Search: 1800-1809::1806 in date 
letter in document-type 
No in transcription-available 
Sorted by:

Showing 8193 of 93 items

From:
George Don
To:
James Brodie
Date:
18 Feb 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/GD/9, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Encloses specimen of 'Gymnostomum donnianum' [extant], named by Dr [James Edward] Smith and to be included in "English botany" for next April, also encloses a magnified drawing of it and letter from the artist [both extant]. Asks Brodie to transmit the whole to Smith. [Dawson] Turner thought it the 'Grimmea pusilla' of "Flora Britannica" but after examining five hundred specimens he is sure it is not.

Letter from James Neill, Lauriston Road, to George Don, Edinburgh, 12 February 1806: describes how he drew the magnified drawing of 'G. donnianum' with a solar microscope, a method he believes is new. Pencil drawing of 'G. donnianum' and specimen of same, wrapped in paper.

Note by Brodie to Smith on cover, forwarding the whole.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Sir James Edward Smith
To:
James Sowerby
Date:
[1806]
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/JS/11, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Returns 6 drawings and two 'Conferva' specimens to be figured as t.2427 and t.2428 [of "English botany"], to finish no.247 June. Also returns Sowerby's "beautiful drawings" for the Duke of Bedford [John Russell, 6th Duke]; difficulty whether to call some 'Mespili' or 'Crataegi'. They intend to arrive back in London shortly.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Sir James Edward Smith
To:
James Sowerby
Date:
8 Mar 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/JS/12, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Concerned to hear Sowerby is ill. Received [Richard] Salisbury's attack on "English botany" yesterday with another "scurrilous" letter; glad to see he praises Sowerby's part of the work. Intends to neither answer Salisbury's letters nor his work, and to return future letters unopened. Defends himself against Salisbury's attack by saying he is the "first English writer who undertook to examine the characters of Linnaeus, & to correct them where [he] found an error", and thus can only be blamed for not bringing them at once to "perfection".

Returns Sowerby's drawing for frontispiece of "Flora Graeca". emphasises that Hudson, Lightfoot and Curtis all copied Linnaeus without correction. Sorry to hear Sowerby is thinking of dropping "Exotic Botany" after its increased sale, reiterates that he is content to wait for his money for this work. Unable to send his specimen of 'Merops apiaster' for Sowerby to draw, so sends drawing of Hooker's. Sends his duplicate of 'Alopecurus fulvus'. Returning various plates for "English botany" and "Exotic botany".

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Sir James Edward Smith
To:
Nathaniel John Winch
Date:
21 Feb 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/MS321/1, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Received Winch's parcel a few days ago, enclosing one from [Olof] Swartz; thanks for present of Winch's work ["The Botanist's guide through the Counties of Northumberland and Durham"] and specimens enclosed in it, particularly 'Hypnum cordifolium' and 'Dicranum fuscescens'. Thanks Winch for his numerous communications through [Dawson] Turner and [James] Sowerby, "which have enriched "English botany"".

Numbered responses to Winch's queries on plants: 1. like 'Hypnum rugosum'; 2. like Ehrhart's 'H. rugosum' but has not the "proper rugosity"; 3. 'Cochlearia officinalis'; 4. an 'Epilobium' he gathered on glacier of Chamouin in Savoy and supposed variety of 'E. alpinum', near 'E. roseum'; 5. a 'Chironia'; 6. 'Eriophorum polystachion'; has no means of ascertaining 'Bartiamia ithyphylla'; of the exotics 1 is a 'Caucalis' unknown to him, and the rest are 'Buphthalmum aquaticum', 'Statice monopetala', 'Fumaria parviflora', 'Frankenia hirsuta', 'Tribulus terrestris', and possible 'Scabiosa plumosa'; 7. 'Pryola media' of Swartz; 8. 'Pyrola folio rotundo'; "always a matter of wonder what all Rivinius's 'Pyrolae' were".

Turner's family in far better health and spirits than could be expected after "the dreadful loss of his only son by fire".

[On recto of second folio] List of specimens, corresponds with Smith's observations above [in Winch's hand].

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Sir Joseph Banks
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
20 Jan 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/1/77, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Urges Smith to reread his last letter [not extant] where Smith will find that Banks did not draw parallels between Smith and [Richard] Salisbury. Had Banks known how deep the quarrel between Smith and Salisbury had become he would never have undertaken the "hopeless task" of effecting a reconciliation, and now relinquishes it. Refers Smith to his advice in last letter, viz to refrain from personal altercations but by no means avoid potential discussion. Remarks that whilst he does not "feel the esteem for Salisbury [he] once did" he does not "despise his indefatigable industry".

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Sir Thomas Gage
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
[1806]
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/ADD/37, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Sending specimens of "fly" 'Ophrys' he collected in Portugal, listed as 'O. muscifera', 'O. apifera', 'O. aranifera', 'O. vespifera', and 'O. vernixia' with brief notes. He has just purchased a "fine collection" of New Holland plants.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Dawson Turner
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
5 Feb 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/10/39, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Grief at the death of his eldest son. His wife and other children only narrowly escaped [the fire]. His family are now recuperating at Coltishall, [Norfolk], is concerned for the well-being of his wife. Endeavouring to take comfort in botany. Will soon return [William Fitt] Drake's manuscript. Moved by and grateful for Smith's expressions of affection and friendship.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Samuel Goodenough
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
4 Apr 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/11/51, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Comments on Smith's Latinity in the "Flora Graeca" and justifies his use of "etc." for saving the trouble of listing every author of authority who has written on Greek flora. Advice on the delination of [John] Sibthorp's name. Small alteration to title page, and to the title of "Prodromus Florae Graecae".

Longs to hear when Smith will be in London. Attended Linnean Society meeting in March, "where to my astonishment, [Richard] Salisbury presented his printed squib against "E[nglish] Botany", ["Generic characters of "English Botany"]". Does not believe [William George] Maton, who was in the chair, should have allowed it to be read. [James] Dickson, [Thomas] Marsham, [Alexander] Macleay, and Sir T[homas Gery] Cullum were all of Goodenough's opinion that the Linnean Society "was not the arena on which any of its members ought to engage". [Jonas] Dryander also agrees with Goodenough. Pointed out to several fellows the weakness and impotency of the attack.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Samuel Goodenough
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
20 Apr 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/11/52, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Invites Smith to Rochester whilst he is in London. Leaves the decision of his becoming a vice-president of Linnean Society to Smith, warning that his clerical duties restrain his abscences from home. Believes there will be no end to the war "while Buonaparte loves to play at sceptres & balls", has never heard of "such imperious doings [...] since the world began".

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Sir James Edward Smith
To:
Samuel Goodenough
Date:
2 Sep 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/11/53, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

His periodical publications delayed by his long stay in London. Gives an account of his correspondence with and about [Richard] Salisbury: received copy of Salisbury's pamphlet ["The generic characters in the English Botany"] and letter signifying that if Smith made concessions he would not publish it. Contrary to Salisbury's claims Salisbury's sisters deny any knowledge of the business. Salisbury has told [Archibald] Menzies he would "give £500" to have never written it but has continued to attack Smith in "Paradisus Londinensis". Is particularly hurt by Sir Joseph Banks' obliviousness to the personal nature of the attacks but has long "been aware of the queerness of this great man" and is now glad he took Goodenough's advice and did name himself only the editor "Flora Graeca", as Banks wanted. As part of an experiment on Banks' humour requested a drawing for use in "Exotic Botany", which was grudgingly granted. Believes his work on 'Globba marantina' and other 'Scitamineae' in "Exotic Botany", in part assisted by [William] Roscoe's paper to Linnean Society, is excellent. [Francis] Buchanan has given him his whole collection of Nepal and Mysore plants, all his manuscript descriptions, and nearly 200 drawings for publication in "Exotic Botany".

Literary plans for winter: intends to finish "Flora Britannica", write a popular introduction to botany, to finish and publish Linnaeus' "Lapland tour", besides going on with "Flora Graeca" and his two periodical works ["Exotic Botany" and "English Botany"]. The first fasciculi of "Flora Graeca" has just printed but with possible errors to correct. Struggled with the 'Umbellatae', 'Silene', and 'Dianthus' in "Prodromus Florae Graecae". The sore on his leg has completely healed but left a "tremendous scar". Finances of the Linnean Society extremely healthy. The alarming state of the nation; "we have only the choice of evils, and perhaps not even that". The new Bishop of Norwich [Henry Bathurst (1744-1837)] a "very amiable, benignant character".

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Samuel Goodenough
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
9 Sep 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/11/54, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Received Smith's letter of 2 September. Describes charms of the neighbourhood of Boxlet, his new living. Discusses Smith's dispute with Salisbury: Salisbury's use of his sisters' names in a false manner "degrades him from the rank of gentleman"; believes Salisbury wishes he never wrote his pamphlet ["Generic characters of English Botany"] but does not know how to retract it; does not intend to read any of Salisbury's "Paradisus Londinensis"; has thought him "too wild to take a lead" since a conversation with him about Salisbury changing the nomenclature of 'Erica'; advises Smith not to enter into a squabble with Sir Joseph Banks [over his unsympathetic attitude towards to Salisbury dispute], "like all great men, he in his way is open to the tittle tattle of designing persons"; Smith should mortify Salisbury with "contemptuous silence"; blames [William George] Maton for allowing the pamphlet into the Linnean Society whilst he was in the chair.

Smith should use the verncaular form of [John] Sibthorp and [Peter Simon] Pallas in his Errata, suggests wording for an explanatory note. His aquaintance with the Bishop of Norwich [Henry Bathurst (1744-1837)]. A botanist, Mrs Brereton, is coming to Boxley. In Boxley has observed 'Hieracium umbellatum', 'Chrysosplenium oppositifolium', 'Hedypnois hieracioides', and 'Crepis biennis'. Has looked in vain in Rochester for 'Viola hirta'. Thinks 'Orchis militaris' is not a variety. [Thomas] Marsham visited after staying with [Aylmer Bourke] Lambert, deplores Lambert's weakness in dispossessing himself of his landed property by giving the inheritance to his "unworthy sisters". His own daughters are still looking for husbands, "impoverished times for such a commodity".

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Samuel Goodenough
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
11 Dec 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/11/55, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Praises the first part of "Florae Graecae prodromus", just received. Laments that because of "Bonaparte's rage" it cannot be made available in Europe, believes peace is impossible and he will not stop until he invades England and "the whole world is at his feet". Became involved in three contested elections for Parliament, upset to see Sir Sidney Smith lose his Rochester seat to a "monied banker who drove in the night before the election" [James Barnett (c 1760-1836)].

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Dawson Turner
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
17 Feb 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/ADD/106, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Urges Smith not to publish [George] Don's moss as a new 'Gymnostomum', as it would be "injurious" to Smith's credit. Hopeful his wife's recovery will continue following the death of their son. [Nathaniel] Winch claims that 'Pyrola media' is 'P. minor'; he says Smith has a parcel from [Olof] Swartz. Asks to borrow "Stockholm Transactions" vol 22 for [Erik] Acharius' papers on 'Collemata'. Encloses two or three 'Lichen'. Will send parcel for [James] Sowerby, and will resend all he has published to [James] Dickson if he wishes it, though does not expect any new publication from him.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London