1862—187 1] JOHN SCOTT 321 



justice and publish your paper, send it to me to be com- Utter 

 municatcd to the Linnean Society, I will delay my paper 

 on successive dimorphic generations in Primula l till yours 

 appears, so as in no way to interfere with your paper. Pos- 

 sibly my results may be hardly worth publishing, but I think 

 they will ; the seedlings from two successive homomorphic 

 generations seem excessively sterile. I will keep this letter 

 till I hear from Dr. Hooker. I shall be very glad if you 

 try Passi flora. Your experiments on Primula seem so well 

 chosen that whatever the result is they will be of value. But 

 always remember that not one naturalist out of a dozen cares 

 for really philosophical experiments. 



To J. Scott. Letter 645 



Down, May 31st [1863]. 

 I am unwell, and must write briefly. I am very much 

 obliged for the Courant} The facts will be of highest 

 use to me. I feel convinced that your paper will have 

 permanent value. Your case seems excellently and carefully 

 worked out. 1 agree that the alteration of title was un- 

 fortunate, but, after all, title does not signify very much. So 

 few have attended to such points that I do not expect any 

 criticism ; but if so, I should think you had much better 

 reply, but I could if you wished it much. I quite understand 

 about the cases being individual sterility ; so Gartner states 

 it was with him. Would it be worth while to send a corrected 

 copy of the Courant to the Gardeners' Chronicle} 7 ' I did not 

 know that you had tried Lobelia fulgens : can you give me 

 any particulars on the number of plants and kinds used, etc., 

 that I may quote, as in a few days I shall be writing on this 

 whole subject ? No one will ever convince me that it is not 

 a very important subject to philosophical naturalists. The 



1 Published in the/ourn. Linn S . X . 1869 [1868]. 

 The Edinburgh Evening Courant used to publish notices of the 

 papers read at the Botanical Society of Edinburgh. The paper referred 

 to here was Scott- on "//. 



\n account of Scott's work appeared in the Gat 

 June 13th, 1863, which is, at least partly, a reprint of the Co:, nee 



it contains the awkward sentence criticised by Darwin and referred to 

 below. The title is " On the Fertilisation of Orchids." which was no 

 doubt considered unfortunate as not suggesting the subject of the paper, 

 and as being the same as that of Darwin's book. 



VOL. II. 2 I 



