"'From Man to Man', Rhodes dream, friendship should precede marriage" Read the full letter
Collection Summary | View All |  Arrange By:
< Prev |
Viewing Item
of 43 | Next >
Letter ReferenceFindlay Family A1199/1149
ArchiveWilliam Cullen Library, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand
Epistolary TypeLetter
Letter Date24 December 1872
Address FromNew Rush, later Kimberley, Northern Cape
Address To
Who ToCatherine ('Katie') Findlay nee Schreiner
Other VersionsRive 1987: 7
PermissionsPlease read before using or citing this transcription
The Project is grateful to the William Cullen Library, University of Johannesburg, for kindly allowing us to transcribe this Olive Schreiner letter, which is part of its Historical Papers.
1 New Rush
2 December 24th 1872
4 My dearest Katie!
6 I had only time to send you such a line before I left Hertzog but I
7must try & find time to send you a note by this post.
9 I arrived here safely last week after a six days journey. I should
10have got here in five but was delayed by the rivers. I found poor
11Ettie on my arrival very ill in bed & suffering dreadfully, it will be
12some time before she will really get about again. The dear old girl
13quite over works herself & can not be made to take care of herself in
14any way.
16 Theo & Willie are well. Will is a fine strong fellow, quite as tall as
17Theo & works as well as any man. I should not have known him again.
18They are not finding much & the little they do find they can get
19hardly any thing for. Diamonds are so low just now.
21 The heat here is some thing dreadful & sickness very prevalent. What
22it will be by New Year I don't know. I hope you & your little ones are
23very well. Do write to me soon. I am always so glad of your letters
24dear Katie. I will try & answer you at once though letter writing here
25is no easy task.
27 I saw Joe Orpen here a little time ago & am expecting him to call in
28every moment so had better close.
30 With much love from Ettie
32 I am ever
33 Your most affectate sister
34 Olive
Rive?s (1987) version omits part of this letter and is also in a number of respects incorrect.