Please read BHL's Acknowledgment of Harmful Content
Close Dialog

Text Sources

Page text in BHL originates from one of the following sources:
Uncorrected OCR Machine-generated text. May include inconsistencies with the content of the original page.
Error-corrected OCR Machine-generated, machine-corrected text. Better quality than Uncorrected OCR, but may still include inconsistencies with the content of the original page.
Manual Transcription Human-created and reviewed text. For issues concerning manual transcription text, please contact the original holding institution.
  • Pages
  • Table of Contents
URL for Current Page
Scientific Names on this Page

Indexed by Global Names
Book Title
Publication Details
London, Churchill, 1838
Holding Institution
Cambridge University Library
Copyright & Usage
Darwin Estate and Cambridge University Library

Copyright Status:
In copyright

Search Inside This Book:
Results For:
Click/Shift+Click pages to select for download
Cancel Generate Review No Pages Added

If you are generating a PDF of a journal article or book chapter, please feel free to enter the title and author information. The information you enter here will be stored in the downloaded file to assist you in managing your downloaded PDFs locally.

Thank you for your request. Please wait for an email containing a link to download the PDF.

For your reference, the confirmation number for this request is .

Join Our Mailing List

Sign up to receive the latest BHL news, content highlights, and promotions.


Help Support BHL

BHL relies on donations to provide free PDF downloads and other services. Help keep BHL free and open!


There was an issue with the request. Please try again and if the problem persists, please send us feedback.

For your reference, the confirmation number for this request is .

Example: Charles Darwin, Carl Linnaeus
Example: Birds, Classification, Mammals
Contributed by Cambridge University Library
Annotation Not Available

annotation      Argument against Mr Walkers law —
     The intellect & instinct in a cross-breed comes from both parents, as in shepherd dogs &c &c — now one would have thought if one parent gave one part & one another, nothing would be so little divisible as the thinking faculty —

annotation 24 Capons are females castrated!
show subjects subjects

annotation 205 Knight on cross of Drayhorse & pony    ■    ■
show subjects concepts

annotation 140 Hereditary fingers & toes

annotation 161 Knight says long faces go with long limbs — Hard t get head of Greyhond on Bull Dog

annotation 206 do says th male in Hybrids overules female in giving form

annotation 209    A Well-bred animal will give preponderance p 216 do

annotation 223 Wilkinson says he has seen breed between long & short horned permanntly made

annotation 228 Knight believes in breeding in & in ‹dog› ‹horse› — Walker sum up authorities Ch 3

annotation 243 do — put pollen of 2 colour on female & both kinds were produced not mixed

annotation 244 Bitches mor inclined t pair with one Dog than another p 276
show subjects subjects

annotation 275 Effect of imagination on offsprng

annotation 299 Knight thinks keeping cattle under different circumstances prevent ill of in & in

annotation 362 on advantages of crossed races of Man

annotation 377 Accoucheurs state hands of labourers infants larger (Disuse)

annotation I reject Mr Walker's theory of one parent givng (see p. 150) one series of organs & ‹another› th other a different set.—    because

annotation (1) the propagation of plants. as we see in their crossing &c &c. is closely similar to that animals, now, in plants we cannot ‹tra› separate the organs into any two analogous divisions — ‹even if› In plants, accordng to Mr K. either father or mother can give “excitability” (& I daresay other similar case could be gathered) now excitability or constitutional peculiarities would scarcely be given in one system of [corrected from `or'] organs.—

annotation 2d.    The kind of argument in favour of it, are such as Phrenologists advance. «(one series affecting muscle & another their supports, ie only in the face)» — does not hold good in my experience.    or rather a double answer might be given /

annotation When different varieties cross, the offsprng take ‹after› the locomotive system frm th male, because, the male has greatest desire frm the female being very [over] different — according to this «the» law, would be quite interfered with in ‹th› a case where the ‹female› «ova» were impregnated by the semen of the male ,as in fishes & frogs, & yet we know that mule fishes occur ,& that it is not necessary in insects or fish that male should see female.—    Moreover, how in cross of black & white man. & different varieties of dogs come there to be litters ‹tak› of puppies some taking after mother & some father. —    Again ,there seems to be as much law (& as doubtful) in crosses of plants, the greater desire of the male is absurd — Again in some cases, the cross-bred offsprng vary much. (as in passion flowers described by Sabine) here then no certain law appears to prevail.    Again Mr. W. admits the offsprng of cross breeds. p. 220 revert , & explains it by. one having the system of [over] one parent, & another a different one — yet by his “law of crossing” all will have locomotive system of male, & hence the possibility of this Heterogeneity depends on ‹fem› male being less vigorous than female.— (& this is next thing to assumption . for if other wise would have been recognized in human race)

annotation / How will Mr Walker laws explain plants which show traces of 3 parents as in plants iα — ? animals as ass & ‹mule› «Zebra & horse» &c of gardens —
     This will overthrow his system: no because he allows. (p. 301) that one series modifies another ! here is cause of error !

annotation He bases some of his views on axiom that “organization is ‹de› indestructible” (p 224)    how have our varieties been formed ?!!

annotation    Law of Breeding in & in

annotation Female always giving locomotive series .—probably invented to explain the loss of Secondary Character in the male , but is not this more probaly effect of infertility . which likewise affects the female . —

annotation I must think there is no difference in law of resemblance to parents in species, varieties, & individuals —
show subjects subjects

annotation vertically crossed Put th case to Sir. J Sebrght of two half bred mongrels exactly like each other being interbred — will offsprng not be then constant — Ask his Opinnion of Walker's Book.—
show subjects subjects

annotation vertically crossed Ask Mr Ford whether he has ever matched two half bred animals which were closely alike & yet the offspring varied —
show subjects subjects

annotation vertically crossed Progeny of hybrid plants stable

annotation cancelled In all crosses of varieties, accordng to Mr W. offsprg ought to take in form after male
show subjects subjects

annotation What has Mr Blaine written p. 271 Mr Hunt. p 290 & Mr Thacker 291
show subjects concepts

annotation ■It is sin■gular twins being ■ so like, & yet between two races «li■ke in Man. sometimes ,or in litters» so unlike . —

annotation cancelled      Experiments.—
     To cross some very artificial male, with old female —    according to Mr Walker, the former ought to preponderate in body — accordg to my, Yarrell's thery , «‹old age time as elemnt›» the father. ought , either in first breed or permanently . —
     Cross half breeds, with some other breeds —    to see whether grandfather will appear —
     Cross two 1/2 breeds exactly similar.t01
t01 - `Cross two ... similar.' cancelled

annotation 24
     From 139 to 144
     p 160
     214 to 243
     244 [he means `274'?]
show subjects concepts

annotation 396 — on Hermaphrodite