E. Nettleship to K. Pearson, 25th March 1907.- External URL
- Correspondence Details
-
Sent From (Definite): Edward NettleshipSent To (Definite): Karl PearsonDate: 25 Mar 1907
- Current Holder(s)
-
Holder (Definite): University College London: Special Collections
- No links match your filters. Clear Filters
-
Sent fromEdward Nettleship
25 Mar 1907
Description:
‘My dear Pearson,
Many thanks for all the information about piebald animals; applying the shorthorn results to matings between negro & white we shd. expect a large majority of children intermediate between father & mother (corresponding to loan[?]) & only an occasional piebald.; & so far as one knows the human facts are not inconsistent with this, tho one cannot say they prove it, & the “sport” explanation of human pibalds may very likely be the commonly true one.
I want very much to get as near the bottom of the human piebald question as possible. I have gone to the originals of all I have found recorded, but you may have others – I wish you wd. kindly send me the names of all the authors you have who give cases of piebald negroes (or anytg. called “partial albinism” or “spotted negroes” &c.); full references need not be given at first for if you have any I have not got I will ask for full reference, to them after.
I think I better be responsible for the piebalds because the questions of disease & of the white having come on after birth come in.
The universally albinotic negroes are, as you say, common enough & have all the ordinary albino characters, often with some scattered pigment spots of small size. But such scattered pigment spots do not, I think, form a stage towards the real piebalds.
The great majority of the piebalds published as “partial albinism” are really Leuco-derma = an acquired disease. Of the residue in which there is more or less reason to believe the pied condition was present at birth I have not found a single one with albinotic eyes nor a single one in which any kinsfolk were ordinary albinos. The one you refer to as coming on “next sheet” is therefore very exciting unless it is the American one by Joseph Jones? Which I don’t count amongst the typical piebalds tho the case is certainly quite unusual as it reads. I suppose the name will be on the sheet when it comes.
I must be stupid for I cannot quite take your meaning in the sentence that I have marked double red line in your letter – “albinotic negro not comparable with white” &c.; unless by “white” you mean “normal white” which wd. make it clear.
...’
-
Sent toKarl Pearson
25 Mar 1907
Description:
‘My dear Pearson,
Many thanks for all the information about piebald animals; applying the shorthorn results to matings between negro & white we shd. expect a large majority of children intermediate between father & mother (corresponding to loan[?]) & only an occasional piebald.; & so far as one knows the human facts are not inconsistent with this, tho one cannot say they prove it, & the “sport” explanation of human pibalds may very likely be the commonly true one.
I want very much to get as near the bottom of the human piebald question as possible. I have gone to the originals of all I have found recorded, but you may have others – I wish you wd. kindly send me the names of all the authors you have who give cases of piebald negroes (or anytg. called “partial albinism” or “spotted negroes” &c.); full references need not be given at first for if you have any I have not got I will ask for full reference, to them after.
I think I better be responsible for the piebalds because the questions of disease & of the white having come on after birth come in.
The universally albinotic negroes are, as you say, common enough & have all the ordinary albino characters, often with some scattered pigment spots of small size. But such scattered pigment spots do not, I think, form a stage towards the real piebalds.
The great majority of the piebalds published as “partial albinism” are really Leuco-derma = an acquired disease. Of the residue in which there is more or less reason to believe the pied condition was present at birth I have not found a single one with albinotic eyes nor a single one in which any kinsfolk were ordinary albinos. The one you refer to as coming on “next sheet” is therefore very exciting unless it is the American one by Joseph Jones? Which I don’t count amongst the typical piebalds tho the case is certainly quite unusual as it reads. I suppose the name will be on the sheet when it comes.
I must be stupid for I cannot quite take your meaning in the sentence that I have marked double red line in your letter – “albinotic negro not comparable with white” &c.; unless by “white” you mean “normal white” which wd. make it clear.
...’
-
