MydearHooker，Ihavebeendeeplyinterestedbyyourletter，andwehadagoodlaughoverHuxley’sremark，whichwassodeucedcleverthatyoucouldnotrecollectit。Icannotquitefollowyourtrainofthought，forinthelastpageyouadmitallthatIwish，havingapparentlydeniedall，orthoughtallmerewordsinthepreviouspagesofyournote;butitmaybemymuddle。IseeclearlythatanysatisfactionwhichPanmaygivewilldependontheconstitutionofeachman’smind。Ifyouhavearrivedalreadyatanysimilarconclusion，thewholewillofcourseappearstaletoyou。IheardyesterdayfromWallace，whosays（excusehorridvanity），\"IcanhardlytellyouhowmuchIadmirethechapteron’Pangenesis。’ItisaPOSITIVE
COMFORTtometohaveanyfeasibleexplanationofadifficultythathasalwaysbeenhauntingme，andIshallneverbeabletogiveituptillabetteronesuppliesitsplace，andthatIthinkhardlypossible，etc。\"Nowhisforegoing[italicised]wordsexpressmysentimentsexactlyandfully:
thoughperhapsIfeelthereliefextrastronglyfromhavingduringmanyyearsvainlyattemptedtoformsomehypothesis。WhenyouorHuxleysaythatasinglecellofaplant，orthestumpofanamputatedlimb，havethe\"potentiality\"ofreproducingthewhole——or\"diffuseaninfluence，\"thesewordsgivemenopositiveidea;——butwhenitissaidthatthecellsofaplant，orstump，includeatomsderivedfromeveryothercellofthewholeorganismandcapableofdevelopment，Igainadistinctidea。Butthisideawouldnotbewortharush，ifitappliedtoonecasealone;butitseemstometoapplytoalltheformsofreproduction——inheritance——metamorphosis——
totheabnormaltranspositionoforgans——tothedirectactionofthemaleelementonthemotherplant，etc。ThereforeIfullybelievethateachcelldoesACTUALLYthrowoffanatomorgemmuleofitscontents;——butwhetherornot，thishypothesisservesasausefulconnectinglinkforvariousgrandclassesofphysiologicalfacts，whichatpresentstandabsolutelyisolated。
Ihavetouchedonthedoubtfulpoint（alludedtobyHuxley）howfaratomsderivedfromthesamecellmaybecomedevelopedintodifferentstructureaccordinglyastheyaredifferentlynourished;Iadvancedasillustrationsgallsandpolypoidexcrescences……