K. Pearson to F. Galton, 14th July 1906.- External URL
- Correspondence Details
-
Sent From (Definite): Karl PearsonSent To (Definite): Sir Francis GaltonDate: 14 Jul 1906
- Current Holder(s)
-
Holder (Definite): University College London: Special Collections
- No links match your filters. Clear Filters
-
Sent fromKarl Pearson
14 Jul 1906
Description:
[re: Huxley’s proposal for new university in London, his part in this]
‘...
I have put in six more lines [in a proof of a biography of Weldon] about the Evolution Committee emphasising what your aims were & how they were rendered unavailing by the numbers pulling in different directions & the struggle of different schools. To my mind the absence of such an experimental farm as you suggested has been the great drawback of the past years. We want a land “Marine Biological Association”. But it would never have been possible to combine the thoroughness of Weldon with the slipshod character of the rival school. Friction would have destroyed everything. The only hope is that a Dhorn may arrive some day with the energy & force of character to carry it out which marks him.
The worst is that the Americans have already got it under the Carnegie Institution, but so far they have done nothing profitable with it because our friend Davenport is not a clear strong thinker. The success of these things always lies in the strength of the individual who determines the whole. Dohrn must have been splendid.
...’
-
Sent toSir Francis Galton
14 Jul 1906
Description:
[re: Huxley’s proposal for new university in London, his part in this]
‘...
I have put in six more lines [in a proof of a biography of Weldon] about the Evolution Committee emphasising what your aims were & how they were rendered unavailing by the numbers pulling in different directions & the struggle of different schools. To my mind the absence of such an experimental farm as you suggested has been the great drawback of the past years. We want a land “Marine Biological Association”. But it would never have been possible to combine the thoroughness of Weldon with the slipshod character of the rival school. Friction would have destroyed everything. The only hope is that a Dhorn may arrive some day with the energy & force of character to carry it out which marks him.
The worst is that the Americans have already got it under the Carnegie Institution, but so far they have done nothing profitable with it because our friend Davenport is not a clear strong thinker. The success of these things always lies in the strength of the individual who determines the whole. Dohrn must have been splendid.
...’
-
