Thomas Jenkinson Woodward, Bungay, [Suffolk], to James Edward Smith, 12 Great Marlborough Street, London

Item data

Ref No GB-110/JES/COR/18/64
Title Thomas Jenkinson Woodward, Bungay, [Suffolk], to James Edward Smith, 12 Great Marlborough Street, London
Letter date 6 Dec 1792
Author(s) Thomas Jenkinson Woodward 1745-1820
Number of Pages 4

See full metadata

See comments

Collection home page

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item

GB-110/JES/COR/18/64 from Thomas Jenkinson Woodward, Bungay, [Suffolk], to James Edward Smith, 12 Great Marlborough Street, London (6 December 1792)

Metadata for GB-110/JES/COR/18/64 from Thomas Jenkinson Woodward, Bungay, [Suffolk], to James Edward Smith, 12 Great Marlborough Street, London (6 December 1792) Close

Item data

Item Type: Document
From: Woodward, Thomas Jenkinson
Sent from: Bungay, Suffolk
To: Smith, Sir James Edward
Sent to location: London
Summary:

Hopes Smith will be rewarded for his lectures at Frogmore [to the Queen and Princesses], as he has "empty praise enough from the literary world". Leaves the setting of 'Woodwardia' entirely to Smith, though worries Smith will be censured for bestowing more honour than his botanical labours deserve.
Discusses 'Fucus abrotanifolius' and the various specimens of it, in detail. Obstructions of certain people in bookseller chain regarding increase of price of "English botany". [Edward] Donovan's [(1768-1837), natural historian] book on insects "very neat", but unsure of its worth as its main authority is [John] Berkenhout [(1726-1791), physician and naturalist], "a very suspicious authority".

Letter date: 6 Dec 1792
Languages: English
Prev Ref No: 18.133
Additional Information:
Note typeNote
Related MaterialFor Smith's reply of 9 January 1793, see JES/COR/18/65. Smith, J E, and Sowerby, J, (1790-1814). "English botany" London. Donovan, E, (1792-1796). "The natural history of British insects... together with the history of... minute insects as require investigation by the microscope..." London: [privately].
AdditionalSmith replied 9 Jan 1793