Showing 11 results

Green leather volume, with embossing and gold decoration. Printed illustration from 'Happy New Year' card pasted to inside front cover. Bookplate, 'Ex Libris Bryan William James Hall', with coat of arms and illustration, pasted to front free endpaper.

Numerous autographs, mostly in the form of ends of letters and addresses on envelopes, pasted into book. Notes beneath items (sometimes also pasted in) often identify writers. Complete letters etc have been described in individual records dependent to this one, referenced by their folio numbers; signatures and addressees are referenced by linked authority record only. Some names remain undeciphered or unidentified.

Compiled by a sister of C. W. King, see part letter from King on f. 14r, 'I enclose the autograph of a distinguished Grecian for your book. With love I am, my dear Sister, yours affect[ionate]ly C. W. King'. Although no first name appears, C. W. King's only sister appears to have been Anne, sometimes known as Annette (1824-1874). A letter from W. G. Clark to C. W. King, preserved on the verso of the flyleaf, was sent with 'some autographs for your friend', and there are also envelopes and letters addressed to William Aldis Wright and other members of Trinity suggesting King was actively gathering material for his sister. The bulk of the collection appears to have been assembled between the late 1860s and early 1870s.

Two letters.

Sunnyhill, St Stephen's Road, Bournemouth - Thanks him for the first section of the GB, and congratulates both him and Mrs Frazer, for he knows 'how eagerly she watches all that you do'; asks him to attend section II of the British Academy on the 22nd to ensure a quorum for [A. E.] Housman's nomination, in view of the recent deaths of [John] Peile, [John] Mayor, [Samuel] Butcher.

Reminiscences of H. R. Luard.

Letters from five people: John E. B. Mayor, 25 May 1873; A. R. Ashwell, 1 Mar. 1858; L. P. Baker, 22 Dec. 1857; George Peacock, 9 Feb. 1858; Frederic Norgate: 18 and 22 Oct. 1867.
Accompanied by extensive notes of proposed edits for an unidentified book.

5 Jordan's Yard. Dated 16 March 1898 - Has read books I-III of [his edition of Pausanias]; thinks he may have omitted biblical parallels for fear of giving offence, but notes [Johann] Westein cites heathen parallels and people use his work without scruple. Accompanied by six pages of notes.

5 Jordan's Yard. Dated 19 March 1898 - Has read half of Pausanias and more than half of his book [commentary?], has seldom learnt so much that was new in so short a time.

5 Jordan's Yard. Dated 12 March 1898 - Has been reading his edition of ['Pausanias'], and thanks him for his notes which make it easy to understand the points at issue; recommends reading Limbourne [recte Limburg] Brouwer.

[Sent from Whittingehame, A. Balfour's house in Lothian]:- He and Nora were very busy up to the end of the previous year, until they escaped to Prestonkirk on New Year's Eve. They arrived in Cambridge on 26 December, on Thursday morning they were completing their arrangements for the Conference of Schoolmistresses on the following day, and their friends arrived that evening 'and educational talk began lasting without intermission till Friday evening...' On Saturday he began to prepare his answers for the Cambridge University Commissioners, and finished them on Monday morning, before his journey to Scotland.

Reports on the conference itself, which 'made up a compact and business-like meeting at the Townhall.' States that he was impressed with the schoolmistresses, who 'said what they had to say in a clear, short, practical way'. They 'fixed a limit of ten minutes for the speeches, but the only speaker who showed the least desire to exceed it was a Man..' Mentions that among the speeches made was one by Professor John Mayor. A short paragraph about the conference was sent to the newspapers, and got into the Times. Among those who came were James Wilson from Rugby with his sister Annie, who is head of a school at Grantham; Annie Marshall from Leeds, Professor Green from Oxford 'with his professorial honours fresh upon him', and Eve 'who used to be at Wellington College. States that Arthur was not able to come because Charlotte was not well enough to be left.

Reports that they have 'delightful weather' there in Prestonkirk, and that his brothers-in-law are all assembled. Claims that he has got the burden of his article pretty much off his mind. Describes the 'lovely winter view' from his window. Sends on Nora's love. Adds that they did not hear any political secrets at Hatfield, but reports that Myers, whom they had seen in London 'had seen Dizzy at Windsor Castle and reports that he bore a remarkably swaggering and triumphant aspect', and they are afraid that 'that Hebrew has been brewing some ill for his step-native land!'

Argues that the grounds on which opposition to the appointment of a Syndicate to consider Degrees in Science are based 'are in each case untenable.' States that the Master of Downing [Alexander Hill] and three other resident members of the Senate base their opposition 'on a narrow interpretation of the term "Science", which they understand to mean "Natural Science" only to the exclusion of Mathematics.' Claims that this is an 'unwarranted interpretation'.

Refers also to the assertion by the Master of Clare [Edward Atkinson] and eleven other resident members of the Senate that the matter in hand raises again the issue decided in the previous October. Refers to five of these eleven men - Swete, Mayor, Mollison, Neil and Bateson - who also signed the circular issued at that time by the Committee formed to oppose the proposal to remove the obligation to study both classical languages as a prerequisite for sitting the Previous Examination. Argues that the matter decided at that time was relevant to Degrees in Arts only. Adds that Professor Browne, who signed the above-mentioned circular, authorises Sidgwick to state that he always understood that the question of Degrees in Science was left open. Concludes that it is 'unreasonable to contend that the issue now raised is one on which the opinion of the Senate has been already given.'