"Details of wedding day" Read the full letter
Collection Summary | View All |  Arrange By:
< Prev |
Viewing Item
of 154 | Next >
Letter ReferenceKarl Pearson 840/4/2/11-12
ArchiveUniversity College London Library, Special Collections, UCL, London
Epistolary TypeLetter
Letter Date18 January 1886
Address FromRoyal Spa Hotel, Shanklin, Isle of Wight
Address To
Who ToKarl Pearson
Other Versions
PermissionsPlease read before using or citing this transcription
Legend
The Project is grateful to University College London (UCL) and its Library Services for kindly allowing us to transcribe this Olive Schreiner letter, which is part of its Special Collections. The date has been written on this note in an unknown hand. Schreiner was resident in Shanklin from mid January to mid February 1886. The name of the addressee is indicated by content and archival location. The note is written onto part of an undated letter Schreiner had received from Havelock Ellis.
1 [page/s missing] I am sorry to say I fully agree with your letter. Had a long
2letter from Ray yesterday on the woman question I should like to send it you,
3but don’t know if he would like it It is very truthful &
4straightforward, - poor old Ray.
5
6 The bit of letter I enclose is from Ellis.
7 O.S.
8
Notation
The book somewhat mockingly referred to is Pearson's (1886) Matter and Soul (London: Sunday Lecture Series), which was later republished in his (1888) The Ethic of Freethought: A Selection of Essays and Lectures London: T. Fisher Unwin. The part-letter from Ellis is as follows: I wondered if this book would interest you at all. I don't think it's full enough. I am going to get that French book ^about physiognomy^ that I showed you at Charlotte St. from Smith to send you. It is really good & interesting. Thanks for papers. Pearson's latest & splendid little study is as good as anything I've seen of his & just what I wanted. That paper of Wilkes' doesn't a contain what I want about size of eyes; it was in the reprint that you had. "Matter & Soul" very good, a better answer to Carpenter, I think, than Ray Lankester. I've sent it to Chubb to read.