TITLE: Source of Hardy-Littlewood's 2nd Conjecture
QUESTION [13 upvotes]: In what paper do Hardy and Littlewood first mention, specifically, their 2nd conjecture? It is not mentioned specifically in Partitio Numerorum III.
This conjecture is usually expressed as 
$$\pi(x+y)\leq \pi(x)+\pi(y). $$
in which $\pi(x)$ is the number of primes not exceeding $x.$
See, for example, Mathworld's note.

REPLY [2 votes]: This is the answer I posted to a similar question some time ago at MathOverflow. 
I took a look at Schinzel and Sierpinski, Sur certaines hypotheses concernant les nombres premiers, Acta Arith IV (1958) 185-208, reprinted in Volume 2 of Schinzel's Selecta, pages 1113-1133. In the Selecta, there is a commentary by Jerzy Kaczorowski, who mentions "the G H Hardy and J E Littlewood conjecture implicitly formulated in [33] that $\pi(x+y)\le\pi(x)+\pi(y)$ for $x,y\ge2$." [33] is Partitio Numerorum III. Schinzel and Sierpinski (page 1127 of the Selecta) define $\rho(x)=\limsup_{y\to\infty}[\pi(y+x)-\pi(y)]$, and point to that H-L paper, pp 52-68. They then write (page 1131), "$\bf C_{12.2}.$ L'hypothese de Hardy et Littlewood suivant laquelle $\rho(x)\le\pi(x)$ pour $x$ naturels $\gt1$ equivaut a l'inegalite $\pi(x+y)\le\pi(x)+\pi(y)$ pour $x\gt1,y\gt1$." It should be said that the proof that the first inequality implies the second relies on Hypothesis H, which essentially says that if there is no simple reason why a bunch of polynomials can't all be prime, then they are, infinitely often. 
Schinzel and Sierpinski express no opinion as to any degree of belief in the conjecture under discussion. 
I don't suppose this actually answers any of the questions, although Kaczorowski's use of the word "implicitly" may be significant.