"James Rose Innes in broader political life, O advises" Read the full letter
Collection Summary | View All |  Arrange By:
< Prev |
Viewing Item
of 586 | Next >
Letter ReferenceHRC/UNCAT/OS-82
ArchiveHarry Ransom Center, University of Texas, Austin
Epistolary TypeLetter
Letter Date7 January 1886
Address From9 Blandford Square, Paddington, London
Address To
Who ToHavelock Ellis
Other VersionsCronwright-Schreiner 1924: 91; Draznin 1992: 399-400
PermissionsPlease read before using or citing this transcription
Legend
The Project is grateful to the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center, the University of Texas at Austin, for kindly allowing us to transcribe this Olive Schreiner letter, which is part of its Manuscript Collections. This letter has been dated by reference to information written onto it by Ellis. Schreiner was resident in Blandford Square from the end of November 1885 to mid January 1886, when she left London for the Isle of Wight.
1The Police Inspectors have been to see me today. I want my Harry boy
2for a long talk. Last night after we came from the club, I asked
3Donkin if he didn’t think Carpenter like you. He was quite indignant.
4 He said he was thinking as he looked round the room that no man in it
5had a face that expressed anything like the same nobility. He likes
6you a great deal. I am so tired my Harry. I never forget you. Last
7night till I went to sleep I thought of you. Life is dark to both of
8us now. How strange these days will look to us in after years as we
9look back at them.
10
11Your.
12Olive
13
14Always & unchangingly
15
Notation
Regarding the police calling on her, see Schreiner's draft letter to the Daily News, 28 December 1888 (HRC/OliveSchreinerLetters/OS-DailyNews/1) complaining about the behaviour of a policeman when she was talking to Bryan Donkin outside her lodgings. Its publication and pressure from Bryan Donkin occasioned the visit referred to. Draznin's (1992) version of this letter is in some respects different from our transcription. Cronwright-Schreiner's (1924) extract is incorrect in various ways.