Showing 4 results

Fettercairne House, Fettercairne - JDF has been unwell and gives a description of his illness. Consequently his studies have been interrupted for some two to three months. JDF is pleased in the recent appointment of his namesake , Edward Forbes, to Edinburgh University. He is sorry that Lord Rosse has resigned from the Royal Society: 'Lord Wrottesley though a very worthy man seems hardly suited for so public a post, so far as I know of him. I think on the whole Murchison [Roderick Murchison] would have done it well. I do not think the Royal Society seems flourishing. The council is not strong and the new elections below criticism'.

Edinburgh - JDF has not passed an autumn without illness since 1851, and gives WW a long description of how his good health has been achieved. The sudden death of Edward Forbes 'has produced a profound sensation'. Only a few days ago JDF had attended one of his lectures. JDF would have put aside his dispute with Louis Agassiz, and should have been glad to see him if he could be persuaded to come over: 'but unfavourable reports of his views of geology connected with scripture, the unity of the human races etc are here in circulation, of the truth of which I know nothing'. Clerk Maxwell is currently with JDF - he is much improved by his stay at Cambridge, and 'spoke to me in a very manly way about his disappointment of a fellowship'. Maxwell has made some 'ingenious experiments and deductions about combinations of colours..and also about Daltonians or Idiopts'. How does WW feel about the government drawing away Stokes and Willis to become lecturers in London 'to (at best) a very limited class of students, thus peculiarly favoured'. JDF is sorry to hear of the 'serious difference' between Challis and Adams.

Kew - JDH had not read WW's 'History' [The History of the Inductive Sciences, from the Earliest to the Present Time, 1837] for upwards of five years: 'I am surprised to find how little there is to add, and nothing that affects the general purport of the work' [WW is bringing out the third edition]. The only two subjects to require touching up are Cryptogamia and Geographical Botany. If WW wants to follow up developments on the former he will send him 'Berkeley's Intro. to Crypt. Bot': - [Miles J. Berkeley, Introduction to Cryptogamic Botany, 1857] Henfrey's [Arthur Henfrey] Report to Brit. Assn. [BAAS] - and a German pamphlet or two'. With regard to geographical Botany, he agrees with WW that in the strict sense it belongs to Paleontology: 'I am puzzled what to say about about it - my own opinion being, that in the present state of our knowledge, we are quite in the dark as to the philosophy of distribution. This subject however occupies so much of the attention of Botanists and Geologists, that it can scarcely be avoided'. Charles Lyell's views are the 'most able and original, and as developed by Edward Forbes have thrown a new light'. We must 'draw upon our imaginations, as to assume that species are created as such, and in one place only'. WW will find it worth while looking at JDH's recent review of Augustin Pyrame de Candolle's work upon Geographical Botany: 'I appear (to myself) however there to favor the doctrine of transmutation more than I really do...My views of progression in Fossil Botany are directly opposed to the prevalent ones; - those I mean which Hugh Miller advocates so strongly'. JDH will also send WW 'another Introductory Essay, and contains some observations upon the study of Systematic Botany; whatever may be good in this attempt is as you will see due in a great measure to the influence of the 'History of the Inductive Sciences' upon the author'. JDH gives a few suggestions on certain other details. The foundations of the natural system were laid by Carl Linnaeus, to a greater extent than most botanists are aware of. 'Brown's [Robert Brown] discovery of gymnosperm is the only real advance hitherto made in the right direction'.