Item data
Item Type:
Document
From:
Johnes, Thomas
Sent from:
Hafod, Cardiganshire
To:
Smith, Sir James Edward
Summary:
Has been busy with assizes and visits at home and abroad. Does not agree with Trafford's notion that Lord Moira [Francis Edward Rawdon-Hastings, 1st Marquess of Hastings (1754-1826)], is a "precox Chevalier", having heard he was "too great a Jobber for the Character, and it came from those who employed him". Reckons that if the newspaper reports are true, and that Napoleon believed [William] Windham [(1750-1810), politician] wished him assassinated, it shows him "a poor mind", and his recent manifesto to the Swiss "proves him a Tyrant". Had once thought Napoleon "great", but now finds "melancholy" that only one person in history has "voluntarily quitted absolute power uncontaminated, and the new world has the glory of it" [probably referring to George Washington (1732-1799), first President of the United States]. Supposes Napoleon's ambition can "never be glutted", expects him to make a formal complaint against the liberty of the English press. Discusses his becoming a printer and arrival of the press; shall shortly commence printing his Froissart [(c 1337-c 1405), French chronicler] and is not concerned by reviews or newspapers.
Reminds Smith of Sir Joseph [Banks'] "famous letter" to the member of the [French] Institute on his election and adds that Banks has written to a lady thanking her for sending him a "most nonsensical ode on the death of Dolomieu". Delighted with the naked barley [Thomas William] Coke gave him, which will be a benefit to this country.
Letter date:
10 Oct 1802
Languages:
English
Prev Ref No:
16.137
Additional Information:
Note type | Note |
---|
Related Material | For Johnes' subsequent letter about Banks' letter see his of 2 December 1802, JES/COR/16/71. |
Finding Aids | Dawson, W R (1934). "Catalogue of the manuscripts in the Library of The Linnean Society - Part I. The Smith papers: The correspondence and miscellaneous papers of Sir James Edward Smith", London: Linnean Society. |
Additional | Smith replied 24 Nov [1802] |