Search: 1800-1809 in date 
Sorted by:

Showing 4160 of 1347 items

From:
Alexander Macleay
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
31 Dec 1802
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/AM/31, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Apologises for delay in answering Smith's letter of 23 [December 1802]; gratified by the confidence Smith puts in him and hopes to ease his anxiety over [Richard] Salisbury's report that remarks had been made at Linnean Society regarding Smith's political beliefs. Uncertain what Salisbury is alluding to, unless he meant "the old story" of Smith's "Tour", and he has never heard any insinuation at the Society regarding Smith's political involvement; the only occasion being during the application for the Society's charter, when Sir Joseph Banks expressed concern that the King [George III (1738-1820)] would recollect the "Tour" on seeing Smith's name, being the only time Banks has commented on Smith's politics. Banks and many others regret Smith's absence from London and its effect on the Society, which proves Smith's political sentiments are not dreaded.

Believes Salisbury is wrong regarding blackballing of [Robert John] Thornton [(c 1768-1837), physician and writer on botany], who was not rejected on account of his politics, but because he is "a Quack in Botany as well as in medicine", and for publishing himself as FLS before even being proposed to the Society; it was not known that he was brought forward by Smith. Reassures Smith he "stand[s] as high in the opinion of the Society at large as [he] ever did", and as long as he chooses to continue President, "there is not the least probability of any other person being proposed", and does not see what consequence it is to the Society to know whether Smith is a Whig or a Tory. His own political beliefs: inclines to Toryism, yet "highly respect[s] the true old English spirit of Whigism". Believes the only politics the Linnean Society should attend to is the proper government of its own body. Encloses new version nomination certificate.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Alexander Macleay
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
27 Sep 1803
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/AM/32, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Very busy with his official duties lately. Apologises for delay in printing of "Linnean Transactions", discusses and raises queries on [William] Roxburgh's Indian silkworms paper, due to be third paper in the new volume. Glad to learn Smith was well pleased with his Liverpool excursion, reminds Smith to pay attention to bye-laws when making out [William] Roscoe's nomination certificate for Linnean Society.

Forwarded Smith's letter to Ventenat, although doubtful of Smith obtaining books from Paris as he has no agent there, as in the last war. No doubt of Bonaparte's intention to invade, but does not believe "that there was ever an occasion on which the Country was more unanimous than it is at present", and that little issue will come of any attack.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Alexander Macleay
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
9 Jan 1804
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/AM/33, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Thanks for turkey. Agrees that Cuvier is highly deserving of becoming a FMLS but reminds him there is a limit of 50 FMLS. Queries Latin form of "habitat in Newfoundland" and "habitat in Long Island" for [Edward] Rudge's paper on American 'Carex' for "Linnean Transactions".

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Alexander Macleay
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
1 Dec 1804
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/AM/34, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Except for Smith's communication and "a very absurd" paper on migration of birds by [John] Lyon there have been new new papers at last two meetings of Linnean Society, and they have nothing for the next meeting. Council meeting on Tuesday to discuss purchase of a house in Nassau Street. Knows nothing yet of Dr [William] Turton's [(1762-1835), conchologist] certificate but when it appears will speak out. Believes that any member who canvasses for blackballing a candidate after signing their certificate should be expelled from the Society; according to present regulations it now takes a third of members present to blackball a candidate.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Alexander Macleay
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
17 Jan 1805
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/AM/35, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Thanks for Smith's letter of 13 [January 1805], which came "very opportunely", as without it they would have had nothing to read at Linnean Society meeting. "Linnean Transactions" volumes being forwarded as instructed. Requests Smith's assistance in obtaining enough support to prevent election of Dr Maver.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Alexander Macleay
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
30 Mar 1805
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/AM/36, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Apologises for delay in replying to Smith's letter of 21 February [1805] accompanying [John William] Lewin's [(1770-1819), naturalist and artist] plates; he had begun describing the insects but "the brother here became jealous of my interference and is now to publish the whole in his own name" ["Prodromus entomology" (1805)].

Confirms that the Ambrose Serle [(1742-1812), colonial officer and religious writer] whose name Smith saw on the box is the same man Smith knew in Bristol in 1773, and is a great friend of his. Dr Maver not elected. The Linnean Society has agreed terms for new rooms at 9 Gerrard Street, Soho, and the Horticultural Society are to pay 25 guineas per annum to hold their meetings in the meeting room.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Alexander Macleay
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
1 Nov 1805
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/AM/37, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

"No impartial person can approve of" [Richard] Salisbury's conduct towards Smith; approves of Smith's determination to not take any further notice. Requests paper from Smith to be read at next Linnean Society meeting at their new house in Gerard Street, [Soho], "which is fitted up in a very capital style". He continues extremely busy with his official work.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Alexander Macleay
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
23 Nov 1805
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/AM/38, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Sorry to hear Smith's health continues bad. Fears Smith misunderstood some of his expressions in his last letter and reassures him that he has not shown any of his letters regarding his dispute with [Richard] Salisbury; the only blame imputed to Smith is for "taking up the Gauntlet at all". Smith's "character as a Botanist stands too highly to be at all affected by anything Mr S has said or can say", pleased to hear Smith will not take the matter further. Mr [John] Loudon proposed FLS on Smith's recommendation.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Alexander Macleay
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
14 Dec 1806
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/AM/39, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Queries on [Thomas] Hardwicke's paper [for "Linnean Transactions"]; suggests a name and character for his new species [of Jerboa]. Sends three papers from which extracts will be printed for Smith to prepare. Intentions for next volume of "Linnean Transactions".

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Alexander Macleay
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
15 Jan 1808
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/AM/46, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Thanks for turkey, which they had on Christmas Day. Praises Smith's "Introduction to Botany", not surprised the preface has been complimented so much; he has heard that [Richard] Salisbury is "not quite pleased with some parts of it".

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Alexander Rogers
To:
Sir John Herschel
Date:
[11 November 1807]
Source of text:
RS:HS 14.386
Summary:

Has arrived in Scotland. Recently witnessed a large comet. Thanks JH and family for hospitality at Slough.

Contributor:
John Herschel Project
From:
Alexander Rogers
To:
Sir John Herschel
Date:
[1 January 1808]
Source of text:
RS:HS 14.387
Summary:

Thanks JH for information concerning the comet. Planned to build telescope with object glasses separated from each other. Optician said this would not correct spherical and chromatic aberrations. Wants advice.

Contributor:
John Herschel Project
From:
Alexander Rogers
To:
Sir John Herschel
Date:
[22 February 1808]
Source of text:
RS:HS 14.388
Summary:

Wishes to teach privately. Asks William Herschel to write a recommendation certificate. Weather has been problematic. Sends greeting to the elder Herschels.

Contributor:
John Herschel Project
From:
Alexander Rogers
To:
Sir John Herschel
Date:
1808-3
Source of text:
RS:HS 14.389
Summary:

Concerned over illness of William Herschel. Discusses 'Evolution of Curve Lines.' Describes [Christiaan] Huygens's terms for evolution of curves. Offers advice to avoid problems with them.

Contributor:
John Herschel Project
From:
Alexander Rogers
To:
Sir John Herschel
Date:
[5 November 1808]
Source of text:
RS:HS 14.390
Summary:

Grateful for letter from Brighton. Agrees with JH concerning comet. Is suspicious of those who claim it is the same comet that was seen one year previously.

Contributor:
John Herschel Project
From:
Alexander Rogers
To:
Sir John Herschel
Date:
[2 January 1809]
Source of text:
RS:HS 14.391
Summary:

Describes the difficulty of [P. Laplace's] Mécanique céleste. Has a new pupil. Discusses proper boundary of a front view mirror.

Contributor:
John Herschel Project
From:
Alexander Rogers
To:
Sir John Herschel
Date:
[25 March 1809]
Source of text:
RS:HS 14.392
Summary:

Discusses problem of the ellipse and offers a method of solving it. States the proper boundary of a front mirror is too difficult to ascertain. Still having problems with teaching.

Contributor:
John Herschel Project
From:
Alexander Rogers
To:
Sir John Herschel
Date:
[20 September 1809]
Source of text:
RS:HS 14.393
Summary:

Describes lunar rainbow seen on 22 August. Congratulates JH on his mathematical attainments. Describes his enjoyment of mathematics. Hopes JH will continue to correspond.

Contributor:
John Herschel Project
From:
Amelia Hume
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
20 Oct [1803]
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/5/90, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Fears invasion by French but concedes that Bonaparte "will have been so far a benefactor to Englishmen that he will have taught us the value of the blessings Providence allows us". A 'Myrtus', the only one to grow between three attempted by her and Lady [Sophia] de Clifford, has flowered. A 'Cobben' Smith gave her the seeds, a creeper with purple flowers, has been grown by [Amelia] Long [neé Hume (1762-1837) daughter of Amelia and Abraham Hume, watercolour painter], has asked her to draw it.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
Amelia Hume
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
7 Aug [1804]
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/5/91, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Sends specimen of 'Humea' and an elm-leaved 'Grewia' for determination. Has a 'Nymphea' very similar to 'Carnia' but the flower is milk-white and nocturnal. Fears of invasion by the French, living in "anxious dread of the great little man's visit". Comments that the "great victory" achieved by the English merchant "China ships" fighting off [Charles-Alexandre Léon Durand] Linois' [French admiral] attack, without a convoy, was a "glory".

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London