Letter and/or further information available at http://linnean-online.org/62610/.
Also published in The Correspondence of Sir James Edward Smith, The Linnean Society's Archive Catalogue.
Please cite as “LINNEAN641,” in Ɛpsilon: The Linnean Society of London Collection accessed on 7 May 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/linnean-society/letters/LINNEAN641
His need to vent with Goodenough like the Suffolk baronet and wife of their acquaintance, who when apart write to each other every day with minimal formalities, and when Sir Thomas Frankland used to write to him with the "most delightful epistolia" of the moment. Recollects the day he spent with Yeates and Broussonet in the woods of Corby Castle, near Carlisle, where he caught and gave to [Thomas] Marsham 'Elater cuprens' and 'Scarabaeus arvicola', wonders why Marsham has only named Yorkshire for the former species and not mentioned him [in "Entomologica Britannia"]. Found 'Elater pectinicornis' on Cromford Moor near Matlock. Noticed that Dr [Samuel] Johnson [(1709-1784), author] explains the "shard-born beetle" of the poets as born or produced among broken stones or pots, Smith thinks it must mean "borne, or flying about, on shards, or shells (testae)".
Argues for his new 'Hookeria' [after William Jackson Hooker] and 'Brodiaea' genera being put forward in spite of [Richard] Salisbury having already published Smith's 'Brodiaea' as 'Hookera' [in "Paradisus Londinensis", after William Hooker (1779-1832), botanical artist]: wrote his papers on 'Hookeria' and 'Brodiaea' before hearing of Salisbury's intention for 'Hookera' and would not normally object except that Salisbury's Hooker is not a botanist and an associate "in an infamous fraud" on Sir Joseph Banks [stealing figures of 'Byblis' and other plants and presenting them as their own]. Urges Goodenough to read his letter in the "Monthly Magazine" [April 1808 edition] which addresses an erroneous statement in the botanical report in [the February 1808] issue of the magazine conjecturing on the nature of the dispute between himself and Salisbury, which is independent of botany.
The Linnean Society of London[View Ɛpsilon collection]
Also published in The Correspondence of Sir James Edward Smith, The Linnean Society's Archive Catalogue.