Might this not have been the origin of the analogous attitude in the dog! The fighting position might have degenerated into an offensive  .6   I have taken the liberty of writing to you, will you pardon me for indicating two points to you which I believe I can explain otherwise than you do. The first thing is the gesture of helplessness, raising the shoulders, lowering the arms and opening the hands. You interpret it as a movement of antithesis. I should rather see in raised shoulders the gesture of someone who is preparing to receive a

640

Translations

blow unresistingly. Try threatening a child with a boxed ear, and you will immediately see him lifting his shoulders as if to tuck his head and neck into them. The shrug may be, in my opinion, that primordial posture weakened, and one can understand very well how it might have been transformed into a sign of resignation. As for the lowered arms and open hands, I should see in these a symbol of the sort that you have admitted for the joined hands of Christian prayer. It would be the sign that one is unarmed, that one has nothing in one’s hands and that one will not defend oneself, a very natural complement of raised shoulders. In the raised arms and open hands of surprise, I should also see not an antithesis, but rather a residue of the terrified posture, with the arms and hands in front as if to ward off a blow. From the psychological point of view, surprise in man proceeds from fear in animals.7 Finally, dear Sir, excuse me if, being a linguist by profession and belonging to the school of Bopp,   Müller and Whitney, I have rather shuddered at the citations you take from a book by Mr. Wedgwood on the origin of language.8 Judging by these extracts, the work is a reverie unworthy of featuring in your books, which are always governed by the most rigorous experimental method. Theories concerning the special affectation of sounds for expressing certain ideas, which have been refuted a hundred times, should be referred to Plato’s Cratylus; and it is another aggravating circumstance to look for the proof of this in words from the English language, without taking account of the thousand phonetic modifications these have undergone since the origin9 I hope, dear Sir, that you will accept these criticisms with more goodness than if I had sent you compliments. Besides, if I were to undertake to list everything I approve and that has instructed me in your book, I should lay myself open to copying it in its entirety. At last we are going to be able to read the second volume of your Descent of Man here. But what a   translation was made of the 1st volume by M. Moulinier!10 11 Traduttore=traditore! It is unintelligible in more than a hundred places for those who cannot divine the English phrase underlying his French, or rather his patois. I do not know how we are translated where you are, but in general, I pity the English authors who fall into the hands of our translators. Once again, dear Sir, forgive me, and believe me | Your sincere admirer | F Baudry | curator of the Arsenal library. | 76, rue Bonaparte—Paris. DAR 160: 95 CD note:   —curious Sanskrit  about licking the dead— after [ Dog attitude] Give same notes   English Review that shrugging shoulders in   of defence or rather  t re  injury passively with as little heed to self as possible.— Moreover [ hardly] agrees with shrugging shoulders being so often done when a person says he cannot prevent action by another person.— I doubt about women— Hands & arms often thrown vertically over head, with no trace of pushing away [interl] action.— Perhaps put note to that effect.— Weed out reference to H. Wedgwood—12 1

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 546–8.

Translations 2 3

4

5 6 7

8

9

10

11 12

641

‘Xbre ’, signifying the tenth month, was a common French abbreviation that drew on the Latin meaning of December and its place in the ancient Roman calendar (OED). Athénaïs Michelet’s name appears on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). Michelet had supplied CD with information about crossing in cats, and had offered to send him a copy of her book, Les chats (see letter from Athénaïs Michelet, 17 May 1872). The Ramayana is an ancient Sanskrit epic that presents the teachings of Hindu sages in allegorical form. The section describing the death of the hermit boy Yajnadatta had been translated into Latin by Jean Louis Burnouf and published with the transliterated Sanskrit (Chézy 1826, appendix, verse 69); however, Baudry’s translation appears to be his own. For a contemporary English version, see Milman trans. 1835, p. 96. In Baudry’s letter, the Latin equivalent is written above each Sanskrit word. Baudry’s reference was added to the second edition of Expression, edited by Francis Darwin (Expression, 2d ed., p. 126 n. 4). The European badger is now Meles meles. See Expression, p. 120. There are no additions to this passage in the second edition of Expression. For CD’s explanation of these gestures, see Expression, pp. 271, 287–8. In Expression 2d ed., p. 285 n. 7, Baudry’s challenge to the principle of unconscious antithesis is mentioned but qualified by the comment that the protective shrug of a schoolboy threatened with a box on the ears differs from the apologetic shrug. Franz Bopp and his students Friedrich Max Müller and William Dwight Whitney had pioneered a new approach in linguistics that demonstrated the affiliations between the Indo-European languages through a comparative study of verbal inflections and an emphasis on the genealogies of languages. Hensleigh Wedgwood, although instrumental in introducing Bopp’s work into England, had disagreed with the German school over the development of language in his Origin of language (H. Wedgwood 1866). For more on these debates, see Alter 1999, pp. 11, 52–3, 79–90. CD referred to H. Wedgwood 1866 several times in Expression in relation to the development of language as a consequence of instinctive actions (see Expression, pp. 273–4, 285–6). Plato’s dialogue Cratylus is a debate about three theories of language: the conventional, the rational, and the natural. Wedgwood had quoted from Cratylus in support of an imitative origin of language, and argued against Max Müller’s claim that this notion of the origin of language could not be ‘scientifically’ determined ‘until some progess has been made in tracing the principal roots not of Sanscrit only, but of Chinese, Bask, and the Turanian and Semitic languages, back to the cries or imitated sounds of nature’ (see H. Wedgwood 1866, pp. 10–11, 14). Jean Jacques Moulinié translated both volumes of Descent (Moulinié trans. 1872) into French. The first volume had been published on 19 February 1872; the second was published on 18 November (see Journal général de l’imprimerie et de la librarie, 2 March 1872, p. 91, and 30 November 1872, p. 563). Traduttore=traditore (Italian): ‘a translator is a traitor’. CD’s references to H. Wedgwood 1866 on the imitative origin of language remained in Expression 2d ed.

From Ernst Haeckel1 10 December 1872 Jena 10 Decbr 72 My dear most honoured friend! Forgive me for only today expressing my kindest thanks for the copy of your very interesting work on “Expression of the emotions etc”, which you so obligingly sent me.2 Over the past months, I was completely absorbed by the task of completing my “Monographie der Kalkschwämme” (Calcispongiae or Grantia). 3 In order to complete the work in this year, I had to write day and night, and in the last weeks

642

Translations

I had to correct an entire set of proofs daily. An awful labour, which prevented me from doing any reading at all. This is why I was able only to skim through your book on “Expression”, and now, liberated from the Spongiae, I hope to be able to read it at leisure. You will receive my monograph on the calcareous sponges (2 volumes text and 1 atlas with 60 plates) within the next few weeks, directly from my publisher, whom I have instructed to send you a copy.4 For the time being I am sending you the last two chapters of the first volume and the title page of the preface. 5 I hope that you will be interested in the general conclusions of ch. 7 and 8, in particular “biogenetische Grundgesetz, die generischen und spezifischen, connexiven und transitorischen Varietäten, and the “Ursachen der Formbildung”(p. 479, 481). 6 Of interest to you in chapter III (morphology) is the intercanal-system (p. 275–290), in chapter IV. the parallel between ontogeny and phylogeny of the Olynthus (p. 347), in chapter V. adaptation (p. 381–391), which can be followed here most admirably, and heredity (p. 399). 7 The result for general zoology is important insofar as the concept of species in the usual sense is not at all applicable to sponges; their variability exceeds all limits. Thus, in the special part (in volume II), I had to create 2 systems, a natural and an artificial one.8 For a comparison between the two I ask you to inspect the forms of Ascetta primordialis in table 2, also Ascaltis Darwinii (table 10, fig. 3) with their generic and specific varieties (A. Erasmi and A. Caroli), and furthermore Leucetta primiginenia (tab. 21) and Sycandra compressa (tab. 57).9 The polymorphosis of this and of other kinds is most instructive for the theory of descent. Olynthus seems to me to be of particular importance, the simplest from of calcareous sponge, because it can be traced back directly to the Gastrula, which also occurs as the larval or embryonic form of higher animals. (p. 466, 467). I believe that through this, the phylogenetic tree of the animal kingdom on p. 465, and especially the descent of all animals (excepting Protozoa) from the Gastraea gain tremendously in certainty. The two lamellae that form the stomach wall of the Olynthus are indentical with the two germ layers of higher animals. With this, the primordial phylogeny of higher animals becomes extremely clear; for the same gastrula can be found in Amphioxus and in the Ascidians.10 To my mind, the significance of the Calcispongiae seems to culminate chiefly in that on the one hand they are closely related to Polyps (Hydra, Cordylophora), and that on the other hand they are evidently far more simple than the lowest sponges of the Ascon-type. The homology of Olynthus and Hydra seems to me indubitable, and consequently the morphological significance of their inner cavity is that of an intestinal cavity11 Also, because of the Gastrula, the Spongi are far removed from the Protozoa.12 If you compare the Gastrula of the Calcispongi (atlas table 13, table 30, table 44) with the corresponding larval form of worms and echinoderms, of Ascidians and of Amphioxus (as I have reproduced them e.g. on table X. fig. A4, B4 in my “natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte),13 you must concede their morphological identity. I am sending you yet another copy of the two last chapters, with the request that you may arrange for the same to get to Sir John Lubbock, whose address I do not have.

Translations

643

Should you talk to Sir Lubbock, please tell him that his “prehistoric times are now being translated into German. I asked Virchow to write an introduction. 14 Have you already received the English translation of my Schöpfungsgeschichte? Or is it not ready yet?15 My dear friend, I hope you are content with your health! Thanking you again for sending me your book, I remain with the usual respect your | wholeheartedly devoted | Ernst Haeckel

644

Translations

A great sensation in Germany is now being created by a book by our brilliant theologian David Strauss: “Alte und neue Glaube”. The author of “Leben Jesu” reveals himself here as a convinced Darwinist, and develops a philosophical religion on the basis of Darwinism!!16 We are making progress!! DAR 166: 34, 59 1 2 3 4 5 6

7

8 9

10

For a transcription of this letter in its original German, see pp. 561–5. Haeckel’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). Haeckel refers to his monograph on calcareous sponges (Haeckel 1872a). CD’s annotated copy of Haeckel 1872a is in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 357–8). Haeckel’s publisher was Georg Ernst Reimer. The enclosure has not been found. For the section on the biogenetic law (ontogeny is the rapid recapitulation of phylogeny), see Haeckel 1872a 1: 471–3; on the generic and specific, connective and transitory varieties, see ibid., pp. 479–80; on causes of structure, see ibid., pp. 481–3. Chapter 3 of Haeckel 1872a contains a section (2A) on the canal-system with a subsection on the intercanal or intervascular system (Haeckel 1872a 1: 275–92). Haeckel included a table linking stages in the ontogeny of Olynthus (now Leucosolenia) with phylogenetic stages (ibid., p. 347; see also Di Gregorio 2005, pp. 208–11). For Haeckel’s description of the classificatory systems and the criteria used for each system, see Haeckel 1872a 1: 79–83. The tables Haeckel refers to are in the Atlas to Haeckel 1872a. The species names are part of his ‘natural’ system of classification. Ascetta primordialis is now Clathrina primordialis; Ascaltis darwinii and the varieties A. erasmi and A. caroli are now Clathrina darwini. Haeckel equated specific ontogenetic stages such as the gastrula (the first invagination of the ball of embryonic cells) with corresponding hypothetical ancestral organisms (in this case, Gastraea). Amphioxus (the lancelet; now Branchiostoma lanceolatum) was initially classed as a primitive fish (subclass Acranii)

Translations

11

12

13

14 15

16

645

but has now been moved to its own class, Cephalochordata. Ascidiacea is a class in the subphylum Tunicata. Both are in the phylum Chordata. Hydra is a genus of the family Hydridae; Cordylophora is in the family Cordylophoridae. Both now belong to the order Anthoathecata within the class Hydrozoa. The Ascones was the most primitive family in Haeckel’s ‘natural’ system of classification and Olynthus was the most primitive genus within the ‘artificial’ system (Haeckel 1872a 1: 482). In Haeckel’s classificatory system, sponges were first placed in the kingdom Protista along with singlecelled Protozoa (see Haeckel 1866, 2: Table I). Haeckel later reassigned sponges to his kingdom Animalia and further developed his ‘Gastraea theory’, which held that the ancestral mode of gastrulation in all animals was by invagination to produce a functional gut (Haeckel 1872a). Haeckel had sent CD the third edition of his Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte (Natural history of creation; Haeckel 1872b) earlier in the year (see letter to Ernst Haeckel, 2 September 1872). For the table and description of the figures, see Haeckel 1872b, facing p. 486 and p. 671. The German translation of Lubbock’s Prehistoric times (Lubbock 1865) appeared in 1874 and had an introduction by Rudolf Virchow (Lubbock 1874). The first English translation of Haeckel’s Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte was published in 1876 (Haeckel 1876a). The translation was revised by Edwin Ray Lankester from an original translation made by ‘a young lady’ (Haeckel 1876a, 1: note facing p. 1). David Friedrich Strauss’s ‘new faith’ (neue Glaube) was based on natural science, particularly on evolution and CD’s theory of human evolution (see Strauss 1872, pp. 174–97). For more on the reception of the book, see Weikart 1993, pp. 483–4. Haeckel also refers to Strauss 1836 (Das Leben Jesu).

From Julius Herschel1 17 December 1872 2, Montague Place, | Russell Square. W.C. 17 Decber 1872. Sir, I have just received a reply from my correspondent in Rio de Janeiro, to the question I put to him in December last year, on the subject of the mortality of monkeys attacked by yellow fever. Here is the reply which, it goes without saying, does not in any way settle the question—at issue—it probably could only be resolved by direct experimentation on these interesting bipeds— Anglo-Brazilian Times, Rio de Janeiro, Nov. 22–1872. “Monkeys and Yellow fever”. “A statement has appeared in some Engl. scientific periodicals, to the effect that the monkeys of Brazil have been dying of yellow fever. We have made inquiries from a number of the most eminent scientific gentlemen of Rio who should be most likely informed in such a matter, and they all agree that they are not aware of any grounds existing for such an assertion, and that, although deaths from consumption (sic) are not unfrequent among the monkeys of Brazil, no case of death from yellow fever has ever come to their knowledge—” “Moreover, a little consideration would show that, as yellow fever is a disease whose local is a few populated seasides, and its attacks are nearly confined to unacclimated foreigners, the probabilities of a yellow fever epidemic breaking out amongst the monkeys of Brazil are extremely small”—2

646

Translations

My correspondent, as you see, Sir, is no man of science. 3 He is a journalist and has given me the reply to my question in his newspaper, which I shall hasten to send you soon.— Believe me, Sir, yours faithfully. | Dr J. Herschel DAR 166: 190, DAR 181: 102 1 2 3

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 574–5; the enclosure was written in English. Herschel’s interest in the deaths of Brazilian monkeys from yellow fever may relate to CD’s claim in Descent 1: 11–12 that humans and animals are liable to the same diseases. Herschel’s correspondent has not been identified.

From Paolo Mantegazza1 23 December 1872 Florence 23 December 1872. Renowned friend. Oh, let me call you my friend, although I don’t have the right to do so.— I esteem, venerate and love you. May nature preserve you for a century, for science and your admirers! You ought to live at least as long as Fontenelle and longer still: you are worthy of it, a thousand times worthy.2 Your latest work has overjoyed me;3 you have made a new science out of physiognomy: up to now it has been an alchemy with Lavater as its founder, you are its Lavoisier;—4 I shall be discussing it at length in our first Revue, and I shall send you a copy in a few days.5 I know that an Italian translation is being made, 6 and if there were no translators, I would have been your translator myself. Some days ago now, I posted you two pamphlets on pain, in which you will find my observations on the respiratory expression of pain,7 which accord perfectly with what you say in your admirable work, which has all the freshness of a man of twenty.— I have just written to my editor to send you a copy of my Physiology of pleasure, which has run to five editions, the last in stereotype. It is a work of psychological observation which is very imperfect, since I wrote it at the age of 22, but in every chapter you will find a description of the physiognomy of all the physical and moral pleasures. 8 For a long time I have been busy with a work on the physiognomy of pain and I ask your permission to dedicate it to you.—9 Here are some observations that I have made during my travels in America10 and in my laboratory. 1) In Paraguay I saw Mycetes carayá11 twice void its bowels from terror after being shot. This is what gives rise to the myth that some monkeys throw their excrement onto travellers. 2) I am very persuaded that during the most intense physical pain man closes his mouth and holds his breath, since by producing a slight degree of asphyxia, general sensibility is diminished and suffering is assuaged.— 12 3) Injuries to self-esteem, when they cannot be exhibited externally, oblige man to an absolute immobility of the facial muscles, and one swallows saliva, exactly as

Translations

647

when tasting very bitter substances. The physiognomy of a man with aloes in his mouth, as captured by photography, is identical to the expression that a man takes on involuntarily when he is humiliated. I have found other striking analogies between physical pain and pain of a higher order, as you will see in my album of photographs taken from nature.—13 Love me a little, in return for the deep affection I have for you and the great veneration your genius inspires in me. Yours | Most sincerely | Mantegazza The study of languages demonstrates that my theory of the expression of injuries to self-esteem is right. In Spanish, Italian and French one says trajar, ingoiare and avaler to express the humiliation which follows an offence. 14 DAR 171: 39 CD note: Dedication Translation [ Pain Horror] & [illeg] letter pleased me greatly Very interesting letter got your pamphlets posted I had no idea that you had attended to subject— but clearly [ case] as our minds agree so closely I am the more pleased, as I feel that I am growing old & all letters are fatigue to me. 15 1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 584–5. Bernard le Bouvier de Fontenelle, the French writer, died a month before his hundredth birthday. Mantegazza’s name is on CD’s presentation list for Expression (see Appendix V). Mantegazza implies that Johann Kaspar Lavater’s work on physiognomy (Lavater [1781]–1803) bore the same relation to Expression as alchemy did to chemistry. Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier was considered to be the founder of modern chemistry. A lightly annotated copy of Mantegazza’s review of Expression in the December 1872 issue of Nuova Antologia (Mantegazza 1872b) is in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. CD had received a request from two men for an Italian translation of Expression (see letter to John Murray, 11 November 1872 and n. 8). Mantegazza 1866 and 1867b. There are annotated copies of these articles in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL. Mantegazza’s work on the physiology of pleasure (Fisiologia del piacere) was first published in 1854 (Mantegazza 1854). There is a lightly annotated copy of the fifth edition (Mantegazza 1870b) in the Darwin Library–CUL (see Marginalia 1: 563). Mantegazza’s publisher was Giuseppe Bernardoni, who has not been further identified. Mantegazza’s work on the physiology of pain (Fisiologia del dolore) was not published until 1880 (Mantegazza 1880). The book was dedicated to Tullo Massarani. Mantegazza had published an account of his travels in South America in Mantegazza 1867a. Mycetes caraya, the black howler monkey, is now known as Alouatta caraya. In Expression, p. 146, CD had mentioned that monkey sometimes voided their excretions from fear. In Expression, pp. 69–70, CD had stated that humans in agony compressed their lips and might hold their breath. Mantegazza’s Atlante della espressioni del dolore (Mantegazza 1876) is an atlas of photographs showing expressions of pain. The words mean ‘to swallow’, as in the English saying ‘to swallow an insult’. CD’s note is for the letter to Paolo Mantegazza, 28 December 1872.

648

Translations

From F. C. Donders1 24 December 1872 Utrecht, 24 December | 1872. My dear Mister Darwin, After receiving your letter of December 21st, I do not want to put off thanking you for sending your book “on the Expression of the emotions”.— 2 and above all for the unique honour you have done me in mentioning, in a manner too flattering to me, the humble services I was able to render you.3 For my part, allow me to repeat that I can only be grateful to you for suggesting the interesting questions you were so good as to submit for my examination. I freely avow, that I had not grasped your book’s full scope before entering into its spirit. What a fine complement it makes to that long succession of studies which the world has followed with ever-growing interest! With regard to the questions you do me the honour of sending in your letter, I shall pay attention to the facts that bear upon them: above all, it will be a matter of observing young children blind from birth, as and when they may present themselves for our consultation.4 Perhaps Mr Bowman will have the opportunity to do so even more often than I.5 As for the observation of older persons, an opportunity will present itself in the form of the Institutes for the blind. At Amsterdam there is such an Institute,6 and I shall not neglect to visit it as soon as I have the time. With regard to young children, who are not admitted to the Institute, it will be necessary to wait for cases. So I cannot promise you a quick reply. I hope that you and yours find themselves well. Yours most affectionately | Donders DAR 162: 234 1 2 3 4 5 6

For a transcription of this letter in its original French, see pp. 588–9. Letter to F. C. Donders, 21 December 1872. CD had acknowledged his indebtedness to Donders’s research and kindness in Expression, pp. 160 and 229–330. CD had asked whether those born blind contracted the muscles around the eye when screaming, or frowned (see letter to F. C. Donders, 21 December 1872). William Bowman was an ophthalmic surgeon at the Royal Ophthalmic Hospital in Moorfields, London. See letter to F. C. Donders, 21 December 1872, n. 3. The Instituut tot Onderwijs van Blinden was founded in 1808 in Amsterdam (Grote Winkler Prins, s.v. Blindenverzorging).

From F. J. Wedgwood1 [1867–72]2

[Enclosure] (—Charma3 was summoned in 1831 to the vacant chair of Philosophy at Caen, a dignity which entailed the preparation of 2 theses before the position could be regularly taken. The 2nd of these was his Essai sur le Langage, which was published

Translations

649

at once, & the 1st. edition being soon exhausted a 2nd., much revised, was issued in 1846, from which my Extracts are taken.4 It is a work of much interest & thought, but hardly touches the problem of Language) “In the invention of language as in all things nature gives us the example and works before us. But the signs that we owe to her keep eternally their original characters: that the almost stationary races so arrange it, good for them! Essentially progressive, our species soon felt the insufficiency. New modes of expression were required; they were. Man then, to render such thoughts as the primitive symbols could not translate, transformed them and in transforming appropriated the signs that nature had provided. This subsequent language, the son of humanity, not by adoption only, but by a true generation, the result of industry or art, is artificial language. The artificial language therefore makes use of the primitive symbols, modifying them to accommodate new needs of thought. (The following note on this passage contains the explanation of nodding & of shaking the head.) I surprised at birth in the very moment of their formation some of these signs. We nod the head forwards and vertically to say yes, horizontally and to the left to say no. Observe the infant falling eagerly upon a food that he likes; he carries his mouth forward to seize the object that he covets; but his feeble head, strongly agitated, and unable to withstand its own shaking, falls to rise at once, rises to fall again, wobbles stretching always towards the object, and consequently up and down. This sign says I want, this sign says Yes. When a food, on the other hand, that the child doesn’t like is offered to him, what happens? He pulls aside his mouth as if he is turning his head from right to left, or from left to right; here is the no in principle and in its origin. DAR 195.1: 52 1 2

3 4

For a transcription of this enclosure in its original French, and the letter with which it was enclosed, see pp. 595–6. The first and fourth paragraphs were in English. The date range is established from the fact that the content of the letter relates to CD’s work on expression (see n. 4, below). CD was working on expression with a view to publishing between 1867 and 1872. Antoine Charma. CD cited Charma 1846 on the origin of nodding and shaking the head in Expression, p. 273 and n. 17, thanking ‘Miss Wedgwood’ for having given him the information. The extract is from Charma 1846, p. 23, and pp. 187–8 n. 14. Wedgwood makes a number of omissions.

APPENDIX II Chronology 1872

This appendix contains a transcription of Darwin’s ‘Journal’ for the year 1872. Darwin commenced his ‘Journal’ in August 1838 and continued to maintain it until December 1881. In this small notebook, measuring 3 inches by 4 21 inches, Darwin recorded the periods he was away from home, the progress and publication of his work, and important events in his family life. The version published by Sir Gavin de Beer as ‘Darwin’s Journal’ (de Beer ed. 1959) was edited before the original ‘Journal’ had been found and relied upon a transcription made by an unknown copyist. The original, now in the Darwin Archive in Cambridge University Library (DAR 158), reveals that the copyist did not clearly distinguish between the various types of entries it contains, and that the transcription made was incomplete. From 1845 onward, Darwin recorded all that pertained to his work (including his illnesses, since these accounted for time lost from work) on the left-hand pages of the ‘Journal’, while the periods he was away from home, and family events, were noted on the right-hand pages. In order to show clearly Darwin’s deliberate separation of the types of entries he made in his ‘Journal’, the transcription has the left- and right-hand pages labelled. All alterations, interlineations, additions, and the use of a different ink or pencil have been noted. In addition, the editors have inserted additional information relevant to Darwin’s correspondence throughout this transcription of the ‘Journal’ for 1872. These interpolations are enclosed in square brackets to distinguish them from Darwin’s own entries, the source of the information being given in the footnotes.

[Left] 1872 Jan 10th. finished Proofs of Origin, & again rewriting Expression.— 1 [Origin 6th ed. published February 1872.]2 Aug 22 Finished last proofs of Expression, which I began on Jan. 17 last year— Has taken me about 12 months.3 Aug. 23d Began working at Drosera

Chronology

651

[Binding of Expression began in October.]4 Nov. 3d — Began writing on do5 Nov. 8th at Murray’s sale 5267 copies of Expression Book sold to London Booksellers. 6 The edition consists of 7000, published November, 2000 at end of year additional.— 7 [Expression published 26 November 1872.]8 [Right] 1872 [3–5? February. Joseph Dalton Hooker visited.] 9 Feb. 16 to March 21. London 9 Devonshire St. Portland Place (5 weeks) [1 March. Visited David Forbes]10 [19 March. William Winwood Reade visited.]11 [17 April. Friend Lewin and Henry Maudsley visited.]12 [Before 3 May. Amy Ruck and Francis Darwin engaged.] 13 [19 May. Thomas and Alice Gertrude Woolner and Samuel Butler visited.] 14 [Before 20 May. Richard Francis Burton had lunch with CD.] 15 [ June. Thomas Wentworth Higginson dined; Charles Leslie Sutherland visited.] 16 [6 June. Edward Burnett Tylor visited.] 17 June 8th to 20. Southampton.18 [11 July. Charles Loring and Letitia Brace visited.] 19 [2 August. John Thomas Gulick visited.]20 Augt. 13th to 21. Leith Hill Place.21 [29 August. Ellen Frances Lubbock and Karl Gottfried Semper visited.] 22 [4 September. Chauncey Wright visited.]23 [7–11 September. Joseph Dalton and Frances Harriet Hooker visited.] 24 [22 September. Vladimir Onufrievich Kovalevsky visited.] 25 [1 October. Hubert Airy visited.]26 Oct 5–26. Sevenoaks common. Dec. 17 to 23 Erasmus (Unwell all time)27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

CD refers to Origin 6th ed. and Expression. See letter from John Murray, 2 February [1872], and Freeman 1977. ‘months’ above del ‘weeks’. CD refers to Expression. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 22 October 1872. CD’s experiments on Drosera were published in 1875 in Insectivorous plants. See letter from John Murray, 9 November 1872. See letter from R. F. Cooke, 6 December 1872. Freeman 1977. Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242); letter from J. D. Hooker, [5 February 1872?]. See letter from David Forbes, 1 March 1872. See letter from W. W. Reade, 18 March [1872]. Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242). See letter to G. H. Darwin, 3 May [1872].

652 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Chronology

Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242). See letter from W. W. Reade, 20 May 1872. See letter to F. E. Abbot, 2 July 1872, letters from C. L. Sutherland, [9–19 June 1872] and 12 September 1872. Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) and letter from Alfred Tylor, 8 June 1872. The Darwins went to stay with their son William Erasmus Darwin. Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242) and letter to Asa Gray, 8 July [1872]. Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242). Leith Hill Place in Surrey was the home of Josiah Wedgwood III and Caroline Sarah Wedgwood. Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242). Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242). Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242). Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242). Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242). CD’s brother, Erasmus Alvey Darwin, lived at 6 Queen Anne Street, London. According to Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242), the Darwins stayed in London until 22 December.

APPENDIX III Diplomas presented to Charles Darwin

In 1872, Darwin received the following diplomas. Although not letters in the conventional sense, diplomas represent significant communication between Darwin and scientific organisations, and the citations in such diplomas often provide valuable indications of those aspects of Darwin’s work that were considered worthy of honour. In view of this, they have been included here.

From Società Italiana di Antropologia e di Etnologia 21 January 1872

Società Italiana di Antropologia e di Etnologia Fondata nel 1871. La Società Italiana di Antropologia e di Etnologia nella sua seduta del 20 Gennajo 1872 ha eletto il Signor Carlo Darwin Socio Onorario e glie ne trasmette il diploma Firenze, li 21 Gennajo 1872 Il Vicepresidente Il Presidente Il Segretario I Cocchi Mantegazza A: Zannetti1

[Translation] Società Italiana di Antropologia e di Etnologia Founded in 1871. The Società Italiana di Antropologia e di Etnologia in its session of 20 January 1872 has elected Mr Charles Darwin an Honorary Fellow and sends him this diploma Florence, 21 January 1872 The Vice-President The President The Secretary I Cocchi Mantegazza A: Zanetti DAR 229: 30

654 1

Diplomas

Igino Cocchi, Paolo Mantegazza, and Arturo Zannetti.

From the New Zealand Institute 16 March 1872

New Zealand Institute. Whereas by the Statutes of the New Zealand Institute, established under the provisions of “The New Zealand Institute Act, 1867,” of the General Assembly of New Zealand, for the promotion of Science, Arts, and Literature, provision is made for the Election of Honorary Members by the Board of Governors from persons who shall have been nominated for such honorary membership by the Societies incorporated under the Act: This is to certify That Charles Darwin Esqre. F.R.S. &c.— &c.— &c was on the 28th. day of February 1872 duly elected, in accordance with the provisions of the said Statutes, to be an Honorary Member of the New Zealand Institute, in recognition of the services he has rendered to the Geology and Natural History of the Pacific area, by his theory of the formation of coral islands and barrier reefs.— Given this 16th. day of March in the year 1872 G. F. Bowen President.1 James Hector Manager. Seal of the New Zealand Institute. | 1867 DAR 229: 31 1

George Ferguson Bowen.

From the Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien 9 April 1872

Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien. Die anthropologische Gesellschaft hat Herrn Charles Darwin auf Grundlage des Paragrafes 8. ihrer Statuten in der Sitzung vom 13. Februar 1872 zum Ehren Mitgliede gemählt. Wien, am 9. April 1872

Diplomas

655

der Secretär der Praesident. S. Wahrmann Rokitansky1 Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien. [Translation] Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien. The Anthropological Society, in accordance with paragraph 8. of its statutes, has elected Mr Charles Darwin as honorary member at its meeting of 13 February 1872. Vienna, 9 April 1872 The Secretary The President. S. Wahrmann Rokitansky Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien. DAR 230: 32 1

Sigmund Wahrmann and Karl Freiherr von Rokitansky.

From Magyar Tudományos Akademia 10 June 1871

Az Ö Császári és Apostoli Királyi Felsége Emelésére Alapított Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Darwin Károly baronet Urat 1872-iki május 24-én külsö taggá Válaszotta, s ezen oklevél erejével társának ismeri. Pest, 1872 junius 10-én. Arany János Lónyay Menyhért fötitkár elnök [Translation] The Hungarian Academy of Sciences, standing under the special protection of His Imperial and Royal Apostolic Majesty, founded for the cultivation and dissemination of science and for the

656

Diplomas

elevation of the Hungarian language, elected Sir Charles Darwin as its external member on 24th May 1872, and by the power of this diploma recognises him as such. Pest, 10th June 1872. Arany János Lónyay Menyhért general secretary president DAR 229: 33

APPENDIX IV Presentation lists for Origin 6th ed. ‘There will hereafter be no further alterations in the “Origin”. . . ’ (letter to John Murray, 30 January 1872) Darwin first proposed a cheap, popular edition of Origin in April 1871, and publication was originally planned for November of that year (Correspondence vol. 19, letter to R. F. Cooke, 22 April [1871], and letter from R. F. Cooke, 26 April 1871. He began revising the text on 18 June 1871, but its appearance was delayed both by two months’ illness on Darwin’s part, and by the substantial changes he made to the text; it was finally published in February 1872, with the beginning of the title amended from ‘On the origin of species’ to ‘The origin of species’. It is the first edition in which the word ‘evolution’ appears. (Freeman 1977, p. 79; Correspondence vol. 19, Appendix II, and this volume, CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II).) In addition to a glossary of scientific terms commissioned from the indexer, William Sweetland Dallas, the volume included a new chapter, ‘Miscellaneous objections to the theory of natural selection’, which brought together material that had been in several different places in earlier editions with much new content (Origin 6th ed., pp. 168–204; see Correspondence vol. 19, letter to John Murray, 6 October [1871], and letter to R. F. Cooke, 13 October [1871]). The changes were made largely in response to criticisms levelled by the Catholic zoologist St George Jackson Mivart, to whom Darwin promised a copy and whose name is included in the presentation list, although it had once been deleted (letter to St G. J. Mivart, 11 January [1872]; see n. 3, below). The first pages of the manuscript were sent to the printers, Messrs Clowes, before 13 October 1871, and the last ones on 29 October. Darwin and his son William finished correcting page-proofs on 10 January 1872, and finished correcting the index on 27 January (CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II); letter to John Murray, 27 January [1872]). The volume was printed in smaller type than previous editions, and was priced at 7s. 6d., which, although substantially cheaper than the two-volume Descent, published the previous year at £1. 4s., was still more expensive than Darwin had hoped (letter to John Murray, 8 January [1872]). The print run was 3000. CD agreed with the publisher, John Murray, that the edition would be stereotyped to make further English-language printings cheaper (Correspondence vol. 19, letter to R. F. Cooke, 30 October 1871); Murray reprinted twice, once in 1872 and again in 1873. (Freeman 1977, pp. 79 and 129.) CD also asked that the New York publisher, Appleton’s,

658

Presentation lists for Origin 6th ed.

be supplied with cheap stereotype plates to encourage them to bring out a new US edition, which they did later in 1872 (letter to John Murray, 30 January 1872). A French translation of the fifth English edition had still not been printed, having been interrupted by the Franco-Prussian war in 1870. The translator, Jean Jacques Moulinié, was asked to incorporate the new material from the sixth English edition, but he was suffering from a terminal illness, and it remained unpublished at the end of the year (letter to J. J. Moulinié, 23 September 1872, and letter from C.-F. Reinwald, 23 November 1872). A German translation was published in 1872 (Bronn and Carus trans. 1872). The two versions of the short presentation list for the sixth English edition of Origin contain principally the names of long-term scientific colleagues, together with some more recent supporters. Biographical details of each recipient may be found in the Biographical register in this volume. Pres. Copies of 6th Edit of Origin  Alexander Agassiz  Chauncey Wright  Winwood Reade 11. St. Mary Abbot Terrace | Kensington1  Wallace2  William Darwin3  Huxley4  Lyell5  E. Ray Lankester—6  O. Salvin7  Flower—  Busk;  Günther8  Prof. Mantegazza Florence9  Pryor of Cambridge10  Dr Lawson11  A. W. Bennet 6. Park Village East | Regents Park. N.W.12  Dr. Theo. Gill. Smithsonian Institution | Washington (promised) 13  Dr Bastian F.R.S.?14  Prof. Phillips Oxford (has given me several books)15  Lowne16  Prof Turner17  Mivart 7 N. Bart. R. P. (promised)18  Prof. Cope.19  Victor Carus20  Dallas21  Hackel22 Bates23  Royal. Soc.24 The 6th & last Edit of Origin Feb 1872 Alexander Agassiz Esq. Harvard U. Cambridge. | Mass. U. States Chauncey Wright Esq do.

Presentation lists for Origin 6th ed.

659

Dr. Theo. Gill Smithsonian Institution | Washington. U.S. Prof. Cope, Academy of Sciences, Philadelphia | U.S. | with the most sincere respect of the Author25 Prof. Victor Carus. 33 Windmuhlenstrasse. Leipzig | Saxony. W. E. Darwin Esq A. R. Wallace Esq Holly House. Barking Prof. Mantegazza. Florence Italy Pryor  Prof. Phillips Oxford Prof. W. Turner, The University, Edinburgh. Prof. Hackel. Jena— Saxe Weimar. Dr Ant Dohrn do do26 14 Dr H. Johnson— Shrewsbury (sent) (6d )27 15 self. 16 Paget 17 Geikie 18. R. Trimen C. of Good Hope28 DAR 210.11: 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

12 13

14 15

16 17 18 19 20

William Winwood Reade. Below ‘Asa Gray?’ deleted. Alfred Russel Wallace. Below ‘Mivart’, deleted. Added pencil. Thomas Henry Huxley. Charles Lyell. Below ‘Hooker’ added and deleted, pencil; Joseph Dalton Hooker. ‘O.’ interlined. William Henry Flower, George Busk, and Albert Günther. Paolo Mantegazza. Marlborough Robert Pryor. Before ‘Pls send with a note on account of Remarks’, deleted. Henry Lawson was the editor of Popular Science Review, which published a favourable review of Origin 6th ed. in January 1872 (Popular Science Review 11: 179–80). Below ‘T. Davidson, 8 Denmark Terrace, Brighton.’ deleted, and ‘Rev d T. R. Stebbing, Tot Crest Hall, Torquay’, deleted. ‘(promised)’ added. Gill had sent CD a number of his publications (see Correspondence vol. 19, letter from T. N. Gill, 6 October 1871). He had been librarian of the Smithsonian Institution; the library was transferred to the Library of Congress in 1866, but Gill continued to be in charge of it (ANB.) Henry Charlton Bastian. John Phillips. There are two books by Phillips in the Darwin Library–Down (Vesuvius (Phillips 1869); Geology of Oxford and the valley of the Thames (Phillips 1871)) and another two in Darwin Library–CUL (Treatise on geology (Phillips 1837–9), Life on earth, its origins and succession (Phillips 1860)). See also Correspondence vol. 17, letter to John Phillips, 27 January 1869, and Correspondence vol. 19, letter to John Phillips, [November–December 1871]. Benjamin Thompson Lowne’s name is in pencil. William Turner’s name is in pencil. St George Jackson Mivart’s name is in pencil. See letter to St G. J. Mivart, 11 January [1872]. Edward Drinker Cope. Julius Victor Carus, after ‘Bowman?’, deleted (CD referred to William Bowman).

660 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Presentation lists for Origin 6th ed.

William Sweetland Dallas. Ernst Haeckel. Henry Walter Bates. Royal Society of London. ‘with . . . Author’, added, pencil. Anton Dohrn’s name is added in pencil, above ‘11 [altered from ‘10’] & self. 13 [altered from ‘12’] copies for self to Orpington’, deleted. ‘Dr . . . (sent)’ pencil. ‘16 . . . Hope’ is in pencil.

APPENDIX V Presentation lists for Expression

‘your Book is one of the most attractive dishes in my Literary Banquet—’ (letter from John Murray, 6 November [1872]) Darwin opened his first notebook on expression, marked ‘Private’, in 1838, and kept another with detailed observations of his children from the birth of his first son, William, in 1839. He originally intended to include a chapter on human descent, which would have incorporated some of these observations, in Variation under domestication, but by the time Variation went to press in 1866, he had amassed too much material and held it back for separate publication. In 1867, while working on Descent, he drew up a series of questions about human expression which he circulated first as a handwritten list, and then, from late 1867 or early 1868, as a printed questionnaire (Correspondence vol. 19, Appendix VII; see also this volume, supplement). Descent was published in February 1871, but again Darwin had too much material, and by mid1870 had decided to publish a separate ‘essay’ on the expression of emotion in both humans and animals (Correspondence vol. 18, letter to James Crichton-Browne, 8 June [1870]). Darwin began writing Expression on 17 January 1871, and finished the first draft of the manuscript on 27 April. Work was suspended to allow him to concentrate on the sixth edition of Origin, but resumed immediately he finished correcting the proofs of that on 10 January 1872. A revised manuscript of Expression was sent to the printers in June; Darwin and his daughter, Henrietta Emma Litchfield, finished revising and correcting the proofs on 22 August, binding began in October, and it was published on 26 November 1872. In addition to a number of engravings, the volume contained seven plates with photographs reproduced using a new process of heliotyping. (Freeman 1977; Correspondence vol. 19, Appendix II; CD’s ‘Journal’ (Appendix II); see also the introduction to this volume.) Darwin recorded in his ‘Journal’ that 5267 copies of Expression were bought at the trade sale on 8 November; the initial print run of 7000 quickly sold out, and the publisher, John Murray, printed an additional 2000, giving Darwin little opportunity for revisions. No further edition was published in his lifetime, but material from his notes and correspondence was incorporated into the second edition published by his son Francis in 1890.

662

Presentation lists for Expression

A German translation by Julius Victor Carus was published almost immediately (Carus trans 1872). Arrangements for a French translation were hampered by the death of Darwin’s previous translator, Jean Jacques Moulinié; a translation by Samuel Pozzi and René Benoît was published in 1874. The list of presentation copies includes the names of the unusually large number of people who contributed information and observations used in Expression; it also includes the names of many family members and friends, reflecting Darwin’s belief that the book had wider popular appeal than his previous publications. Biographical details of each recipient may be found in the Biographical register in this volume. Book on Expression.— 1 (1) E. Darwin 6 Queen Anne St. (W.)2 2. George Darwin 14 Arlington St do 3. Francis Darwin do. do 4 Leonard Darwin Esq R.E. Brompton Barracks Chatham 5 Horace Darwin Esq Trinity College Cambridge 6 W. E. Darwin Esq Bassett, Southampton 7 Mrs. Litchfield 2. Bryanston St. Portman Squ.—3 (8) T. W. Wood Esq 221. Stanhope St Hampstead Road4 (9) J. Wood Esq 68.5 Wimpole St  (10) Dr. Maudsley6 9. Hanover Sqr.— (11) Lady Bell 47 Albany St Regents Park 7 (12) Mrs. Cameron Freshwater Isle of Wight8 (13) H. Wedgwood Esq. 1. Cumberland Place Regents Park9 (14) Mrs. Wedgwood Leith Hill Place Dorking10 (15) A. R. Wallace Esq The Dell, Grays, Essex (16) Winwood Reade Esq 15 Alfred Place Bedford Sqr (17) E. B. Tylor Esq Lindon, Wellington, Somersetshire (18) Dr. De Chaumont Netley Hospital, near Southampton11 (19) Dr Langstaff Southampton12 (20) B. Riviere Esq 16. Addison Rd. Kensington (21) O. G. Rejlander Esq 1 Albert Mansions Victoria St. (22) A. D. Bartlett Esq Zoological Gardens Regents Park (23) S. Butler Esq 15 Clifford Inn Fleet St. (24) A. May Esq care of S. Butler Esq. do do do (25) Revd. R. H. Blair College for the Blind, Worcester13 (26) Sir J. Paget. Bart. Harewood Place— Hanover Sqr (27) P. L. Sclater Esq. F.R.S. Zoolog. Soc. Hanover Sqr (28) Dr. W. Ogle St. George’s Hospital London (29) Dr J. Crichton Browne, West Riding Asylum, Wakefield (30) Professor W. Turner, The University, Edinburgh. (31) The Royal Soc. Burlington House14 (32) Sir C. Lyell. Bart. 72. Harley S.

Presentation lists for Expression

663

33 Sir H. Holland Bart 72.15 Brook St  34 Dr Hooker Kew16 35 Prof. Huxley Museum of Geology, Jermyn St17 36. W. H. Bates, R. Geograph. Soc. Saville Row18  37 Dr. A. H. Garrod 11. Harley St 38 Dr. Bence Jones 84. Brook St19  39 Dr Michael Foster Trinity College Cambridge (40) H. Jackson Esq do. do. (41) Dr. Scott Deaf & Dumb Institution. Exeter20 (42) Dr Bastian 20 Queen Anne St.21 (43) Dr H. Johnson Shrewsbury (44) G. Harris Esq Oeslipps Manor, Northolt, Southall London (W.) 22 (45) Mrs Cupples The Cottage, Guard Bridge, Fifeshire23 (46) Rev W. Darwin Fox, Broadlands, Sandown Isle of Wight. (47) The Anthropological Institute (48) Herbert Spencer Esq , Athenæum Club. Pall Mall (49) W. Bowman Esq 5. Clifford St. W (50) F. Galton Esq F.R.S. 42 Rutland Gate S.W (51) Dr. Günther British Museum, London24 (52) Sir J. Lubbock, Bart. Lombard St (53) Dr. Wallich 2 Warwick Gardens, Kensington25 (54) J. Jenner Weir Esq. 6 Haddo Villas Blackheath (55) Dr Patrick Nicol Sussex Lunatic Asylum, Haywards Heath Book on Expression (to be sent to Down) (1) self (2) Bessy26 (3) E. Wilson Esq. Hayes Place (4)  J. Scott Esqr. R. Botanic Garden Calcutta India viâ Southampton27 (5)  Dr G. B. Duchenne, care of M. Renouard. 6 Rue Tournon Paris 28  (6)  Mrs Asa Gray Cambridge Mass. U. States29 (7)  R. Swinhoe Esq H.B.M. Consul Ningpo China 30 (8)  F. F. Geach Esr Guildford Surrey31 (9)  Rev S. O. Glenie Ceylon viâ Ceylon (10)  Dr Rothrock care of Prof. Asa Gray Cambridge Mass. U. States 32 (11)  Mrs. Barber The Highlands Graham’s Town, Cape of Good Hope. 33 (12)  Herr A Kindermann Hamburgh.34 (13)  Prof. Virchow Berlin35 (14)  Fritz Muller Rio Itajahy. St Catherina, Brazil (15)  Mrs Haliburton Bridge House Richmond, Surrey36 (16)  (Dr R. Sundström, Dagbladets Redaction, Stockholm, Sweden—37 viâ Denmark (17)  Prof. Dana, Yale College, New Haven U. States38

664

Presentation lists for Expression

(18)  C. L. Brace Esq 19 East 4th Street New York. do. (19)  M. A. de Quatrefages Academy of Sciences Paris39 (20)  Dr. Anton Dohrn, Jena, Saxe Weimar40 (21)  Prof. E. Häckel Jena Saxe Weimar (22)  Prof Victor Carus Leipzig Saxony (23)  Prof C. L. Houzeau Hyon (Mons) Belgium41 (24)  Dr Büchner, Darmstadt Germany42 (25)  Prof. Gaudry Paris43 (26)  Dr. Donders Utrecht Holland44 (27)  Rev J. W. Stack, New Zealand (28)  Dr F. von Müller, Government Botanist Victoria, Australia 45 (29)  Alexander Agassiz Cambridge Mass. U. States (30)  Camilla Ludwig (31) Prof. Mantegazza Florence46 32 Miss Ruck47 33 Cooper— Engraver.48 (34) Mr Norman49 35 Michelet.50 36 Dr Spengel.51 37 J. M. Herbert. 38 Forsyth Major52 39 Miss Cobbe53 40 [illeg] 41 A. De Candolle54 42 Dr Juke55 DAR 210.11: 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Expression. Erasmus Alvey Darwin. Henrietta Emma Litchfield. This entry is written below an interlined and deleted entry in the hand of an amanuensis for ‘Miss D— Down’; Elizabeth Darwin’s name appears as the second entry in the list of copies to be sent to Down. ‘68.’ added in pencil. Henry Maudsley, after ‘A. May Esq’, deleted. Marion Bell. The address is added in pencil. Julia Margaret Cameron. Hensleigh Wedgwood. Caroline Sarah Wedgwood. Francis Stephen Bennet François de Chaumont. Charles Langstaff. Robert Hugh Blair, after ‘R. Swinhoe E sq ’, deleted. The Royal Society moved from Somerset House to Burlington House in 1873 (D. C. Martin 1967, p. 17–18). ‘72.’ added in pencil. Joseph Dalton Hooker. Thomas Henry Huxley. ‘Museum’ after ‘26’, deleted.

Presentation lists for Expression 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

665

Henry Walter Bates. ‘Saville Row’ added in pencil. Henry Bence Jones. ‘84.’ added in pencil. William Robson Scott was the principal of the West of England Institution for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb, 1841–77 (Branson and Miller 2002, p. 158). Henry Charlton Bastian. ‘London (W.)’ interlined. Harris lived at Iselipps Manor. Anne Jane Cupples. Albert Günther. George Charles Wallich. ‘2 Warwick Gardens, Kensington’ was added in pencil; ‘Kensington’ after ‘Kensington’, deleted. Elizabeth Darwin. ‘viâ Southampton’ interlined. ‘G. B.’ interlined; ‘Tournon’ after ‘de’, deleted. Veuve Jules Renouard was Duchenne’s publisher. Jane Loring Gray. ‘R. Swinhoe’ after ‘Swinhoe Esqr ’, deleted. Frederick F. Geach. Joseph Trimble Rothrock. Mary Elizabeth Barber. ‘A’ interlined. Rudolf Carl Virchow. Sarah Harriet Haliburton. ‘Dr . . . Sweden’ is written on a separate piece of paper and glued in place; ‘(Forward)’ deleted after ‘Sweden’. James Dwight Dana. This entry below ‘(19) Dr Mich’, deleted. ‘Dohrn’ above ‘Dorhn’, deleted; ‘Jena, Saxe Weimar’ above ‘Palazzo Torlonia, Mergellina Naples’, deleted. Auguste Houzeau de Lehaie. Ludwig Büchner. Albert Gaudry. Frans Cornelis Donders. Ferdinand von Mueller. Paolo Mantegazza. Amy Ruck. James Davis Cooper. CD probably refers to George Warde Norman. CD probably refers to Athénaïs Michelet. Wilhelm Spengel. Charles Immanuel Forsyth Major. Frances Power Cobbe. Alphonse de Candolle. Joseph Beete Jukes.

MANUSCRIPT ALTERATIONS AND COMMENTS

The alteration notes and comments are keyed to the letter texts by paragraph and line numbers. The precise section of the letter text to which the note applies precedes the square bracket. The changes recorded are those made to the manuscript by CD; changes of hand in letters written partly by CD and partly by amanuenses are also recorded. Readers should consult the Note on editorial policy in the front matter for details of editorial practice and intent. The following terms are used in the notes as here defined: del illeg interl omitted over

deleted illegible interlined, i.e., inserted between existing text lines omitted by the editors to clarify the transcription written over, i.e., superimposed

To W. E. Darwin 3 January [1872] 2.1 base is] ‘is’ over del ‘—’ 2.3 under the] ‘the’ interl To L. C. Wedgwood 5 January [1872] 1.2 straight] interl 1.3 surface at nearly] ‘nearly’ interl 1.3 or at nearly] ‘nearly’ interl 2.1 On] ‘O’ over ‘o’ 2.2 It wd ] ‘It’ over ‘it’ 2.3 probe] after del ‘probt’ To Francis Darwin 6 January 1872 1.5 in thickness of the slope] interl in CD’s hand 2.1 & . . . enclosed] interl in CD’s hand To St G. J. Mivart 8 January [1872] 1.3 If I had] ‘I’ after del ‘ha’ To John Murray 8 January [1872] 1.1 immediate] interl 3.1 Mr . . . Glossary.—] added in margin To W. E. Darwin 9 January [1872] 2.1 your] over ‘the’

To St G. J. Mivart 11 January [1872] 1.5 quite] interl 1.6 on me,] interl 1.9 & his . . . useful:] added above ‘but none of their writings have’ 1.10 me] interl 2.3 of] interl 2.7 declared] after del ‘how much’ 2.8 un-explained.] ‘un-’ interl 2.8 Under . . . extent 2.9] interl 2.10 written as you] after del illeg 2.12 should] over ‘shall’ 5.3 so] interl 5.5 to some] ‘some’ interl To C. H. Morris 16 January [1872] 1.2 to you] interl To W. W. Baxter? 17 January [1872–4] 1.3 roughly graduated] interl above del ‘marked’ 2.1 or 8] interl To J. W. Dawson 19 January 1872 2.1 & obliged] in CD’s hand

Manuscript alterations and comments To L. C. Wedgwood 21 January [1872] 1.3 to surface;] interl 1.6 ; or to . . . no old furrows. 1.7] added 5.1 the late] interl 5.1 subsided] interl 5.2 to leeward,] interl; comma over colon 5.2 grass-] interl 5.2 the recent castings] interl 6.1 on] above del ‘near’ To W. E. Darwin 23 January [1872] 2.1 the fine] interl 2.2 everywhere] above del ‘always’ To Francis Galton 23 January [1872] 2.1 soon] interl To Raphael Meldola 23 January [1872] 1.5 the . . . of] interl in CD’s hand 1.11 partly] interl in CD’s hand 2.1 well] added in CD’s hand 3.1 several] interl in CD’s hand To B. J. Sulivan 24 January 1872 2.1 & . . . it,] interl in CD’s hand 5.1 I . . . overworked.] in CD’s hand To William Bowman 25 January 1872 6.9 of the eye] interl in CD’s hand 6.9 distended] interl in CD’s hand above del ‘the’ 6.17 I suppose] interl in CD’s hand 7.1 I was . . . lacrymation— 9.4] in CD’s hand To J. D. Hooker 25 January [1872] 1.3 cd .] ‘c’ over ‘w’ 3.2 in] interl To John Murray 30 January 1872 4.1 As the whole . . . plates.— 4.2] in CD’s hand

To W. E. Darwin 23 [February 1872 – October 1874] 2.1 the rule] ‘the’ interl 2.1 keep to] ‘to’ interl To Amy Ruck 24 February [1872] 6.1 If . . . ledges.— 6.3] in CD’s hand 6.2 the little] after del ‘each’ To G. C. Wallich 24 February [1872] 2.2 to above address] interl 3.1 Was] after del ‘Di’ To T. C. Eyton 4 March [1872] 2.5 now] interl To John Murray [9 March 1872 or later] 1.2 a cheque] ‘a’ interl 2.2 now] interl To John Lubbock [after 21 March 1872] 1.1 called] before del interl ‘here’ 1.2 wishes] over ‘wished’ 1.5 & others] interl pencil 1.5 which I . . . signed] above del ‘with signatures’ 1.5 may . . . faculty] pencil over del ‘is to be sent to all those who have [interl] subscribed for the alteration of the Church’ 1.6 that] interl pencil 1.6 the paper] added pencil 1.9 removed] pencil above del pencil ‘given up’ 1.9 decision] interl 1.9 Ffinden.] before del ‘but [3 words illeg]’ 2.2 to get] above del ‘in getting’ 2.2 not . . . eventually 2.3] interl; ‘that he shall eventually’ added pencil 2.3 the money that] above del ‘what’ To ? 23 March [1872–4] 1.3 some] interl

To Friedrich Hildebrand 9 February 1872 1.3 extremely] underl possibly by CD 2.4 P. argyrolepis] interl in CD’s hand

To Francis Galton 29 March [1872] 1.2 away,] interl 1.6 with, . . . open.] interl

To John Murray 14 February [1872] 1.1 as I hear] interl 1.1 that] after del interl ‘th’

To James Murie 2 April 1872 3.1 To | Dr . Murie] in CD’s hand

To A. R. Wallace [19 February 1872] 2.1 on Saturday] above del ‘yesterday’ 2.3 new] after del ‘lates’ 4.2 so] interl 4.3 mouth.] before del ‘&’

667

To Chauncey Wright 6 April 1872 6.1 P.S. . . . Thackerays.— 6.4] in CD’s hand To William Bowman 8 April [1872] 1.5 (if . . . it)]parentheses over commas 1.9 South . . . Railway. 1.10]added

668

Manuscript alterations and comments

To Gaston de Saporta 8 April 1872 2.13 that the] interl in CD’s hand

To G. S. Ffinden 21 May [1872] 2.1 misunderstood] after del ‘mis’

To Williams & Norgate 12 April [1872] 2.1 try] after del illeg 3.1 can you] interl 3.2 for me] interl

To ? 22 May 1872 1.2 sufficient]above del ‘the’

To Friend Lewin 16 April [1872] 1.1 a more] after del ‘the’ 1.1 viz Chiselhurst] interl 1.2 Chiselhurst] interl 1.3 from my house] above del ‘to it.’ 2.2 nearly] interl To Henry Johnson 2 May [1872] 1.2 that] interl 2.8 there] interl 2.8 apparently] after del illeg 4.2 extracting] interl 4.3 is] interl 4.3 simply] after del ‘in’ 4.3 sake of] interl To Hermann Müller [before 5 May 1872] Diagram: 21y] after del ‘21 y’ To Charles Lyell 10 May [1872] 1.9 kind] before omitted point 1.15 (XLIII)] interl To Albert Günther 11 May [1872] 0.3 (Confidential)] square brackets in ms 5.1 P.S. . . . death? 6.2] in CD’s hand Enclosure: 4.1 To . . . F.R.S.] in CD’s hand To Albert Günther 13 May [1872] 1.1 answer] after del ‘give’ 1.2 of Oregon,] interl To H. E. Litchfield 13 May 1872 1.2 school] after del illeg 1.5 & clearness] interl 1.9 remarks] interl 2.1 about there being] above del ‘my part has’ To W. B. Tegetmeier 14 May [1872] 1.3 hereafter] interl 1.3 colours] interl 4.2 in fact] interl 5.1 with] interl 5.2 the copy,] above del ‘it’

To Francis Galton 27 May [1872] 1.2 (now...footman)] parentheses over commas 2.2 next] interl 2.3 we] after del ‘on the Wednesday’ 3.1 some of] interl 3.2 their] altered from ‘the’ To Chauncey Wright 3 June [1872] 1.8 the] interl 2.5 in] above del ‘of ’ 2.6 that] interl 2.8 preserving] above del ‘presering’ To William Marshall 6 June [1872] 1.4 to see] interl To Herbert Spencer 10 June [1872] 3.2 of the Emotions] interl To Menyhèrt Lónyay [after 11 June 1872] 1.1 obliging] above del illeg 1.1 of June 11th.] after del ‘together with the Diploma.’ 1.3 permission] after del ‘to’ To J. D. Hooker 14 June [1872] 1.3 not] after del ‘th’ 2.4 all] interl To F. E. Abbot 2 July 1872 1.4 will] after del ‘I’ To Asa Gray 8 July [1872] 1.7 done,] above del ‘over’ 3.1 astonished] altered from ‘astonishing’ 3.2 Nile] above del ‘nile’ To John Denny 9 July 1872 1.1 read] in CD’s hand above del ‘great’ To Charles Lyell 12 July [1872] 1.2 recent] interl 2.1 salt] above del ‘sea’ 3.3 glaciers,] comma over full stop 3.4 & . . . ice.—] interl 3.4 clear] interl To John Denny 14 July [1872] 0.2 Denny] altered from ‘D.’

Manuscript alterations and comments 1.2 have] above del ‘do’ 1.3 protected] after del ‘appear to have’ 1.3 as it appears] interl 1.3 the flowers] interl after del interl ‘your’ and above del ‘your plants’ 1.3 indispensable] interl 1.4 most] after del ‘in’ 1.4 of] above del ‘cases, in’ 1.4 experiments] after del ‘exper’ 1.5 made] above del ‘effected’ 1.8 but] interl 1.8 direction; viz] above del ‘conclusion’ 2.1 you . . . that] interl 2.1 &c] added 2.2 some] interl 2.2 it is] interl 2.4 ie . . . nature,] interl 2.6 I feel . . . easily] interl above del ‘be’ 2.6 if published] after del ‘if illeg’ 2.6 only] interl 2.6 without] above del ‘unless published’ 2.7 that given] interl 3.2 vars. . . . &c)] interl after interl and del ‘with’ 3.5 to all] after del ‘in the Journ’ 3.6 to aid] after del illeg 3.7 it . . . advisable] above del ‘I would suggest that you shd ’ 3.7 perhaps] after interl and del ‘to draw attention to [illeg]’ 3.7 I think] interl 3.8 of Pelargonium] interl 4.1 well . . . details] above del ‘well to add’; ‘to give’ above del ‘add’ 4.1 converse] above del ‘contrary’ 4.1 case] after del ‘peltatum’ 4.1 the Ivy-leaved P. 4.2] above del ‘peltatum’ 4.3 an] interl 4.3 ever] after del ‘I believe’ 5.1 I hope] after del ‘Dear Sir’ To J. V. Carus 16 July 1872 5.1 ready . . . vol.] interl in CD’s hand 5.2 £50] added in CD’s hand To Gerard Krefft 17 July 1872 4.1 which . . . present 4.2] interl To John Denny 22 July 1872 4.1 P.S. . . . Hooker.—] in CD’s hand To H. E. Litchfield 25 July 1872 1.5 at] interl To A. R. Wallace 27 July [1872]

669

3.5 so] above del ‘such’ 3.5 subject] ‘subject’ altered from ‘subjects’ To J. T. Gulick 28 July [1872] 2.1 (whom . . . see) 2.2]parentheses over commas 2.4 at about] after del ‘aga’ 3.1 (on . . . Ry .)] interl To R. F. Cooke 29 July 1872 7.3 you] interl in CD’s hand 12.1 £315] in CD’s hand 13.1 I am . . . trouble.— 13.2] in CD’s hand To Edwards & Kidd 30 July [1872] 1.1 accurately] interl 1.3 & which . . . you,] interl 1.5 that] after del ‘that I did not think it fair’ 1.5 as] pencil over ‘as’ 1.6 are] pencil above del pencil ‘were’ 1.6 whereas . . . viz] interl above del “they are [over ‘were’] of the‘’ 1.7 I . . . fair] interl; ‘it’ pencil above del pencil ‘did’; ‘seem to me’ pencil above del ‘think it’ 1.8 in which] after del ‘; & you’ 1.8 increases . . . the] added above del ‘&’; ‘together with the’ pencil after del ‘as the’ 1.8 & you 1.9] after ‘increase’ del pencil above interl & del ‘are both increased;’; ‘you’ altered from ‘You’ 1.9 July] interl 2.1 asked] above del ‘advised’ 2.1 at once] interl 2.1 your] after del ‘you’ 2.2 for 1000 . . . be;] interl after del ‘is’ 2.2 might] after del ‘may’ 2.3 translators] after del pencil ‘several’ 2.3 they] interl 2.3 would] pencil above del pencil ‘will’ 2.3 require] after del ‘be’ 2.4 the foreigners] ‘the’ interl 2.4 with . . . securing 2.5] interl pencil 2.5 payment] after del pencil ‘securing’ 2.5 for them] interl 2.5 they] altered from ‘the’ 2.5 were] after del pencil ‘copies’ 2.5 sent away] above del ‘supplied’ To J. V. Carus 3 August [1872] 1.3 last] interl To A. R. Wallace 3 August [1872] 1.3 In . . . it.—] interl in CD’s hand To R. F. Cooke 4 August 1872 2.2 5£. . . or] interl in CD’s hand

670

Manuscript alterations and comments

2.3 text & cuts] in CD’s hand above del ‘whole’ 3.5 of the Heliotypes] interl in CD’s hand 4.1 who . . . respect.— 4.2] added in CD’s hand To J. D. Hooker 4 August [1872] 2.1 I have been] interl To R. F. Cooke 7 August 1872 1.8 .—] over ‘&’ 1.8 I . . . Appleton.] added 3.1 10£. . . Editors.—] added in margin To R. F. Cooke 8 August [1872] 1.3 & I ... denied; 1.4] interl 1.4 as] after del ‘the’ 1.4 3 larger] interl 1.4 exceed] above del illeg 1.5 7’,] after del ‘at’ 1.5 charge] pencil, above del ‘estimate’ 1.5 somewhat] interl pencil 1.6 in the paper that] interl 1.6 the charge] after interl & del ‘the ch’ 1.6 copies of] ‘of ’ over ‘for’ 1.6 of . . . Plate] transposed from before ‘the charge’ 1.5 1.6 per] after del ‘per’ 1.8 & . . . suppose] interl pencil 1.8 when] interl pencil 1.9 “requiring] after del ‘by’ 1.9 the titling] interl after del ‘it’ 1.10 consists only] above del ‘requires’ above del ‘[ comes]’ 1.11 & &c] ‘&c’ after del ‘3’ 1.11 extra] after del ‘a high degree [ reprehensible] in us after what I have said *to foreign Editors [interl] to put *very heavy [above del “all‘’]’, above del ‘the’ 1.12 cannot] after del ‘will never’ 1.13 I am very] ‘I’ pencil 1.13 am . . . supposing] circled, line down to caret after ‘note’ from before ‘for all you’ 1.13 so.] added pencil 2.1 take] after ‘so.—’ 2.1 the Co] above del ‘them’ 2.1 final] interl pencil 2.3 my seven] ‘my’ after del ‘the’ 2.4 estimate.—] before del ‘which was given to me’ 3.1 sorry to] above del ‘sorry to have’ 3.1 I think] after del ‘&’ 3.1 I think . . . estimate 3.3] pencil 3.2 Probably] after del illeg To J. T. Gulick 8 August [1872] 1.3 being] interl

To R. F. Cooke 10 August [1872] 1.1 would] after del ‘to’ 1.2 according . . . paper 1.3] interl 1.4 & lettering the Plates] interl 1.5 copies] after del ‘Plates’ 3.1 & . . . Foreigners] added in margin To V. O. Kovalevsky 10 August [1872] 8.1 verbal] interl 8.2 is] interl To R. F. Cooke [14 August 1872] 0.1 Leith . . . mistake. 1.2] in CD’s hand To Hubert Airy 24 August 1872 2.4 particulars] interl in CD’s hand To J. D. Hooker 29 August [1872] 3.2 my gardener] interl 3.4 much] interl To John Murray 30 August [1872] 1.2 Anton] ‘ton’ over ‘thon’ 1.2 Journal of Researches] interl 2.3 for . . . Cooke.] added To Chauncey Wright 31 August [1872] 2.1 next week] interl 3.2 always] above del ‘usually’ To A. R. Wallace [2 September 1872] 1.5 numerous] after del ‘in’ 1.8 statements] after del ‘facts’ 1.12 molecules . . . they 1.13] interl To Ernest Edwards 4 September 1872 0.1 Sept 4th . /72/] pencil 1.1 Henrietta] after del ‘the Coy about an’ 1.2 & received . . . answer.] interl 1.2 I also applied] above del ‘and to the’ 1.3 & Autotype] after del ‘Coy ’ 1.3 When] after del ‘There was then a great delay,’ 1.3 Feb. of this Year] interl over ellipsis 1.4 whether . . . engraving; 1.5] interl; ‘Au or W Coy ’ interl 1.5 heard that] ‘that’ after interl & del illeg 1.5 H.s ] after del ‘the’ 1.6 for more . . . time & 1.7] interl 1.7 many times] interl after ‘called’ and transposed 1.7 & I] ‘&’ after del ‘& gave me all possible information’; ‘&’ above del ‘&’ 1.7 your] after del ‘this’ 1.7 advice] after del ‘your’ 1.7 in determining to have 1.8] above del ‘to having’

Manuscript alterations and comments 1.8 photographs] above del ‘Plates’ 1.9 I invariably found] interl 1.9 most] after del ‘were’, above del ‘extremely’ 1.9 in all ways] interl 2.1 show] above del ‘lay’ 2.1 to the best] after del ‘I beli’ 2.2 you &] interl pencil 2.3 C. Darwin] pencil To Chauncey Wright 6 September [1872] 1.1 in 2 vols.] interl To the Linnean Society [after 12] September 1872 4.1 With my Thanks—] in CD’s hand To W. W. Baxter 17 September [1872?] 1.1 Please] below illeg 1.1 me about] ‘about’ interl 1.1 & about] ‘about’ interl 4.1 about] interl 5.1 about] interl To V. O. Kovalevsky 18 September [1872] 1.2 (when . . . down)] parentheses over commas 1.5 leave this house] interl above del ‘leave at’ To V. O. Kovalevsky 24 September [1872] 1.1 to Euston Rd .] interl

To Asa Gray 22 October 1872 1.4 to account 1.5] interl 1.7 in equally] after del ‘eq’ 1.7 in equally . . . curvatures.—] added 3.1 subject,] after del illeg 3.2 Dionæa.—] after del ‘Droser’ 3.6 are] above del ‘we’ 3.6 move] above del ‘mov’ 5.3 afraid] above del ‘afaid’ 6.1 write] above del ‘writ’ 6.2 paper] above del ‘paper’ To J. D. Hooker 22 October [1872] 0.1 Sevenoaks] above del ‘Down, | Beckenham, Kent.’ 2.6 on the road] interl 3.1 you will] ‘you’after del ‘wll’ To J. D. Hooker 24 October [1872] 1.2 sick-leave] ‘sick-’ interl 2.1 & . . . whether] interl above del ‘if ’ To J. V. Carus 27 October [1872] 1.2 in . . . places] interl 1.4 but that] interl 2.2 Mr . R. B.] interl 3.2 she] interl

To J. D. Hooker 4 October [1872] 1.1 tomorrow morning] interl

To J. D. Hooker 27 October [1872] 1.2 somewhere in] interl 1.2 on] after del ‘though’ 3.3 worse] interl

To J. V. Carus 10 October [1872] 5.2 home] interl

To A. R. Wallace 27 October [1872] 1.1 soon] interl

To Alpheus Hyatt 10 October [1872] 1.3 the results] ‘the’ interl 1.7 formerly] interl To T. H. Farrer 13 October [1872] 1.4 for] interl 2.4 it] interl 2.6 prematurely] above del ‘pematurely’ To H. A. Huxley 16 October [1872] 1.3 right] interl 1.6 allowed to] interl To A. R. Wallace 20 October [1872] 1.3 Neither the] above del ‘The’ 4.1 certain] interl above del ‘the’ 4.3 do] over ‘does’ 4.3 placing] after del ‘bringing’ 4.4 &c] interl

671

To W. D. Fox 29 October [1872] 1.3 for 3 weeks] interl 2.2 of an] ‘of ’ interl To J. D. Hooker 31 October [1872] 1.2 instead of Orpington] interl To S. H. Haliburton 1 November [1872] 1.1 now] interl 1.5 present] after del ‘the’ 1.8 happy] interl To Amy Ruck [1 November 1872] 1.1 (if possible)] parentheses over commas To W. W. Baxter? 8 November [1872–4] 1.2 me,] interl 1.2 in height] interl

672

Manuscript alterations and comments

To Francis Galton 8 November [1872] 1.4 to breed,] interl 1.4 one] above del ‘any’ 2.2 more] above del illeg 3.5 I wish . . . crying.—] inserted To J. D. Hooker 9 November [1872] 1.1 about answering Owen] interl 1.3 that] added ink 1.4 fully] above del ‘quite’ 1.5 , which . . . not.—] interl 1.7 as] interl 1.15 that] interl 2.4 have] interl 2.4 from the first] interl 3.2 at any price] interl 3.4 the] altered from ‘them’ To W. W. Baxter? 10 November [1872–4] 1.1 an enema] above del ‘one’ 1.4 size of the] ‘the’ interl 1.4 returned] above del illeg To J. V. Carus 11 November [1872] 1.8 Heliotype] after del ‘Co’ To John Murray 11 November 1872 4.1 of . . . Book] interl in CD’s hand 4.2 to the Academy 4.3] interl in CD’s hand 6.1 P.S. . . . you.— 6.4] in CD’s hand To John Murray 13 November 1872 1.2 both] interl 2.2 convenient] after del illeg 2.2 actually] interl 2.3 half] after del ‘any’ 2.3 or 23 of] interl 2.4 of profit] interl To W. W. Baxter 2 [December 1872] 1.3 as] interl 3.1 & of Colchicum] added To J. D. Hooker 3 [December 1872] 2.1 think] after del ‘propose’ To Alpheus Hyatt 4 December [1872] 1.2 own] interl in CD’s hand 2.1 Another . . . &c; 3.16] in CD’s hand 2.2 ae] e over del ‘d’ 3.1 in] interl 3.2 your] after del ‘in’ 3.3 succeeding] after del ‘a’ 3.5 at most] interl

3.19 with . . . individual 3.20] interl in CD’s hand 4.4 to me] added in CD’s hand 5.4 the presence of 5.5] interl in CD’s hand To W. W. Baxter [after 4 December 1872] 1.3 as they] ‘as’ interl after del ‘if ’ To C. J. Maynard 7 December [1872–3] 1.2 &] over ‘—’ To Alphonse de Candolle 11 December 1872 2.4 in India 2.5] interl in CD’s hand 3.1 allow] interl in CD’s hand To C. L. Dodgson 14 December [1872] 2.2 should occasion occur. 2.3] interl To Alpheus Hyatt 14 December [1872] 2.6 (,as . . . stages) 2.7] interl 2.7 special] interl To A. R. Wallace 14 December [1872?] 0.2 14th .—] under del ‘12th ’ To T. H. Huxley [17] December [1872] 1.4 Post] interl 1.4 soon] interl 1.5 generally] interl 1.5 at . . . hour. 1.6] interl To William Bowman [after 21 December 1872] 1.1 principal] after del ‘who h’ 1.2 informs] above del ‘has written to’ 1.2 persons] interl 1.3 in the case of children 1.4] interl 1.5 point] after del ‘only’ 1.6 whom you may see;] interl 1.8 infants] above del ‘young children’ 1.9 or not] interl 1.9 —these muscles 1.10] after del ‘they do so, (as I see’ 1.10 children born blind] above del ‘they’ 1.10 years] above del illeg 1.12 (3)] after del ‘(3) Do they, as children, shed’ 1.12 children] interl above del ‘those’ 1.13 in contracting] ‘in’ interl 1.14 (4) If of] ‘of ’ above del ‘there is any difference in the above respect, from’ 1.15 would it not] above del ‘I think it cd ’ To Paolo Mantegazza 28 December 1872 4.1 P.S. . . . Pleasure. 4.2] in CD’s hand To Francis Galton 30 December [1872]

Manuscript alterations and comments 1.2 bits of] interl 1.6 or albinoes] interl 1.7 nearly] interl

To L. C. Wedgwood 8 June [1867–72] 1.1 (upper)] interl

673

BIOGRAPHICAL REGISTER This list includes all correspondents and all persons mentioned in the letters and notes that the editors have been able to identify. Dates of letters to and from correspondents are given in chronological order. Letters to correspondents are listed in roman type; letters from correspondents in italic type; third-party letters are listed with the name of the recipient or sender given in parentheses.

Abbot, Francis Ellingwood (1836–1903). American clergyman and philosopher. BA, Harvard, 1859; PhD, 1881. Studied at Harvard Divinity School, 1859–60; at Meadville (Unitarian) Theological School, 1860–3. Minister of the first Unitarian Society of Dover, New Hampshire, 1864–8; of the Unitarian Society of Toledo, Ohio, 1869–73. Helped found the Free ReligiousAssociation in 1867. Editor of the Index from 1870. President, National Liberal League, 1876–8. Helped found the National Liberal League of America after breaking with the NLL in 1878. Wrote on scientific theism. (ANB.) 8 January 1872, 2 July 1872, 18 July 1872 Agassiz, Alexander (1835–1910). Swiss-born zoologist, oceanographer, and mining engineer. Son of Louis Agassiz. Emigrated to the United States in 1849. Joined the US survey of Washington Territory boundaries in 1859. Superintendent, Calumet copper mine, Michigan, 1867; later president of the corporation. Curator of the Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology, 1874. (DAB.) 4 March 1872, 9 December 1872 Agassiz, Elizabeth Cabot Cary (Elizabeth) (1822–1907). Educator. A founder of the educational establishment for women that later became Radcliffe College, Cambridge, Massachusetts. President of Radcliffe College, 1894–9; honorary president, 1900–3. Married Louis Agassiz in 1850. (ANB.) Agassiz, Jean Louis Rodolphe (Louis) (1807–73). Swiss-born zoologist and geologist. Professor of natural history, Neuchâtel, 1832–46. Emigrated to the United States in 1846. Professor of zoology and geology, Harvard University, 1847–73. Established the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard in 1859. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1838. (ANB, DAB, DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Airy, George Biddell (1801–92). Astronomer. Plumian Professor of astronomy and director of the Cambridge Observatory, 1828–35. Astronomer royal, 1835– 81. FRS 1836. (ODNB, DSB.)

676

Biographical register

Airy, Hubert (1838–1903). Physician. Son of George Biddell Airy. BA (Trinity College), Cambridge, 1861; MD 1870. Examiner in sanitary science. Medical inspector to the Local Government Board. Author of sanitary reports. With his father, wrote a definitive paper on migraine. (Alum. Cantab., ODNB s.v. Airy, Sir George Biddell.) 31 May 1872, 7 June 1872, 9 June [1871?], [before 15] July 1872, 16 July 1872, 20 July 1872, 21 July 1872, 24 July 1872, 24 August 1872, 20 September 1872, 24 September 1872, 3 December 1872 Alexander, Robert (1813–82). Civil servant and landowner. Served in the Bengal civil service, 1832–61. Inherited the Holwood estate in Kent from his cousin Robert Monsey Rolfe, Lord Cranworth, in 1868. (County families 1871, Modern English biography.) Allman, George James (1812–98). Botanist and zoologist. Professor of botany, Dublin University, 1844; regius professor of natural history, Edinburgh University, 1855–70. FRS 1854. (ODNB.) 13 April 1872 Althaus, Julius (1833–1900). German-born and trained expert in neurological medicine. Practised in London from 1860 and developed electrotherapy for the treatment of epilepsy. Founded the Regent’s Park Hopital for Epilepsy and Paralysis (later the Maida Vale Hospital for Nervous Diseases), 1866; hospital physician, 1866–94. (ODNB.) 16 December 1872 Andersson, Charles John (Carl Johann) (1827–67). Swedish-born ornithologist, hunter, and explorer. Accompanied Francis Galton to South Africa in 1849. Organised a successful expedition to Lake Ngami and published an account of the expedition in 1856. Continued to explore the South African interior and to carry out ornithological studies. (DSAB, Modern English biography, SBL.) Andersson, Nils Johan (1821–80). Swedish botanist. Explored the Americas on the Eugenie expedition, 1851–3. Lectured on botany at Lund University, 1855. (SBL. Angelico, Fra (1387–1455). Italian painter and Dominican friar. (EB.) Anon. [1872–4], 8 January [1872], [13 February – 21 March 1872], 23 March [1872– 4], 21 April 1872, 22 May 1872, 27 May 1872, 30 July [1872–4], September 1872, 5 December 1872, [1872 or later?] Ansell, Mark (b. 1850/1). Groom at Down House, 1871. (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/855/ 83/1).) Apatowsky, Henri (1823/4–92). Russian-born surgeon. Lived in France and worked as a doctor during the Franco-Prussian War and its aftermath; moved to London before 1872 after losing all his possessions. A regular reader at the College of Surgeons. Reported to have committed suicide. (British Medical Journal, 26 March 1892, p. 688; Census returns of England and Wales 1891 (The

Biographical register

677

National Archives: Public Record Office RG12/221/68); letter from Henri Apatowsky, 11 January 1872.) 11 January 1872 Appleton, Charles Edward Cutts Birchall (1841–79). Philosopher and journal editor. Lecturer in philosophy at St John’s College, Oxford, from 1867. Founded the Academy: a Monthly Record of Literature, Learning, Science, and Art; editor, 1869–79. (ODNB.) Appleton, William Henry (1814–99). American publisher. Partner in the New York firm D. Appleton & Co., 1838–48. Became head of the firm in 1848 on the retirement of his father, Daniel Appleton. D. Appleton & Co. published works by British scientists such as CD and Herbert Spencer. (ANB.) D. Appleton & Co. New York publishing house. Founded by Daniel Appleton (1785–1849) in 1831. His son William Henry Appleton (1814–99) was taken into partnership in 1838. American publishers of works by CD and Herbert Spencer. (ANB.) 17 February 1872, 23 February 1872, 16 March 1872, 1 August 1872 Arany, János (1817–82). Hungarian poet. Considered one of Hungary’s greatest poets. Secretary of the Hungarian Academy, 1865–79. (EB.) Askenasy, Eugen (1845–1903). German botanist. Studied agriculture at the academy in Hohenheim, 1862. PhD, botany, Heidelberg, 1866; habilitated, 1872; professor extraordinarius, 1881; honorary professor, 1897. Studied the physics of water transport, physiology of plant growth, and algology. (NDB.) Aubertin, John James (1818/19–1900). Traveller and writer. Superintendent of the São Paolo Railway, Brazil, 1860–9. Promoted the cultivation of cotton in Brazil; awarded a gold medal by the Manchester Cotton Supply Association in 1869. Met CD at Ilkley Wells hydropathic establishment in Yorkshire in 1859. (Graham 1968, pp. 67–8; Correspondence vol. 11, letter from J. J. Aubertin, 27 April 1863; Modern English biography.) 16 January 1872 Ausserer, Anton (1843–89). Austrian naturalist and arachnologist. Teacher, Felkirsch, 1867; Innsbruck 1869. Obtained a doctorate in 1872; professor at a lycée at Graz, 1874. Travelled in Sicily, 1880–1; Egypt, 1889–7. Specialised in the taxonomy of mygalomorph spiders. (Bonnet 1945–61, 1: 47–8.) Ayrault, Eugène. French veterinary surgeon. Of Niort. Author of De l’industrie mulassière en Poitou (1867). (Catalogue général de la librairie française.) Ayrton, Acton Smee (1816–86). Politician. Solicitor in India; returned to England in 1851 and was called to the bar at the Middle Temple, 1853. Liberal MP for Tower Hamlets, 1857–74. First commissioner of works, 1869–73. Judge-advocategeneral, 1873–4. (ODNB.) Bacon, Roger (c. 1214–92). Philosopher and Franciscan friar. Studied and lectured at the universities of Oxford and Paris; entered the Franciscan order, c. 1257. Emphasised the study of nature through empirical methods and re-interpreted Aristotelian and later pseudo-Aristotelian works in the scholastic tradition, but

678

Biographical register

Bacon, Roger, cont. seen by nineteenth-century writers as a champion of the modern, experimental scientific method. (ODNB.) Bain, Alexander (1818–1903). Scottish philosopher and psychologist. Graduated from Marischal College, Aberdeen, 1840; stayed as assistant and teacher in philosophy. Assistant secretary, metropolitan sanitary commission of the Board of Health, London, 1846. Lecturer at Bedford College, 1851, with other posts following. Professor of logic, University of Aberdeen, 1860. Founded the journal Mind in 1876; editor until 1892. Considered a founder of modern psychology. (ODNB.) Baines, John Thomas (Thomas) (1820–75). Artist and explorer. Official war artist to the British forces in the Cape Frontier War, 1851–2. Joined Augustus Gregory’s expedition to north-west Australia, 1855. Storekeeper and artist to David Livingtone’s expedition to the Zambezi, 1858. Joined James Chapman’s expedition to the Victoria Falls, 1861; later led his own expedition to southern Africa, and continued to travel there until his death from dysentery. (ODNB.) Balfour, Francis Maitland (1851–82). Biologist. Specialised in comparative embryology. Studied natural sciences at the University of Cambridge, 1870–3; from 1874, fellow, Trinity College, Cambridge, where he directed a morphological laboratory. (ODNB.) Balfour, John Hutton (1808–84). Scottish physician and botanist. Professor of botany, Glasgow University, 1841–5. Professor of medicine and botany, University of Edinburgh, and regius keeper of the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, 1845– 79. Founding member of the Botanical Society of Edinburgh, 1836. Founder of the Edinburgh Botanical Club, 1838. Co-editor of the Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal. FRS 1856. (DSB, ODNB.) Ball, John (1818–89). Irish glaciologist and politician. Trained as a barrister but never practised. Assistant under-secretary of state for the colonies, 1855–7. First president of the Alpine Club, 1858–60. Travelled with Joseph Dalton Hooker in Morocco in 1871. FRS 1868. (ODNB.) 31 January [1872] Ballantine, William (1812–87). Barrister. Admitted to the Inner Temple, 1829; called to the bar, 1834. Sarjeant-at-law, 1856. Honorary bencher of the Inner Temple, 1878. Advocate for the Tichborne claimant in his ejectment action, 1871. (ODNB.) Barber, Mary Elizabeth (1818–99). British-born naturalist, artist, and writer in South Africa. Sister of James Henry Bowker. Emigrated to South Africa with her family in 1820. Married Frederick William Barber, a chemist, in 1845. Studied birds, moths, reptiles, and plants, and corresponded with a number of leading scientists, providing them with specimens and drawings. Published a number of scientific papers. (DSAB, ODNB.) Barbier, Edmond (d. 1883). French translator. Translated works by CD (Journal

Biographical register

679

of researches, Origin 6th ed., Variation 2d ed.), John Lubbock, and Edward Burnett Tylor. (Tort 1996.) Baring, Thomas George, 1st earl of Northbrook (1826–1904). Politician. Under-secretary in the India Office, 1859–64. Viceroy of India, 1872–6. First lord of the Admiralty, 1880–5. (ODNB.) Barkly, Henry (1815–98). Colonial administrator. Served as governor of British Guiana, 1849–53; Jamaica, 1853–6; Victoria, 1856–63; Mauritius, 1863–70; and Cape Colony, 1870–77. Sent plants to the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Investigated the ferns of Jamaica and Mauritius and its dependencies. Knighted, 1853. FRS 1864. (Gunn and Codd 1981, ODNB, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 75 (1905): 23–5.) Barnum, Phineas Taylor (1810–91). American entrepreneur, showman, and circus owner. Founded Barnum’s American Museum in New York, displaying animals and curiosities, in 1842. Made a lucrative tour of England in 1844–7 with the dwarf Tom Thumb. Opened a circus in Brooklyn in 1871. (ANB.) Barrago, Francesco. Italian surgeon. Connected with the University of Cagliari, Sardinia. Published on surgery and in support of Darwinian theory. (Istituto Centrale per il Catalogo Unico della Biblioteche Italiane e per le Informazione Bibliografiche, opac.sbn.it (accessed 12 May 2010).) Barrande, Joachim (1799–1883). French-born palaeontologist and stratigrapher. Employed as a tutor by the French royal family until their exile in 1830. Railway engineer in Prague, where he became interested in fossils. Collected and described the fossils of the Bohemian basin, 1840–83. The results of his studies were published in thirty volumes entitled Systême Silurien du centre de la Bohême (1852–1902). (DSB.) Barron, Archibald F. (1835–1903). Gardener. Superintendent of the Royal Horticultural Society gardens at South Kensington and Chiswick. (R. Desmond 1994.) Bartlett, Abraham Dee (1812–97). Taxidermist and zoo superintendent. Taxidermist, circa 1834–52. Superintendent of the natural history department, Crystal Palace, 1852–9; of the Zoological Society’s gardens, Regent’s Park, 1859–97. (Modern English biography, ODNB.) 16 May 1872 Bassani, Francesco (1853–1916). Italian geologist and palaeontologist. Graduated at Padua, 1875; studied at Paris and Monaco. Professor of natural history at Padua, 1880. With Giovanni Canestrini, translated Expression into Italian (1878). Professor of geology, University of Naples, 1887–1916. (DBI.) Bastian, Adolf (1826–1905). German ethnologist. Went to Australia as a ship’s doctor in 1851 and travelled around the world until 1859. Published Der Mensche in Geschichte (1860). Established the Berlin Museum of Ethnography in 1868; the Anthropological Society of Berlin in 1870. Lecturer in ethnology, University of Berlin, from 1868. Opposed the application of Darwinian theory to humans. (DBE, Tort 1996.)

680

Biographical register

Bastian, Henry Charlton (1837–1915). Physician and specialist in clinical neurology. Assistant physician and lecturer on pathology, St Mary’s Hospital, London, circa 1863–6. Professor of pathological anatomy, University College, London, 1867; physician, University College Hospital, 1878. Best known for his work on spontaneous generation. FRS 1868. (DSB.) Bateman, Frederic (1824–1904). Physician. Studied at University College, London, and Paris. MD, Aberdeen, 1850. Appointed house-surgeon, Norfolk and Norwich Hospital, 1851; physician, 1864–95. MRCP, 1866; FRCP, 1876. Specialised in diseases of the brain. His book on aphasia received a prize from the Paris academy of medicine. Knighted, 1892. (British Medical Journal, 20 August 1904, pp. 413–15). Bates, Henry Walter (1825–92). Entomologist. Undertook a joint expedition to the Amazon with Alfred Russel Wallace, 1848–9; continued to explore the area, after Wallace returned to England, until 1859. Provided the first comprehensive scientific explanation of the phenomenon subsequently known as Batesian mimicry. Published an account of his travels, The naturalist on the River Amazons, in 1863. Assistant secretary, Royal Geographical Society of London, 1864–92. President, Entomological Society of London, 1868, 1869, and 1878. FRS 1881. (DSB, ODNB.) Baudry, Frédéric (1818–85). French philologist. Librarian at the agronomic institute in Versailles, 1849; the Arsenal, 1859; and, later, assistant-librarian and administrator of the Mazarine Library, Paris. One of the first to promote in France the scientific study of language as developed in Germany. Published several works on philology. (DBF.) 4 December 1872 Baxter, William Walmisley (1829/30–1900). Chemist. Succeeded his father in business at 40 High Street, Bromley, Kent, with branches in Dartford and Greenwich, 1857; opened another branch in Beckenham; retired in 1897. Churchwarden, manager of the National Schools, trustee of the Philanthropic Society, and honorary secretary of Bromley Literary Institute. (BMD (Death index), Horsburgh 1980, pp. 406–7, Post Office directory of the six home counties 1859, Watkins 1977.) 17 January [1872–4], [after 23 August 1872?], 4 September [1872?], 17 September [1872?], 8 November [1872–4], 10 November [1872–4], 2 [December 1872], 4 December 1872, [after 4 December 1872] Beard, William Holbrook (1824–1900). American artist. Portrait painter in Buffalo, New York, 1850–6; studied in Europe before returning to Buffalo around 1858. Settled in New York City, 1860; specialised in humorous and satirical paintings of animals in human poses, including several that make reference to CD’s theories. (DAB, Peck 1994.) Beethoven, Ludwig van (1770–1827). German composer and pianist. (ADB.) Belgrand, François-Eugène (1810–78). French civil engineer and hydrologist. Studied the hydrology of the Paris basin and explained the landscape as the result of the movement of large bodies of water in the post-glacial period. Engineer responsible for navigation on the river Seine between Paris and Rouen,

Biographical register

681

1852–5. Worked for the department of water and drainage, Paris, from 1855; director, 1867. Inspector-general of roads and bridges, Paris, 1874. Member of the Académie des sciences, 1861. (DBF.) Bell, Charles (1774–1842). Anatomist and surgeon. Best known for his investigations of the nervous system and the expression of emotions in humans. Illustrated his own works. Co-owner of and principal lecturer at the Great Windmill Street School of Anatomy, London, 1814–25. Surgeon at the Middlesex Hospital, 1812– 36. Professor of surgery, Edinburgh University, 1836. Knighted, 1831. FRS 1826. (DSB, ODNB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Bell, Marion (1787–1876). Daughter of Charles Shaw of Ayr. Married Charles Bell in 1811. Following the death of her husband in 1842, lived with her brother, Alexander Shaw; their house became a centre of literary and scientific society. Published her husband’s letters in 1870. (DNB s.v. Bell, Charles (1774–1842), and Shaw, Alexander (1804–90); Modern English Biography.) Beneden, Edouard Joseph Louis Marie van (Edouard) (1846–1910). Belgian embryologist and cytologist. Professor extraordinarius of zoology and comparative anatomy, University of Liège, 1871; professor, 1874. Co-founder of the journal Archives de biologie, in which most of his work was published. Known for his work on mammalian embryo formation, and his discovery of meiosis. (BNB, DSB, EB.) Bennett, Alfred William (1833–1902). Botanist, bookseller, and publisher. Proprietor and editor of the Friend, the monthly journal of the Society of Friends. Lecturer in botany, Bedford College, London, 1868; Westminster Hospital, London, 1869–73. Author of several papers on pollination, 1871–3, and other botanical works. Biological sub-editor for Nature, 1871–4; botanical reviewer and writer for the Academy. Vice-president of the Microscopical Society, 1892, 1899, and 1900; editor of the society’s journal, 1897–1902. Vice-president of the Linnean Society of London, 1891–2. (R. Desmond 1994; Journal of the Royal Microscopical Society 1879–1902; List of the Linnean Society of London, 1891–2; Medical directory 1869–73; ODNB.) 29 February [1872], 22 November 1872 Bennett, George (1804–93). Physician and naturalist. Collected plants around the Pacific and in Australia. Travelled in Australia, 1832–4; settled in Sydney in 1836. (R. Desmond 1994.) Benoît, Justin-Miranda René (René) (1844–1922). French physician and physicist. MD, Montpellier, 1869; doctorat ès sciences (École des hautes études), 1873. Assistant director, Bureau international des poids et mesures, 1877; director, 1889. Translated Expression into French with Samuel-Jean Pozzi (1874). Standardised units of length, temperature, and electrical resistance. (DBF, DSB.) Bentham, George (1800–84). Botanist. Moved his botanical library and collections to the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, in 1854, and was provided with facilities there for his research from 1861. President of the Linnean Society of London, 1861–74. Published Genera plantarum (1862–83) with Joseph Dalton Hooker. FRS 1862. (DSB, ODNB.) Berkeley, Miles Joseph (1803–89). Clergyman and botanist. Perpetual curate of

682

Biographical register

Berkeley, Miles Joseph, cont. Apethorpe and Wood Newton, Northamptonshire, 1833–68. Vicar of Sibbertoft, Northamptonshire, from 1868. Editor of the Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society, 1866–77. An expert on British fungi; described fungi from CD’s Beagle voyage. Royal Society Royal Medallist, 1863. FRS 1879. (DSB, ODNB.) Bernard, Claude (1813–78). French physiologist. Professor of general physiology, Faculté des sciences, Paris, 1854; Muséum d’histoire naturelle, 1868. Professor of medicine, Collège de France, 1855. Made significant discoveries in digestion, neurology, and other aspects of animal physiology. Contributed to the philosophy of experimental methodology. (DSB.) Bert, Paul (1833–86). French physiologist and politician. Studied law and medicine at Paris. Professor of zoology and physiology, Faculté des sciences, Bordeaux, 1866–7; of comparative zoology, Muséum d’histoire naturelle, 1868; of physiology, the Sorbonne, 1869. Entered politics in 1870. Member of the Académie des sciences, 1881. (DBF, DSB.) Biddulph, Alice Myddelton (d. 1897). Daughter of Fanny and Robert Myddelton Biddulph. (Burke’s landed gentry 1952 s.v. Myddelton of Chirk.) Biddulph, Fanny Charlotte Myddelton (d. 1900). Daughter of Fanny and Robert Myddelton Biddulph. (Burke’s landed gentry 1952 s.v. Myddelton of Chirk.) Biddulph, Fanny Myddelton (d. 1887). Second daughter of William Mostyn Owen Sr. Married Robert Myddelton Biddulph in 1832. A close friend and neighbour of CD before the Beagle voyage. (Burke’s landed gentry 1952; England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1858–1966 (Ancestry.com).) Biddulph, Robert Myddelton (1805–72). Politician. Whig MP for Denbighshire, 1832–5 and 1852–68. Colonel of the Denbighshire Militia, 1840–72. Lord lieutenant of Denbighshire, 1841–72. Aide-de-camp to Queen Victoria, 1869–72. Married Fanny Owen in 1832. (Modern English biography, Stenton 1976.) Bismarck, Otto Eduard Leopold (Otto) von (1815–98). German politician. Prime minister of Prussia, 1862–73. Chancellor of Germany, 1871–90. (EB.) Blair, Robert Hugh (1834/5–85). Clergyman. BA, University of Dublin, 1861; MA, 1864. Rector of St Michael’s Bedwardine, Worcester, 1866–72; rector of St Martin’s, Worcester, 1872–85. Principal, Worcester College for the Blind Sons of Gentlemen. (BMD (Death index)(accessed on Ancestry.com); Catalogue of graduates, University of Dublin; Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/2918/102/6), Crockford’s clerical directory.) 9 November 1872 Blechynden, Arthur Henry (1815–94). Horticulturist. Secretary of the Agricultural and Horticultural Society of India, 1844–94. (Gerald Johnson Fox: www. archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/INDIA/2007-06/1180718181 (accessed 16 November 2011).) Blyth, Edward (1810–73). Zoologist. Druggist in Tooting, London, circa 1832–7. Wrote and edited zoological works under the pseudonym Zoophilus. Curator

Biographical register

683

of the museum of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta, India, 1841–62. Provided CD with information on the plants and animals of India in correspondence between 1855 and 1858 and later. Returned to Britain in 1863, and continued to write on zoology and on the origin of species. (Correspondence vols. 5–7, DSB, ODNB.) Boardman, Alexander F. (1819–76). American dry goods merchant. Born in Haiti. Educated in New Hampshire schools; attended Bowdoin College, but left because of weak eyes. Established a large and successful dry goods business in Brunswick, Maine, in 1840. (Wheeler and Wheeler 1878.) 18 March 1872 Bonham-Carter, Elinor Mary (1837–1923). Daughter of Joanna Maria BonhamCarter, a family friend of the Darwins. The family lived at Keston, Kent, from 1853. Married Albert Venn Dicey in 1872. (Bonham-Carter 1960, Burke’s landed gentry 1965.) Bonnier, Albert (1820–1900). Danish-born publisher. Worked in the family publishing business in Sweden. Set up his own firm in Stockholm in 1837. Chairman of the Swedish book publishers’ association, 1877–87. (SBL.) Bopp, Franz (1791–1867). German philologist. Studied Persian and Arabic in Paris from 1812. Taught himself Sanskrit from ancient Indian manuscripts and compiled a Sanskrit grammar and vocabulary. Professor extraordinarius of Oriental literature and general linguistics, University of Berlin, 1821; professor, 1825. His publications were devoted to showing the common origin of the grammatical forms of the Indo-European languages, and helped to establish comparative linguistics as a discipline. (DBE.) Bourke, Richard Southwell, 6th earl of Mayo (1822–72). Irish-born politician. MP, 1847–68. Viceroy of India, 1869–72. Assassinated. (ODNB.) Bouton, Louis Sulpice (Louis) (1799–1878). Mauritian botanist. Collected widely in Mauritius. Helped found the Société d’histoire naturelle (later the Société royale des arts et sciences), 1821; secretary, 1839–78. Through the society, influenced development of botany, zoology, and economic forestry in Mauritius. Wrote on local medicinal plants. (Dictionary of Mauritian biography.) Bowen, George Ferguson (1821–99). Irish-born statesman. BA, Oxford (Trinity College), 1844. Fellow, Brasenose College. President, Greek university of Corfu, 1847–51. Appointed first governor of Queensland, Australia, 1859. Governor of New Zealand, 1868–73; of Victoria, Australia, 1873–9; of Mauritius, 1879–82, of Hong Kong, 1882–6. Head of a royal commission to Malta to report on its new constitution, 1887. Knighted, 1856. (ODNB.) Bowker, James Henry (1822–1900). South African farmer, soldier, civil servant, and naturalist. Brother of Mary Elizabeth Barber. Inspector in the Frontier Armed and Mounted Police, Cape Colony, 1855; commandant, 1858; commanding officer, 1870. High commissioner’s agent in Basutoland, 1868. Chief commissioner at the diamond fields of Griqualand West, after leading the expedition that secured their annexation to the Cape Colony in 1871. Major contributor

684

Biographical register

Bowker, James Henry, cont. of specimens to the South African museum’s collection of Lepidoptera. Collaborated with Roland Trimen to publish South-African butterflies: a monograph of the extra-tropical species (Trimen 1887–9). (DSAB, Trimen 1887–9.) Bowker, Thomas Holden (1807–85). South African politician. Commander in the Eighth Frontier War, 1850–3. Representative, Cape House Assembly, 1853–63. Secretary to the Land Commission on the New Rush diggings at Kimberley, 1872. Excavated stone implements in Fish River. Some of the artifacts were sent to England. (DSAB, Cohen 1999.) Bowman, William (1816–92). Ophthalmic surgeon. Author of works on physiology. Assistant surgeon, King’s College Hospital, London, 1839–56; surgeon, 1856–62; elected joint professor of physiology and of general and morbid anatomy, King’s College, London, 1848; assistant surgeon at the Royal London Ophthalmic Hospital, Moorfields, 1846–51; surgeon, 1851–76. Created baronet, 1884. FRS 1841. (DSB, ODNB.) [before 25 January 1872], 25 January 1872, 8 April [1872], 19 April [1872], 24 July 1872, 31 July 1872, 16 November 1872, [after 21 December 1872] Boyle, Eleanor Vere (1825–1916). Illustrator and author. Daughter of Alexander and Albinia Elizabeth Gordon. Married Richard Cavendish Townshend Boyle in 1845. Illustrated several books, mostly fairy tales or nursery rhymes, 1852– 77. Re-created an extensive garden at Huntercombe Manor near Burnham and wrote on gardens and nature. Involved in charitable work and a patron of the Frome School of Art from 1868. (ODNB.) Brace, Charles Loring (1826–90). American philanthropist and social reformer. After studying theology at Yale University and the Union Theological Seminary, New York City, toured Europe, 1850–1. One of the founders of the New York City Children’s Aid Society, 1853; secretary, 1853–93. (ANB.) 20 July [1872] Brace, Letitia. Née Neill; of Belfast. Met and married Charles Loring Brace in 1854. (ANB s.v. Brace, Charles Loring (1826–90).) Brady, Henry Bowman (1835–91). Naturalist and pharmacist. Pharmacist, Newcastle upon Tyne, from 1855. Treasurer, British Pharmaceutical Congress, 1864– 70; president, 1872–3. Served on the Council of the Pharmaceutical Society; honorary member of a number of overseas pharmaceutical societies. Regular contributor to the Pharmaceutical Journal. Published on the Foraminifera from the 1860s; studied them full-time from 1876. FRS 1874. (ODNB.) Brandram, Maria (1790/1–1874). Of Hayes, Kent. (BMD (Death index), England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1858–1966 (Ancestry.com).) Braun, Alexander Carl Heinrich (1805–77). German botanist. Professor of botany, Freiburg, 1846–50. Professor of botany and director of the botanic garden, University of Berlin, 1851–77. Brother-in-law of Louis Agassiz. Deeply in-

Biographical register

685

fluenced by Naturphilosophie; studied plant morphology. Established the doctrine of spiral phyllotaxy. (DSB, NDB.) Bree, Charles Robert (1811–86). Medical practitioner and zoologist. Medical officer in the Polish army, 1831; qualified to practise medicine in Britain, 1833. MD, Edinburgh, 1859. General practitioner, Colchester, Essex, and physician, Essex and Colchester Hospital, 1860–82. Entomological editor of the Naturalist, 1858. Published articles critical of CD’s theory of the origin of species. (CDEL, Freeman 1978, Medical directory 1847–87.) Brehm, Alfred Edmund (1829–84). German zoologist and traveller. Travelled in Egypt and the Sudan, Spain, Norway and Lapland, Siberia, and Turkestan. Studied natural history in Jena and Vienna, 1853–6. Director of the zoological gardens, Hamburg, 1862–7. Founded the aquarium in Berlin, 1867. Published books and articles on zoology. (ADB, BHGW.) Briggs, Mark. Coachman. Darwin family coachman at The Mount, Shrewsbury, until 1866; thereafter lived in a cottage near The Mount. (Emma Darwin 1904, 2: 13.) Brightwen, Hannah Sarah (1808–82). Daughter of Dawson Turner. Married Thomas Brightwen in 1839. Sister of Maria Hooker. (Allan 1967.) Broca, Pierre Paul (Paul) (1824–80). French surgeon and anthropologist. MD, Paris, 1849. Assistant professor of the medical faculty in Paris and surgeon of the Central Bureau, 1853. Pioneer in the field of anthropology. Elected professor of pathology at Paris, 1867; of clinical surgery, 1868. Vice-president, French Academy of Medicine. (DBF, DSB.) Bromfield, William Arnold (1801–51). Botanist. MD, Glasgow, 1823. Settled at Ryde, Isle of Wight, in 1836 and spent the rest of his life preparing Flora Vectensis (1856). Contributor to botanical publications. Travelled in Germany, Italy, and France, the West Indies, and North America. Died in Damascus while on a tour of Egypt and Syria. (ODNB.) Bronn, Heinrich Georg (1800–62). German palaeontologist. Professor of natural science at Heidelberg University, 1833. Translated and superintended the first German editions of Origin (1860) and Orchids (1862). (DSB, NDB.) Brougham, William, 2d Baron Brougham and Vaux (1795–1886). Law reformer. Brother of Henry Peter Brougham. BA, Cambridge (Jesus College), 1819. Called to the bar, 1823. Whig MP for Southwark, 1831–5. Appointed master in Chancery, 1831. Instrumental in the abolition of the office of master in Chancery in 1852. (ODNB.) Browne, Hugh (1834/5–1915). Solicitor. Admitted to practice, 1859; worked with his father, Michael Browne, at Wheeler Gate in Nottingham. (BMD (Death index), Census returns of England and Wales (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/3508/51/37); Law list 1868; Post Office directory of Cambridgeshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire, & Rutlandshire.) 17 May 1872

686

Biographical register

Browne, Mary Selina (1841/2–78). Wife of Hugh Browne. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/3508/51/37).) Browne, Michael (1839–1906). Lace manufacturer. Brother of Hugh Browne. (BMD (Birth index, Death index), Census returns of England and Wales 1851 (The National Archives: Public Record Office HO107/2129/28/8); 1881 (RG11/3345/ 97/65).) Browne, Michael Ross (b. 1869). Curtain manufacturer. Son of Michael Browne. (BMD (Birth index), Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/3499/36/25), Census returns of England and Wales 1891 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG12/2681/ 56/23).) 12 February 1872 Bruce, Henry Austin, Baron Aberdare (1815–95). Politician. Liberal MP for Merthyr Tudful, 1852–68. Under-secretary at the Home Office, 1862–4. Privy councillor, 1864–6. Home secretary, 1868–73. MP for Renfrewshire, 1869–73. Interested in education. Created Baron Aberdare, 1873. FRS 1876. (ODNB.) Brücke, Ernst Wilhelm von (1819–92). German physiologist. Doctorate, Berlin, 1842. Assistant to Johannes Müller, 1843; habilitated, 1844. Professor of physiology, Königsberg, 1848; Vienna, 1849. (DBE.) Büchner, Friedrich Karl Christian Ludwig (Ludwig) (1824–99). German materialist philosopher and physician. Lecturer in medicine, especially forensic medicine, at Tübingen University, 1854–5. Following the publication of his first work, Kraft und Stoff (1855), he was debarred from academic teaching and returned to general medicine. (DBE, NDB.) Bulwer-Lytton, Edward George Earle Lytton, Baron Lytton of Knebworth (1803–73). Novelist and politician. (ODNB.) Burnouf, Jean Louis (1775–1844). French philologist and translator. Professor of Latin eloquence at the Collège de France, 1817–44. Published translations of Latin authors. An early student of Sanskrit. (DBF.) Burrows, George, 1st baronet (1801–87). Physician. MD, Cambridge, 1831. Lecturer, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London, from 1832; physician, 1841–63. Physician-extraordinary to Queen Victoria, 1870; physician-in-ordinary, 1873. Created baronet, 1874. President, Royal Medical and Chirurgical Society, 1869. Fellow, Royal College of Physicians, 1832; president, 1871–5. Created baronet, 1874. FRS 1846. (ODNB.) Burton, Richard Francis (1821–90). Soldier, diplomat, explorer, and writer. Joined the Indian army in 1842. Studied Asiatic languages and culture. Assistant on the survey of Sind, 1844. Adopting an assumed identity, went on pilgrimage to Mecca in 1853. Explored Somalia in 1854. Served in the Crimea in 1855. Participated in the search for the source of the Nile, 1856–9. British consul, Fernando Po, West Africa, 1861–4; Santos, Brazil, 1864–9; Damascus, 1869–71;

Biographical register

687

Trieste, 1872. In later years, in England, devoted himself to literary scholarship. (ODNB.) Busk, George (1807–86). Russian-born naval surgeon and naturalist. Served on the hospital ship at Greenwich, 1832–55. Retired from medical practice in 1855. Member of several scientific societies. President of the Microscopical Society, 1848–9; of the Anthropological Institute, 1873–4. Zoological secretary of the Linnean Society of London, 1857–68. Hunterian Professor of comparative anatomy, Royal College of Surgeons of England, 1856–9; council member, 1863; member of board of examiners, 1868; president, 1871. Specialised in palaeontology and in the study of Bryozoa. FRS 1850. (DNB, DSB, Plarr 1930.) Butler, Agnes Isabel (1865–1949). Daughter of Henry Montagu and Georgina Isabella Butler. Married Edmund Whytehead Howson (1855–1905), an assistant master at Harrow School, in 1886. (Nicholas Jenkins, W. H. Auden— ‘family ghosts’, auden.stanford.edu (accessed 10 November 2010).) Butler, Arthur Gardiner (1844–1925). Entomologist. Assistant, zoological department, British Museum, 1863; assistant keeper, 1879–1901. Worked mostly on Lepidoptera. (Entomologist 58 (1925): 175–6, Proceedings of the Linnean Society of London 138 (1925–6): 75–6.) Butler, George (1774–1853). Clergyman and headmaster. Headmaster at Harrow School, 1805–29, and dean of Peterborough, 1842–53. His daughter Louisa Jane married CD’s cousin Francis Galton. (ODNB s.v. Butler, George, and Galton, Francis.) Butler, Georgina Isabella (d. 1883). Wife of Henry Montagu Butler. (ODNB s.v. Butler, Henry Montagu.) Butler, Henry Montagu (1833–1918). Headmaster and college head. Son of George Butler (1774–1853). Headmaster of Harrow School, 1859–85. Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, 1886–1918. (ODNB.) Butler, Joseph (1692–1752). Moral philosopher and theologian. BA, Oxford University (Oriel College), 1718; ordained priest, 1718. Bishop of Bristol, 1738–50; of Durham, 1750–2. Published several works on religious issues, including Analogy of religion (1736). (ODNB.) Butler, Samuel (1774–1839). Educationalist and clergyman. Headmaster of Shrewsbury School, 1798–1836. Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, 1836; of Lichfield, 1836–9. (ODNB.) Butler, Samuel (1835–1902). Author and artist. Grandson of Samuel Butler (1774– 1839). Emigrated to New Zealand in 1859; returned to Britain after publishing an account of his time farming in the colony, A first year in Canterbury settlement (1863). Published books on art, music, literature, and philosophy, including the novels Erewhon (1872) and The way of all flesh (1903); published a two-volume life of his grandfather, Life of Samuel Butler, bishop of Lichfield (1896). Became a critic of Darwinism from the 1870s. (Autobiography, pp. 167–219, DNB.) 11 May 1872, [before 30 May 1872] (to Francis Darwin), 30 May 1872

688

Biographical register

Butler, Sarah Maria. (1797/8–72). Daughter of John Gray of Wembley Park, Middlesex. Married George Butler, the headmaster of Harrow School, in 1818. (ODNB s.v. Butler, George (1774–1853); Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/1324/59/33), England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1858–1966 (Ancestry.com).) Butler, Thomas (1806–86). Clergyman. BA, Cambridge (St John’s College), 1829. Rector of Langar with Barnston, Nottinghamshire, 1834–76. Father of Samuel Butler (1835–1902). (Alum. Cantab., ODNB s.v. Butler, Samuel (1835–1902).) Callandar, Robert John (1832–1902). Civil servant. Assistant secretary at the Office of Works. (BMD (Birth index, Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/100/56/1); Post Office London directory 1872.) Cameron, Julia Margaret (1815–79). Photographer. Born in India, but spent much of her childhood in England and France. Became a friend of John Herschel’s in South Africa, where she went in 1835 to convalesce from an illness. Married Charles Hay Cameron in Calcutta in 1838, and acted as a social organiser and hostess for the governor-general of India, Lord Henry Hardinge, in the 1840s. The family returned to England in 1848, and moved to Freshwater, Isle of Wight, in 1860. Cameron took up photography in 1863; was elected to the Photographic Society of London, 1864, and organised her first solo exhibition in 1865. She exhibited regularly in Europe. Emigrated to Ceylon (Sri Lanka) with her husband in 1875. (ODNB.) Cameron, Verney Lovett (1844–94). Explorer in Africa. Joined the Royal Navy in 1857. Took part in a second expedition to find David Livingstone in central Africa, 1872–3, and retrieved Livingstone’s journals from Ujiji. Continued travelling in Africa until 1875 and was the first European to cross Africa from east to west. Travelled from Turkey to India, 1878–9, and joined Richard Burton on a mission to west Africa, 1881–2. (ODNB.) Campbell, George (1824–92). Scottish administrator. Educated at St Andrews University. Entered the service of the East India Company in 1842. Held positions of magistrate, and judicial and financial commissioner; lieutenant-governor of Bengal, 1870–4. Returned to Scotland in 1874. Liberal MP for Kirkcaldy, 1875–92. Wrote works on politics and ethnography. Knighted, 1873. (ODNB.) Campbell, George Douglas, 8th duke of Argyll (1823–1900). Scottish statesman and author of works on science, religion, and politics. A defender of the concept of design in nature. Chancellor of St Andrews University, 1851–1900. President of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 1860–4. Privy seal, 1852–5, 1859– 60, 1860–6, and 1880–1; postmaster-general, 1855–8 and 1860; secretary of state for India, 1868–74. Succeeded to the dukedom in 1847. FRS 1851. (ODNB.) Canby, William Marriott (1831–1904). American botanist, businessman, and philanthropist. Lived in Wilmington, Delaware. Published several articles on insectivorous plants. Amassed a substantial herbarium, which was sold to the College of Pharmacy, City of New York. (Harshberger 1899.)

Biographical register

689

Candolle, Alphonse de (1806–93). Swiss botanist, lawyer, and politician. Active in the administration of the city of Geneva until 1860. Responsible for the introduction of postage stamps to Switzerland. Professor of botany and director of the botanic gardens, Geneva, from 1835. Concentrated on his own research after 1850. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1869. (DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) 2 November [1872], 11 December 1872 Candolle, Anne Casimir Pyramus (Casimir) de (1836–1918). Swiss botanist. Son of Alphonse de Candolle; assistant and colleague of his father. Published monographs of several families of plants. Foreign member, Linnean Society of London, 1893. (DBS, Proceedings of the Linnean Society of London (1918–19): 51–2.) Canestrini, Giovanni (1835–1900). Italian zoologist. Studied philosophy and natural sciences at Vienna, receiving his degree in 1861. Professor of natural history, Modena, 1862–9. Professor of zoology and comparative anatomy and physiology, Padua, 1869–1900. Translated the first Italian edition of Origin (1864) in association with Leonardo Salimbeni. Worked mainly in ichthyology and later on human origins. (DBI, Pancaldi 1991.) Carbonnier, Pierre (1829–83). French fish-breeder. Worked in Paris from 1855, making aquariums. Investigated the transport of living fish and acclimatisation of exotic fish species in France. Author of several books on fish and articles in the Bulletin de la Société d’acclimatation. (DBF.) Cardwell, Edward, 1st Viscount Cardwell (1813–86). Politician. Liberal MP for Oxford City, 1853–74. Secretary of state for war, 1868–74; carried out wideranging army reforms, including, in 1871, the abolition of the purchase of commissions. Became Viscount Cardwell of Ellerbeck in 1874. (ODNB.) Carl Alexander, grand-duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach (1818–1901). Ruler of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach from 1853. (Europäische Stammtafeln.) Carlier, Antoine Guillaume (1829/30–1911). French-born language teacher and author. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/1950/32/7).) 16 April [1872] Carlyle, Thomas (1795–1881). Essayist and historian. (ODNB.) 16 April [1872] Carneri, Bartholomäus von (1821–1909). Austrian politician and philosopher. Studied philosophy at the University of Vienna. Managed the Wildhaus estate in Styria, Austria, from 1857. Served as a member of the Styrian Landtag, 1861– 3. Represented Styrian landowners in the Reichstag, 1870–85. Wrote works on humanitarian social ethics that were influenced by Ernst Haekel’s Darwinism. (DBE.) 12 March 1872 Carpenter, William Benjamin (1813–85). Naturalist. Fullerian Professor of physiology at the Royal Institution of Great Britain, 1844–8; physiology lecturer, London Hospital, 1845–56; professor of forensic medicine, University College,

690

Biographical register

Carpenter, William Benjamin, cont. London, 1849–59. Registrar of the University of London, 1856–79. President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1872. Founding member of the Marine Biological Association. FRS 1844. (DNB, DSB, Modern English biography, Royal Institution of Great Britain, www.rigb.org.) Carter, Charles Henry (b. 1839). Physician. BA, London, 1867; MD, 1871; curator, anatomical museum, University College, London. Clinical assistant, Children’s Hospital, Great Ormond Street. Physician, Hospital for Women at Soho Square. (BMD (Birth index), Medical directory.) Carter, Henry John (1813–95). Surgeon and naturalist. Studied medicine at University College, London, and Ecole de Médecine, Paris. Surgeon in the East India Company, 1842–62; stationed in Bombay from 1846. Retired to Devonshire in 1864. Noted for his papers on South Asian and Arabian geology, and for his extensive researches on sponges and foraminifera. Royal Society Royal Medallist, 1872. FRS 1859. (Modern English biography, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 58 (1895): liv–lvii, Sarjeant 1980–96.) Carus, Julius Victor (1823–1903). German comparative anatomist. Conservator of the Museum of Comparative Anatomy, Oxford University, 1849–51. Professor extraordinarius of comparative anatomy and director of the zoological museum, University of Leipzig, 1853. Translated the third German edition of Origin (1867) and, subsequently, twelve other works by CD. (DSB, NDB.) 27 January [1872], 14 July 1872, 16 July 1872, 3 August [1872], 23 September 1872, 7 October 1872, 10 October [1872], 11 October 1872, 15 October [1872], 24 October 1872, 27 October [1872], 31 October 1872, 11 November [1872], 10 December 1872, 12 December [1872] Carus, Sophie Catherine (1827–84). Daughter of Friedrich Christian Hasse (1773–1848) of Leipzig. Married Julius Victor Carus in 1853. (NDB s.v. Carus, Julius Viktor.) Castagnola, Stefano (1825–91). Italian lawyer and politician. Studied law at Genoa. Minister of agriculture, industry, and commerce, 1869–73. (DBI.) Cavanna, Guelfo (1850–1920). Italian zoologist. Degree in medicine and surgery, Pisa, 1870; assistant in zoology and comparative anatomy, 1871–2. Professor, zoology and comparative vertebrate anatomy, Florence, 1874–95. (Balducci 1921.) Cecil, Sackville Arthur, Lord (1848–98). Company director. Son of James Brownlow William Cecil, 2d marquess of Salisbury (d. 1868), and Mary Catherine Stanley. BA, Cambridge (Trinity College), 1869; MA, 1872. Assistant general manager of the Great Eastern Railway, 1878–80. General Manager, Metropolitan District Railway, 1880–5. Chairman of the Exchange Telegraph Company, 1889–98. (Alum. Cantab., Burke’s peerage.) Chambord, Henri Charles Ferdinand Marie Dieudonné, comte de (1820– 83). French nobleman. Grandson of Charles X of France. (DBF.) Chapuis, Félicien (1824–79). Belgian entomologist and physician. Studied

Biographical register

691

medicine at the University of Liège and practised in Verviers. His entomological publications were mainly on the Coleoptera. Amateur pigeon fancier; wrote Le pigeon voyageur belge (1865). (BNB.) Charma, Antoine (1801–69). French philosopher. Studied at the Collège Bourbon and the École normale supériere, Paris, until 1822. Professor, Caen, from 1830. Doctor of letters, 1831, for Essai sur le langage and a Latin thesis on the purpose of the arts. Accused of anticlericalism, materialism, and atheism. (DBF.) Chaumont, Francis Stephen Bennet François de (1833–88). Physician and military surgeon. MD, Edinburgh, 1853; LRCS, 1853; FRCS, 1864. Assistant surgeon with the Army Medical Department, 1854; surgeon, 1865, surgeon-major, 1876. Served with the Rifle Brigade in the Crimea in 1855. Assistant professor of military hygiene, Army Medical School, Netley hospital, 1863–76; professor, 1876–88. (Edinburgh Academy register 1914, Modern English biography.) Chikhachëv, Nikolai Matveevich (1830–1917). Russian admiral. Rear-admiral, 1867; vice-admiral, 1880; admiral, 1892. Managing director, Russian Steam Navigation and Trading Company. (Entsiklopedicheskii slovar, Bol’shaya entsiklopediya.) Child, Coles William John (1813–73). Bromley landowner. Resided at Bromley Palace, Kent. (Burke’s peerage.) Clark, Henry James (1826–73). Zoologist. Student and assistant of Louis Agassiz. Assistant curator, Museum of Comparative Anatomy, Harvard, from 1859. Assistant professor of zoology, Lawrence Scientific School, Harvard, 1860–5. Professor of botany, zoology, and geology, Pennsylvania State University, 1866–9. Professor of natural history, University of Kentucky, 1869–72. Professor of veterinary science, University of Massachusetts, from 1872. (ANB.) Clarke, Charles Baron (1832–1906). Botanist. BA, University of Cambridge, 1856. Lecturer in mathematics, Queen’s College, Cambridge, 1858–65. In 1865, entered the Bengal civil service, where he worked as an inspector of schools. Collected plants in India. Superintendent, Calcutta botanical gardens, 1869–71. Contributed to Joseph Dalton Hooker’s Flora of British India and worked as a volunteer at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 1887–1906. FRS 1882. (ODNB.) Clarke, Richard Trevor (1813–97). Army officer and horticulturist. Major in the Northampton and Rutland Infantry Militia, 1862. Bred nearly thirty new varieties of begonias and many new strains of cotton. Awarded a gold medal by the Cotton Supply Association of Manchester. Member of the Royal Horticultural Society; served on the council and scientific committee for many years; awarded the society’s Veitchian medal, 1894. (Army list; R. Desmond 1994; Gardeners’ Chronicle, 17 April 1897, p. 263.) Clemens, Samuel Langhorne (1835–1910). American author and lecturer. Wrote under the pen name Mark Twain. (ANB.) Close, Maxwell Henry (1822–1903). Irish geologist. BA, Trinity College, Dublin, 1846; MA, 1867. Ordained priest in the Church of England, 1848. Had various

692

Biographical register

Close, Maxwell Henry, cont. church postings in England, but returned to Dublin in 1861 and became a gentleman scholar. President, Royal Geological Society of Ireland, 1877–9. Published on glaciation in Ireland. (ODNB.) 29 October 1872 (and G. H. Kinahan) Clowes, William (1807–83). Printer. Together with his brothers Winchester (1808– 62) and George (1814–86), took over the London printing firm established by his father, William Clowes (1779–1847). (ODNB.) William Clowes & Sons. Printers. William Clowes (1807–83), eldest son of William Clowes (1779–1847), joined his father’s printing business in 1823; the name of the firm was changed to William Clowes & Sons in 1839. Printed the official catalogue of the Great Exhibition of 1851. Introduced improvements in music printing. Printers to John Murray. (ODNB.) Cobbe, Frances Power (1822–1904). Writer and philanthropist. Wrote extensively on religious and ethical subjects. Leading campaigner for women’s rights and against animal vivisection. (ODNB.) [26 November 1872], 28 November 1872, 28 November [1872], 25 December [1872] Cocchi, Igino (1827–1913). Italian geologist. Professor of geology, Istituto di Studi Superiori di Perfezionamento, and curator, Museo di Fisica e Storia Naturale, Florence, 1860–73. Director, Società Marmifera d’Arni, 1873. (DBI.) Cockburn, Alexander James Edmund, 12th baronet (1802–80). Judge. Fellow, Trinity Hall, Cambridge, 1829–50. Called to the bar, 1829. Liberal MP for Southampton, 1847. Attorney-general, 1851. Chief justice of the queen’s bench, 1859. Presided over the controversial perjury trial of Arthur Orton, the Tichborne claimant, in 1874. Knighted, 1850; succeeded his uncle as 12th baronet, 1858. (ODNB.) Cohn, Ferdinand Julius (1828–98). German botanist and bacteriologist. Professor extraordinarius, University of Breslau, 1859; professor, 1872. Founded the first institute for plant physiology, at Breslau, in 1866. In 1870, founded the journal Beiträge zur Biologie der Pflanzen, in which the earliest articles on bacteriology appeared. Worked on unicellular algae, and attempted to devise a system of classification for lower plants based on Darwinian transmutation theory. Foreign member, Royal Society, 1897. (DSB, NDB.) Cole, Henry (1808–82). Civil servant. Secretary, Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures, and Commerce. A leading organiser of the Great Exhibition (1851); later promoted the government purchase of land in South Kensington for a complex of museums and schools in science and the decorative and industrial arts, including the South Kensington Museum (later divided into the Victoria and Albert Museum and Science Museum). Knighted, 1875. (ODNB.) Colquhoun, John (1805–85). Scottish writer. Author of works on Highland sports. (ODNB.) Columbus, Christopher (1451–1506). European explorer. (EB.) Comte, Isidore Auguste Marie François Xavier (Auguste) (1798–1857). French philosopher. Private secretary to Claude Henri de Rouvroy, comte de

Biographical register

693

Saint-Simon, 1817–23. Founded the Association polytechnique, a group devoted to the education of the working classes, in 1830; the Société positiviste, devoted to the promulgation of the ‘Cult of Humanity’, in 1848. Adopted the term ‘positivism’ for his philosophy. (DSB.) Conder, Claude Reignier (1848–1910). Army officer and explorer of Palestine. Studied at University College, London, and the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich; commissioned into the Royal Engineers, 1870. Carried out a scientific survey of Palestine, 1872–5 and 1881–2. Published extensively on Palestine. (ODNB.) Conway, Moncure Daniel (1832–1907). American preacher and author. Pastor of the Unitarian Church, Washington, until 1856, when he was dismissed because of his outspoken anti-slavery views. Preacher at the First Congregational Church, Cincinnati, until 1862, when he became editor of the Boston anti-slavery newspaper Commonwealth. Moved to Britain in 1863 and, in addition to writing and public speaking, became pastor at the South Place Chapel, Finsbury, London, until 1884, and 1892–7. (DAB.) 24 December 1872 Conybeare, Charles Ranken (1820/1–85). Clergyman. Vicar of Itchin Stoke, Hampshire, 1857–85. (Alum. Oxon.) Cook, James (1728–79). Naval officer, navigator, explorer, and marine surveyor. Commander of several voyages of discovery. Circumnavigated the world, 1768– 71 and 1772–5. FRS 1776. (DSB, ODNB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Cooke, Robert Francis (1816–91). Publisher. Cousin of John Murray and partner in his publishing company, which published many of CD’s books. (Correspondence vol. 13, letter from John Murray, 1 April 1865, Modern English biography.) 12 February 1872, 27 July 1872, 29 July 1872, 1 August 1872, 4 August 1872, 6 August 1872, 7 August 1872, 8 August [1872], 9 August 1872, 10 August [1872], 13 August 1872 (to G. H. Darwin), [14 August 1872], 14 August 1872, 15 August 1872, 16 August 1872, 17 August 1872, 21 August 1872, 23 August 1872, 23 August 1872, 26 August 1872, 2 October 1872, 3 October 1872, 4 October 1872, 9 October 1872, 11 October 1872, [after 11 October 1872], 22 October 1872, 23 October [1872], 25 October 1872, [25 October 1872], 26 October 1872, 27 October [1872], 20 November 1872, 20 November [1872], 25 November 1872, 6 December 1872, 7 December [1872] Cooper, Anthony Ashley, 7th earl of Shaftsbury, (1801–85). Politician and philanthropist. Urged reform of laws protecting factory workers, colliery workers, and chimney-sweeps. Succeeded to the earldom in 1851. (ODNB.) Cooper, James Davis (1846–1922). Wood-engraver. Established his own woodengraving business in London, 1849. In 1857, patented a process for engraving by which the area to be printed black was cut out and the recesses filled to make an electrotype; this never came into general use. (ODNB.) Cooper, William (b. 1818/19). (Letter from William Cooper, 21 September 1872.) 21 September 1872 Cope, Edward Drinker (1840–97). American biologist and palaeontologist.

694

Biographical register

Cope, Edward Drinker, cont. Worked on the reptile collection at the Smithsonian Institution, 1859. Studied the collections of Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology and the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, in the 1860s. Taught zoology at Haverford College, Pennsylvania, 1864–7. Made several palaeontological expeditions to the western states from the early 1870s. Professor of geology and later zoology, University of Pennsylvania, from 1889. (ANB.) Cox, Edward William (1809–79). Lawyer and publisher. Called to the bar at the Middle Temple, 1843; joined the western circuit. Serjeant-at-law, 1868–77. Published the Field, Crockford’s clerical directory, and Exchange and Mart. Founder and editor of the Law Times. Established and was president of the Psychological Society of Great Britain, 1875–9. (ODNB.) Craig, John S. (1853–1923). Scottish medical student. MB CM Aberdeen University, 1874. Practiced in Birmingham. (1871 Scotland census, Leslie parish, 1/12/23; letter from J. S. Craig, 4 November 1872; Medical directory 1887; National probate inventory (accessed on Ancestry.com, 29 June 2012); Roll of the graduates of the University of Aberdeen.) 4 November 1872, 7 November 1872 Crawley, Charles (1846/7–99). Barrister. BA, Cambridge, 1870. Admitted to Lincoln’s Inn, 1870; called to the bar, 1874; worked on the Oxford circuit. Viceprincipal, Working Men’s College, 1883–7. Law examiner, 1892–4. Author of legal works. (Alum. Cantab., Modern English biography.) [18 April 1872], 19 April [1872] Crawley, William (1802–96). Clergyman. BA, Cambridge, 1824. Fellow, Magdalene College, 1824–34. Priest, 1826. Rector of Bryngwyn, 1834–96. Archdeacon of Monmouth, 1844–85. Father of Charles Crawley. (Modern English biography.) Crichton-Browne, James (1840–1938). Scottish physician, psychiatrist, and author. Graduated from the College of Surgeons, Edinburgh, in 1862. Medical director, West Riding Asylum, Wakefield, 1866–75. Lord chancellor’s visitor in lunacy, 1875–1922. Pioneering researcher into the causes and management of mental illness. Editor, West Riding Lunatic Asylum medical reports, 1871–5. One of the founders of Brain, 1878; co-editor, 1878–85. Author of a number of popular works on mental health and social policy. Knighted, 1886. FRS 1883. (DNB.) Crookes, Ellen (1835/6–1916). Daughter of William Humphrey of Darlington. Married William Crookes in 1856. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/200/7/6); ODNB s.v. Crookes, William.) Crookes, William (1832–1919). Chemist and science journalist. Superintendent of the meteorological department at the Radcliffe Observatory, Oxford, 1854; lecturer in Chemistry, Chester Anglican teachers’ training college, 1855. Editor of Chemical News, 1859–1906. Discovered the element thallium in 1861. Investigated mediums, including D. D. Home and Florence Cook, in the 1870s and 1880s. President of the Royal Society of London, 1913–15. Knighted, 1897. FRS 1863. (ODNB.)

Biographical register

695

Crotch, George Robert (1842–74). Entomologist. BA, Cambridge (St John’s), 1864; MA, 1867. Second assistant librarian, Cambridge University Library, 1867– 71. Rearranged the insect collection at the Museum of Zoology and Comparative Anatomy, Cambridge, in 1871. Embarked for North America to collect specimens in 1872. Worked at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard, 1873–4. Specialised in the Coleoptera, especially Coccinellidae and Erotylidae. (Alum. Cantab., Smart and Wager 1977.) Crotch, William Duppa (1831/2–1903). Entomologist and zoologist. Specialised in the Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, and Hemiptera. Travelled with his brother George Robert Crotch (1841–74) on several collecting expeditions. Married a Swede and settled in Scandinavia, where he studied lemmings. (Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine 39 (1903): 256, Gilbert 1977.) 17 November 1872 Cupples, Anne Jane (1839–98). Scottish author. Second daughter of Archibald Douglas. Married George Cupples in 1858. Wrote children’s books. Lived in New Zealand from 1891. (Modern English biography.) 8 November [1872] (to Emma Darwin) Cupples, George (1822–91). Scottish writer and dog breeder. Served as an apprentice on an eighteen-month voyage to India and back on the Patriot King, circa 1838; had his indentures cancelled on his return. Studied arts and theology at Edinburgh University for eight years. Published a number of novels and other books, and wrote many articles and stories for journals. Bred Scottish deer-hounds. (Correspondence vol. 16, letter from George Cupples, 1 May 1868; Cupples 1894; Modern English biography.) 11 November 1872 Cuvier, Jean Léopold Nicolas Frédéric (Georges) (1769–1832). French systematist, comparative anatomist, palaeontologist, and administrator. Professor of natural history, Collège de France, 1800–32; professor of comparative anatomy, Muséum d’histoire naturelle, 1802–32. Permanent secretary to the Académie des sciences from 1803. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1806. (DBF, DSB.) Dall, William Healey (1845–1927). American natural historian, palaeontologist, and malacologist. Mentored in malacology by Louis Agassiz and others. In 1865, worked with the Western Union Telegraph Expedition, preparing to lay an intercontinental telegraph line through the Yukon and Alaska across the Bering Straits to Siberia. Collected specimens for the Smithsonian Institution in California, the Aleutian Islands, Alaska, and Siberia; became director of the scientific corps in 1866. Published Alaska and its resources (1870). Appointed acting assistant to the US Coast Survey, 1871, with responsibility for surveying the Aleutian Islands and Alaska. Palaeontologist, US Geological Survey, 1884–1923. Harriman Alaska Expedition, 1899. Professor, Wagner Free Institute of Science, Philadelphia, 1893–1927. (ANB.) Dallas, William Sweetland (1824–90). Entomologist, author, and translator. Prepared lists of insects for the British Museum, 1847–58. Curator of the Yorkshire

696

Biographical register

Dallas, William Sweetland, cont. Philosophical Society’s museum, 1858–68. Assistant secretary to the Geological Society of London, 1868–90. Translated Fritz Müller’s Für Darwin (1869); prepared the index for Variation and the glossary for Origin 6th ed. Editor, Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 1868–90, Popular Science Review, 1877–80. (Freeman 1978, Geological Magazine n.s. decade 3, vol. 7 (1890): 333–6, Modern English biography, Sarjeant 1980–96.) Dana, Edward Salisbury (1849–1935). American mineralogist. Son of James Dwight Dana. Graduated from Yale University, 1870; undertook graduate studies at Yale, Heidelberg, and Vienna; PhD Yale, 1876. Curator of mineralogy, 1874– 1922; assistant professor of natural philosophy, 1879–90; professor of physics, 1890–1917. Published on mineralogy. (DAB (Supplement 1), Historical register of Yale University.) Dana, James Dwight (1813–95). American geologist and zoologist. Geologist and mineralogist with Charles Wilkes’s expedition to the South Seas, 1838–42; wrote reports on the geology, zoophytes, and Crustacea. An associate editor of the American Journal of Science and Arts from 1846. Professor of natural history, Yale University, 1855–64; professor of geology and mineralogy, 1864–90. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1884. (ANB, DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) 23 May 1872 Dante Alighieri (1265–1321). Italian poet. (EB.) Dareste, Gabriel-Madeleine-Camille (Camille) (1822–99). French zoologist. A specialist in experimental embryology. Doctor of medicine, 1847. Doctor of science, 1851. Taught natural history at various provincial institutions. Professor of zoology, University of Lille, 1864–72. Professor of ichthyology and herpetology, Muséum d’histoire naturelle, Paris, 1872. Director of the laboratory of teratology, later attached to the École des hautes-études, 1875. Awarded the grand prize in physiology by the Académie des sciences for Recherches sur la production artificielle de monstruosités (1877). (DBF, Dictionnaire universel des contemporains.) Darwin, Elizabeth (Bessy/Lizzy) (1847–1926). CD’s daughter. (Darwin pedigree, Freeman 1978.) [7 March 1872 or later] (from L. C. Wedgwood) Darwin, Emma (1808–96). Youngest daughter of Josiah Wedgwood II. Married CD, her cousin, in 1839. (Emma Darwin (1904) and (1915).) 9 March 1872 (from J. B. Innes), [13 May 1872] (from J. D. Hooker), 19 October 1872 (from J. D. Hooker), 8 November [1872] (from A. J. Cupples), 9 December [1872] (from E. A. Darwin) Darwin, Erasmus Alvey (1804–81). CD’s brother. Attended Shrewsbury School, 1815–22. Matriculated at Christ’s College, Cambridge, 1822; Edinburgh University, 1825–6. Qualified in medicine but never practised. Lived in London from 1829. (Alum. Cantab., Freeman 1978.) 3 April [1872], 20 November [1872], 9 December [1872 (to Emma Darwin), 11 December [1872], 13 December [1872]

Biographical register

697

Darwin, Francis (1848–1925). CD’s son. Botanist. BA (Trinity College) Cambridge, 1870. Qualified as a physician but did not practise. Collaborated with CD on several botanical projects, 1875–82. Lecturer in botany, Cambridge University, 1884; reader, 1888–1904. Published Life and letters of Charles Darwin and More letters. President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1908. Knighted, 1913. FRS 1882. (DSB, ODNB.) 6 January 1872, 13 May [1872], [before 30 May 1872] (from Samuel Butler), [before 30 June 1872], [before 30 June 1872], 30 June [1872] (from A. H. Garrod), [before 22 August 1872], [after August 1872?] Darwin, George Howard (1845–1912). CD’s son. Mathematician. BA (Trinity College), Cambridge, 1868; fellow, 1868–78. Studied law in London, 1869–72; called to the bar, 1872, but did not practise. Plumian Professor of astronomy and experimental philosophy, Cambridge University, 1883–1912. President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1905. Knighted, 1905. FRS 1879. (DSB, Men-at-the-bar, ODNB.) 2 May 1872, 3 May [1872], 13 August 1872 (from R. F. Cooke), [13 August 1872] Darwin, Henrietta Emma. See Litchfield, Henrietta Emma. [8 May 1866 – 29 August 1871] (from Mary Lubbock), [1867–72] (from F. J. Wedgwood), [1867–72] (from F. J. Wedgwood), [1867–72] (from F. J. Wedgwood) Darwin, Horace (1851–1928). CD’s son. Civil engineer. BA, Trinity College, Cambridge, 1874. Apprenticed to an engineering firm in Kent; returned to Cambridge in 1877 to design and make scientific instruments. Founder and director of the Cambridge Scientific Instrument Company. Mayor of Cambridge, 1896–7. Knighted, 1918. FRS 1903. (Alum. Cantab., ODNB.) [20 January 1872] (from Amy Ruck), [1 February 1872] (to Horace Darwin) Darwin, Leonard (1850–1943). CD’s son. Military engineer. Attended the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich. Commissioned in the Royal Engineers, 1871; major, 1889. Served on several scientific expeditions, including those for the observation of the transit of Venus in 1874 and 1882. Instructor in chemistry and photography, School of Military Engineering, Chatham, 1877–82. Intelligence service, War Office, 1885–90. Liberal Unionist MP, Lichfield division of Staffordshire, 1892–5. President, Royal Geographical Society of London, 1908–11; Eugenics Education Society, 1911–28. Chairman, Bedford College, London University, 1913–20. (M. Keynes 1943, RMA Gentleman Cadet Register (RMAS archives, Sandhurst collection), Sarjeant 1980–96, WWW.) [29 March 1872] Darwin, Robert Waring (1766–1848). CD’s father. Physician. Had a large practice in Shrewsbury and resided at The Mount. Son of Erasmus Darwin (ODNB) and his first wife, Mary Howard. Married Susannah, daughter of Josiah Wedgwood I (ODNB), in 1796. FRS 1788. (Freeman 1978.) Darwin, Susan Elizabeth (1803–66). CD’s sister. Lived at The Mount, Shrewsbury, the family home, until her death. (Darwin pedigree, Freeman 1978.) Darwin, Susannah (1765–1817). CD’s mother. Daughter of Josiah Wedgwood

698

Biographical register

Darwin, Susannah, cont. I. Married Robert Waring Darwin in 1796. (Darwin pedigree.) Darwin, William Erasmus (1839–1914). CD’s eldest son. Banker. BA, Cambridge (Christ’s College), 1862. Partner in the Southampton and Hampshire Bank, Southampton, 1861. Chairman of the Southampton Water Company. Amateur photographer. (Alum. Cantab., F. Darwin 1914.) [1 January 1872], 3 January [1872], 9 January [1872], 23 January [1872], 26 January [1872], 23 [February 1872 – October 1874], [29 February 1872], [1 March 1872], [3 March 1872], [13 June 1872] (from J. D. Hooker) Davidson, Thomas (1817–85). Artist and palaeontologist. Fellow of the Geological Society of London. Expert on fossil brachiopods. FRS 1857. (ODNB, Sarjeant 1980–96.) Davis, Andrew Jackson (1826–1910). American spiritualist and author. Became involved in mesmerism in 1841, and became a Swedenborgian after a visionary experience in 1844. Published revelations revealed in trances in 1847, and published a magazine, 1847–9. Wrote his major work, The great harmonia, 1850– 5. Took a degree from the United States Medical College, New York, in 1886. (ANB.) Dawkins, William Boyd (1837–1929). Geologist and palaeontologist. Member of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, 1861–9. Curator of natural history, Manchester Museum, 1869. Professor of geology, Owens College, Manchester, 1874–1908. Specialised in fossil mammals. FRS 1867. (ODNB.) Dawson, John William (1820–99). Canadian geologist and educationalist. Investigated the geology of the maritime provinces with Charles Lyell in 1842 and 1852. Superintendent of education for common schools in Nova Scotia, 1850. Appointed principal and professor of geology at McGill University, 1855. Knighted, 1884. FRS 1862. (DNB, DSB.) 19 January 1872 Decaisne, Joseph (1807–82). Belgian botanist. Gardener at the Jardin des plantes, Paris, 1824. Professor of agricultural statistics, Collège de France, 1848. Professor of plant cultivation, Muséum d’histoire naturelle, 1850. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1877. (DBF, NBU.) De la Cour, Anne (1793/4–1883). Landowner. Resident at ‘North Side off High Street’, Frindsbury, Rochester, Kent. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office: RG11/881/ 71/21).) Delbrück, Martin Friedrich Rudolf (Rudolf) (1817–1903). German statesman. Collaborator of Otto von Bismarck. President, Federal Chancellery of the North German Confederation, 1867. Prussian state minister, 1868. President of the Imperial Chancellery, 1871; responsible for the construction of imperial institutions and authorities. Resigned in 1876. Ennobled, 1896. (DBE.) Delpino, Federico (1833–1905). Italian botanist. Travelled extensively for botanical purposes as a youth and in 1873. Civil servant, ministry of finances, Turin, 1852–6; assistant in the botanic garden and museum, Florence, 1867; lecturer,

Biographical register

699

Vallombrosa school of forestry, 1871; professor of botany and director of the botanic garden, Genoa, 1875–84; professor, University of Bologna, 1884; professor of botany and head of the botanic garden, Naples, 1894. (DBI, Mayerhöfer 1959–70, Penzig 1905.) 10 November 1872 Denny, John (b. c. 1819, d. 1881). Physician and horticulturist. Medical officer at the Stoke Newington Dispensary. Founder member and treasurer of the Pelargonium Society. Raised zonal pelargoniums. (R. Desmond 1994.) 9 July 1872, 12 July 1872, 14 July [1872], 20 July 1872, 22 July 1872 Despard, George Packenham (1813–81). Clergyman. Secretary of the Patagonian Mission Society, and of the Bristol and Clifton Clerical Association. Missionary in Tierra del Fuego, based on Keppel Island, 1856–61. Emigrated in the 1860s to Australia, where he was minister of St Paul’s, Sandhurst, until 1881. (Alum. Cantab.) Dicey, Albert Venn (1835–1922). Jurist. BA, Oxford, 1858. Pursued journalistic and scholarly projects in London, 1861–82. Called to the bar, 1863. Married Elinor Mary Bonham-Carter in 1872. Vinerian Professor of English law at Oxford, 1882–1909. Queen’s counsel, 1890. (ODNB.) Dickson, Alexander (1836–87). Scottish botanist. Professor of botany, Dublin University, 1866–8; at the Royal College of Science, Dublin, 1868; at Glasgow University, 1868–79. Professor of botany, Edinburgh University, and regius keeper of the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, 1879–87. (R. Desmond 1994, ODNB.) Dickson, James. Manager of the Northern Whig newspaper in Belfast. (Letter from James Dickson, 14 December 1872.) 14 December 1872 Dillenius, Johann Jakob (1687–1747). German-born botanist. Physician in Geissen before moving to England in 1721. Lived with his patron, William Sherard, in Oxford and London. First president of the Botanical Society (London), 1721. Professor of botany at Oxford, 1734. FRS 1724. (ODNB.) Disraeli, Benjamin (1804–81). Statesman and author. Prime minister, 1868, 1874– 6. Created earl of Beaconsfield, 1876. (ODNB.) Dixon, Edmund Saul (1809–93). Clergyman and poultry-fancier. Rector of Intwood with Keswick, Norfolk, 1842–93. Author of books on the history and management of poultry. Also published under the pseudonym Eugene Sebastian Delamer. (Modern English biography.) Dobbs, Archibald Edward (b. 1838). Barrister. BA, Oxford (Balliol College), 1862. Called to the bar, 1865. (Alum. Oxon., Men-at-the-bar.) 17 January 1872 Dobell, Henry William (1813/14–95). Customs official. Lived in the house formerly owned by James Sherard in Eltham, Kent. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG110/728/54/24); letter from J. J. Weir, 31 July 1872.) Dodgson, Charles Lutwidge (1832–98). Mathematician, photographer, and

700

Biographical register

Dodgson, Charles Lutwidge, cont. author. Appointed lecturer in mathematics at Christ Church College, Oxford, 1855. Ordained deacon in the Church of England, 1861. Wrote fiction under the pseudonym Lewis Carroll. (DSB, ODBN.) 10 December 1872, 14 December [1872] Dohrn, Felix Anton (Anton) (1840–1909). German zoologist. Studied medicine and zoology at various German universities. PhD, Breslau, 1865. Studied with Ernst Haeckel and became Haeckel’s first assistant at Jena, where he habilitated in 1868. Founded the Zoological Station at Naples, built between 1872 and 1874. The station was the first marine laboratory, and served as a model for other similar institutions throughout the world. (DBE, DSB, Heuss 1991.) 3 February 1872, 15 February 1872, 21 August 1872, 24 August [1872], 28 August 1872, 13 November 1872 Don, George (1798–1856). Botanist and plant collector. Foreman gardener, Chelsea Physic Garden, 1816–21. Collected plants for the Horticultural Society, 1821–3. Published a four-volume general systematic work on botany and gardening (1831– 8). Fellow of the Linnean Society of London, 1831. (ODNB.) Donders, Frans Cornelis (Franciscus Cornelius) (1818–89). Dutch physiologist and ophthalmologist. MD, Leiden University, 1840. Professor of anatomy at Utrecht military school; professor of physiology at the University of Utrecht, 1862. President of the science section of the Royal Amsterdam academy of sciences, 1865–83. Founder and director of a physiology laboratory at the University of Utrecht, 1866–88. Founder and director of the Netherlands Hospital for Eye Patients, 1858–83. FRS 1866. (NNBW, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 49 (1890–1): vii–xxiv, Tort 1996.) 29 March 1872, 1 April 1872, 8 April 1872, 17 April 1872, 20 April 1872, 26 April 1872, 29 April [1872], 17 June 1872, 14 July 1872, 21 December 1872, 24 December 1872 Dorrell, Mr. Head of typesetting at William Clowes and Sons, printers to CD’s publisher, John Murray. (Correspondence vol. 14, letter from ?, 10 May [1866?]; Correspondence vol. 18, letter to Mr Dorrell, 9 August 1870.) Dorrell, Edmund Robson (1803/4–76). Bookseller and printer. From 1861, head of Edumund Robson Dorrell & Son, booksellers, stationers, and patent agents at 15 Charing Cross Road, London. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/703/43/25); Post Office London directory 1861–76). Dowie, Annie (1835–1903). Daughter of Robert Chambers. Married James Muir Dowie. (BMD (Death index), Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/3572/67/26), IGI (accessed 11 September 2009).) Drake, Johann Friedrich (Friedrich) (1805–82). German sculptor. Studied with Christian Rauch from 1827. Produced numerous monumental works and portrait

Biographical register

701

statues; appointed professor in Berlin. (DBE.) Du Bois-Reymond, Emil Heinrich (1818–96). German physiologist. A founder of the Physikalische Gesellschaft in Berlin, 1845. Instructor in anatomy, Berlin Academy of Art, 1848–53. Elected member of the Prussian Academy of Sciences, 1851; permanent secretary, 1876. Appointed professor of physiology at the University of Berlin, 1858. Worked on animal electricity, and in 1850 invented the nerve galvanometer to measure the electrical impulses in nerve and muscle tissue. (ADB, DSB, NDB.) Duchenne, Guillaume Benjamin Amand (1806–75). French physician. Studied medicine at Paris, then practised in his native town of Boulogne-sur-Mer. Returned to Paris in 1855 and carried out experiments on the therapeutic use of electricity. One of the founders of neurology. (DBF.) Dumont, Léon A. (1837–77). French writer and lawyer. Studied in Valenciennes. Became an advocate. Published several works, mostly on literary criticism and philosophy, including a book on Ernst Haeckel and the theory of evolution in Germany (1873). (DBF.) Dwight, John Sullivan (1813–93). American music critic. Graduated from Harvard College, 1832; Harvard Divinity School, 1836. His views on music were based on a combination of associationist philosophy and transcendentalism. Founded Dwight’s Journal of Music in 1852; sole editor until 1881. (ANB.) Edwards & Kidd. Photographic printers. Premises at 22 Henrietta Street, London. Run by Ernest Edwards and R. L. Kidd. Produced heliotype illustrations for Expression. Taken over by the Heliotype Company by 1870. (Post Office London directory 1871; Wakeman 1973, p. 116.) 30 July [1872] Edwards, Ernest (1837–1903). Photographer. Ran a photographic studio in London, specialising in portraits, 1864–9. Inventor of the heliotype process in 1869 and manager of the Heliotype Company works in Kilburn, 1872. Moved to Boston, and later New York, where he opened commercial firms in landscape photography and colour printing. ( Johnson 1990; Post Office London directory; Pritchard 1994; Prodger 2009; photoLondon, www.photolondon.org.uk (accessed 13 March 2012), s.v. Heliotype Co. Ltd.) 4 September 1872 Edwards, William Henry (1822–1909). American entomologist, lawyer, and businessman. Author of A voyage up the river Amazon (1847) and The butterflies of North America (1874–97). (ANB.) 23 April [1872] Eichwald, Karl Eduard (Eduard) von (1795–1876). Baltic German geologist and palaeontologist. MD, Vilna (now Vilnius) University, 1819. Lecturer in zoology, Dorpat (now Tartu) University, 1821–3; professor, Kazan University, 1823– 7; professor of zoology, comparative anatomy, and obstetrics, Vilna University, 1827–38; St Petersburg, 1838–55. Collected fossils from all over Russia and from

702

Biographical register

Eichwald, Karl Eduard (Eduard) von, cont. 1853 to 1868 published on them in his Lethaea Rossica. A supporter of evolutionary theory after the publication of Origin. (DSB, NDB.) 10 January 1872 Elizabeth I (1533–1603). Queen of England and Ireland. Acceded to the throne in 1558. (ODNB.) Elliot, Adam (1838/9–78). Cotton broker, born in Brazil. Based at the Liverpool cotton exchange. (Post Office directory of Lancashire, Liverpool and Manchester 1873; Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office: RG10/3838/81/50); England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1858–1966 (Ancestry.com).) 5 April 1872 Eliot, George. See Evans, Marian (or Mary Anne). Emerson, Ralph Waldo (1803–82). American clergyman, essayist, and poet. (ANB.) Engelmann, Frans (b. 1870). Grandson of Frans Cornelis Donders. Son of Marie and Theodor Wilhelm Englemann. (Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 49 (1890–1): xvii–xviii, xxi, xxii.) Engelmann, Marie (d. 1870). Daughter of Frans Cornelis Donders. Married Theodor Wilhelm Engelmann in 1869. Died in childbirth. (DSB s.v. Engelmann, Theodor Wilhelm; NNBW 1: 823 s.v. Engelmann, Theodoor Wilhelm.) Engelmann, Paula (b. 1870). Granddaughter of Frans Cornelis Donders. Daughter of Marie and Theodor Wilhelm Englemann. (Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 49 (1890–1): xvii–xviii, xxi, xxii.) Engelmann, Theodor Wilhelm (1843–1909). German physiologist. Son of Wilhelm Engelmann. Studied in Jena, Leipzig, Heidelberg, and Göttingen. Professor of biology and histology, Utrecht, 1871; professor of physiology, 1888. Professor of physiology, Berlin, 1897. (NDB.) Engelmann, Wilhelm (1808–78). German publisher and bibliographer. In 1833, took over the publishing firm founded by his father. (NDB.) Engleheart, Stephen Paul (1831/2–85). Surgeon. Member of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 1859; licentiate of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, 1860. Surgeon in Down, Kent, 1861–70. Medical officer, Second District, Bromley Union, 1863–70; divisional surgeon of police, 1863–70. Resident in Shelton, Norfolk, 1870–81; in Old Calabar, Nigeria, 1882–5. (Medical directory 1861–86, Post Office directory of the six home counties 1862.) [October 1869 or later] Eschricht, Daniel Frederik (1798–1863). Danish physiologist and zoologist. Professor of physiology, University of Copenhagen, from 1830; of physiology and anatomy, from 1832. Specialised in comparative anatomy and embryology. (DBL, Tort 1996.) Espinas, Alfred Victor (Alfred) (1844–1922). French philosopher. Teacher of

Biographical register

703

philosophy at the lycées of Bastia, 1867, Le Havre, 1871, Dijon, 1873. Lecturer, Faculté des lettres, Douai, 1878; Bordeaux, 1880; professor, 1881; dean, 1887. At the Sorbonne, 1893. Retired in 1911. Admirer of Herbert Spencer. (DBF, Larousse du XXe siècle.) March 1872 Evans, Marian (or Mary Anne) (1819–80). Novelist. Published under the name George Eliot. (ODNB.) Evans-Lombe, Elizabeth (1820–98). Sister of Joseph Dalton Hooker. Married Thomas Robert Evans-Lombe in 1853. (L. Huxley ed. 1918, Allan 1967.) Ewart, Joseph (1831–1906). Surgeon. MD, St Andrews, 1853; served in the Bengal Medical Service. Professor of physiology, professor of anatomy, and principal, Calcutta Medical College. Returned to England in 1876; retired in 1879. Fellow, Royal College of Physicians, 1881. Mayor of Brighton, 1891–4. Knighted, 1895. (Physicians.) Eyton, Thomas Campbell (1809–80). Shropshire naturalist. Friend and Cambridge contemporary of CD. Author of several works on natural history. On coming into possession of the family estate at Eyton, Shropshire, in 1855, he built a museum for which he formed a collection of skins and skeletons of European birds. A magistrate throughout his adult life. (ODNB.) 29 February [1872], 4 March 1872 Falconer, Hugh (1808–65). Palaeontologist and botanist. Superintendent of the botanic garden, Saharanpur, India, 1832–42. Superintended the arrangement of Indian fossils for the British Museum in 1844. Superintendent of the Calcutta botanic garden and professor of botany, Calcutta Medical College, 1848–55. Retired owing to ill health and returned to Britain in 1855; pursued palaeontological research while travelling in southern Europe. Vice-president of the Royal Society of London and foreign secretary of the Geological Society of London, 1865. FRS 1845. (DSB, ODNB.) Falk, Paul Ludwig Adalbert von (Adalbert von) (1827–1900). German politican and lawyer. Privy counsellor of justice and reporting counsellor at the Ministry of Justice, 1868; authorised representative at the Bundesrat, where he worked on the legislative foundations of the German empire, 1871. Prussian minister of education and the arts, 1872–9. (DBE.) Farrer, Emma Cecilia (Ida) (1854–1946). Only daughter of Thomas Henry Farrer and Frances Farrer (née Erskine); distantly related to Charles and Emma Darwin. When her father remarried, became step-daughter of Katherine Euphemia (Effie) Wedgwood. Married Horace Darwin in 1880, and with him built, in 1884, and resided at ‘The Orchard’, Cambridge. Active in Cambridgeshire charities related to mental health. (Cattermole and Wolfe 1987, Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980.) Farrer, Frances (1833–70). Daughter of Maitland and William Erskine. Her mother Maitland, a daughter of Sir James Mackintosh, was a half-sister of

704

Biographical register

Farrer, Frances, cont. Frances Emma Elizabeth Wedgwood (1800–89). Married Thomas Henry Farrer in 1854. (ODNB s.v. Farrer, Thomas Henry; Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980 (family tree).) Farrer, Thomas Henry, 1st Baron Farrer (1819–99). Civil servant. BA, Oxford (Balliol College), 1840. Called to the bar, 1844; ceased to practise in 1848. Secretary of the marine department, Board of Trade, 1850, rising to sole permanent secretary of the Board of Trade, 1867–86. In 1854, married Frances Erskine, whose mother, Maitland, was the half-sister of Frances Emma Elizabeth Wedgwood; in 1873, married Katherine Euphemia Wedgwood, daughter of Frances and Hensleigh Wedgwood. Made a baronet, 1883; created Baron Farrer of Abinger, 1893. (ODNB, Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980.) 16 June 1872, 13 October [1872], 17 October 1872 Ffinden, George Sketchley (1836/7–1911). Clergyman. Ordained priest, 1861. Curate of Monks Risborough, Bucks, 1860–1; Newport Pagnell, 1861–2; Moulsoe, Bucks, 1863–9. Domestic chaplain to Earl Carrington, 1871. Vicar of Down, 1871–1911. (BMD (Death index); Crockford’s clerical directory 1872; Freeman 1978.) 21 May [1872] Fick, Heinrich (1822–95). Swiss advocate. Studied in Marburg, Vienna, and Berlin, 1841–5. Doctor of law, Marburg, 1847. Professor extraordinarus of Roman law and commercial law, University of Zurich, 1851; professor, 1864–95. Sought to apply Darwinian principles to legal theory. (Historisches Lexikon der Schweiz.) 26 July [1872] Flourens, Marie Jean Pierre (1794–1867). French physiologist and historian of science. Permanent secretary of the Académie des sciences, 1833. (DBF, DSB.) Flower, William Henry (1831–99). Anatomist and zoologist. Curator of the Hunterian Museum, Royal College of Surgeons of England, 1861–84; Hunterian Professor of comparative anatomy, Royal College of Surgeons, 1870–84. Director of the Natural History Museum, London, 1884–98. President of the Zoological Society of London, 1879–99. President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1889. Knighted, 1892. FRS 1864. (DNB, ODNB.) 18 February 1872 Fontenelle, Bernard le Bovier de (1657–1757). French writer. Published works on astronomy, mathematics, and the origin of fables. Wrote poetry and librettos for operas. Perpetual secretary of the Paris Académie des sciences from 1699; served as director on three occasions. (DBF, DSB.) Forbes, David (1828–76). Geologist and mining engineer. Brother of Edward Forbes. Supervised mining and metallurgical works in Norway, 1848–57. Travelled in South America, 1857–60, in search of ores of nickel and cobalt for the firm of Evans & Askins, nickel–cobalt refiners of Birmingham. After more years of travelling, he settled in England and became foreign secretary to the Iron and Steel Institute in 1869. FRS 1858. (ODNB.) 1 March 1872

Biographical register

705

Forbes, Edward (1815–54). Zoologist, botanist, and palaeontologist. Naturalist on board HMS Beacon, 1841–2. Appointed professor of botany, King’s College, London, and curator of the museum of the Geological Society of London, 1842. Palaeontologist with the Geological Survey of Great Britain, 1844–54. Professor of natural history, Edinburgh University, 1854. FRS 1845. (DSB, ODNB.) Forster, John Cooper (1823–86). Surgeon. MRCS, 1844; MB, London, 1847; FRCS, 1849. Assistant surgeon, Guy’s Hospital, London, 1855; full surgeon, 1870–80. (ODNB.) Foster, Michael (1836–1907). Physiologist and politician. BA, University College, London, 1854; MD, 1859. Practised medicine until 1866. Instructor in physiology and histology, University College, 1867; assistant professor, 1869; Fullerian Professor of physiology, Royal Institution. Praelector in physiology, Trinity College, Cambridge, from 1870; professor of physiology, Cambridge, 1883–1903. MP, University of London, 1900–6. Knighted 1899. FRS 1872. (ODNB.) Fowler, Lorenzo Niles (1811–96). Phrenologist. Conducted phrenological examinations from offices in New York City from 1836. Established a publishing firm with his brother Orson Squire Fowler and Samuel Robert Wells, issuing phrenological works and other educational writings, in 1844. Moved to London in 1863 and established the Fowler Phrenological Institute and the Phrenological Magazine (1880). (ANB.) Fowler, Orson Squire (1809–87). Phrenologist and educational writer. Established the Phrenological Museum, Philadelphia, 1838; editor of the American Phrenological Journal from 1842. Established a publishing firm with his brother Orson Squire Fowler and Samuel Robert Wells, issuing phrenological works and other educational writings, 1844. Withdrew from the firm in 1855 to concentrate on architectural writing and works on sex education. (ANB.) Fox, Catherine (b. 1836? d. 1892). American medium. From 1848, rapping noises occurred in the presence of Fox and her older sister, Margaret, at the family home. Went to New York with her mother and sisters, with Eliab Capron as manager, in 1850. Over the next few years she and her sisters held public and private sittings throughout the eastern United States. Travelled to England in 1871. Married the spiritualist barrister Henry D. Jencken in 1872. Returned to the US in 1885, four years after her husband’s death. (ANB.) Fox, Ellen Sophia (1820–87). Daughter of Basil George Woodd of Hillfield, Hampstead. Married William Darwin Fox in 1846. (Darwin pedigree.) Fox, William Darwin (1805–80). Clergyman. CD’s second cousin. A friend of CD’s at Cambridge; introduced CD to entomology. Maintained an active interest in natural history throughout his life and provided CD with much information. Rector of Delamere, Cheshire, 1838–73. Spent the last years of his life at Sandown, Isle of Wight. (Alum. Cantab., Autobiography, Correspondence.) 13 July [1872], 16 July [1872], 25 October [1872], 29 October [1872] Fraas, Oscar Friedrich (Oscar) (1821–97). German geologist. Priest in Laufen from 1850. Involved with the palaeontological collections at Stuttgart from 1854. Professor, 1856. (DBE.)

706

Biographical register

Franklin, Benjamin (1706–90). American natural philosopher and writer. (ANB.) Frauenstädt, Christian Martin Julius ( Julius) (1813–79). German philosopher. Studied philosophy and theology, University of Berlin, 1833–7. Worked for various journals; as a private tutor, 1841–52. Influenced by Kant, Hegel, and Schopenhauer; named by Schopenhauer as trustee of his manuscripts and publishing rights. Produced the first complete edition of Schopenhauer’s works (1873–4). (DBE.) Furnivall, Frederick James (1825–1910). Philologist and editor. BA, Cambridge, 1846. Called to the bar, 1849. Honorary secretary of the Philological Society, 1853–1910; laid the foundations for the Oxford English dictionary. Involved in founding the Working Men’s College, 1854. Founded a series of literary and philological societies. (ODNB.) 6 December 1872 Galilei, Galileo (1564–1642). Italian physicist and astronomer. Professor of mathematics, University of Pisa and University of Padua; mathematician and philosopher to the grand duke of Tuscany. Published Dialogue concerning the two world systems (1632), discussing the Copernican system, as a result of which he was tried before the Inquisition at Rome. (DSB.) Galton, Douglas Strutt (1822–99). Military engineer and civil servant. Officer in the Royal Engineers. Joined the Ordnance Survey in 1846. Secretary, Railway Commission, 1847; Railway Department, Board of Trade, 1854. Assistant permanent under-secretary of state for war, 1862. Director of public works and buildings, Office of Works, 1869–75. Author of numerous government reports on sanitation, telegraphy, and railways. Member, British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1860; general secretary, 1871–95; president, 1895. Knighted, 1887. FRS 1859. (ODNB.) Galton, Emma Sophia (1811–1904). Sister of Francis Galton. (Darwin pedigree.) Galton, Francis (1822–1911). Traveller, statistician, and scientific writer. CD’s cousin. Explored in south-western Africa, 1850–2. Carried out various researches on heredity. Founder of the eugenics movement. FRS 1860. (DSB, ODNB.) 23 January [1872], 1 February 1872, [before 28 March 1872], 28 March 1872, 29 March [1872], 31 March 1872, 19 April 1872, 21 April [1872], 26 May 1872, 27 May [1872], 28 May 1872, 4 June 1872, 7 June 1872, 29 July 1872, 1 August [1872], 9 August [1872], 11 August 1872, 7 November 1872, 8 November [1872], 15 November 1872, 30 December [1872] Garrod, Alfred Henry (1846–79). Zoologist. Son of Alfred Baring Garrod. Studied medicine at King’s College, London, and natural sciences at St John’s College, Cambridge; graduated December 1871. Elected prosector, Zoological Society of London, June 1871. Fellow, St John’s College, Cambridge, 1873; professor of comparative anatomy, King’s College, London, 1874; Fullerian Professor of physiology, Royal Institution, 1875. As a student, researched the causes of varying

Biographical register

707

body temperature and developed an improved sphygmograph; later specialised in bird anatomy. FRS 1876. (ODNB.) 30 June [1872] (to Francis Darwin) Gärtner, Karl Friedrich von (1772–1850). German physician and botanist. Practised medicine in Calw, Germany, from 1796, but left medical practice in 1800 to pursue a career in botany. Travelled in England and Holland in 1802. Studied plant hybridisation from circa 1824. Elected a member of the Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina, 1826. Ennobled, 1846. (ADB, DBE, DSB.) Gaudry, Albert-Jean (Albert) (1827–1908). French palaeontologist. Assistant to his brother-in-law, Alcide d’Orbigny, professor of palaeontology at the Muséum d’histoire naturelle. Carried out excavations at Pikermi, Attica, in 1855 and 1860, and published Animaux fossiles et géologie de l’Attique (1862–7). Studied the fossils of small reptiles and batrachians, 1866–92. Taught a course in palaeontology at the Sorbonne, 1868–71; appointed professor of palaeontology at the Muséum, 1872. (DBF, DSB.) Gay, Jacques Étienne ( Jacques) (1786–1864). Swiss-born botanist and civil servant. Moved to Paris in 1811; appointed to the office of the senate. Secretary to the Comité des pétitions. Published several botanical monographs. A founder of the Société botanique de France, 1854. Possessed a large, richly documented, and excellently prepared herbarium, which was sold after his death. (DBF, Vilmorin 1918.) Geach, Frederick F. (1834/5–90). Mining engineer in Malaya. Worked for the Portuguese government in Timor, where he met Alfred Russel Wallace in 1861, and was working in Malacca (Melaka) in 1867. Later a mineral and consulting engineer in Guildford, Surrey. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/812/45/34); Correspondence vol. 15, letter from A. R. Wallace, 2 March [1867]; Marchant ed. 1916.) Gegenbaur, Carl (or Karl) (1826–1903). German anatomist and zoologist. A supporter of CD; emphasised the importance of comparative anatomy in evolutionary reconstruction. Professor extraordinarius of zoology, Jena, 1855–8; professor of anatomy and zoology, 1858–62; of anatomy, 1862–73. Professor of anatomy and comparative anatomy, Heidelberg, 1873–1901. Elected to the Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina, 1857. (DBE, DSB, NDB.) Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Etienne (1772–1844). French zoologist. Professor of zoology, Muséum d’histoire naturelle, 1793. Devoted much attention to embryology and teratology. (DBF, DSB.) Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Isidore (1805–61). French zoologist. Succeeded his father, Etienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, as professor at the Muséum d’histoire naturelle in 1841. Continued his father’s work in teratology. Became professor of zoology at the Sorbonne in 1850. (DBF, DSB.)

708

Biographical register

Gibbs, George (1815–73). American ethnologist and geologist. Graduated from Harvard University with a law degree, 1838; practised in New York City. Left New York in 1849; settled in Astoria, Oregon. Compiled vocabulary lists of indigenous languages and worked on maps of the area west of the Sacramento Valley in 1851. Worked as geologist and ethnologist surveying a railroad route to the Pacific in 1853. Moved in 1854 to Washington Territory, where he continued his ethnological and surveying work; worked for the North-west Boundary Survey, 1857–8. Returned east in 1860, and settled in Washington, D.C., in 1861. Wrote on Native American linguistics; the Smithsonian Institution published several of his works. Clerk to a commission investigating British claims in the American North-west, 1865–9. (ANB.) Gill, Theodore Nicholas (1837–1914). American zoologist. Taught at the Columbian College (now George Washington University) from 1860; professor of zoology, 1884–1910. Librarian, Smithsonian Institution, 1862–6. Assistant librarian, Library of Congress, 1866–74. President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1897. (DSB.) Giuntsburg, Karl Markovich (Charles Gunzbourg) (1816–89). Russian physician. Curator of the Golitsyn Museum, Moscow. Catalogued the Golitsyn library. Acting doctor at the Royal Foundling Hospital, Moscow, 1872. (Giuntsburg 1872, letter from K. M. Giuntsburg, 20 August 1872, NUC). 20 August 1872 Gladstone, William Ewart (1809–98). Statesman and author. Chancellor of the Exchequer, 1852–5 and 1859–66. Prime minister, 1868–74. FRS 1881. (ODNB.) 20 June 1872 (from John Lubbock) Glen, Catherine (b. c. 1820). Scottish teacher. Daughter of William Glen (1789– 1826; ODNB) and Catherine (Kate) Glen of Aberfoyle, Stirling. With her mother, cared for and trained children from the Glasgow poorhouse at Aberfoyle. (1861 Scottish Census, Aberfoyle 4/1/13 (s.v. Cathrine Glen); Good Words 15 (1874): 675–80.) Glenie, Samuel Owen (1811–75). Clergyman. BA, Peterhouse, Cambridge, 1829. MA, Lambeth, 1849. Appointed colonial chaplain, Colombo, Ceylon (Sri Lanka), 1834. Also appointed chaplain at Trincomalee, and at Kandy, at various times from 1840; returned to Trincomalee in 1851. Retired on pension, 1871. Fellow of the Linnean Society of London, 1863–73. (Alum. Cantab., Colonial Office list, R. Desmond 1994.) Gloeden, Dr von 1 July 1872 Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von (1749–1832). German poet and naturalist. (DSB, NDB.) Gordon-Cumming, Roualeyn George (1820–66). Lion hunter. Cornet in the Madras cavalry, 1838–40. Hunter in the interior of South Africa, 1843–8. Published an account of his experiences and became known as the ‘Lion Hunter’. Set up a museum displaying his hunting trophies at Fort Augustus on the Caledonian Canal in 1858. (ODNB.)

Biographical register

709

Gould, Benjamin Apthorp (1824–96). American astronomer. Graduated from Harvard in 1844, and became master of the Roxbury Latin School. Studied in Europe, 1845–8; PhD in astronomy, Göttingen, 1848. Worked for the US coast survey, 1852–67; director of the Dudley Observatory, Albany, New York, 1855– 9. Actuary for the US Sanitary Commission during the Civil War; drew up a series of observations on characteristics of members of the Union forces, later published as Investigations in the military and anthropological statistics of American soldiers (1869). (ANB.) Gounod, Charles (1818–93). French singer and composer. Began composing operas in 1851. Resided in London during the Franco-Prussian war, and until 1874. (DBF.) Gourlay, Jane. Schoolteacher in Edinburgh. Friend of Frances Julia Wedgwood. Tutor to the Paterson children at Linlithen, Forfarshire, the estate of Thomas Erskine (1788–1870; ODNB), theologian. (B. Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980, p. 288.) Grandy, William John (1841/2–77). Naval officer and explorer in Africa. Lieutenant in the Royal Navy. Led the Livingstone Congo expedition of 1872–3. Died in Africa. (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/48/8/8); England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1858–1966 (Ancestry.com); Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society 17 (1872–3): 12–13.) Grant-Duff, Mountstuart Elphinstone (1829–1906). Scottish politician, diarist, and author. Liberal MP for Elgin burghs, 1857–81; under-secretary for India, 1868–74; under-secretary for the colonies, 1880; governor of Madras, 1881–6. Lord rector, Aberdeen University, 1866–72. Travelled in Europe, India, and western Asia. Contributed to the Saturday Review and wrote a number of travel and autobiographical works. Lectured at the Working Men’s College. (ODNB.) Gray, Asa (1810–88). American botanist. Fisher Professor of natural history, Harvard University, 1842–88. Wrote numerous botanical textbooks and works on North American flora. President of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1863–73; of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1872; a regent of the Smithsonian Institution, 1874–88. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1873. (DAB, DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) 15 January 1872, 2 February 1872, 7 March 1872, 31 May 1872, 11 June 1872, 8 July [1872], 6 October 1872, 22 October 1872, 2 December 1872 Gray, George Robert (1808–72). Zoologist. An expert on insects and birds. Assistant in the zoological department of the British Museum, 1831–72. Brother of John Edward Gray. FRS 1865. (ODNB.) Gray, Jane Loring (1821–1909). Daughter of Charles Greely Loring, Boston lawyer and politician, and Anna Pierce Brace. Married Asa Gray in 1848. Edited the Letters of Asa Gray (1893). (Barnhart comp. 1965; Dupree 1959, pp. 177–84.) Gray, John Edward (1800–75). Botanist and zoologist. Assistant keeper of the zoological collections at the British Museum, 1824; keeper, 1840–74. President, Botanical Society of London, 1836–57. FRS 1832. (R. Desmond 1994, ODNB.)

710

Biographical register

Greeley, Horace (1811–72). American newspaper editor, reformer, and politician. Founder of the New York Tribune, 1841; ran (unsuccessfully) in the 1872 presidential election. (ANB.) Green, William (1796–1881). American hardware merchant and Swedenborgian. Hardware merchant in New York. A founder of the New York Anti-Slavery Society in the 1830s, and later vice-president of the American Anti-Slavery Society. Bought twenty acres at Llewellyn Park, New Jersey, 1853. Later became a radical Swedenborgian. (Wilson 1979, pp. 83, 85.) 30 January 1872, 18 May 1872 Greenway, Elizabeth (b. 1851/2). Nurserymaid. Worked in the family of Henry Montagu and Georgina Isabella Butler. (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/1324/47/10).) Greenwood, Frederick (1830–1909). Author and newspaper editor. Editor of the Queen, an illustrated paper, 1861–3. Director, with G. H. Lewes, of the Cornhill Magazine, 1862–4; sole editor from 1864. Editor of the Pall Mall Gazette from its inception in 1865 until 1880, leaving when the new proprietor announced his intention of turning the paper into a Liberal organ (Greenwood had strong Tory sympathies). (ODNB.) Greg, William Rathbone (1809–81). Essayist. Mill-owner, 1832–50. Author of the Creed of Christendom (1851). Wrote articles for the leading quarterlies, and books, mostly on politics and economics. Comptroller of the Stationery Office, 1864–77. (ODNB, Tort 1996.) Grey, William (1818–78). Colonial administrator. Entered civil service in India, 1840. Lieutenant-governor of Bengal, 1867–71. Governor of Jamaica, 1874–7. Knighted, 1871. (ODNB.) Grieve, Peter (1812–95). Gardener. Gardener to the Reverend Edward Richard Benyon at Culford Hall in Suffolk. A producer of variegated leaved pelargoniums and author of A history of ornamental-foliaged pelargoniums, 1869. (R. Desmond 1994, Wilkinson 2007, pp. 148–59.) Gulick, John Thomas (1832–1923). American zoologist and missionary. Born and brought up in the Sandwich Islands (Hawaii). Educated partly in the United States. Missionary in Japan, 1862; China, 1863–75; Japan, 1876–99. Spent part of his furloughs in England. Studied organisms from the perspective of evolution and geographic distribution, paying especial attention to isolation. (DSB Supplement 2.) 27 July 1872, 28 July [1872], 6 August 1872, 8 August [1872] Gull, William Withey, 1st baronet (1816–90). Physician. Son of a barge owner; his medical education was sponsored by Benjamin Harrison, the treasurer of Guy’s Hospital, London. MB, London, 1841; MD, FRCP, 1848. Fullerian Professor of physiology, Royal Institution, 1847–9. Assistant physician, Guy’s Hospital, 1851; physician, 1856–65. Member, General Medical Council, 1871–83; 1886–7. Knighted and created baronet, 1872. (ODNB.) Günther, Albrecht Carl Ludwig Gotthilf (Albert) (1830–1914). German-born

Biographical register

711

zoologist. Began his association with the British Museum in 1857; made catalogues of the museum’s specimens of amphibia, reptiles, and fish; officially joined the staff in 1862. Assistant keeper of the zoological department, 1872–5; keeper, 1875–95. Edited the Record of Zoological Literature, 1864–9. FRS 1867. (NDB, ODNB.) 10 May 1872, 11 May [1872], 13 May 1872, 13 May [1872], 14 May 1872, 17 May 1872, 21 May 1872, 19 June 1872, 21 June [1872], 14 November 1872, 23 November 1872 Gunther, Robert William Theodore (1869–1940). Historian of science. Founded the Museum of the History of Science, Oxford, in 1924. Son of Albert and Roberta Günther. (ODNB.) Haast, John Francis Julius ( Julius) von (1822–87). German-born explorer and geologist. Travelled to New Zealand in 1858 to report on the prospects for German emigration. Explored the western districts of Nelson province at the request of the provincial government in 1859. Appointed geologist to Canterbury province, 1861. Conducted the first geological survey of Canterbury province, 1861–8. Became a British national in 1861. Founded the Philosophical Institute of Canterbury in 1862, and the Canterbury Museum in 1863. Professor of geology, Canterbury College, 1876–87. Member of the senate of the University of New Zealand, 1879–87. Knighted, 1886. FRS 1867. (DNZB, DSB, H. F. von Haast 1948, ODNB.) Haeckel, Ernst Philipp August (Ernst) (1834–1919). German zoologist. MD, Berlin, 1857. Lecturer in comparative anatomy, University of Jena, 1861–2; professor extraordinarius of zoology, 1862–5; professor of zoology and director of the Zoological Institute, 1865–1909. Specialist in marine invertebrates. Leading populariser of evolutionary theory. His Generelle Morphologie der Organismen (1866) linked morphology to the study of the phylogenetic evolution of organisms. (DSB, NDB.) 1 March 1872, 2 September 1872, 12 October 1872, 10 December 1872, 20 December 1872 Hagen, Hermann August (1817–93). German-born surgeon and entomologist. MD, Königsberg, 1840. Surgeon in Königsberg, 1843–66. Published several volumes on termites, 1855–60. With the help of Carl von Osten-Sacken in the US, published Synopsis of the Neuroptera of North America (1861). Emigrated to the US at the invitation of Louis Agassiz; assistant in entomology at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard, 1867. Assistant professor, 1868; professor, 1870. (ANB.) Haliburton, Sarah Harriet (1813/14–86). Eldest daughter of William Mostyn Owen Sr of Woodhouse. Married Edward Hosier Williams (d. 1844) in 1831 and Thomas Chandler Haliburton (d. 1865; Modern English biography) in 1856. A close friend and neighbour of CD before the Beagle voyage. (BMD (Marriage index); Burke’s landed gentry 1952 s.v. Mostyn-Owen; Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/0843/38/13);

712

Biographical register

Haliburton, Sarah Harriet, cont. Correspondence vol. 1 s.v. Owen, Sarah Harriet; London Gazette, 25 May 1888, p. 2983.) 1 November [1872], 3 November [1872], 6 November [1872], 8 November [1872] Halle, Johann Samuel (1727–1810). German historian. Professor of history at the Royal Prussian Cadet School in Berlin, 1760. Author of works on history, art history, biology, economics, and technology. (DBE.) Hamond, Robert Nicholas (1809–83). Naval officer. Lieutenant, 1827. Midshipman on HMS Beagle, 1832–3. (Burke’s landed gentry 1952; Correspondence vol. 1, Appendix III; O’Byrne 1849.) Hare, Thomas (1806–91). Political reformer. Called to the bar, 1833; practised in the Chancery courts. Inspector of charities, 1853; assistant commissioner, 1872– 87. Devised a system of proportional representation for the House of Commons and other electoral bodies. (ODNB.) Harmer, Frederic William (1835–1923). Geologist. Specialised in Pliocene and Quaternary geology and invertebrate palaeontology. Studied the glacial geology of Norfolk and Suffolk. (Sarjeant 1980–96.) 28 August 1872, 29 August 1872, 31 August 1872 Harris, George (1809–90). Author. Called to the bar, 1843; joined the midland circuit. Deputy court judge, Bristol district, 1853. Registrar of the court of bankruptcy, Manchester, 1862–8. Retired from the law owing to ill health. Wrote on legal, political, and anthropological subjects. Vice-president of the Anthropological Society of London, 1871. Co-founder of the Psychological Society, 1875. (ODNB.) 4 October [1872] Harris, William Cornwallis (b. c. 1807 d. 1848). Military engineer and traveller. Commissioned in the Bombay engineering corps, where he achieved the rank of major. Hunted big game in southern Africa, 1835–7. Led a diplomatic mission to the kingdom of Shoa (now in Ethiopia) in 1841. Knighted, 1844. (ODNB.) Harte, Richard. 30 August 1872 Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen, Hermanus (1841–91). Dutch naturalist and geologist. Translator and champion of CD’s work in the Netherlands. (NNBW.) Harvey, William Henry (1811–66). Irish botanist. Colonial treasurer in Cape Town; collected plants in South Africa, 1836–42. Keeper of the herbarium, Trinity College, Dublin, from 1844; professor of botany, Royal Dublin Society, 1848–66; professor of botany, Trinity College, Dublin, 1856–66. Published works on South African plants, including Flora Capensis (1859–65) with Otto Wilhelm Sonder. Specialist in marine algae. FRS 1858. (R. Desmond 1994, DNB, DSB.) Hawkins, Henry, Baron Brampton (1817–1907). Judge. Called to the bar, 1843. Queen’s counsel, 1858. A very popular speaker in court, involved in a number

Biographical register

713

of notorious cases, including the suit of the Tichborne claimant, 1871–2, and the prosecution of the Tichborne claimant for perjury, 1873–4. Appointed judge of the Queen’s Bench Division, then to the Exchequer Division, 1876. Knighted, 1876. Became Baron Brampton, 1899. (ODNB.) Head, Henry A. Of Duluth, Minn., US. (Letter from H. A. Head, 18 September 1872.) 18 September 1872 Hector, James (1834–1907). Scottish geologist. Surgeon and geologist on the government expedition to the western parts of British North America, 1857–60. Geologist to the provincial government of Otago, New Zealand, 1861–5. Director of the Geological Survey of New Zealand, 1865. Director of the meteorological department of the New Zealand Institute, of the Colonial Museum, and of the botanical garden, Wellington, 1866–1903. Knighted, 1887. FRS 1866. (DNZB.) 14 May 1872 Heer, Oswald (1809–83). Swiss biogeographer, palaeontologist, and botanist. An expert on Tertiary flora. Lecturer in botany, University of Zürich, 1834–5; director of the botanic garden, 1834; associate professor, 1835–52; professor of botany and entomology, 1852–83. (DSB, NDB.) 4 August [1872–4] Heliotype Company Limited. Company with premises at 22 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London. They supplied the photographs for Expression. (Correspondence vol. 19, letter from R. F. Cooke to G. H. Darwin, 13 August 1871; Post Office London directory 1872, p. 946.) Helmholtz, Hermann von (1821–94). German physiologist and physicist. Professor of anatomy and physiology at Bonn from 1855, and at Heidelberg from 1858. A close friend of William Thomson from 1853. Appointed professor of physics, Berlin, 1871. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1860. Copley Medal, 1873. (DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Helps, Arthur (1813–75). Public servant and author. BA, Cambridge, 1835. Had sympathies with the Christian socialists and devoted much of his time to social reform. Clerk of the Privy Council, 1860–75. Knighted 1872. (ODNB.) Henfrey, Arthur (1819–59). Botanist. Translated German works on physiological botany into English. Lecturer in botany, St George’s Hospital, London, 1847. Professor of botany, King’s College, London, 1854–9. FRS 1852. (DSB, ODNB.) Henry, H. 23 December 1872 Henslow, John Stevens (1796–1861). Clergyman, botanist, and mineralogist. CD’s teacher and friend. Professor of mineralogy, Cambridge University, 1822–7; professor of botany, 1825–61. Extended and remodelled the Cambridge botanic garden. Curate of Little St Mary’s Church, Cambridge, 1824–32; vicar of Cholsey-cum-Moulsford, Berkshire, 1832–7; rector of Hitcham, Suffolk, 1837–61. (DSB, Historical register of the University of Cambridge, ODNB.)

714

Biographical register

Herbert, John Maurice (1808–82). Lawyer. BA, St John’s College, Cambridge, 1830; fellow, 1832–40. Barrister, 1835. County court judge, South Wales, 1847–82. Friend of CD’s. (Alum. Cantab., Correspondence vol. 1, Modern English biography.) 21 November 1872, 23 November 1872 Herbert, Mary Anne. Poet. Wife of John Maurice Herbert. (Herbert ed. 1877.) Hering, Karl Ewald Konstantin (Ewald) (1834–1918). German physiologist. MD, Leipzig, 1858; lecturer in medical physiology, 1862. Professor of physiology, Vienna, 1865–70; Prague, 1870–95; Leipzig, 1895–1918. Published on the interaction between breathing and circulation. (DBE.) Herschel, Julius. Physician in London. (Post Office London directory 1872.) 17 December 1872 Higginson, Thomas Wentworth (1823–1911). American minister, reformer, soldier, and author. A staunch supporter of the anti-slavery movement and the rights of women. Helped provide financial support for slave insurrections. Colonel of a regiment of freed slaves during the American Civil War; publicised the success of these black troops in his Army life in a black regiment (1870). (ANB.) Hildebrand, Friedrich Hermann Gustav (Friedrich) (1835–1915). German botanist. After studying mineralogy, geology, and agriculture at Berlin, he took up botany, studying at Bonn, then from 1855 to 1858 at Berlin, where he received his doctorate. Habilitated at Bonn, becoming privat-dozent there, in 1859. Professor of botany, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1868–1907. Worked mainly on hybridity, dimorphism, and generation. (Correns 1916, Junker 1989, Tort 1996.) 5 February 1872, 9 February 1872 Hilgendorf, Franz Martin (Franz) (1839–1904). German zoologist, palaeontologist, and museologist. Studied philology in Berlin, 1859–62. Received a doctorate from Tübingen for palaeontology, 1863. Assistant, zoological museum, Berlin, 1860–2, 1863–7. In 1865, spent several months doing further palaeontological research at Steinheim. Director, zoological garden and aquarium, Hamburg, 1868–70. Docent, imperial medical academy, Tokyo, 1872–6. Returned to the zoological museum, Berlin, 1876; keeper, 1880. (Archiv für Naturgeschichte 72 (1) (1906): i–xii.) His, Wilhelm (1831–1904). Swiss anatomist. Taught anatomy and physiology, University of Basel, 1857–92. Professor of anatomy, Leipzig, 1872–1904. Opened a new laboratory of anatomy, 1875. Invented the microtome to slice thin tissue sections for microscopic examination, 1866. (DBE, DSB.) Hoare, Richard Colt (Colt), 2d baronet (1758–1838). Landowner and antiquary. Inherited Stourhead and its estates from his grandfather in 1785. Travelled extensively. Embarked on tree-planting schemes at Stourhead and cultivated exotic plants. His collection of Geraniaceae was the largest in the country. Fellow of the Linnean Society of London, 1812. (ODNB.) Hoernes, Rudolf (1850–1912). Austrian geologist and palaeontologist. Student at the University of Vienna from 1869. Demonstrator at the imperial institute of

Biographical register

715

geology, 1873–6; professor extraordinarius of geology at the University of Graz, 1876; professor, 1881. (OBL.) 4 December 1872 (and F. A. Nussbaumer) Holland, Henry, 1st baronet (1788–1873). Physician. Related to Josiah Wedgwood I. Physician-in-ordinary to Prince Albert, 1840; to Queen Victoria, 1852. President of the Royal Institution of Great Britain, 1865–73. Created baronet, 1853. FRS 1815. (Caroe 1985, DNB, Emma Darwin (1904), Record of the Royal Society of London.) 6 November [1872] Home, Daniel Dunglas (1833–86). Scottish-born medium. Emigrated to the United States with his aunt and uncle about 1842. Became a medium at the age of 18. Studied at the Newburgh Theological Institute in 1853, and commenced medical studies in New York, but in 1855 was diagnosed with pulmonary consumption, and recommended to travel to Europe. Practised as a medium throughout Europe and had many society converts. War correspondent for the San Francisco Chronicle during the Franco-Prussian War, 1870–1. (ODNB.) Hooker, Brian Harvey Hodgson (1860–1932). Fifth child of Frances Harriet and Joseph Dalton Hooker. (Allan 1967 s.v. ‘Hooker pedigree’.) Hooker, Charles Paget (1855–1933). Physician and surgeon. Third child of Frances Harriet and Joseph Dalton Hooker. Trained at St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London; made a licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians of London and the Royal College of Surgeons, Edinburgh, 1879, before being appointed to the staff of the Hertfordshire General Infirmary. Cottishall Cottage Hospital, Norfolk, 1880–5; Cirencester Cottage Hospital, Gloucestershire, 1885–1912. (Allan 1967, Medical directory 1881–1933, Medical who’s who 1914.) Hooker, Frances Harriet (1825–74). Daughter of John Stevens Henslow. Married Joseph Dalton Hooker in 1851. Assisted her husband significantly in his published work. Translated A general system of botany, descriptive and analytical, by Emmanuel Le Maout and Joseph Decaisne (1873). (Allan 1967, Lightman ed. 2004.) Hooker, Grace Ellen (1868–1953). Social worker. Youngest child of Frances Harriet and Joseph Dalton Hooker. Worked among the poor in Bloomsbury, Islington, and Lambeth, from 1901 with Octavia Hill. Looked after her brother Reginald’s children after the death of his wife in 1933. (Allan 1967.) Hooker, Harriet Anne (1854–1945). Second child of Frances Harriet and Joseph Dalton Hooker. (Allan 1967 s.v. ‘Hooker pedigree’.) Hooker, Joseph Dalton (1817–1911). Botanist. Worked chiefly on taxonomy and plant geography. Son of William Jackson Hooker. Friend and confidant of CD. Accompanied James Clark Ross on his Antarctic expedition, 1839–43, and published the botanical results of the voyage. Appointed palaeobotanist to the Geological Survey of Great Britain, 1846. Travelled in the Himalayas, 1847– 9. Assistant director, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 1855–65; director, 1865–85. Knighted, 1877. FRS 1847. (DSB, ODNB.)

716

Biographical register

Hooker, Joseph Dalton, cont. 1 January 1872, 2 January 1872, 24 January 1872, 25 January [1872], [5 February 1872?], 30 March 1872 (to Charles Lyell), 30 April [1872], 11 May 1872, [13 May 1872] (to Emma Darwin), 14 May [1872], 14 May 1872, 13 June 1872] (to W. E. Darwin), 14 June [1872], 15 June 1872, 12 July [1872], 4 August [1872], 29 August [1872], 29 August 1872, 30 August [1872], 2 September 1872, 4 October [1872], 7 October 1872, 10 October [1872], 19 October 1872 (to Emma Darwin), 22 October [1872], 24 October [1872], 26 October 1872, 27 October [1872], 29 October 1872, 31 October [1872], 31 October 1872 (from John Scott), 8 November 1872, 8 November 1872, 9 November [1872], 28 November 1872, 3 [December 1872] Hooker, Maria (1797–1872). Eldest daughter of Dawson Turner. Married William Jackson Hooker in 1815; acted as her husband’s secretary. Mother of Joseph Dalton Hooker. (Allan 1967 s.v. ‘Turner pedigree’, R. Desmond 1994.) Hooker, Maria (1819–89). See McGilvray, Maria. Hooker, Reginald Hawthorn (1867–1944). Sixth child of Joseph Dalton and Frances Harriet Hooker. Took B-ès-Sc. in Paris, and studied mathematics at Trinity College, Cambridge, 1886–9. Assistant to the director of the Intelligence Department of the Board of Agriculture, and subsequently head of the statistical branch until 1927. Secretary, Royal Statistical Society; president, Royal Meteorological Society, 1920–1. Married Olive Marion Rücker in 1911. (Allan 1967, Alum. Cantab., Royal Meteorological Society.) Hooker, William Henslow (1853–1942). Eldest child of Frances Harriet and Joseph Dalton Hooker. Civil servant, India Office, 1877–1904. Encouraged imperial ties between metropolitan institutions (particularly the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew) and British East Africa, circa 1896–1906. (Allan 1967; India list 1904–5; Zanzibar Gazette, 5 February 1896, p. 6, and 28 November 1900, p. 5.) Hooker, William Jackson (1785–1865). Botanist. Father of Joseph Dalton Hooker. Regius professor of botany, Glasgow University, 1820–41. Appointed first director of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 1841. Knighted, 1836. FRS 1812. (DSB, ODNB.) Hopkins, William (1793–1866). Mathematician and geologist. Tutor in mathematics at Cambridge University. President of the Geological Society of London, 1851–3. Specialised in quantitative studies of geological and geophysical questions. FRS 1837. (DSB, ODNB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Horace (Quintus Horatius Flaccus) (65 bce – 8 bce). Roman poet. (Oxford classical dictionary.) Hough, Arthur 15 January [1872–4] Housley, Samuel John (b. 1836). Barrister. Called to the bar, 1860. Married Mary Jane Stanning in 1861. (Men-at-the-bar.) 20 December 1872

Biographical register

717

Houzeau de Lehaie, Charles Auguste Benjamin Hippolyte (Auguste) (1832–1922). Belgian professor and politician. Brother of the astronomer JeanCharles Houzeau. Studied in Paris, 1844–8, Mons, and Brussels. Professor of political economy, School of Mines, Mons, 1870–1905. Mayor of Hyon, 1867–78; member of the Council of Mons, in charge of state education, 1882–84; sat for Mons in the Chamber of Representatives, 1878–94. (BNB vol. 35.) 4 November 1872 Houzeau de Lehaie, Jean-Charles (Houzeau, Jean-Charles) (1820–88). Belgian astronomer. Brother of the politician Auguste Houzeau de Lehaie. Studied at Brussels University, and at the Faculté des sciences, Paris, 1840–1. Assistant astronomer, Observatoire royal, 1846–9. Director of astronomy in the mapping of Belgium, 1854–7. In Texas and elsewhere, 1857–67, Jamaica, 1867–76, as a land-surveyor and journalist. Won the quinquennial prize of the Académie Belge for his work on astronomy in Jamaica. Head of the Observatoire royal from 1876 until his retirement. (BNB vol. 29, Popular Science Monthly 38 (1891): 544–52.) Howorth, Henry Hoyle (1842–1923). Portuguese-born English lawyer and politician. Conservative MP for South Salford, 1886–1900. Best known for courting controversy as a writer of political letters and historical treatises; also wrote extensively on ethnology. Wrote books arguing that violent floodwaters rather than glaciers were agents of geological change. FRS 1893. (The Times, 17 July 1923, p. 14.) 30 July 1872 Hughes, Thomas (1822–96). Writer, jurist, and social reformer. Author of Tom Brown’s school days (1857), which describes life at Rugby School. Called to the bar, 1848. Appointed Queen’s counsel, 1869. County-court judge, 1882–96. Leading advocate of trade unions. One of the founders of the London Working Men’s College, 1854; principal 1872–83. (ODNB.) Humphrey, Elizabeth (b. 1810/11). Mother of Ellen Crookes. (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/ 200/7/6).) Hunter, James Bradbridge (1837–89). American physician. Practised in New York. Editor of the New York Medical Journal. (New York Times, 11 June 1889.) Hutchinson, William Nelson (1803–95). Army officer and inventor. Joined the army in 1820 and rose steadily through the ranks. Colonel in the Duke of Wellington’s West Riding regiment, 1863–95. Patented inventions relating to the steering of balloons and to steam engines. Author of a book on dog-breaking (1848). (Modern English biography.) Huxley, Henrietta Anne (1825–1915). Born Henrietta Anne Heathorn. Emigrated to Australia in 1843. Met Thomas Henry Huxley in Sydney, Australia, in 1847, and married him in 1855. (A. Desmond 1994–7, Freeman 1978.) 16 October [1872], 17 October 1872 (and T. H. Huxley) Huxley, Henry (1865–1946). Physician. Son of Henrietta Anne and Thomas

718

Biographical register

Huxley, Henry, cont. Henry Huxley. Became a fashionable general practitioner in London. (R. W. Clark 1968.) 17 and 20 January 1872 Huxley, Thomas Henry (1825–95). Zoologist. Assistant-surgeon on HMS Rattlesnake, 1846–50, during which time he investigated Hydrozoa and other marine invertebrates. Lecturer in natural history, Royal School of Mines, 1854; professor, 1857. Appointed naturalist to the Geological Survey of Great Britain, 1854. Hunterian Professor, Royal College of Surgeons of England, 1862–9. Fullerian Professor of physiology, Royal Institution of Great Britain, 1855–8, 1866–9. President of the Royal Society of London, 1883–5. FRS 1851. (R. W. Clark 1968, A. Desmond 1994–7, DSB, ODNB.) 17 October 1872 (and H. A. Huxley), 22 October 1872, [17] December [1872], 20 December 1872 Hyatt, Alpheus (1838–1902). American palaeontologist and marine biologist. BS, Harvard, 1862. Studied marine fossils with Louis Agassiz. Served in the army, 1862–5, during the American Civil War. Curator, Essex Institute, 1867. Cofounder and editor, American Naturalist, 1867–71. Custodian, Boston Society of Natural History, 1870–81; curator, 1881–1902. Taught zoology and palaeontology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1870–1888; Boston University, 1877–1902. Founded a natural history laboratory at Annisquam, 1879; the laboratory was moved to Woods Hole, 1888, and incorporated as the Marine Biological Laboratory, with Hyatt as first president of its board of trustees. Palaeontologist to the US Geological Survey from 1889. (ANB.) 10 October [1872], [late] November 1872, 4 December [1872], 8 December 1872, 14 December [1872] IJkema (Ykema), Johan (fl. 1870s). Dutch bookseller, editor, and publisher. Publisher of the Dutch translation of Descent (Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen, trans. 1871–2). (Correspondence vol. 18, letter from Hermanus Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen, 27 November 1870.) 21 August 1872 Innes, John Brodie (1817–94). Clergyman. Perpetual curate of Down, 1846–68; vicar, 1868–9. Left Down in 1862 after inheriting an entailed estate at Milton Brodie, near Forres, Scotland; changed his name to Brodie Innes in 1861 as required by the entail. Priest in charge of Milton Brodie Mission and general licentiate of the diocese of Moray, 1861. Chaplain to the Bishop of Moray, 1861–80 and 1886–94. (Clergy list, County families 1864, Crockford’s clerical directory, Freeman 1978, J. R. Moore 1985.) 8 March 1872 (to Emma Darwin) Innes, John William Brodie (1848–1923). Barrister and novelist. Son of John Brodie Innes. BA, Cambridge (St John’s), 1872. Called to the bar, 1876. Advocate at the Scottish bar, 1888. Interested in antiquarian research, romance, demonology, witchcraft, and criminology. (Alum. Cantab., Freeman 1978.)

Biographical register

719

Irving, Washington (1783–1859). American author. (ANB.) Jackson, Henry (1839–1921). Classical scholar. BA, Cambridge (Trinity College), 1862; fellow of Trinity, 1864; assistant tutor, 1866; praelector in ancient philosophy, 1875; vice-master, 1914. Regius professor of Greek, Cambridge, from 1906. (ODNB.) Jackson, William (b. 1849/50). Servant. A former groom who became CD’s butler in 1875. (Atkins 1974, pp. 73–4; J. Browne 2002, pp. 459–60; Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/855/92/20).) Jäger, Gustav (1832–1917). German physician and zoologist. Co-founder and director of the Vienna zoological garden, 1858–66. Professor of zoology and anthropology, Hohenheim Academy, from 1867; Stuttgart Polytechnic, from 1870. Taught physiology and histology at the Veterinary School, Stuttgart, from 1874. Co-editor of Kosmos, 1877–9. Returned to medical practice in 1884. (DBE, Freeman 1978, NDB, Weinreich 1993.) Janson, Edward Westey (1822–91). Natural history dealer. Educated for the medical profession. Assisted his father as a city merchant and later was secretary of the Dutch Rhenish railway. On the death of his father, in 1867, went into business as a bookseller and natural history dealer. Specialised in Coleoptera and Elateridae, of which he amassed a large collection. Curator of the collections of the Entomological Society of London, 1850–63; librarian until 1874; secretary, 1857–61. (Gilbert 1977, Proceedings of the Entomological Society of London (1891): xlix–l.) Jeitteles, Ludwig Heinrich (1830–83). Austrian palaeontologist and zoologist. Studied natural sciences at the University of Vienna. Taught in various secondary schools, 1856–70, then at teacher-training colleges in Salzburg, 1870–4, and Vienna, 1874–83. In 1858, travelled to Upper Hungary as a representative of the Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna, to study the effects of the earthquake of 15 January 1858. (OBL.) 3 November 1872, 7 November 1872 Jenkin, Henry Charles Fleeming (1833–85). Engineer and university teacher. Studied natural philosophy at Genoa. Apprenticed at Fairbairn’s works, Manchester, 1851. Worked as a draughtsman and marine telegraph engineer in London from 1855. Carried out important experiments on the resistance and insulation of electrical cables with William Thomson (later Lord Kelvin). Largely occupied in the fitting out of submarine telegraph cables, 1858–73. Appointed professor of civil engineering, University College, London, 1866; professor of engineering, Edinburgh University, 1868. Promoted the formation of a sanitary association, Edinburgh, 1877–8. Wrote miscellaneous papers on literature, science, and political economy. FRS 1865. (ODNB.) Jesse, Edward (1780–1868). Writer on natural history. Deputy-surveyor of royal parks and palaces, circa 1821–51. (ODNB.) Jesse, George Richard (1820–98). French-born engineer. Worked as a civil

720

Biographical register

Jesse, George Richard, cont. engineer in England, India, and Egypt. Founded the Society for the Abolition of Vivisection in 1875. (Modern English biography.) Jeudwine, John (1772–1835). Schoolteacher. BA, Cambridge, 1794. Second master, Shrewsbury School, 1798–1835. (Alum. Cantab.) Johnson, Henry (1802/3–81). Physician. A contemporary of CD’s at Shrewsbury School and Edinburgh University. Senior physician, Shropshire Infirmary. Member of Royal College of Physicians of London, 1859. Founder member and honorary secretary of the Shropshire and North Wales Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 1835–77. (Medical directory, Salopian Shreds and Patches 5 (1882): 2.) 2 May [1872] Jones, Henry Bence (1814–73). Physician and chemist. Physician to St George’s Hospital, 1846–62. Secretary of the Royal Institution, 1860–72. Devoted himself especially to the application of chemistry to pathology and medicine. FRS 1846. (ODNB.) Jones, John Winter (1805–81). Librarian. Appointed assistant, library of the British Museum, 1837; assistant keeper of printed books, 1850; keeper, 1856; principal librarian, 1866. (ODNB.) Jones, Thomas Rupert (1819–1911). Geologist and palaeontologist. Medical assistant, 1842–50. Appointed assistant secretary of the Geological Society of London, 1855; editor of the Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, 1850–65. Lecturer on geology, Royal Military College, Sandhurst, 1858–62; professor of geology, 1862–80. An authority on Entomostraca and Foraminifera. FRS 1872. (ODNB.) Jones, William (1746–94). Orientalist and judge. Judge of the high court in Calcutta, 1783–94. Founded the Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1784. FRS 1772. (ODNB.) Jordan, Claude Thomas Alexis (Alexis) (1814–97). French botanist. Conducted field research, 1836–46, to complete and correct existing French floras. Assembled an important private herbarium. After giving up his botanical expeditions, worked in his own experimental gardens, trying to demonstrate the stability of species. A strong opponent of transmutation theory. (DSB, Tort 1996.) Jukes, Joseph Beete (1811–69). Geologist. Geological surveyor of Newfoundland, 1839–40. Naturalist aboard HMS Fly in the survey of the north-east coast of Australia, 1842–6. Geologist with the Geological Survey of Great Britain working in North Wales and the English Midlands, 1846–50. Local director of the Geological Survey of Ireland, 1850–67; director, 1867–9. Lecturer on geology at the Royal College of Science, Dublin, from 1854. President of the Geological Society of Dublin, 1853–4. FRS 1853. (ODNB.) Kaines, Joseph ( fl. 1860–90). Author and translator. Translated works from French. Wrote on positivism. (CDEL.) 8 April 1872 Kant, Immanuel (1724–1804). German philosopher. (DSB, NDB.) Keferstein, Wilhelm Moritz (1833–70). German zoologist. Studied at the polytechnical school, Hannover, 1849–52. Studied medicine at Göttingen and Berlin

Biographical register

721

from 1852; habilitated at Göttingen in zoology, and was soon after made professor. Spent time in Naples for health reasons, 1858–9, and worked on marine zoology there. Completed a work on zoological taxonomy begun by Heinrich Bronn, 1862–6. (ADB.) Kellock, William Berry (1821–1903). Surgeon. Resident medical officer and surgeon, Stamford Hill and Stoke Newington Dispensary, London. Fellow, Royal College of Surgeons, 1878. (Plarr 1930.) Kerner von Marilaun, Anton (1831–98). Austrian botanist. Studied medicine in Vienna, 1848–53. MD 1854. Teacher of natural history, Oberrealshule, Ofen, 1855; professor of natural history, Josefs-Polytechnikum, 1858–60. Professor of natural history and director of the botanic gardens and museum of natural history, University of Innsbruck, 1860–78. Professor of systematic botany and director of the botanic gardens, University of Vienna, 1878–98. Established an experimental alpine garden near the top of Mt Blaser, above Trins in the Gschnitztal (Tirol). Studied the effects of climate on the morphology of plants. (NDB, OBL.) Kinahan, George Henry (1829–1908). Irish geologist. Joined the Geological Survey of Ireland in 1854; senior geologist, 1861; district surveyor, 1869–90. President of the Royal Geological Society of Ireland, 1879–81. (ODNB.) 29 October 1872 (and M. H. Close) Kindermann, Adolph Diedrich (1823–92). German artist and photographer. Studied and worked in Hamburg; Dresden, 1843–8; Paris, 1850–3. Opened a photography studio in Hamburg in 1863 to supplement his income as a portrait artist. Returned to painting full-time in 1876. (Allgemeines Lexikon der bildenden Künstler.) King, George (1840–1909). Scottish botanist. MB, Aberdeen, 1865; entered the Indian Medical Service, arriving in Calcutta in 1866. Temporary superintendent, Botanic Garden, Saharunpore (now Saharanpur), 1868–9. Indian forest service, 1869–71. Superintendent of the Royal Botanic Garden, Calcutta, and of cinchona cultivation in Bengal, 1871–98. Organised the botanical survey of India; first director, 1891. FRS 1887. Knighted, 1898. (ODNB.) 28 October 1872, November 1872 King, Philip Gidley (1817–1904). Australian farmer and mining company manager. Son of Phillip Parker King. Midshipman in HMS Beagle, 1831–6. Settled in Australia in 1836. Entered the service of the Australian Agricultural Company in 1842; superintendent of stock, 1851. New South Wales manager for the Peel River Land and Mineral Company, 1852–81. (Aust. dict. biog.) Kingsley, Charles (1819–75). Author and clergyman. Appointed professor of English, Queen’s College for Women, London, 1848. Regius professor of modern history, Cambridge University, 1860–9. Rector of Eversley, Hampshire, 1844–75. Chaplain to the queen, 1859–75. (ODNB.) Kirchhoff, Alfred (1838–1907). German geographer. Taught geography, Kriegsakademie, Berlin, 1871–3; professor of geography, University of Halle, from 1873. (DBE.)

722

Biographical register

Klein, Edward Emanuel (1844–1925). Slavonian-born histologist and bacteriologist. Obtained a medical degree from the University of Vienna. Emigrated in 1871 to Britain, where he worked at the Brown Animal Sanatory Institute and lectured at St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London. Professor of bacteriology at the College of State Medicine, London, 1889–91. Naturalised British, 1887. FRS 1875. (ODNB.) Knight, Thomas Andrew (1759–1838). Botanist and horticulturist. Correspondent to the Board of Agriculture from 1795. President of the Horticultural Society of London, 1811–38. Interested in cross-breeding and hybridisation; conducted research on the phenomenon now known as geotropism. FRS 1805. (R. Desmond 1994, DSB.) Koch, Eduard Friedrich (Eduard) (1838–97). German publisher. Took over E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung in 1867, after which the firm published mostly scientific titles. Published a multi-volume edition of CD’s works, translated by Julius Victor Carus. (Biographisches Jahrbuch und deutscher Nekrolog 2 (1898): 227.) Kölliker, Rudolf Albert von (1817–1905). Swiss anatomist and physiologist. Professor of physiology and comparative anatomy, University of Würzburg, 1847–64; professor of anatomy, 1849–97. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1860. (DSB.) Kölreuter, Joseph Gottlieb (1733–1806). German botanist. Assistant keeper of the natural history collections, Imperial Academy of Sciences, St Petersburg, 1756–61. Professor of natural history and director of the gardens of th e margrave of Baden, Karlsruhe, 1763–86. Carried out extensive hybridisation experiments on plants. (ADB, DBE, DSB, NDB, Taxonomic literature.) Kovalevsky, Alexander Onufrievich (1840–1901). Russian embryologist. Brother of Vladimir Onufrievich Kovalevsky. Held academic posts at various Russian universities; professor of histology, St Petersburg, 1890–4. His studies of ascidian embryology revealed that tunicates were chordates and gave strong support to Darwinian transmutation theory. Foreign member of the Royal Society of London, 1885. (DSB, GSE s.v. Tunicata.) Kovalevsky, Vladimir Onufrievich (1842–83). Russian palaeontologist. Graduated from the School of Jurisprudence in 1861. Thereafter published, translated, and edited works by CD, Charles Lyell, Louis Agassiz, and others. Studied natural science and palaeontology, travelling throughout Europe, 1869–74. Submitted doctoral thesis on the palaeontology of horses at the university of Jena in 1872. Associate professor, Moscow University, 1880–3. (DSB.) 30 March 1872, [after 8 June 1872], [ c. 7 August 1872], [before 8 August 1872], 8 August [1872], 10 August [1872], [12–17 August 1872], [after 12 August 1872], 17 August 1872, 6 September [1872], 10 September 1872, 18 September [1872], 20 September [1872], 24 September [1872] Krefft, Johann Louis Gerard (Gerard) (1830–81). German-born zoologist. Worked in the Australian goldfields, 1852–7. Took part in an expedition to the

Biographical register

723

Lower Murray and Darling Rivers in 1857; made a large natural history collection and was employed by the National Museum, Melbourne, to catalogue it. Assistant curator, Australian Museum, Sydney, 1864–74. Specialised in snakes; discovered the Queensland lungfish, Ceratodus forsteri (now Neoceratodus forsteri). (Aust. dict. biog.) 15 May 1872, 17 July 1872, 30 December 1872 Lacaze-Duthiers, Félix Joseph Henri de (1821–1901). French invertebrate zoologist. Assistant to Henri Milne-Edwards. Professor of zoology in Lille, 1854–64; at the Muséum d’histoire naturelle, Paris, 1865–9; at the Faculté des sciences, Paris, from 1869. Elected to the Académie des sciences, 1871. (DSB.) 28 September 1872, 11 December 1872 Lamarck, Jean Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet ( Jean Baptiste) de (1744–1829). French naturalist. Held various botanical positions at the Jardin du roi, 1788–93. Appointed professor of zoology, Muséum d’histoire naturelle, 1793. Believed in spontaneous generation and the progressive development of animal types; propounded a theory of transmutation. (DSB.) Lampson, Curtis Miranda, 1st baronet (1806–85). American-born fur merchant and telegraph-cable promoter. Moved to England in 1830 and set up in business as a fur merchant in London. Naturalised a British subject, 1849. Director and vice-chairman of the company laying the Atlantic telegraph cable. Created baronet, 1866. (ODNB.) Landseer, Charles (1799/1800–1879). Painter of historical and genre subects. Brother of Edwin Henry Landseer and Thomas Landseer. Exhibited extensively. Keeper of the Royal Academy, 1851–73. (ODNB.) Landseer, Edwin Henry (1802–73). Animal painter. Pupil of Benjamin Robert Haydon, 1813–16; studied at the Royal Academy Schools from 1816. Made several expeditions to Scotland, 1824–35. Known for animal paintings, especially in Scottish settings. (ODNB.) Langstaff, Charles (1832/3–84). Surgeon. MD, Edinburgh, 1858. President of the Southampton Medical Society. Medical officer at the Female Orphan Asylum, Southampton. Medical officer in charge of the Royal Engineers and to the Ordnance Survey. Surgeon at the Royal South Hampshire Infirmary. (Medical directory.) Langstroth, Lorenzo Lorraine (1810–95). American minister and apiarist. Principal of schools in Philadelphia and Greenfield, Massachusetts. In 1851, developed an innovative moveable-frame beehive that revolutionised bee-keeping. Author of Langstroth on the hive and the honey-bee (1853). (ANB.) Langton, Charles (1801–86). Rector of Onibury, Shropshire, 1832–41. Left the Church of England in 1841. Resided at Maer, Staffordshire, 1841–7, and at Hartfield Grove, Hartfield, Sussex, 1847–63. Married Emma Darwin’s sister, Charlotte Wedgwood, in 1832. After her death, married CD’s sister, Emily Catherine Darwin, in 1863. (Alum. Oxon., Emma Darwin (1915), Freeman 1978.) Langton, Diana (1872–1963). Third daughter of Edmund and Emily Caroline

724

Biographical register

Langton, Diana, cont. Langton. Name changed to Massingberd following her mother’s inheritance of the Massingberd family estate at Gunby, Lincolnshire, 1887. (BMD (Death index); Burke’s landed gentry s.v. Massingberd; R. B. Litchfield, Births, deaths, and marriages (DAR 248/3).) Langton, Edmund (1841–75). Son of Charles and Charlotte Langton. BA, Cambridge (Trinity College), 1864. Admitted at Lincoln’s Inn, 1864. (Alum. Cantab., Emma Darwin (1915).) Langton, Emily Caroline (Lena) (1847–97). Suffragist, and anti-vivisection and temperance campaigner. Married her second cousin Edmund Langton in 1867. Resided principally in Bournemouth. Succeeded to the estate of Gunby Hall, Lincolnshire, in 1887 and resumed her maiden name of Massingberd. Founded a women’s club, the Pioneer Club in London, in 1892. (ODNB s.v. Massingberd, Emily Caroline Langton.) Langton, Emily Catherine (Catherine) (1810–66). CD’s sister. Married Charles Langton in 1863. (Darwin pedigree.) Lankester, Edwin Ray (1847–1929). Zoologist. Studied natural sciences at Oxford under George Rolleston, 1866–8; physiology at Leipzig and Vienna; morphology under Ernst Haeckel at Jena; marine zoology with Anton Dohrn in Naples, 1871–2. Fellow and tutor, Exeter College, Oxford, 1872–5; professor of zoology, University College, London, 1875–91; Linacre Professor of comparative anatomy, Oxford, 1891–8; director of the natural history departments and keeper of zoology, British Museum, 1898–1907. Knighted, 1907. FRS 1875. (ODNB.) Lartet, Edouard Amant Isidore Hippolyte (Edouard) (1801–71). French palaeontologist and prehistorian. Trained as a lawyer. Began palaeontological research in the 1830s, and became interested in the question of the antiquity of humans; carried out excavations in 1860 that provided proof of the contemporaneity of humans with extinct animal species. Named professor of palaeontology, Muséum d’histoire naturelle, 1869, but ill health prevented him from fulfilling his duties. (DSB, Sarjeant 1980–96.) Lavater, Johann Kaspar (1741–1801). Swiss poet and physiognomist. Educated at Zürich. Took holy orders in 1769. Wrote religious poetry and works of physiognomy. (EB.) Lavoisier, Antoine Laurent (1743–94). French scientist and public servant. Principally a chemist, he discovered the role of oxygen in chemical reactions. Had a lifelong interest in geology, was a pioneer in scientific agriculture, and an able financier. Executed on the guillotine during the ‘Reign of Terror’. (DSB.) Lawson, Henry (1840–77). Physician and journal editor. Graduate of Queen’s University, Belfast. Lecturer in histology, St Mary’s Hospital, London. Editor of the Monthly Microscopical Journal, Scientific Opinion, and Popular Science Review. Published on the treatment of neuralgia with injection of morphia, based on his own case. (Barton 1998, pp. 6 and 16; British Medical Journal, 13 October 1877, p. 550.) Layard, Edgar Leopold (1824–1900). Civil servant and naturalist. Served in the

Biographical register

725

Ceylon civil service, 1846–54; in the Cape of Good Hope civil service, 1854–70. Studied the birds and shells of Ceylon (Sri Lanka). Curator of the South African museum, 1855–72. Published on the birds of South Africa (1867). (DSAB, Modern English biography.) Layton, Charles (b. 1826/7). Publisher’s agent. London agent for D. Appleton & Co., New York City. (Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/68: 13); Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Charles Layton, 22 November 1869.) 13 August 1872 Leclerc, Georges Louis, comte de Buffon (1707–88). French naturalist, philosopher, and mathematician. Keeper, Jardin du roi, 1739–88. His theory of transmutation is outlined in Histoire naturelle (1749–1804). FRS 1739. (DBF, DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Lefroy, John Henry (1817–90). Army officer and meteorologist. At the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, 1831–4. Made an expedition to discover the geomagnetic characteristics of British North America and to attempt to locate the magnetic north pole, 1843–4. Retired from the army, 1870. Governor of Bermuda, 1871–7; of Tasmania, 1880–1. Published on many subjects, including meteorology, botany, military history, and the Bermudas. FRS 1848. Knighted, 1877. (ODNB.) Lehmann, Amalie (1837–1906). Née Léo. Married Emil Lehmann, 1859. (Biographisch-bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, www.bautz.de/bbkl/ s.v. Lehmann, Emil (accessed 17 March 2011).) Lehmann, Emil (1823–87). German translator, journalist, and librarian. Studied at Kiel and Heidelberg and received a degree in law. Worked as a lawyer, journalist and then librarian at the Hamburg commerce library. Married Amelie Léo, 1859. From around 1864, suffered from vision problems, but began translating works from English and French. Translated Wilkie Collins and was George Eliot’s authorised German translator. Hamburg correspondent for several European newspapers. (Biographisch-bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, www.bautz.de/bbkl/ (accessed 17 March 2011).) 18 October [1872] Leifchild, John Roby (1814–89). Author and reviewer. Son of John Leifchild, a leading evangelical minister (ODNB), and Elizabeth Stormonth. Visiting government commissioner to coal mines in Newcastle and Durham. Author of works on mining and coal. Reviewed Origin in the Athenæum in 1859, Orchids in 1862, and Descent in 1871. (BLC, BMD (Death index), NUC, Wellesley index.) Lemoine, Jacques Félix Albert (Albert) (1824–74). French philosopher. Professor of philosophy, Faculté de Nancy, 1855; Bordeaux, 1856; lycée Bonaparte, Paris, 1859. Author of De la physionomie et de la parole (1865) and l’Habitude et l’instinct (1875). (Dictionnaire universel de contemporains 1880.) Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim (1729–81). German writer, critic, and philosopher. (DBE.)

726

Biographical register

Lettington, Henry (b. 1822/3). Gardener in the village of Down, Kent. Worked as a gardener at Down House, 1854–79, and occasionally in following years. Assisted CD with botanical experiments. Son-in-law of William Brooks, who was also employed by the Darwins. (CD’s Classed account books (Down House MS); Census returns of England and Wales 1861 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG9/462: 70); F. Darwin 1920, pp. 56–7; letter from Emma Darwin to G. H. Darwin, 5 July [1884] (DAR 210.3: 110); Recollections of CD by Francis Darwin (DAR 140.3: 90a).) Leveson-Gower, Granville George, 2d Earl Granville (1815–91). Politician and diplomat. MP for Morpeth, 1837–40; for Lichfield, 1841–6. Under-secretary for foreign affairs, 1840–1. Became second Earl Granville, 1846. Paymastergeneral, 1847–52; vice-president, Board of Trade, 1848–51. Lord president of the council, 1855–8 and 1860–6. Chancellor of the University of London, 1856– 71. Colonial secretary, 1868–70; foreign secretary, 1870–4, 1880–5. FRS 1853. (ODNB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) [before 19 April 1872] Lewes, George Henry (1817–78). Writer. Author of a biography of Goethe (1855). Contributed articles on literary and philosophical subjects to numerous journals. Editor, Fortnightly Review, 1865–6. Published on physiology and on the nervous system in the 1860s and 1870s. Lived with Marian Evans (George Eliot) from 1854. (Ashton 1991, ODNB.) Lewin, Friend (1842/3–1919). Physician. MRCS, England, 1868; LRCP, Edinburgh, 1869. House surgeon, St Mary’s Hospital, London, 1870–2. Surgeon, P & O Co. 1873–5. Returned to private practice in London, 1876. (England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1858–1966 (Ancestry.com); London, England, births and baptisms, 1813–1906 (accessed on Ancestry.com); Medical directory.) 16 April [1871] L’Héritier de Brutell, Charles Louis (1746–1800). French botanist. Active in court circles and the Jardin du roi; published on plants newly introduced into Europe. Published Geraniologia (1792). Lost his fortune during the French Revolution, and was assassinated in 1800. (DSB.) Liddell, Henry George (1811–98). Lexicographer and dean of Christ Church, Oxford. Co-authored with Robert Scott A Greek–English lexicon, first published in 1843. (ODNB.) Lilljeborg, Wilhelm (1816–1908). Swedish zoologist. Held academic posts in zoology at Lund University, 1844–53. Professor of zoology at Uppsala, 1854–82. Established a zoological laboratory at Uppsala in 1875. Specialised in biogeography and pioneered the systematics of the fauna of Sweden and Norway. (SBL.) Lindsay, James Ludovic (1847–1913). Astronomer, book collector, and electrical inventor. Moved to Scotland from London, 1872, and built an observatory near Aberdeen. Joined the expedition to observe the transit of Venus in 1874. MP

Biographical register

727

for Wigan, 1874–80. President, Royal Astronomical Society, 1878 and 1879. Succeeded his father as earl of Crawford and earl of Balcarres, 1880. FRS 1878. (Noakes 2007; ODNB.) Linnaeus, Carolus. See Linné, Carl von. Linné, Carl von (Carolus Linnaeus) (1707–78). Swedish botanist and zoologist. Professor of practical medicine, University of Uppsala, 1741; professor of botany, diatetics, and materia medica, 1742; court physician, 1747. Proposed a system for the classification of the natural world, and reformed scientific nomenclature. FRS 1753. (DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Linnean Society of London 12 September 1872, [after 12] September 1872 Lister, Caroline (d. 1897). Third daughter of William Mostyn Owen Sr and Harriet Elizabeth Mostyn Owen of Woodhouse. Married George Spofforth Lister of Finningley Park, Yorkshire, and Hirst Priory, Lincolnshire, in 1848. (Burke’s landed gentry 1952 s.v. Mostyn-Owen.) Litchfield, Henrietta Emma (1843–1927). CD’s daughter. Married Richard Buckley Litchfield (Alum. Cantab.) in 1871. Assisted CD with his work. Edited Emma Darwin (1904) and (1915). (Burke’s landed gentry 1952, Correspondence, Freeman 1978.) 13 May 1872, 25 July 1872 See also Darwin, Henrietta Emma. Litchfield, Richard Buckley (1832–1903). Barrister. BA, Cambridge (Trinity College), 1853. Admitted to the Inner Temple, 1854; called to the bar, 1863. First class clerk in the office of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. Married Henrietta Emma Darwin in 1871. A founder and treasurer of the Working Men’s College; taught mathematics there, 1854–70, music from 1860. (Alum. Cantab.; Emma Darwin (1915) 2: 204, 206; R. B. Litchfield, Record, personal and domestic, vol. 1 (DAR 248/1).) Livingstone, David (1813–73). Explorer and missionary. Travelled in Africa, 1841– 56, and published an account of his travels in 1857. Consul for part of the east coast and interior of Africa and commander of an expedition to explore East and Central Africa, 1858–64. In England, 1864–6. Read a paper on Africa at the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science at Bath in 1864. Explored the Nile basin, 1866–73. FRS 1858. (DNB, ODNB.) Lloyd, Mary Charlotte (1819–96). Welsh landowner and artist. Studied in Italy with the sculptor John Gibson. Met Frances Power Cobbe there and became her lifelong companion. Neighbour of the Darwin family during their stay at Caerdeon, Barmouth, Wales, in summer 1869. (Peter Lucas 2007.) 5 June [1872] Lockyer, Joseph Norman (1836–1920). Astronomer. Civil servant in the War Office, 1857–75; published papers on solar physics. Secretary to the royal commission on scientific instruction and the advancement of science, 1870–5; employee of the Science and Art Department at South Kensington from 1875; first director

728

Biographical register

Lockyer, Joseph Norman, cont. of the Solar Physics Observatory, and professor of astronomical physics, Royal College of Science, South Kensington, 1890–1911. Established the journal Nature in 1869. Knighted, 1897. FRS 1869. (DNB, DSB.) Longet, François-Achille (1811–71). French physician and physiologist. Member, Académie de médecine, 1844. Professor, Faculté de médecine, 1853. Worked on the central nervous system. (Larousse du XXe siècle.) Lónyay, Menyhért (1822–84). Hungarian financial expert and politician. Member of Parliament from 1843. Briefly exiled for his involvement in the 1848 revolution. Finance minister, 1867–71; prime minister, 1871–2. Created count, 1871. Forced out of office following allegations of corruption. President, Hungarian Academy, 1871–84. (Magyar életrajzi lexikon,Meyers Konversationslexikon.) 11 June 1872, [after 11 June 1872] Lorain, Paul Joseph (1828–75). French physician. (IBN.) Lord, John Keast (1818–72). Naturalist and traveller. Served as veterinary surgeon in the Crimea, 1855–6. Naturalist to the Boundary Commission sent to British Columbia, 1858. Joined the staff of the journal Land and Water in 1866 before being engaged by the viceroy in archaeological and scientific research in Egypt. Appointed manager of the newly established Brighton Aquarium four months before his death. (ODNB.) Lortet, Louis (1836–1909). French naturalist. MD, Paris, 1861. Professor of zoology, School of Medicine, Lyon; director, Museum of Natural History, Lyon. Led scientific expeditions to Greece, 1875, and Syria, 1875, 1880. (Dictionnaire universel des contemporains, Index biographique de l’Académie des sciences.) Louis XI (1423–83). King of France. Acceded to the throne in 1461. (EB.) Lovén, Sven (1809–95). Swedish marine biologist. Travelled to Spitsbergen and northern Norway, 1836–7. Curator of the invertebrate section of the Museum of Natural History, Stockholm, 1841. Studied shell banks on the west coast of Sweden, providing evidence that an Arctic sea had once covered much of the present Scandinavian land-mass. (Catalogue of the library of the British Museum (Natural History), DSB.) Lowe, Robert, 1st Viscount Sherbrooke (1811–92). BA, Oxford (University College), 1833. Lived in Australia, 1842–50. Writer of lead articles for The Times, 1851–68. MP, 1852–80. Became Viscount Sherbrooke in 1880. FRS 1871. (ODNB, Record of the Royal Society.) Lowne, Benjamin Thompson (b. c. 1839 d. 1925). Surgeon and naturalist. FRCS, LSA, 1873; MD, Durham, 1896. Collected plants in Palestine and Syria, 1863–4. Lecturer, physiology and general anatomy, Middlesex Hospital Medical School, 1871–95; Royal College of Surgeons, 1876–80. Junior surgeon, Great Northern Hospital, 1874–6; ophthalmic surgeon from 1876. Lecturer in botany, Royal Veterinary College, from 1885. (R. Desmond 1994, Plarr 1930.) Lubbock, Ellen Frances (1834/5–79). Daughter of the Reverend Peter Hordern of Chorlton-cum-Hardy, Lancashire. Married John Lubbock in 1856. (Burke’s

Biographical register

729

peerage 1970, Census returns of England and Wales 1861 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG9/462: 75)(accessed Ancestry.com).) Lubbock, Frances Mary (Mary) (1845–1922). Daughter of the Reverend Henry Turton and Amelia St George. Married Henry James Lubbock in 1866. (Burke’s peerage 1929 s.v. Avebury, IGI s.v. Turton, Frances Mary.) [8 May 1866 – 29 August 1872] (to H. E. Darwin) Lubbock, Henry James (1838–1910). Banker. Second son of John William Lubbock. High sheriff for the county of London, 1897. (WWW.) Lubbock, John, 4th baronet and 1st Baron Avebury (1834–1913). Banker, politician, and naturalist. Son of John William Lubbock and a neighbour of CD’s in Down. Studied entomology and anthropology. Worked at the family bank from 1849; head of the bank from 1865. Liberal MP for Maidstone, Kent, 1870–80; for London University, 1880–1900. Succeeded to the baronetcy in 1865. Created Baron Avebury, 1900. FRS 1858. (DSB, Hutchinson 1914, ODNB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) [after 21 March 1872], 20 June 1872 (to W. E. Gladstone) Lucian of Samosata (b. c. 120). Belletrist and wit in Greek. Born in Samosata (now in Turkey). (Oxford classical dictionary.) Ludwig, Camilla (b. 1837/8). German-born governess. Born in Hamburg. Governess to the Darwin family, 1860–3. Translated German works for CD. Married Reginald Saint Pattrick, vicar of Sellinge, Kent (Alum. Oxon.), in 1874. (CD’s Classed account books (Down House MS); Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/1013/76/12); letter from R. S. Pattrick, 19 October 1881 (Calendar no. 13416).) Lumb, Edward (d. 1872). British merchant in Buenos Aires. (Freeman 1978; letter from Alfred Tylor, 8 June 1872.) Lyell, Charles, 1st baronet (1797–1875). Scottish geologist. Uniformitarian geologist whose Principles of geology (1830–3), Elements of geology (1838), and Antiquity of man (1863) appeared in many editions. Professor of geology, King’s College, London, 1831. President of the Geological Society of London, 1835–7 and 1849– 51; of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1864. Travelled widely and published accounts of his trips to the United States. CD’s scientific mentor and friend. Knighted, 1848; created baronet, 1864. FRS 1826. (DSB, ODNB.) 30 March 1872 (from J. D. Hooker), 10 May [1872], 22 May [1872], 1 June 1872, 12 July [1872] Lyell, Mary Elizabeth (1808–73). Eldest child of Leonard Horner. Married Charles Lyell in 1832. (Freeman 1978.) Lyon, William Penman (1811/12–77). Clergyman. BA, University of Glasgow, 1837. Congregational minister at Albany Chapel, London, then Stowmarket, then Tunbridge Wells. (Roll of the graduates of the University of Glasgow.) MacColl, Norman (1843–1904). Scottish journal editor and Spanish scholar. BA, moral sciences, Cambridge, 1866. Editor of the Athenæum, 1871–1900. (ODNB.)

730

Biographical register

McGill, John (1832/3–71). Linguist. Professor of Hebrew and oriental languages, St Mary’s College, University of St Andrews, 1868–71. LLD Glasgow, 1869. (Roll of the graduates of the University of Glasgow.) McGilvray, Maria (1819–89). Daughter of William Jackson Hooker and Maria Turner. Sister of Joseph Dalton Hooker. Married Walter McGilvray in 1846. (Allan 1967 s.v. ‘Hooker pedigree’.) MacKay, Henry (1822–1906). Scottish clergyman. Ordained in the Episcopal Church, 1859. Rector in Monagahela City, Pennsylvania. Missionary in Butler County, Pennsylvania. Later businessman and railroad investor. Retired to New Mexico. (Journal of the Annual Convention, Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh 1868, 1871, and 1874; Parish historian, St Paul’s Church, Monogahela, Pennsylvania (personal communication).) 16 November 1872 Mackenzie, John Finlayson (1847/8–1913). Civil engineer. Worked in the Indian department of public works. (India Office Records: Financial Department Records IOR/L/F/8/3/242, 26 July 1867; Scotland Census 1901 (Parish: Edinburgh Morningside; 148/11/2); England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1858–1966 (Ancestry.com).) 8 February 1872 Macmillan, Alexander (1818–96). Publisher. Co-founder with his brother Daniel of the firm Macmillan & Co. in 1843. After moving the firm’s headquarters to London in the early 1860s, began commissioning textbooks on botany, chemistry, and geology for children in elementary schools. (ODNB.) Macrobius. Author in Latin. (Oxford classical dictionary.) Main, William (b. 1825). Physician. MD, Edinburgh, 1845. Assistant surgeon in the Royal Navy. GP in Birkenhead. (Census returns of England and Wales 1871, 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/3742/24/41, RG11/3571/ 27/48), Medical directory 1873.) 26 November 1872, 29 November [1872] Maine, Henry James Sumner (1822–88). Jurist. BA, Cambridge, 1844. Regius professor of civil law, 1847–54. Called to the bar at Lincoln’s Inn, 1850. Reader in Roman law and jurisprudence at the Council of Legal Education from 1852. Legal member of the governor-general’s council in India, 1862–9. Corpus Professor of jurisprudence, Oxford, 1869–77. Master of Trinity Hall,Cambridge, from 1877. Knighted, 1871. FRS 1874. (ODNB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Major, Charles Immanuel Forsyth (1843–1923). German-born palaeontologist, physician, and botanist. Studied at Tübingen, Göttingen, and Basel; MD 1868. Practised medicine in Italy from about 1872 and also pursued his study of palaeontology and botany. Travelled and collected in Samos, 1886–9. Worked for the British Museum, 1892–1908; travelled and collected in Madagascar, 1894–6. FRS 1908. (Stehlin 1924.) 18 October 1872, 17 November 1872 Mallet, Robert (1810–81). Irish-born civil engineer and seismologist. Carried out

Biographical register

731

many engineering projects in Ireland. Consulting engineer in London, 1861. FRS 1854. (DSB, ODNB.) Malm, August Wilhelm (1821–82). Swedish zoologist. Studied zoology in Lund with Sven Nilsson; at the national museum in Stockholm; in Copenhagen. Curator, Gothenburg natural history museum, 1848; professor, 1881. Specialist in fish and molluscs. (SBL, Tort 1996.) Manners, John James Robert (1818–1906). Politician. Entered Parliament, 1841. Became first commissioner of works, 1852; held the post again, 1858, 1866–8. Postmaster-general, 1874–80. Became seventh duke of Rutland in 1888. (ODNB.) Manning, Henry Edward (1808–92). Roman Catholic convert and cardinalarchbishop of Westminster. (ODNB.) Mantegazza, Paolo (1831–1910). Italian anthropologist and pathologist. MD, Pavia, 1853. Travelled extensively in Europe and South America. Assistant, Ospedale Maggiore, Milan, 1858. Professor of pathology, Pavia, 1860; anthropology, Florence, 1870. Did research on animal organ transplants. Deputy for Monza in the Italian parliament, 1865–76; senator from 1876. Co-founder of the Archivio di etnologia e d’antropologia. (Dizionario del risorgimento nazionale, DSB.) 4 May 1872, 23 December 1872, 28 December 1872 Margherita di Savoia (1851–1926). Queen of Italy. Daughter of Ferdinand, duke of Genoa. Married her cousin, the future Umberto I of Italy, in 1868. (EI.) Markens, Isaac (1846–1928). American writer. Of New York. In the shipping and communications business, 1862–7; commercial traveller, 1867–73; stenographer, 1873–7; private secretary, 1877–81; newspaper manager and editor, 1881–9. Authority on Abraham Lincoln. (WWWA.) 27 November 1872 Marshall, William Adolf Ludwig (William) (1845–1907). German zoologist. Studied in Jena and Göttingen; Dr phil., Göttingen, 1871. Assistant at the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie (National museum of natural history) in Leiden, the Netherlands, from 1867 to 1872. Secretary to the grand duke of SaxeWeimar-Eisenach, 1872–9. Assistant in zoology to Rudolf Leuckart, Leipzig, 1877; lecturer, 1880; professor extraordinarius of zoology and comparative anatomy, 1885–1907. (Daum 1998, p. 500.) 6 June [1872], 15 October 1872 Martin, John Royle. Worked for the Artizans, Labourers, & General Dwellings Co. (Letter from J. R. Martin, 27 March 1872.) 27 March 1872 Martineau, Harriet (1802–76). Author, reformer, and traveller. Friend of Erasmus Alvey Darwin and Hensleigh and Frances Emma Elizabeth Wedgwood. (ODNB, B. Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980.) Martineau, James (1805–1900). Unitarian theologian, writer, and lecturer. Ordained, 1828. Had ministries in Dublin and Liverpool. Professor of mental and moral philosophy and political economy, Manchester New College, 1840; professor of mental, moral, and religious philosophy, 1857 (by which time the college

732

Biographical register

Martineau, James, cont. had moved to University Hall, Gordon Square, London). Minister of Little Portland Street Chapel, London, 1859. Principal of Manchester New College, 1869. Gave up preaching owing to ill health in 1872. Younger brother of Harriet Martineau. (DNB.) Martinelli, Fulvio. Italian surgeon. Of Modena. Author of a work on pigeons (1872). (Memorandum from Fulvio Martinelli, 21 May 1872.) 21 May 1872 Martins, Charles Frédéric (1806–89). French botanist. Qualified as a doctor in Paris in 1834. Professor of botany, Faculté de Montpellier, 1846. Also published on geology and meteorology. (Dictionnaire universel des contemporains, NBU.) 3 February 1872 Massarani, Tullo (1826–1905). Italian writer and politician. (DBI.) Masters, Maxwell Tylden (1833–1907). Botanist, journal editor, and general medical practitioner. Sub-curator, Fielding Herbarium, University of Oxford, circa 1853–7. GP at Peckham from 1856. Lecturer on botany at St George’s Hospital medical school, 1855–68. Editor of the Gardeners’ Chronicle, 1865–1907. Active in the Royal Horticultural Society, succeeding Joseph Dalton Hooker as the chairman of the scientific committee; secretary of the International Horticultural Congress, 1866. FRS 1870. (Clokie 1964, pp. 106, 208; ODNB.) 4 November 1872 Maudsley, Henry (1835–1918). Medical psychologist. MD, University College Hospital, London, 1857. Assistant medical officer, Wakefield Asylum, 1857–8; medical superintendent, Manchester Royal Lunatic Asylum, 1859–62. Physician, West London Hospital, from 1864; lecturer on insanity, St Mary’s Hospital, London, 1868–81; professor, medical jurisprudence, University College, London, 1869–79. Joint editor, Journal of Mental Science, 1863–78. Developed a lucrative private practice. Researched heredity and degeneration, and promoted belief in the physical causes of mental illness. Wrote extensively on medical jurisprudence. President, Medico-Psychological Association, 1870. (ODNB.) 6 November 1872 Maury, Matthew Fontaine (1806–73). American naval officer, astronomer, hydrographer, and meteorologist. Superintendent of the Depot of Charts and Instruments and of the Naval Observatory, Washington, 1841. Published a series of wind and current charts with sailing instructions for all the oceans. His 1855 study, The physical geography of the sea, laid the foundation for the science of oceanography. Resigned in 1861 and was commissioned in the Confederate States Navy. Agent in Britain for the Confederate government from 1862. Professor of meteorology, Virginia Military Institute at Lexington, 1869–73. (ANB, DAB, DSB.) Maw, George (1832–1912). Tile manufacturer, geologist, botanist, and antiquarian. Partner with his younger brother Arthur in the encaustic tile company Maw & Co. of Brosley, Shropshire. Established a well-known garden at his residence at Benthall Hall, Shropshire; an expert on crocuses. Wrote on the geology of western England and North Wales. Travelled to Morocco and Algeria with Joseph

Biographical register

733

Dalton Hooker in 1871 and independently in 1873, writing on the geology of these countries. (Benthall 1980; R. Desmond 1994; Gardeners’ Chronicle, 12 February 1881, pp. 205–6, 208, 209; Sarjeant 1980–96.) Max Müller, Friedrich (1823–1900). German-born orientalist and philologist. Published an edition of the Rig Veda, the most important of the sacred books of the Brahmans, 1849–74. Moved to Paris in 1845; settled in Oxford in 1848 after fleeing the revolution in France. Deputy Taylorian Professor of modern European languages, Oxford University, 1851–4; professor, 1854–68; professor of comparative philology, 1868–1900. Curator of the Bodleian Library, Oxford, 1856–63 and 1881–94. (ODNB.) May, Arthur Dampier (1857–1916). Artist. Made two drawings of dogs used in Expression, pp. 54 and 55. Friend of Samuel Butler (1835–1902). (BMD (Birth index); England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1858– 1966 (Ancestry.com); Expression, pp. 54, 55; letter from Samuel Butler to Francis Darwin, [before 30 May 1872].) Maynard, Charles Johnson (1845–1929). American taxidermist, collector, and naturalist. Carried out work for the Boston Society of Natural History, and provided leading ornithologists with specimens. Travelled widely in the United States. Published numerous articles and books despite having no formal scientific training. (DAB.) 7 December [1872–3] Meehan, Thomas (1826–1901). English-born botanist, horticulturist, and author. Gardener at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 1845–8. In 1848, emigrated to the United States, where he worked as a gardener. Established a nursery in Germantown, Pennsylvania, circa 1853. Editor, Gardener’s Monthly, 1859–87; Meehan’s Monthly, 1891–1901. Botanist on the Philadelphia state board of agriculture, 1877– 1901. Elected to the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 1860; to the American Philosophical Society, 1871. (H. G. Baker 1965, DAB.) Meek, Fielding Bradford (1817–76). American palaeontologist. Self-taught in geology. Geological assistant to the federal survey of Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, 1848–9. Assistant to the palaeontologist James Hall in Albany, New York, 1852–8. Worked on the geological survey of Missouri, 1854 and 1855. Collaborated with F. V. Hayden on his publications and went on collecting expeditions with him. Worked at the Smithsonian Institution, 1858–76. (ANB.) Meldola, Raphael (1849–1915). Chemist and entomologist. Studied at the Royal College of Chemistry, 1866–8. Assistant to the assayer of the Royal Mint, 1868– 71. Worked in the coal-tar dye industry, 1871–3 and 1877–85. Took part in the Royal Society of London’s eclipse expedition to the Nicobar Islands, 1875. Professor of chemistry, Finsbury Technical College, from 1885. Interested in protective colouring and mimicry in moths; secretary of the Entomological Society of London, 1876–80. FRS 1886. (ODNB.) 21 January [1872], 23 January [1872], 25 January 1872, 27 January [1872], 12 March 1872, 26 March 1872, 28 March 1872 Mellersh, Arthur (1812–94). Naval officer. Midshipman and mate on HMS Beagle,

734

Biographical register

Mellersh, Arthur, cont. 1825–36. Served off the coast of Syria, then in command of HMS Rattler in the Burma campaign in 1852. Served off the coast of China in the 1850s, suppressing piracy, and in the Caribbean and South America before retiring in 1864. (Modern English biography; The Times, 28 September 1894, p. 4.) 25 January 1872, 2 February 1872 Meyer, Adolf Bernhard (1840–1911). German zoologist, anthropologist, and museum director. Trained as a physician in Berlin. Travelled extensively in the Eastern Archipelago, publishing on the birds of the Celebes. Director, Royal Museum of Zoology, Anthropology, and Ethnography in Dresden, from 1874. (Auk 28 (1911): 519.) 25 April 1872 Meyerbeer, Giacomo (1791–1863). German composer. Wrote operas in Italian, French, and German and contributed to the ‘grand opera’ style, involving elaborate sets, costumes, and orchestra, with productions extending to four or five acts. (EB.) Michelet, Adèle-Athénaïs Mialaret (Athénaïs) (1826–99). French author and natural historian. Taught in Vienna. Married Jules Michelet as his second wife in 1849. Collaborated in his work on L’Oiseau, L’Insecte, and La Mer; Michelet’s literary executor. Published natural history and other works in her own right. (BLC, Larousse du XXe siècle.) 17 May 1872, 23 May 1872, 26 June 1872, 16 November 1872 Michelet, Jules (1798–1874). French historian and natural historian. Director of the historical section of the national archives from 1831; professor of history and moral philosophy, Collège de France, from 1838. Married Athénaïs Mialaret as his second wife in 1849. Author of Histoire de France and numerous other works. (Larousse du XXe siècle.) 15 November 1872 Miklucho-Maclay, Nikolai Nikolaievich (1846-88). Russian zoologist, anthropologist, and explorer. After being expelled from the University of St Petersburg for political reasons in 1864, studied at Heidelberg, Leipzig, and Jena, 1864– 8. Worked on the comparative anatomy of various marine organisms. Explored much of Papua New Guinea and lived there 1871–2, 1876–7; explored throughout Micronesia and Indonesia. Founded a biological station near Sydney, Australia, 1881. (GSE.) Mill, John Stuart (1806–73). Philosopher and political economist. (DSB, ODNB.) Milman, Henry Hart (1791–1868). Historian and clergyman. Professor of poetry, Oxford University, 1821–31. Rector of St Margaret’s, Westminster, 1835–49. Dean of St Paul’s, 1849–68. First translator of some of the Indian epics. (ODNB.) Milton, John (1608–74). Poet. (ODNB.) Mitchell, Thomas Livingstone (1792–1855). Surveyor-general, New South Wales, 1828–55. Led four expeditions into the Australian interior. (Aust. dict. biog., DNB.)

Biographical register

735

Mivart, St George Jackson (1827–1900). Comparative anatomist. Converted to Catholicism, 1844. Called to the bar, 1851, but never practised. Established his reputation as an anatomist by his studies on primates. Lecturer in comparative anatomy, St Mary’s Hospital Medical School, London, 1862–84. Secretary, Linnean Society of London, 1874–80; vice-president, 1892. Professor of the philosophy of natural history, University of Louvain, 1890–3. Excommunicated, 1900. Vigorous critic of Darwinism. Attempted to reconcile evolutionary theory and Catholicism. FRS 1869. (DNB.) 4 January 1872, 5 January 1872, 6 January 1872, 8 January [1872], 10 January 1872, 11 January [1872] Moggridge, John Traherne (1842–74). Entomologist and botanist. Wintered in Mentone, France, and studied the flora of the area. (R. Desmond 1994, Gardeners’ Chronicle n.s. 2 (1874): 723.) 6 October 1872, 9 October [1872] Montague, Henry (b. 1799/1800). Editor and writer. Editor of the London Commercial Record. (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/369/120/28); letter from H. Montague, 24 May 1872.) 24 May 1872 Moore, Thomas (1779–1852). Irish poet and songwriter. Known for his patriotic verse. Biographer of Sheridan. (ODNB.) Moore, Thomas Edward Laws (b. c. 1820 d. 1872). Naval officer and polar explorer. Took part in James Clark Ross’s Antarctic expedition, 1839–43; undertook the magnetic survey of the south Atlantic in 1845, and of Hudson’s Bay in 1846. Promoted commander of the Plover, 1848. Searched for Sir John Franklin and for the North-west Passage, 1848–52. Governor of the Falkland Islands, 1855–62. Rear-admiral, 1867. FRS 1854. (ODNB.) Moran, Benjamin (1820–86). American diplomat and writer. Assistant secretary, American legation, London, 1857; secretary, 1864. Minister resident, Portugal, 1874; chargé d’affaires, Lisbon, 1876–82. From 1857 to 1875, kept a journal, parts of which were later published. (ANB.) Morigerovskii, Alexander Nikiforovich (1828/9–1903). Russian publisher and public figure. (Omsk State University Science Library online catalogue: library. omsu.ru.) Morley, John (1838–1923). Politician and writer. Lost his faith while at Lincoln College, Oxford, and left for London, where he earned a living from 1860 as a teacher and journalist. Editor of the Fortnightly Review, 1867–82; of the Pall Mall Gazette, 1880–3; of Macmillan’s Magazine, 1883–5. Liberal MP for Newcastle, 1883– 95; for Montrose Burghs, 1896–1908. Chief secretary for Ireland, 1886 and 1892– 5; secretary of state for India, 1905–10. Created Viscount Morley of Blackburn, 1908. (ODNB.) Morgan, Lewis Henry (1818–81). Anthropologist. Practised law in Rochester, New York, from 1844 until the mid 1860s. Studied the Iroquois, and kinship in

736

Biographical register

Morgan, Lewis Henry, cont. the Iroquois and other Native American peoples. Published League of the Ho-de’nosau-nee, or Iroquois (1851); Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family (1871); and Ancient society (1877). (ANB.) 20 January 1872 Morris, Caroline Honoria (1815/16–73). Composer. Née Campbell. Born in Gibraltar. Composed songs with piano accompaniment. Music mistress to Princess Augusta. Married James Morris in 1840. Lived in Mauritius from 1844 to 1849. Following her husband’s death in 1869, she took over as agent for the Royal Society of Arts and Sciences of Mauritius. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1851 (The National Archives: Public Record Office HO107/1513/50/27)(accessed on Ancestry.com); Court Journal 1835, p. 267; Dictionary of Mauritian biography s.v. Morris, James.) 16 January [1872] Morris, John (1810–86). Geologist. Originally a pharmaceutical chemist in Kensington. Published Catalogue of British fossils (1845). Professor of geology, University College London, 1854–77. (ODNB.) Mostyn Owen, Arthur (1813–96). Son of William Mostyn Owen Sr of Woodhouse. Attended Shrewsbury School, 1827–8, and the East India Company College, Haileybury, 1829–31. Served in the Indian Civil Service, 1832–48. High sheriff of Shropshire, 1876. (Modern English biography, Shrewsbury School register.) Mostyn Owen, Caroline. See Lister, Caroline. Mostyn Owen, Charles (1818–94). Army officer. Son of William Mostyn Owen Sr of Woodhouse. BA, Oxford (Trinity College), 1842. Served in South Africa during the Kaffir War of 1845–7. Chief constable of Oxfordshire from before 1877 to 1888. Married Frances, daughter of Edward Duncombe, rector of Barthomley, Cheshire in 1855. (Burke’s landed gentry 1952, Modern English biography.) Mostyn Owen, Francis (b. 1815). Army officer. Son of William Mostyn Owen Sr of Woodhouse. Attended Shrewsbury School, 1829–31. Captain, 1845. (Burke’s landed gentry 1952, Shrewsbury School register.) Mostyn Owen, Sobieski (d. 1890). Youngest daughter of William Mostyn Owen Sr of Woodhouse. (Burke’s landed gentry 1952.) Mostyn Owen, William, Sr. Army officer. Lieutenant, Royal Dragoons. Squire of Woodhouse, Shropshire. (Burke’s landed gentry 1952.) Motley, John Lothrop (1814–77). American historian and diplomat. AB, Harvard, 1831; studied in Germany until 1835. Secretary of the US legation in St Petersburg, 1841–2. Author of The rise of the Dutch Republic (1856). Minister to Austria, 1861–7; ambassador to the Court of St James, 1868–70. (ANB.) Moulinié, Jean Jacques (1830–73). Swiss zoologist and militia inspector. Translated Variation, Descent, and the sixth edition of Origin into French. (Tort 1996.) 1 January 1872, 4 January 1872, 1 February 1872, 23 September 1872 Mueller, Ferdinand Jakob Heinrich (Ferdinand) von (1825–96). Germanborn explorer and botanist. Emigrated to Australia in 1847. Government botan-

Biographical register

737

ist, Victoria, 1852. Botanist to the North West Australia Expedition, 1855–7. Director of the Botanical Gardens, Melbourne, 1857–73. President of the Australian Association for the Advancement of Science, 1890. FRS 1861. (Aust. dict. biog., R. Desmond 1994.) Müller, Heinrich Ludwig Hermann (Hermann) (1829–83). German botanist and entomologist. Brother of Johann Friedrich Theodor (Fritz) Müller. Schoolteacher in Schwerin, 1854–5. Studied blind cave insects in Krain, 1855. Teacher of natural sciences at the Realschule in Lippstadt, 1855–83; became director of the school. After settling in Lippstadt, studied the local flora, in particular the mosses. CD’s Orchids directed Müller’s attention to the pollination and fertilisation of flowers, on which he published several papers and books. (Gilbert 1977, Krause 1883, Science 2 (1883): 487–8.) [before 5 May 1872], 5 May 1872 Müller, Johannes Peter (1801–58). German comparative anatomist, physiologist, and zoologist. Became professor of anatomy and physiology at Berlin University in 1833. Foreign member, Royal Society, 1840. (DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Müller, Johann Friedrich Theodor (Fritz) (1822–97). German naturalist. Emigrated to the German colony in Blumenau, Brazil, in 1852. Taught mathematics at the Lyceum in Destêrro (now Florianópolis), 1856–67. Naturalista viajante of the National Museum, Rio de Janeiro, 1876–91. His anatomical studies on invertebrates and work on mimicry provided important support for CD’s theories. (ADB, DBE, Möller ed. 1915–21, NDB, West 2003.) 16 January 1872 Munby, Arthur Joseph (1828–1910). Diarist and civil servant. Called to the bar, 1855. Worked for the Ecclesiastical Commission, 1860–88. His posthumously published diary covered his daily life, topical events, his relationship with a working-class woman, Hannah Cullwick (whom he secretly married in 1873), his depictions of different kinds of working women, his literary friendships, and his involvement in Christian socialism through the Working Men’s College. A close friend of Richard Buckley Litchfield. (ODNB.) 9 December 1872 Munby, John Forth (b. c. 1831 d. 1872). Solicitor in York. Captain in the local Volunteers. Brother of Arthur Joseph Munby. (Hudson 1972, pp. 7, 312–13.) Murie, James (1832–1925). Physician and naturalist. MD, Glasgow, 1857; appointed pathologist to the Glasgow Royal Infirmary, 1857. Naturalist and medical officer on John Petherick’s expedition to the upper White Nile, 1861–3. Prosector to the Zoological Society, 1865–70. Secretary, Linnean Society of London, 1876– 80; librarian, 1880–8. (R. Desmond 1994; Proceedings of the Linnean Society of London (1925–6): 92–4.) 31 March 1872, 2 April 1872 Murray, John (1808–92). Publisher, and author of guide-books. CD’s publisher from 1845. (Freeman 1978, ODNB s.v. Murray family, publishers.)

738

Biographical register

Murray, John, cont. 8 January [1872], 27 January [1872], 30 January 1872, 2 February [1872], 14 February [1872], 9 March 1872, [9 March 1872 or later], 7 June [1872], 30 August [1872], 3 September [1872], 6 November [1872], 7 November [1872], 9 November 1872, 11 November 1872, 12 November [1872], 13 November 1872 Musters, George Chaworth (1841–79). Naval officer and explorer. Served in the Royal Navy from 1854. Travelled in South America, 1869–70, living with Patagonian Indians, and crossed northern Patagonia from east to west. Visited Vancouver Island in 1872, and travelled in Bolivia, 1874–6. (ODNB.) Naevius, Gnaeus (fl. 235–04 bce). Italian epic poet and dramatist. (Oxford Classical Dictionary.) Nägeli, Carl Wilhelm von (1817–91). Swiss botanist. Maintained a teleological view of evolution. Originally studied medicine, but transferred to botany under Alphonse de Candolle at Geneva. Worked for eighteen months with Matthais Jacob Schleiden at the University of Jena, then worked in Zurich, where he collaborated with Carl Cramer, 1845–52. Professor of botany, University of Freiburg, 1852; University of Munich, 1857. (DSB s.v. Naegeli, Carl Wilhelm von.) Nathorst, Alfred Gabriel (1850–1921). Swedish palaeobotanist and geologist. BA, Uppsala, 1873; docent, Lund, 1874. Assistant geologist, Swedish Geological Survey, 1873. Professor, archegoniates and fossil plants, Swedish museum of natural history, 1884–1917. Made several polar expeditions from 1870 and discovered and collected fossils, particularly fossil plants of which he made detailed studies. (Swedish Museum of Natural History: www.nrm.se/en/menu/researchand collections/departments/palaeobotany/history/agnathorst.867_en.html; accessed 26 July 2010.) [after August 1872] Nature 3 August [1872] Newman, Henry Wenman (1788–1865). Army officer and landowner. Joined the South Gloucestershire Militia in 1814; captain, 1820; lieutenant-colonel commandant, 1854–60. Succeeded to his father’s estates at Thornbury Park, Gloucestershire, in 1829. (Burke’s landed gentry 1871, Modern English biography.) Newton, Alfred (1829–1907). Zoologist and ornithologist. Travelled throughout northern Europe and North America on ornithological expeditions, 1854–63. Editor of Ibis, the journal of the British Ornithologists’ Union, 1865–70. Professor of zoology and comparative anatomy, Cambridge University, 1866–1907. FRS 1870. (DNB.) Newton, Isaac (1642–1727). Mathematician and natural philosopher. Advanced the theory of gravitation in Principia mathematica (1687) and of light in Opticks (1704). Lucasian Professor, Cambridge University, 1669–1701. Master of the Mint, 1699. President of the Royal Society of London, 1703–27. Knighted, 1705. FRS 1672. (ODNB, DSB.) Nicol, Patrick (1847–73). Scottish-born physician and mental health practitioner.

Biographical register

739

MD, Aberdeen, 1871. Clinical assistant, West Riding Lunatic Asylum, Wakefield, Yorkshire; assistant medical officer, Sussex County Asylum, 1870; physician, Bradford Infirmary. Forced to resign from his post at Sussex County Asylum for insulting the medical superintendent. Published papers on mental illness. ( J. Gardner 1999; Roll of the graduates of the University of Aberdeen; West Riding Lunatic Asylum Medical Reports 1 (1871): 178–208.) Nicols, Robert Arthur (Arthur) (1840–91). Writer and traveller. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1841, 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office HO107/657/6; RG10/1330/23/39); Correspondence vol. 19, letter from Arthur Nicols, 7 March 1871.) 20 August 1872, 23 August 1872 Nizami Ganjavi (Ilyas Yusif oglu) (1140–1202). Azerbaijani poet. Wrote five significant Persian epics. Possessed a wide knowledge of mathematics, astronomy, astrology, alchemy, medicine, law, theology, philosophy, music, and art. (Talattof and Clinton eds. 2000, pp. 1–3.) Nordhoff, Charles (1830–1901). German-born American journalist and author. Joined the US navy and travelled around the world, 1844–7. Merchant seaman, 1847–53. Became a journalist and wrote several books based on his experiences at sea. Editor, Harper & Brothers, 1857; managing editor, New York Evening Post, 1861–71. Travelled in California and Hawaii, 1871–4. Washington correspondent, New York Herald, 1874–90. (DAB.) 27 February 1872 Norman, George Warde (1793–1882). Writer on finance. Merchant in the Baltic timber trade, 1810–30. A director of the Bank of England, 1821–72. A founder member of the Political Economy Club, 1821. Public works commissioner, 1831– 76. A director of the Sun Insurance Office, 1830–64. Succeeded to his father’s estate at the Rookery, Bromley Common, Kent, in 1830. A family friend of the Darwins. (Burke’s landed gentry 1965, ODNB, Post Office directory of the six home counties 1859.) Norton, Charles Eliot (1827–1908). American editor, literary critic, and professor of art history. Graduated from Harvard College in 1846. Apprenticed himself in the East India trade, travelling widely in India and Europe. Gradually shifted to a literary career; wrote, translated, and edited books; contributed to the Atlantic Monthly; co-edited the North American Review, 1863–8; and co-founded and wrote for the Nation. Travelled and lived in England and continental Europe, 1868–73. Taught history of art and literature at Harvard, 1874–98. (ANB.) Norton, Susan Ridley Sedgwick (1838–72). Daughter of Sara Ashburner and the American legal theorist Theodore Sedgwick. Grew up in New York and Massachusetts. Married Charles Eliot Norton in 1862. Died in Dresden, Germany, after giving birth to her sixth child. (Turner 1999.) Nunn, John (b. 1803). Sailor. Sailed on the Royal Sovereign to Kerguelen’s Land, 1825. He was stranded, with other survivors, until 1829 after the Favorite was wrecked while leaving the island. (Nunn 1850.)

740

Biographical register

Nussbaumer, Fidelis Alois (b. 1848). Synaesthetic. Student at the University of Vienna in 1871. Published an account of his and his brother’s experience of colour hearing in 1873 that contributed to the investigation of synaesthesia in science. ( Jewanski et. al. 2011, p. 295 n. 5.) 4 December 1872 (and Rudolf Hoernes) Ogle, William (1827–1912). Physician and naturalist. MD, 1861. Lecturer on physiology at the medical school, and assistant physician St George’s Hospital, 1869– 72. Superintendent of statistics, General Register Office, 1880–1903. Translated Aristotle’s On the parts of animals into English in 1882. Published on flower structure and mechanisms for pollination. (Alum. Oxon., The Times, 15 April 1912, p. 9.) Oliver, Daniel (1830–1916). Botanist. Assistant in the herbarium of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 1858; librarian, 1860–90; keeper, 1864–90. Professor of botany, University College, London, 1861–88. FRS 1863. (R. Desmond 1994, List of the Linnean Society of London, 1859–91.) Oppel, Albert (1831–65). German palaeontologist. Studied at Tübingen, 1851– 3; student of Quenstedt. Travelled in Europe. Assistant in the Bavarian State Palaeontological Collection, Munich, 1858; professor extraordinarius, 1860; professor of palaeontology, 1861. Subdivided the Jurassic system into thirty-three zones using palaeontological content rather than lithographical features, allowing deposits to be correlated across countries. (DSB.) Orbigny, Alcide Charles Victor Dessalines d’ (1802–57). French palaeontologist. Travelled widely in South America, 1826–34, on a commission for the Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle. Professor of palaeontology, Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, 1853. (DSB.) Owen, Richard (1804–92). Comparative anatomist. Assistant conservator of the Hunterian Museum, Royal College of Surgeons of England, 1827; Hunterian Professor of comparative anatomy and physiology, 1836–56. Superintendent of the natural history departments, British Museum, 1856–84; prime mover in establishing the Natural History Museum, South Kensington, 1881. President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1858. Described the Beagle fossil mammal specimens. Knighted, 1884. FRS 1834. (DSB, ODNB.) Oxenden, George Chichester (1797–1875). Author of satiric verse and parodies, and orchid-fancier. Son of Henry Oxenden, seventh baronet. Lived at the family seat at Broome Park, near Canterbury, Kent. (Alum. Cantab., BLC, Burke’s peerage 1895, Correspondence vol. 10.) 8 April 1872 Packard, Alpheus Spring, Jr (1839–1905). American entomologist. Studied under Louis Agassiz. Qualified as a physician but practised for only a few months. In 1867, co-founder, with Edward Sylvester Morse, Alpheus Hyatt, and Frederic Ward Putnam, of the American Naturalist, which he edited for about twenty years. Professor of zoology and geology at Brown University, 1878–1905. (ANB, DSB.) 1 August 1872 Paget, James, 1st baronet (1814–99). Surgeon. Assistant surgeon at St Barth-

Biographical register

741

olomew’s Hospital, London, 1847; surgeon, 1861–71. Arris and Gale Professor of anatomy and surgery at the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 1847– 52. Lectured on physiology in the medical school, St Bartholomew’s, 1859–61; on surgery, 1865–9. Appointed surgeon-extraordinary to Queen Victoria, 1858; serjeant-surgeon, 1877. Created baronet, 1871. FRS 1851. (ODNB.) [1872] Parker, Marianne (1798–1858). CD’s eldest sister. Married Henry Parker (1788– 1856) in 1824. (Darwin pedigree.) Parslow, Joseph (1811/12–98). CD’s manservant at 12 Upper Gower Street, London, circa 1840–2, and butler at Down House until 1875. (Census returns of England and Wales 1861 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG9/462: 74), Freeman 1978.) Parsons, Laurence, 4th earl of Rosse (1840–1908). Astronomer and engineer. Son of William Parsons, third earl of Rosse. Graduated from Trinity College, Dublin, 1864. Succeeded to the title and estates in 1867. High sheriff of King’s county, Ireland, 1867; representative peer for Ireland, 1868. Worked in particular on the radiant heat of the moon. FRS 1867. (ODNB.) Parsons, Robert Mann (1829–97). Army officer and surveyor. Attended the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich. Commanded the survey office in British Columbia, 1858–63. Surveyor, Survey of Great Britain, Chatham, 1863–9. Superintendent, Ordnance Survey Office, Southampton, 1869–79. FRS 1870. (Captain Robert Mann Parsons, ‘Expert knowledge of survey’, The Royal Engineers in her Britannic Majesty’s colonies of Vancouver’s Island and British Columbia, www.royal engineers.ca/Parsons.html (accessed 14 September 2010).) Parsons, William, 3d earl of Rosse (1800–67). Astronomer. Constructed a telescope with a 72-inch disc at Birr Castle, Ireland, in 1845. Made important observations on nebulae. President of the Royal Society, 1848–54. Appointed chancellor of the University of Dublin in 1862. FRS 1831. (DSB, ODNB.) Pasteur, Louis (1822–95). French chemist and microbiologist. Professor of chemistry, Strasbourg University, 1849–54. Professor of chemistry and dean of the science faculty, Lille University, 1854–7. Administrator and director of scientific studies, Ecole normale, Paris, 1857–67; director of the laboratory of physiological chemistry, 1867–88. Professor of chemistry, the Sorbonne, Paris, 1867–74. Director of the Institut Pasteur, Paris, 1888–95. Renowned for his work on fermentation and for experiments providing evidence against the theory of spontaneous generation. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1869. (Dictionnaire universel des contemporains, DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Phillips, John (1800–74). Geologist. Keeper of the Yorkshire Museum, 1825–40. Assistant secretary, British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1832– 62. Professor of geology, King’s College, London, 1834–9. Palaeontologist to the Geological Survey of Great Britain, 1841–4. Deputy reader in geology, Oxford University, 1853; professor, 1860–74. FRS 1834. (DSB, ODNB.) Pickard-Cambridge, Octavius (1828–1917). Anglican clergyman and zoologist.

742

Biographical register

Pickard-Cambridge, Octavius, cont. Ordained deacon, 1858; priest, 1859. Succeeded his father as rector of Bloxworth, Dorset, 1860. Travelled in Europe and the Middle East in 1864 and 1865 and collected Lepidoptera. An expert on spiders, on which he published numerous papers and monographs. FRS 1887. (Pickard-Cambridge 1918; Proceedings of the Royal Society series B, 91 (1920): xlix–liii.) Pictet de la Rive, François Jules (1809–72). Swiss zoologist and palaeontologist. Professor of zoology, University of Geneva, 1835. (Gilbert 1977, Sarjeant 1980– 96.) Plato (427–347 bce). Athenian philosopher. (EB.) Plautus, Titus Maccius (fl. 205–184 bce). Latin playwright. (Oxford classical dictionary.) Plutarch (before 50 – after 120). Greek philosopher and biographer. (Oxford classical dictionary.) Pope, Alexander (1688–1744). Poet. (ODNB.) Powell, Henry (1839/40–92). Clergyman. BA, Cambridge, 1861. Ordained priest, 1864. Curate of Chertsey, 1862–4; St Luke, King’s Cross, 1864–5; Willesden, 1865–6; Mortlake, 1866–9. Vicar of Down, 1869–71; Oatlands, Surrey, 1871–2. Rector of Lavendon with Cold Bradfield, 1874–5. Vicar of East Horndon, Essex, 1875–80. Rector of Stanningfield, 1882. (Alum. Cantab., Crockford’s clerical directory 1890.) Pozzi, Samuel Jean (1846–1918). French surgeon and gynaecologist. MD, Paris, 1873. Assistant (agrégé) surgeon, 1875; surgeon, 1877. Lecturer at Lourcine-Pascal hospital from 1884; professor of gynaecology, 1900. Member of the Académie de médecine, 1896. Pioneered a number of surgical procedures. (BLHA, Tort 1996.) Prestwich, Joseph (1812–96). Geologist and businessman. Entered the family wine business in London in 1830; became proprietor in 1842. Professor of geology, Oxford University, 1874–88. President of the Geological Society of London, 1870–2. An expert on the Tertiary geology of Europe. Prominent in studies of human prehistory. Knighted, 1896. FRS 1853. (DSB, ODNB.) Pryor, Marlborough Robert (1848–1920). Businessman. BA, Cambridge, 1870; fellow of Trinity College, 1870. Chairman, Sun Life Insurance Co. (Alum. Cantab.) Quatrefages de Bréau, Jean Louis Armand de (Armand de Quatrefages) (1810–92). French zoologist and anthropologist. Doctorate in the physical sciences, University of Strasbourg, 1830; doctorate in medicine, 1832. Founded Journal de médicine et de chirurgie de Toulouse, 1836. Moved to Paris and took a doctorate in the natural sciences, 1840. Professor of natural history at the Lycée Henri IV, Paris, 1850; professor of anthropology, Muséum d’histoire naturelle, 1855. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1879. (DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) 12 January 1872, 15 January [1872], 23 July 1872 Quenstedt, Friedrich August (1809–89). German palaeontologist and stratig-

Biographical register

743

rapher. Associate professor of mineralogy and geology, University of Tübingen, 1837; professor, 1842–89. (ADB, DSB.) 15 January [1872] Ramsay, Andrew Crombie (1814–91). Geologist. Appointed to the Geological Survey of Great Britain, 1841; senior director for England and Wales, 1862; director-general, 1872–81. Professor of geology, University College, London, 1847–52; lecturer on geology at the Royal School of Mines, 1852–71. President of the Geological Society of London, 1862–4. Knighted, 1881. FRS 1862. (DSB, ODNB.) 3 January 1872 Rawlinson, Henry Creswicke, 1st baronet (1810–95). Assyriologist and diplomat. Officer in the East India Company’s service, 1827–44. Consul at Baghdad from 1844; consul-general, 1851–5. Deciphered Persian cuneiform. President, Royal Geographical Society of London, 1871–2, 1874–5. Knighted, 1856. Created baronet, 1891. (Geographical Journal 5 (1896): 490–7, ODNB.) Rayner, Thomas (b. c. 1826 d. 1891). Hydrotherapist. Assistant to James Manby Gully. MD, Edinburgh, 1858; studied at Edinburgh and Paris. Conducted hydropathic establishments in Dublin, at Clydesdale House in Malvern, and at Abbey Road in Malvern. (Medical directory, Metcalfe 1906, pp. 90–1.) Rayson, Charles (fl. 1870s). Rabbit fancier. From Yorkshire. Wrote books on keeping rabbits. (Letter from Francis Galton, [24 March 1872]; Rayson 1872.) Reade, William Winwood (1838–75). Traveller, novelist, and journalist. Travelled in West Africa, 1861–3. Studied at St Mary’s Hospital, London, in 1865; worked at a cholera hospital in Southampton, 1866. Travelled in West Africa, 1868–70, and again in 1873 as correspondent for The Times. Wrote novels as well as travel observations. Nephew of the novelist Charles Reade. (Correspondence vol. 18, letter from W. W. Reade, 3 September 1870, ODNB.) 13 February 1872, 16 February 1872, 18 February 1872, 20 February 1872, 12 March 1872, 14 March 1872, 18 March [1872], 3 April 1872, 3 May 1872, 16 May 1872, 20 May 1872, 7 September 1872, 12 September [1872], 14 October [1872], 5 November 1872 Reimer, Georg Ernst (1804–85). German publisher. After studying history in Berlin and Bonn, entered the family publishing firm, G. Reimer, in 1826. Director, 1842–84. (DBE.) Reinhardt, Johannes Theodor (1816–82). Danish zoologist. (NUC.) Reinwald, Charles-Ferdinand (1812–91). German-born bookseller and editor. Founded a business exporting French books in Paris in 1849. Editor in particular of foreign scientific works, and of the Dictionnaire universel de la langue française, by M. P. Poitevin. Published the Catalogue annuel de la librairie française. (Dictionnaire universel des contemporains.) 13 September 1872, 17 September 1872, 26 September 1872, 22 October 1872, 23 November 1872

744

Biographical register

Rejlander, Oscar Gustaf (1813–75). Swedish?-born photographer. Studied art in Rome. Opened a painter’s studio in Wolverhampton in 1845. Took up photography in 1853. Moved to London in 1862. Famous for genre photographs. CD used some of his photographs in Expression. (ODNB.) Renshaw, Benjamin Adolphus (b. 1843 d. 1918–22). American merchant. Born in Venezuela. Son of the US consul general to Venezuela, Benjamin Renshaw. Lived in the US, 1845–9. Ward of a Liverpool merchant, William Evans. Resided in Tenerife, Canary Islands, until 1900 and then moved to Spain. (Census returns of England and Wales 1861 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG9/2708/78/46); New York passenger lists, 1820–1957 (Ancestry.com); US passport applications, 1795–1925 s.v. Renshaw, Joseph (Ancestry.com).). 15 June 1872 Richiardi, Sebastiano (1834–1904). Italian anatomist and zoologist. Studied human anatomy, comparative anatomy, and physiology at Pisa and received a degree in natural history from the University of Turin, 1860. Professor of comparative anatomy, Bologna, 1861. Professor of zoology and comparative anatomy, Pisa, from 1871. Worked on Crustacea. (Museo Galileo: Institute and Museum of the History of Science, brunelleschi.imss.fi.it/itineraries/biography/Sebastiano Richiardi.html (accessed 21 March 2011).) Richter, Hermann Eberhard Friedrich (1808–76). German physician. MD, Leipzig, 1834. Professor of general and special therapy, medical-surgical academy, and director, medical polyclinic, Dresden, 1837. Lost both positions following accusations of treason in connection with civil unrest in 1849, but was exonerated. Thereafter worked in private practice. Editor, Schmidts Jahrbücher der gesammten Medizin, from 1850. Extraordinary member, regional medical committee of Saxony, 1864. Founder and secretary, association of German physicians, 1872. (ADB, BLA, DBE.) Rifle Volunteer Corps 23 April 1872 Riley, Charles Valentine (1843–95). Entomologist. Emigrated to the United States circa 1859. Worked as a livestock farmer in Illinois. Wrote and illustrated for the Prairie Farmer in Chicago, 1863–8; served in a volunteer regiment in 1864. State entomologist of Missouri, 1868–76. Became a US citizen in 1869. Chief of the Department of the Interior’s US Entomological Commission, 1877–82. Entomologist with the Division of Entomology of the Department of Agriculture, 1878, 1881–94. Appointed honorary curator of the Department of Insects of the Smithsonian Institution, 1881. Organised the American Association of Economic Entomologists, 1889. (ANB.) Rivers, Thomas (1798–1877). Nurseryman. Succeeded to the family business in Sawbridgeworth, Hertfordshire, in 1827. Specialised in the cultivation of roses and fruit. Author of works on rose and fruit culture; contributed extensively to gardening journals. A founder of the British Pomological Society, 1854. (ODNB.) 29 March 1872, 3 April 1872

Biographical register

745

Rivers, Thomas Francis (1831–99). Nurseryman. Son of Thomas Rivers (1798– 1877). Known for his experimental work on prolonging the season of various fruit trees. (R. Desmond 1994, Journal of Horticulture 39 (1899): 161–2.) Riviere, Briton (1840–1920). Painter. BA, Oxford (St Mary Hall), 1866; MA, 1873. Noted as an animal painter. (ODNB.) 1 April 1872, 3 April 1872, 4 April 1872, 16 May 1872, 19 May [1872], 20 May 1872, 22 May 1872, 26 May 1872, 28 May 1872, 29 May 1872, 6 June 1872, 22 November 1872 Roberts, Dora 17 December [1872 or later] Robinson, George Frederick Samuel, 1st marquess of Ripon (1827–1909). Politician. MP for Huddersfield, 1853–7; for the West Riding, until 1859. A believer in co-operative principles. Helped set up the Working Men’s College in 1854. Earl of Ripon and de Gray, 1859; marquess of Ripon, 1871. A member of William Ewart Gladstone’s cabinet, 1868–73. Viceroy of India, 1880–4. (ODNB.) Robinson, William (1838–1935). Irish-born gardener and writer. Under-gardener at the Royal Botanic Society, Regent’s Park, 1861–3; foreman of the herbaceous department, 1863–7. Travelled in France, 1867–8, and North America, 1870. Promoted the use of perennials. Founded the Garden, 1871, and Gardening Illustrated, 1879. (Allan 1982, R. Desmond 1994, Gardeners’ Chronicle 3d ser. 97 (1935): 323–4.) Rokitansky, Karl Freiherr von (1804–78). Austrian anatomist. Professor of pathological anatomy, Vienna, 1844. President of the Kaiserliche Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna, 1867–78. (OBL.) Rolle, Friedrich (1827–87). German geologist, palaeontologist, and natural history dealer. Assistant at the Kaiserlich-königliche Hofmineralien-Cabinett, Vienna, 1857–9; associate, 1859–62. Returned to Bad Homburg in 1862. Author of Ch. Darwin’s Lehre von der Entstehung der Arten und ihre Anwendung auf die Schöpfungsgeschichte (1863). (ADB, BLKO, Martin and Uschmann 1969, Sarjeant 1980–96.) Rood, Ogden Nicholas (1831–1902). American physicist and painter. Studied physics and chemistry in Germany, 1854–8. Professor of chemistry, University of Troy, New York State, 1858; professor of physics, Columbia College, 1863. Specialised in light, optics, and colour, and also published textbooks on colour for artists. Member of the National Academy of Science, 1865; vice-president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1869. (ANB.) Rosse, Lord. See Parsons, William, and Parsons, Laurence. Rothrock, Abraham. American dentist. Married Phoebe Brinton Trimble. Father of Joseph Trimble Rothrock. (DAB s.v. Rothrock, Joseph Trimble; letter from J. T. Rothrock, 25 November 1872.) Rothrock, Joseph Trimble (1839–1922). American physician, botanist, and forester. In 1860, entered the Lawrence Scientific School, Harvard University, where he was a student of, and an assistant to, Asa Gray. Enlisted in the 131st Pennsylvania Infantry in 1862; commissioned captain in the 20th Pennsylvania Cavalry in 1863; honourably discharged, 1864. Professor of botany, Pennsylvania State

746

Biographical register

Rothrock, Joseph Trimble, cont. Agricultural College, 1867. Botanist and surgeon to the government survey in Colorado, New Mexico, and California, 1873. Professor of botany, University of Pennsylvania, 1877–1904. (DAB.) 25 November 1872 Rouget, Charles Marie Benjamin (1824–1904). French physiologist and histologist. Professor of physiology, University of Montpellier, 1860; Muséum d’histoire naturelle, Paris, 1879–93. Noted for his microscopic studies of the physiology of the reproductive organs, contractile tissue, nerve endings, and the eye, and for developing special photographic methods for displaying histological structure. (DSB.) Roujou, Anatole (1841–1904). French anthropologist and geologist. Studied natural history at the Muséum d’histoire naturelle, Paris, from 1865. Worked as geologist for the city of Paris department of roads and bridges, 1867–74. Received his doctorate in natural science from Montpellier, 1874. Lecturer in the faculty of science, Clermont, 1874–88. (Bulletins et mémoires de la Société d’anthropologie de Paris 6 (1905): 256–9.) 28 February [1872] Rowse, Samuel Worcester (1822–1901). American artist. Painted portraits of Boston society, including Ralph Waldo Emerson. Friend of Chauncey Wright. (Emerson 1918, pp. 389–90; Wayne 2006.) Royds, Ernest Edmund Molyneux (1848–92). Banker, magistrate, and rabbit and poultry fancier. Of Greenhill, Rochdale, Lancashire. Provided rabbits for Francis Galton’s transfusion experiments, and judged poultry shows. (BMD (Birth index, Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archive: Public Record Office RG11/4109/45); Correspondence vol. 18, letter from Francis Galton, 8 April 1870; Galton 1871, p. 405.) Royer, Clémence Auguste (1830–1902). French author and economist. Studied natural science and philosophy in Switzerland. In Lausanne in 1859, founded a course on logic for women. Translated Origin into French in 1862. (Dictionnaire universel des contemporains, J. Harvey 1997.) Ruck, Amy Richenda (Amy) (1850–76). Daughter of Mary Anne and Lawrence Ruck. Married Francis Darwin, as his first wife, in 1874. Died shortly after the birth of their son, Bernard Richard Meirion Darwin. ( J. Browne 2002; Freeman 1978; ODNB s.v. Darwin, Francis.) [20 January 1872] (to Horace Darwin), [1 February 1872] (to Horace Darwin), 24 February [1872], 15 March [1872], [1 November 1872] Ruck, Arthur Ashley (1847–1939). Soldier and civic official. Entered the army in 1866; major, 1882; retired with the rank of lieutenant colonel, 1886. Chief Constable of Carnarvonshire after his retirement from the army until 1912. (Army list; BMD (Birth index); Records of the Carnarvonshire Constabulary (GB 0219 XJ, XS/1234); The Times, 15 July 1939, p. 1.) Ruck, Lawrence (1819/20–96). Landowner. Married Mary Anne Matthews in

Biographical register

747

1841. Father of Amy Richenda Ruck, who married Francis Darwin in 1874. (BMD (Death index, Marriage index); Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/5478/64/18); Montgomeryshire collections 17: 52, ODNB s.v. Darwin, Bernard Richard Meirion, and Darwin, Sir Francis.) Ruck, Mary Anne (1821/2–1905). Née Matthews; married Lawrence Ruck in 1841. Lived at Pantlludw, near Machynlleth, Wales. Mother of Amy Richenda Ruck, who married Francis Darwin in 1874. (BMD (Death index, Marriage index); Census returns of England and Wales 1861 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG9/15/12/28); Darwin pedigree, ODNB s.v. Ruck, Amy Roberta.) Ruck, Richard Matthews (1851–1935). Army officer. Brother of Amy Ruck, the first wife of Francis Darwin. Attended the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich. Entered the Royal Engineers, 1871; captain, 1883, major, 1889; lieutenantcolonel, 1896; colonel, 1904; major-general, 1908. Knighted, 1920. (Ruck 1935, WWW 1929–40.) Russell, Arthur John Edward (Arthur) (1825–92). Member of Parliament. Brother of the ninth duke of Bedford, Hastings Russell. Private secretary to Lord John Russell, 1849–54. Liberal MP for Tavistock, 1857–85. Member of the Royal Geographical, Linnean, and Zoological Societies of London, and the Anthropological Institute. (Grant Duff 1903, 2: 112–28; Stenton 1976.) 15 April 1872 Russell, George (1830–1911). Junior clerk to the Treasury, 1851–6. Assistant secretary to the Board of Works from 1856; secretary in the 1870s. Grandson of the fifth duke of Bedford. (Burke’s peerage 2003, s.v. Bedford; Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/1031/127); Port 1984, p. 155 n. 33, and p. 157; Sainty 1972.) Russell, John, 1st Earl Russell (1792–1878). Statesman. Home secretary, 1835– 41. Liberal prime minister, 1846–52 and 1865–6. Foreign secretary under Lord Palmerston, 1859–65. Created Earl Russell of Kingston Russell, 1861. In later life, occupied with literary work. FRS 1847. (ODNB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Rütimeyer, Karl Ludwig (Ludwig) (1825–95). Swiss palaeozoologist and geographer. Professor of zoology and comparative anatomy, University of Basel, 1855; rector, 1865; professor in the medical and philosophical faculties, 1874–93. Made important contributions to the natural history and evolutionary palaeontology of ungulate mammals. (DSB.) Sabine, Edward (1788–1883). Physicist and army officer. Entered the army in 1803; general, 1870. Astronomer to expeditions in search of a north-west passage, 1818 and 1819–20. Appointed one of three scientific advisers to the Admiralty, 1828. General secretary of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1839–52 and 1853–9. Foreign secretary of the Royal Society of London, 1845; treasurer, 1850; president, 1861–71. Knighted, 1869. FRS 1818. (DSB, ODNB.)

748

Biographical register

Sachs, Julius (1832–97). German botanist and plant physiologist. PhD, Prague, 1856. Research assistant, forestry academy, Tharandt, 1859. Professor of botany, agricultural training institute, Poppelsdorf, 1861; professor, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1867; Wurzburg, 1868. Founded the institute of plant physiology, Wurzburg. Ennobled 1877. (DBE, DSB.) St John, Charles George William (Charles) (1809–56). Sportsman and naturalist. Worked in the Treasury, 1828–33, then moved to Sutherland, where he studied animals and birds. Author of Short sketches of the wild sports and natural history of the Highlands (1846), which went through many reprints. (ODNB.) Salt, George Moultrie (1825–1907). County attorney. Eldest son of Thomas Salt. Admitted to practice, 1845. Partner in the law firm Salt & Sons, Shrewsbury, 1848–1907. (D. F. Harris 2004, Law list 1848–1907). Salvin, Anthony (1799–1881). Architect. Expert on medieval buildings; carried out much restoration work, including the Beauchamp Tower of the Tower of London and several cathedrals. Designed a number of country houses. Exhibited artwork at the Royal Academy. Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, 1824. (ODNB.) Salvin, Osbert (1835–98). Ornithologist and entomologist. Undertook natural history explorations in North Africa, 1857, and Central America, 1857–60, 1861– 3, 1873–4. Strickland Curator of ornithology, University of Cambridge, 1874–82. FRS 1873. (DNB.) Saporta, Louis Charles Joseph Gaston (Gaston), comte de (1823–96). French palaeobotanist. Specialist on the Tertiary and Jurassic flora. Wrote extensively on the relationship between climatic change and palaeobotany. (DSB.) 18 March 1872, 8 April 1872 Saunders, William Wilson (1809–79). Insurance broker, entomologist, and botanist. Underwriter at Lloyd’s of London. President of the Entomological Society, 1841–2 and 1856–7. Treasurer of the Linnean Society of London, 1861–73. FRS 1853. (R. Desmond 1994, ODNB.) Scherzer, Karl von (1821–1903). Austrian scientific traveller and diplomat. Principal scientist of the Novara expedition. Austrian consul in London, 1875–8. (BLKO.) Schlegel, August Wilhelm von (1767–1845). German literary historian, poet, translator, and philosopher. Translated many of Shakespeare’s plays in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Considered one of the founders of German romanticism. (DBE.) Schlegel, Hermann (1804–84). German naturalist. Trained in bronze-casting; assistant, court museum, Vienna, 1824. Taxidermist, Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, 1825; curator, 1828; director, 1858. (DBE.) Schleicher, August (1821–68). German linguist and philologist. Professor of philology, University of Prague, 1853–6; University of Jena, 1857–68. (ADB.) Schmick, Jacob Heinrich (1824–1905). Teacher. From 1848, taught at various levels in Germany, England, Ireland, and France. Dr Phil., Jena, 1859. Published on spiritualism and topics in science. (BHGW vol. 4, NUC.) 3 May 1872

Biographical register

749

Schmidt, Eduard Oskar (Oskar) (1823–86). German zoologist. Professor extraordinarius of zoology, Jena, 1849; director of the zoological museum, 1851. Professor of zoology and comparative anatomy, Graz, 1857; director of the agricultural and zoological museum, 1863. Professor of zoology and zootomy, Strasbourg, 1872. His major research interest was the anatomy of sponges. His inaugural lecture supporting Darwinism, made in 1865 at the University of Graz, led to conflict with the Catholic Church in Austria and sparked a wider debate between Catholics and German nationalists at the university. (ADB, OBL.) Schweizerbart, Christian Friedrich (1805–79). German publisher. Director of E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung of Stuttgart, 1841–67. Publisher of the German translations of Origin (1860, 1863, 1867) and Orchids (1862). (JubiläumsKatalog.) E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung. German publishing company in Stuttgart; founded by Wilhelm Emanuel Schweizerbart in 1830; conducted by his nephew Christian Friedrich Schweizbart from 1841. (Jubiläums-Katalog.) Sclater, Philip Lutley (1829–1913). Lawyer and ornithologist. One of the founders of Ibis, the journal of the British Ornithologists’ Union, 1858; editor, 1858–65 and 1878–1912. Secretary of the Zoological Society of London, 1860–1903. FRS 1861. (DSB, Scherren 1905.) Scott, John(1836–80). Scottish botanist. Gardener at several different country estates, before becoming foreman of the propagating department at the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, in 1859. Through CD’s patronage emigrated to India in 1864, and worked briefly on a Cinchona plantation before taking a position as curator of the Calcutta botanic garden in 1865. Seconded to the opium department, 1872–8. Carried out numerous botanical experiments and observations on CD’s behalf. Fellow of the Linnean Society of London, 1873. (Lightman ed. 2004, ODNB.) 15 January 1872, 22 March 1872, 15 April [1872], 12 August 1872, 25 September 1872, 26 October 1872, 31 October 1872 (to J. D. Hooker) Scott, Robert (1811–87). Lexicographer and dean of Rochester. Co-authored with Henry George Liddell A Greek–English lexicon, first published in 1843. (ODNB.) Scott, Walter, 1st baronet (1771–1832). Scottish poet and novelist. President of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 1820. Created baronet, 1818. (ODNB.) Scott, William Robson (1810/11–77). Teacher. Principal of the West of England Institution for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb, 1841–77. In his book, The deaf and dumb, he provided the earliest comprehensive linguistic analysis of British Sign Language. (BMD (Death index); Branson and Miller 2002, p. 158.) Seidlitz, Georg Karl Maria (Georg) von (1840–1917). Baltic German entomologist. Privat-docent, Dorpat, 1868–77. Docent and assistant for zoology, medical faculty, Königsberg, 1877–9. Landowner and farmer near Königsberg, 1879–88. Specialised in the study of beetles in eastern German provinces and Russia. (Entomologische Blätter 13 (1917) : 239–48.) 1 April 1872, 10 April 1872, 22 April 1872

750

Biographical register

Seidlitz, Gerhard Karl Lamarck Darwin von. Son of Georg von Seidlitz. (Kalling and Tammiksaar 2009.) Seidlitz, Karl Johann (Karl) von (1798–1885). Baltic German doctor. MD, Dorpat (Tartu), 1821. Joined the Russian army and served in the naval hospital at St Petersburg, 1822–6. Held several appointments in military field hospitals. Professor of clinical medicine, medical–surgical academy, St Petersburg, 1837–47. Retired to Dorpat. (BLA.) Semper, Karl Gottfried (1832–93). German zoologist. Studied engineering, Hannover, 1851–4. Studied zoology, histology, and comparative anatomy, University of Würzburg; completed his thesis in 1856. Travelled in the Philippines and Palau Islands, 1858–65, and acquired zoological and ethnographical collections. Appointed privat-dozent, University of Würzburg, 1866; professor and director of the Zoological Institute, 1869. Published on zoology (especially molluscs), geography, and ethnography. (DSB s.v. Semper, Carl Gottfried.) Seneca (the younger) (b. 4bce – 1ce d. 65). Italian politician and author. (Oxford classical dictionary.) Seward, William Henry (1801–72). American statesman. Governor, New York, 1838–42. Campaigned for the reform of education, as well as of prisons and the treatment of the insane. A leader of the anti-slavery movement. Served as secretary of state under President Abraham Lincoln, from 1860. (ANB, DAB). Shakespeare, William (1564–1616). Poet and dramatist. (ODNB.) Shaler, Nathaniel Southgate (1841–1906). American geologist, geographer, and educationalist. Student of Louis Agassiz at Harvard. Captain of the Fifth Kentucky Battery during the American Civil War. Classified fossils at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard. Accompanied Agassiz on his 1865 expedition to Brazil. Lecturer in palaeontology, Harvard, 1868; professor, 1869; professor of geology, 1888. Director of the Kentucky Geological Survey, 1872. Director of the Atlantic Coast Division of the US Geological Survey, 1884–1900. Dean, Lawrence Scientific School, Harvard, 1891–1904. (ANB, DAB.) Sharpey, William (1802–80). Scottish physiologist. MD, Edinburgh University, 1823. Joint lecturer on systematic anatomy, Edinburgh University, 1832. Professor of anatomy and physiology, University College, London, 1836–74. Examiner in anatomy, London University, from 1840. Secretary of the Royal Society of London, 1853–72. Member of the General Medical Council, 1861–76. FRS 1839. (DNB, DSB.) Shaw, Alexander (1804–90). Scottish surgeon. MA, University of Glasgow, 1822. Entered Middlesex Hospital, London, as a pupil, 1822; assistant surgeon, 1836, surgeon 1842. Also entered the Great Windmill Street School of Anatomy, 1827. Member of Royal College of Surgeons, 1828; fellow 1843; served on its college council, 1858–65. Published on and edited works by Sir Charles Bell, his brotherin-law. (ODNB.) Shaw, Charles (1795–1871). Scottish army officer. Entered the army in 1813. Served in the Napoleonic wars. Studied in the military department of the Car-

Biographical register

751

olinum College in Brunswick (Braunschweig), 1817–18. Became partner in a wine business in Leith, 1818–30; captain of the volunteer corps of Leith sharpshooters. Fought in Portugal, 1831–4; Spain, 1835–6. Chief commissioner of police, Manchester, 1839–42. (ODNB.) Sherard, James (1666–1738). Apothecary and botanist. Retired from business in 1720 and purchased several properties. Lived mainly at Eltham in Kent where he cultivated valuable and rare plants and made one of the finest private gardens in England. (ODNB.) Smith, Charles Hamilton (1776–1859). Flemish-born army officer and writer on natural history. Wrote on historical costume and war, and produced many natural history illustrations. Knighted, 1834. FRS 1824. (ODNB.) Smith, David Thomas (b. 1840). American physician and lawyer. MD, Louisville, Kentucky, 1870; practised medicine 1870–1903. Admitted to the bar, 1881; practised law from 1903. Wrote on medicine and philosophy. (WWWA.) 19 November 1872, [after 19 November 1872] Smith, Edgar Albert (1847–1916). Zoologist. Son of the entomologist Frederick Smith. Worked at the British Museum, 1867–1913; became assistant keeper in the Zoological Department. Published memoirs on molluscs. (Freeman 1978; Geological Magazine 53 (1916): 431–2.) Smith, Edmund Denman (d. 1877). Officer in the Indian army. With the third Ghoorkha Regiment. Ensign, 1859; lieutenant, 1860; captain, 1868. (England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1858–1966 (Ancestry.com); India list.) 16 May 1872 Smith, Frederick (1805–79). Entomologist. Entomologist in the zoology department of the British Museum from 1849. Specialised in the Hymenoptera. President of the Entomological Society of London, 1862–3. (Entomologist 12 (1879): 89–92, Gilbert 1977.) Smith, John (1798–1888). Scottish gardener and pteridologist. Gardener at the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, 1818; at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 1822. Curator of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 1842–64. (R. Desmond 1994, Taxonomic literature.) Smith, John (1821–1888). Scottish gardener. Gardener to the duke of Roxburgh; to the duke of Northumberland at Syon House, Middlesex, 1859–64. Curator, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 1864–86. (R. Desmond 1994.) Smith, William Robertson (1846–94). Theologian and Semitic scholar. MA, Aberdeen, 1865. Chair of Hebrew and Old Testament exegesis, Aberdeen Free Church College, 1870–81. Editor-in-chief, Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1881. Lord almoner professor of Arabic, Cambridge, 1883–6; Sir Thomas Adams professor of Arabic, 1889. (ODNB.) Smither, A. 19 December 1872 Smyth, Robert Brough (1830–89). Mining engineer. Emigrated to Victoria,

752

Biographical register

Smyth, Robert Brough, cont. Australia, in 1852. Secretary, Board of Mines, 1860; honorary secretary, Board for the Protection of Aborigines, 1860; director of the geological survey of Victoria, 1871–6. Fellow of the Linnean Society of London, 1874. (Aust. dict. biog., ODNB.) Snellen, Herman (1834–1908). Dutch ophthalmologist. MD, Utrecht, 1857; chir. Dr, 1858. Assistant physician, Nederlandsch Gasthuis voor behoeftige en minvermogende ooglijders (the Netherlands Hospital for Eye Patients), Utrecht, 1858; chief physician, 1862. Professor of ophthalmology, Utrecht, 1877; rector of the university, 1892. In 1862, developed optotypes, eye charts with different-sized letters to measure visual acuity. (Dutch medical biography.) Snow, George (1820/1–85). Coal-dealer, Down, Kent. Operated a weekly carrier service between Down and London. (Census returns of England and Wales 1861 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG9/462: 72); gravestone inscription, Down churchyard; Post Office directory of the six home counties 1862.) Snow, Maria Isabella (1851/2–79). Daughter of the Reverend George D’Oyly Snow and Maria Jane Snow. Of Down Wood House, Langton Long Blandford, Dorset. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1861, 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG9/1334/45/9; RG10/1979/40/4).) 29 [November 1872 or later] Snow, Sarah (b. 1817/18). Wife of William Parker Snow. (Census returns of England and Wales 1851 (The National Archives: Public Record Office HO107/ 1469/424/58).) Snow, William Parker (1817–95). Merchant seaman, writer, and adventurer. Spent some years in Australia as a young man. Worked as an amanuensis in England; spent a year in America, returning in 1850. Joined the expedition to search for Sir John Franklin as purser, doctor, and chief officer on board the Prince Albert. Went to Patagonia, Tierra del Fuego, and the Falklands in command of the South American Missionary Society’s vessel Allen Gardiner in 1854; removed from command for disobedience by the superintending missionary at the Falkland Islands, 1856. Moved to New York and wrote and edited travel books. Spent the last years of his life in England researching the fate of the Franklin expedition. (ODNB.) Sobko, N. 3 September 1872 Somervile (Somerville), William (1675–1742). Poet. (ODNB.) Spalding, Douglas Alexander (1841–77). Comparative psychologist. Attended lectures in literature and philosophy, Aberdeen, 1862. Entered the Middle Temple, 1866; called to the bar, 1869. Reported his experimental work on instinct in chicks at the 1872 meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. Became a regular reviewer for Nature and the Examiner from 1872. Became tutor to John Francis Russell in 1873, and continued his experimental work on physiological psychology. (ODNB.)

Biographical register

753

Spallanzani, Lazzaro (1729–99). Italian priest and natural scientist. Best known for his disproof of spontaneous generation and his elucidation of the process of digestion. Professor in Modena, 1763–9; Pavia, 1769–99. (DSB.) Sparkes, George (1810–78). East India Company official. Worked in the Madras Presidency from 1828 in various capacities from collector to judge and magistrate. Resigned in 1840. Moved to Bromley, Kent, in 1848. (Horsburgh 1980; Hazelle Jackson, ‘Library gardens Bromley’, www.londongardenstrust.org/index.htm? features/bromleylib.htm (accessed 23 July 2010); Prinsep 1885.) 14 February 1872 Spencer, Herbert (1820–1903). Philosopher. Apprenticed as a civil engineer on the railways, 1837–41. Became sub-editor of the Pilot, a newspaper devoted to the suffrage movement, in 1844. Sub-editor of the Economist, 1848–53. From 1852, author of books and papers on transmutation theory, philosophy, and the social sciences. (DSB, ODNB.) 10 June [1872], 12 June 1872, 16 November 1872 Spengel, Johann Wilhelm (Wilhelm) (1852–1921). German zoologist. PhD in zoology, University of Göttingen, 1875. Librarian, Zoological Station in Naples, 1877–8. Head of municipal natural history and ethnography collections, Bremen, from 1881. Editor of the Zoologische Jahrbücher from 1886. Professor of zoology and comparative anatomy, University of Giessen, from 1887. (DBE.) Spenser, Edmund (b. c. 1552 d. 1599). Poet. (ODNB.) Spottiswoode, William (1825–83). Mathematician and physicist. Succeeded his father as queen’s printer in 1846. Throughout his life pursued mathematical studies in which he supplied new proofs of known theorems and also did important original work; produced a series of memoirs on the contact of curves and surfaces. President of the mathematical section of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1865; of the Royal Society of London, 1878–83. FRS 1853. (DNB.) Stack, James West (1835–1919). New Zealand missionary, clergyman, and interpreter. Travelled to London with his family in 1848; trained as a teacher at the Church Missionary Society Training College, Islington. Returned to New Zealand in 1852. Taught at CMS industrial schools at Maraetai, at Waikato Heads, and Te Kohanga. Worked for the Maori mission in Christchurch, 1859– 88. Ordained priest, 1862. Worked as a government interpreter, 1860–80, and later as inspector of native schools on South Island. Left New Zealand, 1898. Wrote on Maori subjects. (DNZB.) Stainton, Henry Tibbats (1822–92). Entomologist. Founder of the Entomologist’s Annual, 1855–74, and of the Entomologist’s Weekly Intelligencer, 1856–61. Secretary to the Ray Society, 1861–72; to the biology section of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1864 and 1867–72. Co-founder, Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine, 1864. FRS 1867. (ODNB.) Stanley, Edward Henry, 15th earl of Derby (1826–93). Politician and diarist. BA (Trinity College), Cambridge, 1848. MP for King’s Lynn, 1848–69.

754

Biographical register

Stanley, Edward Henry, 15th earl of Derby, cont. Visited the West Indies twice, 1848–50. First secretary of state for India from 1858. Foreign secretary from 1874. Colonial secretary from 1882. Succeeded to the earldom in October 1869. (ODNB.) Stanley, Mary Catherine, countess of Derby (1824–1900). Political hostess. Daughter of George Sackville-West, fifth Earl De La Warr (1791–1869). Married James Brownlow William Gascoyne-Cecil in 1847. After his death, married Edward Henry Stanley in 1870. Deeply involved in conservative politics. (ODNB.) 4 June 1872 Stanley, Thomas 24 January 1872 Stansfeld, James (1820–98). Politician and social reformer. A supporter of the Northern Reform Union. Elected radical MP for Halifax, 1859. Financial secretary to the Treasury, 1869; president of the Local Government Board, 1871; appointed the first woman to be a poor-law inspector in 1872. Knighted, 1895. (ODNB.) Stebbing, Thomas Roscoe Rede (1835–1926). Zoologist and clergyman. BA, King’s College, London, 1855. BA, Worcester College, Oxford, 1857; fellow, 1860–8; tutor, 1865–7; vice-provost, 1865; dean, 1866. Tutor and schoolmaster, Torquay, 1867–77; in 1877, moved to Tunbridge Wells and devoted his time to natural history. Specialised in amphipod Crustacea. His strong Darwinian views led to his being forbidden a parish. Lectured and wrote essays in favour of Darwinism. FRS 1896. (ODNB.) Steenstrup, Johannes Japetus Smith ( Japetus) (1813–97). Danish zoologist. Professor of zoology and director of the Zoology Museum, University of Copenhagen, 1846–85. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1863. (DBL, DSB.) Stephen, Harriet Marian (1840–75). Youngest daughter of William Makepeace Thackeray. Married Leslie Stephen in 1867. (ODNB.) Stephen, Leslie (1832–1904). Author and literary critic. Fellow, Trinity Hall, Cambridge, 1854–67; tutor, 1856–62. Left Cambridge for London in 1864 to pursue a literary career. Contributed articles to newspapers and journals on a wide variety of subjects. Editor of the Cornhill Magazine, 1871–82. First editor of the Dictionary of national biography from 1882. Knighted, 1902. (ODNB.) Stevens, John (b. 1844/5). Doorplate engraver and metal worker in London. (Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/535/103/41).) Stirling, Waite Hockin (1829–1923). Clergyman and missionary. Secretary, Patagonian Mission Society, 1857–62. Superintendent missionary of Tierra del Fuego, 1862–9. Bishop of the Falkland Islands, 1869–1900. Assistant bishop of Bath and Wells, 1901–11; canon of Wells, 1901–20; precentor, 1903–20. (Alum. Oxon., Crockford’s clerical directory 1923, Hazlewood 2000, Macdonald 1929.) Strasburger, Eduard Adolf (Eduard) (1844–1912). Botanist. Inspired by Ernst Haeckel’s enthusiasm for Darwin’s theory of evolution. Studied natural sciences in Paris, Bonn, and Jena from 1862. PhD in botany, 1866. Professor extraordi-

Biographical register

755

narius and director of the Botanical Institute, Jena, 1869; professor, 1871. Taught at the University of Bonn from 1881; rector, 1891–2. Travelled through Italy, Egypt, and around the Red Sea. Co-editor of Jahrbuch für wissenschaftliche Botanik from 1894. Published histological–cytological works on plant fertilisation. (DBE, DSB.) 29 July 1872 Strauss, David Friedrich (1808–74). German theologian and writer. (ADB, DBE.) Stronge, Charles Walter (1816/17–98). Civil servant. Clerk in the treasury, 1833– 4 and 1883–4. Private secretary to several ministers. After retirement, government director of telegraphs. (The Times, 1 February 1898, p. 5.) Sulivan, Bartholomew James (1810–90). Naval officer and hydrographer. Lieutenant on HMS Beagle, 1831–6. Surveyed the Falkland Islands in HMS Arrow, 1838–9. Commander of HMS Philomel, 1842–6. Resided in the Falkland Islands, 1848–51. Commanded HMS Lightning in the Baltic, 1854–5. Naval officer in the marine department of the Board of Trade, 1856–65. Admiral, 1877. Knighted, 1869. (ODNB.) 23 January 1872, 24 January 1872, 20 June 1872 Sulivan, Sophia (1809/10–90). Daughter of vice-admiral James Young, of Barton End, near Stroud, Gloucestershire. Married Bartholomew James Sulivan in 1837. (County families 1871, s.v. Sulivan, Bartholomew James; ODNB, s.v. Sulivan, Bartholomew James; Sulivan ed. 1896, pp. xii, 395.) Sulivan, Sophia Henrietta (b. 1837/8). Daughter of Sophia and Bartholomew James Sulivan. Married the surgeon Henry Bullock in 1882. (Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/ 1194: 136); Marriage register, Holy Trinity Church, Bournemouth (1882): 176.) Sundström, Carl Rudolf (Rudolf ) (1841–89). Swedish zoologist, writer, and translator. Lectured at Stockholm, 1865, 1868–9. Worked as a journalist, 1867–77. Wrote popular natural history books and translated scientific works into Swedish, including Descent and works by Thomas Henry Huxley. (SMK.) 20 June 1872 Sutherland, Charles Leslie (1839–1911). Civil servant, landowner, and animal breeder. With the War Office, 1858–70. Assistant commissioner, Royal Commission on Agriculture, 1879. Attached to the India Office, 1880–1901. Bred asses, mules, and poultry; published on horse, ass, and mule breeding with William Bernhard Tegetmeier. Resided at Coombe, Surrey, and Downe Hall, Down, Kent, where he was a neighbour of CD’s. (WWW.) [9–19 June 1872], 12 September 1872 Sutherland, Peter Cormack (1822–1900). Scottish physician, naturalist, and explorer. Undertook expeditions to the west coast of Africa and to Greenland. Accompanied an expedition in search of John Franklin, 1850. Government geologist and surveyor-general in Natal, South Africa, 1853–86. (R. Desmond 1994, DSAB.) 17 January 1872 Sutton, Seth. A keeper at the zoological gardens of London. (Archives of the

756

Biographical register

Sutton, Seth, cont. Zoological Society of London, ‘Daily occurrences’, September 1860; Correspondence vol. 15, letter from Seth Sutton, 8 August 1867; Freeman 1978.) Swinhoe, Robert (1836–77). Diplomat and ornithologist. Attached to the British consulate in Hong Kong, 1854; in Amoy (Xiamen), China, 1855. British viceconsul, Formosa (Taiwan), 1860–5; consul, 1865–73. Acting consul, Amoy, 1865– 71; Ning-po (Ningbo), 1871–3. Consul, Ning-po, 1873–5. Collected plants and animals in Eastern Asia. FRS 1876. (Foreign Office list 1877, Hall 1987, ODNB.) Sylvester, James Joseph (1814–97). Mathematician. Professor of natural philosophy, University College, London, 1838–41. Professor of mathematics, University of Virginia, 1841–2; Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, 1855–70; Johns Hopkins University, 1876–83. Savilian Professor of geometry, University of Oxford, 1883–94. FRS 1839. (ODNB; Parshall 2006.) Taylor, Helen (1831–1907). Promoter of women’s rights. Involved, along with her stepfather, John Stuart Mill, in the women’s suffrage cause, and acted as his amanuensis. In 1876, elected to Southwark school board; was twice re-elected but resigned in 1884 on grounds of ill health. Supported causes such as free education, Irish home rule, land reform, and the banning of the Contagious Diseases Acts and fox-hunting. (ODNB.) Taylor, John Ellor (1837–95). Curator and populariser of science. With John Gunn, established the Norwich Geological Society in 1864. Fellow of the Geological Society of London, 1869. Curator of the Ipswich Corporation Museum, 1872–93, giving an annual free lecture series in the natural sciences. Editor, Hardwicke’s Science-Gossip, 1872–93. Fellow of the Linnean Society of London, 1873. (ODNB.) 13 January [1872] Tegetmeier, William Bernhard (1816–1912). Editor, journalist, lecturer, and naturalist. Pigeon-fancier and expert on poultry. Pigeon and poultry editor of the Field, 1864–1907. Secretary of the Apiarian Society of London. (Field, 23 November 1912, p. 1070; ODNB; Richardson 1916.) 13 May 1872, 14 May [1872] Tennent, James Emerson (1804–69). Traveller, politician, and author. Assumed the name Tennent on the death of his father-in-law, William Tennent, in 1832. MP for Belfast, 1832–37, 1838–41, 1842–45. Civil secretary to the colonial government of Ceylon (Sri Lanka), 1845–50. Appointed governor of St Helena in 1850, but never assumed office. FRS 1862. (ODNB.) Tennyson, Alfred, 1st Baron Tennyson (1809–92). Poet. Poet laureate, 1850. Created Baron Tennyson, 1883. (ODNB.) Thackeray, Anne Isabella (1837–1919). Writer. Eldest surviving daughter of William Makepeace Thackeray. Acted as her father’s amanuensis, and published novels and reminiscences. Married her cousin Richmond Thackeray Willoughby Ritchie in 1877. (ODNB.) Thackeray, William Makepeace (1811–63). Novelist. (ODNB.)

Biographical register

757

Thiselton-Dyer, William Turner (1843–1928). Botanist. Educated at Christ Church, Oxford. Professor of natural history at the Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, 1868–70. Professor of botany, Royal College of Science, Dublin, 1870–2; Royal Horticultural Society, London, 1872. Directed botanical teaching at the Department of Science and Art, South Kensington, London, 1873, 1875, 1876. Appointed assistant director of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, by Joseph Dalton Hooker, 1875. Married Hooker’s eldest daughter, Harriet Anne, in 1877. Appointed director of Kew, 1885. Knighted, 1899. FRS 1880. (ODNB.) Thomson, Charles Wyville (1830–82). Scottish naturalist and oceanographer. Professor of mineralogy and geology, Queen’s College, Belfast, 1854–62; of natural history from 1862. Professor of botany, Royal College of Science, Dublin, 1868–70. Appointed regius professor of natural history, University of Edinburgh, 1870. Interested in deep-sea researches; appointed chief of the civilian scientific staff of the Challenger expedition, 1872–6. Knighted, 1877. FRS 1869. (DSB, ODNB.) Thomson, Thomas (1817–78). Naturalist. MD, Glasgow, 1839. Travelled to India as assistant surgeon to the East India Company. Curator of the Asiatic Society’s museum, Calcutta, 1840. Travelled and was taken prisoner in Afghanistan, 1840–2. Accompanied Joseph Dalton Hooker to the Himalayas, 1850–1, and collaborated with him at Kew on various botanical publications. Superintendent of the Calcutta botanic garden and professor of botany at the Calcutta Medical College from 1855 until his return to England in 1861. FRS 1855. (R. Desmond 1994, ODNB.) Thorell, Tord Tamerlan Teodor (1830–1901). Swedish zoologist. Specialist in spiders. Professor of zoology at the University of Upsala. (Tort 1996.) Tichborne claimant (d. 1898). Claimant of baronetcy. He identified himself as the long-lost Sir Roger Tichborne after arriving in England in 1866. He was involved in a number of civil and criminal actions in connection with his claim. (ODNB.) Tieck, Johann Ludwig (Ludwig) (1773–1853). German poet, writer, editor, and translator. Edited a German edition of Shakespeare’s plays, many of which were translated by August Wilhelm von Schlegel. (DBE.) Tiemann, Friedrich (fl. 1860s and 1870s). Polish museum curator. Curator, Botanical museum and zoological gardens, University of Breslau. (Egon Höcker, ‘Geschichte von Breslau: Vorgeschichte des Breslauer 2005’, www.breslau-wroclaw.de/de/breslau/history/g_zoo/ (accessed 25 January 2012); letter from Friedrich Tiemann, 16 June 1872.) 16 June 1872 Tipping, William (1816–97). Railway magnate and politician. Director, NorthWestern Railway. MP for Stockport, 1868–74, 1885–6. (Stenton 1976.) Tollet, Georgina (1808–72). Daughter of George and Frances Tollet. A close friend of the Wedgwoods and Darwins. Edited the manuscript of Origin. (M. E. Smith ed. 2008.)

758

Biographical register

Topham, Mr 5 December 1872 Treat, Mary Lua Adelia (Mary) (1830–1923). American botanist and entomologist. Née Davis; married Joseph Treat in 1863. Moved to Vineland, New Jersey, in 1868 to join the intellectual and agricultural community established by Charles Landis. Wrote many scientific and popular works on plants and insects from 1869. Separated from her husband in 1874 and supported herself by her writing and by collecting plant and insect specimens. Corresponded with CD, Asa Gray, C. V. Riley, August Forel, and Gustav Mayr. Advocate of the theory of natural selection. Her most notable research was on the anatomy and behaviour of harvesting ants, and on carnivorous plants. (Burstyn ed. 1990.) 5 January 1872, 13 December 1872 Trécul, Auguste Adolphe Lucien (1818–96). French botanist. Appointed by the Muséum d’histoire naturelle and the French Ministry of Agriculture to study nutrition and collect plants in the United States, 1848–50. Continued his researches into the anatomy, physiology, and organogeny of plants. His conclusions on fermentation were contrary to those of Louis Pasteur, and caused controversy at the Académie des sciences in 1866. Awarded the legion of honour, 1867. (Dictionnaire universel des contemporains, Index biographique de l’Académie des sciences.) Trench, Catherine Sabine. Daughter of Sophia and Bartholomew James Sulivan. Married William Wallace Trench in 1870. (Burke’s peerage 1970, p. 123.) Trimen, Henry (1843–96). Botanist. Assistant in the botanical department of the British Museum, 1869–79. Appointed to succeed George Henry Kendrick Thwaites as director of the Peradeniya botanic gardens, Ceylon (Sri Lanka), in 1879. Editor of the Journal of Botany, 1871–96. Brother of Roland Trimen. FRS 1888. (ODNB.) Trimen, Roland (1840–1916). Zoologist and entomologist. Emigrated to South Africa in 1858. Arranged the Lepidoptera at the South African Museum. Held civil-service positions in the Commission of Land and Public Works, the governor’s office, and the colonial secretary’s office. Acting curator, South African Museum, 1866; curator, 1872–95. FRS 1883. (DSAB, Iziko: www.iziko.org.za/ images/uploads/iziko_entomology_manual.pdf, accessed 26 January 2012.) 13 April 1872 Troschel, Franz Hermann (1810–82). German zoologist. Professor extraordinarius of zoology and natural history, University of Bonn, 1849; professor, 1851. An expert on malacology, ichthyology, and herpetology. (Verhandlungen des naturhistorischen Vereines der preussischen Rheinlande und Westfalens 40 (Correspondenzblatt 1) (1883): 35–54.) Trousseau, Armand (1801–67). French physician. Studied with Pierre Bretonneau. Physician to the Hôpital St Antoine, 1839; Hôtel Dieu, 1850. A prolific author. (Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 1 (2003): 2463–5), Pearce 2002.) Trübner, Johann Nicolaus (Nicholas) (1817–84). German-born publisher and philologist. Foreign corresponding clerk for Longmans (publishers), 1843–51. In

Biographical register

759

partnership with Thomas Delf and David Nutt, established a successful London publishing house specialising in Asian literature and translations of works in philology, philosophy, and religion. (ADB, ODNB.) 30 May [1872] Tuke, Daniel Hack (1827–95). Physician, psychiatrist, and author. Secretary to the York Retreat, a private mental asylum, 1847–50; assistant medical officer, 1853. Studied medicine at St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London, and in Heidelberg, 1850–3. Taught psychological medicine at York medical school; from the 1870s was a general consultant on insanity. Initiated a campaign to end mechanical restraint, and wrote standard texts on the treatment of the insane. Joint editor, Journal of Mental Science, 1880; president, Medico-Psychological Association, 1881. (ODNB.) 22 December 1872 Tupman, George Lyon (1838/9–1922). Naval officer. First lieutenant on the Forte, 1861–4. Stationed in Naples Harbour, assigned to the prince consort, second captain, Royal Marine Artillery, 1871. (BMD (Death index), Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/5783/136/2), Navy list.) Tupper, Martin Farquhar (1810–89). Poet and writer. BA, Oxford (Christ Church), 1832. Called to the bar at Lincoln’s Inn, 1835. Published a book of aphorisms, Proverbial philosophy (1838), which went through numberous editions and translations in most European languages. (ODNB.) Turner, William (1832–1916). Anatomist and administrator. Senior demonstrator to John Goodsir, professor of anatomy, University of Edinburgh, 1854–67; professor of anatomy, 1867–1916; principal, 1903–16. Published papers on anthropology and comparative anatomy from 1854. Knighted, 1886. FRS 1877. (DSB, ODNB.) Twain, Mark. See Clemens, Samuel Langhorne. Tyler, Daniel F. (1839–1910). Businessman and author. Worked for the Stuyvesant Safe Deposit Company in New York. Wrote How to get rich under the pseudonym ‘Uncle Ben’; and a travel book on Florida. (Trow’s New York city directory, vol. 85 (1872); New York Times, 18 April 1910, p. 23; Cushing 1888.) 15 August 1872 Tylor, Alfred (1824–84). Geologist. Educated at the School of the Society of Friends, Grove House, Tottenham. Entered the family brassfoundry business in 1840, but studied geology in his spare time. Wrote on the Quaternary period. Brother of Edward Burnett Tylor. (ODNB, Sarjeant 1980–96.) 8 June 1872 Tylor, Edward Burnett (1832–1917). Anthropologist. Educated at the School of the Society of Friends, Grove House, Tottenham. Author of Primitive culture (1871). Keeper of Oxford University Museum, 1883; reader in anthropology, Oxford University, 1883; professor, 1896; professor emeritus, 1909. President of the Anthropological Society, 1879–80, 1891–2. Helped to establish anthropology

760

Biographical register

Tylor, Edward Burnett, cont. as a legitimate field of scientific enquiry. Knighted, 1912. FRS 1871. (Men and women of the time 1899, ODNB.) Tyndall, John (1820–93). Irish physicist, lecturer, and populariser of science. Studied in Marburg and Berlin, 1848–51. Professor of natural philosophy, Royal Institution of Great Britain, 1853–87; professor of natural philosophy, Royal School of Mines, 1859–68; superintendent of the Royal Institution, 1867–87. Scientific adviser to Trinity House and the Board of Trade, 1866–83. FRS 1852. (DSB, ODNB.) 8 June [1872] Umberto I (1844–1900). King of Italy. Married his cousin Margherita, daughter of Ferdinand, duke of Genoa, in 1868. Became king in 1878. (EI.) James Veitch & Son. Nurserymen with premises on the King’s Road, Chelsea, London. (Gardener’s year-book 1864, Post Office London directory 1863.) Virchow, Rudolf Carl (1821–1902). German physician, pathologist, medical reformer, and politician. Professor of pathological anatomy at the University of Würzburg, 1849–56. Professor of pathological anatomy and director of the Pathological Institute, University of Berlin, from 1856. Foreign member, Royal Society of London, 1884; awarded the Copley Medal, 1892. (BLA, DBE, DSB, Record of the Royal Society of London, Wrede and Reinfels eds. 1897.) Vischer, Friedrich Theodor von (1807–87). German writer on philosophy of art. Professor extraordinarius, Tübinger Stifft (Tübingen Foundation), 1837; professor, 1844. Professor, literary history, Zürich, 1855; Tübingen, 1866–8. Lecturer, Stuttgart Polytechnikum, 1867–77. Author of Aesthetik, oder, Wissenschaft des Schönen (1846–57). Raised to the aristocracy, 1870. (DBE.) Vivian, Edward (1808–93). Banker in Torquay. Wrote on geology, meteorology and human antiquity. Explored Kent’s cavern, near Torquay. (Modern English biography, Royal Society catalogue of scientific papers.) 23 August [1872] Vogt, Carl (1817–95). German naturalist. Received a doctorate in Giessen in 1839; worked in Switzerland with Louis Agassiz on a treatise on fossil and freshwater fish until 1846. Professor of zoology, Giessen, 1846. Forced to leave the German Federation for political reasons, 1849; settled in Geneva. Professor of geology, Geneva, 1852; director of the Institute of Zoology, 1872. (ADB, DSB, Judel 2004.) Wagner, Moritz (1813–87). German zoologist and explorer. Studied at the natural history colleges in Erlangen and Munich, 1834–5. Made a scientific expedition to Algeria, 1836. Editor of the Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung, 1838. Continued his studies in Göttingen, 1840. Made research trips to the Caucasus, Armenia, Persia, and South Asia, 1843–5; to North and Central America, 1852–5; to Panama and Ecuador, 1857–9. Professor at Munich University from 1862. Formulated the migration theory for fauna and flora in 1868. (DBE, Tort 1996.) Wahrmann, Sigmund (1836–1911). Austro-Hungarian physician. MD, Vienna,

Biographical register

761

1859; practised in Vienna. Founder member of the Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien (anthropological society of Vienna); secretary, 1871–6; editorial committee, 1870–99. (Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien (Sitzungsberichte) 42 (1912): [141–2].) Wale, Emma (b. 1844/5). Children’s nurse. Worked for the family of Henry Montagu and Georgina Isabella Butler. (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office: RG10/1324/47/10).) Wallace, Alexander (1829–99). Physician, entomologist, and plantsman. BA, Oxford, 1852; MD, Oxford, 1861. Physician in Colchester from 1859. Tried to introduce silkworm culture to England. Introduced many new varieties of lilies and orchids from Japan. (Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine 25 (1899): 275–6, Modern English biography.) Wallace, Alfred Russel (1823–1913). Naturalist. Collector in the Amazon, 1848– 52; in the Malay Archipelago, 1854–62. Independently formulated a theory of evolution by natural selection in 1858. Lecturer and author of works on protective coloration, mimicry, and zoogeography. President of the Land Nationalisation Society, 1881–1913. Wrote on socialism, spiritualism, and vaccination. FRS 1893. (DSB, ODNB.) [19 February 1872], 3 March 1872, 27 July [1872], 3 August [1872], 4 August 1872, 28 August [1872], 31 August 1872, [2 September 1872], 20 October [1872], 27 October [1872], 15 November 1872, 14 December [1872?] Wallace, Herbert Spencer (1867–74). Son of Alfred Russel Wallace. (Raby 2001.) Wallace, Richard, baronet (1818–90). Philanthropist and art collector. Created baronet, 1871. Knighted, 1878. (ODNB.) Wallace, Violet (b. 1869). Schoolteacher. Daughter of Alfred Russel Wallace. Worked as a kindergarten teacher in Liverpool; later started a school near her parents at Tulgey Wood, Broadstone. (Raby 2001, pp. 199, 262, 282.) Wallich, Beatrice Harriet (1859–1943). Daughter of George Charles Wallich. Married William Ingham Brooke in 1891. (BMD (Death index); Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archive: Public Record Office RG10/ 32/18/29); IGI (accessed 25 August 1010).) Wallich, George Charles (1815–99). Surgeon and zoologist. Served with the Indian army medical service, 1838–57. Joined HMS Bulldog as naturalist to the North Atlantic telegraphic expedition in 1860; discovered evidence of animal life at great oceanic depths and published his findings. Also published on the Protozoa. (DSB, ODNB.) 24 February [1872], [20 March 1872] Wanklyn, John Bradshaw (1825/6–73). Merchant. (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office: RG10/796/41/3); England & Wales, national probate calendar (index of wills and administrations), 1858–1966 (Ancestry.com).) Way, Albert (1805–74). Antiquary, traveller, and author. A friend of CD’s at Cambridge: the two went on entomological outings together. Fellow, Society of

762

Biographical register

Way, Albert, cont. Antiquaries of London, 1839; director, 1842–6. A founder of the Archaeological Institute, 1845. (Alum. Cantab., ODNB.) Weale, James Philip Mansel (1838–1911). Naturalist, farmer, and writer. BA, Oxford, 1860. Resided in South Africa, circa 1860–78. Supported the formation of a museum in Port Elizabeth. Farmed property (Brooklyn) near King William’s Town. CD communicated his papers on orchid pollination to the Linnean Society of London; his papers on South African insects appeared in the Transactions of the Entomological Society. (BMD (Death index); Gunn and Codd 1981; Royal Society catalogue of scientific papers; The Times, 26 September 1899, p. 9; Weale 1877; Weale 1878; Weale 1891.) Webb, Mary Gladys (Mary) (1881–1927). Novelist and poet. Spent most of her life in Shropshire. (ODNB.) Wedgwood, Caroline Sarah (1800–88). CD’s sister. Married Josiah Wedgwood III, her cousin, in 1837. (Darwin pedigree.) Wedgwood, Clement Francis (1840–89). Second son of Frances and Francis Wedgwood. Apprenticed in the Wedgwood pottery business, 1859; later a partner in the business and director at the Etruria works in Staffordshire. (Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980.) Wedgwood, Frances Emma Elizabeth (Fanny) (1800–89). Second child of James Mackintosh and Catherine Allen. Married Hensleigh Wedgwood in 1832. (Freeman 1978, O’Leary 1989.) Wedgwood, Frances Julia (Snow) (1833–1913). Novelist, biographer, historian, and literary critic. Daughter of Hensleigh and Frances Emma Elizabeth Wedgwood. Published two novels in her mid-twenties, one under the pseudonym Florence Dawson. Wrote book reviews and an article on the theological significance of Origin. Conducted an intense friendship with Robert Browning between 1863 and 1870. Published a study of John Wesley (1870), and helped CD with translations of Linnaeus in the 1870s. Published The moral ideal: a historical study (1888). Active in the anti-vivisection movement. (Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980, ODNB.) [1867–72], [1867–72], [1867–72] (to H. E. Darwin), [1867–72] (to H. E. Darwin), [1867–72] (to H. E. Darwin?) Wedgwood, Godfrey (1833–1905). Son of Francis Wedgwood and Frances Mosley. Joined the Wedgwood pottery works in Staffordshire; partner, 1859; senior partner, 1875–1905. (Freeman 1978, Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980.) Wedgwood, Hensleigh (1803–91). Philologist. Emma Darwin’s brother. Qualified as a barrister in 1828, but never practised. Fellow, Christ’s College, Cambridge, 1829–30. Police magistrate at Lambeth, 1831–7; registrar of metropolitan carriages, 1838–49. An original member of the Philological Society, 1842. Published A dictionary of English etymology (1859–65). Married Frances Emma Elizabeth Mackintosh in 1832. (Freeman 1978, ODNB.) [1867–72], [1867–72], [1867–72?]

Biographical register

763

Wedgwood, Hope Elizabeth (Dot) (1844–1934). Daughter of Hensleigh and Frances Emma Elizabeth Wedgwood. Second wife of Godfrey Wedgwood. (Freeman 1978.) Wedgwood, Jessie (1804–72). CD’s and Emma Darwin’s cousin. Married Henry Allen Wedgwood in 1830. (Emma Darwin (1915).) Wedgwood, Josiah II (1769–1843). Master-potter. Partner in the Wedgwood pottery works at Etruria, Staffordshire, 1795–1841. Resident at Maer Hall, Staffordshire. Whig MP for Stoke-on-Trent, 1832–4. Emma Darwin’s father. (Burke’s peerage 1980, Emma Darwin (1915), Freeman 1978.) Wedgwood, Josiah III (1795–1880). Master-potter. Partner in the Wedgwood pottery works at Etruria, Staffordshire, 1841–4; moved to Leith Hill Place, Surrey, in 1844. Emma Darwin’s brother. Married CD’s sister Caroline, his cousin, in 1837. (Freeman 1978.) Wedgwood, Josiah Clement, first Baron Wedgwood (1872–1943). Politician. Son of Clement Francis and Emily Catherine Wedgwood. (ODNB.) Wedgwood, Katherine Euphemia (Effie) (1839–1931). Daughter of Hensleigh and Frances Emma Elizabeth Wedgwood. Married Thomas Henry Farrer in 1873. (Burke’s peerage 1980, Freeman 1978.) Wedgwood, Laurence (1844–1913). Son of Francis Wedgwood and Frances Mosley. (Freeman 1978, s.v. Wedgwood, Lawrence; B. Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980.) Wedgwood, Lucy Caroline (1846–1919). Daughter of Caroline Wedgwood and Josiah Wedgwood III. CD’s niece. Married Matthew James Harrison in 1874. (Darwin pedigree, Freeman 1978, Wedgwood and Wedgwood 1980.) 5 January [1872], 20 January [1872], 21 January [1872], [8 February 1872], [7 March 1872 or later] (to Elizabeth Darwin), [15 June 1872?], 8 June [1867–72] Wedgwood, Margaret Susan. See Williams, Margaret Susan Vaughan. Wedgwood, Sarah Elizabeth (Elizabeth) (1793–1880). Emma Darwin’s sister. Resided at Maer Hall, Staffordshire, until 1847, then at The Ridge, Hartfield, Sussex, until 1862. Moved to London before settling in Down in 1868. (Emma Darwin (1915), Freeman 1978.) [1867–72?] Weir, Harrison William (1824–1906). Painter and illustrator. Specialised in landscape and natural history subjects. Brother of John Jenner Weir. (ODNB.) Weir, John Jenner (1822–94). Naturalist and accountant. Worked in HM customs as an accountant, 1839–85. Studied entomology, especially microlepidoptera; conducted experiments on the relations between insects and insectivorous birds and published papers in 1869 and 1870. Member of the Entomological Society of London from 1845, serving many times on the council. Fellow of the Linnean Society of London, 1865; Zoological Society, 1876. (Science Gossip n.s. 1 (1894): 49–50.) 30 April [1872], 31 July 1872, 31 July [1872], 14 August 1872 Weismann, Leopold Friedrich August (August) (1834–1914). German

764

Biographical register

Weismann, Leopold Friedrich August (August), cont. zoologist. Studied medicine at Göttingen, 1852–6; qualified as a doctor, 1858. Physician to Archduke Stephan of Austria, 1861–3. Studied zoology at Gießen in 1861; habilitated at Freiburg (im Breisgau), 1863; privat-dozent in zoology and comparative anatomy, 1863; professor extraordinarius, 1866; full professor and first holder of the chair in zoology, 1874. Best known for his work on heredity, especially the theory of continuity of the germ-plasm. (DBE, DSB.) 29 February 1872, 5 April 1872 Wellesley, Arthur, 1st duke of Wellington (1769–1852). Army officer and statesman. Field marshal, 1816. Chancellor of Oxford University, 1834–52. FRS 1847. (ODNB, Record of the Royal Society of London.) Wells, John Soelberg (1824–79). Ophthalmic surgeon. MD, Edinburgh, 1856. Studied for four years in Germany and Holland. Clinical assistant to William Bowman, Royal Ophthalmic Hospital, Moorfields, from 1860; assistant surgeon, 1867; surgeon, 1873. Professor of ophthalmology, King’s College, London. (Plarr 1930.) Wells, Samuel Roberts (1820–75). Publisher and writer. Married Charlotte Fowler, the sister of Orson Squire Fowler and Lorenzo Niles Fowler in 1844. Established the publishing firm of Fowlers and Wells, issuing phrenological works and other educational writings, 1844. Wrote works on health, education, and self and home improvement. (ANB.) West, Algernon Edward (1832–1921). Civil servant. Private secretary, India Office, 1860–6. Private secretary to the prime minister, William Ewart Gladstone, 1868–72. Commissioner in the Inland Revenue, 1872–92. Knighted, 1886. (ODNB.) West, James (b. 1850/1). Librarian. Assistant librarian (also porter, messenger, collector, and housekeeper) at the Linnean Society, 1872–83. (Census returns of England and Wales 1881 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG11/127/ 92/12); Gage and Stearn 1988, pp. 67, 78.) West, Thomas (1821/2–72). Librarian. Assistant librarian (also porter, messenger, collector, and housekeeper) at the Linnean Society, 1858–72. (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/134/10/14); Gage and Stearn 1988, pp. 67, 223.) Wheatstone, Charles (1802–75). Experimental physicist and inventor. Professor of experimental philosophy, King’s College, London, 1834. Noted for contributions in optics, electricity, telegraphy, and automatic recording instruments. Knighted, 1868. FRS 1836. (ODNB.) White, Charles (1728–1813). Surgeon. Co-founder of the Manchester Infirmary, 1752, the Manchester Lying-in Hospital, 1790, and the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, 1781. Published An account of the regular gradation in man, animals and vegetables (1799). FRS 1762. (ODNB.) Whitley, Charles Thomas (1808–95). Clergyman and mathematician. Attended Shrewsbury School, 1821–6. BA, St John’s College, Cambridge, 1830. Reader

Biographical register

765

in natural philosophy and mathematics, Durham University, 1833–55. Vicar of Bedlington, Northumberland, 1854–95. (Alum. Cantab., Modern English biography.) Whitney, William Dwight (1827–94). American Sanskrit scholar, linguistic scientist, and lexicographer. Pursued botany and ornithology as a young man; presented a collection of stuffed birds (including the last wild turkey) to the Peabody Museum, Yale. Worked in his father’s bank, 1846–9. Accompanied his brother Josiah Whitney on a geological survey of the Lake Superior region in 1849 and contributed a chapter on botany to the survey report. Studied Sanskrit in Germany with Franz Bopp and others, 1850–3. Professor of Sanskrit at Yale, 1854, adding comparative philology in 1869. President, American Oriental Society, 1884–90; co-founder and first president, American Philological Association, 1869–70. Published extensively on grammar and oriental languages. (ANB, DAB.) Wickham, John Clements (1798–1864). Naval officer and magistrate. First lieutenant on HMS Beagle, 1831–6; commander, surveying the Australian coast, 1837– 41. Settled in Australia in 1842. Police magistrate in New South Wales, 1843–57; government resident, 1857. Left Australia and took his family to southern France in 1862. (Aust. dict. biog., R. Desmond 1994.) Wiegmann, Arend Friedrich (1771–1853). German pharmacist and botanist. Lecturer in natural science at a college in Brunswick (Braunschweig) from 1821; professor, 1832. His research on plant hybridisation was recognised by the Prussian Academy of Sciences in 1826. (BHGW ; Roberts 1929, pp. 160–4; Taxonomic literature.) Wilhelm I (1797–1888). King of Prussia, 1861–88; German emperor, 1871–88. (DBE.) Willem III (Willem Alexander Paul Frederik Lodewijk) (1817–90). King of the Netherlands, 1849–90. (NNBW.) Williams, Arthur Charles Vaughan (1834–75). Clergyman. Student at Christ Church, Oxford, 1853–68; BA 1857. Vicar of Down Ampney, Wiltshire, 1868–75. (Alum. Oxon., ODNB s.v. Williams, Ralph Vaughan.) Williams, Margaret Susan Vaughan (1843–1937). Daughter of Caroline Wedgwood and Josiah Wedgwood III. CD’s niece. Married Arthur Charles Vaughan Williams in 1869. Mother of Ralph Vaughan Williams (ODNB). (Emma Darwin (1915), Freeman 1978.) Williams & Norgate. Booksellers and publishers specialising in foreign scientific literature, with premises at Covent Garden, London, and South Frederick Street, Edinburgh. A partnership between Edmund Sydney Williams (1817–91) and Frederick Norgate. Publishers of the Natural History Review. (Modern English biography s.v. Williams, Edmund Sidney, Post Office Edinburgh directory.) 12 April [1872], 6 May [1872] Wilson, Edward (1813–78). Australian newspaper proprietor. Left England for Australia in 1841; proprietor of the Argus newspaper from 1848. Founded the Acclimatisation Society of Victoria in 1861. Moved back to England in 1864; moved to Hayes Place, Bromley, Kent, in 1867. Continued to be active in Australian

766

Biographical register

Wilson, Edward, cont. affairs and promoting assisted emigration. A founder of the Colonial Society, 1868, and member of the council from 1868. (Aust. dict. biog., ODNB.) Wittig, Gregor Constantin. German translator. In co-operation with Alexander Asakow, translated books on spiritualism into German. (Pytlik 2005, p. 40.) Woinow, Mikhail Mikhailovich (1844–75). Russian ophthalmologist. Worked with Frans Cornelis Donders and Hermann von Helmholtz. (NUC s.v. Voinov, Mikhail Mikhailovich; Archiv für Ophthalmologie 16 (part 1, 1870): 211; letter from F. C. Donders, 1 April 1872.) Wolf, Joseph (1820–99). German-born painter and illustrator. Specialised in animals. Apprenticed as a lithographer in Koblenz before studying art at the Antwerp Academy. Arrived in London in 1848. Established a studio with Johann Baptist Zwecker at 59 Berners Street, London, circa 1860. Illustrated many natural history publications including Henry Walter Bates’s The naturalist on the river Amazons (1863). (Bates 1863, p. vi; ODNB; Post Office London directory 1859–63.) Wood, Charles, 1st Viscount Halifax (1800–85). Politician. Chancellor of the Exchequer, 1846. President of the Board of Control, 1852. First lord of the Admiralty, 1855. Secretary of state for India, 1859. Lord privy seal in William Ewart Gladstone’s cabinet, 1870–4. (ODNB.) Wood, John (1825–91). Surgeon. Articled to a solicitor, but disliked law. Dispenser, Bradford Infirmary. Studied medicine at King’s College, London, 1846–8. Appointed house surgeon, King’s College Hospital, 1850; demonstrator of anatomy, 1851; assistant surgeon, 1856. Appointed professor of surgery, King’s College, 1871, lecturer on clinical surgery (with Joseph Lister), 1877; emeritus professor of clinical surgery, 1889. Examiner in anatomy and physiology, Royal College of Surgeons, 1875–80; in surgery, 1879–89; in dental surgery, 1883–8; vice-president of the council, 1885; Hunterian Professor, 1884–5. FRS 1871. (ODNB.) Wood, Searles Valentine (1798–1880). Geologist. Served in the East India Company’s mercantile fleet, 1811–26. Became a partner, with his father, in a bank at Hasketon, near Woodbridge, until 1839. Appointed curator of the museum of the Geological Society of London, 1838; elected fellow of the Geological Society, 1839. Studied the fossils of the East Anglian crag pits, and of the Hampshire Tertiaries, and French Eocene fossil Mollusca. (ODNB.) Wood, Searles Valentine (1830–84). Geologist and lawyer. Son of Searles Valentine Wood (1798–1880). Practised as a solicitor from 1851; after his retirement in 1865, worked full-time on geology. Pioneer in the study of glacial deposits, especially in East Anglia. Fellow, Geological Society, 1864. (ODNB.) Wood, Thomas W. (b. 1833/4). Illustrator. Son of animal artist Thomas W. Wood. Made some animal illustrations for Descent 2d ed. and Expression. (Census returns 1871 (The National Archives: Public Record Office RG10/205/37/66), Engen 1985, Tort 1996.) Woodall, John Woodall (1831/2–1905). Banker. BA, Oxford University, 1854.

Biographical register

767

Banker in Scarborough. Mayor of Scarborough, 1869, 1882, 1886. Fellow of the Geological Society of London. (Rugby School register.) Woodington, Ann (b. 1800/1). Let apartments in Sevenoaks, Kent. (Census returns of England and Wales 1871 (The National Archive: Public Record Office RG10/923/5/1).) Woodroffe, Thomas (1789–1878). Clergyman. BA, Oxford (St John’s), 1810. Professor of classics, Royal Military College, Sandhurst, 1814–16. Canon residentiary of Winchester, 1845–78. (Modern English biography.) Woodward, Samuel Pickworth (1821–65). Naturalist. Sub-curator, Geological Society of London, 1839–45. Professor of botany and natural history at the Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, 1845–7. First-class assistant in the department of geology and mineralogy, British Museum, 1848–65. (ODNB, Sarjeant 1980– 96.) Woolner, Alice Gertrude (1845–1912). Wife of Thomas Woolner. (ODNB s.v. Thomas Woolner, The Times, 11 March 1912, p. 1.) Woolner, Thomas (1825–92). Sculptor and poet. Member of the Pre-Raphaelite brotherhood. Established his reputation in the 1850s with medallion portrait sculptures of Robert Browning, Thomas Carlyle, and William Wordsworth. Went on to make acclaimed busts of CD, Charles Dickens, Thomas Henry Huxley, Adam Sedgwick, and Alfred Tennyson, and life-size studies of Francis Bacon, John Stuart Mill, and William Whewell. (DNB.) Wordsworth, William (1770–1850). Poet. (ODNB.) Wright, Chauncey (1830–75). American mathematician and philosopher. Calculator for the newly established American ephemeris and nautical almanac, for which he devised new methods of calculation, 1852–72. Recording secretary, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Boston, 1863–70. Published the first of a series of philosophical essays in the North American Review in 1864. (ANB.) 3 April 1872, 6 April 1872, [11 or 12] April [1872], 24 May 1872, 3 June [1872], 29 August 1872, 31 August [1872], 2 September 1872, 6 September 1872, 9 September 1872 Wright, William (1830–89). Semitist. BA, St Andrews, 1849. Honorary doctorate, Leiden, 1853. Professor of Arabic, University College, London, 1855–6; Trinity College, Dublin, 1856–61. Assistant (later assistant keeper), manuscripts, British Museum, 1861. Sir Thomas Adams Professor of Arabic, Cambridge, 1870–89. (ODNB.) Wrightson, John (1840–1916). Teacher of agriculture. Professor of agriculture, Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, 1864–79. Founder, College of Agriculture, Downton, 1880; president, 1880–1906. Professor of agriculture and agricultural chemistry, Royal College of Science, South Kensington, 1882–98. (Nature, 14 December 1916, p. 294; WWW.) Wundt, Wilhelm Maximilian (1832–1920). German psychologist. PhD in medicine, University of Heidelberg, 1855. Assistant to Hermann von Helmholtz at

768

Biographical register

Wundt, Wilhelm Maximilian , cont. Heidelberg, 1858–63, focusing on the physiology of sense perception. Professor extraordinarius, 1864–70; professor, 1871–3. Professor of philosophy, University of Leipzig, 1875. Established the Institute for Experimental Psychology at Leipzig in 1879. In his later career, concentrated on the development of language, myth, and art (or ‘folk psychology’). (DBE.) Wyman, Jeffries (1814–74). American comparative anatomist and ethnologist. Curator of the Lowell Institute, Boston, 1839–42. Travelled in Europe, 1841–2. Professor of anatomy and physiology, Hampden-Sydney College, Virginia, 1843–8. Hersey Professor of anatomy, Harvard College, 1847–74. Curator, Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard, 1866–74. (ANB, DSB.) Youmans, Edward Livingston (1821–87). American writer, editor, and promoter of science education. Took a degree in medicine circa 1852, but did not practise. Wrote and lectured on scientific subjects. Advised the Appleton company on scientific publications and translations; founded their International Scientific Series in 1871. Founded the Popular Science Monthly in 1872. (ANB.) Zannetti, Arturo. Italian anthropologist and ethnologist. Close collaborator of Paolo Mantegazza. (Landucci 1987.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY The following bibliography contains all the books and papers referred to in this volume by author–date reference or by short title. Short titles are used for some standard reference works (e.g., ODNB, OED), for CD’s books and papers, and for editions of his letters and manuscripts (e.g., Descent, LL, Notebooks). Works referred to by short titles are listed in alphabetical order according to the title; those given author–date references occur in alphabetical order according to the author’s surname. Notes on manuscript sources are given at the end of the bibliography. Abbot, Francis Ellingwood. [1870.] Truths for the times. Mount Pleasant, Ramsgate: Thomas Scott. —–. 1872. The god of science. Index Tracts 11: 1–23. Abney, William de Wiveleslie. 1876. Instruction in photography. 3d edition. London: Piper & Carter. ADB: Allgemeine deutsche Biographie. Under the auspices of the Historical Commission of the Royal Academy of Sciences. 56 vols. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot. 1875– 1912. Agassiz, Alexander. 1869. Preliminary report on the Echini and star-fishes dredged in deep water between Cuba and the Florida Reef, by L. F. de Pourtales, Assist. U.S. Coast Survey. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard 1 (1863–9): 253–307. —–. 1872–4. Revision of the Echini. 4 parts and an atlas of plates. Cambridge, Mass.: University Press. Agassiz, Elizabeth Cary. 1885. Louis Agassiz: his life and correspondence. 2 vols. London: Macmillan and Company. Agassiz, George Russell, ed. 1913. Letters and recollections of Alexander Agassiz, with a sketch of his life and work. London: Constable & Co. Agassiz, Jean Louis Rodolphe. 1871. A letter concerning deep-sea dredgings, addressed to Professor Benjamin Pierce, superintendent United States Coast Survey. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College 3 (1871–6): 49–53. —–. 1872a. Glacial phenomena. New York Tribune, 26 June 1872, pp. 1–2. —–. 1872b. Professor Agassiz’s South American expedition. [Reprinted from the New York Tribune, 26 June 1872.] Nature, 11 July 1872, p. 216; 8 July 1872, pp. 229–31; 1 August 1872, pp. 270–3. Airy, Hubert. 1873. On leaf-arrangement. Abstract. Communicated by Charles Darwin. [Read 27 February 1873.] Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 21 (1872– 3): 176–9.

770

Bibliography

Airy, Hubert. 1874. On leaf-arrangement. Abstract. Communicated by Charles Darwin. [Read 30 April 1874.] Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 22 (1873–4): 298–307. Allan, Mea. 1967. The Hookers of Kew, 1785–1911. London: Michael Joseph. —–. 1982. William Robinson 1838–1935. Father of the English flower garden. London: Faber and Faber. Allgemeines Lexikon der bildenden Künstler: Allgemeines Lexikon der bildenden Künstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart. 37 vols. Edited by Ulrich Thieme and Felix Becker. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann; E. A. Seeman. 1907–50. Alter, Stephen G. 1999. Darwinism and the linguistic image: language, race, and natural theology in the nineteenth century. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. —–. 2005. William Dwight Whitney and the science of language. Baltimore, Md. and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Althaus, Julius. 1868. On certain points in the physiology and pathology of the fifth pair of cerebral nerves. [Read 24 November 1868.] Medico-Chirurgical Transactions 52: 27–42. Alum. Cantab.: Alumni Cantabrigienses. A biographical list of all known students, graduates and holders of office at the University of Cambridge, from the earliest times to 1900. Compiled by John Venn and J. A. Venn. 10 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1922–54. Alum. Oxon.: Alumni Oxonienses: the members of the University of Oxford, 1500–1886: . . . with a record of their degrees. Being the matriculation register of the university. Alphabetically arranged, revised, and annotated by Joseph Foster. 8 vols. London and Oxford: Parker & Co. 1887–91. ANB: American national biography. Edited by John A. Garraty and Mark C. Carnes. 24 vols. and supplement. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1999– 2002. Andersson, Charles John. 1856. Lake Ngami: or, explorations and discoveries during four years’ wanderings in the wilds of South Western Africa. London: Hurst and Blackett. Appiah, Kwame Anthony and Gates, Henry Louis, Jr., eds. 2005. Africana: the encyclopedia of the African and African American experience. 2d edition. 5 vols. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Appleton, C. E. 1877. American efforts after international copyright. Fortnightly Review 21: 237–57. Army list: The army list. London: printed for the compiler of the annual official army list; Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 1815–1900. Artizans’ & General Properties Company Ltd. [1967.] Artizans Centenary: 1867–1967. [London]: Artizans’ & General Properties Company Ltd. Ashton, Rosemary. 1991. G. H. Lewes: a life. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Askenasy, Eugen. 1872. Beiträge zur Kritik der Darwin’schen Lehre. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann. Atkins, Hedley. 1974. Down: the home of the Darwins; the story of a house and the people who lived there. London: Royal College of Surgeons.

Bibliography

771

Aust. dict. biog.: Australian dictionary of biography. Edited by Douglas Pike et al. 14 vols. [Melbourne]: Melbourne University Press. London and New York: Cambridge University Press. 1966–96. Autobiography: The autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809–1882. With original omissions restored. Edited with appendix and notes by Nora Barlow. London: Collins. 1958. Ayrault, Eugène. 1867. De l’industrie mulassière en Poitou. Niort: L. Clouzot. Baker, Herbert G. 1965. Charles Darwin and the perennial flax—a controversy and its implications. Huntia 2: 141–61. Balducci, Enrico. 1921. Guelfo Cavanna. Annali del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale 3d ser. 9 (1920–2): 194–207. Bales, Richard F. 2002. The great Chicago fire and the myth of Mrs. O’Leary’s cow. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company. Balfour, John Hutton. 1860. A manual of botany: being an introduction to the study of the structure, physiology and classification of plants. Edinburgh: A. and C. Black. Barbier, Edmond, trans. 1876. L’origine des espèces au moyen de la sélection naturelle ou la lutte pour l’existence dans la nature. By Charles Darwin. [Translation of Origin 6th ed.] Paris: Reinwald. Barnhart, John Hendley, comp. 1965. Biographical notes upon botanists . . . maintained in the New York Botanical Garden Library. 3 vols. Boston, Mass.: G. K. Hall. Barrande, Joachim. 1871. Trilobites. Prague: the author. —– et al. 1852–1911. Systême silurien du centre de la Bohême. 8 parts in 28 vols. Prague: the author. Barton, Ruth. 1998. ‘Huxley, Lubbock, and Half a Dozen Others’: professionals and gentlemen in the formation of the X Club, 1851–1864. Isis 89: 410–44. [Bastian, Adolf.] 1871a. [Review of Descent.] Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 3: 133–43. [—–.] 1871b. [Review of Die Abstammung des Menschen und die geschlechtiche Zuchtwahl, übersetzt von V. Carus Bd. II.] Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 3: 349–59. Bastian, Henry Charlton. 1864. Monograph on the Anguillulidæ, or free nematoids, marine, land and freshwater, with descriptions of 100 new species. [Read 1 December 1864.] Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 25 (1865–6): 73–184. —–. 1872. The beginnings of life: being some account of the nature, modes of origin and transformations of lower organisms. 2 vols. London: Macmillan. Bateman, Frederic. 1870. On aphasia, or loss of speech: and the localisation of the faculty of articulate language. London: John Churchill and Sons. Norwich: Jarrold and Sons. —–. 1872. Darwinism tested by recent researches in language. [Read 18 March 1872.] Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 7 (1874): 73–91. Bates, Henry Walter. 1861. Contributions to an insect fauna of the Amazon valley. Lepidoptera: Heliconidæ. [Read 21 November 1861.] Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 23 (1860–2): 495–566. —–. 1863. The naturalist on the River Amazons. A record of adventures, habits of animals, sketches of Brazilian and Indian life, and aspects of nature under the equator, during eleven years of travel. 2 vols. London: John Murray. Baussard, Monsieur. 1789. Mémoire sur deux Cétacées échoués vers Honfleur, le

772

Bibliography

19 septembre 1788. Observations sur la physique, sur l’histoire naturelle et sur les arts 34: 201–6. BDWS: Biographical dictionary of women in science: pioneering lives from ancient times to the mid-20th century. Edited by Marilyn Ogilvie and Joy Harvey. 2 vols. New York and London: Routledge. 2000. Beckett, Ian Frederick William. 1982. Riflemen form. A study of the Rifle Volunteer Movement, 1859–1908. Aldershot: The Ogilby Trusts. Belgrand, François-Eugène. 1869. La Seine. I, Le bassin parisien aux âges antéhistoriques. Paris: Imprimerie Impériale. Bell, Charles. 1844. The anatomy and philosophy of expression as connected with the fine arts. Preface by George Bell, and an appendix on the nervous system by Alexander Shaw. 3d edition, enlarged. London: John Murray. —–. 1865. The anatomy and philosophy of expression: as connected with the fine arts. 5th edition. London: Henry G. Bohn. —–. 1870. Letters of Sir Charles Bell, K.H., F.R.S.L. & E., selected from his correspondence with his brother George Joseph Bell. London: John Murray. Benthall, Paul. 1980. George Maw: a versatile Victorian. National Trust Studies (1980): 11–20. Bentham, George and Hooker, Joseph Dalton. 1862–83. Genera plantarum. Ad exemplaria imprimis in herbariis Kewensibus servata definita. 3 vols. in 7. London: A. Black [and others]. Berg, Wieland and Kaasch, Michael. 2010. Halle als Sitz der Leopoldina: Zufall oder glückliche Fügung? Acta Historica Leopoldina 55: 293–330. Bert, Paul. 1867–72. Recherches sur les mouvements de la sensitive (Mimosa pudica, Linn.). Journal de l’anatomie et de la physiologie 4 (1867): 534–52; 8 (1872): 201–33. BHGW : Biographisch-literarisches Handwörterbuch zur Geschichte der exacten Wissenschaften enthaltend Nachweisung über Lebensverhältnisse und Leistungen von Mathematikern, Astronomen, Physikern, Chemikern, Mineralogen, Geologen usw. By Johann Christian Poggendorff. 5 vols. Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth; Verlag Chemie. 1863–1926. BLA: Biographisches Lexikon der hervorragenden Aerzte aller Zeiten und Völker. Edited by A. Wernich et al. 6 vols. Vienna and Leipzig: Urban and Schwarzenberg. 1884–8. BLC: The British Library general catalogue of printed books to 1975. 360 vols. and supplement (6 vols.). London: Clive Bingley; K. G. Saur. 1979–88. BLHA: Biographisches Lexikon der hervorragenden Ärzte der letzten fünfzig Jahre: zugleich Fortsetzung des Biographisches Lexikons der hervorragenden Ärzte aller Zeiten und Völker. Edited by August Hirsch et al. Berlin and Vienna: Urban & Schwarzenberg. 1932–3. BLKO: Biographisches Lexikon des Kaiserthums Oesterreich, enthaltend die Lebensskizzen der denkwürdigen Personen, welche seit 1750 in den österreichischen Kronländern geboren wurden oder darin gelebt und gewirkt haben. By Constant von Wurzbach. 60 vols. Vienna: L. C. Zamarski. 1856–91. BMD: General Register Office, England and Wales civil registration indexes. England & Wales birth index, 1837–1983. England and Wales marriage index, 1837–1983. England and Wales death index, 1837–1983. Online database. Provo, Utah: The Generations Network. 2006. www.ancestry.co.uk

Bibliography

773

BNB: Biographie nationale publiée par l’Académie Royale des Sciences, des Lettres et des Beaux-arts de Belgique. 44 vols., including 16 supplements. Brussels: H. Thiry-Van Buggenhoudt [and others]. 1866–1986. Bol’shaya entsiklopediya: Bol’shaya entsiklopediya v shestidesyati dvukh tomakh. Main editor: S. A. Kondratov. Scientific editorial advisor: G. A. Mesiyats. 62 vols. Moscow: Terra. 2006. Bondeson, J. and Miles, A. E. W. 1996. The hairy family of Burma: a four generation pedigree of congenital hypertrichosis lanuginosa. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 89: 403–8. Bonham-Carter, Victor. 1960. In a liberal tradition: a social biography 1700–1950. London: Constable. Bonnet, Pierre. 1945–61. Bibliographia araneorum: analyse méthodique de toute la littérature aranéologique jusqu’en 1939. 3 vols. in 7. Toulouse: Douladoure. Brace, Charles Loring. 1872. The dangerous classes of New York, and twenty years’ work among them. New York: Wynkoop & Hallenbeck. Branson, Jan and Miller, Don. 2002. Damned for their difference: the cultural construction of deaf people as ‘disabled’. Washington DC: Gallaudet. Bree, Charles Robert. 1860. Species not transmutable, nor the result of secondary causes. Being a critical examination of Mr Darwin’s work entitled ‘Origin and variation of species’. London: Groombridge & Sons. Edinburgh: Maclachlan & Stewart. —–. 1872. An exposition of fallacies in the hypothesis of Mr. Darwin. London: Longmans, Green, and Co. Brehm, Alfred Edmund. [1869–73.] La vie des animaux illustrée, ou description populaire du règne animal. French translation supervised by Z. Gerbe. 4 vols. Paris: J. B. Baillière et Fils. —–, et al. 1864–9. Illustrirtes Thierleben. Eine allgemeine Kunde des Thierreichs, etc. 6 vols. Hildburghausen: Bibliographisches Institut. Bridges, John Henry, ed. 1900. The ‘Opus Majus’ of Roger Bacon. London: William & Norgate. Brinkman, Paul. 2003. Bartholomew James Sulivan’s discovery of fossil vertebrates in the Tertiary beds of Patagonia. Archives of Natural History 30: 56–74. Bronn, Heinrich Georg and Carus, Julius Victor, trans. 1872. Über die Entstehung der Arten: durch natürliche Zuchtwahl oder die Erhaltung der begünstigen Rassen im Kampfe um’s Dasein. By Charles Darwin. 5th edition (from the English 6th edition). Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung (E. Koch). Brown, Robert. 1810. Prodromus floræ Novæ Hollandiæ et Insulæ Van-Diemen. Vol. 1 (no more published). London: Richard Taylor et socii. Browne, C. A. ed. 1871. Letters and extracts from the addresses and occasional writings of J. Beete Jukes. London: Chapman and Hall. Browne, Janet. 1995. Charles Darwin. Voyaging. Volume I of a biography. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. —–. 1998. I could have retched all night. Darwin and his body. In Science incarnate. Historical embodiments of natural knowledge, edited by Christopher Lawrence and Steven Shapin. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

774

Bibliography

Browne, Janet. 2002. Charles Darwin. The power of place. Volume II of a biography. London: Pimlico. Brücke, Ernst Wilhelm von. 1847. Anatomische Beschreibung des menschlichen Augapfels. Berlin: G. Reimer. Burke’s landed gentry: A genealogical and heraldic history of the commoners of Great Britain and Ireland enjoying territorial possessions or high official rank but unvisited with heritable honours. Burke’s genealogical and heraldic history of the landed gentry. By John Burke, et al. 1st–18th edition. London: Henry Colburn [and others]. 1833–1969. Burke’s peerage: A genealogical and heraldic dictionary of the peerage and baronetage of the United Kingdom. Burke’s peerage and baronetage. 1st– edition. London: Henry Colburn [& others]. 1826–. Burnett, William A. S. 1992. Darwin’s microscopes. Microscopy: the Journal of the Quekett Microscopical Club 36: 604–27. Burstyn, Joan N. ed. 1990. Past and promise: lives of New Jersey women. Metuchen, NJ, and London: The Scarecrow Press. Butler, Arthur Gardiner. 1871. A monograph of the Lepidoptera hitherto included in the genus Elymnias. [Read 6 June 1871.] Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1871): 518–25. Butler, Joseph. 1736. The analogy of religion, natural and revealed, to the constitution and course of nature. London: James, John and Paul Knapton. [Butler, Samuel.] 1872a. Erewhon, or, Over the range. London: Trübner. —–. 1872b. Erewhon, or, Over the range. 2d edition. London: Trübner. —–. 1903. The way of all flesh. London: Grant Richards. Calendar: A calendar of the correspondence of Charles Darwin, 1821–1882. With supplement. 2d edition. Edited by Frederick Burkhardt et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1994. Candolle, Alphonse de. 1873. Histoire des sciences et des savants depuis deux siècles: suivie d’autres études sur des sujets scientifiques en particulier sur la sélection dans l’espèce humaine. Geneva: H. Georg. Candolle, Casimir de. 1865. Théorie de l’angle unique en phyllotaxie. Bibliothèque universelle et revue Suisse. Archives des sciences physiques et naturelles 23: 199–212. Canestrini, Giovanni and Bassani, Francesco, trans. 1878. L’espressione dei sentimenti nell’uomo e negli animali. By Charles Darwin. Turin: Unione Tipografico-Editrice. Capanna, Ernesto. 1999. Lazzaro Spallanzani: at the roots of modern biology. Journal of Experimental Zoology: Part B, Molecular and Developmental Evolution 285: 178–96. Carbonnier, Pierre. 1870. Nouvelle note sur un poisson de Chine appartenant au genre Macropode. Bulletin de la Société impériale zoologique l’acclimatation 2d ser. 7: 26–32. Carlier, Antoine Guillaume. [1872.] Darwinism refuted by researches in psychology. London: Jarrold & Sons. Carneri, Bartholomaeus. 1871. Sittlichkeit und Darwinismus. Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller.

Bibliography

775

Caroe, Gwendolen Mary. 1985. The Royal Institution: an informal history. With a final chapter by Alban Caroe. London: John Murray. Carter, Henry John. 1857. Transformation of the vegetable protoplasm into Actinophrys. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 2d ser. 19: 259–63. —–. 1871. A description of two new Calcispongiæ, to which is added confirmation of Prof. James-Clark’s discovery of the true form of the sponge-cell (animal), and an account of the polype-like pore-area of Cliona corallinoides, contrasted with Prof. E. Häckel’s view on the relationship of the sponges to the corals. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 4th ser. 8: 1–27. Carus, Julius Victor, trans. 1868. Das Variiren der Thiere und Pflanzen im Zustande der Domestication. By Charles Darwin. 2 vols. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung (E. Koch). —–, trans. 1871. Die Abstammung des Menschen und die geschlechtliche Zuchtwahl. By Charles Darwin. 2 vols. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung. —–, trans. 1871–2. Die Abstammung des Menschen und die geschlechtliche Zuchtwahl. By Charles Darwin. German translation of Descent. 2d edition. 2 vols. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung (E. Koch). —–. 1872a. Geschichte der Zoologie bis auf Joh. Müller und Charl. Darwin. Munich: R. Oldenbourg. —–, trans. 1872b. Der Ausdruck der Gemüthsbewegungen bei dem Menschen und den Thieren. By Charles Darwin. German translation of Expression. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung. —–, trans. 1873. Das Variiren der Thiere und Pflanzen im Zustande der Domestication. By Charles Darwin. 2d edition. 2 vols. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung (E. Koch). Carus, Julius Victor and Gerstaecker, Carl Edouard Adolph. 1863–75. Handbuch der Zoologie. 2 vols. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann. Catalogue of the fossil Mammalia in the British Museum (Natural History). By Richard Lydekker. 5 vols. London: Taylor and Francis. 1885–7. Catalogue of graduates, University of Dublin: A catalogue of graduates who have proceeded to degrees in the University of Dublin, from the earliest recorded commencements to July, 1866: with supplement to December 16, 1868. Dublin: Hodges, Smith, & Foster. 1869. Catalogue of the library of the British Museum (Natural History): Catalogue of the books, manuscripts, maps and drawings in the British Museum (Natural History). 5 vols. London: Trustees of the British Museum. 1903–15. Cattermole, Michael J. G. and Wolfe, Arthur F. 1987. Horace Darwin’s shop: a history of the Cambridge Scientific Instrument Company 1878 to 1968. Bristol and Boston: Adam Hilger. CDEL: A critical dictionary of English literature, and British and American authors, living and deceased, from the earliest accounts to the middle of the nineteenth century . . . with forty indexes of subjects. By S. Austin Allibone. 3 vols. London: Trübner. Philadelphia: Childs & Peterson; J. B. Lippincott. 1859–71. A supplement to Allibone’s critical dictionary of

776

Bibliography

English literature and British and American authors. Containing over thirty-seven thousand articles (authors), and enumerating over ninety-three thousand titles. By John Foster Kirk. 2 vols. Philadelphia and London: J. B. Lippincott. 1891. Chadwick, Owen. 1970. The Victorian church. 2d edition. 2 parts. London: A. and C. Black. Challinor, John. 1978. A dictionary of geology. 5th edition. Cardiff: University of Wales Press. Chambers: The Chambers dictionary. Edinburgh: Chambers Harrap Publishers. 1998. Chapuis, Félicien. 1865. Le pigeon voyageur belge. Verviers: Imprimerie de Ch. Vinche. Charma, Antoine. 1846. Essai sur le langage. 2d edition. Paris: L. Hachette. Chauvin, Michael. 2004. H¯ok¯uloa: the British 1874 transit of Venus expedition to Hawai’i. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press. ´nadattabada, ˘ ou, la mort d’Yadjnadatta, épisode Chézy, Antoine Léonard de, trans. 1826. Yaj´ extrait du Ramâyana, poème épique sanscrit . . . suivi par forme d’appendice d’une traduction latine littérale par J. L. Burnouf. Paris: F. Didot. Christiansen, Ditte G. and Reyer, Heinz-Ulrich. 2009. From clonal to sexual hybrids: genetic recombination via triploids in all-hybrid populations of water frogs. Evolution 63: 1754–68. Clark, Henry James. 1871. The American Spongilla, a craspedote, flagellate infusorian. American Journal of Science and Arts 3d ser. 2: 426–36. Clark, Ronald W. 1968. The Huxleys. London: Heinemann. Clergy list: The clergy list . . . containing an alphabetical list of the clergy. London: C. Cox [and others]. 1841–89. ‘Climbing plants’: On the movements and habits of climbing plants. By Charles Darwin. [Read 2 February 1865.] Journal of the Linnean Society (Botany) 9 (1867): 1–118. Climbing plants: On the movements and habits of climbing plants. By Charles Darwin. London: Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts & Green; Williams & Norgate. 1865. Climbing plants 2d ed.: The movements and habits of climbing plants. 2d edition. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1875. Clokie, Hermia Newman. 1964. An account of the herbaria of the department of botany in the University of Oxford. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Cobbe, Frances Power.] 1872a. The consciousness of dogs. Quarterly Review 133: 419–51. [—–.] 1872b. Dogs whom I have met. Cornhill Magazine 26: 662–78. —–. 1889. The friend of man, and his friends, the poets. London: George Bell & Sons. Cohen, Alan. 1999. Mary Elizabeth Barber, the Bowkers and South African prehistory. South African Archaeological Bulletin 54: 120–7. Collected papers: The collected papers of Charles Darwin. Edited by Paul H. Barrett. 2 vols. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. 1977. Colonial Office list: The Colonial Office list . . . or, general register of the colonial dependencies of Great Britain. London: Edward Stanford; Harrison & Sons. 1862–99. Colquhoun, John. 1840. The moor and the loch: containing practical hints on most of the

Bibliography

777

highland sports, and notices of the habits of the different creatures of game and prey in the mountainous districts of Scotland, with an essay on loch-fishing. Edinburgh: W. Blackwood & sons. London: T. Cadell. Columbia gazetteer of the world: The Columbia gazetteer of the world. Edited by Saul B. Cohen. 3 vols. New York: Columbia University Press. 1998. Conway, Moncure Daniel. 1904. Autobiography: memories and experiences of Moncure Daniel Conway. 2 vols. London: Cassell. Cook, James. 1967. The journal of Captain James Cook on his voyages of discovery. Edited by J. C. Beaglehole. 2 volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cope, Edward Drinker. 1868. On the origin of genera. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia (1868): 242–300. —–. 1869. On the origin of genera. Philadelphia: Merrihew & Son, printers. —–. 1871. The method of creation of organic forms. [Read 15 December 1871.] Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 12 (1871–2): 229–63. Coral reefs: The structure and distribution of coral reefs. Being the first part of the geology of the voyage of the Beagle, under the command of Capt. FitzRoy RN, during the years 1832 to 1836. By Charles Darwin. London: Smith, Elder & Co. 1842. Corliss, John O. 2001. Protozoan taxonomy and systematics. eLS (Wiley online library). DOI: 10.1038/npg.els.0001925 Correns, C. 1916. Friedrich Hildebrand. Berichte der deutschen botanischen Gesellschaft 34 (pt 2): 28–49. Correspondence: The correspondence of Charles Darwin. Edited by Frederick Burkhardt et al. 20 vols to date. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1985–. Corsi, Pietro and Weindling, Paul J. 1985. Darwinism in Germany, France and Italy. In The Darwinian heritage, edited by David Kohn. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press in association with Nova Pacifica. County families: The county families of the United Kingdom; or, royal manual of the titled & untitled aristocracy of Great Britain & Ireland. By Edward Walford. London: Robert Hardwicke; Chatto & Windus. 1860–93. Walford’s county families of the United Kingdom or royal manual of the titled and untitled aristocracy of England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland. London: Chatto & Windus; Spottiswoode & Co. 1894–1920. Crabbe, George. 1878. Church restoration. Fraser’s Magazine 17: 449–57. Craig, John. 1984. Scholarship and nation building: the universities of Strasbourg and Alsatian society, 1870–1939. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Crane, Walter. [1876.] The baby’s opera: a book of old rhymes with new dresses. London and New York: George Routledge and Sons. Crockford’s clerical directory: The clerical directory, a biographical and statistical book of reference for facts relating to the clergy and the church. Crockford’s clerical directory etc. London: John Crockford [and others]. 1858–1900. Croll, James. 1870. On the cause of the motion of glaciers. Philosophical Magazine 40: 153–70. Crookes, William. 1871. Some further experiments on psychic force. Quarterly Journal of Science n.s. 1: 471–93.

778

Bibliography

Crookes, William. 1874. Notes of an enquiry into the phenomena called spiritual, during the years 1870–73. Quarterly Journal of Science n.s. 4: 77–97. Cross and self fertilisation: The effects of cross and self fertilisation in the vegetable kingdom. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1876. Crotch, William Duppa. 1876. On the migration and habits of the Norwegian lemming. [Read 4 May 1876.] Additional note relative to the Norwegian lemming. [Read 15 June 1876.] Further remarks on the lemming. [Read 2 November 1876.] Journal of the Linnean Society (Zoology) 13 (1878): 27–34, 83, 157–60. Cupples, George. 1894. Scotch deer-hounds and their masters. With a biographical sketch of the author by James Hutchison Stirling. Edinburgh and London: William Blackwood and Sons. Curle, Richard. 1954. The Ray Society: a bibliographical history. London: Ray Society. Cuvier, Georges. 1812. Recherches sur les ossemens fossiles de quadrupèdes, où l’on rétablit les caractères de plusieurs espèces d’animaux que les révolutions du globe paroissent avoir détruites. 4 vols. Paris: Deterville. DAB: Dictionary of American biography. Under the auspices of the American Council of Learned Societies. 20 vols., index, and 10 supplements. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons; Simon & Shuster Macmillan. London: Oxford University Press; Humphrey Milford. 1928–95. Dallas, William Sweetland, trans. 1869. Facts and arguments for Darwin. By Fritz Müller. London: John Murray. Dana, James Dwight. 1872. Corals and coral islands. New York: Dodd & Mead. Darwin, Francis. 1874. Contributions to the anatomy of the sympathetic ganglia of the bladder in their relation to the vascular system. Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science n.s. 14: 109–14. —–. 1875. On the primary vascular dilatation in acute inflammation. Journal of Anatomy and Physiology 10: 1–16. —–. 1914. William Erasmus Darwin. Christ’s College Magazine 29: 16–23. —–. 1916. Memoir of Sir George Darwin. In Scientific papers, by George Howard Darwin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —–. 1920. Springtime and other essays. London: John Murray. Darwin, George Howard. 1872. Development in dress. Macmillan’s Magazine 26: 410–16. Darwin pedigree: Pedigree of the family of Darwin. Compiled by H. Farnham Burke. N.p.: privately printed. 1888. [Reprinted in facsimile in Darwin pedigrees, by Richard Broke Freeman. London: printed for the author. 1984.] Daum, Andreas W. 1998. Wissenschaftspopularisierung im 19. Jahrhundert: bürgerliche Kultur, naturwissenschaftliche Bildung und die deutsche Offentlichkeit, 1848–1914. Munich: R. Oldenbourg. Davis, Andrew Jackson. 1847. The principles of nature, her divine revelations, and a voice to mankind. New York: S. S. Lyon and Wm Fishbough. —–. 1850–68. The great harmonia: being a philosophical revelation of the natural, spiritual, and

Bibliography

779

celestial universe. 5 vols. New York and Boston: Benjamin B. Mussey & Co [and others]. —–. 1857. The magic staff: an autobiography. New York: J. S. Brown & Co. Boston: Bela Marsh. —–. 1862. The harbinger of health: containing medical prescriptions for the human body and mind. New York: the author. —–. 1867. Harmonische Philosophie: über die physiologischen Laster und Tugenden und die sieben Phasen der Ehe. Authorised translation by Gregor Constantin Wittig. Leipzig: Franz Wagner. —–. 1868. Der Zauber-Stab: eine Autobiographie des amerikanischen Sehers und Verkündigers der ‘Harmonischen Philosophie’ Andrew Jackson Davis. Translated by Alexander Aksakow and Gregor Constantin Wittig. Leipzig: Wagner. —–. 1872. The penetralia: being harmonial answers to important questions. Boston: Colby & Rich. Davitashvili, Leo Shiovich. 1951. V. O. Kovalevsky. 2d edition. Moscow: Academy of Science of the USSR. Dawson, John William. 1871. The fossil plants of the Devonian and Upper Silurian formations of Canada. Montreal: Dawson Bros. London: Sampson Low, Son and Marston. DBE: Deutsche biographische Enzyklopädie. Edited by Walter Killy et al. 12 vols. in 14. Munich: K. G. Saur. 1995–2000. DBF : Dictionnaire de biographie Française. Under the direction of J. Balteau et al. 20 vols. (A–Le Nain) to date. Paris: Librairie Letouzey & Ané. 1933–. DBI : Dizionario biografico degli Italiani. Edited by Alberto M. Ghisalberti et al. 70 vols. (A–Marsilio) to date. Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana. 1960–. DBL: Dansk biografisk leksikon. Founded by Carl Frederick Bricka, edited by Povl Engelstoft and Svend Dahl. 26 vols. and supplement. Copenhagen: J. H. Schultz. 1933– 44. 3d edition. Edited by Sv. Cedergreen Bech. 16 vols. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. 1979–84. Dean, Dennis R. 1991. Robert Mallet and the founding of seismology. Annals of Science 48: 39–67. De Beer, Gavin, ed. 1959. Darwin’s journal. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History). Historical Series 2 (1959–63): 3–21. Decaisne, Joseph. 1839. Sur la structure des poils qui couvrent le péricarpe de certaines Composées. Annales des sciences naturelles (botanique) 2d ser. 12: 251–4. . 1863. De la variabilité dans l’espèce du poirier; résultat d’expériences faites au Muséum d’histoire naturelle de 1853 à 1862 inclusivement. Comptes rendus hebdomadaires des séances de l’Académie des sciences 57: 6–17. [Reprinted in Annales des sciences naturelles (botanique) 4th ser. 20: 188–200.] Denny, John. 1872a. The relative influence of parentage in flowering plants. Gardeners’ Chronicle, 29 June 1872, p. 872, 6 July 1872, pp. 904–5. —–. 1872b. On cross-breeding pelargoniums. Florist and Pomologist ( January 1872): 10–12, (February 1872): 34–6, (March 1872): 50–3.

780

Bibliography

Denny, John. 1872c. The relative influence of parentage in flowering plants. Journal of Horticulture n.s. 23: 32–4. —–. 1872d. The relative influence of parentage in flowering plants. [Read 26 June 1872.] Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society of London n.s. 4 (1873–7): 16– 24. Descent: The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. By Charles Darwin. 2 vols. London: John Murray. 1871. Descent 2d ed.: The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1874. Descent US ed.: The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. By Charles Darwin. 2 vols. New York: D. Appleton. 1871. Desmond, Adrian. 1994–7. Huxley. 2 vols. London: Michael Joseph. Desmond, Ray. 1994. Dictionary of British and Irish botanists and horticulturists including plant collectors, flower painters and garden designers. New edition, revised with the assistance of Christine Ellwood. London: Taylor & Francis and the Natural History Museum. Bristol, Pa.: Taylor & Francis. —–. 1995. Kew: the history of the Royal Botanic Gardens. London: Harvill Press with the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. —–. 1999. Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker, traveller and plant collector. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Antique Collectors’ Club with the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Dickens, Charles. 1879. Dickens’s dictionary of London, 1879: an unconventional handbook. London: Charles Dickens. Dickson, Alexander. 1871. On some abnormal cones of Pinus pinaster. [Read 1 May 1871.] Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 26 (1869–72): 505–20. Dictionary of Mauritian biography: Dictionary of Mauritian biography. Société de l’Histoire de l’Ile Maurice. Port Louis, Mauritius. [1941–.] Dictionnaire universel des contemporains: Dictionnaire universel des contemporains contenant toutes les personnes notables de la France et des pays étrangers . . . Ouvrage rédigé et continuellement tenu à jour avec le concours d’écrivains et des savants de tous les pays. Edited by Louis Gustave Vapereau. Paris: Libraire Hachette. 1858. 3d edition, 1865. 4th edition, 1870. 5th edition, 1880. 6th edition, 1893. Di Gregorio, Mario A. 2005. From here to eternity: Ernst Haeckel and scientific faith. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Dillenius, Johann Jakob. 1732. Hortus Elthamensis seu plantarum rariorum quas in horto suo Elthami in Cantio coluit vir ornatissimus et praestantissimus Jacobus Sherard. 2 vols. London: the author. ‘Dimorphic condition in Primula’: On the two forms, or dimorphic condition, in the species of Primula, and on their remarkable sexual relations. By Charles Darwin. [Read 21 November 1861.] Journal of the Proceedings of the Linnean Society (Botany) 6 (1862): 77–96. [Collected papers 2: 45–63.] ‘Distribution of the erratic boulders’: On the distribution of the erratic boulders and on the contemporaneous unstratified deposits of South America. By Charles

Bibliography

781

Darwin. [Read 14 April 1841.] Transactions of the Geological Society of London 2d ser. 6 (1841–2): 415–31. [Shorter publications, pp. 147–62.] Dizionario del risorgimento nazionale: Dizionario del risorgimento nazionale: dalle origine a Roma capitale. Fatti e persone. Director, Michele Rosi. 4 vols. Milan: Francesco Vallardi. 1930–7. DNB: Dictionary of national biography. Edited by Leslie Stephen and Sidney Lee. 63 vols. and 2 supplements (6 vols.). London: Smith, Elder & Co. 1885–1912. Dictionary of national biography 1912–90. Edited by H. W. C. Davis et al. 9 vols. London: Oxford University Press. 1927–96. DNZB: A dictionary of New Zealand biography. Edited by G. H. Scholefield. 2 vols. Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Internal Affairs. 1940. The dictionary of New Zealand biography. Edited by W. H. Oliver et al. 5 vols. Auckland and Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Internal Affairs [and others]. 1990– 2000. Dobbs, Archibald Edward. 1871. General representation on a complete readjustment and modification of Mr. Hare’s plan. London: Longmans, Green, & Co. Dohrn, Anton. 1871. Englische Kritiker und Anti-Kritiker über den Darwinismus. Ausland 44: 1153–7. —–. 1872a. The foundation of zoological stations. Nature, 8 February 1872, pp. 277– 80, and 4 April 1872, pp. 437–40. —–. 1872b. Der gegenwärtige Stand der Zoologie und die Gründung zoologischer Stationen. Preussische Jahrbücher 30: 137–61. —–. 1875. Der Ursprung der Wirbelthiere und das Princip des Functionswechsels. Genealogische Skizzen. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann. [Reprinted in Theory in Biosciences 125 (2007): 181–241.] Don, George. 1831–8. A general history of the dichlamydeous plants: arranged according to the natural system. 4 vols. London: J. G. and F. Rivington. Donders, Frans Cornelis. 1848. Beitrag zur Lehre von den Bewegungen des menschlichen Auges. Holländische Beiträge zu den anatomischen und physiologischen Wissenschaften 1: 105–45. —–. 1864. On the anomalies of accommodation and refraction of the eye: with a preliminary essay on physiological dioptrics. Translated by William Daniel Moore. London: New Sydenham Society. —–. 1870a. De beweging van het oog toegelicht met het phaenophthalmotroop. Nederlandsch Archief voor Genees- en Natuurkunde 5: 222–42. —–. 1870b. On the action of the eye-lids in determination of blood from expiratory effort. Translated by William Daniel Moore. Archives of Medicine 5: 20–38. —–. 1871. Die Projection der Gesichtserscheingungen nach den Richtungslinien. Archiv für Ophthalmologie 17 (part 2): 1–68. —–. 1872. La projection des phénomènes visuels suivant les lignes de direction. Journal de l’anatomie et de la physiologie normales et pathologiques de l’homme et des animaux 8: 557–60.

782

Bibliography

Donovan, D. T. 1994. History of classification of Mesozoic ammonites. Journal of the Geological Society 151: 1035–40. Drayton, Richard. 2000. Nature’s government: science, imperial Britain, and the ‘improvement’ of the world. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. DSAB: Dictionary of South African biography. Edited by W. J. de Kock et al. 4 vols. Pretoria and Cape Town: Nasionale Boekhandel Beperk [and others]. 1968–81. DSB: Dictionary of scientific biography. Edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie and Frederic L. Holmes. 18 vols. including index and supplements. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. 1970–90. Dubow, Saul. 1995. Scientific racism in modern South Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Duchenne, Guillaume Benjamin Amand. 1862. Mécanisme de la physionomie humaine, ou analyse électro-physiologique de l’expression des passions. 1 vol. and ‘Atlas’ of plates. Paris: Ve Jules Renouard, Libraire. Dumont, Léon A. 1873. Le transformisme en Angleterre. L’expression des sentiments chez l’homme et les animaux, d’après Darwin. Revue scientifique de la France et de l’étranger 2d ser., no. 44, 3 May 1873, pp. 1033–42. Dupree, Anderson Hunter. 1959. Asa Gray, 1810–1888. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University. Dutch medical biography: Dutch medical biography: a biographical dictionary of Dutch physicians and surgeons 1475–1975. By G. A. Lindeboom. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 1984. Earthworms: The formation of vegetable mould, through the action of worms, with observations on their habits. By Charles Darwin. London. 1881. EB: The Encyclopædia Britannica. A dictionary of arts, sciences, literature and general information. 11th edition. 29 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1910–11. Edwards, William Henry. 1868–72. The butterflies of North America. Philadelphia: American Entomological Society. EI : Enciclopedia Italiana di scienze, lettere ed arti. 35 vols. Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana. 1929–39. Eichwald, Eduard von. 1871. Geognostisch-paleontologische Bermerkungen über die Halbinsel Mangischlak und die Aleutischen Inseln. St Petersburg: Buchdruckerei der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Ekman, Paul. 1998. Introduction, afterword, and commentary to the third edition of The expression of the emotions in man and animals, by Charles Darwin. London: HarperCollins Publishers. Emerson, Edward Waldo. 1918. The early years of the Saturday Club, 1855–1870. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin. Emery, Anthony. 1996–2006. Greater medieval houses of England and Wales: 1300–1500. 3 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Emma Darwin (1904): Emma Darwin, wife of Charles Darwin. A century of family letters. Edited by Henrietta Litchfield. 2 vols. Cambridge: privately printed by Cambridge University Press. 1904. Emma Darwin (1915): Emma Darwin: a century of family letters, 1792–1896. Edited by Henrietta Litchfield. 2 vols. London: John Murray. 1915.

Bibliography

783

Endersby, Jim. 2008. Imperial nature: Joseph Hooker and the practices of Victorian science. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Engen, Rodney K. 1985. Dictionary of Victorian wood engravers. Cambridge: ChadwyckHealey. Entsiklopedicheskii slovar: Entsiklopedicheskii slovar Russkogo bibliograficheskogo instituta Granat. 58 vols. Moscow: The institute. [1911–48.] Eschricht, Daniel Frederik. 1845. Undersögelser over Hvalyrene. 4. Om Næbhvalen. Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskabs naturvidenskabelige og mathematiske Afhandlinger 11: 321–78. Espinas, Alfred and Ribot, Théodule Armand, trans. 1874–5. Principes de psychologie. By Herbert Spencer. 2 vols. Paris: G. Baillière. Europäische Stammtafeln: Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der europäischen Staaten. Edited by Wilhelm Karl Prinz zu Issenberg et al. 28 vols. and n.s. 3 vols. to date. Marburg: J. A. Stargardt. 1956–. Evans, George. [1921.] The old snuff house of Fribourg & Treyer at the sign of the Rasp & crown: no. 34 St. James’s Haymarket, London, S.W., 1720, 1920. [London]: published for the author by D. Macbeth. Expression: The expression of the emotions in man and animals. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1872. Expression 2d ed.: The expression of the emotions in man and animals. By Charles Darwin. 2d edition. Edited by Francis Darwin. London: John Murray. 1890. Falconer, Hugh. 1863. On the American fossil elephant of the regions bordering the Gulf of Mexico (E. Columbi, Falc.); with general observations on the living and extinct species. Natural History Review n.s. 3: 43–114. Farley, John. 1977. The spontaneous generation controversy from Descartes to Oparin. Baltimore, Md., and London: Johns Hopkins University Press. Farrer, Thomas Henry. 1872. On the fertilisation of a few common papilionaceous flowers. Nature, 10 October 1872, pp. 478–80, 17 October 1872, pp. 498–501. Fick, Heinrich. 1872. Einfluss der Naturwissenschaft auf das Recht. Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik 18: 248–77. Fick, Helene. 1897–1908. Heinrich Fick. Ein Lebensbild: Nach seinem eigenen Aufzeichnungen und Briefen dargestellt und ergânzt. 2 vols. Zürich: J. Schabelitz. Fletcher, Harold R. 1969. The story of the Royal Horticultural Society 1804–1968. London: Oxford University Press for the Royal Horticultural Society. Flint, Oliver S., Jr, et al. 1999. Nomenclatural and systematic changes in the neotropical caddisflies (Insecta: Trichoptera). Insecta Mundi 13: 73–84. Flora Capensis: Flora Capensis: being a systematic description of the plants of the Cape Colony, Caffraria & Port Natal, and neighbouring territories. Vols. 1–3 by William Henry Harvey and Otto Wilhelm Sonder; vols. 4–7 edited by William Turner Thiselton-Dyer; vol. 5 sect. II and supplement edited by Arthur William Hill. 7 vols. and supplement. London: L. Reeve and Co. 1860–1933. Flourens, Marie-Jean-Pierre. 1864. Examen du livre de M. Darwin sur l’origine des espèces. Paris: Garnier Frères. Flower, William Henry. 1868. On the affinities and probable habits of the extinct

784

Bibliography

Australian marsupial, Thylacoleo carnifex, Owen. [Read 8 April 1868.] Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society 24: 307–19. Flower, William Henry. 1871a. On the recent ziphioid whales, with a description of the skeleton of Berardius arnouxi. [Read 7 November 1871.] Transactions of the Zoological Society of London 8 (1874): 203–34. —–. 1871b. On the ziphioid whales. Nature, 7 December 1871, pp. 103–6. —–. 1879–91. Catalogue of the specimens illustrating the osteology and dentition of vertebrated animals, recent and extinct, contained in the museum of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. 3 vols. London: Taylor and Francis. Forbes, Edward. 1850. On the succession of strata and distribution of organic remains in the Dorsetshire Purbecks. Report of the 20th meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science held at Edinburgh (1851), Transactions of the sections, pp. 79–81. ‘Formation of mould’: On the formation of mould. [Read 1 November 1837.] Transactions of the Geological Society of London 2d ser. 5 (1840): 505–9. [Shorter publications, pp. 124–7.] Forms of flowers: The different forms of flowers on plants of the same species. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1877. Fossil Mammalia: Pt 1 of The zoology of the voyage of H.M.S. Beagle . . . during the years 1831 to 1836. By Richard Owen. Edited and superintended by Charles Darwin. London: Smith, Elder and Co. 1839–43. Francini, Ronaldo Bastos and Penz, Carla M. 2006. An illustrated key to male Actinote from Southeastern Brazil (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae). Biota Neotropica 6 (1). (www.biotaneotropica.org.br, accessed 19 March 2012.) Frauenstädt, Julius. 1872. Darwin’s Auffassung des geistigen und sittlichen Lebens des Menschen. Unsere Zeit n.s. 8(1): 535–49, 597–605. Freeman, Richard Broke. 1968. Charles Darwin on the routes of male humble bees. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Historical Series 3 (1962–9): 177–89. —–. 1977. The works of Charles Darwin: an annotated bibliographical handlist. 2d edition. Folkestone, Kent: William Dawson & Sons. Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books, Shoe String Press. —–. 1978. Charles Darwin: a companion. Folkestone, Kent: William Dawson & Sons. Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books, Shoe String Press. Frost, John. 1853. Wild scenes in a hunter’s life; including Cumming’s adventures among the lions, and other wild animals of Africa, etc. Auburn: Derby and Miller. Gaisinovich, A. E., ed. 1988. A. O. i V. O. Kovalevskie. Perepiska 1867–1873gg. Moscow: Nauka (science). Gage, Andrew Thomas and Stearn, William Thomas. 1988. A bicentenary history of the Linnean Society of London. London: Academic Press. Galton, Francis. 1871. Experiments in pangenesis, by breeding from rabbits of a pure variety, into whose circulation blood taken from other varieties had previously been largely transfused. [Read 30 March 1871.] Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 19 (1870–1): 393–410.

Bibliography

785

—–. 1872a. On blood-relationship. [Read 13 June 1872.] Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 20 (1871–2): 394–402. [Reprinted in Nature, 27 June 1872, pp. 173–6.] —–. 1872b. Statistical inquiries into the efficacy of prayer. Fortnightly Review, 1 August 1872, pp. 125–35. Gardeners’ year-book: The gardeners’ year-book, almanack, and directory. By Robert Hogg. London: Journal of Horticulture and Cottage Gardener office. 1864–86. Gardner, James. 1999. Sweet bells jangled out of tune: a history of the Sussex Lunatic Asylum (St Francis Hospital) Haywards Heath. Brighton: James Gardner. Garrod, Alfred Henry. 1872. On the law which regulates the frequency of the pulse. London: H. K. Lewis. Gärtner, Karl Friedrich von. 1844. Versuche und Beobachtungen über die Befruchtungsorgane der vollkommeneren Gewächse und über die natürliche und künstliche Befruchtung durch den eigenen Pollen. Pt 1 of Beiträge zur Kenntniss der Befruchtung der vollkommeneren Gewächse. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbart. —–. 1849. Versuche und Beobachtungen über die Bastarderzeugung im Pflanzenreich. Mit Hinweisung auf die ähnlichen Erscheinungen im Thierreiche, ganz umgearbeitete und sehr vermehrte Ausgabe der von der Königlich holländischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbart. Gegenbaur, Carl. 1870. Ueber das Skelet der Gliedmaassen der Wirbelthiere im Allgemeinen und der Hintergliedmaassen der Selachier insbesondere. Jenaische Zeitschrift für Medicin und Naturwissenschaft 5: 397–447. —–. 1872. Ueber das Archipterygium. Jenaische Zeitschrift für Medizin und Naturwissenschaft 7 (1871–3): 131–41. Gerhardt, H. Carl and Huber, Franz. 2002. Acoustic communication in insects and anurans: common problems and diverse solutions. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Gianquitto, Tina. 2007. ‘Good observers of nature’. American women and the scientific study of the natural world, 1820–1885. Athens, Ga., and London: University of Georgia Press. Giard, Alfred. 1872a. Étude critique des travaux d’embryogénie relatifs à la parenté des vertébrés et des tuniciers. Archives de zoologie expérimentale et générale 1: 233–88. —–. 1872b. Deuxième étude critique des travaux d’embryogénie relatifs à la parenté des vertébrés et des tuniciers. Archives de zoologie expérimentale et générale 1: 397-428. Gibbs, Edward J. 1889. England and South Africa. London: Longmans, Green. Gilbert, Pamela. 1977. A compendium of the biographical literature on deceased entomologists. London: British Museum (Natural History). Gillispie, Charles Coulston, et al. 2008. Complete dictionary of scientific biography. Detroit: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Gilman, Daniel C. 1899. The life of James Dwight Dana. New York and London: Harper and Brothers. Giuntsburg, Karl Markovich (Günzburg, Charles). 1872. Die Kindersterblichkeit im Allgemeinen und die in den Findelhäusern insbesondere im Lichte der Darwin’schen Theorie. Journal für Kinderkrankheiten 58: 161–80.

786

Bibliography

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. 1790. Versuch die Metamorphose der Pflanzen zu erklären. Gotha: Carl Wilhelm Ettinger. Gordon-Cumming, Roualeyn George. 1856. The lion hunter of South Africa. Five years’ adventures in the far interior of South Africa. Revised and condensed edition. London: John Murray. Gordon-Taylor, Gordon and Walls, E. W. 1958. Sir Charles Bell, his life and times. Edinburgh and London: E. & S. Livingstone. Gould, Benjamin Apthorp. 1869. Investigations in the military and anthropological statistics of American soldiers. New York: Hurd & Houghton. Gould, Stephen Jay. 1977. Ontogeny and phylogeny. Cambridge, Mass.; London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. —–. 1997. The mismeasure of man. Revised and expanded edition. London: Penguin Books. Gourvish, Terence Richard. 2006. The official history of Britain and the Channel Tunnel. London: Routledge. Graham, Richard. 1968. Britain and the onset of modernization in Brazil 1850–1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gray, Asa. 1857. First lessons in botany and vegetable physiology, illustrated by over 360 wood engravings, from original drawings, by Isaac Sprague. To which is added a copious glossary, or dictionary of botanical terms. New York: G. P. Putnam; Ivison & Phinney. —–. 1858a. Introduction to structural and systematic botany, and vegetable physiology, being a fifth and revised edition of the botanical text-book. New York: Ivison & Phinney. —–. 1858b. Botany for young people and common schools. How plants grow, a simple introduction to structural botany. With a popular flora, or an arrangement and description of common plants, both wild and cultivated. New York, Cincinnati, and Chicago: American Book Company. —–. 1872a. Botany for young people. Part II. How plants behave: how they move, climb, employ insects to work for them, &c. New York and Chicago: Ivison, Blakeman, Taylor, and Company. —–. 1872b. Sequoia and its history: an address. Salem, Mass.: Salem Press. —–. 1872c. On the derivation of American plants. Popular Science Monthly 1: 724–34. —–. 1872d. Sequoia and its history. American Naturalist 6: 577–96. —–. 1879. Gray’s botanical text-book. Vol. I. Structural botany or organography on the basis of morphology. To which is added the principles of taxonomy and phytography, and a glossary of botanical terms. 6th edition. New York and Chicago: Ivison, Blakeman, and Company. Gray, Jane Loring, ed. 1893. Letters of Asa Gray. 2 vols. London: Macmillan and Co. Greg, William Rathbone. 1872. Enigmas of life. London: Trübner. Groeben, Christiane. 1982. Charles Darwin 1809–1882, Anton Dohrn 1840–1909: correspondence. Naples: Macchiaroli. Grote Winkler Prins: Grote Winkler Prins: encyclopedie in twintig delen. 7th edition. Edited by Johan Frederick Staal et al. 20 vols. and supplement (3 vols.) Amsterdam: Elsevier. 1966–94.

Bibliography

787

GSE: Great Soviet encyclopedia. Edited by Jean Paradise et al. 31 vols. New York: Macmillan. London: Collier Macmillan. 1973–83. [Translation of the 3d edition of Bol’shaia Sovetskaia entsiklopediia, edited by A. M. Prokhorov.] Gulick, Addison. 1932. Evolutionist and missionary: John Thomas Gulick. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Gulick, John Thomas. 1856. Descriptions of new species of Achatinella, from the Hawaiian Islands. [Read 10 June 1856.] Annals of the Lyceum of Natural History of New York 6 (1853–8): 173–255. —–. 1872a. On the variation of species as related to their geographical distribution, illustrated by the Achatinellinæ. Nature, 18 July 1872, pp. 222–4. —–. 1872b. On diversity of evolution under one set of external conditions. [Read 2 November 1872.] Journal of the Linnean Society (Zoology) 11 (1873): 496–505. Gunn, Mary and Codd, L. E. 1981. Botanical exploration of Southern Africa. Cape Town: A. A. Balkema. Günther, Albert Charles Lewis Gotthilf. 1858. Handbuch der medicinischen Zoologie: bearbeitet für Studirende der Naturwissenschaften, der Medicin und Pharmacie, für praktische Aerzte und Pharmaceuten. Stuttgart: Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung und Druckerei. —–. 1861. On the British species of Mugil, or grey mullets. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 3d ser. 7: 345–52. —–. 1864. The reptiles of British India. London: Ray Society. Gunther, Albert E. 1972. The original drawings of George Henry Ford. Journal of the Society for the Bibliography of Natural History 6 (1971–4): 139–42. —–. 1975. A century of zoology at the British Museum through the lives of two keepers, 1815–1914. London: Dawsons of Pall Mall. Haast, Heinrich Ferdinand von. 1948. The life and times of Sir Julius von Haast, explorer, geologist, museum builder. Wellington, New Zealand: privately published. Haast, John Francis Julius von. 1864. Glacial deposits in New Zealand. Natural History Review n.s. 4: 474–6. Haeckel, Ernst. 1866. Generelle Morphologie der Organismen. Allgemeine Grundzüge der organischen Formen-Wissenschaft, mechanisch begründet durch die von Charles Darwin reformirte Descendenz-Theorie. 2 vols. Berlin: Georg Reimer. —–. 1868. Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte. Gemeinverständliche wissenschaftliche Vorträge über die Entwickelungslehre im Allgemeinen und diejenige von Darwin, Goethe und Lamarck im Besonderen, über die Anwendung derselben auf den Ursprung des Menschen und andere damit zusammenhängende Grundfragen der Naturwissenschaft. Berlin: Georg Reimer. —–. 1870. On the organisation of sponges, and their relationship to the corals. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 4th ser. 5: 1–13, 107–20. —–. 1872a. Die Kalkschwämme: eine Monographie. 3 vols. Berlin: G. Reimer. —–. 1872b. Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte. Gemeinverständliche wissenschaftliche Vorträge über die Entwickelungslehre im Allgemeinen und diejenige von Darwin, Goethe und Lamarck im Besonderen. 3d edition. Berlin: Georg Reimer. —–. 1876a. The history of creation: or the development of the earth and its inhabitants by the action of natural causes. A popular exposition of the doctrine of evolution in general, and that

788

Bibliography

of Darwin, Goethe, and Lamarck in particular. Translation of Haeckel’s Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte. Translation revised by E. Ray Lankester. 2 vols. London: Henry S. King & Co. Haeckel, Ernst. 1876b. Die Perigenesis der Plastidule, oder die Wellenzeugung der Lebenstheilchen. Berlin: Georg Reimer. Hagen, Hermann August. 1858. Monographie der Termiten. Linnaea Entomologica 12: 1–342 —–. 1864. Ueber Phryganiden-Gehäuse. Entomologische Zeitung 25: 113–44, 221–63. Hall, Philip B. 1987. Robert Swinhoe (1836–1877), FRS, FZS, FRGS: a Victorian naturalist in Treaty Port China. Geographical Journal 153: 37–47. Halle, Johann Samuel. 1788–1801. Fortgesetzte Magie, oder, die Zauberkräfte der Natur, so auf den Nutzen und die Belustigung, angewandt worden. 12 vols. Berlin: J. Pauli. Hammond, Mason, et al., eds. 1970. T. Macci Plauti Miles gloriosus. 2d edition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Hannaway, Caroline. 1993. Environment and miasma. In vol. 1, Companion encyclopedia of the history of medicine, edited by William F. Bynum and Roy Porter (2 vols.). New York: Routledge. Harris, Donald F. 2004. Notes on the real-estate and financial affairs of Dr. Robert Waring Darwin of Shrewsbury. Typescript deposited at Cambridge University Library. Harris, George. 1869. Theory of the arts: or, art in relation to nature, civilization, and man; comprising an investigation, analytical and critical, into the origin, rise, province, principles, and application of each of the arts. 2 vols. London: Trübner and Co. Harshberger, John W. 1899. The botanists of Philadelphia and their work. Philadelphia: T. C. Davis & Son. Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen, Hermanus, trans. 1871–2. De afstamming van den mensch, en de seksueele teeltkeus. By Charles Darwin. 2 vols. (Dutch translation of Descent.) Delft: Van IJkema and Van Gijn. —–, trans. 1873. Het Uitdrukken der Gemoedsaandoeningen bij den Mensch en de Dieren. By Charles Darwin. [Dutch translation of Expression.] The Hague: Joh. Ykema. Hartshorne, Henry. 1872. On the relation between organic vigor and sex. American Naturalist 6: 747–51. Harvey, Joy. 1997. ‘Almost a man of genius’: Clémence Royer, feminism, and nineteenth-century science. New Brunswick, N.J., and London: Rutgers University Press. Harvey, William Henry. 1849. A manual of the British marine algae: containing generic and specific descriptions of all the known British species of sea-weeds. 2d edition. London: John Van Voorst. Hazlewood, Nick. 2000. Savage. The life and times of Jemmy Button. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Hector, James. 1864. On the geology of Otago, New Zealand. [Read 7 December 1864.] Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 21 (1865): 124–8. Heer, Oswald. 1861. On the fossil flora of Bovey Tracey. [Read 21 November 1871.] Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 152 (1862): 1039–86.

Bibliography

789

—–. 1869. Die Miocene Flora und Fauna Spitzenbergens. [Read 30 December 1869.] Kongliga Svenska Vetenskaps-Akademiens Handlingar 8 (1870): no. 7, pp. 1–98. —–. 1870. Fossile Flore der Bären Insel. [Read 30 September 1870.] Kongliga Svenska Vetenskaps-Akademiens Handlingar 9 (1871): no. 5, pp. 1–51. Heilbron, J. L. 2010. Galileo. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Helmholtz, Hermann von. 1868. Théorie physiologique de la musique, fondée sur l’étude des sensations auditives. Translated from the German by M. G. Guéroult. Paris: Victor Masson et fils. Henfrey, Arthur, trans. 1853. Reflections on the phenomena of rejuvenescence in nature, especially in the life and development of plants. By Alexander Carl Heinrich Braun. In Botanical and physiological memoirs, edited by Arthur Henfrey. London: Ray Society. Herbert, John Maurice, ed. 1877. Poems by the late Mary Anne Herbert. London: Harrison and Son. Hering, Ewald. 1977. The theory of binocular vision (1868). Translated and introduced by Bruce Bridgeman. Commentary by Lawrence Stark. New York and London: Plenum Press. Herschel, John Frederick William. 1830. A preliminary discourse on the study of natural philosophy. Part of Dionysius Lardner’s Cabinet cyclopædia. London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown & Green; John Taylor. Heuss, Theodor. 1991. Anton Dohrn: a life for science. Translated from the German by Liselotte Dieckmann. Berlin: Springer Verlag. Higginson, Thomas Wentworth. 1870. Army life in a black regiment. Boston: Fields, Osgood, and Co. —–. 1898. Cheerful yesterdays. Cambridge, Mass.: Riverside Press. Hildebrand, Friedrich. 1872a. Ueber die Verbreitungsmittel der Compositenfrüchte. Botanische Zeitung 30: 1–14. —–. 1872b. Entwickelung der haarigen Anhänge an Pflanzensamen. Botanische Zeitung 30: 233–9, 257–70. —–. 1872c. Ueber die Verbreitungsmittel der Gramineen-Früchte. Botanische Zeitung 30: 853–63, 869–75. —–. 1872d. Ueber die Verbreitungsmittel der Pflanzenfrüchte durch Haftorgane. Botanische Zeitung 30: 869–75, 901–15. Hilgendorf, Franz. 1866. Ueber Planorbis multiformis im Steinheimer Süswasserkalk. Monatsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (1866): 474–504. Historical register of the University of Cambridge: The historical register of the University of Cambridge, being a supplement to the Calendar with a record of university offices, honours, and distinctions to the year 1910. Edited by J. R. Tanner. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1917. Historical register of Yale University: Historical register of Yale University 1701–1937. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University. 1939. Historisches Lexikon der Schweiz. 10 vols. (A–Schaf ) to date. Basel: Schwabe. 2002–.

790

Bibliography

Hooker, Joseph Dalton. 1844–7. Flora Antarctica. 1 vol. and 1 vol. of plates. Pt 1 of The botany of the Antarctic voyage of HM discovery ships Erebus and Terror in the years 1839– 1843, under the command of Captain Sir James Clark Ross. London: Reeve Brothers. —–. 1848a. On some peculiarities in the structure of Stigmaria. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, and of the Museum of Practical Geology in London 2, pt 2: 431–9. —–. 1848b. Remarks on the structure and affinities of some Lepidostrobi. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, and of the Museum of Practical Geology in London 2, pt 2: 440–56. —–. 1848c. On the vegetation of the Carboniferous period, as compared with that of the present day. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, and of the Museum of Practical Geology in London 2, pt 2: 387–430. —–. 1853–5. Flora Novæ-Zelandiæ. 2 vols. Pt 2 of The botany of the Antarctic voyage of HM discovery ships Erebus and Terror, in the years 1839–1843, under the command of Captain Sir James Clark Ross. London: Lovell Reeve. —– 1854. Himalayan journals; or, notes of a naturalist in Bengal, the Sikkim and Nepal Himalayas, the Khasia Mountains, &c. 2 vols. London: John Murray. —–. 1855–60. Flora Tasmaniæ. Pt 3 of The botany of the Antarctic voyage of HM Discovery Ships Erebus and Terror, in the years 1839–1843, under the command of Captain Sir James Clark Ross. 2 vols. London: Reeve Brothers. —–. 1859. On the flora of Australia, its origin, affinities, and distribution; being an introductory essay to the flora of Tasmania. London: Lovell Reeve. —–. 1860. Outlines of the distribution of Arctic plants. [Read 21 June 1860.] Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 23 (1862): 251–348. —–. 1903. A sketch of the life and labours of Sir William Jackson Hooker, . . . late director of the Royal Gardens of Kew. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Hooker, Joseph Dalton and Ball, John. 1878. Journal of a tour in Marocco and the Great Atlas. London: Macmillan and Co. Hooker, Joseph Dalton and Thomson, Thomas. 1855. Flora Indica: being a systematic account of the plants of British India, together with observations on the structure and affinities of their natural orders and genera. London: W. Pamplin. Hopkins, William. 1860. Physical theories of the phenomena of life. Fraser’s Magazine 61: 739–52; 62: 74–90. Hopwood, Nick. 2006. Pictures of evolution and charges of fraud: Ernst Haeckel’s embryological illustrations. Isis 97: 260–301. Horsburgh, E. L. S. 1980. Bromley, Kent: from the earliest times to the present century, compiled from materials collected from original sources by various hands. Reprint edition. Chislehurst, Kent: Lodgemark Press. Houzeau, Jean-Charles. 1872. Études sur les facultés mentales des animaux comparées à celles de l’homme par un voyageur naturaliste. 2 vols. Brussels: Hector Manceaux. Paris: Hachette et Cie. Howard, Joseph Jackson and Crisp, Frederick Arthur, eds. 1893–1921. Visitation of England and Wales. 21 vols. [London]: privately printed.

Bibliography

791

Howorth, Henry Hoyle. 1871a. A new view of Darwinism. Nature, 29 June 1871, pp. 161–2. —–. 1871b. A new view of Darwinism. Nature, 13 July 1872, pp. 200–1. —–. 1871c. Recent changes in circumpolar lands. Nature, 28 December 1871, pp. 162– 3. —–. 1872a. Circumpolar land. Nature, 28 March 1872, pp. 420–2. —–. 1872b. Recent climatic changes. Nature, 9 May 1872, pp. 24–5. —–. 1872c. Strictures on Darwinism. Part I. On fertility and sterility. [Read 19 February 1872.] Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 2 (1873): 21–40. —–. 1872d. Strictures on Darwinism. Part II. The extinction of types. [Read 3 June 1872.] Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 3 (1874): 208–29. —–. 1873. Recent elevations of the earth’s surface in the northern circumpolar regions. Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London 43: 240–63. —–. 1874. Recent changes in the southern circumpolar region. Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London 44: 252–62. Hudson, Deryk. 1972. Munby: man of two worlds. The life and diaries of Arthur J. Munby, 1828–1910. London: John Murray. Humboldt, Alexander von. 1814–29. Personal narrative of travels to the equinoctial regions of the New Continent, during the years 1799–1804. By Alexander de Humboldt and Aimé Bonpland. Translated into English by Helen Maria Williams. 7 vols. London: Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, & Brown; J. Murray; H. Colburn. Hunter, James B. 1871. A review of Darwin’s theory of the origin and development of man. Journal of Psychological Medicine 4: 550–66. Hutchings, Michael J. 2010. The population biology of the early spider orchid Ophrys sphegodes Mill. III. Demography over three decades. Journal of Ecology 98: 867–78. Hutchinson, Horace Gordon. 1914. Life of Sir John Lubbock, Lord Avebury. 2 vols. London: Macmillan. Hutchinson, William Nelson. 1850. Dog breaking. The most expeditious, certain, and easy method; whether great excellence or only mediocrity is required. 2d edition. London: John Murray. Huxley, Leonard, ed. 1900. Life and letters of Thomas Henry Huxley. 2 vols. London: Macmillan. —–, ed. 1918. Life and letters of Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker, OM, GCSI. Based on materials collected and arranged by Lady Hooker. 2 vols. London: John Murray. [Huxley, Thomas Henry.] 1860. Darwin on the origin of species. Westminster Review n.s. 17: 541–70. —–. 1868. Remarks upon Archæopteryx lithographica. [Read 30 January 1868.] Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 16 (1867–8): 243–8. —–. 1869. An introduction to the classification of animals. London: J. Churchill & sons. —–. 1871a. Mr. Darwin’s critics. Contemporary Review 18: 443–76.

792

Bibliography

Huxley, Thomas Henry. 1871b. Administrative nihilism. [Read before the Midland Institute, Birmingham, 9 October 1871.] Fortnightly Review n.s. 10: 525–43. Hyatt, Alpheus. 1866. On the parallelism between the different stages of life in the individual and those in the entire group of the molluscous order Tetrabranchiata. [Read 21 February 1866.] Memoirs of the Boston Society of Natural History 1 (1866–9): 193–209. —–. 1870. On reversions among the ammonites. [Read 5 October 1870.] Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History 14 (1870–1): 22–43. —–. 1872. Fossil cephalopods of the Museum of Comaparative Zoology. Embryology. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 3: 59–111. IBN : Index bio-bibliographicus notorum hominum. Pt C: Corpus alphabeticum sectio generalis. Edited by Jean-Pierre Lobies et al. 168 vols. (A–Mattioli, Costantino). Osnabrück, Germany: Biblio Verlag. 1974–. IGI : International genealogical index. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 2008. www.familysearch.org ‘Illegitimate offspring of dimorphic and trimorphic plants’: On the character and hybrid-like nature of the offspring from the illegitimate unions of dimorphic and trimorphic plants. By Charles Darwin. [Read 20 February 1868.] Journal of the Linnean Society of London (Botany) 10 (1869): 393–437. Index biographique de l’Académie des sciences: Index biographique de l’Académie des sciences du 22 décembre 1666 au 1er octobre 1978. Paris: Gauthier-Villars. 1979. India list: The East-India register and directory. 1803–44. The East-India register and army list. 1845–60. The Indian Army and civil service list. 1861–76. The India list, civil and military. 1877–95. The India list and India Office list. 1896–1917. London: Wm. H. Allen [and others]. Insectivorous plants. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1875. Irving, Washington. 1828. A history of the life and voyages of Christopher Columbus. 4 vols. London: John Murray. —–. 1831. Voyages and discoveries of the companions of Columbus. London: John Murray. Jackson, Benjamin Daydon. 1900. A glossary of botanic terms: with their description and accent. London: Duckworth & Co. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippencott Company. Jeitteles, Ludwig Heinrich. 1867. Ueber einige seltene und wenig bekannte Säugethiere des südöstlichen Deutschlands. Offprint from the fourth ‘Programm der n. ö. LandesOberrealschule zu St. Pölten’. St Pölten: Franz Lorenz. —–. 1871–2. Die vorgeschichtlichen Alterthümer der Stadt Olmütz und ihrer Umgebung. Mittheilungen der anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 1 (1871): 127–36, 238–42; 2 (1872): 18–32, 53–64, 86–91, 130–6, 162–84, 233–49, 274–88. [ Jenkin, Henry Charles Fleeming.] 1867. The origin of species. North British Review 46: 277–318. Jewanski, Jörg, et al. 2011. The development of a scientific understanding of synesthesia from early case studies (1849–1873). Journal of the History of the Neurosciences 20: 284–305.

Bibliography

793

Johnson, William S. 1990. Nineteenth-century photography: an annotated bibliography, 1839– 1879. Boston: G. K. Hall & Co. Jones, A. G. E. 1979. William Parker Snow. Falkland Islands Journal (1979): 26–31. Jones, Henry. 1868. The laws and principles of whist stated and explained and its practice illustrated on an original system by means of hands played completely through by ‘Cavendish’. 8th edition. London: Thomas De La Rue & Co. Jones, Thomas Rupert. 1870. On the primæval rivers of Britain. Geological Magazine 7: 371–6. Jones, William. 1807. The works of Sir William Jones: with the life of the author by Lord Teignmouth. 13 vols. Edited by John Shore, Baron Teignmouth. London: John Stockdale and John Walker. Jordan, Alexis and Fourreau, Jules. 1866–1903. Icones ad floram Europæ novo fundamento instaurandam spectantes. 3 vols. Paris: Savy. Journal of researches: Journal of researches into the geology and natural history of the various countries visited by HMS Beagle, under the command of Captain FitzRoy, RN, from 1832 to 1836. By Charles Darwin. London: Henry Colburn. 1839. Journal of researches 2d ed.: Journal of researches into the natural history and geology of the countries visited during the voyage of HMS Beagle round the world, under the command of Capt. FitzRoy RN. 2d edition, corrected, with additions. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1845. Journal of researches (1860): Journal of researches into the natural history and geology of the countries visited during the voyage of HMS Beagle around the world, under the command of Capt. FitzRoy RN. By Charles Darwin. Reprint edition. London: John Murray. 1860. Journal of researches (1870): Journal of researches into the natural history and geology of the countries visited during the voyage of HMS Beagle round the world, under the command of Capt. FitzRoy RN. By Charles Darwin. New edition. London: John Murray. 1870. Journal of researches US ed. (1871): Journal of researches into the natural history and geology of the countries visited during the voyage of H.M.S. Beagle round the world, under the command of Capt. Fitz Roy, R.N. By Charles Darwin. New edition. New York: D. Appleton and Company. 1871. Journal of researches US ed. (1872): Journal of researches into the natural history and geology of the countries visited during the voyage of H.M.S. Beagle round the world, under the command of Capt. FitzRoy. By Charles Darwin. New edition. New York: D. Appleton and Company. 1872. Jubiläums-Katalog: Jubiläums-Katalog der E. Schweizerbart’schen Verlagsbuchhandlung (Erwin Nägele) G.m.b.H., Stuttgart, 1826–1926. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbart. 1926. Judel, Claus Günther. 2004. Der Liebigschüler Carl Vogt als Wissenschaftlicher, Philosoph und Politiker. Giessener Universitätsblätter 37: 51–6. Junker, Thomas. 1989. Darwinismus und Botanik. Rezeption, Kritik und theoretische Alternativen im Deutschland des 19. Jahrhunderts. Stuttgart: Deutscher Apotheker Verlag. Kaines, Joseph. 1871. The anthropology of Auguste Comte. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 1 (1872): 349–62.

794

Bibliography

Kalling, Ken and Tammiksaar, Erki. 2009. Darwini ideede omaksv¸ott Eestis. Eesti Loodus, February 2009. www.loodusajakiri.ee (accessed 26 January 2011). Kerner von Marilaun, Anton. 1864. Die Cultur der Alpenpflanzen. Innsbruck: Wagner’schen Universitäts-Buchhandlung. Kinahan, George Henry and Close, Maxwell Henry. 1872. The general glaciation of IarConnaught and its neighbourhood, in the counties of Galway and Mayo. Dublin: Hodges, Foster & Co. Kirby, Kent B. 1988. Studio collotype: continuous tone printing for the artist, printmaker and photographer. Dalton, Mass.: Heliochrome Press. Koeberl, Christian. 2001. Craters on the moon from Galileo to Wegener: a short history of the impact hypothesis, and implications for the study of terrestrial impact craters. Earth, Moon and Planets 85–86: 209–24. Kovalevsky, Vladimir Onufrievich, trans. 1868–9. Proiskhozhdenie vidov. Otdel 1. Izmeneniya zhivotnyk i rastenii vsledstvie prirucheniya. Priruchenniya zhivotniya i vozdelanniya rasteniya. By Charles Darwin. (Russian translation of Variation.) Edited by Ivan Mikhailovich Sechenov, the botanical parts by Alexander Heard. 2 vols. St Petersburg: F. S. Sushchinskii. [—–], trans. 1871–2. Proiskhozhdenie cheloveka i podbor’ po otnosheniyu k polu. By Charles Darwin. Translated from English under the editorial direction of I. M. Sechenov. (Russian translation of Descent.) 2 vols. Saint Petersburg: Izdanie Knizhnago Magazina Cherkesova. —–. 1872. Sur l’Anchitherium aurelianense Cuv. et sur l’histoire paléontologique des chevaux. [Read 5 September 1872.] Mémoires de l’Académie impériale des sciences de Saint-Pétersbourg 7th ser. 20 (1873), no. 5: 1–73. [—–], trans. 1872. O vyrazhenii oshchushchenii u cheloveka i zhivotnykh. By Charles Darwin. Translated from the author’s proofs under the editorial direction of Prof. A. Kovalevsky. (Russian translation of Expression.) St Petersburg: Tipografia F. S. Sushchinskogo. —–. 1873. On the osteology of the Hyopotamidae. [Read 6 February 1873]. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 163: 19–94. —–. 1873–4. Monographie der Gattung Anthracotherium Cuv. und Versuch einer natürlichen Classification der fossilen Hufthiere. Palaeontographica. Beiträge zur Naturgeschichte der Vorwelt 22 (1873–6): 131–347. Krause, Ernst. 1883. Prof. Dr. Hermann Müller von Lippstadt. Ein Gedenkblatt. Kosmos 13: 393–401. —–, ed. 1885–6. Gesammelte kleinere Schriften von Charles Darwin: ein Supplement zu seinen grösseren Werken. 2 vols. Leipzig: Ernst Gun¨ thers Verlag. Krefft, Gerard. 1866. On the dentition of Thylacoleo carnifex (Ow.). Annals and Magazine of Natural History 3d ser. 18: 148–9. —–. 1872. [Review of A Cuvierian principle in palæontology, tested by evidences of an extinct leonine marsupial ( Thylacoleo carnifex), by Professor Owen [i.e. Owen 1870].] From the Sydney Mail, 18 May 1872, with corrections. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 4th ser. 10: 169–82.

Bibliography

795

Kuhlemeier, Cris. 2007. Phyllotaxis. Trends in Plant Science 12: 143–50. Lacaze-Duthiers, Félix Joseph Henri de. 1864. Histoire naturelle du corail. Organisation — reproduction — pèche en Algérie — industrie et commerce. Paris: J. B. Baillière et fils. —–. 1872. Direction des études zoologiques. Archives de zoologie expérimentale et générale 1: 1–64. Lamas, Gerardo. 1995. A critical review of J. Y. Miller’s checklist of the neotropical Castniidae (Lepidoptera). Revista Peruana de Entomologia 37: 73–87. Landucci, Giovanni. 1987. L’occhio e la mente. Scienze e filosofia nell’Italia del secondo ottocento. Florence: Leo S. Olschki Editore. Langstroth, Lorenzo Lorraine. 1863. A practical treatise on the hive and honey-bee. 3d edition. New York: C. M. Saxton. Lankester, Edwin Ray. 1872. Siebold’s new researches in parthenogenesis. Nature, 10 October 1872, pp. 483–5, and 24 October 1872, pp. 523–5. —–. 1873. Summary of zoological observations made at Naples in the winter of 1871–72. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 4th ser. 11: 81–97. Larousse du XXe siècle. Edited by Paul Augé. 6 vols. Paris: Librairie Larousse. 1928–33. Larson, Kenneth E. 1987. The origins of the ‘Schlegel-Tieck’ Shakespeare in the 1820s. German Quarterly 60: 19–37. Larson, Taft Alfred. 1978. History of Wyoming. 2d edition. Lincoln, Nebr.: University of Nebraska Press. Lartet, Edouard. 1851. Notice sur la colline de Sansan, suivie d’une récapitulation des diverses espèces d’animaux vertébrés fossiles, trouvés soit a Sansan, soit dans d’autres gisements du terrain tertiaire Miocène dans le bassin Sous-Pyrénéen. Auch: J.-A. Portes. —–. 1856. Note sur un grand singe fossile qui se rattache au groupe des singes supérieurs. Comptes rendus hebdomadaires des séances de l’Académie des sciences 43: 219– 23. Lavater, Johann Caspar. [1781]–1803. Essai sur la physiognomonie: destiné à faire connoître l’homme & à le faire aimer. Translated by Marie Elisabeth La Fite et al. 4 vols. La Haye: J. van Karnebeek. Law list: Clarkes’ new law list; being a list of the judges and officers of the different courts of justice . . . and a variety of other useful matter. London: W. Clarke. 1816–40. The law list; comprising the judges and officers of the different courts of justice: counsel, special pleaders, draftsmen, conveyancers, attorneys, notaries, &c., in England and Wales . . . and a variety of other useful matter. London: V. & R. Stevens & G. S. Norton [and others]. 1841– 1969. Leifchild, John Roby. 1872. The higher ministry of nature viewed in the light of modern science, and as an aid to advanced Christian philosophy. London: Hodder & Stoughton. Lewens, Tim. 2007. Darwin. London: Routledge. [Lewes, George Henry.] 1868. Darwin on domestication and variation. [Review of Variation.] Pall Mall Gazette 7: 555, 636–7, 652. Liddell, Henry George and Scott, Robert, comps. 1996. A Greek–English lexicon. Revised and augmented by Henry Stuart Jones with the assistance of Roderick McKenzie. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

796

Bibliography

Lightman, Bernard, ed. 2004. Dictionary of nineteenth-century British scientists. 4 vols. Bristol: Thoemmes Press. Lindsay, James Ludovic. 1871. Reichenbach’s magnetic flames, and the levitation of the human body. Spiritualist 1: 177. Linnaeus, Carolus (Carl von Linné). 1758–9. Systema naturæ per regna tria naturæ, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. 10th edition. 2 vols. Stockholm: Laurentius Salvius. Lipski, John M. 1994. Latin American Spanish. London and New York: Longman. List of the Linnean Society of London. London: [Linnean Society of London]. 1805–1939. LL: The life and letters of Charles Darwin, including an autobiographical chapter. Edited by Francis Darwin. 3 vols. London: John Murray. 1887–8. Lorain, Paul. 1870. Études de médecine clinique faites avec l’aide de la méthode graphique et des appareils enregistreurs: le pouls, ses variations et ses formes diverses dans les maladies. Paris: Baillière. Lortet, Louis. 1867. Recherches sur la vitesse du cours du sang dans les artères du cheval, au moyen du nouvel hémadromographe de chauveau. Annales des sciences naturelles. Zoologie et paléontologie. 5th ser. 7: 279–313. Lowne, Benjamin Thompson. 1869. On the imaginal discs of Dr. August Weismann. [Read 28 May 1869.] Journal of the Quekett Microscopical Club 1 (1868–9): 197. Lubbock, John. 1865. Pre-historic times, as illustrated by ancient remains, and the manners and customs of modern savages. London and Edinburgh: Williams & Norgate. —–. 1874. Die vorgeschichtliche Zeit, erläutert durch die Ueberreste des Alterthums und die Sitten und Gebräuche der jetzigen Wilden. Translated by A. Passow. Introduction by Rudolf Virchow. 2 vols. Jena: Hermann Costenoble. Lucas, Peter. 2007. Charles Darwin, ‘little Dawkins’ and the platycnemic Yale men: introducing a bioarchaeological tale of the descent of man. Archives of Natural History 34: 318–45. Lurie, Edward. 1959. Louis Agassiz and the idea of evolution. Victorian Studies 3: 87–108. —–. 1960. Louis Agassiz: a life in science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lyell, Charles. 1830–3. Principles of geology, being an attempt to explain the former changes of the earth’s surface, by reference to causes now in operation. 3 vols. London: John Murray. —–. 1863. The geological evidences of the antiquity of man with remarks on theories of the origin of species by variation. London: John Murray. —–. 1865. Elements of geology, or the ancient changes of the earth and its inhabitants as illustrated by geological monuments. 6th edition, revised. London: John Murray. —–. 1867–8. Principles of geology or the modern changes of the earth and its inhabitants considered as illustrative of geology. 10th edition. 2 vols. London: John Murray. —–. 1871. The student’s elements of geology. London: J. Murray. —–. 1872. Principles of geology or the modern changes of the earth and its inhabitants considered as illustrative of geology. 11th edition. 2 vols. London: John Murray. Lyell, Katherine Murray, ed. 1881. Life, letters and journals of Sir Charles Lyell, Bart. 2 vols. London: John Murray.

Bibliography

797

Lyle, Herbert Willoughby. 1935. King’s and some king’s men: being a record of the medical department of King’s College, London, from 1830 to 1909, and of King’s College Hospital Medical School from 1909 to 1934. London: Oxford University Press. Lyon, William Penman. [1871.] Homo versus Darwin: a judicial examination of statements recently published by Mr. Darwin regarding ‘The descent of man.’ London: Hamilton, Adams, and Co. Macdonald, Frederick C. 1929. Bishop Stirling of the Falklands. The adventurous life of a soldier of the cross whose humility hid the daring spirit of a hero & an inflexible will to face great risks. London: Seely, Service & Co. MacLeod, Roy M. 1971. Of medals and men: a reward system in Victorian science, 1826–1914. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 26: 81–105. —–. 1974. The Ayrton incident: a commentary on the relations of science and government in England, 1870–1873. In Science and values: patterns of tradition and change, edited by Arnold Thackray and Everett Mendelsohn. New York: Humanities Press. Magyar Életrajzi Lexikon. Edited by Ágnes Kenyeres. 3 vols. and supplement. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 1967–94. Maienschein, Jane. 1994. ‘It’s a long way from Amphioxus’: Anton Dohrn and late nineteenth century debates about vertebrate origins. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 16: 465–78. Major, Charles Immanuel Forsyth. 1873. La faune des vertébrés de Monte Bamboli. Atti della Società Italiana di Scienze Naturali 15 (1872–3): 290–503. Mallet, Robert. 1872. Volcanic energy: an attempt to develop its true origin and cosmical relations. [Read 20 June 1872.] Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 163 (1873): 147–227. Malm, August Wilhelm. 1867. Bidrag till kännedom af Pleuronektoidernas utveckling och byggnad. Kongliga Svenska Vetenskaps-Akademiens Handlingar 7 (1867–8): (4th paper) 1–28. Mantegazza, Paolo. 1854. Fisiologia del piacere. Milano: n.p. —–. 1866. Dell’azione del dolore sulla calorificazione e sui moti del cuore. Gazzetta Medica Italiana–Lombardia 5th ser. 5: [3–54]. —–. 1867a. Rio de la Plata e Tenerife: viaggi e studii. Milan: Gaetano Brigola. —–. 1867b. Dell’azione del dolore sulla respirazione. Gazzetta Medica Italiana–Lombardia 5th ser. 6: [3–47]. —–. 1870a. Dell’indice cefalospinale nell’uomo e nelle scimmie antropomorfe, e del metodo per determinarlo. Rendiconti dell’Instituto Lombardo di Scienza e Lettere: Classe di Scienze Matematiche e Naturali 2d ser. 3: 481–98. [Also in Archivio per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia 1 (1871): 40–62.] —–. 1870b. Fisiologia del piacere. 5th edition. Milan: G. Bernardoni. —–. 1871. Della capacità dell’ orbita nel cranio umano e dell’ indice cefalorbitale. Archivio per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia 1: 149–66. [Also in Rendiconti dell’Istituto Lombardo di Scienza e Lettere: Classe di Scienze matematiche e naturali 2d ser. 4 (1871): 232–49.] —–. 1872a. Di alcuni possibili errori nella determinazione dell’angolo sfenoidale.

798

Bibliography

Rendiconti dell’Istituto Lombardo di Scienza e Lettere: Classe di Scienze Matematiche e Naturali 2d ser. 5: 354–60. Mantegazza, Paulo. 1872b. Rivista scientifica. Fisionomia delle emozione.— Uomini ed animali— La mitodogia zoologica. [Review of Expression.] Nuova Antologica, December 1872, pp. 230–45. —–. 1873. Della capacità delle fosse nasali e degli indici rinocefalico e cerebrofacciale nel cranio umano. Rendiconti dell’Istituto Lombardo di Scienza e Lettere: Classe di Scienze Matematiche e Naturali 2d ser. 6: 499–504. [Also in Archivio per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia 3 (1874): 253–74.] —–. 1876. Atlante della espressioni del dolore; fotografie prese dal vero e da molte opere d’arte, che illustrano gli studi sperimentali sull’espressione del dolore. Florence: Brogi. —–. 1880. Fisiologia del dolore. Florence: Felice Paggi. Marchant, James, ed. 1916. Alfred Russel Wallace. Letters and reminiscences. 2 vols. London: Cassell and Company. Marcou, Jules. 1896. Life, letters, and works of Louis Agassiz. 2 vols. London and New York: Macmillan and Co. Marginalia: Charles Darwin’s marginalia. Edited by Mario A. Di Gregorio with the assistance of Nicholas W. Gill. Vol. 1. New York and London: Garland Publishing. 1990. Marshall, William Adolph Ludwig. 1870. Ueber Thieraehnlichkeiten der Menschen. [Read 17 November 1870.] Niederländisches Archiv für Zoologie 1 (1871–3): 113–131. —–. 1871. Sur les plumes caudales allongées des oiseaux de paradis. Archives Néerlandaises des sciences exactes et naturelles 6: 296–304. —–. 1872a. Ueber die knoechernen Schaedelhoecker der Voegel. Niederländisches Archiv für Zoologie 1 (1871–3): 133–79. —–. 1872b. Beobachtungen über den Vogelschwanz. Niederländisches Archiv für Zoologie 1 (1871–3): 194–210. Martin, D.C. 1967. Former homes of the Royal Society. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 22: 12–19. Martin, Gerald P. R. and Uschmann, Georg. 1969. Friedrich Rolle 1827–1887, ein Vorkämpfer neuen biologischen Denkens in Deutschland. Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth. Martineau, Harriet, trans. 1853. The positive philosophy of Auguste Comte. By Auguste Comte. 2 vols. London: Chapman. Martineau, James. 1871. The place of mind in nature and intuition in man. Contemporary Review 19: 606–23. Martinelli, Fulvio. 1872. Memoria sulla collezione di colombi nostrati. Modena: Tip. C. Vicenzi. Martins, Charles-Frederic. 1871. La création du monde organisé d’après les naturalistes anglais et allemands de la nouvelle école. Revue des deux mondes 96: 764–87. Masters, Maxwell Tylden. 1869. Vegetable teratology, an account of the principal deviations from the usual construction of plants. London: Ray Society.

Bibliography

799

Maudsley, Henry. 1873. Body and mind: an inquiry into their connection and mutual influence, specially in reference to mental disorders. New edition. London: Macmillan and Co. Maury, Matthew Fontaine. 1855. The physical geography of the sea. London: Sampson Low, Son, & Co. Max Müller, Friedrich. 1861. Lectures on the science of language delivered at the Royal Institution of Great Britain in April, May, and June, 1861. London: Longman, Green, Longman & Roberts. —–. 1871. Lectures on the science of language. 6th edition. 2 vols. London: Longmans Green and Co. Mayerhöfer, Josef. 1959–70. Lexikon der Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften: Biographien, Sachwörter und Bibliographien. Vol. 1. Vienna: Verlag Brüder Hollinek. Medical directory: The London medical directory . . . every physician, surgeon, and general practitioner resident in London. London: C. Mitchell. 1845. The London and provincial medical directory. London: John Churchill. 1848–60. The London & provincial medical directory, inclusive of the medical directory for Scotland, and the medical directory for Ireland, and general medical register. London: John Churchill. 1861–9. The medical directory . . . including the London and provincial medical directory, the medical directory for Scotland, the medical directory for Ireland. London: J. & A. Churchill. 1870–1905. Medical who’s who: The medical who’s who. London: London & Counties Press Association [and others]. 1913–27. Meehan, Thomas. 1871. [Observations on buds of Fraxinus quadrangulata.] [Meeting of 2 May and 3 October 1871.] Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 23: 110, 245. Meldola, Raphael. 1873. On a certain class of cases of variable protective colouring in insects. [Read 4 February 1873.] Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1873): 153–62. Men and women of the time: The men of the time in 1852 or sketches of living notables. 2d edition, 1853. 3d edition, 1856. 4th edition, 1857. New edition, 1865. 7th edition, 1868. 8th edition, 1872. 9th edition, 1875. 10th edition, 1879. 11th edition, 1884. 12th edition, 1887. 13th edition, 1891. 14th edition, 1895. Men and women of the time: a dictionary. 15th edition. By Victor G. Plarr. 1899. London: David Bogue [and others]. 1852–99. Men-at-the-bar: Men-at-the-bar: a biographical hand-list of the members of the various inns of court, including Her Majesty’s judges, etc. By Joseph Foster. London: Reeves & Turner. 1885. Metcalfe, Richard. 1906. The rise and progress of hydropathy in England and Scotland. London: Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent & Co. Meyers Konversationslexikon. 4th edition. Leipzig and Vienna: Verlag des Bibliographischen Instituts. 1885–92. Michelet, Athénaïs. 1904. Les Chats. Paris: Ernest Flammarion. —–. 1978. Les Chats, avec une introduction et des notes de Gabriel Monod, de l’Institut et des lettres inédites de J. Michelet, Michel Amari, Ch. Darwin, G. Pouchet, etc., etc. Reprint of the 1902 edition, Paris: Flammarion. Plan-de-la-Tour (Var): Éditions d’Aujourd’hui.

800

Bibliography

Michelet, Jules. 1856. L’Oiseau. Paris: L. Hachette. —–. 1858. L’Insecte. Paris: Hachette. —–. 1959–76. Journal: texte intégral, établi sur les manuscrits autographes e publié pour la première fois, avec une introduction, des notes et de nombreux documents. Edited by Claude Digeon and P. Viallaneix. 4 vols. Paris: Éditions Gallimard. Mill, John Stuart. 1865. Auguste Comte and positivism. London: Trübner. Miller, Diana. 1996. Pelargoniums: a gardener’s guide to the species and their cultivars and hybrids. London: B. T. Batsford. Miller, Philip. 1768. The gardener’s dictionary. 8th edition. London: the author. Milman, Henry Hart, trans. 1835. The death of Yajnadatta. In Nala and Damayanti and other poems: translated from the Sanscrit into English verse, with mythological and critical notes. Oxford: D. A. Talboys. Milne, Alexander. 1869. Manual of materia medica and therapeutics, embracing all the medicines of the British pharmacopœia &c. &c. 2d edition. Edinburgh: E. & S. Livingstone. Milne-Edwards, Henri. 1834–40. Histoire naturelle des Crustacés, comprenant l’anatomie, la physiologie et la classification de ces animaux. 4 vols. Paris: Librairie encyclopédique de Roret. Milton, John. 1667. Paradise lost. A poem written in ten books. London: Peter Parker, Robert Butler, and Mathias Walker. —–. 1671. Paradise regain’d. A poem. In IV books. To which is added Samson Agonistes. London: J. Starkey. Mitchell, Thomas Livingstone. 1838. Three expeditions into the interior of eastern Australia: with descriptions of the recently explored region of Australia Felix, and of the present colony of New South Wales. 2 vols. London: T. & W. Boone. [Mivart, St George Jackson.] 1869. Difficulties of the theory of natural selection. Month 11: 35–53, 134–53, 274–89. —–. 1871a. On the genesis of species. London: Macmillan and Co. —–. 1871b. On the genesis of species. 2d edition. London and New York: Macmillan and Co. [—–.] 1871c. Darwin’s Descent of man. Quarterly Review 131: 47–90. —–. 1871d. Ape resemblances to man. Nature, 20 April 1871, p. 481. —–. 1872a. Evolution and its consequences. A reply to Professor Huxley. Contemporary Review 19 (1871–2): 168–97. —–. 1872b. Specific genesis. North American Review 114: 451–68. ML: More letters of Charles Darwin: a record of his work in a series of hitherto unpublished letters. Edited by Francis Darwin and Albert Charles Seward. 2 vols. London: John Murray. 1903. Modern English biography: Modern English biography, containing many thousand concise memoirs of persons who have died since the year 1850. By Frederick Boase. 3 vols. and supplement (3 vols.). Truro, Cornwall: the author. 1892–1921. Moggridge, John Traherne. 1873. Harvesting ants and trap-door spiders: notes and observations on their habits and dwellings. London: L. Reeve & Co.

Bibliography

801

Möller, Alfred, ed. 1915–21. Fritz Müller. Werke, Briefe und Leben. 3 vols in 5. Jena: Gustav Fischer. Montgomeryshire Collections: Collections Historical & Archaeological Relating to Montgomeryshire (and its Borders). 48 vols. Welshpool: Powysland Club. 1868–1943. Moore, James Richard. 1985. Darwin of Down: the evolutionist as squarsonnaturalist. In The Darwinian heritage, edited by David Kohn. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press in association with Nova Pacifica. Moore, John. 2005. Celebration of innovation: a history of autotype 1868–2005. Wantage: Autotype International. Moore, Thomas. 1853–6. Memoirs, journal and correspondence. 8 vols. Edited by Lord John Russell. London: Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans. Morgan, Lewis Henry. 1870. Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family. Washington: Smithsonian Institution. [Morley, John.] 1871a. Review of Descent. Pall Mall Gazette, 20 March 1871, pp. 11–12, 21 March 1871, pp. 11–12. Mosher, Orville W. Jr. 1925. Louis XI King of France as he appears in history and in literature (his character and his private life). Toulouse: Édouard Privat. Motley, John Lothrop. 1855. The rise of the Dutch republic. 3 vols. London: John Chapman. Moulinié, Jean Jacques, trans. 1872. La descendance de l’homme et la sélection sexuelle. By Charles Darwin. Preface by Carl Vogt. Paris: C. Reinwald & Cie. —–, trans. 1873. L’origine des espèces au moyen de la sélection naturelle, ou, la lutte pour l’existence dans la nature. By Charles Darwin. Paris: C. Reinwald. Müller, Fritz. 1863. Die Verwandlung der Garneelen. Archiv für Naturgeschichte 29: 8–23. —–. 1864a. Für Darwin. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann. —–. 1864b. On the metamorphoses of the prawns. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 3d ser. 14: 104–15. —–. 1872–3. Bestaubungsversuche an Abutilon-Arten. Jenaische Zeitschrift für Medicin und Naturwissenschaft 7: 22–45, 441–50. —–. 1876. Einige Worte über Leptalis. Jenaische Zeitschrift für Naturwissenschaft 10: 1–12. —–. 1878. Notes on Brazilian entomology. [Read 5 June 1878.] Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (1878): 211–23. Müller, Hermann. 1871. Application of the Darwinian theory to flowers and the insects which visit them. [Translated into Italian from the German with annotations by Federico Delpino. Translated from the Italian by R. L. Packard.] American Naturalist 5: 271–97. —–. 1872. Anwendung der Darwin’schen Lehre auf Bienen. Verhandlungen des naturhistorischen Vereins der preussischen Rheinlande und Westphalens 29: 1–96. —–. 1873. Die Befruchtung der Blumen durch Insekten und die gegenseitigen Anpassungen beider. Ein Beitrag zur Erkenntniss des ursächlichen Zusammenhanges in der organischen Natur. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.

802

Bibliography

Müller, Johannes Peter. 1833–7. Handbuch der Physiologie des Menschen für Vorlesungen. 2 vols. Coblenz: J. Holscher. Murie, James. 1867. On the organization of the caaing whale, Globiocephalus melas. [Read 27 June 1867.] Transactions of the Zoological Society of London 8 (1872–4): 235– 301. —–. 1870. On the form and structure of the manatee (Manatus americanus). [Read 15 November 1870.] Transactions of the Zoological Society of London 8 (1872–4): 127–202. Murray, John. 1908–9. Darwin and his publisher. Science Progress in the Twentieth Century 3: 537–42. Musters, George Chaworth. 1871. At home with the Patagonians: a year’s wanderings over untrodden ground from the Straits of Magellan to the Rio Negro. London: John Murray. Nägeli, Carl Wilhelm von. 1865. Entstehung und Begriff der naturhistorischen Art. Munich: Verlag der königl. Akademie. Nathorst, Alfred Gabriel. 1872. Om arktiska växtlemningar i Skånes sötvattensbildningar. Öfversigt af Kongl. Vetenskaps-Akademiens Förhandlingar 29: 123–42. —–. 1873. On the distribution of Arctic plants during the post-glacial epoch. Journal of Botany, British and Foreign n.s. 2: 225–8. —–. 1892. Fresh evidence concerning the distribution of Arctic plants during the glacial epoch. Nature, 21 January 1892, pp. 273–6. Navy list: The navy list. London: John Murray; Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 1815– 1900. NBU : Nouvelle biographie universelle depuis les temps les plus reculés jusqu’à nos jours, avec les renseignements bibliographiques et l’indication des sources a consulter. Edited by Jean Chrétien Ferdinand Hoefer. 46 vols. in 23. Paris: Firmin Didot Frères. 1852–66. NDB: Neue deutsche Biographie. Under the auspices of the Historical Commission of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences. 24 vols. (A–Sta) to date. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. 1953–. Newman, Henry Wenman. 1851. On the habits of the Bombinatrices. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London n.s. 1: 86–92, 109–12, 116–18. Newton, Isaac. 1687. Philosophiæ naturalis principia mathematica. London: Royal Society. NNBW : Nieuw Nederlandsch biografisch Woordenboek. Edited by P. C. Molhuysen et al. 10 vols. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff ’s Uitgevers-Maatschappij. 1911–37. Noakes, Richard. 2002. Instruments to lay hold of spirits: technologizing the bodies of Victorian spiritualism. In Bodies/machines, edited by Iwan Rhys Morus. Oxford: Berg. —– 2004. Spiritualism, science, and the supernatural in mid-Victorian Britain. In The Victorian supernatural, edited by Nicola Bown et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —–. 2007. Cromwell Varley FRS, electrical discharge and Victorian spiritualism. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 61: 5–21. North, John S. 1989. The Waterloo directory of Scottish newspapers and periodicals, 1800– 1900. 2 vols. Waterloo, Ontario: North Waterloo Academic Press.

Bibliography

803

Northcott, Richard. 1918. Gounod’s operas in London. London: Press Printers. NUC: The national union catalog. Pre-1956 imprints. 685 vols. and supplement (69 vols.). London and Chicago: Mansell. 1968–81. Nunn, John. 1850. Narrative of the wreck of the ‘Favorite’ on the island of Desolation: detailing the adventures, sufferings, and privations of John Nunn. Edited by W. B. Clarke. London: William Edward Painter. Nützel, A. and Bandel, K. 1992. Studies on the side-branch planorbids (Mollusca, Gastropoda) of the Miocene crater lake of Steinheim am Albuch (southern Germany). Scripta Geologica Special Issue 2: 313–57. Nyhart, Lynn K. 2002. Learning from history: morphology’s challenges in Germany ca. 1900. Journal of Morphology 252: 2–14. OBL: Österreichisches biographisches Lexikon 1815–1950. Edited by Leo Santifaller et al. 12 vols. and 4 fascicles of vol. 13 (A–Stulli Gioachino) to date. Vienna: Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. 1957–. O’Byrne, William R. 1849. A naval biographical dictionary: comprising the life and services of every living officer in Her Majesty’s Navy, from the rank of admiral of the fleet to that of lieutenant, inclusive. London: John Murray. ODNB: Oxford dictionary of national biography: from the earliest times to the year 2000. (Revised edition.) Edited by H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison. 60 vols. and index. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2004. OED: The Oxford English dictionary. Being a corrected re-issue with an introduction, supplement and bibliography of a new English dictionary. Edited by James A. H. Murray, et al. 12 vols. and supplement. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1970. A supplement to the Oxford English dictionary. 4 vols. Edited by R. W. Burchfield. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1972–86. The Oxford English dictionary. 2d edition. 20 vols. Prepared by J. A. Simpson and E. S. C. Weiner. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1989. Oxford English dictionary additional series. 3 vols. Edited by John Simpson et al. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1993–7. O’Leary, Patrick. 1989. Sir James Mackintosh: the Whig Cicero. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press. Oliver, Daniel. 1868–77. Flora of tropical Africa. 3 vols. London: L. Reeve and Co. Oppel, Albert. 1856–8. Die Juraformation Englands, Frankreichs und des Südwestlichen Deutschlands. Nach ihren einzelnen Gliedern eingetheilt und verglichen. Stuttgart: Verlag von Ebner & Seubert. Oppenheim, Janet. 1985. The other world: spiritualism and psychic research in England, 1850–1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Orchids: On the various contrivances by which British and foreign orchids are fertilised by insects, and on the good effects of intercrossing. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1862. Origin: On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1859. Origin 2d ed.: On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1860.

804

Bibliography

Origin 3d ed.: On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. With additions and corrections. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1861. Origin 4th ed.: On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. With additions and corrections. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1866. Origin 5th ed.: On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. With additions and corrections. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1869. Origin 6th ed.: The origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. With additions and corrections. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1872. Origin US ed.: On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. A new edition, revised and augmented by the author. By Charles Darwin. New York: D. Appleton. 1860. Origin 2d US ed.: On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. By Charles Darwin. From the fifth London edition, with additions and corrections. New York: D. Appleton. 1870. Origin 3d US ed.: On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life. By Charles Darwin. From the 6th London edition. New York: D. Appleton and Company. 1873. Owen, Richard. 1853. Description of some species of the extinct genus Nesodon, with remarks on the primary group (Toxodontia) of hoofed quadrupeds, to which that genus is referable. [Read 13 January 1853.] Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 143: 291–310. —–. 1858. On the fossil mammals of Australia.— Part I. Description of a mutilated skull of a large marsupial carnivore (Thylacoleo carnifex, Owen), from a calcareous conglomorate stratum, eighty miles S.W. of Melbourne, Victoria. [Read 16 December 1858.] Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 149 (1859): 309–22. [—–.] 1860. [Review of Origin & other works.] Edinburgh Review 111: 487–532. —–. 1870. On the fossil mammals of Australia.— Part IV. Dentition and mandible of Thylacoleo carnifex, with remarks on the arguments for its herbivority. [Read 17 November 1870.] Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 161 (1871): 213–66. Oxford classical dictionary. 3d edition, revised. Edited by Simon Hornblower and Anthony Spawforth. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003. Paget, James. 1873. Clinical lectures on the nervous mimicry of organic diseases. Lancet, 11 October 1873, pp. 511–13; 18 October 1873, pp. 547–9; 1 November 1873, pp. 619–21; 22 November 1873, pp. 727–9; 29 November 1873, pp. 763–5; 13 December 1873, pp. 833–5. Paget, Stephen, ed. 1901. Memoirs and letters of Sir James Paget. London: Longmans, Green, and Co.

Bibliography

805

Pancaldi, Giuliano. 1991. Darwin in Italy. Science across cultural frontiers. Translated by Ruey Brodine Morelli. Updated and expanded edition. Bloomington and Indianapolis, Ind.: Indiana University Press. Parshall, Karen Hunger. 2006. James Joseph Sylvester: Jewish mathematician in a Victorian world. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Patagonian Missionary Society. 1857. A brief reply to certain charges made against the Patagonian, or South American Missionary Society, by W. Parker Snow. Bristol: I. E. Chillcott. Patek, Sheila N., et al. 2006. Multifunctionality and mechanical origins: ballistic jaw propulsion in trap-jaw ants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 103: 12787–92. Pauly, Daniel. 2004. Darwin’s fishes. An encyclopedia of ichthyology, ecology, and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pearce, J. M. 2002. Armand Trousseau—some of his contributions to neurology. Journal of the History of the Neurosciences 11: 125–35. Pearson, Karl. 1914–30. The life, letters and labours of Francis Galton. 3 vols. in 4. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Peck, Robert McCracken. 1994. William Holbrook Beard (1824–1900). Magazine Antiques 146: 692–700. Peckham, Morse, ed. 1959. The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin: a variorum text. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Penzig, Ottone. 1905. Commemorazione di Federico Delpino. Malpighia 19: 294– 310. Petrunkevitch, Alexander. 1963. August Weismann. Personal reminiscences. Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 18: 20–35. Pfeifer, Edward J. 1965. The genesis of American neo-Lamarckism. Isis 56: 156–67. Phillips, John. 1837–9. Treatise on geology. 2 vols. London: Longman, Orme, Brown, Green & Longmans, John Taylor, and A. Spottiswoode. —–. 1860. Life on the earth, its origin and succession. Cambridge and London: Macmillan and Co. —–. 1869. Vesuvius. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. —–. 1871. Geology of Oxford and the valley of the Thames. Oxford: Clarenden Press. Philpott, Robert A. 2009. Keppel: a South American Missionary Society settlement in the Falkland Islands, 1855–1911: an archaeological and historical survey. Stanley: Falkland Islands Museum and National Trust. Liverpool: National Museums Liverpool. Physicians: The roll of the Royal College of Physicians of London. By William Munk. 2d edition, revised and enlarged. 3 vols. London: Royal College of Physicians. 1878. Lives of the fellows of the Royal College of Physicians of London. Compiled by G. H. Brown et al. 5 vols. London: Royal College of Physicians. Oxford and Washington, D.C.: IRL Press. 1955–89. Pickard-Cambridge, Arthur Wallace. 1918. Memoir of the Reverend Octavius PickardCambridge. Oxford: printed for private circulation.

806

Bibliography

Pictet de la Rive, François Jules. 1860. Sur l’origine de l’espèce par Charles Darwin. Bibliothèque universelle. Revue suisse et étrangère n.s. 7: 233–55. Piggott, J. R. 2004. Palace of the people: the Crystal Palace at Sydenham 1854–1936. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press. Plarr, Victor Gustave. 1930. Plarr’s lives of the fellows of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. Revised by Sir D’Arcy Power. 2 vols. London: Simpkin Marshall. Pope, Alexander, trans. 1715–20. The Iliad of Homer. 6 vols. London: Bernard Lintot. —–. 1751. The works of Alexander Pope Esq. 9 vols. London: J. and P. Knapton, H. Lintot, J. and R. Tonson, and S. Draper. Port, M. H. 1984. A contrast in styles at the office of works. Layard and Ayrton: aesthete and economist. Historical Journal 27: 151–76. Post Office directory of Cambridgeshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire, & Rutlandshire. London: Kelly & Co. 1864. Post Office directory of Lancashire, Liverpool and Manchester: Post Office directory of Lancashire. Post Office directory of Lancashire, Liverpool and Manchester. London: Kelly & Co. 1858– 92. Post Office directory of Northamptonshire etc.: Post Office directory of Berkshire, Northamptonshire, Oxfordshire, with Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, and Huntingdonshire. The Post Office directory of Northamptonshire, Huntingdonshire, Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Berkshire, and Oxfordshire. The Post Office directory of the counties of Bedford, Huntingdon, Northampton, Berks, Buckingham and Oxford. London: Kelly and Co. [1847]–77. Post Office directory of the six home counties: Post Office directory of the six home counties, viz., Essex, Herts, Kent, Middlesex, Surrey and Sussex. London: W. Kelly & Co. 1845–78. Post Office Edinburgh directory: Post-Office annual directory and calendar. Post-Office Edinburgh and Leith directory. Edinburgh: Ballantyne & Hughes [and others]. 1845–1908. Post Office London directory: Post-Office annual directory. . . . A list of the principal merchants, traders of eminence, &c. in the cities of London and Westminster, the borough of Southwark, and parts adjacent . . . general and special information relating to the Post Office. Post Office London directory. London: His Majesty’s Postmaster-General [and others]. 1802– 1967. Pozzi, Samuel and Benoit, René, trans. 1874. L’expression des émotions chez l’homme et les animaux. By Charles Darwin. [French translation of Expression.] Paris: C. Reinwald et Cie . Prestwich, Joseph. 1859. On the occurrence of flint implements, associated with the remains of animals of extinct species in beds of a late geological period, in France at Amiens and Abbeville, and in England at Hoxne. [Read 26 May 1859.] Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 150 (1860): 277–317. —–. 1862. Theoretical considerations on the conditions under which the (drift) deposits containing the remains of extinct mammalia and flint implements were accumulated, and on their geological age. On the Loess of the valleys of the south of England, and of the Somme and the Seine. [Read 27 March and 19 June 1862.] Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 154 (1864): 247–309.

Bibliography

807

—–. 1872. Anniversary address of the president. [Read 16 February 1872.] Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 28: xxix–xc. Prinsep, Charles C. 1885. Record of services of the honourable East India Company’s civil servants in the Madras Presidency from 1741 to 1858. London: Trübner & Co. Pritchard, Michael. 1994. A directory of London photographers 1841–1908. Revised and expanded edition. Watford, Hertfordshire: PhotoResearch. Prodger, Phillip. 1998. Photography and The expression of the emotions. In The expression of the emotions in man and animals, by Charles Darwin, edited by Paul Ekman. London: HarperCollins. —–. 2009. Darwin’s camera: art and photography in the theory of evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pullen, Henry William. [1871.] The fight at Dame Europa’s school: showing how the German boy thrashed the French boy, and how the English boy looked on. London: Simpkin, Marshall. Pytlik, Priska. 2005. Okkultismus und Moderne: ein kulturhistorisches Phänomen und seine Bedeutung für die Literatur um 1900. Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh. Quatrefages de Bréau, Jean Louis Armand de. 1870. Charles Darwin et ses précurseurs français. Etude sur le transformisme. Paris: Germer Baillière. Raby, Peter. 1990. Samuel Butler: a biography. London: Hogarth. —–. 2001. Alfred Russel Wallace: a life. London: Chatto & Windus. Radick, Gregory. 2008. The simian tongue: the long debate about animal language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bristol: University Presses Marketing. Rayson, Charles. 1872. Rabbits for prizes and profit: general management. 2 vols. London: ‘The Bazaar’ office. Reade, William Winwood. 1860. Liberty Hall, Oxon. 3 vols. London: C. J. Skeet. —–. 1872. The martyrdom of man. London: Trübner & Co. —–. 1873. The African sketch-book. 2 vols. London: Smith, Elder, and Co. Record of the Royal Society of London: The record of the Royal Society of London for the promotion of natural knowledge. 4th edition. London: Royal Society. 1940. Redfern, Percy. 1938. The new history of the C. W. S. London: J. M. Dent. Richards, Robert J. 1987. Darwin and the emergence of evolutionary theories of mind and behavior. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Richardson, Edmund William. 1916. A veteran naturalist; being the life and work of W. B. Tegetmeier. London: Witherby & Co. Richardson, John and Gray, John Edward. 1844–75. The zoology of the voyage of H.M.S. Erebus & Terror, under the command of Captain Sir James Clark Ross, R.N., F.R.S., during the years 1839 to 1843. 2 vols. London: E. W. Janson. Richter, Hermann Eberhard. 1871. Die Zukunft der Soldatenvölker. Dresden: Hellmuth Henkler. Riley, Charles Valentine. 1869–77. Annual reports on the noxious, beneficial, and other, insects of the State of Missouri. Jefferson City, Mo.: Regan & Edwards, public printer [and others].

808

Bibliography

Ritvo, Harriet. 1990. The animal estate: the English and other creatures in the Victorian age. London: Penguin Books. —–. 2000. Animal consciousness: some historical perspective. American Zoologist 40: 847–52. Roberts, H. F. 1929. Plant hybridisation before Mendel. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Rolle, Friedrich. 1863. Chs. Darwin’s Lehre von der Entstehung der Arten im Pflanzen- und Thierreich in ihrer Anwendung auf die Schöpfungsgeschichte. Frankfurt: J. C. Hermann. —–. 1870. Ch. Darwins lära om arternas uppkomst i vät- och djurriket, tillämpad på skapelsehistorien. Translated by Carl Rudolf Sundström. Stockholm: S. Flodius förlag. Roll of the graduates of the University of Aberdeen: Roll of the graduates of the University of Aberdeen 1860–1900. By William Johnston. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press. 1906. Roll of the graduates of the University of Glasgow: A roll of the graduates of the University of Glasgow. From 31st December, 1727. To 31st December, 1897. Compiled by W. Innes Addison. Glasgow: James MacLehose & Sons. 1898. Roujou, Anatole. 1872. Note sur quelques analogies du type humain avec celui de très-anciens mammifères. [Read 18 January 1872.] Bulletins de la Société d’anthropologie de Paris 2d ser. 7: 44–122. Royal Society catalogue of scientific papers: Catalogue of scientific papers (1800–1900). Compiled and published by the Royal Society of London. 19 vols. and index (3 vols.). London: Royal Society of London. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1867–1925. Royer, Clémence Auguste, trans. 1862. De l’origine des espèces ou des lois du progrès chez les êtres organisés. By Charles Darwin. With preface and notes by the translator. [Translated from the 3d English edition.] Paris: Guillaumin & Cie; Victor Masson. —–, trans. 1866. De l’origine des espèces par sélection naturelle ou des lois de transformation des êtres organisés. By Charles Darwin. With preface and notes by the translator. 2d edition. Augmented in accordance with notes by the author. Paris: Guillaumin et Cie; Victor Masson et fils. —–. 1870. Origine de l’homme et des sociétés. Paris: Guillaumin et cie; Victor Masson et fils. —–, trans. 1870. De l’origine des espèces par sélection naturelle ou des lois de transformation des êtres organisés. By Charles Darwin. With preface and notes by the translator. 3d edition. Paris: V. Masson et fils. Ruck, Berta. 1935. A story-teller tells the truth: reminiscences & notes. London: Hutchinson & Co. Rugby School register: Rugby School register. Vol. 1 from April 1675 to October 1857. Revised and annotated for the Old Rugbeian Society by Godfrey A. Solly. Rugby: George Over. 1933. Rupke, Nicolaas A. 1994. Richard Owen, Victorian naturalist. New Haven, Conn., and London: Yale University Press.

Bibliography

809

Rütimeyer, Ludwig. 1867. Versuch einer natürlichen Geschichte des Rindes in seinen Beziehungen zu den Wiederkauern im Allgemeinen. Erste Abtheilung. Neue Denkschriften der allgemeinen schweizerischen Gesellschaft für die gesammten Naturwissenschaften 22: 1–103. —–. 1868. [Review of Ernst Haeckel’s Ueber die Entstehung und den Stammbaum des Menschengeschlechts and Naturliche Schöpfungsgeschichte.] Archiv für Anthropologie 3: 301– 2. Sachs, Julius. 1870. Lehrbuch der Botanik nach dem gegenwärtigen Stand der Wissenschaft. 2d edition. Leipzig: Wilheln Engelmann. St John, Charles George William. 1849. A tour in Sutherlandshire: with extracts from the field-books of a sportsman and naturalist. 2 vols. London: John Murray. Sainty, J. C. 1972. Office-holders in modern Britain, vol. 1: Treasury officials, 1660–1870. London: Athlone Press. Sammarco, Anthony Mitchell. 1997. The Great Boston Fire of 1872. Dover, N.H.: Arcadia. Saporta, Louis Charles Joseph Gaston de. 1869. L’école transformiste et ses dernièrs travaux. Revue des deux mondes 2d ser. 83: 635–74. —–. 1872–4. Études sur la végétation du sud-est de la France à l’époque tertiaire. Supplément I: Révision de la flore des gypses d’Aix. Annales des Sciences Naturelles. Botanique 5th ser. 15 (1872): 277–351; 17 (1873): 5–44; 18 (1874): 23–146. Sarjeant, William A. S. 1980–96. Geologists and the history of geology: an international bibliography. 10 vols. including supplements. London: Macmillan. Malabar, Fla.: Robert E. Krieger Publishing. SBL: Svenskt biografiskt lexikon. Edited by Bertil Boëthius et al. 32 vols. (A–Ström) to date. Stockholm: Albert Bonnier and P. A. Norstedt. 1918–. Schaik, Carel P. van. 2004. Among orangutans: red apes and the rise of human culture. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Scherzer, Karl von. 1861–3. Narrative of the circumnavigation of the globe by the Austrian frigate Novara (Commodore B. von Wullerstorf-Urbair), undertaken by order of the imperial government, in the years 1857, 1858, & 1859, under the immediate auspices of his I. and R. Highness, the Archduke Ferdinand Maximilian. 3 vols. London: Saunders, Otley, & Co. Schlegel, August Wilhelm von and Tieck, Ludwig, trans. 1825–33. Shakespeare’s dramatische Werke. 9 vols. Berlin: G. Reimer. Schleicher, August. 1863. Die Darwinsche Theorie und die Sprachwissenschaft. Offenes Sendschreiben an Herrn Dr Ernst Häckel. Weimar, Germany: Hermann Böhlau. —–. 1869. Darwinism tested by the science of language. Translated from the German, with preface and additional notes, by Alex V. W. Bikkers. London: John Camdem Hotten. Schmick, Jacob Heinrich. 1869. Die Umsetzungen der Meere und die Eiszeiten der Halbkugeln der Erde, ihre Ursachen und Perioden. Cologne: M. DuMont-Schauberg’schen Buchhandlung.

810

Bibliography

Schmick, Jacob Heinrich. 1871. Thatsachen und Beobachtungen zur weiteren Begründung seiner neuen theorie einer Umsetzung der Meere durch die Sonnenanziehung und eines gleichzeitigen Wechsels der Eiszeiten auf beiden Halbkugeln der Erde. Görlitz: E. Remer’s Buchhandlung. —–. 1872. Die neue Theorie periodischer säkularer Schwankungen des Seespiegels und gleichzeitiger Verschiebungen der Wärmezonen auf Nord- und Südhalbkugel der Erde: mit allgemeinen und besonderen Forschungs-Ergebnissen der Geologie in Uebereinstimmung gezeigt; durch ganz specielle geognostische Untersuchungen als ewiges Naturgesetz begründet und erwiesen und demzufolge als solches zur Aufhellung geologischer, palaeontologischer und ethnologischer Dunkelheiten benutzt. Münster: Russell. Schmidt, Eduard Oskar. 1871. War Goethe ein Darwinianer? Graz: Leuschner and Lubensky. Scrope, George Poulett. 1825. Considerations on volcanos, the probable causes of their phenomena, the laws which determine their march, the disposition of their products, and their connexion with the present state and past history of the globe; leading to the establishment of a new theory of the earth. London: W. Phillips. Seidlitz, Georg Carl Maria von. 1871. Die Darwin’sche Theorie: Elf Vorlesungen über die Entstehung der Thiere und Pflanzen durch Naturzüchtung. Dorpat: Verlag von C. Mattiesen. Seidlitz, Karl von. 1871. ‘Die Abstammung der Menschen und die geschlechtliche Zuchtwahl’ von Charles Darwin. Aus dem engl. über. v. Dr. Victor Carus. Stuttgart, 1871. [Review of German translation of Descent.] Baltische Wochenschrift für Landwirthschaft, Gewerbefleiß und Handel 9: 670–5, 685–92, 702–7, 720–8. Shaler, Nathaniel Southgate. 1872. The rattlesnake and natural selection. American Naturalist 6: 32–7. Shorter publications: Charles Darwin’s shorter publications, 1829–1883. Edited by John van Wyhe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2009. Shrewsbury School register: Shrewsbury School register. 1734–1908. Edited by J. E. Auden. Oswestry: Woodall, Minshall, Thomas and Co., Caxton Press. 1909. Sigurdsson, Haraldur. 1999. Melting the Earth: the history of ideas on volcanic eruptions. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sloan, Phillip. 2010. Evolution. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (fall 2010 edition), edited by Edward N. Zalta. plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2010/entries/ evolution. Smart, John and Wager, Barbara. 1977. George Robert Crotch, 1842–1874: a bibliography with a biographical note. Journal of the Society for the Bibliography of Natural History 8 (1976–8): 244–8. Smith, Adam. 1776. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell. Smith, Charles Hamilton. 1839–40. The natural history of dogs: Canidæ or genus Canis of authors. Including also the genera Hyæna and Proteles. 2 vols. (Vols. 4 and 5 of Mammalia in The naturalist’s library, edited by William Jardine.) Edinburgh: W. H. Lizars.

Bibliography

811

Smith, Charles Manby. 1857. Curiosities of London life: or, phases, physiological and social, of the great metropolis. London: W. and F. G. Cash. Smith, Mavis E., ed. 2008. Ellen Tollet of Betley Hall. Journals and letters from 1835. Crewe: the author. Smith, S. R. 1892. The Wyoming Valley in 1892. Scranton, Pa.: Scranton Republican Print. Smith, Walter G. 1869. Report on materia medica and therapeutics. Dublin Quarterly Journal of Medical Science 48: 191–208. SMK : Svenska män och kvinnor biografisk uppslagsbok. Edited by Nils Bohman et al. 8 vols. Stockholm: Albert Bonniers. 1942–55. Snow, William Parker. 1858. The ‘Patagonian Missionary Society’ and some truths connected with it: addressed to the subscribers and friends of missions. London: Piper, Stephenson, and Spence. Spalding, D. A. 1872. On instinct. [Read before the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 19 August 1872.] Nature, 10 October 1872, pp. 485–6. Sparks, Jared, ed. 1836–40. The works of Benjamin Franklin: containing several political and historical tracts not included in any former edition, and many letters official and private not hitherto published, with notes and a life of the author. 10 vols. Boston: Hillard Gray. ‘Specific difference in Primula’: On the specific difference between Primula veris, Brit. Fl. (var. officinalis of Linn.), P. vulgaris, Brit. Fl. (var. acaulis, Linn.), and P elatior, Jacq.; and on the hybrid nature of the common oxlip. With supplementary remarks on naturally produced hybrids in the genus Verbascum. By Charles Darwin. [Read 19 March 1868.] Journal of the Linnean Society (Botany) 10 (1869): 437–54. Spencer, Herbert. 1858–74. Essays: scientific, political, and speculative. . . . Reprinted chiefly from the quarterly reviews. 3 vols. London: Longmans; Williams & Norgate. —–. 1864–7. The principles of biology. 2 vols. London: Williams & Norgate. —–. 1870–2. The principles of psychology. 2d edition. 2 vols. London and Edinburgh: Williams and Norgate. —–. 1872. Mr. Martineau on evolution. Contemporary Review 20: 141–54. —–. 1872–3. The study of sociology. Contemporary Review 19: 555–72, 701–18; 20: 307– 26, 455–82; 21: 1–26, 159–82, 315–34, 475–502, 635–51, 799–820; 22: 1–17, 165–74, 325–46, 509–32, 663–77. Stearn, William T. 1981. The Natural History Museum at South Kensington: A history of the British Museum (Natural History), 1753–1980. London: Heinemann in association with the British Museum (Natural History). Stebbins, Robert E. 1988. France. In The comparative reception of Darwinism, edited by Thomas F. Glick. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Stehlin, H. G. 1925. C. J. Forsyth Major. Verhandlungen der Naturforschenden Gesellschaft in Basel 36 (1924–5): 1–23. Stenton, Michael. 1976. Who’s who of British members of Parliament, 1832–1885. Brighton: Hanover Press. [Stephen, Leslie.] 1872. Darwinism and divinity. Fraser’s Magazine n.s. 5: 409–21.

812

Bibliography

Stephens, Thomas M. 1989. Dictionary of Latin American racial and ethnic terminology. Gainesville, Fla.: University of Florida Press. Sterne, Madeleine B. 1971. Heads & headlines: the phrenological Fowlers. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Stevenson, Robert Louis. 1969. Memoir of Fleeming Jenkin; and, A family of engineers. With a preface by Rae Jeffs. London: Heron. Steverding, Dietmar. 2008. The history of African trypanosomiasis. Parasites & Vectors 1: 3. Stocking, George W., Jr. 1987. Victorian anthropology. New York: The Free Press. London: Collier Macmillan. Strasburger, Eduard. 1872. Die Coniferen und die Gnetaceen: eine morphologische Studie. 2 vols. Jena: Hermann Dabis. Strauss, David Friedrich. 1836. Das Leben Jesu: kritisch bearbeitet von Dr. D. F. Strauss, gepruft für Theologen und Nichttheologen von Wilhelm Hoffmann. Stuttgart: P. Balz’sche Buchhandlung. —–. 1872. Der alte und der neue Glaube: ein Bekenntniss. Leipzig: S. Hirzel. —–. 1873. The old faith and the new: a confession. Authorised translation from the sixth edition by Mathilde Blind. London: Asher. Strick, James. 1999. Darwinism and the origin of life: the role of H. C. Bastian in the British spontaneous generation debates, 1868–1873. Journal of the History of Biology 32: 51–92. —–. 2000. Sparks of life: Darwinism and the Victorian debates over spontaneous generation. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Sulivan, Henry Norton, ed. 1896. Life and letters of the late Admiral Sir Bartholomew James Sulivan, KCB, 1810–1890. London: John Murray. Sundström, Carl Rudolf, trans. 1872. Menniskans härledning och könsurvalet. By Charles Darwin. 2 vols. (Translation of Descent.) Stockholm: Albert Bonniers Forlag. Talattof, Kamran and Clinton, Jerome W. eds., 2000. The poetry of Nizami Ganjavi: knowledge, love, and rhetoric. New York and Basingstoke: Palgrave. Taxonomic literature: Taxonomic literature. A selective guide to botanical publications and collections with dates, commentaries and types. By Frans A. Stafleu and Richard S. Cowan. 2d edition. 7 vols. Utrecht, Netherlands: Bohn, Scheltema & Holkema. The Hague, Netherlands: W. Junk. 1976–88. Taylor, Helen. 1871. The new attack on toleration. Fortnightly Review 10: 718–27. [Taylor, John Ellor.] 1872. The geographical distribution of animals and plants, geologically considered. Westminster Review n.s. 41: 28–49. Taylor, Roger and Wakeling, Edward. 2002. Lewis Carroll, photographer: the Princeton University Library albums. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Tedesco, Roberto Carlos, et al. 2005. Architecture of the ciliary muscle of Gallus domesticus. Anatomical Record Part A: Discoveries in Molecular, Cellular, and Evolutionary Biology 284A: 544–9. Tennent, James Emerson. 1861. Sketches of the natural history of Ceylon, with narratives and

Bibliography

813

anecdotes illustrative of the habits and instincts of the mammalia, birds, reptiles, fishes, insects &c. London: Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts. Tennyson, Alfred. 1859. Idylls of the king. London: E. Moxon. Thayer, James Bradley. 1878. Letters of Chauncey Wright with some account of his life. Cambridge, Mass.: John Wilson and Son (Privately Printed). Thiselton-Dyer, William Turner. 1870. On spontaneous generation and evolution. Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science n.s. 10: 333–54. —–. 1925. Flora Capensis. Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens, Kew) (1925): 289–93. Thomson, Charles Wyville. 1873. The depths of the sea. An account of the general results of the dredging cruises of the H.M.Ss. ‘Porcupine’ and ‘Lightning’ during the summers of 1868, 1869 and 1870. London: Macmillan and Co. ‘Three forms of Lythrum salicaria’: On the sexual relations of the three forms of Lythrum salicaria. By Charles Darwin. [Read 16 June 1864.] Journal of the Linnean Society (Botany) 8 (1865): 169–96. [Collected papers 2: 106–31.] Tiemann, Friedrich. 1872. Haarlos geborene Ziege. Der Zoologische Garten 13: 186–7. Tort, Patrick. 1996. Dictionnaire du Darwinisme et de l’evolution. 3 vols. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Traquair, Ramsay H. 1865. On the asymmetry of the Pleuronectidæ, as elucidated by an examination of the skeleton in the turbot, halibut, and plaice. [Read 15 June 1865.] Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 25: 263–96. Treat, Mary. 1871. Drosera (sundew) as a fly-catcher. American Journal of Science and Arts 3d ser. 2: 463. —–. 1873. Controlling sex in butterflies. American Naturalist 7: 129–32. Trimen, Roland. 1868. On some remarkable mimetic analogies among African butterflies. [Read 5 March 1868.] Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 26 (1868– 70): 497–522. —–. 1887–9. South-African butterflies: a monograph of the extra-tropical species. With the assistance of James Henry Bowker. 3 vols. London: Trübner. Trousseau, Armand. 1868–72. Lectures on clinical medicine: delivered at the Hôtel Dieu. Translated by Pierre Victor Bazire and John Rose Cormack. 5 vols. London: New Sydenham Society. Trow’s New York city directory. J. F. Trow: New York. 1853–99. Tuke, Daniel Hack. 1872. Illustrations of the influence of the mind upon the body in health and disease, designed to elucidate the action of the imagination. London: J. & A. Churchill. Tupper, Martin Farquhar. 1838. Proverbial philosophy: a book of thoughts and arguments, originally treated. London: Joseph Rickerby. Turner, James. 1999. The liberal education of Charles Eliot Norton. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press. Twain, Mark. 1867. The celebrated jumping frog of Calaveras County, and other sketches. New York: C. H. Webb. ‘Two forms in species of Linum’: On the existence of two forms, and on their recip-

814

Bibliography

rocal sexual relation, in several species of the genus Linum. By Charles Darwin. [Read 5 February 1863.] Journal of the Proceedings of the Linnean Society (Botany) 7 (1864): 69–83. [Collected papers 2: 93–105.] Twyman, Michael. 1998. The British Library guide to printing: history and techniques. London: British Library. Tylor, Alfred. 1852. On changes of the sea level effected by existing physical causes during stated periods of time. Abstract. [Read 15 December 1852.] Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 9 (1853): 47–9. —–. 1866. On the interval of time which has passed between the formation of the upper and lower valley-gravels of part of England and France. [Read 25 April 1866.] Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society 22: 463–8. —–. 1867. On the Amiens gravel. [Read 6 November 1867.] Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 24 (1868): 1–2, 103–25. —–. 1868a. On the formation of deltas; and on the evidence and cause of great changes in the sea-level during the glacial period. [Read 11 November 1868.] Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 25 (1869): 7–12. —–. 1868b. On Quaternary gravels. [Read 6 May 1868.] Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 25 (1869): 57–100. —–. 1868c. On the formation of deltas; and on the evidence and cause of great changes in the sea-level during the glacial period. Abstract. [Read 11 November 1868.] Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 25 (1869): 7–11. —–. 1872. On the formation of deltas: and on the evidence and cause of great changes in the sea-level during the glacial period. Geological Magazine 9: 392–9, 485–501. Tylor, Edward Burnett. 1871. Primitive culture: researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, art, and custom. 2 vols. London: John Murray. Tyndall, John. 1873. Six lectures on light delivered in America in 1872–1873. London: Longmans, Green and Co. Vallot, Jean Nicolas. 1855. Sur deux fourreaux hélicoïdes façonnés par les larves d’insectes. Mémoires de l’Académie des sciences, arts et belles-lettres de Dijon. Section des sciences 2d ser. 3 (1854–5): x–xii. Variation: The variation of animals and plants under domestication. By Charles Darwin. 2 vols. London: John Murray. 1868. Variation 2d ed.: The variation of animals and plants under domestication. By Charles Darwin. 2d edition. 2 vols. London: John Murray. 1875. Vilmorin, Jacques de. 1918. Notice biographique sur J. Gay. Bulletin de la Société botanique de France 65: 78–82. Vincent, John Russell, ed. 1994. A selection from the diaries of Edward Henry Stanley, 15th earl of Derby (1826–93), between September 1869 and March 1878. London: Royal Historical Society. Vischer, Friedrich Theodor. 1846–57. Aesthetik, oder, Wissenschaft des Schönen. 3 vols. Routlingen, Leipzig: C. Mäcken.

Bibliography

815

Vogt, Carl. 1859. Altes und Neues aus Thier- und Menschenleben. 2 vols. Frankfurt am Main: Rüsten und Löning. —–. 1867. Mémoire sur les microcéphales ou hommes-singes. Reprinted from Mémoires de l’Institute national genévois, vol. 11. Geneva: Georg, Libraire de l’Institute Genevois. ‘Volcanic phenomena and the formation of mountain chains’: On the connexion of certain volcanic phenomena in South America; and on the formation of mountain chains and volcanos, as the effect of the same power by which continents are elevated. By Charles Darwin. [Read 7 March 1838.] Transactions of the Geological Society of London 2d ser. 5 (1840): 601–31. [Shorter publications, pp. 97–124.] Wagner, Moritz. 1868a. Ueber die Darwin’sche Theorie in Bezug auf das geographischen Verbreitung der Organismen. [Read 7 March 1868.] Sitzungberichte der königlichen bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu München (1868) pt 1: 359–95. —–. 1868b. Die Darwin’sche Theorie und das Migrationsgesetz der Organismen. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot. —–. 1870. Ueber den Einfluss der geographischen Isolirung und Colonienbildung auf die morphologischen Veränderungen der Organismen. Sitzungsberichte der könig. bayer. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu München (1870) pt 2: 154–74. Wakeman, Geoffrey. 1973. Victorian book illustration: the technical revolution. Newton Abbot, Devon: David & Charles. [Wallace, Alfred Russel.] 1867. Mimicry and other protective resemblances among animals. Westminster Review n.s. 32: 1–43. —–. 1869. The Malay Archipelago: the land of the orang-utan, and the bird of paradise. A narrative of travel, with studies of man and nature. 2 vols. London: Macmillan and Co. —–. 1870. Contributions to the theory of natural selection. A series of essays. London: Macmillan and Co. —–. 1871. A new view of Darwinism. Nature, 6 July 1871, p. 181. —–. 1872a. Presidential address to the Entomological Society of London. [Read 22 January 1872.] Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (Proceedings) (1871): li–lxxv. —–. 1872b. The last attack on Darwinism. Nature, 25 July 1872, pp. 237–9. —–. 1872c. Houzeau on the faculties of man and animals. [Review of Études sur les facultés mentales des animaux comparées à celles de l’homme by Jean-Charles Houzeau.] Nature, 10 October 1872, pp. 469–71. —–. 1872d. The beginnings of life. Nature, 8 August 1872, pp. 284–7, and 15 August 1872, pp. 299–303. —–. 1905. My life: a record of events and opinions. 2 vols. London: Chapman & Hall. Watkins, A. H. 1977. William Baxter: Bromley antiquary. Bromley Local History 2: 30–5. Waugh, Francis Gledstanes. [1888.] Members of the Athenæum Club, 1824 to 1887. N.p.: privately printed.

816

Bibliography

Wawro, Geoffrey. 2003. The Franco-Prussian war: the German conquest of France in 1870– 1871. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wayne, Tiffany K. 2006. Encyclopedia of transcendentalism. New York: Facts on File. Weale, James Philip Mansel. 1877. On the variation of Rhopalocerous forms in South Africa. [Read 4 July 1877.] Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (1877): 265–75. —–. 1878. Notes on South African insects. [Read 3 April 1878.] Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (1878): 183–8. —–. 1891. The truth about the Portuguese in Africa. London: Swan Sonnenschein. Webb, Gladys Mary. 1930. Gone to earth. London: Jonathan Cape. Webb, William J. 1984. The Pelargonium family: the species Pelargonium, Monsonia, and Sarcocaulon. London and Dover, N.H.: Croom Helm. Webster, Angus Duncan. 1971. Greenwich Park: its history and associations. London: Conway Maritime Press. Wedgwood, Barbara and Wedgwood, Hensleigh. 1980. The Wedgwood circle, 1730– 1897: four generations of a family and their friends. London: Studio Vista. Wedgwood, Hensleigh. 1866. On the origin of language. London: N. Trübner & Co. —–. 1872. A dictionary of English etymology. 2d edition. London: Trübner and Co. Weikart, Richard. 1993. The origins of social Darwinism in Germany, 1859–1895. Journal of the History of Ideas 54: 469–88. —–. 1995. A recently discovered Darwin letter on social Darwinism. Isis 86: 609–11. Weinreich, Heinrich. 1993. Duftstofftheorie: Gustav Jaeger (1832–1917); vom Biologen zum ‘Seelenriecher’. Stuttgart: Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft. Weismann, August. 1864. Die nachembryonale Entwickelung der Musciden nach Beobachtungen an Musca vomitoria und Sarcophaga carnaria. Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Zoologie 14: 187–336. —–. 1872. Ueber den Einfluss der Isolirung auf die Artbildung. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann. —–. 1875. Studien zur Descendenz-Theorie. I. Ueber den Saison-Dimorphismus der Schmetterlinge. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann. Weissman, Charlotte. 2010. The origins of species: the debate between August Weismann and Moritz Wagner. Journal of the History of Biology 43: 727–66. Wellesley index: The Wellesley index to Victorian periodicals 1824–1900. Edited by Walter E. Houghton et al. 5 vols. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1966–89. Wells, John Soelberg. 1869. A treatise on the diseases of the eye. London: John Churchill & Sons. West, David A. 2003. Fritz Müller. A naturalist in Brazil. Blacksburg, Va.: Pocahontas Press. Wheeler, George Augustus and Wheeler, Henry Warren. 1878. History of Brunswick, Topsham, and Harpswell, Maine, including the ancient territory known as Pejepscot. Boston: Alfred Mudge and Son.

Bibliography

817

White, Charles. 1799. An account of the regular gradation in man, and in different animals and vegetables; and from the former to the latter. London: C. Dilly. Whitney, William Dwight. 1871. Strictures on the views of August Schleicher respecting the nature of language and kindred subjects. Transactions of the American Philological Association 2: 35–64. Wiegmann, Arend Friedrich. 1828. Über die Bastarderzeugung im Pflanzenreiche. Eine von der königl. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin gekrönte Preisschrift. Brunswick: Friedrich Vieweg. Wilkinson, Anne. 2007. The passion for pelargoniums: how they found their place in the garden. Stroud: Sutton Publishing. Wilson, Richard Guy. 1979. Idealism and the origin of the first American suburb: Llewellyn Park, New Jersey. American Art Journal 11 (no. 4): 79–90. Woinow (Voinov), Mikhail Mikhailovich. 1870. Beiträge zur Lehre vom binoculären Sehen. Archiv für Ophthalmologie 16 (part 1): 200–11. Wrede, Richard and Reinfels, Hans von, eds. 1897. Das geistige Berlin. Eine Encyklopädie das geistigens Lebens Berlin. Vols. 1 and 3. Berlin: H. Storm. Wright, Chauncey. 1870. [Review of Contributions to the theory of natural selection, by Alfred Russel Wallace, 1870.] North American Review 111: 282–311. —–. 1871a. Darwinism: being an examination of Mr. St. George Mivart’s ‘Genesis of species’. London: John Murray. —–. 1871b. The uses and origin of the arrangements of leaves in plants. [Read 10 October 1871.] Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 9 (1873): 379–415 —–. 1872. Evolution by natural selection. [Review of Origin 6th ed., and of ‘Evolution and its consequences’ and ‘Specific genesis’ by St George Jackson Mivart.] North American Review 115: 1–30. —–. 1873. The evolution of self-consciousness. North American Review 116: 245–310. Wundt, Max Wilhelm. 1863. Vorlesungen ueber die Menschen- und Thierseele. Leipzig: L. Voss. WWW : Who was who: a companion to Who’s who, containing the biographies of those who died during the period [1897–1995]. 9 vols. and cumulated index (1897–1990). London: Adam & Charles Black. 1920–96. WWWA: Who was who in America. A companion to Who’s Who in America. 9 vols., historical vol., and index. Chicago: A. N. Marquis. 1943–89. Wynter, Andrew. 1863. Subtle brains and lissom fingers: being some of the chisel-marks of our industrial and scientific progress and other papers. London: Robert Hardwicke.

NOTES ON MANUSCRIPT SOURCES The majority of the manuscript sources cited in the footnotes to the letters are either in the Darwin Archive, Cambridge University Library, or at Down House, Downe, Kent. Further details about the Darwin Archive are available in the Handlist of Darwin papers at the University Library Cambridge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960) and the unpublished supplementary handlist available at the library; a new catalogue of the papers is currently being prepared. Further details about the manuscripts at Down House are available in Philip Titheradge, ed. The Charles Darwin Memorial at Down House, Downe, Kent, revised ed. ([Downe: Down House Museum], 1981) and from the curator (The Curator, Down House, Downe, Kent, BR6 7JT). In addition, there are a number of named sources that are commonly used in the footnotes: for each of these, the editors have provided brief descriptive notes. Many manuscript sources are now available online at The complete work of Charles Darwin online (darwin-online.org.uk). CD’s Account books (Down House MS). This series of seventeen account books begins on 12 February 1839, a fortnight after CD and Emma’s marriage, and ends with CD’s death. The books contain two sets of accounts. From the start, CD recorded his cash account according to a system of double-entry bookkeeping. On each left-hand page he recorded credits (i.e., withdrawals from the bank, either in the form of cash paid to himself or cheques drawn for others), and on each right-hand page he recorded debits (i.e., cash or cheques paid to others). CD also recorded details of his banking account from the start, but only noted them down in a single column at the bottom of the left-hand page of his cash account. In August 1848, however, he began a system of detailing his banking account according to double-entry book-keeping, in a separate chronological section at the back of each account book. On the left, he recorded credits to the account in the form of income (i.e., investments, rent, book sales, etc.). On the right, he recorded debits to the account (i.e., cash or cheque withdrawals). CD’s Classed account books (Down House MS). This series of four account books, covering the years 1839–81, runs parallel to CD’s Account books. For each year, September–August (after 1867, January–December), CD divided his expenditure into different classes; in addition, he made a tally for the year of his income, expenditure, cash in hand, and money in the bank. From 1843, CD also compiled at the back of each book a separate account of the total expenditure under the various headings in each year, and from 1844 he added a full account of his income in each year, and of capital invested and ‘paid’ up. CD’s Experimental notebook (DAR 157a). This notebook contains notes on some of the experiments carried out between 13 November 1855 (with some

Notes on manuscript sources

819

back references) and 20 May 1868; the majority of the notes date from before 1863. Often only the details of the experiment attempted are given, usually with cross-references to results recorded in CD’s portfolios of notes. The notebook also contains a number of letters to CD. CD’s Investment book (Down House MS). This book records for each of CD’s investments the income received during the period 1846–81. CD’s ‘Journal’. See Appendix II. CD’s Library catalogue (DAR 240). This manuscript catalogue of CD’s scientific library was compiled by Thomas W. Newton, assistant librarian of the Museum of Practical Geology, London, in August 1875. Additions to the catalogue were later made by Francis Darwin (who inherited most of his father’s scientific library) and by H. W. Rutherford, who apparently used this catalogue as a basis for compiling his Catalogue of the library of Charles Darwin now in the Botany School, Cambridge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1908). However, there are items listed in this manuscript catalogue that do not appear in Rutherford’s published catalogue, and which must have been dispersed after being listed. Down Coal and Clothing Club account book (Down House MS). CD was for some years treasurer of this charitable organisation. The account book records subscriptions made by honorary subscribers between 1841 and 1876; between 1848 and 1869 the entries are in CD’s handwriting. For the years 1841–8 and 1868–76, there is also a statement of expenditures, though not in CD’s handwriting. Emma Darwin’s diary (DAR 242). This is a series of small pocket diaries, in which Emma recorded details of the health of family members, trips made by herself, CD, and their children, school holidays, and visits to Down by others. The collection at CUL comprises diaries for the years 1824, 1833–4, 1839–45, and 1848–96. H. E. Litchfield’s autobiography (DAR 246). This unfinished autobiography, written in 1926 on forty-two loose leaves, and chiefly concerning Henrietta Emma Darwin’s childhood, has never been published. List of pamphlets (DAR 252.4). This is a catalogue of CD’s pamphlet collection prepared by CD and Francis Darwin in 1878 (see the letter from Emma Darwin to Henrietta Emma Litchfield, [ June 1878] (DAR 219.9: 175)). From about 1878 CD began to arrange the articles, papers, and reprints he received into a numbered collection. CD maintained this reprint collection until his death, when it was taken over by Francis Darwin. Francis continued the collection, adding new items, the numbers running consecutively from those of his father. Evidently, until this catalogue was prepared, CD used a working index similar to that of his ‘List of reviews’. The catalogue is in two sections, a list of the quarto collection and one of the general collection. Both sections are alphabetically arranged with the entries pasted on sheets in a loose-leaf folder. List of reviews (DAR 262.8: 9–18 (English Heritage MS: 88206151–60)). This manuscript, headed ‘List Reviews of Origin of Sp & of C. Darwins Books’,

820

Notes on manuscript sources

was CD’s working index to his collection of reviews of his own books. It corresponds approximately to the review collection in the Darwin Pamphlet Collection–CUL, but includes some items that were dispersed after being listed. Reading notebooks. See Correspondence vol. 4, Appendix IV. These notebooks are divided into sections entitled ‘Books Read’ and ‘Books to be Read’. CD’s entries in ‘Books Read’ often include a brief opinion of the work. Scrapbook of reviews (DAR 226.1 and 226.2). Many of the reviews contained in these two volumes bear CD’s annotations and thus were evidently collected by CD. However, the scrapbook seems to have been assembled by Francis Darwin: the tables of contents are in the handwriting of H. W. Rutherford, an assistant at Cambridge University Library who acted as a copyist for Francis on several occasions (see ML, 1: x, and Francis Darwin, ed. The foundations of the Origin of Species. Two essays written in 1842 and 1844 by Charles Darwin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909)). In addition, the scrapbook is identified as Francis’s in a note (DAR 226.1:132a) made in 1935 by Arthur Keith, whose appeal led to the purchase of Down House as a Darwin memorial (see Arthur Keith, An autobiography (London: Watts & Co., 1950)). DAR 226.1 bears the inscription ‘Reviews of C. Darwin’s works’ on the spine, and contains, among others, reviews of Origin and Orchids; DAR 226.2 is inscribed: ‘Reviews. Descent. Expression. Insect. Pl. Eras. D.’ W. E. Darwin’s botanical notebook (DAR 117). This notebook contains observational and experimental notes on plants made by William, often in consultation with CD. The first observation bears the date 13 July 1862, and, although the date of the last observation is 26 June 1870, most of the notes were made between 1862 and 1864. The notebook originally contained letters from CD, but these were later removed. William entered notes made from botanical textbooks in a separate notebook (DAR 234). W. E. Darwin’s botanical sketchbook (DAR 186: 43). This sketchbook, which contains entries dated 1862–72, was evidently begun in parallel to William’s botanical notebook. It contains ink drawings of various parts of plants, and of sections, together with descriptions, which are sometimes very extensive.

INDEX

The dates of letters to and from Darwin’s correspondents are listed in the biographical register and are not repeated here. Darwin’s works are indexed under the short titles used throughout this volume and listed in the bibliography. Abbot, Francis Ellingwood: CD thanks for eulogy in Index, 14 & n.1; CD subscribes to Index, 289 & n.1, 312–13 & 313 n.2; lectures on ‘The god of science’, 289 & n.2, 313 Aberdeen University: T.H. Huxley elected rector, 531 & 533 n.7; students would like to nominate CD as rector, xxvi, 480 & n.1, 486 Abutilon: F. Müller’s experiments with, 224 & n.4 Académie des sciences, Paris: CD’s supporters renew application for his election as correspondent to anatomy and zoological section, 20 & 21 n.2, 23 & n.4, 603–4 & 604 n.2; rejects second application to elect CD, 86 n.5, 318–19 & 319 nn.2–3, 630–1 & 631 nn.2–3 Academy: Expression, review copy, 499–500 & 500 n.7, 501 & n.5; Expression, review (A. Dohrn), 500 n.7 Acer pseudoplatanus: variegation in progeny, 333 & 333–4 n.1 Achatinella: J. Gulick researches, 325 & nn.1–2, 326– 7 & 327 n.2 Acraea thalia (Actinote thalia), 122 & 124 n.5 Agassiz, Alexander: donates publications to Naples zoological station, 364 & 365 n.5; Expression, presentation, 557 & 558 n.1, 664; Boston fire, loss of plates, 557–8 & 558 n.2; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 99 & 100 n.1, 658; Revision of the Echini, 99 & 100 nn.3–4, 557–8 & 558 nn.3 & 5 Agassiz, Louis: collection of fossils, 534 & 541 n.5; donates publications to Naples zoological station, 364 & 365 n.5; glaciation in South America, 295 & 296 nn.2, 4 & 5; joins Hassler deep-sea dredging expedition, 22 & n.2, 38–9 & 39 n.4, 41 & n.1, 99 & 100 n.5, 295 & 296 nn.2–3; opposition to evolution, 19 & 20 n.4, 570 & 571 n.6 Agraulis juno (Dione juno), 26 & 28 n.5 Airy, George Biddell, 150 n.5; CD hopes he may allow L. Darwin to join British expeditions to ob-

serve transit of Venus, xxii, 369–70 & 370 nn.1–4 Airy, Hubert: CD asks to recommend L. Darwin to his father, xxii, 369–70 & 370 n.1; CD communicates paper to Royal Society, 308 n.2, 546 n.11; CD lends C. Wright’s paper on phyllotaxy, 149 & 150 n.5; CD’s lack of mathematics limits his understanding of phyllotaxy, 250 & 251 n.2; medical inspector, Local Government Board, forced to defer studies of phyllotaxy, 544 & 545 nn.2–3, 546; models using oak galls, 303–7 & 308 nn.10– 17, 418 n.3, 545 & 546 n.10; phyllotaxy, critical comments on C. Wright’s paper, xxii, 233–7 & 237 nn.1, 3 & 5, 250 & 251 n.2; phyllotaxy, principles of, 246 & n.1, 300–7 & 308 nn.2–17, 309 & n.2, 313–14 & 314 nn.1–2, 317 & 317–18 nn.2–3, 319–21 & 321 nn.1–11, 409–11 & 411–12 nn.1– 9, 415–18 & 418 nn.2–5; returns books to CD, 544– 5 & 545 n.1; visits Down House, 411 & 412 n.10, 418 & n.4, 651 & 652 n.26 Akademischer Verein der Naturhistoriker, Vienna: CD sends publications to, 552 & 552–3 nn.1–3 Alexander, Robert: owns Holwood House, Beckenham, 242 & n.3 Allman, G.J.: thanks CD for translation of A.W. Malm’s work on flatfish, 156 & n.1 Alouatta caraya. See Mycetes caraya Althaus, Julius: operation of cerebral nerves, 574 & n.1 American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS): A. Gray, presidential address, 429 & 430 nn.8–9, 454 & 455 n.1 American Journal of Science, 567 n.7; M. Treat, observations on Drosera longifolia, 12 n.3 American Naturalist: H. Müller, ‘Application of Darwinian theory to flowers and the insects that visit them’, 156 n.3; N.S. Shaler, ‘Rattlesnakes and natural selection’, 87 & n.3, 157 & 159 n.7;

822

Index

American Naturalist, cont. M. Treat, controlling sex in butterflies, 12 n.2, 570 & 571 n.3 ammonites: A. Hyatt on acceleration and retardation of development of, 534–41 & 541– 2 nn.7–25 & 27 Amphioxus: A. Dohrn researches embryology, 372 & 373 n.8 Amygdalus, 142 & 143 n.2 Anas crecca. See Querquedula crecca Anastomus oscitans: sexual selection, 359 & 369 n.6 Anchitherium: V.O. Kovalevsky’s monograph on, 134 & n.5 Andersson, Charles John: African observations, 397 & 398 n.1 Andersson, Nils Johan: warm adherent of Darwinism, 281 Andromeda polifolia: found in peat beds of Bavaria, 388 & 389 n.9 Annelida: A. Dohrn believes to be ancestors of vertebrates, 372 & 373 n.8 Annona cherimola (cherimoya): failure to seed in England, 72–3 & 73 n.3 Annulosa: specialization over time, 79 & 80 n.4 Ansell, Mark: groom at Down House, 229 n.2, 351 n.3, 435 & 436 n.1, 504 Anser hyperboreus (Chen caerulescens): plumage, 359 & 360 n.4 Anthropological Institute: Expression, presentation, 663 Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien: elects CD honorary member, 654–5 & 655 n.1 Anticherium aurelianense: V.O. Kovalevsky’s monograph on, 134 & n.5 ants: harvesting, J.T. Moggridge’s study of, 430– 2 & 432 nn.1–3; transmission of instincts since neuters have no progeny, 453 & n.6 Apatowsky, Henri: field physician in FrancoPrussian war, seeks CD’s help in publishing memoir, 18 & 19 n.5, 603 & n.5 Appleton, Charles Edward Cutts Birchall: founder and editor, Academy, 499 & 500 n.7, 501 & n.5 Appleton, William Henry, 54 n.1; advocates AngloUS copyright convention, 166 & 167 n.3 D. Appleton & Co., 155; Descent, CD refused to have stereotyped, 82 n.2; Descent, US ed., 359 & 360 n.3; give W. Green CD’s address, 214 & n.1; Expression, agree to publish, 76 & 77 n.3; Expression, stereotypes and heliotypes, 328 & 329 n.5, 335 & 336 n.3, 339 & n.4, 342 & nn.2–3, 344 & nn.2– 3, 349, 354 & n.3, 355 & n.1, 363 & 364 n.2, 371 & n.1, 394, 437 & n.2, 441 & 442 n.1, 442 & 443 n.4, 454 & n.3, 516 n.3; Journal of researches continues to sell, 76 & 77 n.2, 80 & 81 n.2, 108 &

n.3; C. Layton London agent, 80 & 82 n.3, 81, 108 & n.2, 355 & nn.1–2, 357, 363 & 364 n.2, 371 & n.1, 441 & 442 n.1, 454 & n.3; Origin, 6th ed., stereotypes, 54 & n.1, 62 & n.2, 76 & 77 n.1, 657– 8; payments to CD, 81 & 82 n.1, 108 & n.2, 167 n.2, 334 & 335 nn.1–2, 339 & n.3 Arany, János: secretary, Hungarian Academy, 655, 656 Archives de zoologie expérimentale: H. de LacazeDuthiers, editor, 424 & n.1 arctic plants: in freshwater aquifers, 388–9 & 389 nn.2–13 Arctostaphylos: found in Devonshire, 389 & n.14 Argyll, duke of. See Campbell, George Douglas, duke of Argyll Aricia agestis. See Lycaena agestis Aristotle: Politics, 94 n.10, 609 n.10 Artizans, Labourers, and General Dwellings Company: CD shareholder in, 124–5 & 125 n.1 & 126 n.4, 490 & 492 n.1 Art-Journal: Expression, review, 467 n.8 Ascaltis darwinii (Clathrina darwinii), 563 & 565 n.9, 642 & 644 n.9 Ascetta primordialis (Clathrina primordialis), 563 & 565 n.9, 642 & 644 n.9 ascidians: A. Dohrn disagrees with CD ontheir place in ancestry of vertebrates, 365 & n.9, 372 & 373 n.8; E. Haeckel compares with caliciform sponges, 563 & 565–6 n.10, 642 & 644–5 n.10 Askenasy, Eugen: criticisms of Darwinian theory, 69 & nn.6–7 Athenæum: critical reviews of CD’s works (J. Leifchild), 156 n.2; CD expects hostile review of Expression, 499 & 500 n.6; W.W. Reade expected to apply Darwinian principles to history and religion, 70 & 71 n.1, 75 & 76 nn.2 & 5; W.W. Reade, Martyrdom of man, abusive review, 215 & 216 n.2 Atropa belladonna, 549 nn.1–3 Aubertin, John James: alopecia, whether communicable to other species, 24–5 & 25 n.2 Ausland: A. Dohrn, ‘Englische Kritiker under AntiKritiker über Darwinismus’, 62 & 63 n.1 Ausserer, Anton: identifies trapdoor spiders for J.T. Moggridge, 432 & n.5 Ayrault, Eugène: mule breeding in the Poitou, 402 & 403 nn.1–2 Ayrton, Acton Smee: J.D. Hooker, conflict over control of Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 6 n.1, 256 & 257 n.5, 263, 270–2, 267–76 & 278 nn.15, 17 & 19, 273–4 & 278 nn.26–7, 275–7 & 278 n.30, 504 n.8, 531 & n.5 & 532 n.8; offered J. Smith post at Hyde Park behind J.D. Hooker’s back, 269 & 278 n.19; orders open competition for all appointments at Royal Botanic Garden, 40 & n.7, 276;

Index R. Owen supports over moving Kew herbarium into new Natural History Museum, 467 n.3, 470 & n.4, 473 & 474 n.5, 491 & 492 n.6, 492 & 493 n.3; sketched as porcupine, 471 Aythya. See Fuligula BAAS. See British Association for the Advancement of Science Bacon, Roger, 424 & n.3 Bain, Alexander: St G.J. Mivart now persuaded of errors of views of, 17 & 18 n.4 Baines, Thomas, 30 & 31 n.2 Balfour, Francis Maitland: experiments with skin grafts on rabbits to prove pangenesis, 591 & nn.3–4 Balfour, John Hutton, 320 & 321 n.7 Ball, John: collected in Morocco with J.D. Hooker, 57 & 58 n.7; probability of survival of new varieties, 55–7 & 57 nn. 1 & 3 Ballantine, William, 61 & 62 n.7 Bank Holiday Act, 9 & 10 n.2, 277 n.11 Barber, Mary Elizabeth: responded to CD’s queries on expression, 467 & n.2; presentation copy of Expression, 663 & 665 n.33 Barbier, Edmond: translates Origin 6th ed. into French, 524 n. Baring, Thomas George, 1st earl of Northbrook: viceroy of India, 377 & 378 n.8 Barkly, Henry: governor, Cape Colony, 158 & 159 n.13 Barnum, Phineas Taylor, 257 & 258 n.3 Barrago, Francesco, 1 Barrande, Joachim: account of trilobites informed by Catholic prejudices, 63 & 64 nn.3–4, 604–5 & 605 nn.3–4 Barron, Archibald F., 294 n.7 Bartlett, Abraham Dee: Expression, presentation, 662; introduces porcupine to a snake at CD’s request, 194, 208 & n.1; superintendent, Zoological Gardens, Regent’s Park, 194 & 195 n.2 Bassani, Francesco: with G. Canestrini, translates Expression into Italian, 500 n.8, 591 n.4 Bastian, Adolf: E. Haeckel critises review of Descent, 390 & 391 nn.4–5; E. Haeckel defends himself against criticisms of, 391 n.2 Bastian, Henry Charlton: Beginning of life, A.R. Wallace impressed by, 341 & 342 n.3, 365 & n.8; CD unconvinced by, 374–5 & 375 nn.2–11, 385–6 & 386 nn.2–3, 390 & 391 n.7, 439 n.7; Expression, presentation, 663 & 665 n.21; E. Haeckel questions judgment of, 443–4 & 444 n.4, 633 & n.4; T.H. Huxley identified ‘spontaneously generated’ organism as Sphagnum, 374 & 375 n.9, 385–6 & 386 n.2, 392 & n.2; Origin, 6th ed., pre-

823

sentation, 658 & 659 n.14; theory of spontaneous generation, 439 & 440 n.1; W.T. Thiselton-Dyer criticises theory, 439 & n.7 Bateman, Frederic: claims to prove fallacy of Darwinism in respect of language, 384 & 385 nn.4–5; On aphasia cited in Descent, 2d ed. and Expression, 384 & 385 n.3 Bates, Henry Walter: Expression, presentation, 663 & 665 n.18; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 660 n.23; protective mimicry, 34 & n.5; urges J.D. Hooker to ignore R. Owen’s attack in Nature, 492 & 493 n.1 Batrachia, 196 & n.2 Baudry, Frédéric: comments on Expression, 546–8 & nn.4–9, 639–40 & 641 nn.4–9 Baussard, M., 77 & 78 n.2 Baxter, William Walmisley: CD asks whether animal matter is used in preparation of belladonna, 542 & 543 n.2, 549 & nn.1–3, 553; CD orders chemicals for experiments, xxiv, 29 & n.2, 369 & nn.1–3, 395 & nn.1–3, 404 & nn.2–3; CD orders enema, 488 & n.2, 496 & n.2 Beagle voyage: CD read volume 1 of Lyell’s Principles of geology, 190 n.2; CD stayed with E. Lumb in Buenos Ayres, 249 n.7; CD stayed with W. Mostyn Owen prior to sailing, 476 n.3, 477–8 & 478 n.5; F. Delpino hopes to emulate, 496–7 & 497 n.2, 637 & n.2; fossil mammal specimens described by R. Owen, 15 n.3; B.J. Sulivan recalls, 38 & 39 nn.1–2; Toxodon cranium collected by CD, 312 n.4 Beard, William Holbrook: ‘The youthful Darwin expounding his theories’, 252 & 253 n.3, 290, 291 bees: CD, ‘Routes of male bumblebees’, 183–6 & 187 nn.7–14, 188 & n.3, 621–3 & 623– 4 nn.3–7; hive bees, whether sex is determined in the egg, 570 & 571 nn.4–5; sexual selection, 182–3 & 187 nn.2–5 Beethoven, Ludwig van, 73 & 74 n.3 Belgrand, François-Eugène: rainfall in post-glacial times, 248 & 249 n.3 Bell, Charles: Anatomy of expression, 493 & 494 n.2, 517 & 518 nn.6 & 10–12; cited in Expression, 487 n.5; involuntary action of the eye during sleep, 131 & nn.2–3, 136 & 138 n.1; orbicularis, action of, 487 n.5, 558 & 559 n.4 Bell, Marion: Expression, presentation, 517 & 518 n.6, 662 & 664 n.7; recollections of C. Bell, 517 & 518 nn.6–12 Beneden, Edouard van: A. Günther applies to for testimonial, 201 & n.7 Bennett, Alfred William: CD seeks reference to article on rattlesnakes, 87 & n.3; dissociates himself from Nature‘s publication of R. Owen’s attack on

824

Index

Bennett, Alfred William, cont. J.D. Hooker, 491 & 492 n.3, 531 & 533 n.6; hopes to use CD’s woodcuts in article for Nature, 520 & n.3; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658; reviews Origin 6th ed. in Nature, 87 & n.5, 157 & 159 n.7; seeks CD’s support for new scientific journal and hopes to use woodcuts, 519–20 & 520 n.1; subeditor, Nature, 150 n.4, 491 & 492 n.3, 520 n.2 Bennett, George: director, Australian Museum, 592 & 593 n.4 Benoît, René: with S. Pozzi, translates Expression into French, 406 n.6 Bentham, George: herbarium and library given to Kew, 277 n.4; supports J.D. Hooker in dispute with A.S. Ayrton, 193 & 194 n.2, 250 n.3, 277; urges J.D. Hooker to ignore R. Owen’s attack in Nature, 492 & 493 n.1 Berkeley, Miles Joseph: co-editor, Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society, 294 n.8; enjoys Expression, 491 & 492 n.7 Berlin Academy of Sciences: supports Naples Zoological Station, 501 & 502 n.5 Bernard, Claude, 92 & 94 n.9, 607–8 & 609 n.9 Bernardoni, Giuseppe, 585 n.8, 647 n.8 Bert, Paul: movements of mimosa, 481 & n.2 Betbeder, Faustin: Acton Smee Ayrton, sketched as porcupine, 471 Bethnal Green Museum: A.R. Wallace applies to direct but no appointment made, 326 & n.6, 375 & 375–6 n.12, 386 & nn.5–6, 392 & n.5 Betula: B. nana found in peat beds of Mecklenburg and in Devonshire, 388 & 389 n.6, 389 Biddulph, Alice Myddelton, 478 n.6 Biddulph, Fanny Charlotte, 478 n.6 Biddulph, Fanny Myddelton, 478 & n.6 Biddulph, Robert Myddelton, 478 n.6 Birmingham Horticultural Congress, 316 n.2 Bismarck, Otto von, 587 & 588 n.18 black coot. See Fulica atra Blair, Robert Hugh: born-blind cannot control muscles involved in frowning, 493 & 494 nn.3–4, 580–1 & 581 n.2, 581–2 & 582 nn.2–3; Expression, presentation, 493 & 494 n.1, 662 Blechynden, Arthur Henry, 377 & 378 n.7 Blyth, Edward: approves of W.W. Reade’s Martyrdom of man, 216 & 217 n.6 Boardman, Alexander F.: natural selection and emigration, 109–11 & 111 nn.1–5 Bombus (bumblebee): CD, ‘Routes of male bumblebees’, xix–xx, 183–6 & 187 nn.7–14, 188 & n.3, 621–3 & 623–4 nn.3–7; sexual selection, 182–3 & 187 nn.3–5 Bonham-Carter, Elinor Mary: helps CD get drawings of dogs for Expression, xx, 139 & 140 n.3, 217

& 218 n.3, 244 & 245 n.4; marries A.V. Dicey, 323 n.5 Bonnier, Albert: publishes Swedish translation of Descent, 281 & 282 n.2 Bopp, Franz, 547 & 548 n.8, 640 & 641 n.8 Bos etruscus, 450–1 & 451 n.6, 635 & 636 n.6 Boston: fire of 1872, 557–8 & 558 n.3 Bourke, Richard Southwell, 6th earl of Mayo: viceroy of India, 377 & 378 n.8 Bouton, Louis: CD sends his photograph, 25 & n.2 Bowen, George Ferguson: president, New Zealand Institute, 654 & n.1 Bowker, James Henry, 470 & n.1 Bowker, Thomas Holden, 470 & n.1 Bowman, William, 659 n.20; xxiv, CD asks to check information on frowning in born-blind, 581–2 & 582 nn.2–3, 589 & n.5, 648 & n.5; CD consults on causes of weeping, xxi, 42–3 & 44 n.2, 44–5 & 45 nn.2–5, 261 & 262 n.3; deplores J.D. Hooker’s treatment in dispute with Ayrton, 333 & n.3; F.C. Donders stays with in London, 299 & 300 n.3, 321–2 & 322 & n.1; Expression, presentation, 507 & n.1, 663; lends CD J.S. Wells’s Diseases of the eye, 136 & 138 n.3, 150 & 151 n.2, 151 & n.3, 164 & n.2; may visit CD with F.C. Donders, 262 & n.4, 332–3 & 333 nn.1–2 Boyle, Eleanor Boyle, 431 & 432 n.4 Brace, Charles Loring: CD and E. Darwin enjoy Dangerous classes of New York, 314 & n.4; Expression, presentation, 664; visits Down House, 238 & n.1, 291 & n.8, 314 & n.4, 428 & 429 n.3, 429 & 430 n.10, 651 & 652 n.19 Brace, Letitia: visits Down House, 238 & n.1, 291 & n.8, 314 & n.4, 430 n.10, 651 & 652 n.19 brachiopoda: E. Eichwald seeks to sell collection, 16–17 & 17 nn.3–5 brachyurous Crustacea: direction of swimming and development of eye-stalks, 156 & 157 n.5 Brady, Henry Bowman, 87 n.4 Bramah fowl: plumage of crosses, 123 & 124 n.12 Brandram, Maria, 329 & n.2 Braun, Alexander Carl Heinrich: deputy president, Leopoldina, 133 & n.1; phyllotaxy and budding of the vine, 544 & 545 n.6 Bree, Charles Robert: accused CD of lying and criticises W.B. Tegetmeier’s observations, 200 & n.10, 203 & 204 n.4; CD writes to Nature defending A.R. Wallace against, xxi–xxii, 338 & n.2, 338 & 339 nn.1–2, 341 & 342 n.1; denies primeval ear, 579 & 580 n.3; A.R. Wallace’s review demolishes his arguments against Darwinism, 325–6 & 326 nn.2–3 & 5, 341 & 343 n.2 Brehm, Alfred Edmund, 288 & 289 n.8, 630 & n.8; Illustrirtes Thierleben, French translation, 224 & n.3

Index Briggs, Mark: Darwin family coachman, 568 & n.4 Brightwen, Hannah Sarah, 174 & n.5 British Association for the Advancement of Science (BAAS): Brighton meeting, A. Dohrn reports on zoological stations, 364 & 365 n.1; Brighton meeting, J.T. Gulick, paper on diversity of evolution, 343 & 344 n.1, 347 n.3 British Museum: A.G. Butler, assistant keeper, zoological department, 219 & n.4; Isle of Wight fossils, 250 & n.2; J.W. Jones, principal librarian, 212 & n.2; R. Owen, superintendent, natural history departments, 201 n.2, 219 n.4, 341 n.4; zoological department, A. Günther appointed assistant keeper, 188–9, 192–3, 195, 196 & n.3, 200–1 & 201 nn.1–3, 211–12 & 212 n.1, 219 & n.5, 262 & n.1, 282 & n.1 Broca, Paul, 77 & 78 n.5; instruments for study of craniology, 181 & 182 n.5, 620 & 621 n.5; recommends S.J. Pozzi as translator of Expression, 457 & n.2 Bromfield, William Arnold: herbarium and library given to Kew, 277 n.4 Bronn, Heinrich Georg, 77 & 78 n.5; CD’s first German translator, 105 n.2 Brougham, William, 2d Baron Brougham and Vaux, 211 & n.2 Browne, Hugh: inherited colour-blindness, 211 & n.3 Browne, Mary Selina, 211 & n.4 Browne, Michael, 211 & n.4 Browne, Michael Ross, 211 & n.4 Bruce, Henry Austin, Baron Aberdare: supports J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute but fails to take action, 202 & 203 n.3 Brücke, Ernst Wilhelm von, 435 n.3 Büchner, Ludwig: Expression, presentation, 664 & 665 n.42 Buffon, comte de. See Leclerc, George Louis, comte de Buffon Bulwer-Lytton, Edward, 531 & 533 n.7 bumblebees. See Bombus Burnouf, Jean Louis, 548 n.4, 641 n.4 Burrows, George: signs memorial supporting J.D. Hooker, 250 n.3, 277 Burton, Richard Francis: interested in CD’s theories of beauty, 25 & n.4; lunches with CD, 25 n.4, 216 & 217 n.13, 651 Busk, George, 392 & n.3, 593 n.6; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.8; signs memorial supporting J.D. Hooker, 250 n.3, 277; supports A. Günther’s application for promotion at British Museum, 212 & n.3 Butler, Agnes Isabel: inherited habit of raising arm when sleeping in a chair, 135 n.2, 505 n.7

825

Butler, Arthur Gardiner: assistant keeper, zoological department, British Museum, 219 & n.4; communicates R. Meldola’s paper to Linnean Society, 34 & n.3; mimicry in butterflies, 51 & 51 n.3, 105 & 106 n.3, 123 & 124 n.13; names specimens sent to CD by F. Müller, 121–2 & 124 nn.2– 10 Butler, George: habit of raising arm when sleeping in a chair inherited by his children, 126 & 127 n.6, 127, 505 & nn.6–7 Butler, Henry Montagu: inherited habit of raising arm when sleeping in a chair, 126 & 127 n.6, 127 & 129 n.2, 505 & nn.6–7 Butler, Joseph: Analogy of religion, 190 & 192 n.2 Butler, Samuel (1774–1839): headmaster, Shrewsbury School, 163 & 164 n.2, 519 n.5; CD recalls his prolonged hum of disapproval, 197 & n.2 Butler, Samuel (1835–1902), 191; Erewhon, 216 & 217 n.12, 232 & nn.2 & 4, 519, 521–2 & 522 n.7; Erewhon, disclaims intention to satirise CD’s theories, xx, 190–2 & 192 nn.1 & 4, 232 n.4; Expression, presentation, 662; sends CD A.D. May’s drawings of dogs, xx, 231 & n.2, 231–2 & 232 n.2, 245 n.5; visits Down House, 197 & n.4, 232 n.5, 519 & n.5, 651 Butler, Sarah Maria, 127 & 129 n.2, 505 n.8 Butler, Thomas, 216 & 217 n.12; an unpleasant old man, 519 & n.5, 521–2 & 522 nn.7–8 butterflies: attracted to highly coloured plants, 567 n.8; mimicry, 33–4 & 34 n.3, 37–8 & 38 nn.3–4 & 7, 50–1, 105 & 105–6 nn.2–4, 123 & 124 n.13, 129–30, 148 & 149 n.11; Papilio asteris, M. Treat suggests feeding habits of larvae determine sex, 11 & 12 n.1, 570 & 571 n.3 Callandar, Robert John, 278 n.17 Calotermes: C. rugosus (Rugitermes rugosus), 26–7 & 28 n.7; C. nodulosus (Rugitermes nodulosus), 27 & 28 n.8; C. heerii (Mastotermes heerii), 27 & 28 n.9 Cameron, Julia Margaret: Expression, presentation, 662 & 664 n.8 Cameron, Verney Lovett, 487 n.3 Campanula medium: stability of progeny, 122–3 & 124 n.11 Campbell, George: lieutenant governor of Bengal, 377 & 378 n.7, 419 & 423 n.3 Campbell, George Douglas, 8th duke of Argyll: supports J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute but fails to take action, 202 & 203 n.3 Canby, William Marriott: A. Gray will ask to observe Dionaea for CD, 543 & 544 n.6 Candolle, Alphonse de: CD admires Histoire des sciences, 476 & 477 n.2, 566–7 & 567 nn.1–8; Expression, presentation, 476 & 477 n.3, 664 & 665 n.54

826

Index

Candolle, Casimir de: phyllotaxy, 544 & 545 n.4 Canestrini, Giovanni: with F. Bassani, translates Expression into Italian, 500 n.8, 591 n.4 Canis familiaris palustris: descent, 479 & 479–80 n.4 Carbonnier, Pierre: articles on Macropodus, 218 & 219 n.1 Cardwell, Edward, 1st Viscount Cardwell: on cabinet committee seeking to resolve Hooker/Ayrton dispute, 273 & 278 n.24; supports J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute but fails to take action, 202 & 203 n.3 Carl Alexander, grand-duke of Saxe-WeimarEisenach: W. Marshall secretary to, 453 n.2 Carlier, Antoine Guillaume: sends CD his Darwinism refuted by researches in psychology, 161 & 162 n.1 Carlyle, Thomas: shareholder, Artizans, Labourers & General Dwellings Company, 125; signs petition for Anglo-US copyright convention, 167 n.5 Carneri, Bartholomäus von: CD will send German translations of his works to Naturwissenschaftlicher Verein für Steiermark, 104 & 105 n.2; Darwinian theory and moral philosophy, 170 & 171 n.7, 390 & 391 nn.2–3 Carpenter, William Benjamin, 258 & n.5 Carter, Charles Henry: assists F. Galton with experiments on rabbits, 58 & n.2, 230 & n.3, 351 & n.2 Carter, Henry John: heterogenesis, 392 & n.4; structure of sponges, 96 & 97 n.7, 610 & 611 n.7 Carus, Julius Victor, 105 n.2, 450; CD gifts rights to translate Expression, 339 & 340 n.6, 414 n.3; Descent, German translation, 63 n.7, 105 n.2, 140 n.3, 286 & 288 n.3, 310 n.2, 626 & 630 n.3; Descent, German ed., CD requests further copy, 310 n.5; Expression, CD suggests German publishers increase sales estimates, 497 & 498 n.4; Expression, errata, 434 & n.6, 438 & n.5, 441 & n.1, 446 & n.2, 458–9 & 460 nn.1–11, 465, 472–3 & 473 nn.2–6, 555 n.2; Expression, translates into German, 297 & n.1, 310 & n.2, 324 n.1, 336 n.5, 337 & 338 n.2, 339 & 340 n.6, 414 & nn.2–3, 432–4 & 435 nn.2–9, 438 & n.5, 450 & n.2, 451 n.2, 497 & n.2, 569 & n.3; Expression, presentation, 434 & 435 n.10, 497 & 498 n.5, 664; handbook of zoology, 434 & 435 n.11; history of zoology, 297 & n.5, 310, 414 & n.1; invited to lecture at Edinburgh University, 434 & 435 n.12; Mivart’s Genesis of species had little impact in Germany, 297 & n.4, 310; Origin, 6th ed., German translation, 50 & n.2, 105 n.2, 297 & n.4, 310; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.20, 659; plans work on geographical distribution, 434, 438 & 439 n.10; Variation, new German edition planned, 561 & n.1, 569 & n.2

Carus, Sophie Catherine, 297 & n.2 Castagnola, Stefano: fails to distribute F. Martinelli’s pamphlet on pigeon breeding, 220–1 & 222 n.5 Castanea sativa: bud-axis, 411 & 412 n.9 Castnia spp.: coloration, 26 & 28 n.6 cats: Crystal Palace cat shows, 213 & 214 n.8, 224 & n.1, 625 & 626 n.8; expression of anger, 527; fertility of cross-breeds, 213 & 214 n.6, 224 & n.4, 624–5 & 625 n.6; instinctive behaviour and mental powers, 390 n.1; leave a house in which dead bodies lie, 389–90; A. Michelet studies history and behaviour, 212–13 & 214 n.3, 224 & n.4, 282– 3 & 283 n.5, 627 & 628 n.5, 509 & n.4, 624–5 & 625–6 n.3; raise forepaws like a pointer, 482 & 483 n.3; six-toed, 382–3 & 383 n.1 Cavanna, Guelfo, 450 & 451 n.4, 635 & 636 n.4 Cecil, Sackville Arthur, Lord: would like to attend W. Crooke’s séance, 244 & n.1, 247 & n.1 Ceratodus (Neoceratodus fosteri): A. Günther’s article on, 521 & n.1 Chambord, Henri Charles, comte de, 63 & 64 n.4, 605 & n.4 Channel Tunnel Company, 506 n.2, 638 n.2 Chapuis, Félicien: Belgian homing pigeons, 198 & 200 n.5 Charma, Antoine: cited in Expression, 596 n.4, 649 n.4; origin of nodding and shaking the head, 594–6 & nn.2 & 4, 648–9 & 649 nn.2 & 4 Chaumont, Francis Stephen Bennet François de: Expression, presentation, 662 & 664 n.11 Chen caerulescens. See Anser hyperboreus cherimoya. See Annona cherimola Chicago: fire of 1871, 429 & 430 n.14 Chikhachëv, Nikolai Matveevich: managing director, Russian Steam Navigation and Trading Company, 372 & n.3 Child, Coles William John: grows cherimoya, 72 & 73 n.4 Chlamydosaurus kingii (frilled lizard): ability to hop, 204 Chrysolophus pictus. See Phasianus pictus Cinchona (quinine): introduced from Kew to Ceylon, India and Jamaica, 267 & 277–8 n.12 Clark, Henry James: structure of sponges, 96 & 97 n.7, 610 & 611 n.7 Clarke, Charles Baron, 378 & n.12 Clarke, Richard Trevor, 72 & 73 n.1 Clemens, Samuel Langhorne (Mark Twain), 238 n.3 Close, Maxwell Henry: glaciation of Ireland (with G.H. Kinahan), 472 & n.1 Clathrina: C. darwinii. See Ascaltis darwinii; C. primordialis. See Ascetta primordialis

Index William Clowes & Sons: Origin, 6th ed., stereotypes, 54 & n.2, 62 & 63 n.1; print Expression, 247 & 248 n.2, 252 n.4, 262 n.2, 324 & 325 n.3, 327 & 328 n.2, 335 & 336 n.2, 371 & n.2, 441 & 442 n.1, 442 & 443 n.2, 466 & 467 n.7, 485 & 486 n.3, 487 & n.1, 554 & n.2 Cobbe, Frances Power: CD doubts claim that dogs commit suicide, 528 & 529 n.5, 590 n.2; emotions and psychology of dogs, 526 & nn.5–6, 528 & 529 nn.2–7, 529–30; Expression, presentation, xxiii, 525, 664 & 665 n.53; orang-utan reported to outstare a baboon, 589 & 590 n.5 Cocchi, Igino: vice-president, Società Italiana di Antropologia et di Etnologia, 653 & 654 n.1 Cockburn, Alexander James Edmund, 280 n.2 Cohn, Ferdinand Julius: theory of spontaneous generation, 392 & n.4 Cole, Henry: secretary, Department of Science and Arts, 386 & n.5 Colotis danae. See Teracolus danae Colquhoun, John: cited in Descent, 360 & n.9 Comte, Auguste: anthropology of, 151 & 152 nn.2– 3; J.S. Mill’s critique of, 76 & n.8; W.W. Reade’s Martyrdom of man indebted to, 78 & 79 n.5 Conder, Claude Reignier: introduced CD to Heliotype Company, 395 & 396 n.1 Contemporary Review: T.H. Huxley, ‘Mr Darwin’s critics’, 70–1 & 71 n.6, 105 & 106 n.7; St G.J. Mivart responds to T.H. Huxley’s criticism, 10 & n.1, 15 n.2, 144 & 145 n.4; H. Spencer, appeal for recognition of sociology, 251 & 252 n.3 Conway, Moncure Daniel: comments on Expression, 586–7 & 588 nn.2–18 Conybeare, Charles Ranken: account of dog’s suicide, 589 & 590 n.3 Cooke, Robert Francis: Expression, binding, 441, 442 & 443 n.3, 453; Expression, cut pages for 250 copies only, 454 & n.2; Expression, electrotypes, 324 & 325 n.3; Expression, folding of plates, 437 & n.2, 442 & 443 n.6; Expression, foreign editions, xxiii, 324 & n.1, 327–8 & 328 n.1, 335 & 336 n.5, 339 & 339–40 nn.4–8, 357, 360–1, 361, 363 & 364 nn.2–3, 367 & n.3, 400 & 401 n.3, 425 & n.1, 425– 6 & 426 n.2, 425 & n.1, 425–6 & 426 nn.2–3, 461 & n.3, 463 & nn.1–2; Expression, heliotypes, 324 & 325 n.2, 328 & n.3, 335, 344 & n.3, 346 & 347 nn.2–4, 349 & n.2, 349–50 & 350 n.2, 350, 353–4 & 354 nn.1–3, 354 & n.3, 355 & 356 n.2, 356 & nn.1–2, 357, 358 & n.6, 360–1 & 361 n.2, 367 & n.2, 367–8, 348 n.4, 371, 384 & n.4, 393, 425 & n.1, 425–6, 515–16, 516, 524 & n.1; Expression, index, 363, 368 & n.2; Expression, presentations, 453 & 454 n.1, 458, 461 & n.1; Expression, price, 356; Expression, publication, 436–7, 441 & 442 n.2; Ex-

827

pression, reprint, xxiii, 515–16, 516, 524 & n.1, 554 & n.1, 554 & 555 n.2, 555 & n.6; Expression, stereotypes, 335 & 336 n.3, 339 & n.3, 342 & nn.2–3, 344 & n.2, 349, 441 & 442 n.1; Origin, 6th ed., costs and publication price, 69– 70 & 70 nn.1–3 Cooper, Anthony Ashley, 7th earl of Shaftsbury: president, Artizans, Labourers & General Dwellings Company, 125 & 126 n.3 Cooper, James Davis: engraved woodblocks for Expression, 143 n.2, 146 & n.1, 209 & n.3, 214 & 215 n.2, 218 n.1, 223 & n.3, 228 & n.2, 231 & n.2, 245 n.3, 248 n.3, 328 & 329 n.7, 335 & 336 n.4; Expression, presentation, 664 & 665 n.48 Cooper, William: asks CD to subsidise his researches, 412–13 & 413–14 nn.1–2 Co-operative Wholesale Society: CD deprecates its exclusion of competition, 323 & 324 n.4 Cope, Edward Drinker: acceleration and retardation of development, 440 nn.3–5, 535 & 541 n.13, 550 & 551 n.3, 556–7 & 557 nn.4–5, 573 & n.4; cited in Origin, 6th ed., 101 & n.2, 440 nn.3–5, 534 & 541 n.4; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.19, 659; C. Wright plans to read essays, 226 & 227 n.4 copyright: Descent, pirated Russian editions, 345 & 346 n.5, 442; petition for Anglo-US convention, 166–7 & 167–8 nn.1-5 Cordylophora, 563 & 566 n.11, 642 & 645 n.11 Cornhill Magazine: F.P. Cobbe, stories about dogs, 526 & n.6, 529 & 530 n.3, 530 Cox, Edward William, 127 & 129 n.3, 165 & 166 n.2 Craig, John Smith: Aberdeen University would like to nominate CD as rector, xxvi, 480 & n.1, 486 Crawley, Charles: forwards list of pupils at Shrewsbury School and translations from Plautus, 163 & 164 nn.2–3, 164 & 165 nn.2–3 Crawley, William, 522 & nn.9–10; sends CD list of pupils at Shrewsbury School, 163 & 164 n.2, 164 & 165 n.2 Crighton-Browne, James: Expression, presentation, 662 Crookes, Ellen, 129 & n.5 Crookes, William: investigates psychic powers of mediums, xxii, 36 & 37 n.3, 127 & 129 n.3, 129, 131 & 132 n.2, 134, 165–6 & 166 nn.4–5, 169 & n.4, 227–8 & 228 n.3, 244 & nn.1–2, 247 & n.1 Crotch, George Robert, 511 & n.4 Crotch, William Duppa: cited in Descent, 2d ed., 511 n.2; horns of female reindeer, 510–11 & 511 n.1; migration of lemmings, 511 & n.4 Crustacea: stalk-eyed, 156 & 157 nn.4–5 Crystal Palace: cat shows, 213 & 214 n.8, 224 & n.1, 625 & 626 n.8; rabbits in poultry show, 504 & 505 n.3; Wombwell’s Menagerie, 590 n.5

828

Index

Cumming, Roualeyn George Gordon, 397 & 398 n.3 Cupples, Anne Jane: dogs that howl to music, 488 & 489 n.4; Expression, presentation, 488 & 489 n.2, 498, 663 & 665 n.23 Cupples, George: admires Expression, 498–9; female dogs vomit up food for their young, 499 & n.4 Cuvier, Georges, 528 n.5; form of molars determines whether a fossil was a carnivore, 312 & n.3 Cynopithecus niger, 579 & n.2 Cyrena fluminalis: C. Lyell found at Grays, Essex, 239 & 241 n.6 Daily News: reviews Expression, 482 & 483 n.12; supports J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute, 294–5 & 295 nn.2–3, 341 n.3 Daily Telegraph: Artizans, Labourers & General Dwellings Company, leader on, 124 & 125 n.1; reviews Expression, 482 & 483 n.12 Dall, William: surveys Aleutian island, 16 & 17 n.2 Dallas, William Sweetland: Expression, index, 328 & 329 n.9, 335 & 336 n.9, 339 & 340 n.8, 368 & n.2; W.H. Flower suggests he be asked to add titles of works to authors cited in Origin, 6th ed., 77 & 78 n.6; Origin, 6th ed., glossary, 15 & n.4, 51 & 52 n.4; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 660 n.21 Dana, Edward Salisbury, 223 & 224 n.2 Dana, James Dwight: Expression, presentation, 663 & 665 n.38; professor of geology, Yale University, 224 n.2; sends CD book on corals, 223 & 224 n.1, 331 & 332 n.5 Dante Alighieri, 597 & 598 n.8 Daptonoura: D. limnoria, D. lycimnia (Melete lycimnia), 122 & 124 n.4 Dareste, Camille: Descent, French ed., presentation, 522 & 523 n.1 Darwin, Charles Robert awards and positions: Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien, honorary member, 654– 5 & 655 n.1; Hungarian Academy of Sciences, foreign member, 253, 254 & n.2, 655–6; Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, foreign member, 173 & n.3, 173–4, 618–19; Leopoldina, elected member (1857), 133 n.1; New Zealand Institute, honorary member, 201 & 202 n.1, 654; Società Italiana di Antropologia et di Etnologia, honorary member, 181, 620, 653 & 654 n.1 finances: Appletons pay royalties on sales of Origin and Descent, 80–2 & 82 n.1, 108, 334 & 335 nn.1– 2, 339 & n.3; Artizans, Labourers & General Dwellings Company, bought ten shares (1871), 125 & 126 n.4; Castle Morton tithes, 558 & 559

n.8; considers sale of railway shares, 81 & n.2; Descent, payments received from J. Murray, 103– 4, 104, 328 & 329 n.10, 336 & n.10, 342, 344 & n.1; Down Church restoration fund, £35, 218 & n.2; Expression, J. Murray refunds £34.2s.6d. paid to artists, 328 & 329 n.8, 394 & n.6; Fuegian mission, donated £5 (1867), 281 n.7; H. Huxley, gift of £100 for new home, 447–8 & 448 n.2; Index, $5 to renew subscription, 312–13; joint inheritance with E.A. Darwin, 568 & n.4; J.H. Lefroy, charitable payment of £1, 66 n.2; A.D. May, pays £2.2s. for drawings of dogs, 232 n.1; pays £12 for H. Darwin to take water cure in Malvern, 311 n.3; property in Lincolnshire, 568 n.4; O.G. Rejlander, £7.7s. for photographs for Expression, 355 & 356 n.4; B. Riviere, five guineas for sketches of dogs, 215 & n.3, 217–18; sale of Etruria, £1833.6s.8d., 516–17 & 518 n.3; subscribes £10 for new road, 223 & n.1; will directs that real estate be sold, 569 health: xxv, xxvi, 228; able to work 3–4 hours daily but must avoid talk and excitement, 311; a confirmed invalid, 519, 521; delays trip to London, 554 & 555 n.4, 559 n.7, 569 & n.2, 573 & n.2, 576 n.2; fails several times a day, when unable even to read; often unable to go out, 169; growing old and all letters are a fatigue, 585, 647; ill-health excludes from society, 475–6; ‘not well and overworked’ (January), 41; only able to talk to people for short periods, 327 & n.2; orders enemas, 488 & n.2, 496; overwork forces going away from home to rest, 419 & n.5, 426 & 427 n.4, 427 & 428 n.5, 436, 453, 454 & 455 n.3, 456 & n.3, 456 & 457 n.4, 469; poor health during previous summer and autumn (1871), 131 & n.4; poor health in December, 572 & n.4, 573, 573 & n.3, 578; rarely has an hour of comfort unless asleep or immersed in work, 326; remains very feeble, 487; unable to accept nomination as rector of Aberdeen University, xxvi, 486; unable to attend a séance xxii, 168–9 & 169 n.2; weak health inherited by several of his children, 476 opponents of theories: Académie des sciences rejects second application on CD’s behalf, 318–19 & 319 nn.2–3, 630–1 & 631 nn.2–3; L. Agassiz, 19 & 20 n.4, 570 & 571 n.6; E. Askenasy, 69 & nn.6– 7; H.C. Bastian, 374 & 375 n.11; F. Bateman, 384 & 385 nn.4–5; C.R. Bree, 325–6 & 326 nn.2–3 & 5, 338 & 339 n.1; H.C.F. Jenkin, 19 & 20 n.6; J. Leifchild, 156 n.2; W.P. Lyon, 373 & 373–4 nn.1– 3, 376 & nn.1 & 3; St G.J. Mivart, 10 n.1, 11 & nn.1–2, 14 & 15 n.2, 19 & 20 n.6, 75 & 76 n.4, 153 & 154 n.4; C.W. Nägeli, 69 & n.7; R. Owen, 14 & 15 n.3; F.J. Pictet de la Rive, 19 & 20 n.6; M.

Index Wagner, 170 & nn.4–5 publications: — Climbing plants; spiralling tendrils, 455 n.2; woodcuts, 520 & n.3 — Climbing plants, 2d ed., 477 & n.4; P. Bert cited, 481 n.2 — Coral reefs; H. Howorth attempts to extend CD’s research, 331 & 332 nn.4–5 — Cross and self fertilisation, 6 n.4, 148 n.4, 317 n.9 — Descent, xvii; Académie des sciences, members upset by, 319 & n.4, 630 & 631 n.4; Anser hyperboreus, plumage, 359 & 360 n.4; available on Pacific Railway, 85; beauty, concepts of, 25 n.4; butterflies attracted to highly coloured plants, 567 n.8; Caffres, whether a distinct group, 106 & 107 n.4; P. Carbonnier cited, 219 n.1; cats, instinctive behaviour and mental powers, 390 n.1; colour in mammals attributable to sexual selection, 106 & 107 n.6; colour of skin and hair affects immunity, 106 & 107 n.5; comparative mortality of males and females, 362 & n.2, 631 & n.2; CD fears publication was a mistake, 63, 73, 75 & 76 n.1; CD receives payment of £300.15s. from J. Murray, 103–4, 104; development of human intellect in remote past, 117 n.6, 617 n.6; dogs, reasoning power, 359–60 & 360 nn.8–9; Dryopithecus shows antiquity of anthropomorphous Simiae, 154 n.8; effect of light and heat on hair and skin colour, 359 & 360 n.7; errata, 1– 2 & 2–3 nn.1–10, 198; A. Espinas comments on, 90–93 & 94 nn.2–13, 605– 9 & 609 nn.2–13; female baboon stole young dogs and cats, 577 n.2; H. von Helmholtz cited, 177 n.2; E. Haeckel acknowledges debt to, 390 & 391 n.2; hairiness in humans, 257 & 258 n.2; humans and animals liable to same diseases, 575 n.2, 646 n.2; imitation, natural selection and, 37 & 38 n.4; J.F. Mackenzie notes inherited characteristics in India after reading, 66 & 66–7 nn.1– 6; C.J. Maynard’s observation on mud-turtles, 555 n.2; moral sense in humans and animals, 86 n.6, 142 & n.3, 528; J. Murray pays CD £315 for reprint, 328 & 329 n.10; negroes have scanty beards and no whiskers, 106 & 107 n.2; origin of language, 385 n.5; pheasants, females of several species resemble each other in plumage, 121 n.2; photograph of hairy Burmese, 147 n.1; pirated Russian editions, 345 & 346 n.5, 401 & n.5, 442; presentations, 20–1 & 21 n.4, 484 & n.2, 604 & n.4; proportion of male and female births mysteriously affected by illegitimacy, 286 & 288 n.3, 628 & 630 n.3; reindeer, appearance of horns, 245 & 246 n.4; retrogression, 94 n.2, 609 n.2; reversion, 515 n.5; reviews, Quarterly Review [St G.J. Mivart], 11 & n.2, 15 n.2, 20 nn.6–7, 70–1 & 71

829

n.6, 75 & 76 n.4; sales, CD fears 2d edition will not be needed, 499 & 500 n.2; G. de Saporta comments on, 111–17 & 117–18 nn.2–16, 611–17 & 617 nn.2–16; savage music, W.W. Reade dissents from CD’s views on, 70 & 71 n.3, 106 & 107 n.3; sexual selection favours the more attractive, 176 n.2; sexual selection, characters gained are commonly transferred to the other sex, 149 n.12; simian ancestry of humans, 112 & 117 nn.3 & 4, 612 & 617 nn.3 & 4; social instincts, role in preservation of species, 93 & 94 n.13, 608 & 609 n.13; success in UK, 63 & n.8; sutures in skulls of children and early humans, 515 n.4; tree climbing in children, 117 n.5, 617 n.5; A.R. Wallace, protective coloration of butterflies, 106 n.4; Woolnerian ear, 579 n.1 — Descent, 2d ed., 182 n.8, 500 n.2, 621 n.8; F. Bateman cited, 385 n.3; changing colours of North American migratory birds, 360 n.7; W.D. Crotch cited, 511 n.2; domesticated koalas, 362–3 & 363 n.1; dull colours of organisms in dull-coloured regions, 38 & n.7; H. von Helmholtz cited, 177 n.2; J.C. Houzeau cited, 397 n.2; W. Marshall cited, 246 n.4; H. Müller cited, 187 nn.3–5; sexual selection, mimetic butterflies, 28 n.4; Spiza cyanea, aggression when courting, 357 n.3; A. Weismann cited, 187 n.6 — Descent, Dutch ed., 366 & n.3 — Descent, French ed.; delayed by J.J. Moulinié‘s illness, 403–4 & 404 nn.2–3, 405 & nn.2 & 4, 632 & nn.2–3; J.J. Moulinié‘s translation often unintelligible (F. Baudry), 547 & 548 n.10, 640 & 641 n.10; presentations, 153 n.1, 522 & 523 n.1; publication of vol. 1, 7 & 8 n.4, 117 n.2, 457, 617 n.2; publication of vol. 2, 457 & 457–8 n.3, 522–3 & 523–4 nn.1–2, 547 & 548 n.10, 640 & 641 n.10 — Descent, German ed., 310 & n.5; furor caused by, 63 & n.7; reviews, K. von Seidlitz, 140 & n.3 — Descent, Russian edition; ban on publication lifted, 346 n.4; pirated editions, 345 & 346 n.5, 401 & n.5, 442 — Descent, Swedish edition; volume 1 published, 281–2 & 282 n.1 — Descent, US ed., 359; CD refused to print from stereotypes, 80 & 82 n.2; payment to CD, 334 & 335 nn.1–2, 339 & n.3 — Earthworms; analysis of chalk, 96 n.3; deep worm burrows in India, 121 n.2; dried earth, measurement by weight, 130 n.2; earthworms, feeding, 178 n.5; D. Forbes cited, 96 n.3; G. King cited, 475 n.1; published 1881, 475 n.1; ridges and furrows near Stonehenge and Beaulieu Abbey observed by W.E. Darwin, 5 nn.2–4; ridges and furrows, persistence of, 32 n.3, 60 n.2, 68

830

Index

Darwin, Charles Robert, cont. n.2; J. Scott cited, 24 n.2, 121 n.2; vegetable mould,chemical analysis, 178 n.3; L.C. Wedgwood’s evidence cited without attribution, 33 n.1, 68 n.3; Wroxeter, worm casts, 35 n.3 — Expression; advance copy sent to CD, 466; advertised in Publisher’s Circular, 247 & 248 n.4; Arrotino, spelling corrected in 2d printing, 441 & n.1; C. Bell cited, 518 nn.6 & 12, 559 nn.4–5; biblical quotations questioned by J.V. Carus, 458– 9 & 460 nn.1–3; binding, 441, 442 & 443 n.3, 453, 651; blushing of hands, 534 n.2; W. Bowman thanked, 507 & n.3; bristling hair under fear, 560 n.5; cats, drawings (T. Wood), 139 & 140 n.4; A. Charma cited, 596 n.4, 649 n.4; children react to touch on sole of foot at seven days, 503 & 504 n.3; corrections to first printing, 460 nn.4, 7 & 10, 466 & 467 n.7, 485, 487 & n.1, 554 & 555 n.2; cut pages, CD’s preference for, 442, 454 & n.2; CD completes ms., 252 & n.4, 254 & 255 n.2, 650 & 651 n.1, 661; CD corrects proofs, 310, 326, 350 & n.4, 367 n.1, 369 n.1, 650 & 651 n.3, 661; CD defers payment, 502; CD might prepare 2d ed. in a year’s time, 554; CD refers to as ‘essay’, 498 & 499 n.2, 661; devotion, 588 nn.8 & 17; dog transfers maternal affection to master, 577 n.2; dogs do not close their eyes when barking loudly, 559 n.3; dogs, drawing sent by M.C. Lloyd, 244–5 & 245 n.3; dogs, drawings (A.D. May), xx, 231 n.2, 231–2 & 232 nn.1–2, 245 nn.2 & 5; dogs, drawings (B. Riviere), xx, 139 & n.1, 143, 146, 209 & n.1, 214–15 & 215 n.3, 217–18 & 218 n.2, 222– 3, 228 & n.2, 230 & n.1, 230–1, 245 n.2, 246 & n.3; dogs, gesticulations, 526 & 527 n.1, 547 & 548 n.6, 639 & 641 n.6; dogs, movement of lips when barking, 601 n.2; dogs roll in carrion but do not eat it, 482 & 483 n.6; dogs, snarling, 588 n.10; F.C. Donders cited, 151 n.4; ear of Cynopithecus niger, 579 & n.2; electrotypes, 324 & 325 n.3, 342 & nn.2–3, 344 & n.2, 400 & 401 n.3; elephants shed tears, 398 n.3; extent (370–80 pp.), 261 & 262 n.2, 310; eyelids, movement during meditation, 588 n.4; fear and terror, 560 n.1, 584 n.3; foreign editions, production costs, 327–8 & 328 n.1, 339 & n.4, 335 & 336 nn.5 & 8, 342 & nn.2– 3, 344 & n.2, 348 & n.8, 348–9 n.10, 355 & 356 n.3, 400 & 401 n.3, 414 & n.2, 462 n.5; F. Galton cited on inherited gestures, 132 n.3; game cocks, terror causes raising of head feathers, 200 n.9; girl hides her head in shame, 598 n.3; gnashing of teeth, 482 & 483 n.5; grief muscles exhibited in ancient sculptures, 441 & n.1; heliotypes, 83–4 & 84 n.3, 118 & n.3, 310, 324 & 325 n.2, 336 & n.7, 337, 339, 344 n.3, 346 & 347 n.4, 353, 356 &

n.1, 357, 358 & n.6, 363 & 364 n.1, 371 & n.1, 384 & n.4, 393, 395–6 & 396 n.2, 405 & 406 n.7, 414 & n.2, 423–4, 425 & nn.1–3, 425–6, 437 & n.2, 441 & 442 n.1, 442,461 & n.3, 461, 463, 487 & n.2, 497 & 498 n.4, 515–16 & 516 n.2, 524 & n.1, 554 & n.2, 554–5 & 555 n.5, 661; heliotypes, cost, 328 & n.3, 330 & 330–1 nn.2–3, 335 & 336 n.6, 342, 344 & n.3, 346 & 347 nn.2–4, 347 & 348 n.4, 349 & n.2, 349–50 & 350 n.2, 350, 353–4 & 354 nn.1–3, 354 & n.3, 355 & 356 n.2, 356 & n.2, 357 & 358 nn. 2–3, 360–1 & 361 n.2, 361 & n.2, 363 & 364 n.2, 367 & n.3, 367- -8, 371 & n.1, 400 & 401 n.4, 462 & n.5, 512 & n.4, 638 & 639 n.4; heliotypes, shortage delays reprint, 425 & n.3, 426 & n.1, 515–16 & 516 n.2, 516, 524 & n.1, 554–5 & 555 n.5; heliotypes praised by Graphic magazine, 467 n.8; H. von Helmholtz cited, 177 n.2; humans in agony compress their lips, 585 n.12, 647 n.12; index, 328 & 329 n.9, 335 & 336 n.9, 339 & 340 n.8; inherited gestures, 132 & n.3, 505 n.7; Italian translation (Canestrini and Bassani), 500 & n.8, 500, 591 n.4; Italian translation, C.I.F. Major seeks to undertake, 450, 511–12 & nn.3– 4, 635, 638 & 639 nn.3–4; Italian translation, P. Mantegazza offers to undertake, 335 & 336 n.8, 584 & 585 n.6,590, 646 & 647 n.6; lachrymation, W. Bowman paraphrased, 44 n.2; laughter accompanied by tears, 398 n.1; H.E. Litchfield reads proofs, 296 & 297 n.6, 322 & 322–3 n.1; R.B. Litchfield quoted on genesis of melody, 197 & n.3, 510 & n.2; Macrobius cited, 599 n.2; modulation of sounds made by babies, 588 n.2; monkeys void excrement through fear, 585 n.11, 647 n.11; A. Nicols asks for a copy, 363 & n.2; orbicularis, action of, 486 & 487 n.5, 559 nn.4– 5; photograph of smiling girl, 83–4 & 84 nn.2–3, 84; pitch of children’s voices, 602 n.2; pointers’ raised forepaws, 482 & 483 n.3; porcupine rattles quills on sight of a snake, 208 n.1; presentations, 218 & n.4, 328 & n.2, 352 & n.2, 370–1 & 371 n.5, 390 & 391 n.8, 427 & n.6, 434 & 435 n.10, 438, 453 & 454 n.1, 458, 461 & n.1, 464 & 465 n.5, 466, 467 n.2, 468 n.1, 469 & n.3, 476 & n.2, 476 & 477 n.3, 480 & 481 n.2, 482 & 483 n.1, 484 n.2, 485 & n.1, 488 & 489 n.2, 491 & 492 n.7, 493 & 494 n.1, 497 & 498 n.5, 501 & 502 n.1, 503 & 504 n.1, 506 & n.1, 507 & n.1, 509–10 & 510 n.1, 517 & 518 n.6, 520 & n.1, 524–5 & 525 n.1, 525, 543 & 544 n.1, 546 & 548 n.3, 557 & 558 n.1, 561 & 565 n.2, 578 & 579 n.6, 580 & 581 n.1, 584 & 585 n.3, 636 & n.2, 639 & 641 n.3,641 & 644 n.2, 646 & 647 n.3; price (12s.), 356, 499 & 500 n.4, 500 & 501 n.2; principles of involuntary expression, 507 & n.2; print run (5000 copies), xxiii, 324, 327,

Index 353; publication (26 November), xvii, 324, 352 & n.2, 390 & 391 n.8, 426 & 427 n.3, 436–7 & 437 n.3, 441 & 442 n.2, 465 n.5, 469 & n.3, 651 & n.8; puzzled meditation, Plautus’ Miles gloriosus quoted, 164 & 165 n.3; raising of feathers and hair, 200 n.9, 577–8 nn.2–5; W.W. Reade cited, 71 n.8, 482 & 483 n.1 — Expression; reprint (2000 copies), xxiii, 554 & nn.1 & n.4, 578 & 579 n.6, 569 & n.3, 661; review copies, 466 & 467 n.1; reviews, 482 & 483 nn.12– 13, 499 & 500 n.6; reviews, Pall Mall Gazette, 445 & 446 n.2; Quarterly Journal of Science (A.R. Wallace), 506 & 507 n.2; reviews, Revue scientifique (L. Dumont), 568 n.2; reviews, The Times, 569 & 570 n.4, 571 & 572 nn.1 & 3; sales, 467 n.6, 495–6 & 496 n.1, 497, 499, 651; salivation increased in hungry man faced with tempting food, 553 n.1; Seneca cited on expression of shame, 596 n.2; W. Shakespeare quoted, 434 & 435 n.7, 438, 553 & n.1; shrugging, 547 & 548 n.7, 588 n.16, 639–40 & 641 n.7; sneezing as reflex, 588 n.7; N. Sobko seeks to translate into Russian, 394 & 395 n.3, 401 & n.8; W. Somerville quoted, 434 & 435 n.6; stereotypes, 327, 328 & 329 n.5, 335 & 336 n.3, 337, 339 & n.4, 342 & n.2, 344 & n.2; R. Sundström eagerly anticipates, 282 & n.3; surprise, 584 n.2; Tapaya douglasii (horned toad), 196 n.2; W.B. Tegetmeier cited, 200 n.9; J.E. Tennent cited, 398 n.2; A. Tennyson (mis)quoted, 322 & 323 n.2; voluntary vomiting, humans may have lost facility, 367 n.3; G.C. Wallich thanked for photograph, 83 n.3; H. Wedgwood cited, 548 n.8, 641 n.8; weeping, 584 n.4; woodblocks engraved by J.D. Cooper, 143 n.2, 146 & n.1, 223 & n.3, 209 & n.3, 214 & 215 n.2, 218 n.1, 231 & n.2, 245 n.3, 248 n.3 — Expression, 2d ed.; F. Baudry cited, 548 n.7, 641 n.7; blushing of hands, 534 n.2; born-blind cannot control muscles involved in frowning, 494 n.4; corrections, 460 n.11, 473 n.6, 473 n.6; edited by F. Darwin and published after CD’s death, xxiv, 351 n.2, 460 n.11, 553 n.1, 555 n.3, 560 n.1, 572 n.4, 661; female dogs vomit up food for their young, 499 n.4; human scream like that of a horse in agony, 577 n.3; kissing unknown in Africa, 483 n.7; laughter accompanied by tears, 398 & n.4; A.J. Munby’s description of fear and terror, 560 n.1; physician unconsciously imitating muscular contractions of woman in labour, 525 n.4; Ramayana cited, 548 n.4, 641 n.4; Shakespeare meant blush was unseen, not absent, 553 & n.1; W. Tuke cited, 582 n.1; twitching of toes uncontrollable and may reveal a lying witness, 500 n.5; voluntary vomiting, 572 n.4; H. Wedg-

831

wood cited, 548 n.12, 641 n.12; W.M. Wundt cited, 351 n.2 — Expression, Dutch ed., 335 & 336 n.8, 366 & n.2, 394 & n.2, 414, 425 & 426 nn.2–3, 426 n.2 — Expression, French ed., 335 & 336 n.8, 339 & 340 n.7, 357 & 358 n.4, 414, 423–4 & 424 n.2, 425 & 426 n.2, 461–2 & 462 nn.3 & 5, 463 & nn.1–2, 466 & 467 nn.2–3, 662; illness prevents J.J. Moulinié from translating, 404 & n.4, 405 & n.5, 424 & n.3, 457 & n.1, 523, 632 & n.4, 658; trans. S. Pozzi and R. Benoît, 406 n.6, 457 & n.2, 523 & 524 n.6 — Expression, German ed., 297 & n.1, 310 & n.2, 324 n.1, 336 n.5, 337 & 338 n.2, 357 & 358 n.3, 361 & n.2, 384 n.3, 394 & n.4, 414 & n.2, 425 & 426 nn.2–3, 432–4 & 435 nn.2–9, 441, 443 n.2, 450 n.2, 451 n.2, 497 & 498 nn.3–4, 569 & n.3, 636 n.2, 662 — Expression, Russian ed., 134 & n.2, 324 & n.1, 335 & 336 n.5, 339 & 340 n.5, 344–5 & 345 nn.2 & 4–6, 345–6 & 346 nn.2 & 6, 347–8 & 348–9 nn.4 & 10, 350 & n.1, 351 & 352 n.4, 357 & 358 n.3, 361–2, 394 n.2, 396 & n.3, 400–1 & 401 nn.1–4 & 8, 414, 419 & n.1, 425 & 426 n.2, 443 nn.2 & 5 — Expression, US ed., 76 & 77 n.3, 328 & 329 n.5, 335 & 336 n.3, 339 & n.4, 342 & n.2, 344 & n.2, 349, 354 & n.3, 355 & n.1, 357 & 358 n.2, 358 & n.6, 363 & 364 n.2, 371 & n.1, 394, 414, 437 & nn.2–3, 441 & 442 n.1, 442 & 443 n.4, 454 & n.3, 516 n.3 — Forms of flowers, 477 n.4 — Insectivorous plants, 61 n.2, 238 n.4, 369 nn.1–3, 377 n.3, 395 n.2, 404 nn.2–3, 430 n.6, 455 n.5, 477 n.4, 543 n.2, 549 nn.1 & 3, 651 n.5 — Orchids; presentation, G.C. Oxenden, 153 n.1; woodcuts, 520 & n.3 — Variation, 317 n.9; cats, fertility of cross-breeds, 213 n.6, 625 n.6; cross-breeding, 292 n.5, 445 & n.6; domestic fowl, crossing, 124 n.12; hairless Turkish dogs, 260 & 261 n.4, 626 & 627 n.4; Nicotiana tabacum, fertility of crosses, 298 & 299 n.12; peach tree descended from almond, 241 n.11; Phasianidae, crosses, 121 & n.2; reviews, Pall Mall Gazette (G.H. Lewes), 180 n.6; T. Rivers cited, 133 n.3; seedlings of apples resemble parents, 241 n.2; six-toed cats, 383 n.1; sweetpeas, cross-fertilisation — Variation, 2d ed.; L.H. Jeitteles cited, 479 n.3 — Variation, German ed.; new edition planned, 561 & n.1, 569 & n.2 — ‘Dimorphic conditions in Primula’, 73 n.2, 477 & n.4 — ‘Distribution of erratic boulders’, 296 n.6 — ‘Formation of mould’, 22 n.1, 23 & 24 n.1 — ‘Illegitimate offspring of dimorphic and trimor-

832

Index

Darwin, Charles Robert, cont. phic plants’, 477 n.4 — ‘Specific difference in Primula’, 477 n.4 — ‘Three forms of Lythrum salicaria’, 65 n.2, 318 n.3, 477 n.4 — ‘Two forms in species of Linum’, 477 n.4 — ‘Volcanic phenomena and the formation of mountain chains’, 436 n.5 reading: E. Askenasy, criticisms of Darwinian theory, 69 & n.6; E. Ayrault, mule breeding in the Poitou, 403 n.1; H.C. Bastian, The beginning of life, 374–5 & 375 n.2; C. Bell, Anatomy of expression, 131 n.2; A.C.H. Braun on phyllotaxy and budding of the vine, 545 n.6; C.R. Bree, Species not transmutable, 326 n.3; A. de Candolle, Histoire des sciences, 477 n.2, 566–7 & 567 nn.1– 8; J.V. Carus, Geschichte der Zooloogie, 414 & n.1; F.P. Cobbe, emotions and psychology of dogs, Quarterly Review, 528–9 & 529 n.1; E.D. Cope, ‘Method of creation of organic forms’, 541 n.13; J.D. Dana, Corals and coral islands, 224 n.1; J.W. Dawson, flora of Devonian and Upper Silurian formations in Canada, 30 & n.1; J. Denny, ‘Relative influence of parentage in flowering plants’, 291–2 & 292 n.1; A. Dohrn, ‘Englische Kritiker under Anti-Kritiker über Darwinismus’, 62 & 63 n.1; F.C. Donders, projection of visual phenomena, 138 n.7, 151 & n.3; W.H. Edwards, Butterflies of North America, part 9, 171 n.2; T.H. Farrer, fertilisation of papilionaceous flowers, 444– 5 & 445 n.2; H.Fick, influence of natural science on rights, 323 & 324 n.2; K.F. von Gärtner, Befruchtungsorgane der vollkommeneren Gewächse (1844), 292 n.6; K.F. von Gärtner, Bastarderzeugung in Pflanzenreich (1849), 292 n.6; K. Giuntsburg, child mortality in the light of Darwinian theory, 362 n.3, 632 n.3; A. Gray, How plants behave, 289 & 291 nn.2–3; A. Gray, presidential address to American Association for Advancement of Science, 430 n.9; J. Gulick, Achatinella, 326– 7 & 327 n.1; J.T. Gulick, diversity of evolution, 347 n.3; A. Günther, Ceratodus, 521; E. Haeckel, monograph on calciform sponges, 565 n.4, 644 n.4; E. Haeckel, Naturliche Schöpfungsgeschichte, 3d ed., preface, 390 & 391 n.1; O. Heer, fossil flora of Spitzbergen, 340 & n.2; F. Hildebrand, papers on seed dispersal, 64 & 65 n.4, 68; A. Hyatt, fossil cephalopods, 440 & nn.2 & 4; A. Hyatt, reversion in ammonites, 541 n.14; L.H. Jeitteles, fossil remains in south-west Germany and Austria, 479 n.1–2, 479 n.2, 487 n.1; J. Kaines, anthropology of Auguste Comte, 151 & 152 n.2; A. Kerner von Marilaun, cultivation of Alpine plants, 418 n.5, 545 n.5; G. Krefft, review of R.

Owen’s study of Thylacoleo carnifex, 311–12 & 312 n.2; E.R. Lankester, ‘Siebold’s new researches in parthenogenesis’, 445 & n.10; C. Lyell, Principles of geology, 11th ed., 190 n.2; T. Mallet, volcanic energy, 439 & n.4; P. Mantegazza, physiology of pain, 585 n.8, 590, 647 n.8; P. Mantegazza, respiratory expression of pain, 585 n.7, 647 n.7; P. Mantegazza, review of Expression, 585 n.5, 647 n.5; W. Marshall, bony protruberances on skulls of birds, 245 & n.2; W. Marshall, resemblances between humans and other animals, 245 & n.2; H. Martineau, Positivist philosophy of August Comte, 151 & 152 n.3; C.F. Martins, new school of English and German naturalists, Revue des deux mondes, 64 n.2, 605 n.2; T. Meehan, buds of Fraxinus quadrangulata, 309 n.18; St G.J. Mivart’s response to T.H. Huxley, Contemporary Review, 10 n.1; J.T. Moggridge, Harvesting ants and trap-door spiders, 432 n.1; Month, critique of natural selection [St G.J. Mivart], 14 & 15 n.2; L.H. Morgan, Systems of consanguinity, 31 & n.1; H. Müller, ‘Application of Darwinian theory to flowers and the insects that visit them’, 156 n.3, 182–3 & 187 n.2; J. Nunn, voyage to Kerguelen Island, 427 & 428 n.3; W.W. Reade, Martyrdom of man, 180 n.1; Revue scientifique, 568 & n.2; H.E. Richter, future of the military class, 323 & 324 n.3; A. Roujou, analogies of humans and ancient mammals, 86 & n.2; J. Sachs, Lehrbuch der Botanik, 545–6 n.7; G. de Saporta, ‘L’ecole transformiste et ses derniers travaux’, 154 & n.9; J. Scott, Loranthaceae, 161 & n.5; G. von Seidlitz, Die Darwin’sche Theorie, 140 n.1; D.A. Spalding, ‘On instinct’, 445 & n.9; H. Spencer, Principles of psychology, 2d ed., 255 n.3; L. Stephen, ‘Divinity and Darwinism’, 150 & n.8; J.E. Taylor, ‘Geographical distribution of animals and plants, geologically considered’, 21 & n.2; W.T. Thiselton-Dyer, ‘On spontaneous generation and evolution’, 439 & n.7; W. Tuke, Influence of the mind upon the body, 582 & n.1; A. Weismann, influence of isolation on formation of species, 89 & n.3, 147–8 & 148 n.1, 222 & n.3; C. White, Regular gradation in man, 427 & n.5; W.D. Whitney, strictures on A. Schleicher’s views on the nature of language, 241 & 242 nn.4–5; C. Wright, reply to St G.J. Mivart, North American Review, 227 n.6, 241 & 242 n.2; C. Wright, uses and origin of arrangements of leaves in plants, 149 & 150 n.1, 308 n.8 scientific views: H.C. Bastian’s theory of spontaneous generation unconvincing, 439 & n.7; beauty, tastes of animals can vary, 148 & 149 n.10; change in nature is gradual, 78 & 79 n.3; characters of two fathers cannot be transmitted to a

Index single individual, 224 & n.4; contrast between ‘methodical’ and ‘unconscious’ selection, 241 & 242 n.5; Expression will provide speculations that others may correct, 151; forms unchanged when a species moves as a body, 222 & n.2; instincts, disagrees with A. Gray’s view that all are congenital habits, 566 & 567 n.7; humans the offshoot of Old World simian stem, 339 n.2; marine animals resembling ascidians were most ancient progenitors of vertebrates, 365 & n.9; natural selection daily and hourly scrutinises the world, 373–4 n.3; natural selection is not solely responsible for the modification of species, 19 & 20 n.8, 343 & 344 n.3; pangenesis will one day be proved true, 374 & 375 n.11; peacock spreads his tail to excite the female, 89; reduction of an organ is an environmental response, not degeneration, 94 n.5, 609 n.5; retrogression may occur when greater complexity is unnecessary, 94 n.2, 609 n.2; sexual selection a powerful agent in formation of new species, 148 & 149 nn.9–10; sexual selection, characters gained are commonly transferred to the other sex, 148 & 149 n.12; sexual selection, females undoubtedly appreciate male display, 89; simian ancestry of man, 153 & 154 n.2, 339 n.2; unconvinced by secular refrigeration theories, 439 & n.5 scientific work: action of the eye during meditation, 130–1 & 131 n.2; analysis of chalk, 87 & 88 n.3, 94 & 95 n.4, 95 & 96 nn.2–3, 98 & n.3; any further work will be chiefly new, xvii, 489; Bombus, routes of male bumblebees, 183–6 & 187 nn.7–14, 188 & n.3, 621–3 & 623–4 nn.3–7; cause of wrinkles on turf, 82–3 & 83 nn.2–3; causes of lachrymation, 44–5 & 45 nn.3 & 5; climbing plants, spiralling tendrils, 543; cross- and selffertilisation, 147–8 & 148 n.4, 291–2, 317 n.9; earthworms, action of, xvii, xxiv, 3–5 & 5 nn.2– 4, 8–9 & 9 nn.3–4, 9 & n.1, 12 & n.2, 22 & n.1, 23–4 & 24 n.2, 102 n.4, 130 & nn.2–3, 160–1 & 161 n.3, 177–8 & 178 nn.2–3 & 5, 259 n.2, 369 & n.1, 475; Expression, completes ms. and corrects proofs, xx, 131, 151, 209, 231 & n.2, 254 & 255 n.2, 289 & 291 n.4, 310, 326, 350 & n.4, 363, 367 n.1, 369 n.1, 650 & 651 n.1, 661; functions of mucus on moistened seeds, 69 & nn.3–4; heart rate, effect of strong emotion, 283 & 282 n.3, 284 & n.3; horned toad, 196 & n.2; inherited gestures, 132 & n.3; insectivorous plants, experiments on, xvii, xxiv, 61 & n.2, 238 & n.4, 289 & 291 n.4, 369 & nn.1–3, 376 & 377 n.3, 390 & 391 n.9, 395 & nn.1– 3, 404 & nn.2–3, 427 & n.2, 454–5 & 455 nn.5–7, 460 & 461 n.4, 473, 497 & 498 n.7, 542 & 543 nn.2– 3, 543 & 544 n.5, 549 nn.1 & 3, 553, 570,

833

572 n.3, 650 & n.5; intermediate varieties, 148 & 149 n.6; Lathyrus, cross- and self-fertility, 445 & n.6, 449 n.3; orchids, whether self-fertile, 293 & 294 n.9; Origin, 6th ed., corrects proofs, xvii, xx, 59, 650 & 651 n.1; Origin, 6th ed. the last; will devote remaining strength to new work, xvii, 59; Phasianidae, crosses, 121 & n.2; Pleroma, experiments with, 6 & n.4; polyanthus, experiments with crossing, 73 n.2; porcupine, action of quills on sight of a snake, 194; pouting in children, 284 & n.4; Queries about expression, W.W. Reade, 71 n.8; rattlesnake, purpose of rattle, 87 & nn.3–4, 157–8 & 159 nn.7–8; restricts himself to botanical physiology, 477 & n.4; resumes botanical work and will never again attempt to discuss theoretical views, 390, 392; reversion in rabbit crosses, 126 & 127 n.4; spiralling tendrils, whether in response to stimulus, xvii, 289 & 291 n.3, 428, 454 & 455 n.2; tails and manes of horses, 135 & 136 n.2; will not write anything more on so difficult a subject as evolution, xvii, 326 support for theories: F.E. Abbott, 313; H. Airy, 415 & 418 n.2; A. de Candolle, 566 & 567 n.4; B. von Carneri, 170 & 171 n.7, 390 & 391 nn.2– 3; A.E. Dobbs, 29; A. Dohrn, xix, 62 & 63 n.1; F. Galton, 37 n.2, 58 & n.4; K. Giuntsburg, 362 & n.3, 631 & 632 n.3; J. Gulick, 325 & n.1, 342– 4; E. Haeckel, 96, 390 & 391 n.2, 443, 444, 610, 632, 633; H.A. Head, 407–8; G. Jäger, 391 n.2; A. Kirchhoff, 391 n.2; F.J.H. de Lacaze-Duthiers, 23 & n.3, 424 & 424–5 nn.2–3; P. Mantegazza, 181– 2, 620–1, 584, 585, 646, 647; W. Marshall, 245 & 245–6 nn.2–5, 446–7, 634; C.F. Martins, 63–4 & 64 n.2, 604–5 & 605 n.2; R. Meldola, 33–4, 46–8, 105 & 106 n.6; J. Michelet, 505–6 & 506 n.2, 637 & 638 n.2; H. Müller, xix, 156 n.3, 182–3 & 187 n.2,; A.S. Packard, 337; W.W. Reade, 70 & 71 n.1, 75–6 & 76 nn.1–5, 78 & n.1, 141–2 & 142 n.1, 483 n.11; A. Roujou, 86 & nn.2–4; O. Schmidt, 391 n.2; G. von Seidlitz, 140 & n.1, 170; W. Spengel, 391 n.2; E. Strasburger, 329–30 & 330 nn.1–2; D. Strauss, 565 & 566 n.16, 644 & 645 n.16; R. Sundström, 281–2; J.E. Taylor, 21 & n.3; C. Vogt, 18 & 19 n.2, 603 & n.2; A. Weismann, xix, 148 & 149 n.9 trips and visits: Albury, Surrey (1871), 45 & n.6; Leith Hill Place, Surrey (Aug.), 350 & n.3, 351 & n.3, 354 & 355 n.7, 355, 651 & 652 n.21; London (Feb./Mar.), xx, 71 & 72 n.1, 76 & n.9, 79 n.1, 83 & 84 n.1, 86 & n.1, 87 & n.1, 94 & 95 n.1, 103 n.2, 104 & n.1, 107 & n.1, 111, 118 & n.4, 192 & 193 n.4, 395 & 396 n.2, 376 & 377 n.4, 651; London (Dec. 1871), 8 & n.3; London (Dec. 1872), 521 & n.3, 554 & 555 n.4, 558 & 559 n.7, 569 & n.2, 573 n.5,

834

Index

Darwin, Charles Robert, cont. 573 & nn.2–3, 575–6 & 576 n.3, 578 & 579 n.5, 580 & nn.3–4, 651 & 652 n.27; Sevenoaks (Oct.), 419 & n.5, 426 & 427 n.4, 427 & 428 n.5, 436, 437 & 438 n.4, 438 & n.8, 442, 444, 445 n.1, 447, 453 & n.5, 454 & 455 n.3, 456 & n.3, 456 & 457 n.4, 458 & n.2, 462 & n.4, 469 & n.2, 651; Southampton (visiting W.E. Darwin, June), xxi, 229 & n.4, 243 & n.6, 252 & n.4, 255 n.2, 651 Darwin, Elizabeth (Bessy), 98 n.10, 259 & n.3, 284 & n.4, 466 n.6, 594 & n.2, 611 n.10; Expression, presentation, 663 & 665 n.26; visits Bournemouth, 41 & n.4; L.C. Wedgwood writes to, 101 Darwin, Emma, 600 n.1; A.J. Cupples thanks for present of Expression, 488–9 & 489 n.2; E.A. Darwin gives details about H. Wedgwood’s move from London, 558 & 559 n.2; diary, 6 n.7, 40 n.6, 46 n.8, 65 n.1, 66 n.4, 107 n.1, 179 nn. 5–6, 232 n.5, 248 n.1, 291 n.8, 311 n.5, 323 nn.6–8, 327 n.2, 327 n.2, 344 n.1, 350 n.6, 352 n.5, 353 n.3, 377 n.2, 382 n.1, 387 n.3, 393 nn.2–3, 397 n.3, 400 n.4, 396 n.4, 409 n.1, 412 n.2,412 n.10, 418 n.4, 419 & n.4, 463 n.5, 490 n.3, 559 n.7, 576 n.2, 572 n.4, 591 n.2, 651 nn.9 & 12, 652 nn.14, 17, 19–20 & 22–7; dogs’ expression when hostile and pleased, 139 n.1; A. Dohrn sends regards to, 74 & 75 n.13, 365 & 366 n.12, 502; Down Church, J.B. Innes asks for information on restoration fund, 102–3 & 103 n.1; exchanges regards with B.J. Sulivan, 39, 41; G.S. Ffinden assures he has no intention of abolishing church pews, 118–19 & n.3; E.S. Fox sends regards to, 296 & 297 n.4; J.L. Gray sends regards to, 101 & n.3, 429; F.H. Hooker sends love to, 196 & n.4; J.D. Hooker thanks for sympathy on his mother’s death, 451–2 & 452 n.1; J.D. Hooker would like to bring his daughter to stay, 194, 196 & n.4, 202; J.D. Hooker’s search for a cart-horse, 452 & n.2, 456 & n.2; insists CD stops work and takes trip away from home, 419 & n.5; V.O. Kovalevsky sends regards to, 134; marriage settlement, 516–17 & 518 n.3; A. Mellersh sends regards to, 49; J.J. Moulinié sends regards to, 7; opposes CD attending a séance, 168–9 & 169 n.2; R. Owen’s letter to Nature, finds obscure, 494 & 495 n.1; postscript to CD’s letter to H.E. Litchfield, 322 & 323 n.2; W.W. Reade’s Martyrdom of man, enjoys preface but displeased by passages on religion, 179, 208; reads aloud to CD, 314; sends regards to F.C. Donders, 262; sends regards to E.S. Fox, 311 & n.7; sends regards to S.H. Haliburton, 476, 483; sends regards to J.M. and M.A. Herbert, 519; C.L. Sutherland sends compliments to, 251, 403; unwell (Febru-

ary), 65 & 66 n.4; with CD, visits W.E. Darwin in Southampton, 229 n.4, 243 & n.6, 252 & n.4, 255 n.2, 651 Darwin, Erasmus Alvey, 322 & 323 n.3, 526 n.4, 598 & n.5; CD stays with in London, 580 n.3, 652 n.27; E. Darwin’s marriage settlement, 516– 17 & 518 n.3; Expression, presentation, 662; Midland Railway shares, 516 & 518 n.2; offered M.D. Conway introduction to CD, 586 & 588 n.1; passes C. Nordhoff ’s letter to CD, 141 & n.2; revises his will, 567–8 & 568 nn.2–4, 569; visits Down House, 311 n.5; H. Wedgwood’s move from London, 558 & 559 n.2 Darwin, Francis, 591 n.2; S. Butler sends A.D. May’s drawings of dog for CD, 231 & n.2; CD asks to arrange for a porcupine to be shown a snake, 194; edited Expression, 2d ed., 398 n.4, 460 n.11, 494 n.4, 499 n.4,548 n.4, 553 n.1, 555 n.3, 560 n.1, 572 n.4, 641 n.4; Expression, presentation, 662; engaged to Amy Ruck (married 1874), xxiv, 178 & 179 nn.5–6, 476 n.2, 651; friend of C. Crawley, 522 & n.9; functions of mucus on moistened seeds, 69 & n.5; heart rate during strong emotion, seeks information from A.H. Garrod for CD, 283 & 284 n.3, 284 & n.3; measures ridges and furrows for CD, 12–13 & 13 n.1; monkeys in Zoological Gardens may vomit voluntarily, 366–7 & 367 n.3; notes on J. Wolf ’s drawings of dogs, 140 n.2; sends CD quotation from A. Trousseau’s lectures, 387–8 & 388 nn.1–2; studies medicine at St George’s Hospital, London, 285– 6 n.7; visited US (1871), 223 & 224 n.3, 387 n.3, 429 & 430 n.13; visits his parents at Sevenoaks, 453 n.2 Darwin, George Howard: advises CD on angles of worm holes, 35 & n.4; advises E.A. Darwin on his will, 567 & 568 n.2, 569 & n.3; called to the bar, 178 & n.4, 568 n.2, 569 n.3; R.F. Cooke informs of cost of heliotypes for Expression, 353–4 & 354 nn.1–3, 354 & n.3, 355 & 356 n.2, 356; ‘Development in dress’, Macmillan’s Magazine, 178 & n.3; Expression, presentation, 662; H. von Helmholtz on major and minor chords, sends CD translation, 176–7 & 177 n.2, 178; measures volume of dried soil for CD, 130 n.3; poor health, 65 & 66 n.4, 311 & n.3, 469 & n.6; takes Drosera to London, 427 & n.1; translates A.W. Malm’s paper on flatfish from Swedish, 156 n.1; visited US (1871), 223 & 224 n.3, 387 n.3, 429 & 430 n.13; visits Germany and Switzerland, 393 n.2; visits parents at Sevenoaks, 453 n.2; C. Wright calls on, 393 & n.2 Darwin, Henrietta Emma: E. Haeckel sends regards to, 97 & 98 n.10, 610 & 611 n.10; M. Lub-

Index bock notes age at which babies shed tears varies, 594 & n.3; marriage to R.B. Litchfield, 311 n.4, 478 & n.8, 483 n.15, 489 & n.10, 594 n.1; F.J. Wedgwood notes passages in literature dealing with shame, 597 & 597–8 nn.2–5; F.J. Wedgwood sends descriptions of shame, 598 & nn.2–3, 598– 9 & 599 n.2. See also Litchfield, Henrietta Emma Darwin, Horace, 32 & n.3, 60 & n.2; accompanies G.H. Darwin to Germany, 311 & n.3; could not have passed matriculation examination at University of London, 45 & 46 n.3; Expression, presentation, 662; poor health, 311 n.3, 469 & n.6; A. Ruck sends measurements of ridges and furrows for CD, 32 & n.3, 60 & n.2 Darwin, Leonard, 32 & n.5, 396 n.1, 453 n.2; commissioned in Royal Engineers, works at School of Military Engineering, Chatham, 165 n.4, 370 & n.4; Expression, presentation, 662; hopes to join expedition to observe transit of Venus, 369–70 & 370 nn.1–4, 427 & 428 n.4; measures weight of dried soil for CD, 130 & n.2; Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, second place in examinations, 370 & n.2; visits parents at Sevenoaks, 453 n.2 Darwin, Robert Waring, 529 & n.7, 559 n.8 Darwin, Susan Elizabeth, 475 & 476 n.4 Darwin, Susannah, 455 & 456 n.1 Darwin, William Erasmus, 558 & 559 n.7; advises CD on investments, 35 & 36 n.2, 81 & n.2; asks R.M. Parsons to determine volume of clay in sample of chalk, 87 & 88 n.3, 94 & 95 n.4, 98 & n.3; CD advises of publication dates of Lyell’s works, 50 & n.1; CD and E. Darwin visit in Southampton, 229 n.4, 243 & n.6, 252 & n.4, 255 n.2, 651; Expression, presentation, 662; measures ridges and furrows near Stonehenge, 3–5 & 5 nn.2–4, 8–9 & 9 nn.3–4, 35 & n.3; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658, 659; Origin, 6th ed., reads proofs, xvii, 16 & n.1, 657; poor health, 469 & n.6 Davidson, Thomas, 659 n.12 Davis, Andrew Jackson: W. Green recommends writings to CD, 52–4 & 54 nn.1–5 Dawkins, William Boyd: opposes A. Tylor’s view on Quaternary gravels, 249 n.2 Dawson, John William: CD thanks for memoir on Devonian and Upper Silurian formations, 30 & n.1 De La Cour, Anne, 343 & 344 n.4 Decaisne, Joseph: pericarpal hairs of some composites, 69 & n.3 Delbrück, Rudolf, 501 & 502 n.4 Delpino, Federico: fertilisation of Papilionaceae, 445 n.3; sails on Garibaldi, hoping to emulate Beagle voyage, 496–7 & 497 n.2, 637 & n.2

835

Denny, John, 412 & 414 n.2; fertilisation of pelargoniums, 291–2 & 292 nn.1–4, 293 & 294 nn. 2 & 5–7, 298 & 299 nn.2–4 & 7–8, 315–16 & 316–17 nn.2–10, 318 & n.2, 481 Dentalium, 28 & n.13 Derby, countess of. See Stanley, Mary Catherine, countess of Derby Derby, earl of. See Stanley, Edward Henry, earl of Derby Despard, George Pakenham, 280 n.1 Diadema anomala (Hypolimnas anomala), 2 & 3 n.8 Dicey, Albert Venn, 322 & 323 n.5 Dickson, Alexander: ‘Some abnormal cones of Pinus pinaster’, Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 155 & n.2, 226 & 227 n.3 Dickson, James: power of voluntary vomiting, xxiii, 571–2 & 572 n.4 Dieudonné, H.C.F.M., comte de Chambord, duc de Bordeaux, 63 & 64 n.4, 605 & n.4 Dillenius, Johann Jakob, 333 & 333–4 n.1 Dionaea muscipula (Venus fly trap): W.M. Canby observes, 543 & 544 n.6; CD discovers nerves of, 454–5 & n.5, 543, 570; CD resumes experiments on, 404 n.4, 455 n.5, 477 n.4, 498 n.7, 543; A. Gray urges CD to publish on, 61 & n.2, 238 & n.4; J.D. Hooker sends CD plants and advises on their care, 460 & 461 n.4, 473 & 474 n.2, 491 & 492 n.10, 495 & n.8 Dione juno. See Agraulis juno Disraeli, Benjamin, 203 n.2, 500 n.5 Dixon, Edmund Saul: cited in Descent, 198 & 200 n.8 Dobbs, Archibald Edward: sends CD pamphlet on proportional representation, 29 & 30 n.1 Dobell, Henry William, 333 & n.1 Dodgson, Charles Lutwidge: sends CD photograph of smiling girl, xxiii–xxiv, 561 & n.2, 562, 572 & n.2 dogs: F.P. Cobbe writes about emotions and psychology, 526 & n.5, 528 & 529 nn.2–7; communication, 363; descent, 479 & 479–80 n.4; dog transfers maternal affection to its master, 577 n.2; Expression, drawing sent by M.C. Lloyd, 244–5 & 245 n.3; Expression, drawings by A.D. May, xx, 231 n.2, 231–2 & 232 nn.1–2, 245 nn.3 & 5; Expression, drawings by B. Riviere, xx, 139 & n.1, 143, 146, 209 & n.1, 214–15 & 215 n.3, 217– 18 & 218 n.2, 222–3, 228 & n.2, 230 & n.1, 230–1, 245 n.2, 246 & n.3; Expression, drawings provided by J. Wolf, 139 & 140 n.2; expressions and gesticulations, 526 & 527 n.1, 547 & 548 n.6, 588 n.10, 601 & n.2, 639 & 641 n.6; hairless Turkish dogs, 260 & 261 n.4, 626 & 627 n.4; love shown by C. Bell’s terrier, 517 & 518 n.8; orbicularis muscle, whether

836

Index

dogs, cont. possessing, 558 & 559 n.3; reasoning power, 359– 60 & 360 nn.8–9; roll in carrion but do not eat it, 482 & 483 n.6; sense of shame, 528–9 & 529 n.7, 529 Dohrn, Anton: admires Expression, 501 & 502 n.1; Annelida and origin of vertebrates, 372 & 373 nn.8–9; ascidians, disagrees with CD on place in evolution, 365 & n.9; assures CD publication of Descent was not a mistake, xix, 73 & 74 n.2; deprecates A.R. Wallace associating himself with H.C. Bastian, xxii, 365 & n.8; English critics and defenders of Darwinism, article in Ausland, 62 & 63 n.1, 73; Expression, presentation, 370–1 & 371 n.5, 501 & 502 n.1, 664; Naples Zoological Station, progress, 74 & nn.6–7, 501 & 502 nn.1 & 4–5; Naples zoological station, requests CD’s publications for library, xxii, 364 & 365 nn.2–6, 370–1 & 371 nn.3–4, 371–2 & 372 n.1, 383–4 & 384 n.2, 394, 501 & 502 n.3; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 659; possible zoological station at Scarborough, 372 & n.4; regrets he will miss T.H. Huxley’s visit, 74 & 75 nn.8–9; secretary, BAAS committee for foundation of zoological stations, 364 & 365 n.1; visited Down House (1870), 75 n.13, 365 & 366 n.12, 502 n.6 Don, George: described cherimoya, 72–3 & 73 n.5 Donders, Frans Cornelis: action of the eye during sleep and meditation, 130–1, 136–8 & 138–9 nn.2 & 4–11, 151; attends Ophthalmological Congress in London and hopes to visit CD, 163 & n.3, 168 & n.3, 299 & 300 nn.2–3, 321–2 & 322 n.1, 327 & n.2, 332–3 & 333 nn.1–2, 618 & n.3; CD asks to check information on frowning in born-blind, xxiv, 580–1 & 581 nn.2–3, 589 & nn.4 & 6, 648 & nn.4 & 6; CD indebted to for advice on Expression, xx–xxi, 151 & n.4, 588–9 & 589 n.3, 648 & n.3; cited in Expression, 487 n.5; contraction of orbicular muscles under emotion, 44 & 45 nn.2– 3, 261–2 & 262 n.4, 487 n.5; Expression, offers to check accuracy of physiological facts, 162–3, 168 & n.2, 298 & 299 n.4, 618; Expression, presentation, 580 & 581 n.1, 664 & 665 n.44; great qualities of CD’s writing outweigh any lapses in physiological expertise, 162–3, 618; honoured by students at Utrecht on 25th anniversary, 507 & 507–8 n.4; Netherlands Royal Academy of Sciences elects CD as foreign member, xxvi, 173 & n.3, 173–4, 618–19 Dorrell, Edmund Robson, 248 n.2 Dowie, Annie, 450 & n.3 Down: St Mary’s Church, CD raises subscription to restoration fund, 218 & n.2; St Mary’s Church, CD signs petition opposing removal of church

pews, 118–19 & n.3; St Mary’s Church, repairs and improvements, 102–3 & 103 n.1, 119 & nn.4– 5; G. Snow, carrier to London, 230 n.4, 336 & 337 n.1, 349 & n.2, 351 & n.3; vicarage, CD will not subscribe to building, 218 & n.3 Down House: H. Airy visits, 411 & 412 n.10, 418 & n.4, 651 & 652 n.26; F. M. Balfour visits, 591 n.2; C.L. and L. Brace visit, 238 & n.1, 291 & n.8, 314 & n.4, 429 n.3, 430 n.10, 651 & 652 n.19; R.F. Burton visits, 25 n.4, 216 & 217 n.13, 651; S. Butler visits, 197 & n.4, 651; A. Dohrn visited (1870), 365 & 366 n.12; W.D. Fox visited (1849), 462 & 463 n.5; J.T. Gulick visits, 327 & n.2, 342–3 & 344 n.1, 651 & 652 n.20; S.H. Haliburton visits (1874), 490 n.3; T.W. Higginson visits, 289 & n.3, 313, 651; J.D. Hooker visits, 40 n.6, 46; J.D. and F.H. Hooker visit, 376 & 377 n.2, 377 & 378 n.3, 651 & 652 n.24; V.O. Kovalevsky visits, 250 & n.3, 340 n.5, 350 & n.6, 351 & 352 n.5, 353 & n.3, 396 & n.4, 409 & n.1, 412 & n.2, 419 & n.4, 651 & 652 n.25; F. Lewin visits, 162 & n.2, 651 & n.12; H.E. & R.B. Litchfield visit, 322 & 323 n.7; H. Maudsley visits, 162 & n.2, 651 & n.12; A. Mellersh visited (1862), 49 & n.3; W.W. Reade visits, 71 n.3, 107 n.1; sandwalk, 6 & n.5, 8; B.J. Sulivan visited (1862), 49 & n.3; C.L. Sutherland visits, 251 & n.2, 403 & n.3, 651; A.I. Thackeray visits, 40 n.5; E.B. Tylor visits, 248 n.1, 255 n.2, 651; J.C. Wickham visited (1862), 49 & n.3; T. and A.G. Woolner visit, 197 & n.4, 651; Working Men’s College members visit, 322 & 323 n.8; C. Wright visits, 382 n.1, 387 & n.3, 393 & n.3, 397 & n.3, 399 & 400 n.4, 651 & 652 n.23 Draba verna: A. Jordan classifies forms as 52 separate species, 57 & 58 n.6 Drake, Friedrich, 508 n.5 Drosera: CD resumes experiments on, xxiv–xxv, 289 & 291 n.4, 369 & nn.1–3, 376 & 377 n.3, 391 n.9, 395 & n.2, 404 nn.2–3, 427 & n.2, 454 & 455 n.6, 463 & 464 n.2, 477 n.4, 498 n.7, 543 & 544 n.5, 549 nn.1 & 3, 572 n.3, 650 & 651 n.5; A. Gray urges CD to publish on, 61 & n.2, 238 & n.4, 428; J.D. Hooker advises CD on care of, 463–4 & 464 n.2; D. capensis and D. filiformis, CD borrows from Kew, 376 & 377 n.3, 391, 427 & n.2. 436, 439 & n.2, 454; D. filiformis, CD asks A. Gray to experiment on, 454–5 & 455 n.7, 543 & 544 n.5; D. filiformis, M. Treat will observe for CD, 570 & 571 n.2; D. longifolia (D. anglica), M. Treat’s observations to be published, 11 & 12 n.3; D. rotundifolia, CD succeeds in paralysing, 454 & 455 n.5 Dryomys nitedula. See Myoxus dryas Dryopithecus: shows antiquity of anthropomorphous Simiae, 154 & n.8

Index Du Bois-Reymond, Emil Heinrich, 501 & 502 n.5 Duchenne, Guillaume Benjamin Amand: grief muscles depicted in ancient sculpture, 441 n.2; Expression, presentation, 663 ducks: mouths of progenitors of baleen whales might have resembled lamellated beaks, 98 & 99 n.2, 157 & 159 n.4 Dumont, Léon: reviews Expression in Revue scientifique, 568 n.2 Dwight, John Sullivan, 586 & 588 n.5 Eastern Daily Press: F.W. Harmer, F. Bateman and W.P. Lyon dispute origin of language, 384 & 385 nn.6–7 Echo: claims J.D. Hooker has apologised to A.S. Ayrton, 531 & n.5 Edwards & Kidd, 396 n.1; cost of printing heliotypes for Expression, 330 & n.2 Edwards, Ernest: CD writes testimonial for heliotype, 395–6 & 396 n.1; heliotypes for Expression, cost of plates, 330 & n.2, 346 & 347 n.2; invented heliotype process, 118 n.3 Edwards, William Henry: Butterflies of North America, CD thanks for new part, 171 & n.2 Eichwald, Eduard von: seeks to sell palaeontological collection, 16 & 17 nn.3–5; sends CD paper on Manghischlak and Alaska, 16–17 & 17 nn.1–5 elephants: weeping, 397 & 398 n.2 Eliot, George. See Evans, Marian Elizabeth I, queen of England, 321 n.2 Elliot, Adam: sends CD photograph of offspring of Burmese woman allegedly impregnated by an ape, 146–7 & 147 n.1 Elymnias: mimicry, 123 & 124 n.13 Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 587 & 588 n.9 Enante spp., 124 n.4 Engelmann, Frans and Paula, 507 & 508 n.6 Engelmann, Marie, 507 & 508 n.6 Engelmann, Theodor Wilhelm, 507 & 508 n.6 Engelmann, Wilhelm, 188 & n.4; donates publications to Naples zoological station, 364 & 365 n.5 Engleheart, Stephen Paul: children blushing, 601 & n.2 Entomological Society of London: E.W. Janson, librarian, 34 n.4; H.W. Newman, report on habits of humblebees, 185 & 187 n.13, 623 & 624 n.7; A.S. Packard attends meeting, 291 n.9; A.R. Wallace, presidential address, 79 & 79–80 n.3 Eresia lansdorfi, 122 & 124 n.7 Eschricht, Daniel Frederik, 77 & 78 n.4 Espinas, Alfred Victor: questions CD on aspects of Descent, 90–93 & 94 nn.2–13, 605–9 & 609 nn.2– 13; translates H. Spencer’s Principles of psychology into French, 94 n.7, 609 n.7

837

Euphysetes macleayi (Kogia breviceps), 592 & 593 n.8 Euplocamus nycthemerus (Lophura nycthemera), 121 n.2 Evans, Marian (George Eliot): G.H. Lewes breaks with Pall Mall Gazette over critical review of poem by, 180 n.6 Evans-Lombe, Elizabeth: J.D. Hooker’s sister, 452 & n.3; J.D. Hooker visits in Torquay, 6 & n.6 Ewart, Joseph, 378 & n.11 Eyton, Thomas Campbell, xxv; CD believes he will be converted to evolution if not to natural selection, 88, 100; skeletons of American ducks identical to European though plumage differs, 88 & n.2, 100 Fagus quadrangulata: function of bud scales, 409 & 411 n.2 Falconer, Hugh: laws of phyllotaxy, 149 & 150 n.2 Falk, Adalbert von, 501 & 502 n.4 Farrer, Emma Cecilia (Ida), 260 n.3 Farrer, Frances, 449 n.2 Farrer, Katherine Euphemia (neé Wedgwood). See Wedgwood, Katherine Euphemia Farrer, Thomas Henry: CD congratulates on article in Nature on fertilisation of flowers, 444– 5 & 445 nn.2–3 & 5, 448, 445 & n.8; permanent secretary, Board of Trade, 445 & n.7, 448; plans comparative study of Lathyrus odoratus and L. sylvestris, 448 & 449 n.3; seeks Myosotis from Down and describes exceptional hollies at Abinger, 259–60 & 260 n.1 Ffinden, George Sketchley: CD sends cheque for £35 for church restoration fund, 218 & n.2; Down church, repairs and improvements, 102– 3 & 103 n.1, 119 & n.5; orders moving of church pews to satisfy Ecclesiastical Commission, 118–19 & n.3 Fick, Heinrich: CD thanks for work on natural science and rights, 323–4 & 324 nn.2–3 Field: C.R. Bree criticises W.B. Tegetmeier’s observations on stomach contents of finches, 204 n.4; T. Wood draws for, 139 & 140 n.4 Fischer (Cassel): donates publications to Naples zoological station, 364 & 365 n.5 fishing-frogs. See Lophius flatfish: movement of eyes, 156 & 156–7 nn.1–3, 157 & 159 n.5 Flora Capensis: funds for completion of, 158 & 159 n.13 Florist: J. Denny, ‘On cross-breeding pelargoniums’, 293 & 294 n.5, 298 & 299 n.2 Flourens, Marie Jean Pierre: critique of Origin, 19 & 20 n.5 Flower, William Henry: curator, Hunterian Museum, 39 n.6, 41 & n.2; first director, Natural

838

Index

Flower, William Henry, cont. History Museum, 6 n.3; lectures on mammalian digestive organs, 77 & n.1; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 77 & n.1, 658 & 659 n.8; supports A. Günther’s application for promotion at British Museum, 212 & n.3; Thylacoleo carnifex, teeth, 311–12 & nn.2–3; ziphoid whales, 77 & n.3 Fontanelle, Bernard le Bouvier de, 584 & 585 n.2, 646 & 647 n.2 Forbes, David: analysis of chalk, 94 & 95 n.4, 95 & 96 nn.2–3, 98 & n.2; analysis of vegetable mould, 177 & 178 n.3; cited in Earthworms, 96 n.3; CD visits, 71 & n.7, 95, 651 Forbes, Edward: forms of gastropods in distinct strata, 148 & 149 n.7 Forster, John Cooper: patron, Artizans Dwellings Company, 125 & 126 n.8 Fortnightly Review: F. Galton, tests for efficacy of prayer unnecessary as its uselessness can already be proved, 490 n.6; T.H. Huxley, ‘Administrative nihilism’, 75 n.11 fossil cephalopods, 440 & n.2 Foster, Michael: general secretary, BAAS, 344 n.2; Expression, presentation, 663 Fowler, Lorenzo Niles, 359 & 360 n.6 Fowler, Orson Squire, 359 & 360 n.6 Fox, Catherine: F. Galton observes psychic powers, 127, 129 & n.3, 165 & 166 n.3, 166, 227 & 228 n.2 Fox, Ellen Sophia, 296 & 297 n.4, 311 & n.7, 462 & 463 n.5 Fox, William Darwin: CD commiserates on poor health and sends family news, xxv, 310–11 & 311 nn.3–5; Expression, presentation, 663; hopes for news of CD and his family, 462–3 & 463 nn.3 & 5, 469 & n.6; invites CD to Isle of Wight, 296 & 297 n.3 Fraas, Oscar, 536 & 542 n.19 Franco-Prussian war, 7 & 8 n.5, 587 & 588 n.12, 611 n.4; H. Apatowsky witnessed atrocities, 18 & 19 n.3, 603 & n.3; expressions of French peasants on discovering American journalist was not a German, 587 & 588 n.13; delayed French edition of Origin, xviii, 523 & 524 n.3, 658; A. Dohrn visited Down while on leave from Prussian army, 365 & 366 n.12; J. Michelet moves to Italy to escape siege of Paris, 283 n.2, 627 & n.2 Franklin, Benjamin: colour and absorption of heat, 358–9 & 360 n.1 Fraser’s Magazine: L. Stephen, ‘Divinity and Darwinism’, 150 & n.8, 226 & 227 n.5 Frauenstädt, Julius: article on Darwin’s theory of human morality, 188 & n.1 frogs: whether capable of crossing with toads, 160 Fulica atra (black coot): only nests in places where

rusted fungus in reed grass provides protection, 447, 453 n.3, 634 Fuligula valisneria (Aythya valisneria): similarity to F. ferina (A. ferina), 88 & n.2 Furnivall, Frederick James: CD declines invitation to be vice-president [of New Shakspere Society], 554 Galileo Galilei, 571 n.7 Galton, Douglas Strutt: director of public works and buildings, 273 & 278 n.26, 470 & n.5; general secretary, BAAS, 343 & 344 n.2 Galton, Emma Sophia: health, 489 & 490 n.5, 505 & n.5 Galton, Francis, 128; attempts to prove pangenesis by transfusing rabbits, 37 n.2, 58 & n.4, 126 & 127 n.2, 230 n.2, 504 & 505 n.1, 591 n.3; bloodrelationship, paper read at Royal Society, 230 & n.5, 242–3 & 243 nn.2–5, 386 & n.4, 392 & 393 n.9; Butler family, inherited habit of raising arm when sleeping in a chair, 126 & 127 n.6, 127, 135 & n.2; cited in Expression, 132 n.3; crying children rub eyes with their knuckles, 486 & 487 n.5, 489; CD takes care of rabbits used in experiments, 36–7 & 37 n.2, 58 & n.1, 227 & 228 n.1, 228–9 & 229 n.5, 229–30 & 230 n.2, 242, 329 & n.1, 336, 349, 351, 486 & 487 n.4, 489 & 490 nn.2–3, 504 & 505 n.1; expects influence of Expression to show at Royal Academy, 505 & n.4; Expression, presentation, 486 & 487 n.1, 663; investigates psychic phenomena associated with spiritualism, xxii, 36 & 37 n.3, 127, 129 & nn.3–6, 131–2, 134, 165–6 & 166 nn.1 & 3–5, 168–9 & 169 n.2, 227–8 & 228 n.3, 244 & n.1, 247 & n.1, 329 & n.5; offers to send queries on expression to explorers, 486 & 487 n.3, 489; Royal Geographical Society, vice-president, 331 & 332 n.3; tests for efficacy of prayer unnecessary as its uselessness can already be proved, 489 & 490 n.6 game cocks: terror causes raising of head feathers, 198 & 200 n.9 Garden: support A.S. Ayrton in dispute with J.D. Hooker, 470 & n.5 Gardeners’ Chronicle: CD describes Pumilo argyrolepis (1861), 68 & 69 n.2; J. Denny, ‘Relative influence of parentage in flowering plants’, 291–2 & 292 nn.1–4; P. Grieve, cross-fertilisation of pelargoniums, 294 n.3; M.T. Masters, editor, 481 Garrod, Arthur Henry: effect of strong emotion on heart rate, 283 & 284 n.3, 284 & n.3, 284–5 & n.6; Expression, presentation, 663; prosector, Zoological Society of London, 284 n.2; medical associate, King’s College Hospital, London, 285 n.2 Gärtner, Karl Friedrich von: cross- and self-

Index fertilisation, 292 & n.6, 293 & 294 n.4, 316 & 317 nn.10–11; CD encourages Ray Society to translate researches on fertilisation, 298 & 299 n.5 Gaudry, Albert, 326 & n.5, 523 & 524 n.9; cited in Descent and Origin, 5th and 6th eds, 524 n.9; Expression, presentation, 664 & 665 n.43 Gay, Jacques: herbarium purchased for Kew, 277 n.10 Geach, Frederick F.: Expression, presentation, 468 & n.1, 663 Gegenbaur, Carl, 281 & 282 n.2; A. Dohrn worked with at Jena, 373 nn.7–8; V.O. Kovalevsky studies with, 134 n.4; paper on archipterygium discusses A. Günther’s view on Ceratodus, 192 & 193 n.3, 195, 219 & n.3 Geikie, Archibald: Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 659 Geoffroy de Saint-Hilaire, Etienne, 59 & 60 n.6 Geoffroy de Saint-Hilaire, Isidore, 59 & 60 n.6 Geological Society of London, 249 n.6; CD’s paper on mould read to (1869), 22 n.1; opposes A. Tylor’s views on post-glacial river gravels, 248 & 248–9 nn.1–3 Gerstaecker, Adolph: identified specimens for F. Müller, 124 n.3 Giard, Alfred: embryology of ascidians, 424 & 424– 5 nn.2–3 Gibbs, George, 16 & 17 n.1 Gill, Theodore Nicholas: Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.13, 659 giraffes: weeping, 397 & 398 n.3 Giuntsburg, Karl (Charles Gunzbourg): natural selection and child mortality, 362 & n.3, 631 & 632 n.3 Gladstone, William Ewart, 499 & 500 n.5; attempts to resolve dispute between J.D. Hooker and Commission of Works, xxi, 5–6 & 6 n.1, 193– 4 & 194 n.1, 202–3 & 203 nn.2 & 5, 272–3 & 278 n.18; CD regards government’s conduct in Hooker/Ayrton dispute as reprehensible, 295 & n.3; scientists’ memorial supporting J.D. Hooker, 250 nn.2–3, 255 & n.2, 256 & n.1, 262–77 & 277– 8 nn.1–30, 295 & n.2, 317 n.12, 333 n.3, 493 n.3; A.E. West, private secretary, 6 n.1, 272 & 278 n.22 Glen, Catherine, 488 & 489 n.5 Glenie, Samuel Owen: Expression, presentation, 663 Gloeden, Dr von: factors influencing proportion of male and female births, 285–8 & 288– 9 nn.2–9, 628–30 & nn.2–9 goats: hairless goat born at Breslau zoo, 260–1 & 261 nn.2–5, 626 & 626–7 nn.2–5 Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, 73 & 74 n.3, 237 n.4; Faust, 560 n.3; as precursor of CD, 73 & 74 n.4 Gordon-Cumming, Roualeyn George, 397 & 398 n.3

839

Gould, Benjamin Apthorp: military and anthropological statistics, 109 & 111 n.2 Gounod, Charles: Faust, 560 n.3 Gourlay, Jane: girl hides her faces in shame, 597 & 598 n.6, 598 & n.2 Grandy, William John, 487 n.3 Grant-Duff, Mountstuart Elphinstone, 480 n.1 Graphic: Expression, review, 467 n.8 Gray, Asa: American Association for the Advancement of Science, presidential address, 429 & 430 nn.8–9, 454 & 455 n.1; believes all instincts to be congenital habits, 566 & 567 n.7; delighted CD likes his Botany for young people, delivered by C.L. Brace, 428 & 429 n.3; Drosera filiformis, asks W.M. Canby and M. Treat to observe for CD, 543 & 544 n.6, 570 & 571 n.2; Drosera and Dionaea, urges CD to publish on, xxiv, 61 & n.2, 238 & n.4; Drosera and Dionaea, welcomes CD’s resumption of work on, 428, 543; earthworms in North America, xxiv, 22 & n.1, 60–1, 160, 177–8 & 178 n.4, 475; encourages CD to publish collected botanical papers, 428 & 430 n.6; Expression, looks forward to reading, 543; First lessons in botany quoted by H. Airy, 320 & 321 n.3; W.J. Hooker’s herbarium the most valuable in the world, 277 n.2; How plants behave, CD enjoys, 238 & n.1, 289 & 291 nn.2–3; new edition of textbook on structural botany, 428 & 430 n.4; travels to California, 252 & 253 n.2, 291 n.6, 428 & 429 n.1, 429; sends CD letter from L. Agassiz, 22 & n.2; sends CD W.H. Beard’s painting, ‘The youthful Darwin expounding his theories’, 252 & 253 n.3, 290, 291; spiralling tendrils of climbing plants, 289 & 291 n.3, 428, 454 & 455 n.2, 543; M. Treat, quotes observations on Drosera, 12 n.3; C. Wright, distributes paper on phyllotaxy, 145 & 146 n.9; C. Wright, lends paper by A. Dickson, 226 & 227 n.3 Gray, George Robert: assistant keeper, zoological department, British Museum, death of, 188, 189, 192, 195 & n.5 Gray, Jane Loring: accompanies A. Gray to California, 252 & 253 n.2, 291& n.6, 429 & 430 n.11, 454; CD sends regards to, 22 & n.3; Expression, presentation, 543 & 544 n.1, 663 & 665 n.29; presents J.D. Hooker with photographs of California, 174 n.3, 175; reported in Expression, 544 n.1; sends regards to CD and his family, 61 & n.3, 101 & n.3 Gray, John Edward: A. Günther takes over correspondence, 503 & 504 n.7; keeper, zoological collections, British Museum, 201 n.4, 219 & n.4; G. Krefft sends Euphysetes specimen to, 592 & 593 n.6; supports A. Günther’s application for

840

Index

Gray, John Edward, cont. promotion, 200–1 & 201 n.4, 219 n.4 Great Eastern Railway: accident near New Cross, 354 & 355 n.6 Greely, Horace, 586 & 588 n.6 Green, William: commends writings of A.J. Davis to CD, 52–4 & 54 nn.1–5, 214 & n.1 Greenway, Elizabeth, 129 n.2 Greenwood, Frederick: editor, Pall Mall Gazette, 80 n.1; Origin, 6th ed., may ask J. Morley to review alongside Mivart’s Genesis of species, 80 & n.3, 179 & 180 n.4; warns W.W. Reade that Martyrdom of man will cause furor, 80 & n.2 Greg, William Rathbone: Enigmas of life, 506 & 507 n.5, 531 & n.3 Grey, William: lieutenant governor of Bengal, 377 & 378 n.7 Grieve, Peter: cross-fertilisation of pelargoniums, 293 & 294 n.3 Grumicha grumicha. See Phryganea grumicha Guardian: supports J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute, 341 n.3 Gulick, James T.: Achatinella in Sandwich Islands, 325 & nn.1–2, 326–7 & 327 n.2; paper on diversity of evolution, 342–4 & 344 n.1, 347 & n.3; visits Down House, 327 & n.2, 342–3 & 344 n.1, 651 & 652 n.20 Gull, William Withey: surgical removal of vestigial organs might improve humans, 88 & n.5 Günther, Albert: admires Expression, 503 & 504 n.1, 521; applies for promotion as assistant keeper, zoological department, British Museum, 188–9, 192–3, 195, 196 & n.3, 200–1 & 201 nn.1–3, 211–12 & 212 n.1, 219 & n.5; appointed assistant keeper, 262 & n.1, 503 & 504 n.6; Ceratodus, article in Popular Science Review, 521 & n.1; Ceratodus, C. Gegenbaur discusses views on, 192 & 193 n.3, 195, 219 & n.3; CD asks whether horned toad is a batrachian or a lizard, 196 & n.2; CD sends information on Macropodus, 218 & 219 n.1; despairs at Ayrton/Hooker dispute, 503–4 & 504 n.8; Expression, presentation, 663; Handbuch der medicinischen Zoologie, 201 & n.6; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.8; Zoological Record, completes work on, 219 n.3 Gunther, Robert William Theodore, 503 & 504 n.3 Gunzbourg, Charles. See Giuntsburg, Karl Haast, Julius von, 40 & 41 nn.2–3 Haeckel, Ernst, 281 & 282 n.2, 373 n.7; H.C. Bastian’s judgment questionable, 443–4 & 444 n.4, 633 & n.4; calciform sponges, monograph, 96 & 97 n.6, 444 & n.6, 561, 563–5 & 565–6 nn.3–12, 578, 610 & 611 n.6, 633 & 634 n.6, 641–3 & 644–5

nn.3–12; Descent, praise for, 390 & 391 n.2; Expression, presentation, 390 & 391 n.8, 561 & 565 n.2, 578 & 579 n.6, 641 & 644 n.2, 664; Goethe as precursor of CD, 74 & n.4; W. Marshall studied with at Jena, 446 & 447 n.3, 634 & n.3; Monera, discovery of, 443–4 & 444 n.5, 633 & 634 n.5; Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte, 3d ed., 96 & 97 n.8, 390 & 391 nn.1–4, 443 & 444 n.2, 610 & 611 n.8, 632 & 633 n.2; Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte, English translation, 564 & 566 n.15, 643 & 645 n.15; Olynthus, CD finds drawing striking, 578 & n.2; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 96 & 97 n.2, 610 & 611 n.2, 658 & 660 n.22, 659; pangenesis, plans to consider in terms of comparative histology, 96 & 97–8 n.9, 610 & 611 n.9; responds to criticism of L. Rütimeyer, 443 & 444 n.3, 633 & n.3; G. von Seidlitz believes he underestimates natural selection, 170 & n.4; turns down chair at Strasbourg, 96 & 97 n.4, 610 & 611 n.4 Hagen, Hermann August: termite spp., 27 & 28 nn.7, 9, 11 & 13 Haliburton, Sarah Harriet (née Owen): CD sends Expression as mark of old friendship, xxv, 475–6 & 476 n.2, 477–8 & 478 nn.5–7, 483–4, 490, 663 & 665 n.36; visits Down House, 483, 490 & n.3 Halifax, Viscount. See Wood, Charles, Viscount Halifax Halle, Johann Samuel, 287 & 288 n.5, 629 & 630 n.5 Hamond, Robert Nicholas, 38 & 39 n.2 Hare, Thomas: devises system of proportional representation, 29 & 30 n.2 Harmer, Frederic William: controversy with W.P. Lyon over his Homo versus Darwin, 373 & 373–4 nn.1–3, 376 & n.1, 384–5 & 385 nn.2 & 6 Harper’s Bazaar: F. Galton, inefficacy of prayer, 490 n.6 Harris, George: Expression, presentation, 427 & n.6, 663; sends CD his Theory of the Arts, 426 & 427 n.2 Harris, William Cornwallis, 398 n.3 Harte, Richard: six-toed cats, 382–3 & 383 n.1 Hartogh Heijs van Zouteveen, Hermanus: Descent, Dutch translation, 366 & n.3; Expression, Dutch translation, 336 n.8, 366 & n.2, 426 n.2, 461 n.3 Hartshorne, Henry: ‘Relation between organic vigor and sex’, American Naturalist, 571 n.4 Harvey, William Henry: classification of pelargonium, 294 n.2; Flora Capensis, 159 n.13 Hawkins, Henry, 49 & n.2 Head, Henry A.: admiration for CD and his supporters, 407–8 & 409 n.11; flora and fauna of Duluth, 406–7 & 408 nn.2–7; visited Down House, 406 & 408 n.1

Index Hector, James: CD thanks for election to New Zealand Institute, 201 & 202 n.1; manager, New Zealand Institute, 654; researches in New Zealand, 40 & 41 n.2 Hedychium: F. Müller believes red, yellow and white are separate species, 26 & 28 n.3 Heer, Oswald: CD thanks for book on fossil flora of Spitzbergen, 340 & n.2; found fossil Sequoia in Devon, 314 & n.3; Salix polaris found in peat beds, 388 & 389 n.11 Heliconia phyllis (Heliconius erato phyllis), 122 & 124 n.7 Heliotype Company: CD provides testimonial, 395–6 & 396 n.1; CD retrieves G.C. Wallich’s negative from, 118 & n.3; Expression, plates, xxiii, 324 & 325 n.2, 328 & n.4, 330 & n.2, 335 & 336 nn.6–7, 346 & 347 n.2, 349 & n.2, 349–50 & 350 n.2, 353–4 & 354 nn.1–2, 354 & n.3, 355–6 & 356 n.2, 356 & n.2, 358 & n.6, 360 & 361 n.1, 363 & 364 n.1, 367 n.3, 371, 384 n.4, 395–6 & 396 nn.1 & 3, 406 n.7, 414 n.2, 425 & n.2, 425–6, 426 & n.1, 497 & 498 n.4; Expression, shortage of plates delays reprint, 425 & n.3, 426 & n.1, 515–16 & 516 n.2, 516, 524 & n.1, 554–5 & 555 n.5; London premises, 325 n.2, 330 n.2, 425 n.2 Helmholtz, Hermann von: bust presented to F.C. Donders, 507 & 508 n.5; cited in Descent and Expression, 177 n.2; differences between major and minor chords, 176–7 & 177 n.2, 619–20 & 620 n.2; supports Naples zoological station, 501 & 502 n.5 Helps, Arthur, 273 & 278 n.25 Henfrey, Arthur, 545 n.6 Henry, H.: gestures associated with surprise, fear and weeping, 583 & 584 nn.1–4 Henslow, John Stevens: wrinkles on turf not caused by sheep, 82–3 & 83 n.2 Herbert, John Maurice: CD sends Expression as memento of old friendship and gift of microscope, xxv, 518–19 & 519 nn.1–3, 521–2 Herbert, Mary Ann, 518 & 519 n.4, 521 & 522 n.4, 522 Hering, Ewald, 137 & 139 n.9 Herschel, Julius: monkeys and yellow fever, 574–5 & 575 n.2, 645 & 646 n.2 Higginson, Thomas Wentworth: visits Down House, 289 & n.3, 313 & n.3, 651 Hildebrand, Friedrich: catalogue from Freiburg botanical garden, 64 & 65 n. 5; Oxalis valdiviana, thanks CD for advice on crossing, 64 & 65 n.2; papers on seed dispersal, 64 & 65 n.4, 68; welcomes questions raised by Descent, 64 & 65 n.3 Hilgendorf, Franz: fossil snails in Steinheim beds, 539 & 542 nn.22–5, 551 & 552 n.12; Planorbis multiformis, 149 n.6 His, Wilhelm, 391 n.2

841

Hoare, Richard Colt: classification of pelargoniums, 316 n.5 Hoernes, Rudolf: Vienna University natural history society thanks CD for works, 552 & 552–3 nn.1–3 Holland, Henry, 517 & 518 n.5; attempts to mediate in Hooker/Ayrton dispute, 6 & 7 n.8; Descent, presentation, 484 & n.2; Expression, presentation, 484 n.2, 663; signs memorial supporting J.D. Hooker, 250 n.3, 277; travels to the Arctic and Madeira, 484 & n.4 Home, Daniel Dunglas: W. Crookes investigates procedures, 127 & 129 n.4, 165–6 & 166 nn.1 & 4; F. Galton suggests CD attends one of his séances, 165–6, 168–9 & 169 nn.2–3, 227–8 & 228 n.2, 247 & n.1 Homer: Iliad, passages describing shame, 597 & nn.2–3 Hooker, Brian Harvey Hodgson, 530 & 531 n.1, 531 Hooker, Charles Paget, 530 & 531 n.1, 531 Hooker, Frances Harriet, 196 & n.2, 460 & 461 n.5; harrassed by Ayrton dispute, 256 & 257 n.3; visits Down House, 376 & 377 n.2, 378 n.3, 651 & 652 n.24 Hooker, Grace Ellen, 531 & n.2 Hooker, Harriet Anne, 194 & n.4, 196 & n.4, 531 & n.2; reads Expression, 491 & 492 n.7 Hooker, Joseph Dalton: achievements at Kew, 265– 7 & 277–8 nn.10, 12–14 & 16; Artizans Dwellings Company, seeks information from CD, 490 & 492 n.1; awarded Royal medal (1854), 267 & 278 n.14; Ayrton dispute, 5–6 & 6 n.1, 8, 39 & 40 n.4, 40 & n.7; Ayrton dispute, W. Bowman deplores odious treatment in, 333 & n.3; Ayrton dispute, CD presses his case with countess of Derby, 255 & 256 n.3; Ayrton dispute, CD signs memorial of support, xxi, 255 & n.2, 255 & 256 n.2, 256 & n.1, 277; Ayrton dispute, Echo claims he has apologised, 531 & 531 n.5; Ayrton dispute goes before House of Lords, 193–4 & 194 nn.1 & 3, 202 & n.3, 202–3 & 203 n.1, 256 & n.2; Ayrton dispute, J. Lubbock attempts to bring before House of Commons, xxi, 342 & n.4; Ayrton dispute, memorial of support signed by leading scientists, xxi, 249 & 250 nn.2–3, 255 & n.2, 255 & 256 n.2, 256 & n.1, 262–77 & 277–8 nn.1–30, 277, 294–5 & 295 n.2, 317 n.12, 333 n.3, 493 n.3; Ayrton dispute, newspapers support his case, xxi, 294–5 & 295 n.2, 326 & n.7, 340 & 341 n.3, 422 & 423 n.8; Ayrton dispute, support of Royal Horticultural Society, 316 & 317 n.12; Ayrton dispute, Treasury ministers praise his work, 340 & 341 n.1; carthorse for Kew, asks CD for help in finding, 435– 6, 452 & n.2, 456 & n.2; cultivated plants in the

842

Index

Hooker, Joseph Dalton, cont. wild, 239 & 241 n.7; CD and E. Darwin commiserate on death of his mother, 451–2 & 451 n.1, 455–6 & 456 n.1; CD seeks address for G. King, 460, 464 & n.3, 464; CD seeks address for M.E. Barber, 467 & n.2, 470 & n.1; Dionaea, sends CD plants and advises on their care, 460 & 461 n.4, 463–4 & 464 n.2, 473 & 474 n.2, 491 & 492 n.10, 495 & n.8; Drosera, CD borrows Dd. capensis and filiformis, 376 & 377 n.4, 391, 427 & n.2, 436, 439 & n.2; early career and discoveries, 264–5 & 277 nn.6–9; Expression, presentation, 473 & 474 n.4, 491 & 492 n.7, 531 & n.2, 663; Flora Capensis, invited to complete, 159 n.13; Genera plantarum, might work on at Down House, 194 & n.5; Greenland plants, disagrees with CD on survival during glaciation, 194 & n.6; hopes T.H. Huxley may be invited to organize Natural History Museum, 6 & nn.2–3, 8 & n.3; T.H. Huxley’s support in Ayrton dispute invaluable, 377 & 378 n.5; Leopoldina, asks CD and C. Lyell to approve new rules, 133 & n.1; observed wrinkles on turf in Himalayas and Atlas, 83 & n.3; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 659 n.6; R. Owen attacks direction of Kew herbarium in Nature, 491 & 492 nn.3 & 5, 492, 494–5 & 495 nn.1–4; believes R. Owen is damaging science, 531 & n.4; R. Owen recommends transfer of Kew herbarium to new Natural History Museum, 467 & 467–8 nn.3–5, 470 & n.4, 473 & 474 n.5; presents framed photographs of California to Kew, 174 & n.3, 175; recurrence of rheumatic fever, 491 & 492 n.4; Royal Botanic Gardens, accomplishments as director, 265–7 & 277–8 nn.10–14; Royal Botanic Gardens, opposes open examinations for horticultural and botanical posts, 40 & n.7, 276; J. Scott’s loan from CD, forwards repayment, 377–8 & 378 n.2, 383 & n.1, 474; seeks hazels from CD’s sandwalk, 6 & n.5, 8; signs petition for Anglo-US copyright convention, 167 n.5; sons send CD a cartoon, 530 & 531 n.1; suggests J. Ball write to CD about chances of survival of new species, 55 & 57 n.2; unable to join Grays’ trip to California, 429 & 430 n.13; values J. Tyndall’s support in Ayrton dispute, 377 & 378 n.4; visits Down House, 40 & n.6, 46, 65 & n.1, 376 & 377 n.2, 377 & 378 n.3, 465 n.4, 651 & 652 n.24; wonders whether Zizania aquatica is an annual, 39 & 40 n.2 Hooker, Maria: health causes concern, 174 & n.4; J.D. Hooker visits in Torquay, 6 & n.6; kept in ignorance of Ayrton dispute, 256 & 257 n.4; death, 451–2 & 451 n.1, 455–6 & 456 n.1 Hooker, Reginald Hawthorn, 530 & 531 n.1, 531 Hooker, William Henslow, 530 & 531 n.1, 531; joins

ship-broking firm, 470 & 471 n.7; matriculates at University of London, 39 & 40 n.1, 45 & 46 n.2; sent to New Zealand (1869), 46 n.5 Hooker, William Jackson: herbarium, 263–4 & 277 n.2, 266 & 277 n.10; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, role in development of, 263–4 & 277 nn.2– 5, 266 Hopkins, William: criticisms of Origin, 19 & 20 n.6 Horace, 257 n.6 Horticultural Society of London, 152 & 153 n.5 Hough, Arthur: CD thanks for ‘curious’ photograph, 22 & 22–3 nn.1–2 Housley, Samuel John: son has ‘Woolner ear’, 579 & 579–80 nn.1 & 4 Houzeau de Lehaie, Auguste, 480 & 481 n.2, 636 & n.2 Houzeau de Lehaie, Jean-Charles: Expression, presentation, 480 & 481 n.2, 636 & n.2, 664; study of mental faculties of animals, 397 & n.2, 480 & 481 nn.2–3, 636 & nn.2–3; A.R. Wallace reviews study in Nature, 452–3 & 453 n.4 Howorth, Henry Hoyle: coral reefs, attempts to extend CD’s research, 331 & 332 nn.4–5; CD abandons discussion with, 392 & 393 n.7; ‘Strictures on Darwinism’, avows personal respect for CD, 331 & n.1; ‘Strictures on Darwinism’, CD and A.R. Wallace respond to in Nature, 332 n.2, 386 & n.7; A.R. Wallace regards as utterly untrustworthy, 386 Hughes, Thomas: takes Huxley children to the circus, 30 & n.2 Humboldt, Alexander von: F.C. Donders likens CD to, 162, 618 Humphrey, Elizabeth, 129 & n.5 Hungarian Academy of Sciences: elects CD as foreign member, 253, 254 & n.2, 655–6 Hunter, James Bradbridge: ‘A review of Darwin’s theory’, Journal of Psychological Medicine, 155 & 156 n.4 Hunterian Museum. See Royal College of Surgeons, Hunterian Museum Hutchinson, William Nelson: cited in Descent, 360 & n.9 Huxley, Henrietta Anne: arranges leave for T.H. Huxley so that he can visit Egypt and restore his health, 30 n.1; CD sends present of £100 as housewarming gift, xxv, 447–8 & 448 n.2, 449 Huxley, Henry, xxv; CD’s favourite, visits the circus, 30 & nn.1–2 Huxley, Thomas Henry, 147 & n.3, 281 & 282 n.2, 408 & n.10; Archaeopteryx closer to birds than reptiles, 204 & 207 n.3; identifies one of H.C. Bastian’s ‘spontaneously generated’ organisms as Sphagnum, 374 & 375 n.9, 385–6 & 386 n.2, 392

Index & n.2; breakdown of health through overwork, 6 & n.2, 8 & n.3, 448 & n.3, 456 & n.4, 470 & n.6, 531; CD hopes to see in London, 575–6 & 576, 580; CD signs petition calling for abolition of prize fellowships, 456 & 457 n.2; classification of primates, 154 n.7; A. Dohrn sorry to miss in Naples, 74 & 75 n.10; A. Dohrn reports renewed vigour, 372 & n.6; Expression, presentation, 663; J.D. Hooker, supports in Ayrton dispute, 193 & 194 n.2, 250 n.3, 277, 377 & 378 n.5; J.D. Hooker, supports against criticisms of R. Owen, 378 n.5, 492 & 493 n.1; J.D. Hooker hopes he may be invited to organise Natural History Museum, 6 & n.3, 8; G. Krefft sends skeleton of frilled lizard, 204; lecturer in natural history and palaeontology, School of Mines, 17 & 18 n.5, 30 n.1, 576 n.4, 580 n.2; St G. J. Mivart, critique in Contemporary Review, xviii, 10 & n.1, 17 & 18 n.2, 62 & 63 n.2, 70 & 71 n.6, 105 & 106 n.7; St G.J. Mivart responds to, 10 & n.1, 15 n.2, 144 & 145–6 nn.4 & 6; new house in St John’s Wood, xxv, 447–8 & 448 n.2, 449, 580 & nn.2 & 4; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.4; Pall Mall Gazette may ask to review Expression, 445 & 446 n.2, 482 & 483 n.13; rector, Aberdeen University, 531 & 533 n.7; review of Origin (1860), 78 & 79 n.4; G. von Seidlitz sends his Darwin’sche Theorie, 169 & 170 n.2; signs petition for Anglo-US copyright convention, 167 n.5; supports A. Günther’s application for promotion at British Museum, 212 & n.3; travels to Egypt to restore his health, 30 & n.1; visits A. Dohrn’s zoological station in Naples, 62 & 63 n.3, 74 & 75 n.8 Hyatt, Alpheus, 101 & n.2; acceleration and retardation of development, 549–51 & 551–2 nn.4–5 & 7–10, 555–7 & 557 nn.4–5, 573 & nn.2 & 4; ammonites, mode of development, 534–41 & 541– 2 nn.7–25 & 27, 536 & 541 nn.14 & 16; CD regrets not sufficiently acknowledging in Origin 6th ed., 440 & nn.3–5, 534 & 541 n.11; CD sends Origin, 6th ed., 572 & 573 n.3; embryology of fossil cephalopods, 440 & n.2, 540 & 542 n.26 Hydra, 563 & 566 n.11, 642 & 645 n.11 Hygrohyphum ochraceum. See Hypnum ochraceum Hyperodon, 77 & 77–8 nn.3–4 Hypnum ochraceum (Hygrohyphum ochraceum), 388 & 389 n.3 Hypolimnas anomala. See Diadema anomala Hyopotamus: V.O. Kovalevsky studies, 250 & n.2 Hystrix (porcupine), 208 nn.1–2 Iberis: purpose of mucus on moistened seeds, 69 & n.4 IJkema, Johan: Descent, Dutch edition, 366 & n.3;

843

Expression, Dutch edition, 366 & n.2, 367, 394 & n.3, 425 & 426 n.2, 461 & n.3 Imara pallasia, 28 n.6 Independent (New York): F. Galton, inefficacy of prayer, 490 n.6 Index: CD’s support for, 14 & n.2, 312–13 & 313 n.2 Innes, John Brodie: Down Church restoration fund, asks E. Darwin for information, 102–3 & 103 n.1 Innes, John William Brodie: examinations at Cambridge, 103 & n.3 ipecacuanha. See Psychotria ipecacuanha Iphiclides ajax. See Papilio ajax Irving, Washington: suicide among natives in West Indies, 78 & 79 n.7 Italian Society of Anthropology and Ethnology. See Società Italiana di Antropologia et di Etnologia Ithomia sylvo (Pteronymia sylvo), 122 & 124 n.8 Jackson, Henry: Expression, presentation, 663 Jackson, William: groom at Down House, later butler, 229 n.2, 351 n.3, 504 Jäger, Gustav: uses CD’s theories of human descent to further his work, 391 n.2 Janson, Edward Westey: agrees to publish R. Meldola’s paper on protective mimicry, 34 & n.4 Jeitteles, Ludwig Heinrich: cited in Variation, 479 n.3; sends CD new paper on fossil mammalia, 479 & n.2, 487 & n.1 Jenkin, Henry Charles Fleeming: criticisms of Origin, 19 & 20 n.6; probability of survival of new varieties, 55 & 57 n.3 & 58 n.4 Jesse, Edward, 528 & 529 n.3, 530 Jesse, George Richard, 529 n.3 Jeudwine, John: second master, Shrewsbury School, 163 & 164 n.2 Johnson, Henry: analysis of worm castings, 177–8 & 178 nn.2–3; Expression, presentation, 663; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 659; wormcasts at Wroxeter excavations, 35 & n.3 Jones, Henry Bence: Expression, presentation, 663 Jones, John Winter: principal librarian, British Museum, 212 & n.2 Jones, Thomas Rupert, 248 & 248–9 n.1 Jones, William, 588 n.14 Jordan, Alexis: Draba verna, classifies forms as 52 separate species, 57 & 58 n.6 Journal of Psychological Medicine: J. Hunter, ‘A review of Darwin’s theory’, 155 & 156 n.4 Journal of researches, 40 & 41 n.4, 528 & n.1; C. Bell read shortly before his death, 517 & 518 n.7; CD sends to L. Bouton, 25 & n.2; CD sends signed copy to B. Riviere, 228 n.1; F. Delpino salutes author of, 497 & n.3, 637 & n.3; J. Gulick

844

Index

Journal of researches, cont. influenced by, 325 & n.1; hailstones as large as small apples, 209 & 210 n.1; C. Nordhoff read while a sailor, 85 & 86 n.4; US ed. continues to sell, 76 & 77 n.2, 80 & 82 n.2, 108 & n.3 Journal of the Anthropological Institute: J. Kaines, ‘The anthropology of Auguste Comte’, 152 n.2 Journal of the Linnean Society (Zoology): J.T. Gulick, diversity of evolution, 347 n.3 Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London: H. Howorth, geological uplift greatest in high latitudes, 331 & 332 n.3 Jukes, Joseph Beete: Expression, presentation, 664 & 665 n.55; Letters, 40 & 41 n.5 Kaines, Joseph: CD enjoys his ‘Anthropology of Auguste Comte’, 151 & 152 n.2 Kant, Immanuel, 73 & 74 n.3 Keferstein, Wilhelm Moritz, 446 & 447 n.3, 634 & n.3 Kellock, William Berry, 412 & 414 n.2 Kerner von Marilaun, Anton: cultivation of Alpine plants, 418 & n.5, 544 & 545 n.5 Kinahan, George Henry: CD thanks for study of glaciation in Ireland (with M.H. Close), 472 & n.1 Kindermann, Adolph Diedrich: Expression, presentation, 663 King, George: cited in Earthworms, 475 n.1; earthworms in India, 460 & 461 n.3, 464 & n.3, 464, 468–9, 468–9, 474–5 & 475 n.1; earthworms in south of France, 475; on sick leave in England, 419 & 423 n.2, 460, 464, 465 n.2; Paritium tricuspis, sent CD specimens, 475 & n.5; superintendent, Royal Botanic Gardens, Calcutta, 378 & n.9, 419 & 423 n.2, 461 n.2 King, Philip Gidley: A. Mellersh’s last meeting with, 61 & 62 n.5; settled in Australia, 49 n.2; B.J. Sulivan sends recent photograph to CD, 38 & 39 n.1, 41 & n.3, 49 & n.1 Kingsley, Charles, 204 n.4 Kippist, Richard: librarian, Linnean Society, 402 n.1 Kirchhoff, Alfred: uses CD’s theories of human descent to further his work, 391 n.2 Klein, Edward Emanuel: CD gives German edition of Descent, 310 & n.5 Knight, Thomas Andrew: president, Horticultural Society of London, 152 & 153 n.5 Koch, Eduard Friedrich: director, E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlags(buch)handlung, 310 n.5, 394 n.4, 497 & 498 nn.3–4; Expression, German edition, 327 & 328 n.1, 335 & 336 n.5, 357 & 358 n.3, 361 & n.2, 384 & n.3, 414 & n.2; plans new

edition of Variation, 561 & n.1 Kogia breviceps. See Euphysetes macleayi K.F. Köhler Verlag, 169 & 170 n.2 Kölliker, Rudolf Albert von: A. Günther applies to for testimonial, 201 & n.7 Kölreuter, Joseph Gottlieb: fertility of crosses of Nicotiana tabacum, 299 n.12 Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen (Netherlands Royal Academy of Sciences): elects CD as foreign member, xxvi, 173 & n.3, 173–4, 618–19 Kovalevsky, Alexander Onufrievich, 250 n.3, 401 n.8; Expression, oversees translation, 345 & 346 n.7, 347 & 348 n.2; Expression, Russian edition, distribution of profits, 400–1 & 401 n.1; lecturer at university of Kiev, 344–5 & 345 n.3; A.R. Wallace disparages research findings, 79 & 79–80 n.3 Kovalevsky, Vladimir Onufrievich: Anchitherium, monograph, 134 & n.5; Expression, Russian translation, 134 & n.2, 324 & n.1, 335 & 336 n.5, 339 & 340 n.5, 344–5 & 345 nn.2 & 4–5, 345–6 & 346 nn.2 & 6, 347–8 & 348–9 nn.4 & 10, 350 & n.1, 351 & 352 n.4, 357 & 358 n.3, 361–2, 394 n.2, 396 & n.3, 400–1 & 401 nn.1,4 & 8, 419 & n.1, 426 n.2, 443 nn.2 & 5; palaeontological research, 134 & n.5, 250 & nn.1–2, 348 & n.5, 396 & n.2; pirated Russian editions of CD’s works, 345 & 346 n.5, 401 & n.5, 442; N. Sobko’s application to translate Expression, 395 n.3, 401 & n.8; studies marsupials in Jena, 134 & n.4; translated Descent and Variation, 134 & n.2, 346 n.4; visits Down House, 250 & n.3, 340 n.5, 345, 347–8 & 348 n.2, 350 & n.6, 351 & 352 n.5, 353 & n.3, 396 & n.4, 409 & n.1, 412 & n.2, 419 & n.4, 651 & 652 n.25; visits A.R. Wallace to discuss expedition to Borneo, 348 & n.7; W.M. Wundt, Menschen- und Thierseele, orders for CD and sends with annotations, 348 & n.9, 350 & n.5, 351 & n.2, 352 & 353 n.2, 401 & n.7 Krefft, Gerard: cicadas in Sydney, 591–2 & 592–3 n.1; CD impressed by paper, 311–12 & 312 n.2; disagrees with R. Owen’s views on teeth of Thylacoleo carnifex, 311–12 & 312 n.2; enjoys Descent, 591–2 & 593 n.3; found traces of man at Breccia Cavern, Wellington, New Zealand, 204 & 207 n.4; sends CD photographs of Neanderthal skulls, 592 & 593 n.6; Thylacoleo carnifex, evidence suggests it was not carnivorous, 204–7 & 207 nn.1 & 4–7 Lacaze-Duthiers, Félix Joseph Henri de: corals, nourishment of polyps, 92 & 94 n.12, 608 & 609 n.12; CD thanks for articles and photograph, 568 & nn.1–2; sends CD Giard’s papers endorsing

Index evolution, 424 & 424–5 nn.2–3; supports CD’s nomination to Académie des sciences, 20 & 21 n.2, 23 & n.3, 603–4 & 604 n.2 Lamarck, Jean Baptiste, 59 & 60 n.6 Lampson, Curtis Miranda, 125 & 126 n.3 Lancet: J. Paget, nervous mimicry of organic senses, 1 n.2 Landseer, Charles: CD’s inquiry about dogs’ orbicularis, 558 & 559 nn.3–4 Landseer, Edwin Henry: Alexander and Diogenes, photograph of, 139 & 140 n.3, 143 & n.3 Langstaff, Charles: Expression, presentation, 662 & 664 n.12 Langstroth, Lorenzo Lorraine: ‘observing hive’, 570 & 571 n.5 Langton, Charles: advised CD on sale of railway shares, 81 & n.2 Langton, Diana, 280 & 281 n.6 Langton, Edmund, 41 & n.4, 280 & 281 n.6 Langton, Emily Caroline (Lena), 41 & n.4, 280 & 281 n.6 Langton, Emily Catherine (Catherine), 475 & 476 n.4 Lankester, Edwin Ray: Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.6; ‘Siebold’s new researches in parthenogenesis’, article in Nature, 445 & n.10, 448; studies Cephalopoda in Naples, 74 & 75 n.12; translates E. Haeckel’s Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte, 564 & 566 n.15, 643 & 645 n.15 Lartet, Edouard: Miocene fossils, 113 & 117 n.7, 613 & 617 n.7 Lavater, Johann Kaspar, 584 & 585 n.4, 646 & 647 n.4 Lavoisier, Antoine-Laurent, 584 & 585 n.4, 646 & 647 n.4 Lawson, Henry: editor, Popular Science Review, 481 & n.3; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.11 Layard, Edgar Leopold, 158 & 159 n.11 Layton, Charles: D. Appleton & Co., London agent, 80 & 82 n.3, 81, 108 & n.2, 363 & 364 n.2, 371 & n.1, 441 & 442 n.1, 454 & n.3; Expression, Appletons accept J. Murray’s prices for stereotypes, 355 & nn.1–2, 357, 363 & 364 n.2 Leclerc, George Louis, comte de Buffon, 59 & 60 n.6 Leersia: CD grows from seed but is unable to obtain perfect flowers, 120 & 121 n.3, 161 & n.6; CD offers L. oryzoides to Kew, 39 & 40 n.3, 46 & n.6 Lefroy, John Henry: CD makes charitable payment of £1 to, 65 & 66 n.2 Lehman, Amalie, 450 n.2 Lehman, Emil: offers to translate Expression into German, 450 & n.2 Leifchild, John Roby: critical reviews of CD in

845

Athenæum, 156 n.2; ‘The higher ministry of nature’, CD seeks to buy, 155 & 156 n.2 Lemoine, Albert: praise for C. Bell quoted in Expression, 517 & 518 n.12 Leopoldina (Academia Caesarea LeopoldinoCarolina Germanica Naturae Curiosorum): new rules require members’ signature, 133 & n.1 Leptalis, 122 & 124 nn.4–6 & 9–10 Leptocerus, 28 & n.13 Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim, 73 & 74 n.3 Lettington, Henry: CD’s gardener, 376 & 377 n.5, 391 & n.1, 439 & n.2 Leucosolenia. See Olynthus Leveson-Gower, Granville George, 2d earl Granville: petition for Anglo-US copyright convention, 166–7 & 167–8 nn.1–5 Lewes, George Henry: breaks with Pall Mall Gazette over critical review of poem by George Eliot, 179 & 180 n.6; signs petition for Anglo-US copyright convention, 167 n.5 Lewin, Friend: visits Down House, 162 & n.2, 651 & n.12 L’Héritier de Brutell, Charles: separated pelargoniums from geraniums, 294 n.6 Liddell, Henry George: Liddell & Scott cited, 587 & 588 n.11 Lilljeborg, Wilhelm, 281 Lindsay, James Ludovic: experiment on psychic powers of D.D. Home, 247 & n.2 Linné, Carl von (Carolus Linnaeus): affinity of man and higher apes, 153 & 154 n.3; leaping termites, 28 & n.12 Linnean Society of London: CD advises J. Denny to submit findings to, 298 & n.9, 315, 318 & n.2; CD authorises J. West to receive Transactions due to him, 403 & n.2; CD sends C. Wright’s paper on phyllotaxy, 145 n.1, 149; CD sends G. von Seidlitz, Der Darwin’sche Theorie, 155 & n.2, 170; R. Kippist, librarian, 402 n.1; R. Meldola’s paper on protective mimicry read to, 33–4 & 34 n.3; J. Scott elected fellow of, 474 & n.3, 546 n.2; H.T. Stainton, secretary, 34 & n.3; Transactions sent to CD, 401 & 402 n.1 Linum: purpose of mucus on moistened seeds, 69 & n.4 Lister, Caroline, 478 & n.7 Litchfield, Henrietta Emma: assisted CD by commenting on work, 466 n.6; A.J. Cupples sends regards to, 489 & n.10; CD hopes she may never have a child as her health is very delicate, xxvi, 311 & n.4; CD would not publish R.B. Litchfield’s views without attribution, 197 & n.1; E. Darwin writes about removal of pews in Down church, 119 n.3; Expression, presentation, 662;

846

Index

Litchfield, Henrietta Emma, cont. J.D. Hooker inquires after health of, 40 & n.8; illness (December 1871), 6 & n.7; J.B. Innes inquires after, 103 & n.2; V.O. Kovalevsky aware of how much CD will miss her help, 134 & n.1; lives in Devonshire Street, 103 n.2, 580 & n.4; marriage to R.B. Litchfield, 478 & n.8, 483 n.15, 489 & n.10; reads proofs of Expression, xxi, 296 & 297 n.6, 322 & 322–3 n.1, 661; taken ill on visit to Down House, 46 & n.8; translates E. Haeckel’s preface for CD, 390 & 391 n.2; visits Down House, 322 & 323 n.7 Litchfield, Richard Buckley, 229 & n.1; Expression, CD would not publish views on origin of music without attribution, xxi, 197 & n.1; marriage to H.E. Darwin, 311 n.4, 478 & n.8, 594 n.1; H. Spencer disagrees with views on genesis of melody, 510 & n.2; visits Down House, 323 n.7 Livingstone, David, 487 n.3 Lloyd, Mary Charlotte, 525 & 526 n.3, 529 & n.9, 529 & 530 n.4, 589 & 590 n.4; offers to obtain drawings of dogs for Expression, 244–5 & 245 n.3 Lockyer, Joseph Norman: dispute with A.W. Bennett over publication of R. Owen’s letter, 531 & 533 n.6; editor, Nature, 491 & 492 n.3 Longet, François-Achille: supported CD’s nomination to Académie de sciences, 20 & 21 n.2, 603–4 & 604 n.2 Lónyay, Menyhért: Hungarian Academy of Sciences elects CD as foreign member, 253, 254 & n.2, 655, 656 Lophius (fishing-frogs, monkfish): filaments, 158 & 159 n.9 Lophura nycthemera. See Euplocamus nycthemerus Lorain, Paul: cited in Expression, 285 n.4; measurements of heart rate, 285 & n.4 Lord, John Keast, 47 & 48 n.6 Lortet, Louis: increase of heart rate in horse scenting food, 285 & n.5 Louis XI, king of France, 560 n.3 Lovén, Sven: Académie des sciences elects as correspondent over CD, 319 & n.3, 630 & 631 n.3 Lowe, Robert: supports J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute but fails to take action, 202 & 203 n.3 Lowne, Benjamin Thompson: Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.16 Lubbock, Ellen Frances, 365 & 366 n.11; visits Down House, 651 & 652 n.22 Lubbock, Henry James, 594 n.1 Lubbock, John: attempts to bring Hooker/Ayrton dispute before House of Commons, 342 & n.4; Bank Holiday Act, 9 & 10 n.2, 277 n.11; CD explains that Down church pews must be moved to secure grant, 119 & n.4; Expression, presenta-

tion, 663; E. Haeckel sends chapters on calciform sponges, 563–4, 578, 642–3; J.-C. Houzeau sends study of mental faculties of animals, 480 & 481 n.2, 636 & n.2; Prehistoric times, German translation, 564 & 566 n.14, 643 & 645 n.14; W.W. Reade’s Martyrdom of man indebted to, 78 & 79 n.5; sends W.E. Gladstone scientists’ memorial supporting J.D. Hooker, 250 nn.2–3, 255 & n.2, 256 & n.1, 262–3, 295 n.2, 317 n.12, 333 n.3, 493 n.3; signs petition for Anglo-US copyright convention, 167 n.5; suicide rare among savages, 78 & 79 n.5; supports J.D. Hooker in dispute with A.S. Ayrton, xxi, 193 & 194 n.2, 256 & n.2; vicepresident, BAAS and president of biology section, 344 n.1 Lubbock, Mary: age at which babies shed tears, 594 & n.3 Lucian of Samosata, 472 & 473 n.2 Ludwig, Camilla, 322 & 323 n.6; Expression, presentation, 664 Lumb, Edward: death of, 248 & 249 n.7 Luther, Martin: German translation of Jeremiah and Ezra, 458–9 & 460 n.1 Lycaena agestis (Aricia agestis): geographical variation, 48 & 49 n.12 Lyell, Charles, 79 n.4, 326 & n.5; Antiquity of man, 241 n.6; CD points to passage Origin, 6th ed. on forms not changing when migrating in a body, 222 & n.2; CD thanks for showing him S.V. Wood’s letter on fertility of cultivated varieties grown from seed, 238; Elements of geology, 239 & 241 n.6; Expression, presentation, 662; fluidity of magmas attributable to water, 439 n.6; Leopoldina, J.D. Hooker asks to sign approval of new rules, 133 & n.1; opposition to A. Tylor’s views on ‘Pluvial’ period, 249 nn.2 & 4; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.5; Principles of geology, 11th ed., 50 & n.1, 189–90 & 190 nn.2–4, 239 & 241 nn.6–7; recommends A.R. Wallace as director of Bethnal Green Museum, 386 & n.5; sends CD New York Tribune article on L. Agassiz’s findings in Patagonia, 295 & 296 n.2; signs memorial supporting J.D. Hooker, 250 n.3, 277; Students’ elements of geology likely to replace old Elements, 50 & n.1; Student’s elements published with cut pages, 51 & n.3; Student’s elements, price, 70 & n.3; visits Aurignac caves, 222 & n.4 Lyell, Mary Elizabeth, 222 n.4; takes Huxley children to the circus, 30 & n.2 Lyon, William Penman: Homo versus Darwin, 373 & 373–4 nn.1–3, 376 & nn.1 & 3, 384–5 & 385 n.2 MacColl, Norman: editor, Athenæum and author of ‘Literary Gossip’, 71 n.1, 76 n.5

Index McGill, John, 488 & 489 n.8 McGilvray, Maria, 452 & n.3 MacKay, Henry: questions CD’s theory of origins of morality, 508–9 Mackenzie, John Finlayson: inherited characteristics observed in India, 66 & 66–7 nn.1–6 McLeod, Mr: representative, London Heliotype Company, 324 & 325 n.2, 335 & 336 n.6, 342 & n.4 Macmillan, Alexander, 87 & n.2 Macmillan’s Magazine: G.H. Darwin, ‘Development in dress’, 178 & n.3 Macrobius: Saturnalia, description of shame, 598–9 & 599 n.2 Macropodus, 218 & 219 nn.1–2 Mahoney, O., 174 & n.2 Main, William: theory of lines, 526–7, 533 Maine, Henry James Sumner: twitching of toes may reveal a lying witness, 500 n.5 Major, Charles Immanuel Forsyth: applies to translate Expression into Italian, 450, 511– 12 & nn.3–4, 635–6, 638 & 639 nn.3–4; Expression, presentation, 664 & 665 n.52; studies vertebrate fauna of Monte Bamboli, 451 & n.8, 635 & 636 n.8 Mallet, Robert: theory of volcanic energy, 436 & n.5, 439 & nn.4–5 Malm, August Wilhelm: migration of flatfish, translation by G.H. Darwin, 156 & 156–7 nn.1–2 Manners, John James Robert: previous commissioner of works, 256 & 257 n.5 Manning, Henry Edward, archbishop of Westminster, 125 & 126 n.3 Mantegazza, Paolo: delighted by Expression, 584 & 585 n.3, 590, 646 & 647 n.3, 664 & 665 n.46; Expression, would have been happy to translate, 584 & 585 n.6, 590, 646 & 647 n.6; observations of expression during travels in South America, 584–5 & 585 nn.10–13, 646–7 & 647 nn.10–13; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 181 & 182 n.3, 620 & 621 n.3, 658 & 659 n.9, 659; Physiology of pain, hopes to dedicate to CD, 584 & 585 n.9, 590 & 591 n.3, 646 & 647 n.9; Physiology of pleasure, 584 & 585 n.8, 590, 646 & 647 n.8; president, Società Italiana di Antropologia et di Etnologia, 653 & 654 n.1; researches human skulls from Africa and New Zealand, 181–2 & 182 nn.6–8, 620–1 & 621 nn.6–8; respiratory expression of pain, 584 & 585 n.7, 646 & 647 n.7; reviews Expression in Nuova Antologia, 584 & 585 n.5, 646 & 647 n.5; sends CD papers on human skull and teeth, 181 & 182 n.4, 620 & 621 n.4; Società Italiana di Antropologia et di Etnologia elects CD as honorary member, 181, 620, 653 & 654 n.1 Margherita di Savoia, queen of Italy, 222 n.1

847

Markens, Isaac: asks for signed copy of Expression, 528 Marpesia petreus, 26 & 28 n.5 Marshall, William: assistant, Museum of Natural History, Leiden, 446 & 447 n.4, 452 & 453 n.2, 634 & n.4; black coots only nest in places where rusted fungus in reed grass provides protection, 447 & n.5, 453 n.3, 634 & 635 n.5; CD sends specimens to A.R. Wallace, 447 n.7, 452 & 453 n.2, 635 n.7; CD thanks for publications on structure of man in relation to other animals, 245 & nn.2–3; secretary to grand duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, 453 n.2; studied with E. Haeckel at Jena, 446 & 447 n.3, 634 & n.3 Martin, John Royle: asks CD to double shares in Artizans, Labourers & General Dwellings Company, 124–5 & 125 n.1 & 126 n.4 Martineau, Harriet: The positive philosophy of August Comte, 151 & 152 n.3 Martineau, James: H. Spencer answers arguments for divine creation, 251 & 252 n.2, 254 & 255 n.1, 326 & n.4 Martinelli, Fulvio: seeks CD’s aid in distributing pamphlet on pigeons, 219–22 & 222 n.2 Martins, Charles Frédéric: Descent, French ed., presentation, 522 & 523 n.1; new school of naturalists seeks to expound CD’s ideas, 63 & 64 n.2, 604–5 & 605 n.2; recommends S.J. Pozzi as translator of Expression, 457 & n.2; revises French translation of Origin, 6th ed., 523 Massarani, Tullo, 585 n.9, 647 n.9 Masters, George, 593 n.7 Masters, Maxwell Tylden: thanks CD for malformed pear, 481 & n.1 Mastotermes heerii. See Calotermes heerii Maudsley, Henry: addresses British Medical Association on medical psychology, 485 & n.2; Expression, presentation, 485 & n.1, 662 & 664 n.6; visits Down House, 162 & n.2, 651 & n.12 Maury, Matthew Fontaine, 110 & 111 n.3 Maw, George: visited Morocco with J.D. Hooker, 58 n.7 Max Müller, Friedrich: origin of language, 381 & 382 n.8,459 & 460 n.6, 547 & 548 n.8, 640 & 641 n.8 May, Arthur Dampier: drawings of dogs used in Expression, xx, 140 n.4, 231 & n.2, 231– 2 & 232 nn.2–3, 245 nn.3 & 5; Expression, presentation, 662 Maynard, Charles Johnson: CD sends a better photograph, 555 & n.2 Mayo, earl of. See Bourke, Richard Southwell, 6th earl of Mayo Meehan, Thomas: function of bud scales, 308

848

Index

Meehan, Thomas, cont. & 309 n.18, 409 & 411–12 nn.1–3 Meek, Fielding Bradford, 16 & 17 n.1 Meldola, Raphael: mimetic characters transmitted through pangenesis, 47 & 48 n.4; protective mimicry in butterflies, 33–4 & 34 n.3, 37–8 & 38 nn.3–4 & 7, 46–8 & 48 n.3 & 49 n.13, 50–1, 105 & n.2, 123, 129–30; returns F. Müller’s letters and specimens with A.G. Butler’s nomenclature, 121– 3 & 124 nn.2–10 Melete lycimnia. See Daptonoura lycimnia Mellersh, Arthur: lives in Haslemere, close to his birthplace, 61; sends CD photograph of P.G. King, 38 & 39 n.1, 49 & n.1; thanks CD for his photograph, 61 & n.2; visited Down House (1862), 49 & n.3 Meyer, Adolf Bernhard: expressions in Philippines, 172 & 173 nn.1–2 Meyerbeer, Giacomo, 510 n.4 Michelet, Athénaïs: anxiety over her husband’s health, 282 & 283 n.2, 627 & n.2; Expression, presentation, 546 & 548 n.3, 639 & 641 n.3, 664 & 665 n.50; studies history and behaviour of cats, 212–13 & 214 nn.3 & 7, 224 & n.4, 282–3 & 283 n.5, 509 & nn.3–4, 627 & 628 n.5, 624–5 & 625–6 nn.3 & 7, 638 & nn.3–4 Michelet, Jules: admiration for CD, 212 & 214 nn.2 & 4, 505–6 & 506 n.2, 624 & 625 nn.2 & 4, 637 & 638 n.2; in poor health since returning from refuge in Italy, 282 & 283 n.2, 509, 627 & n.2, 638 Miklucho-Maclay, Nikolai Nikolaievich: death reported, 348 & n.6 Mill, John Stuart: critique of Comte’s positivism, 76 & n.8; St.G.J. Mivart now persuaded of errors of, 17 & 18 n.4; signs petition for Anglo-US copyright convention, 167 n.5 Milton, John: depictions of shame, 597 & 598 n.4 Milman, Henry Hart, 548 n.4, 641 n.4 Mitchell, Thomas Livingstone: tracings of teeth of Thylacoleo carnifex, 207 n.6 Mivart, St George Jackson: accuses T.H. Huxley and C. Wright of misrepresentation, 17– 18 & 18 nn.1–2; ‘Ape resemblances to man’, 153 & 154 n.4, C.R. Bree criticises for affirming some form of evolution, 326 & n.5; CD answers criticisms in new chapter of Origin, xviii, 8 n.2, 10 & 11 n.2, 63 & n.6, 78 & 79 n.2, 98 & 99 nn.2–3, 105 & 106 n.5, 144 & 145 n.3, 157 & 159 n.4, 297 & n.4, 657; CD charges with misrepresentation and accusations of bigotry, 11 & n.2, 62–3 & 63 n.5; CD closes correspondence, xix, 14–15; defends his opposition to CD, who is mortified by his criticism, xix, 13, 14–15 & 15 n.2, 19; Descent, hostile review in

Quarterly Review, xviii, 11 & n.2, 15 n.2, 20 nn.6–7, 70–1 & 71 n.6, 75 & 76 n.4; Genesis of species attempts to mimic Origin, 179 & 180 n.3; Genesis of species criticises natural selection, 10 n.1, 15 n.2, 19 & 20 n.6, 98 & 99 nn.3–4; Genesis of species made little impact in Germany (J.V. Carus), 297 & n.4, 310; Genesis of species, Pall Mall Gazette may review alongside 6th ed. of Origin, 70–1 & 71 n.5, 72 & n.2; Genesis of species, D.T. Smith reviews in Louisville Courier-Journal, 512 & 515 n.2; T.H. Huxley, critique of Genesis of species, 10 & n.1, 17 & 18 n.2, 70 & 71 n.6, 105 & 106 n.7; T.H. Huxley’s critique, reply to, 10 & n.1, 11 & nn.1–2, 15 n.2, 144 & 145–6 nn.4 & 6; incipient structures, differs from CD, 365 & 366 n.10; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, xix, 658 & 659 n.18; probability of survival of new varieties, 55 & 57 n.3; C. Wright, critical review of Genesis of species, xix, 17, 26 & 28 n.1, 144 & 145 n.4, 226 n.6; C. Wright’s critique, reply to, 10 & n.2, 17–18 & n.1, 144 & 145–6 nn.4– 6, 149 & 150 n.7, 226 & 227 n.6 Moggridge, John Traherne: harvesting ants and trapdoor spiders, 430–2 & 432 nn.1–6, 437 & nn.2–3 monkeys: voluntary vomiting, 366–7 & 367 n.3 Montague, Henry: asks CD’s help in completing and publishing his life’s work, 225 & n.2 Month: critique of natural selection [St G.J. Mivart], 14 & 15 n.2 Moore, Thomas: J. Russell’s memoirs of, 211 & n.1 Moore, Thomas Edward Laws: governor, Falkland Island, 279 & 280 n.1 Moran, Benjamin, 85 & 86 n.5, 141 & n.2 Morgan, Lewis Henry: CD thanks for work on consanguinity, 31 & n.1 Morigerovskii, Alexander Nikiforovich: Descent, Russian translation, 346 n.5 Morley, John: may review Origin, 6th ed. alongside Mivart’s Genesis of species, 80 & n.3, 179 & 180 n.4 Morris, Caroline Honoria: London agent, Royal Society of Mauritius, 25 & n.2 Morris, John, 248 & 248–9 n.1 Morton, Henry, 549 & n.3 Mostyn Owen, Arthur, 478 & n.7 Mostyn Owen, Charles, 478 & n.7 Mostyn Owen, Francis, 478 & n.7 Mostyn Owen, Sobieski, 478 & n.7 Mostyn Owen, William, Sr, 476 n.3, 477 & 478 nn.4 &7 Motley, John Lothrop: Rise of the Dutch republic, 138 & 139 n.13 Moulinié, Jean Jacques: Descent, French translation, 7 & 7–8 nn.1 & 4, 457 & 457–8 n.3; Descent, translation often unintelligible (F. Baudry), 547 & 548

Index n.10, 640 & 641 n.10; Expression, illness prevents from translating, 404 & n.4, 405 & n.5, 424 & n.3, 457 & n.1, 632 & n.4; illness delays translation of 2d volume of Descent and 6th ed. of Origin, xviii, 403–4 & 404 nn.2–3, 405 & nn.2 & 4, 457 & 457– 8 n.3, 522–3 & 524 n.2, 632 & nn.2–3, 658; Origin, French ed., new chapter in 6th ed. to be printed as appendix, 7 & 8 n.2, 10 & 11 n.2; Origin, French ed., prefatory letter from CD, 7, 58–9 & 59–60 n.1, 423 & 424 n.1; Origin, French ed., revisions in 5th and 6th eds. incorporated, xviii, 7 & 7–8 nn.1 & 3, 59–60 n.1, 414–15 & 416 nn.2–4, 523 & 524 n.3–5, 658 Mueller, Ferdinand von: Expression, presentation, 664 & 665 n.45 Mugil (grey mullet), 218 & 219 n.2 Müller, Friedrich Max. See Max Müller, Friedrich Müller, Fritz: Abutilon, experiments show influence of two male parents on a single fruit, 224 & n.4; caddisflies, 28 & n.13; Decapodia, nauplius stage, 573 & n.4; Descent, liked chapter on Lepidoptera, 89 & 90 n.7; Expression, presentation, 663; mimicry in butterflies, 26 & 28 n.4, 37 & 38 n.6, 148 & 149 n.11; mimicry in butterflies, CD sends letter and specimens to R. Meldola, 37 & 38 n.5, 47–8 & 48 nn.5–6, 50, 105 & n.2; termites, 26–8 & 28 nn.7–12 Müller, Hermann, 28 n.2; ‘Application of Darwinian theory to flowers and the insects that visit them’, American Naturalist, xix–xx, 155 & 156 n.3, 182–3 & 187 n.2, 187–8 & 188 n.2; fertilisation of flowers, book ready for publication, 188 & n.4 Müller, Johannes Peter, 508 n.5; Handbuch der Physiologie, 287 & 288 n.4, 288 & 289 n.9, 629 & 630 n.4, 630 & n.9 Munby, Arthur Joseph: description of fear and terror, 559–60 & 560 nn.1–4 Murie, James: CD endorses application as professor at Royal Veterinary College, 135 & 136 n.1, 140–1 & 141 n.1; papers on manatee and whales, 135 & 136 n.3 Murray, John, 25 & n.2, 262 n.2, 362 & n.1, 476 & n.1, 520 & n.3; annual trade sale, xxiii, 441, 458, 461, 466 & 467 n.6, 485 & 486 n.4, 495–6 & 496 n.1, 651, 661; CD’s publications sent to Naples zoological station’s library, 383–4 & 384 n.2, 394; Descent, pays CD 300 guineas, 103–4, 104; Descent, US ed., at CD’s behest, did not supply stereotypes, 80 & 82 n.2; Expression, French edition, 405 & 406 n.7, 423–4 & 424 n.2, 461–2 & 462 nn.3 & 5, 463 & nn.1–2; Expression, German edition, 384 & n.3; Expression, heliotypes, 330 & 330–1 nn.2– 3, 336, 347 & 348 n.4, 393, 425 n.3, 511 & n.4, 639 n.4; Expression, ms. received by W. Clowes,

849

247 & 248 n.2; Expression, presentations, 458, 461 & n.1; Expression, print run, xxiii, 384; Expression, publication advertised, 247 & 248 n.4; Expression, refunds CD for payments to artists, 394 & n.6; Expression, reprints, 485 & 486 n.2, 487 & n.1, 554 & n.3, 579 n.6 Expression, Russian edition, 345 & n.5, 351 & 352 n.4; Expression, US ed., 76 & 77 n.3, 328 & 329 n.5, 339 & n.4, 355 & nn.1–2; holiday in Scotland, 324, 364 & n.4, 368 & n.3; Origin, 6th ed., 657–8; Origin, 6th ed., CD completes correction and urges cut pages, 51 & n.3; Origin, 6th ed., CD sends diagram, 15 & n.2; Origin, 6th ed., pays CD £210; Origin, 6th ed., presentations, 203 & 204 n.5; Origin, 6th ed., price, xvii–xviii, 15 & n.3, 70 & n.3; Origin, 6th ed., review copy for Pall Mall Gazette, 72 & n.2, 461, 500, 502 & n.1; Origin, 6th ed., stereotypes for US edition, xviii, 54 & n.1, 62 & n.2; publishes Quarterly Review, 526 & n.5 Musters, George Chaworth: expedition to Patagonia, 280 & 281 n.8 Mycetes caraya (Alouatta caraya): voids excrement through fear, 584 & 585 n.11, 646 & 647 n.11 Myoxus dryas (Dryomys nitedula), 479 & n.1 Myrtillus uliginosa (Vaccinium uliginosum): in peatmass in Bavaria, 388 & 389 n.9 Naevius, 163 & 164 n.4 Nägeli, Carl Wilhelm von: opposition to Darwinism, 69 & n.7 Nathorst, Alfred Gabriel: Arctic plants in freshwater aquifers of Scania, 388–9 & 389 nn.2 & 4 Natural History Museum: J.D. Hooker hopes T.H. Huxley may be invited to organise, 6 & n.3, 8; R. Owen advocates transfer of Kew herbarium to, 340 & 341 n.4, 467 & 468 n.5, 470 & n.4, 491 & 492 n.3, 492 & 493 n.1, 494–5 & 495 nn.1–4, 504 n.8, 531 & 533 n.6; plans for creation of, 6 n.3 natural selection: acceleration and retardation of development, 538–40 & 541–2 nn.10– 21, 549–51 & 551–2 nn.4–5 & 7–10; A.F. Boardman postulates illustration from immigration, 109–11 & 111 nn.1–5; daily and hourly metaphorically scrutinises the world, 373 & 373–4 n.3; A.E. Dobbs attempts to apply to legislative institutions, 29 & 30 n.1; imitation, role in, 37 & 38 n.4; infant mortality and, 362 & nn.2–3, 631 & 631–2 nn.2–3; isolation, role in species development, 89 & n.3; and mimetic colouring, 46–8; probability of survival of new varieties, 55–7 & 57 nn. 1 & 3; and protective mimicry, 33–4 & 34 n.3, 46–8 & 48 n.3 & 49 n.13; G. von Seidlitz believes in primacy of, 170; C. Wright defends, 144–5 & 145–6 nn.4–7

850

Index

Nature, 291 n.9; J.L.R. Agassiz, glacial action in Patagonia, 296 n.2; J. Ball, chance of survival of new varieties, 55 & 57 n.2 & 58 n.4; A.W. Bennett, subeditor, 491 & 492 n.3; A.W. Bennett dissociates himself from publication of R. Owen’s letter on transfer of Kew herbarium, 531 & 533 n.6; A.G. Butler, mimicry in butterflies, 51 n.3, 105 & 106 n.3; CD defends A.R. Wallace against C.R. Bree, 338 & n.2, 338 & 339 nn.1– 2, 341 & 342 n.1; CD sends C. Wright’s paper on phyllotaxy for review, 145 n.1, 149 & 150 n.4; A. Dohrn, zoological station in Naples, 74 & n.7; Expression, review copy, 466 & 467 n.8; T.H. Farrer, fertilisation of some common papilionaceous flowers, 445 n.2; F. Galton, blood-relationships, 230 n.5; J. Gulick, Achatinella, 325 & nn.1–2, 326– 7 & 327 n.1; J.D. Hooker replies to R. Owen’s report advocating transfer of Kew herbarium to Natural History Museum, 467 & 467–8 nn.3– 5, 470 & n.4, 491 & 492 n.5, 492, 495 n.2; Hooker/Ayrton dispute, 6 n.1; Hooker/Ayrton dispute, memorial from leading scientists, 250 n.2; H.H. Howorth, sterility and fertility, CD and A.R. Wallace respond to, 332 n.2, 386 & n.7; H.H. Howorth, upheaval and subsidence in earth’s crust, 331 & 332 n.3; T.H. Huxley, ‘Dr Bastian and spontaneous generation’, 392 n.3; E.R. Lankester, ‘Siebold’s new researches in parthenogenesis’, 445 & n.10, 448; J.N. Lockyer, editor, 492 n.3, 531 & 533 n.6; Origin, 6th ed., review, 87 & n.5, 157 & 159 n.7; R. Owen, ‘The national herbarium’, 491 & 492 n.3, 492 & 493 n.3, 531 & 533 n.6; D. Spalding, ‘On instinct’, 445 & n.9, 448 & 449 n.5; A.R. Wallace, favourable review of H.C. Bastian, The beginning of life, 341 & 342 n.3, 365 & n.8; A.R. Wallace, review of C.R. Bree’s attack on Darwinism, 325–6 & 326 nn.2– 3, 341 & 343 n.2; A.R. Wallace, review of J.-C. Houzeau’s book on mental faculties of animals, 452–3 & 453 n.4 Naturwissenschaftlicher Verein für Steiermark: CD presents with German translations of his works, 104 & 105 n.2 Neoceratodus fosteri. See Ceratodus New York, Central Park Zoo, 407 & 408 n.8 New York Tribune: L. Agassiz’s findings in Patagonia, 295 & 296 n.1 New Zealand Institute: elects CD as honorary member, 201 & 202 n.1, 654 Newman, Henry Wenman: habits of humble-bees, 185 & 187 n.13, 623 & 624 n.7 Newton, Alfred: edits Zoological Record from 1870, 219 n.3 Newton, Isaac: W. Main likens importance of CD’s

ideas to, 527 & 528 n.6; Principia mathematica, W.W. Reade likens Origin to, 78 & n.1 Nicol, Patrick: Expression, presentation, 663 Nicols, Arthur: CD sends table of contents for Expression, 363 & n.2, 368 & 369 n.1; communication in sheep, 368; domesticated koalas, 362–3 & 363 n.1; intercommunication among dogs, 363 Nicotiana tabacum: fertility of crosses, 298 & 299 n.12 Nizami Ganjavi, 587 & 588 n.14 Nordhoff, Charles: cock’s crow is learned behaviour; stallions care for mares, 85 & n.1; read Journal of researches while a sailor, 85 & 86 n.4; sends letter through B. Moran at American legation, 85 & 86 n.5, 141 & n.2 Norman, George Warde: Expression, presentation, 664 & 665 n.49 North American Review: St G.J. Mivart, response to C. Wright’s criticism, 10 & n.2, 18 n.1, 19 & 20 n.3, 144 & 145 nn.4 & 5, 150 n.7, 226 & 227 n.6; C. Wright, reply to St G.J. Mivart, 144 & 145 n.5, 241 & 242 n.2; C. Wright, review of St G.J. Mivart’s Genesis of species, 26 & 28 n.1, 145 n.4, 227 n.6 North British Review: probability of survival of new varieties [H.C.F. Jenkin], 55 & 57 n.3 Northbrook, earl of. See Baring, Thomas George, 1st earl of Northbrook Norton, Charles Eliot, 101 n.4 Norton, Susan Ridley Sedgwick: death in childbirth, 101 & n.4 Numida mitrata (N. meleagris mitratus): cross with common fowl, 30–1 & 31 n.1 Nunn, John: voyage to Kerguelen Island, 427 & 428 n.3 Nussbaumer, Fidelis Alois: Vienna University natural history society thank CD for works, 552 & 552–3 nn.1–3 Odontomachus: mandibles used in jumping, 27–8 & 28 n.10 Ogle, William: Expression, presentation, 662 Oliver, Daniel: Flora of tropical Africa, 275 & 278 n.30; urges J.D. Hooker to ignore R. Owen’s attack in Nature, 492 & 493 n.1 Olynthus (Leucosolenia): E. Haeckel’s conclusions regarding, 563 & 565 n.7, 564, 565, 642 & 644 n.7, 643, 644 Ophrys spp., 152 & 153 nn.2–3 & 7 Oppel, Albert: study of Jurassic formations, 534 & 541 n.8, 536 & 541–2 nn.15 & 18 orang-utan: dissected flesh smells like human flesh, 172 Orbigny, Alcide Charles Victor Dessalines d’, 536 & 542 n.18, 538

Index orchids: CD’s experiments with fertilisation of, 293 & 294 n.9 Origin, 527, 657–8; development of seals’ flippers, 94 n.5, 609 n.5; effects of glaciation on distribution of species, 409 n.11; T.H. Huxley reviewed (1860), 78 & 79 n.4; natural selection not solely responsible for the modification of species, 19 & 20 n.8, 343 & 344 n.3; neuter insects a difficulty in theory of natural selection of instincts, 453 n.6; R. Owen, hostile review by, 15 n.3, 341 n.5, 495 n.6; W.W. Reade likens importance to Principia mathematica and Wealth of nations, 78 & n.1; W.W. Reade uses as model, 106, 179; retardation of development, 535 & 541 n.12 Origin, 2d ed.: J. Butler quoted, 192 n.2 Origin, 5th ed., 567 n.6; affinities between extinct and living species, 376 & n.2; intermediate varieties, difficulty in determining, 149 n.6; intermediate varieties, probability of survival, 55 & 57 n.3 & 58 n.5; H.C.F. Jenkin’s criticisms taken into account, 19 & 20 n.6; metaphorically, natural selection daily and hourly scrutinises the world, 373–4 n.3; retrogression, 94 n.2, 609 n.2; variability of highly developed characteristics, 37 & 38 n.3, 46 & 48 n.2 Origin, 6th ed.: acceleration and retardation of development, 440 & n.3–5, 541 n.12; affinities between extinct and living species, 376 & n.2; author citations, W.H. Flower would like works cited, 77; cheaper than earlier editions, 461 & n.2; costs of production, 69–70 & 70 n.2.; CD corrects index, 50, 51; CD corrects proofs, xvii, 59, 650 & 651 n.1, 657; CD keen pages should be cut, 51 & n.3; CD receives £210 from J. Murray, 500, 502 & n.1; CD receives first copy, 69; W.E. Darwin reads proofs, 16 & n.1; extent, 15 & n.3; flatfish, movement of eyes, 157 & 159 n.5; fold-out diagram, 15 & n.2; glossary, 15 & n.4, 51 & 52 n.4; historical sketch, 158 & 159 n.12; A. Hyatt, presentation, 572 & 573 n.3; imperfection of the geological record, 158 & 159 n.10; incipient structures, 310; influence of laws of growth on morphological structure, 550 & 552 n.8; list of changes, 79 & n.2; natural selection does not necessarily include progressive development, 551 & 552 n.10; new chapter responding to critics, xviii, 8 n.2, 10 & 11 n.2, 63 & n.6, 74 & n.5, 78 & 79 n.2, 98 & 99 nn.2–3, 105 & 106 n.5, 144 & 145 n.3, 157 & 159 n.4, 297 & n.4, 657; new chapter, typesetting and correction costs, 69 & 70 n.2; presentations, 51 & 52 n.5, 77 & n.1, 78 & n.1, 79, 96 & 97 n.2, 98 & 99 n.1, 99 & 100 n.1, 144 & 145 n.2, 49 & 150 n.6, 157 & 158 n.1, 181 & 182 n.3, 620 & 621 n.3, 203 & 204 n.5, 657–60; price

851

(7/6d.), xvii–xviii, 15 & n.3, 51, 69–70 & 70 nn.1 & 3, 657; publication (February 1872), xvii, 657; reprints, 657; review copies, 51, 72 & n.2; reviews, Nature (A.W. Bennett), 157 & 159 n.7; reviews, Popular Science Review, 659 n.11; sales, 467 n.6, 500 & 501 n.3; species travelling in a body undergo little modification, 222 n.2; stereotyped, xviii, 19–20 & 20 n.9, 50 & n.3, 59, 80 & 82 n.2, 657; typeface, 69 & 70 n.1, 104 & n.2 Origin, French ed.: 3d ed. did not incorporate changes in 4th English ed., xviii, 59 & 60 n.5, 415 & n.2; CD’s prefatory letter for new edition, 7, 58–9 & 59–60 n.1, 423 & 424 n.1; delays in publication, xviii, 403–4 & 404 nn.2–3, 405 & nn.2 & 4, 457 & 457–8 n.3, 522–3 & 524 n.2, 632 & nn.2– 3, 658; new chapter to be printed as appendix, 7 & 8 n.2, 10 & 11 n.2; revisions in 5th and 6th eds. incorporated, xviii, 7 & 7–8 nn.1 & 3, 10 & 10–11 nn.1–2, 59–60 n.1, 414–15 & 416 nn.2–4, 423, 523 & 524 n.3–5, 658; trans. E. Barbier (1876), 524 n.5; trans. J.J. Moulinié 7 & 7–8 nn.1 & 3, 58–9 & 59–60 n.1, 403–4 & 404 nn.2–3, 405 & nn.2 & 4, 414–15 & 416 nn.2–4, 423 & 424 n.1, 457 & 457–8 n.3, 522–3 & 524 n.2, 632 & nn.2–3, 658; trans.of 1st ed. by C. Royer, 59 & 60 n.5 Origin, German ed.: trans. J.V. Carus, 50 & n.2, 105 n.2, 297 & n.4, 310, 658 Origin, US ed., 657–8; Appletons agree CD’s terms for publishing 6th ed., 76 & 77 n.1; payments to CD, 81, 334 & 335 nn.1–2; stereotypes, 54 & n.1, 62 & n.2, 80 & 82 n.2, 657–8 Orpington: nearest station to Down on South Eastern Railway, 327 & n.3, 332–3, 353 & n.4, 387 & n.4, 409, 466; packages for CD delivered to station, 150, 233, 401 & 402 n.1, 473 & 474 n.2 Owen, Richard, 219 & n.4; attacks J.D. Hooker and advocates transfer of Kew herbarium to new Natural History Museum, 340 & 341 n.4, 378 n.5, 467 & 467–8 nn.3–4, 470 & n.4, 473 & 474 n.5, 491 & 492 n.3, 492 & 493 n.1, 494–5 & 495 nn.1– 4, 504 n.8, 531 & n.4; C.R. Bree criticises for affirming evolution, 326 & n.5; curator, Hunterian Museum, may have neglected specimens, 41 n.2, 467 & 468 n.5; CD answers criticisms in new chapter of Origin, 159 n.12; CD deprecates bigoted views on Thylacoleo carnifex, 312 & nn.2–3; CD likens St G.J. Mivart’s hostility to that of, 14 & 15 n.3; CD regards as a blackguard, 467, 495 & n.6; CD’s enduring contempt for, 340 & 341 n.5; J.D. Hooker responds to criticisms in Nature, 467 & n.3, 492 n.5, 492 & 493 n.1, 495 nn.2–3; hostility to evolution, 15 n.3, 158 & 159 n.12, 341 n.5, 495 n.6; T.H. Huxley supports J.D. Hooker against criticisms of, 378 n.5; Nature publishes

852

Index

Owen, Richard, cont. attack on J.D. Hooker’s direction of Kew herbarium, 491 & 492 n.3, 494–5 & 495 nn.1–4, 531 & 533 n.6; superintendent, natural history departments, British Museum, 201 n.2, 219 & n.4; supports A. Günther’s application for promotion, 200–1 & 201 n.2; Thylacoleo carnifex, believes to be a fell carnivore, 204 & 207 nn.1–2 & 6, 207, 312 & nn.2–3; Toxodon deduced to be aquatic, 312 & n.4; R. Trimen finds attitude to evolution puzzling, 158 & 159 n.12 Oxalis valdiviana (O. valdiviensis): F. Hildebrand’s experiments on crossing, 64 & 65 n.2 Oxenden, George Chichester: wild orchids at Broome Park, 152 & 153 nn.1–4 & 7 Oxycoccus palustris (Vaccinium oxycoccos): found in peat beds of Bavaria, 388 & 389 n.9 Packard, Alpheus Spring: A. Gray introduces to CD, 100–1, 291 & n.9, 337 & n.1 Paget, James: nervous mimicry of organic disease, 1 & n.2; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 659; signs memorial supporting J.D. Hooker, 250 n.3, 277 Pall Mall Gazette: CD asks for review copy of Origin, 6th ed. be sent to, 72 & n.2; Expression, review, 445 & 446 n.2, 482 & 483 n.13; F. Greenwood, editor, 80 n.1, 445 & 446 n.2; may review Origin, 6th ed. alongside Mivart’s Genesis of species, 70– 1 & 71 n.5, 72 & n.2, 80 & n.3, 179 & 180 n.4; supports J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute, 294–5 & 295 n.2 Palustris spp., 539 & 542 nn.23–5 pangenesis hypothesis: F.M. Balfour experiments with skin transplants on rabbits, 591 & n.3; H.C. Bastian describes as relic of old philosophy of evolution, 375 n.11; CD continues to be believe it will one day be proved, 374–5; F. Galton attempts to prove by transfusing rabbits, 37 n.2, 58 & n.4, 126 & 127 n.2, 230 n.2, 504 & 505 n.1, 591 n.4; E. Haeckel plans to develop, 96–7 & 97–8 nn.8–9, 610 & 611 nn.8–9; R. Meldola believes to be mechanism for transmitting mimetic characters, 47 & 48 n.4 Papilio: P. ajax (Iphiclides ajax), dimorphism, 171 & n.3; P. asteris (P. polyxenes asterius) M. Treat’s experiments on feeding of larvae and determination of sex, 11 & 12 n.1, 570 & 571 n.3; P. ridleyanus (Graphium ridleyanus) mimics Acraea egina in colour of palpi, 123 & 124 n.14 Paritium tricuspis (Talipariti hastatum), 475 & n.5 Parker, Marianne, 475 & 476 n.4 Parslow, Joseph: butler at Down House, 119 n.3, 435 & 436 n.1, 436, 439 & n.3 Parsons, Laurence, 4th earl of Rosse, 485 n.5

Parsons, Robert Mann: analyses chalk samples for W.E. Darwin, 87 & 88 n.3, 94 & 95 n.4, 98 & n.3 Parsons, William, 3d earl of Rosse: reflecting telescopes, 484 & 485 n.5 Pasteur, Louis, 375 n.7 Patagonian Missionary Society: W.P. Snow sues for wrongful dismissal, 279 & 280 nn.1–2 & 4 pelargoniums: fertilisation of, 291–2 & 292 nn.1–4, 293 & 294 nn.2–3 & 5–8, 298 & 299 nn.2–4, 7–8 & 11 Peltatum elegans: fertilisation of, 292 & n.2, 293 & 294 n.2, 298 & 299 n.11, 316, 318 Phalanger: Thylacoleo carnifex may be no more carnivorous than (G. Krefft), 204 & 207 n.1 Phalaris arundinacea. See Phragmites arundinacea Phasianidae (pheasants): crosses, 121 & n.2 Phasianus pictus (Chrysolophus pictus): plumage, 121 n.2 Phillips, John: Geology of Oxford, 248 & 248–9 n.1; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.15, 659 Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: R. Owen, paper on Thylacoleo carnifex, 204 & 207 n.1 Phoca: descent from terrestrial carnivore, 153 & 154 n.6 photography: Burmese woman allegedly impregnated by an ape, 146–7 & 147 n.1; S. Butler suggests dogs’ expressions might be best illustrated by, 232; CD sends L. Bouton his photograph, 25 & n.2; CD sends C.J. Maynard a better photograph, 555 & n.2; CD sends S. Haliburton his photograph, 484, 490 & n.2; F. Darwin attempts to photograph J.C. Wedgwood pouting, 284 & n.4; Descent, hairy Burmese, 147 n.1; C.L. Dodgson sends CD photograph of smiling girl, 561 & n.2, 562, 572 & n.2; Expression, woodblock, though cheaper than plates, could not have conveyed expressions, 361; heliotype. See under Darwin, Charles Robert, publications, Expression; J.D. Hooker presents Kew with framed photographs of California, 174 & n.3, 175; P.G. King, recent photograph, 38 & 39 n.1, 41 & n.3, 49 & n.1; H. Lacaze-Duthiers and CD exchange photograph, 568 & n.1; E.H.Landseer’s Alexander and Diogenes, photograph of, 139 & 140 n.3, 143 & n.3; machanga of Tenerife, photograph will assist identification as human or monkey, 258; P. Mantegazza, photographic atlas of expressions of pain, 585 & n.13, 647 & n.13; A. Mellersh and CD exchange photographs, 61 & n.2; Neanderthal skulls, G. Krefft sends CD photographs of, 592 & 593 n.6; G. von Seidlitz requests CD’s photograph, 170; W.B. Tegetmeier and C.L. Sutherland examining a pigeon, 403 & n.4; W.B. Tegetmeier sends CD his photograph,

Index 198, 199, 203; Thylacoleo carnifex, teeth, 207 & n.7; traces of man in New Zealand caves, G. Krefft promises photograph of, 204 & 207 n.4 Phragmites arundinacea (Phalaris arundinacea): black coots nest in for protection, 447 & n.5, 453 n.3, 634 & 635 n.5 Phryganea grumicha (Grumicha grumicha), 28 n.13 Phrynosoma: P. cornutum, 196 & n.2, 201; P. douglasii. See Tapaya douglasii phyllotaxy: H. Airy explains principles of, 300–307 & 308 nn.2–16, 309 & n.2, 313–14 & nn.1–2, 317 & 317–18 nn.2–3, 409–11 & 411–12 nn.1–9, 415– 18 & 418 nn.2–5; H. Airy unconvinced by C. Wright’s paper, 233–7 & 237 nn.1, 3 & 5, 250 & 251 n.2; CD responds to H. Airy, 308 & 308–9 nn.17–18, 309 & n.2; A. Dickson’s paper on, 155 & n.2, 226 & 227 n.3; C. Wright’s paper on, 143– 4 & 145 n.1, 145, 149 & 150 nn.1 & 3–5, 233–7 & 237 nn.1, 3 & 5, 250 & 251 n.2 Pickard-Cambridge, Octavius: names trapdoor spiders for J.T. Moggridge, 432 & n.5 Pictet de la Rive, François Jules: critical review of Origin, 19 & 20 n.6 pigeons: F. Martinelli describes work on, 219–22 & 222 n.2 Pinus sylvestris: in peat beds of Switzerland, 388 & 389 n.10 Planorbis multiformis: new species formed without geographical isolation, 148 & 148–9 nn.5–6 Plantago spp.: leaf arrangement, 410 & 412 n.7 Plato: Cratylus, 547 & 548 n.9, 640 & 641 n.9 Plautus, Titus Maccius: Miles gloriosus, 163 & 164 n.3, 164 & 165 n.3 Pleroma: CD experiments with, 6 & n.4 Pleuronectidae (righteye flounders): movement of eyes, 156 & 156–7 nn.2–3, 157 & 159 n.5 Plutarch, 529 n.4 Podophthalmia: eye stalks essential as locomotion always retrograde, 156 & 157 n.4 Polly (H.E. Darwin’s dog, later CD’s), 482 & 483 n.15, 601 & n.4; sense of shame, 528–9 Polygonum viviparum, 388 & 389 n.12 Pope, Alexander, 360 & n.9 Popular Science Monthly: A. Gray, presidential address to AAAS, 429 & 430 n.9 Popular Science Review: CD (wrongly) expects to publish Mivart’s reply to C. Wright, 149 & 150 n.7; Expression, review copy, 466 & 467 n.8; A. Günther, Ceratodus, 521 & n.1; H. Lawson, editor, 481 & n.3; Origin, 6th ed., review copy, 51 porcupine: reaction to sight of a snake, 194, 208 & n.1 Powell, Henry, 218 & n.3 Pozzi, Samuel: with R. Benoît, translates Expression

853

into French, 406 n.6, 457 & n.2, 523 & 524 n.6 Prestwich, John: opposes A. Tylor’s views, 249 nn.2–5 Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London: R. Meldola, protective mimicry and natural selection, 34 n.4 Prodromus flora Nova Hollandiae (Brown 1810), 494 & 495 n.4 Prunus simonii (apricot-plum), 132–3 & 133 n.4, 142 & 143 n.2 Pryor, Marlborough Robert, 354 & 355 n.5; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.10, 659 Psychotria ipecacuanha (ipecacuanha): introduced to India by Kew, 267 & 277–8 n.12 Pteronymia sylvo. See Ithomia sylvo Publisher’s Circular: publication of Expression advertised, 248 n.4 Pumilo argyrolepis: achenes, 68 & 69 n.2 Punch: ‘Valour in the field’, 531 n.1, 532 Quarterly Journal of Science: W. Crookes, investigation of mediums, 228 n.3; deals only with physical science, 520 & n.4; review of Expression (A.R. Wallace), 506 & 507 n.2 Quarterly Review: F.P. Cobbe, emotions and psychology of dogs, 526 & n.5, 528 & 529 nn.2–7; Descent, hostile review [St G.J. Mivart], 11 & n.2, 70–1 & 71 n.6, 75 & 76 n.4, 11 & nn.1–2, 15 n.2, 20 n.6 Quasisequoia couttsiae. See Sequoia couttsiae Quatrefages, Armand de: Descent, comments, 20–1 & 21 n.4, 604 & n.4; dissents from some of CD’s theories, 20–1 & 21 n.3, 23319 & n.5, 604 & n.3, 631 & n.5; Expression, presentation, 664; renews attempts to admit CD to anatomy and zoology section of Académie de sciences, 20 & 21 n.2, 23 & n.4, 318–19 & 319 nn.2–3, 603–4 & 604 n.2, 630–1 & 631 nn.2–3 Quenstedt, Friedrich August, 534 & 541 n.8 Querquedula crecca (Anas crecca), 88 & n.2 quinine. See Cinchona Ramayana: mother licks the face of her dead son, 546 & 547 n.4 Ramsay, Andrew Crombie: measures subsidence of pavement due to action of earthworms, 9 & n.1 Rana esculenta (edible frog), 160 & n.1 Rankin, Flora: smiling photograph, 561 & n.2, 562, 572 & n.2 rattlesnakes: purpose of rattle, 157–8 & 159 nn.7–8; N.S. Shaler, ‘Rattlesnakes and natural selection’, American Naturalist, 87 nn.3–4, 157 & 159 n.7 Rawlinson, Henry Creswicke: signs memorial supporting J.D. Hooker, 250 n.3, 277 Rayner, Thomas: hydropathic establishment, 176

854

Index

Rayner, Thomas, cont. & 177 n.1 Ray Society: CD encourages to translate K.F. Gärtner’s works, 298 & 299 n.5; commissions translation of Gärtner’s book on crossfertilisation, 317 n.11 Rayson, Charles, 126 & 127 n.5 Reade, William Winwood: admires CD’s style, 106, 141; African sketch-book, 70 & 71 n.4, 106 & 107 n.7, 179 & 180 n.2, 208 & 209 n.2, 215 & 217 nn.4 & 10, 402 & n.2, 482 & 483 nn.2 & 14; applies to review Expression in Pall Mall Gazette, 445 & 446 n.2; Bechuanas cry with laughter, 397 & 398 n.1; Caffres, identity with negroes, 216 & 217 n.11; Descent, comments on, 75 & nn.1–4, 106 & 107 n.1; dissents from CD’s views on savage music, 70 & 71 n.3, 106 & 107 n.3; elephants and giraffe shed tears, 397 & 398 nn.2–3; Expression, presentation and comments, 482 & 483 nn.1–9, 662; expressions, native physiognomy the same as ours, 71 & n.8; Martyrdom of man, consults CD and expresses his debt to, 70 & 71 n.1, 75 & 76 nn.2 & 5, 106 & 107 n.1, 107 & 108 n.3, 111 & n.3, 141–2 & 142 n.1, 179 & 180 n.1, 208 &209 n.1, 215–16; Martyrdom of man, religion and morality, 215–16 & 217 nn.3 & 8; Martyrdom of man, responses to, 80 & n.2, 179, 208, 215 & 216 nn.2–3, 402 & n.3, 445–6 & 446 n.3, 482 & 483 nn.10 & 16; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 78 & n.1, 658 & 659 n.1; Pall Mall Gazette may jointly review Origin, 6th ed. and Mivart’s Genesis of species, 70–1 & 71 n.5, 72 & n.2, 80 & n.3, 179 & 180 n.4; savages’ use of verse and song, 216 & 217 n.5; visited Down House (1871), 71 n.3, 107 n.1; visits CD in London, xx, 107 & n.1, 111 & n.2, 142 n.2, 651 Reimer, Georg Ernst, 565 n.4, 644 n.4 reindeer: development of horns, 245 & 246 n.4 Reinhardt, Johannes Theodor: A. Günther applies to for testimonial, 201 & n.7 Reinwald, Charles-Ferdinand: Descent, French ed., publication of vol.2, 405 & n.4, 457 & 457–8 n.3, 522 & 523 n.1, 523; Expression, French edition, 339 & 340 n.7, 405 & 405–6 nn.5–7, 423–4 & 424 nn.1–3, 425 & 426 n.2, 461–2 & 462 nn.3 & 5, 463 & nn.1–2, 466 & 467 nn.2– 3, 457 & n.2, 523 & 524 n.6; J.J. Moulinié‘s illness delays translations, 403–4 & 404 nn.2–4, 405 & n.4, 424, 457 & n.1, 522 & 524 n.2, 632 & nn.2–4; Origin, CD’s prefatory note for new French edition, 59–60 & 60 nn.5–6, 423 & 424 n.1; Origin, French translation (E. Barbier), 524 n.5; Origin, French translation (J.J. Moulinié), 59 & 60 n.2, 457 & 457–8 n.3, 523 & 524 nn.3–5; S.J. Pozzi to replace J.J. Moulinié as translator of Expression, 406 n.6, 457 & n.2, 523

& 524 n.6 Rejlander, Oscar Gustaf: CD pays 7 guineas for photographs for Expression, 329 n.8, 355 & 356 n.4; Expression, presentation, 662; photographed CD, 61 n.2, 555 n.2 Renshaw, Benjamin A.: child in Tenerife resembling a monkey, 257–8 Revue des deux mondes: C.F. Martins, new school of English and German naturalists, 63 & 64 n.2, 604–5 & 605 n.2; G. de Saporta, ‘L’ecole transformiste et ses derniers travaux’, 154 & n.9 Revue horticole: Prunus simonii, 132 & 133 n.4, 142 & 143 n.2 Revue scientifique de la France et de l’étranger: CD subscribes to, 568 & n.2 Richiardi, Sebastiano, 451 n.4, 636 n.4 Richter, Hermann Eberhard Friedrich: future of the military class, 323 & 324 n.3 Rifle Volunteer Corps: CD unable to attend concerts in aid of, 171 & n.1 Riley, Charles Valentine: insects of Missouri, 38 & n.8 Ripon, Lord. See Robinson, George Frederick Samuel, marquess of Ripon Rivers, Thomas: apricot-plum, 132–3 & 133 n.4; cited in Variation, 133 n.3; sends CD gift of two vines, 132 & 133 n.1, 142 & n.1 Rivers, Thomas Francis, 132 & 133 n.3 Riviere, Briton: Expression, presentation, 520 & n.1, 662; returns CD’s cheque and asks for copy of Origin, 215 & n.3, 217–18, 223 & n.2, 228 & n.1; sketches dogs for Expression, xx, 139 & n.1, 143, 146, 209 & n.1, 214–15 & 215 n.3, 217–18 & 218 n.2, 222–3, 228 & n.2, 230 & n.1, 230–1, 245 n.3, 246 & n.3 Roberts, Dora: misdirected maternal energy in hen house, 576–7 & n.1 Robinson, George Frederick Samuel, 1st marquess of Ripon: attempts to mediate in Hooker/Ayrton dispute, 202 & 203 n.3, 273 & 278 n.24, 273–4, 275; president, council on education, 386 & n.5 Robinson, William: founder and editor, Garden, opposes J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute, 470 & n.5 Rokitansky, Karl: president, Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien, 655 & n.1 Rolle, Friedrich, 281 & 282 n.2 Rood, Ogden Nicholas: sends A. Gray copies of W.H. Beard’s painting, ‘The youthful Darwin expounding his theories’, 252 & 253 nn.1 & 3 Rosse, Lord. See Parsons, William, and Parsons, Laurence Rothrock, Abraham, 525 n.3 Rothrock, Joseph Trimble: cited in Expression, 525

Index n.1; Expression, presentation, 524–5 & 525 n.1, 543, 663 & 665 n.32; unconscious sympathy of physician and patient, xxiii, 525 & nn.3–4 Rotifera: H.C. Bastian claims they generate spontaneously, 374 & 375 n.8 Rouget, Charles Marie Benjamin: reprimanded for teaching Darwinism, 63 & 64 n.5, 605 & n.5 Roujou, Anatole: CD impressed by work on analogies of humans and ancient mammals, 86 & nn.2–4 Rowse, Samuel Worcester, 393 n.1 Royal Academy of Sciences, Amsterdam. See Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen Royal Academy of Stockholm: commissions A.G. Nathorst to research Arctic plants, 388 & 389 n.2 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew: cherimoya nonseeding, 72 & 73 n.3; Commission of Works orders open examination for all appointments, 40 & n.7, 276; CD offers specimens of Leersia oryzoides, 39 & 40 n.3, 46 & n.6; CD seeks loan of Drosera capensis, 376 & 377 n.4, 391; economic botany, 264 & 277 n.3, 267 & 277–8 n.10; herbarium, 264 & 277 nn.4–5, 266 & 277 n.10, 270; herbarium, R. Owen advocates transfer to new Natural History Museum, 340 & 341 n.4, 467 & 467–8 nn.3–4, 467 & 467–8 nn.3–4, 470 & n.4, 473 & 474 n.5, 491 & 492 n.3, 492 & 493 n.1, 494– 5 & 495 nn.1–4, 504 n.8; J.D. Hooker presents framed photographs of California, 174 & n.3, 175; J.D. Hooker’s role in development of, 265–7 & 277–8 & nn.10, 12–14 & 16; W.J. Hooker’s role in development of, 263–4 & 277 nn.2–5; Pleroma plants sent to CD, 6 & n.4; J. Scott sends CD boxes of worm castings from India, 340 & 341 n.6, 352 & n.1, 419 & 423 n.1. For J.D. Hooker’s dispute with A.S. Ayrton, see under Hooker, Joseph Dalton Royal College of Surgeons, Hunterian Museum: W.H. Flower, curator, 39 n.6, 41 & n.2; R. Owen was a neglectful curator, 41 & n.2, 467 & 468 n.5; B.J. Sulivan finds Beagle fossils inadequately curated, 39 & n.5, 41 & n.2 Royal Commission on Scientific Instruction: discuss Hooker/Owen, 503–4 & 504 n.8 Royal Geographical Society, 216 & 217 n.6; F. Galton, vice-president, 331 & 332 n.3 Royal Horticultural Society: belatedly, supports J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute, 316 & 317 n.12; W.H. Thiselton-Dyer professor and co-editor of Journal, 294 nn.7–8 Royal Military Academy, Woolwich: L. Darwin takes second place in examinations, 370 & n.2 Royal School of Mines: T.H. Huxley lecturer in

855

natural history and palaeontology, 17 & 18 n.5, 30 n.1, 576 n.4, 580 n.2 Royal Society of London: awards Royal medal to J.D. Hooker (1854), 267 & 278 n.14; CD communicates H. Airy’s paper on phyllotaxy, 308 n.2, 546 n.11; CD sends G. von Seidlitz, Der Darwin’sche Theorie, 155 & n.2, 170; G.H. Darwin returns books borrowed by CD, 354 & n.2; Expression, presentation, 662 & 664 n.14; F. Galton reads paper on blood-relationship, 230 & n.5; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 660 n.24. See also Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Royds, Ernest Edmund Molyneux, 126 & 127 n.3 Royer, Clémence Auguste: translated Origin into French, 59 & 60 n.5, 415 & n.3 Ruck, Amy: assists CD’s study of earthworms by observing ridges and furrows, 32 & n.3, 36, 60 & n.2, 82–3 & 83 n.1, 108 & n.2, 259 n.2, 476 n.1; engaged to F. Darwin, xxiv, 178 & 179 nn.5–6, 476 n.2, 651; Expression, presentation, 476 & n.1, 664 & 665 n.47 Ruck, Arthur Ashley, 32 & n.2 Ruck, Lawrence, 32 & n.4, 178 & 179 n.6 Ruck, Mary Anne: her daughter Amy’s engagement to F. Darwin, 178 & 179 n.6 Ruck, Richard Matthews, 32 & n.5 Rugitermes. See Calotermes Ruscus aculeatus (butcher’s broom), 307 & 308 n.15 Russell, Arthur: frog at Woburn Abbey may have copulated with a toad, 160 & nn.1–3 Russell, George: secretary, Board of Works, 273 & 278 n.27 Russell, John, 1st Earl Russell: memoirs of Thomas Moore, 211 & n.1; supports J.D. Hooker in dispute with A.S. Ayrton, 194 & n.3 Rütimeyer, Ludwig: criticisms of E. Haeckel, 390 & 391 n.2, 443 & 444 n.3, 633 & n.3; described Bos etruscus, 450–1 & 451 n.6, 635 & 636 n.6; L.H. Jeitteles works with, 479 n.2; professor of zoology, University of Basel, 479 n.2 Sabine, Edward: patron, Artizans Dwellings Company, 125 & 126 n.9 Sachs, Julius: phyllotaxy, 544–5 & 545–6 n.7 St John, Charles: dogs are good physiognomists, 71 & n.9 Salix: arctic species in freshwater aquifers, 388–9 & 389 n.8; Ss. polaris and reticulata found in peat beds of Switzerland, 388 & 389 n.11 Salt, George Moultrie: E.A. Darwin’s will, 567–8 & 568 n.2 Salvin, Anthony, 61 & 62 n.8 Salvin, Osbert, 61 & 62 n.9; Origin, 6th ed.,

856

Index

Salvin, Osbert, cont. presentation, 658 & 659 n.7; plans to apply to become assistant keeper, British Museum but withdraws application, 189 & n.3, 192 &193 n.2, 195 & n.2, 200 & 201 n.3, 211–12 & 212 n.1 Saporta, Gaston de: Descent, French ed., presentation, 522 & 523 n.1; ‘L’ecole transformiste et ses derniers travaux’, Revue des deux mondes, 154 & n.9; origin of man, comments on Descent, 111–17 & 117–18 nn.2–16, 611–17 & 617 nn.2–16; origins of man, CD remains convinced of simian ancestry, 153–4 & 154 nn.2 & 7 Saturday Review: review W.W. Reade’s Martyrdom of man, 445–6 & 446 n.3 Satyridae (Satyrinae): R. Meldola comments on F. Müller’s observations on, 47–8 & 49 n.11 Saunders, Wilson William: collection of exotic plants, 391 & 392 n.2 Scherzer, Karl von: suicide not uncommon among Maori, 78 & 79 n.6 Schlegel, August Wilhelm von (with Ludwig Tieck): German translation of Shakespeare, 434 & 435 n.8 Schlegel, Hermann: director, Museum of Natural History, Leiden, 446–7 & 447 n.4, 452 & 453 n.2, 634 & n.4 Schleicher, August: organic development of language, 241 & 242 nn.4–5 Schmick, Jacob Heinrich: sends CD his book on transposition of the oceans, 180–1 & 181 nn.1–2 Schmidt, Oskar: Goethe’s theory of metamorphosis in relation to Darwinian theory, 391 n.2 E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlags(buch)handlung, Stuttgart: Descent, German edition, 310 & n.5; Expression, German edition, 310 & n.5, 336 n.5, 384 n.3, 394 & n.4, 414 n.2, 425 & 426 n.2, 497 & 498 nn.3–4; E. Koch, director, 394 n.4, 425 n.1; Variation, new edition planned, 561 & n.1 Sclater, Philip Lutley: Expression, presentation, 662; secretary, Zoological Society of London, 558 n.4 Scotsman: W.W. Reade, Martyrdom of man, review, 215 & 216 n.3 Scott, John: acting superintendent, Calcutta botanic garden, 419 & 423 n.2, 464; asks J.D. Hooker to propose him as fellow of Linnean Society, 474 & n.3, 546 & n.2; earthworms in India, 23–4 & 24 n.2, 119–20 & 121 n.1, 160–1 & 161 n.3, 177–8 & 178 n.4, 419–23 & 423 nn.4- -9, 460 & 461 n.2, 464, 465, 475; earthworms in India, sends CD boxes of worm castings, xxiv, 340 & 341 n.6, 352 & n.1, 378 & n.13, 419 & 423 n.1; Expression, presentation, 352 & n.2, 464 & 465 n.5, 663; Loranthaceae, paper on, 161 & n.5; papaya, paper on structure of, 422 & 423 n.7, 464 & 465

n.4; repays part of loan from CD, 377–8 & 378 nn.2 & 6, 383 & n.1, 474, 546 & n.2; supplied CD with observations on expressions in India, 352 & n.2 Scott, Walter, 560 n.3 Scott, William Robson: Expression, presentation, 663 & 665 n.20 Scrope, George Poulett: fluidity of magmas attributable to water, 439 n.6 Seidlitz, Georg von: Der Darwin’sche Theorie, CD thanks for and sends to Royal Society and Linnean Society, 140 & n.1, 154 & 155 nn.1–2, 169–70 & 170 n.2; laws of migration, contests M. Wagner’s hypotheses, 170 & nn.4–5; requests CD’s photograph and names first-born in his honour, 170 & 171 n.8 Seidlitz, Gerhard Karl Lamarck Darwin von, 170 & 171 n.8 Seidlitz, Karl von: review of Descent, 140 & n.3; sends regards to CD, 170 & 171 n.9 Semper, Karl Gottfried: visits Down House, 651 & 652 n.22 Seneca (the younger): cited in Expression on gestures denoting shame, 596 n.2 Sequoia couttsiae (Quasisequoia couttsiae): fossil found in Devon, 314 & n.3 Seward, William Henry, 587 & 588 n.15 sexual selection: bees, 182–7 & 187 nn.2–5; bony crests in birds, 246 n.5; colour in mammals may be attributable to, 106 & 107 n.6; mimetic butterflies, 26 & 28 n. 4, 46–8 & 48 n.2; as modifying colour of skin, 142 & n.4; role in formation of new species, 148 & 149 nn.9–10 Shakespeare, William: meant blush was unseen, not absent, 553 & n.1; quoted in Expression, 434 & 435 n.7, 435, 465 Shaler, Nathaniel Southgate: rattlesnakes and natural selection, 87 & n.3, 157 & 159 n.7 Sharpey, William: A. Günther applies to for testimonial, 189, 201 & n.4; infusoria in solutions not containing nitrogen, 392 & n.3; professor of anatomy and physiology, University College, London, 189 & n.2 Shaw, Alexander, 517 & 518 n.10 Shaw, Charles, 517 & 518 n.13 Sherard, James, 333 & 333–4 n.1 Smith, Adam: Wealth of nations, W.W. Reade likens Origin to, 78 & n.1 Smith, Charles Hamilton: natural history of the dog, 479 & 479–80 n.4 Smith, David Thomas: lectures on descent of man, 512–15, 515 Smith, Edgar Albert, 219 & n.4 Smith, Edmund Denman: exceptionally large hail-

Index stones in Nepal, 209–10 Smith, Frederick: E. Haeckel consulted on habits of bees, 185 & 187 n.12, 623 & 624 n.6; may apply to become assistant keeper, zoological department, British Museum, 189 & n.1, 192 & 193 n.2, 200 & 201 n.1; poor health, 262 Smith, John (1798–1888): curator, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (1842–64), 72 & 73 n.3 Smith, John (1821–88): curator, Royal Botanic Gardens after 1864, A.S. Ayrton tempts to become superintendent of works in Hyde Park, 269 & 278 n.19 Smith, William Robertson: Adams Professor of Arabic, Cambridge, 460 n.11 Smither, A.: raising of feathers or hair a form of protection, 577 & 577–8 nn.2–5 Smyth, Robert Brough, 459 & 460 n.10, 465 Snellen, Hermann, 299 & 300 n.2 Snow, George: carrier between Down and London, 230 n.4, 336 & 337 n.1, 349 & n.2, 351 & n.3 Snow, Maria Isabella: hands ‘blush’ when playing the piano, xxiii, 533–4 & 534 n.2 Snow, Sarah, 279 & 280 n.3 Snow, William Parker: sued Patagonian Missionary Society and attempts to extort money from old acquaintance, 279 & 280 nn.1–5 Sobko, N.: seeks to translate Expression into Russian, 394 & 394–5 nn.2–3, 401 nn.6 & 8 Società Italiana di Antropologia et di Etnologia: elects CD as honorary member, 181, 620, 653 & 654 n.1 Somerville, William: quoted in Expression, 434 & 435 n.6 South American Mission Society, 39 n.3, 49 Spalding, Douglas Alexander: ‘On instinct’, article in Nature, 445 & n.9, 448 & 449 n.5 Spallanzani, Lazzaro: attempts to hybridise frogs and toads, 160 & n.3 Sparkes, George: attempts to hybridise a rare polyanthus, 72 & 73 n.2 Spectator: ‘Sir W. Gull on physiological intervention’, 88 & n.5; review of Expression, 558 & 559 n.6 Spencer, Herbert: C.R. Bree criticises for affirming evolution, 326 & n.5; CD admires answer to J. Martineau and supports plea for recognition of sociology, 251 & 251 nn.2–3, 254 & 255 n.1, 326 & n.4; CD unconvinced by his deductive reasoning, 374 & n.5; disagrees with R.B. Litchfield on genesis of melody, 510 & n.2; doctrine of linear adaptation, CD applauds A.R. Wallace’s resumé of, 79 & 80 n.4; A. Espinas invokes on attributions of man, 91 & 94 n.7, 607 & 609 n.7; Expression, presentation, 509 & 510 n.1, 663; familiarity

857

leads CD to misspell Spenser, 465; St.G.J. Mivart now persuaded of errors of, 17 & 18 n.4; obscurity of expression, 197 & n.2; Principles of psychology, 2d ed., 254 & 255 n.3; Principles of psychology, A. Espinas translates into French, 94 n.7, 609 n.7; signs petition for Anglo-US copyright convention, 166–7 & 167–8 nn.1–5 Spengel, Wilhelm: Expression, presentation, 664 & 665 n.51; uses CD’s theories of human descent, 391 n.2 Spenser, Edmund: quoted in Expression, 435 & n.13, 459 & 460 n.8, 465 spiders: trapdoor, J.T. Moggridge’s study of, 431–2 & 432 nn.4–6, 437 & n.3 Spiza cyanea: aggression towards S. ciris when courting, 357 & nn.2–3 Spotiswoode, William: buys Combe Bank, near Sevenoaks, 436 & n.4; signs memorial supporting J.D. Hooker, 250 n.3, 277 Stack, James West: Expression, presentation, 664 Stainton, Henry Tibbats: secretary, Linnean Society, 34 & n.3 Stanfield, James: financial secretary to the Treasury, 270 & 278 n.20 Stanley, Edward Henry, earl of Derby: leader of House of Lords, calls for papers in Hooker/Ayrton dispute, 193 & 194 n.1, 203 & n.4, 255 & 256 n.3, 256 & n.2; rents Holwood House, Beckenham, 244 n.3, 256 n.3 Stanley, Mary Catherine, countess of Derby: S. Cecil would like to attend W. Crooke’s séance, xxii, 244 & n.1; xxi, CD presses J.D. Hooker’s case against Commission of Works, 255 &256 n.3 Stanley, Thomas: seeks information about glaciation in New Zealand, 40–1 & 41 nn.2–5 Stebbing, Thomas Roscoe Rede, 659 n.12 Steenstrup, Japetus: A. Günther applies to for testimonial, 201 & n.7; researches Arctic plants, 388 & 389 n.5 Stephen, Harriet Marian (née Thackeray), 40 n.5, 150 n.8 Stephen, Leslie: ‘Divinity and Darwinism’, Fraser’s Magazine, 150 & n.8, 226 & 227 n.5 Stevens, John, 412 & 413 n.1 Stirling, Waite Hockin: bishop of the Falkland Islands, 280 & 281 n.7 Strasburger, Eduard: sends CD his work on Coniferae, 329–30 & 330 nn.1–2 Strauss, David Friedrich: ‘new faith’ based on Darwinism, 565 & 566 n.16, 578 & 579 n.7, 644 & 645 n.16 Stronge, Charles Walter: clerk to the Treasury, 275 & 278 n.29 Sulivan, Bartholemew James: appalled by W.P.

858

Index

Sulivan, Bartholomew James, cont. Snow’s suit against Patagonian Mission and warns CD against him, 279 & 280 nn.1–4; Falkland Islands, progress of mission, 280 & 281 n.7; health, 279–80; fossils at College of Surgeons inadequately curated, 39 & n.5, 41 & n.2; P.G. King, sends CD recent photograph, xxv–xxvi, 38 & 39 n.1, 41 & n.3, 49 & n.1; mission to Beagle Channel, 38 & 39 n.3, 49; visited Down House (1862), 49 & n.3; wonders whether L. Agassiz might investigate Gallegos fossil bed, 38–9 & 39 nn.4–5, 41 & n.1 Sulivan, Sophia, 41 & n.4 Sulivan, Sophia Henrietta, 41 & n.4 Sundström, Rudolf: Descent, sends first part of Swedish translation, 281–2 & 282 n.1; Expression, presentation, 663 Sus: fossil remains, 451 & n.7, 635 & 636 n.7 F.S. Sushchinskii: publishes Russian edition of Expression, 426 n.2 Sutherland, Charles Leslie: sends CD E. Ayrault’s book on mule breeding, 402–3 & 403; sends CD photograph with W.B. Tegetmeier, 403 & n.4; visits Down House, 251 & n.2, 403 & n.3, 651; J. Wrightson would like to visit CD, 251 & n.2 Sutherland, Peter Cormack: guinea fowl crosses, 30–1 & 31 n.1 Sutton, Seth: keeper, zoological gardens, Regent’s Park, 366 & 367 nn.2–3 Swinhoe, Robert: Expression, presentation, 663 Sydney Mail: G. Krefft, review of R. Owen’s paper on Thylacoleo carnifex, 204 & 207 n.1 Sylvester, James Joseph: professor of mathematics, Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, 370 & n.3 Sympalamides phalaris, 28 n.6 Syon Park, 72 & 73 n.3 Tadorna variegata: fledglings at Zoological Gardens, 357 & n.4 Talbot, Emily Fairbanks, 602 n.2 Talipariti hastatum. See Paritium tricuspis Tapaya douglasii (Phrynosoma douglasii; horned lizard), 196 & n.2, 201 Tardigrada: H.C. Bastian claims they generate spontaneously, 374 & 375 n.8 Taylor, Helen: critique of T.H. Huxley’s ‘Administrative nihilism’, 74 & 75 n.11 Taylor, John Ellor: CD thanks for article on geographical distribution, 21 & n.2 Tegetmeier, William Bernhard: asks for signed copy of Origin, 6th ed., 198, 203; Descent, errata, 198; pigeon breeding, experiments show bleaching and sexual colours, 198, 203; sends CD his photograph, 198, 199, 203; skull of horned cock,

finds CD had indeed returned, 197–8 & 200 n.1 Tennent, James Emerson: elephants shed tears, 397 & 398 n.2 Tennyson, Alfred: H. Airy quotes, 303 & 308 n.9; CD misquotes in Expression, 322 & 323 n.2; Idylls of the king, depiction of shame, 597 & 598 n.5 Teracolus danae (Colotis danae), 47 & 48 n.6 Termes spp., 27–8 & n.11 Territelariae: J.T. Moggridge’s study of, 431–2 & 432 nn.4–6, 437 & n.3 Thackeray, Anne Isabella: J.D. Hooker enjoys meeting, 39 & 40 n.5 Thackeray, Harriet Marian, 40 n.5, 150 n.8 Thiselton-Dyer, William Turner: completes Flora Capensis, 159 n.13; criticises H.C. Bastian’s theory of spontaneous generation, 439 & n.7; professor, Royal Horticultural Society and co-editor of its journal, 294 nn.7–8; Ray Society asks to trans¨ late Gartner’s work on cross-fertilisation, 316 & 317 n.11 Thomson, Charles Wyville, 434 & 435 n.12 Thomson, Thomas, 343 & 344 n.2 Thorell, Tord Tamerlan Teodor, 281 Thuja occidentalis (arborvitae, tree of life), 307 & 308 n.15 Thylacoleo carnifex: teeth, G. Krefft rejects R. Owen’s deductions, 204–7 & 207 nn.1–7, 207, 311–12 & 312 nn.2–3 Tichbourne claimant, 49 & n.2, 61 & 62 n.4, 101 & 102 n.2 Tieck, Ludwig: German translation of Shakespeare (with A.W. von Schlegel), 434 & 435 n.8 Tiemann, Friedrich: hairless goat born at Breslau zoo, 260–1 & 261 nn.2–5, 626 & 626–7 nn.2–5 The Times: T.H. Huxley, letter supporting J.D. Hooker against criticisms of R. Owen, 378 n.5; international copyright, correspondence, 167 n.3; review of Expression, 569 & 570 n.4, 571 & 572 nn.1 & 3; supports J.D. Hooker in dispute with A.S. Ayrton, 294–5 & 295 n.2, 341 n.3 Tipping, William, MP, 125 Tollet, Georgina, 595 Topham, Mr: Shakespeare meant blush unseen, not absent, 553 & n.1 Toxodon: R. Owen deduced to be aquatic, 312 & n.4 trades unions: CD deprecates opposition to competition, 323 & 324 n.4 Transactions of the Entomological Society of London: H.W. Newman, habits of humble-bees, 185 & 187 n.12, 623 & 624 n.7 Transactions of the Linnean Society: R. Trimen, mimicry in butterflies, 50 & 51 n.3 Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: A. Dickson, ‘Some abnormal cones of Pinus pinaster’,

Index 155 & n.2, 226 & 227 n.3 Treat, Mary: American Naturalist will publish article on controlling sex in butterflies, 570 & 571 n.3; CD praises work on sex of butterflies, xxii, 11– 12 & 12 nn.1–2; Drosera, observations published, 11 & 12 n.3; excitement generated by Darwinism in US, xix, 570; hive bees, experiments with determination of sex, 570 & 571 nn.4–5; researches Drosera filimformis for A. Gray, 570; will observe Dionaea for CD, 570 & 571 n.2 Trécul, Auguste Adolphe Lucien: spontaneous generation, 392 & n.4 Trench, Catherine Sabine, 41 & n.4 Trimen, Henry, 157 & 159 n.2 Trimen, Roland: curator, South African Museum, 158 & 159 n.11; mimicry in butterflies, 50 & 51 n.3, 123 & 124 n.14; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 157 & 158 n.1, 659; rattlesnake, purpose of rattle, 157–8 & 159 nn.7–8 Troschel, Franz Hermann: A. Günther applies to for testimonial, 201 & n.7 Trousseau, Armand: lectures, F. Darwin sends CD quotation on catemenia suppressed by change of place, 387–8 & 388 nn.1–2 Trübner, Nicholas: CD orders book [Erewhon?], 232–3 & n.2; publishes W.W. Reade’s Martyrdom of man, 209 & n.4, 216 & 217 n.9 tsetse fly (Glossina), 90 & 94 n.3, 606 & 609 n.3 Tuke, Daniel Hack: Influence of the mind upon the body, CD regrets he had not read before writing Expression, 582 & n.1 Tupman, George Lyon, 61 & 62 n.6 Tupper, Martin Farquhar: patron, Artizans Dwellings Company, 125; Proverbial philosophy, 129 & n.6 Turner, William: Expression, presentation, 662; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 658 & 659 n.17, 659 Twain, Mark. See Clemens, Samuel Langhorne Tyler, Daniel F.: effect of climate on colour of plumage, 358–9 & 360 n.7.; reasoning power of dogs, 359–60 & 360 nn.8–9 Tylor, Alfred: postulates ‘Pluvial’ period, 248 & 248–9 nn.1–5 Tylor, Edward Burnett: Expression, presentation, 662; Primitive cultures, influence on W.W. Reade, 75–6 & 76 n.8, 78 & 79 n.5; H. Spencer meets at Athenæum, 254 & 255 n.2; visits Down House, 248 n.1, 255 n.2, 651 Tyndall, John: buys shares in Artizans & General Dwellings Co., 125 & 126 n.7; letters from USA read to X Club, 491 & 492 nn.8–9; organises memorial supporting J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute, 249 & 250 nn.2–3, 255 & 256 n.2, 256 & n.1, 277; proposes tests for efficacy of prayer, 490

859 n.6; signs petition for Anglo-US copyright convention, 167 n.5; supports J.D. Hooker in dispute with A.S. Ayrton, xxi, 193 & 194 n.2, 377 & 378 n.4

Umberto, prince of Piedmont, later Umberto I, king of Italy, 220 & 222 n.1 Unio littoralis: C. Lyell found at Grays, Essex, 239 & 241 n.6 Unknown correspondent: cats leave house in which dead bodies lie, 389–90; compliments slip, 169; CD asks for receipt, 71 & 72 n.2; CD declines to join movement, 15 & 16 n.2; CD subscribes £10 for new road, 223 & n.1; CD thanks for information about colour of eyes of shepherd dogs, 332; Descent, errata, 1–2 & n.1; directions to Down House, 229; pheasant crosses, 121 & n.2; pitch of children’s voices, 602 & n.2; wrote to CD about watering mouth, 553 & n.1 Vaccinium: V. oxycoccos. See Oxycoccus palustris; V. uliginosum. See Myrtillus uliginosa James Veitch & Son, 463 & 464 n.2 Victoria Institute, London, 384 & 385 n.4 Vieweg (Brunswick): donates publications to Naples zoological station, 364 & 365 n.5 Virchow, Rudolf Carl, 92 & 94 n.9, 607–8 & 609 n.9; Expression, presentation, 663 & 665 n.35; forward to German edition of J. Lubbock’s Prehistoric times, 564 & 566 n.14, 643 & 645 n.14; forward to E. Haeckel’s Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte, 578 & 579 n.5 Vischer, Friedrich Theodor von: Aesthetik, 177 & n.4, 620 & n.2 Vivian, Edward: CD thanks for information, 369 & n.1 Vogt, Carl: corals, 92 & 94 n.11, 608 & 609 n.11; microcephalous idiots a case of reversion, 153 & 154 n.5; recommended J.J. Moulinié as CD’s translator, 457 n.1; support for CD’s theories, 18 & 19 n.2, 603 & n.2 Wagner, Moritz: isolation essential for development of species, 89 n.3, 148 & 148–9 n.5; G. von Seidlitz contests views on laws of migration, 170 & nn.4–5; A. Weismann disgrees with premise, 148 & 148–9 n.5 Wahrmann, Sigmund: secretary, Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien, 655 & n.1 Wale, Emma, 129 n.2 Wallace, Alexander: cited in Descent, 2 & 3 n.7 Wallace, Alfred Russel: Bethnal Green Museum, hopes for position at, 326 & n.6, 375 & 375–6 n.12; builds a house in Grays, Essex, 99 & n.5,

860

Index

Wallace, Alfred Russel, cont. 326 & n.6; cited in Descent, 2 & 3 n.7; convinced by H.C. Bastian’s Beginning of life, but CD is not, xxii, 341 & 342 n.3, 374–5 & 375 nn.2–11, 385–6 & n.3; CD admires review of J.-C. Houzeau’s book on mental faculties of animals, 452–3 & 453 n.4; CD defends against C.R. Bree, xxi–xxii, 325–6 & 326 nn.2–3, 338 & n.2, 338 & 339 nn.1–2, 341 & 342 n.1; CD hopes to see in London, 79 & n.1, 99, 573; CD seeks F.F. Geach’s address, 468 & n.1; CD sends specimens and translation from W. Marshall, 452 & 453 n.2; A. Dohrn deprecates his approval of H.C. Bastian, xxii, 365 & n.8; effects of glaciation on distribution of species, 408 & 409 n.11; encourages V.O. Kovalevsky to plan expedition to Borneo, 348 & n.7; Entomological Society, presidential address, CD comments on, 79 & 79–80 n.3; Expression, presentation, 506 & n.1, 662; H.H. Howorth accuses of dogmatism, 331 & 332 n.2; H.H. Howorth’s ‘Strictures on Darwinism’, responds to in Nature, 386 n.7, 386 n.2; H.H. Howorth’s writings utterly untrustworthy, 386 & n.7, 392 & 393 n.7; mimicry in butterflies, 105 & 106 n.4; Origin 6th ed., new chapter answers Mivart’s objections, xviii, 98 & 99 n.2; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 79, 658 & 659 n.2, 659; praises F. Galton’s paper on bloodrelationship, 386 & n.4, 392 & 393 n.8; protective mimicry, 34 & n.5, 47–8 & 49 nn.8 & 10; seeks catalogue of vertebrate fossils, 506 & 507 n.4; spiritualism, espousal of, 62 & 63 n.4, 365 n.8 Wallace, Herbert Spencer, 506 & 507 n.3 Wallace, Richard, 386 n.6 Wallace, Violet, 506 & 507 n.3 Wallich, Beatrice Harriet, 84 n.2 Wallich, George Charles: CD borrows negative of smiling girl for Expression, 83–4 & 84 nn.2–3, 84, 118; Expression, presentation, 663 & 665 n.25 Wanklyn, John Bradshaw, 125 Watkins, Carlton: ‘Grisley giant’ (1861), 175 Way, Albert: CD recalls beetle-hunting in Cambridge, 311 & n.6 Weale, James Philip Mansel, 467 n.2 Webb, Mary, 522 n.6 Wedgwood, Caroline Sarah, 101 & 102 n.3, 296 & 297 n.5, 311 & n.5, 350 n.3, 354 & n.4, 652 n.21, 475 & 476 n.4, 598 & n.5; Expression, presentation, 662 & 664 n.10 Wedgwood, Clement Francis, 518 n.3 Wedgwood, Elizabeth, 598 n.4, 600 & n.1 Wedgwood, Frances Emma Elizabeth (Fanny), 260 & n.3, 322 & 323 n.6, 559 n.2; M. Bell writes to about Expression, 517 & 518 n.4

Wedgwood, Frances Julia (Snow), 558 & 559 n.2; J. Gourlay describes girls hiding faces in shame, 597 & 598 n.6, 598 & n.2; notes passages in literature dealing with shame, 596 & n.2, 597 & 597–8 nn.2–5, 598–9 & 599 n.2; sends CD extract from A. Charma’s essay on language, 594– 6 & 596 nn.2 & 4 Wedgwood, Godfrey, 518 n.3 Wedgwood, Hensleigh, 260 & n.3, 322–3 nn.1–2, 586; CD consults on origins of words used in Expression, 599 & nn.1–2, 600 & nn.2–3, 600; Expression, presentation, 662 & 664 n.9; moves from London to Down, 558 & 559 n.2; origin of language, 459 & 460 n.4, 472, 547 & 548 n.8, 548 & n.12, 640 & 641 n.8, 640 & 641 n.12 Wedgwood, Hope Elizabeth, 259 & 260 n.2, 322 & 323 n.6, 558 & 559 n.2 Wedgwood, Jessie, 600 & n.2 Wedgwood, Josiah, I, 559 n.8 Wedgwood, Josiah, II, 518 n.3 Wedgwood, Josiah, III, 350 n.3, 652 n.21, 516–17 & 518 n.3 Wedgwood, Josiah Clement, 284 & n.4 Wedgwood, Katherine Euphemia (Effie), 260 & n.3, 323 n.6, 558 & 559 n.2 Wedgwood, Laurence, 518 n.3 Wedgwood, Lucy Caroline, 33; CD asks to observe her dog barking, 601 & n.2; observes activity of earthworms for CD, xxiv, 12 & n.2, 32–3 & 33 n.1, 34–5, 67–8 & 68 nn.2–3, 101–2 & 102 n.4, 258–9 & n.2 Wedgwood, Margaret Susan. See Williams, Margaret Susan Vaughan Wedgwood, Sarah Elizabeth (Elizabeth), 259 & 260 n.2 Weir, Harrison William: judge at Crystal Palace cat show, 224 n.1 Weir, John Jenner: accountant, H.M. Customs, 174 & 176 n.3; causes of variegation remain unknown, 333 & 333–4 n.1, 334; Expression, presentation, 663; incipient disease causes female to be less attractive to male, 174 & 176 n.2; judge at Crystal Palace cat show, 224 n.1; sexual selection, examples from his aviary, 356–7 & 357 nn.1–4 Weismann, August: CD glad his sight has improved, 89 & n.3; CD recommends pamphlet to C. Lyell, 222 & n.3; influence of isolation on formation of species, 89 & n.3, 147–8 & 148 nn.1–3 & 9–10, 183 & 187 n.6, 551 & 552 n.12 Wellesley, Arthur, duke of Wellington, 588 n.9 Wells, John Soelberg: Diseases of the eye, abstract of F.C. Donders’s researches, 136 & 138 n.3, 150 & 151 n.2, 151 & n.3, 164 & n.2 Wells, Samuel Roberts, 359 & 360 n.6

Index Welwitschia: R. Owen blames J.D. Hooker for its failure at Kew, 494 & 495 n.3 West, Algernon Edward: W.E. Gladstone’s private secretary, 5 & 6 n.1; J.D. Hooker meets to discuss dispute with A.S. Ayrton, 272 & 278 n.22, 273 West, James: messenger, Linnean Society, 403 & n.2 West, Thomas: porter, Linnean Society, 403 n.2 Westminster Review: J.E. Taylor, ‘Geographical distribution of animals and plants, geologically considered’, 21 & n.2 whales: mouths of progenitors of baleen whales might have resembled lamellated beaks of ducks, xviii, 98 & 99 n.2, 157 & 159 n.4 Wheatstone, Charles: patron, Artizans Dwellings Company, 125 White, Charles: human–ape hybrids, 147 n.2 Whitley, Charles Thomas: CD inquires after, 519 & n.5, 521 & 522 n.5 Whitney, William Dwight: theory of language, 241 & 242 nn.4–5, 379–80 & 382 nn.3 & 8- -10, 547 & 548 n.8, 640 & 641 n.8 Wickham, John Clements: now deceased, visited Down House (1862), 49 & n.3 Wiegmann, Arend Friedrich: hybrids generally resemble mother, 481 & n.5 Wilhelm I, emperor of Germany, 502 n.4 Willem III, king of the Netherlands, 173 n.3, 619 n.3 Williams & Norgate: agents for Naples zoological station, 364 & 365 n.6, 371–2 & 372 n.2, 383 & 384 n.2, 501 & 502 n.3; CD orders books and periodicals from, 155 & 156 nn.2–4, 188 & n.1 Williams, Charles Vaughan, 102 n.3 Williams, Margaret Susan Vaughan, 102 n.3 Wilson, Edward: Expression, presentation, 663 Wittig, Gregor Constantin, 54 & n.5 Woinow, Mikhail Mikhailovich: article on binocular vision, 137 & 138 n.6 Wolf, Joseph: provides CD with drawings of dogs, 139 & 140 n.2 Wood, Charles, Viscount Halifax, 273 & 278 n.24; supports J.D. Hooker in Ayrton dispute but fails to take action, 202 & 203 n.3 Wood, John: Expression, presentation, 662; professor of surgery, King’s College, London, 558 & 559 n.3 Wood, Searles Valentine (1798–1880): fertility of peach trees in New Zealand, 240 & 241 n.10; C. Lyell offers specimen of Unio littoralis from Grays, Essex, 239 & 241 n.6 Wood, Searles Valentine (1830–84): opposes A. Tylor’s view on Quaternary gravels, 249 n.2; reduced fertility of cultivated varieties grown from seed, 239–40

861

Wood, Thomas W.: drawings of cats used in Expression, 139 & 140 n.4, 329 n.8; Expression, presentation, 662 Woodall, John Woodall: may subsidise zoological station at Scarborough, 372 & n.4 Woodburytype, 558 n.5; CD considered for Expression, 395 & 396 n.2 Woodington, Ann: CD rents her house in Sevenoaks, 427 n.4, 428 n.5, 442, 443, 447, 453 n.5, 455 n.3 Woodroffe, Thomas, 125 & 126 n.3 Woodward, Samuel Pickworth, 240 & 241 n.9 Woolner, Alice Gertrude: visits Down House, 232 n.5, 197 & n.4, 651 Woolner, Thomas: visits Down House, xx, 197 & n.4, 232 n.5, 651 Wordsworth, William, 597 & 598 n.8 Working Men’s College: members visit Down House, 322 & 323 n.8 Wright, Chauncey: CD invites to consider ‘unconscious’ selection, 241 & 242 n.5, 379–82 & 382 n.5; CD sends paper on phyllotaxy to Nature and Linnean Society, xxii, 149 & 150 n.4; development of language, 379–82 & 382 n.11, 387; evolution of self-consciousness, 399 & 400 n.3; homological and genetic characters, 226–7 & 227 n.8; mental faculties of animals, 398–9, 397 & n.2, 398 & 399 n.1; North American Review, critical review of St.J.G. Mivart’s Genesis of species, 26 & 28 n.1, 145 n.4, 227 n.6; North American Review, St G.J. Mivart replies to review, 10 & n.2, 17 & 18 n.1, 19 & 20 n.3, 144 & 145 n.4; North American Review, reply to Mivart’s response, 144 & 145 n.5, 241 & 242 n.2; Origin, 6th ed., presentation, 144 & 145 n.2, 658; Origin, 6th ed., welcomes new chapter answering critics, 144 & 145 n.3; phyllotaxy, CD recommends article on by A. Dickson, 155 & n.2; phyllotaxy, paper on, 143–4 & 145 n.1, 145, 149 & 150 nn.1 & 3–4, 225–6 & 227 n.2; phyllotaxy, H. Airy unconvinced by paper, xxii, 233–7 & 237 nn.1 & 3, 303 & 308 nn.2 & 8; visits Down House, 378 & 382 n.1, 387 & n.3, 393 & n.3, 397 & n.3, 399 & 400 n.4, 651 & 652 n.23 Wright, William, 459 & 460 n.11 Wrightson, John: hopes to meet CD, 251 & n.2 Wundt, Wilhelm Maximilian: cited in Expression, 2d ed., 351 n.2; study of souls of men and animals, V.O. Kovalevsky orders for CD and sends with annotations, 348 & n.9, 350 & n.5, 351 & n.2, 401 & n.7, 419 & n.3 Wyman, Jeffries, 375 n.7 X Club: J. Tyndall’s letters from USA read to, 491

862

Index

X Club, cont. & 492 n.8 Youmans, Edward Livingston, founder, Popular Science Review, 429 & 430 n.9 Zannetti, Arturo: secretary, Società Italiana di Antropologia et di Etnologia, 653 & 654 n.1 Zizainia aquatica: J.D. Hooker believes it might be an annual, 39 & 40 n.2, 46

Zoological Gardens, Regent’s Park, London: A.D. Bartlett, superintendent, 194 & 195 n.2; monkeys may vomit voluntarily, 366–7 & 367 n.3; Tadorna variegata, 357 & n.4 Zoological Record: P. Carbonnier, Macropodus, 218 & 219 n.1; A. Günther, editor and contributor, 218 & 219 n.3; A. Newton, editor, 219 n.3 Zoological Society of London: P. Sclater, secretary, 558 n.4 1