I 



('ofrt«ponfh'un' wif/i C/uirffti iJaririii 183 



In coiicluHiiiti, I roKlkte n foriiiiT (liifiiiitinii, llmt F gtLVo of tlio clmmctor of llm rvlationHhip 

 iMflwi't'u |iiii'crit Hii<l oliiUI, wliicli I iiiakt;otit to Ix-, not like that wliioh conrKH!tna parc>iit nation 

 iiiul itH colonists, Imt like tluit wliicrh connects tlie r»/tri»i-nlittioe tjorfninirnl of the parent nation 

 with the r<!pre«entiitivti government of the colonistx; with the further Hupponition, that the 

 government of the ^uinuit country in enipowcn-<l to nominate a Hninll proportion of the ooloniata. 



I have now, so far as the limits of a lett4}r admit, made a clean Ijreast of my audacity in 

 theoretically differing from Pangenesis; — 



(1) In Hup|M)sing the sexual elements to be of as early an origin as any part of the \tody 

 (it was th(! emphatic declarations of Btilliiani on this point that chiellv attracted my 

 interest) and that they are not formed hy aggregation -of germs, floating loow and 

 freely circulating in the 8yMt<>m, and 



(2) In supposing the |>erKoiial structure to be of very secondary importance in Heredity, 

 l)eiiig, as I take it, a muiiple of that which is of primary importance, but not the 

 thing itself. 



If I could help, even in accustoming p«H)ple to the idea that the notion of Organic Germs 

 is certainly that on which the true theory of Heredity must rest, and that the queHtion now is 

 upon details and not on first principles, I shoidd lie very happy. Ever yours, FBANfis OaltoN 



Thanks for the letter on the Hindoo family, which I will keep, and for the pamphlet on the 

 wholesale execution of weakly |>eople, which I return hy Ixtok post. 



iVov. 4th [1873]. Dowx, Beckknham, Kkst. 



Railway Station, Okpinctov, S.E.R. 



Mv DKAK Galton, I have just returned from London where I was forced to go yesterday 

 for Vivisection Commis.sion. 



I have read your interesting note and am delighted that you stick up for germs. I can 

 hardly form any opinion until I read your paper in fxtf.nso. I have mtKlitie<l |)arts of the 

 Chapter on Pangenesis which is now printing, and have allowed that the gemmules may, or 

 perhaps do, multiply in the reproductive organs. I write now as I fancy that you have not re^ul 

 B.-Si^quard's last pa|)er, in which he gives 17 or 13 (I forget which) instances of deficient toes 

 on the same foot in the ottspring of parents, which hatl gnawed off their own gangrenous toes 

 owing to the sciatic nerve having been divided. 



You s})eak of "almost the necessity of double parentage in all complex organiwUions." I 

 suppose you have thought well on the many ca-ses of parthenogenesis in Ijepidoptera and Hy- 

 meuoptera and surely these are complex enough. 



I am very glad indeed of your work, though I cannot yet follow all your reasoning. 



In haste. Most sincerely yours, C. Dabwiv. 



Down, Beckbnham, Kent. [1A^or4, 1876'.] 

 Railway Station, Okhinoton, S.E.R. 



My DBA It Mil Galton, My father thought you might care to have the reference to Brown- 

 Sequard's jmper. There is a good resume of all his ob-servations in the ' Lancet,' Jan. 1875, p. 7. 



Yours very sincerely, Francis Dahwih. 



' The reader will note with amusement the completr, omission of date — the inheritance in an 

 intensified form of a habit peculiar not only to Charles Darwin but also to Mrs Darwin. I only 

 know one letter to which Darwin did put a date, it is the following written to his aunt Violetta 

 Galton, Francis Gallon's nintlu-r. 



July 12, 1871. Down, Bkckenham, Kkxt. 



My DKAK Aunt, 1 am very much obligi-d to you for your great kindne.ss in writing to me 

 with your own hand. My sons were no doubt deceivetl, and the picturest>ller affixed the name 

 of a celebrated man to the picture for the sake of getting his price. Your note is a wonderful 

 proof how well some few people in this world can write and express themselves at an advanced 

 age. It is enough to make one not fear so much the advance of age, as I often do, though you 

 must think me quite a youth ! With my l)e8t thanks, pray believe me with much respect, Your 

 affectionate nephew, Chakles Dakwin. 



This letter so gracefully suggestive of both Violetta Darwin and Charles Darwin deserves 



t4> tx' put on riMoiil, 



