DAR 7: [170r] (138 choice variety & breeding from it, ‹& thus^t1 getting› a whole group of sub-varieties more or less characterized^t2 by^t3 the «peculiarities of the» parent. «The case of the Peach & Nectarine with their many varieties might have been instanced^t4.» No doubt ‹that› the relationship of our different domestic breeds has been obscured in an extreme^t5 degree by their^t6 crossing; & from^t7 the^t8 slight^t9 difference between many breeds^t10, it ‹might sometimes›^t11 «has ‹often› probably often» happened^t12 that a "Sport"^t13 from^t14 one breed ‹would more› «has less» closely resembled^t15 «its parent breed, ‹it› than» ‹the› «some» other breed, ‹than it our parent breed,›^t16 & «has» therefore ‹has› been classed ‹amongst› «‹with› with» the ‹former.› latter. (A)

Insert (A) DAR 7: [170v] see image (A)
  Moreover, «the» effects of a similar climate ‹might› «may» in some cases «have» more than counterbalanced «the» similarity consequent on a common descent; though I should think the similarity of the «breeds of» cattle of^t17 India or sheep of Siberia, was far more probably due to «the» community of their^t18 descent, than to the ‹similarity of the› effects of climate ‹of› «on» animals ‹derived› «descended» from different stocks.] ⁋.

DAR 7: [170r] continued Notwithstanding these ‹great› sources of ‹doubt› difficulty , «I apprehend» ‹if it were possible,› everyone^t19 would admit that «if it were possible» a geneological^t20 classification of our domestic varieties, would be the most satisfactory ‸^t21 ‸^t22 «one;» & as far as varieties were concerned^t23, would be the Natural^t24 System. In attempting to follow out this object, «a person would have to class a variety whose» ‹he^t25 would ‸^t26 when he did not know the› parentage ‹of a variety, have to examine & compare› «he did not know, by its external characters,»
‹its [possible illegible deleted characters] class it, by its ‹cha^t27› «‹quite useless›» resemblance with others, whose position were ascertained; ‹&› «but» in doing^t28 this he would have the^t29 ulterior object, of «its» descent in view, in the same manner the^t30 ‹every› «regular» systematist seems to have some ulterior object, which he calls the plan of the creation.›^t31
, but he would have a distinct ulterior object in view, namely its descent, in the same manner, as a regular systematist seems «also» to have ‹some an› «an» ulterior but undefined ‹object› end in «all» his classifications. Like the regular systematist, he would

Physical Characteristics: watermark: TN; size W=20 H=32 (cm)

^t1 thus] conjectured transcription ^t2 characterized] compressed letters: 'ed' ^t3 by] rewritten ^t4 instanced] retouched 'd' ^t5 extreme] retouched 'e' ^t6 their] retouched 'e' ^t7 from] retouched 'rom' ^t8 the] retouched 'e' ^t9 slight] retouched 'gh' ^t10 breeds] highly compressed final letter ^t11 might sometimes] crossed with wavy horizontal line ^t12 happened] letters appended 'ed' ^t13 Sport] retouched 'S' ^t14 from] retouched 'rom' ^t15 resembled] 'ed' over 'e' ^t16 than it our parent breed,] deleted by horizontal line & uprights ^t17 of] retouched ^t18 their] written over illegible letters ^t19 everyone] 'r' dropped or absorbed into 'y' ^t20 geneological] retouched 'n' ^t21 ‸ ] redundant caret ^t22 ‸ ] altered from comma ^t23 concerned] retouched 'o' ^t24 Natural] retouched 'u' ^t25 he] conjectured transcription ^t26 ‸ ] redundant caret ^t27 cha] conjectured transcription ^t28 doing] retouched 'oin' ^t29 the] written over 'an' ^t30 the] written over 'as' ^t31 ‹its [possible illegible deleted characters] class it…of the creation.›] boxed; passage crossed

Transcription and apparatus copyright the American Museum of Natural History