Letter 1 of 1

Patricia A. Patrician, PhD, RN, FAAN
In memory of her dad, Frank R. Markiewicz

Description: Florence Nightingale writes to Mrs. James about patient admittance, payment, demographics and lengths of stay at the Institute for the Care of Sick Gentlewomen. Nightingale was superintendent at this institution for a year between her training in Germany and nursing in the Crimean War.

Transcript:

1 Upper Harley St.
Sept. 20, 1853

Dear Mrs. James:

The half-guinea wards have been adopted, and to such an extent that we have now only two guinea patients, and soon shall have none perhaps, as an Institution always sinks to the lowest rate for which it is intended.

You will see by the papers what constitutes the "Necessary" for admission, viz : two letters of introduction, a certificate from a medical man, and a guarantee for payment. I enclose the forms of Application and of Guarantee. Nothing more is required. Though 6 out of 7 of our present cases are dying, it is not ostensibly the custom to take in cases, where no cure is expected - and the medical man is expected to certify that improvement, at least, may be hoped for.

All denominations of religion are received - the class, of course, which does come, is almost without exception, governesses.

We are thoroughly and completely busy and have five more patients coming in this week.

With many thanks for your kind note, believe me, dear Mrs. James,

Very truly yours
F. Nightingale

Patients are only admitted for two months but the term may be prolonged.

Letter 1 of 4

Larry G. Hornsby, CRNA (BSN 1981, BS 1985) and Carol Cochran Hornsby (BSN 1981)

Description: Nightingale writes to Mr. Whitfield, praising and making recommendations concerning a sanitary report written by his nephew, Thomas Gillham Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay. She also comments on Sydney Infirmary, recognizing the likeness of health abuses in all countries.

Transcript:

Copy - Miss Nightingale to Mr. Whitfield - 35 South Street - Park Lane - London W. - June 8/67
Dear Mr. Whitfield

I feel like a criminal for not having answered your note before about your nephew, Mr. Hewlett's, truly magnificent work as Health Officer of Bombay. It is most instructive, full & graphic. The illustrations are a great addition, as it is always well to speak to people through their eyes. It is much better & more full of information than the Reports of Officers of Health in England usually are, as to what is to be done as well as what is to be observed. It is very good on the subjects to which it is especially devoted, namely nuisances resulting from bad management & want of sanitary works.

I do not allude to the appendix on trades, simply because it is a matter on which, of course, I am no judge. But it forms a most important addition to the Sanitary Report.

If you see your way to making this suggestion I should add, not as if it were a want in the Report, because, of course, as Health Officer he has reported completely, but as a suggestion as to how it should be followed up immediately; before we can know really what Bombay & other Indian cities require, we must have Engineering reports showing all the existing Engineering defects & the plans of water supply, sewerage, house drainage, & surface paving, improved streets, &c &c necessary to make the cities what they should be. We have sent minutes to this effect over & over again, not that European Health reports embody the Engineering points one bit more than Indian Health Reports do but that Sidney Herbert established a new principle in our Reportings which, had he lived, he certainly would have extended to India. He insisted upon the evils to be pointed out, the engineering remedies to be proposed, the constructive arrangements to be carried out, always appearing in the same Report.

Otherwise a Sanitary Report is only a report to somebody else, that, somebody else is to examine into & report what are the essential improvements necessary.

I fear too there is a disposition in India not to take the advice of those whom she has herself constituted as her advisors, e.g. a Health Officer, or Sanitary Commissioner ought to be the responsible adviser, if constituted the adviser. Instead of that, they send the foolscap round India to see how many heads it will fit, of course it fits a good many, & then they decide to by the majority (fools heads).

Also: I think there is a tendency "to make the best of things" (not in Mr. Hewlett) "to make things easy & pleasant" &c &c &c. When I see people "making the best of things" then I know that somebody is to pay for it somewhere.

Sir Bartle Frere has arrived in England & I hope he will introduce something better into our India Council here.

You cannot praise your nephews work too highly, I wish I could send him something as full of good as he has sent me. I have never thanked you for your long & valuable letters on the Sydney Infirmary which formed the basis of my letters to Bd of Directors.

I send you a printed paper which the Colonial Secretary sent me on the Infirmary. It is to be hoped such a state of things is over. It is curious how like abuses are in all countries.

I send it only for your information and it does not appear that it reports evils now in existence. Perhaps you will return it to me at your leisure. I hope that you may be able to go to Liverpool to inspect the Workhouse Infirmary.

Ever yours faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Letter 2 of 4

Larry G. Hornsby, CRNA (BSN 1981, BS 1985) and Carol Cochran Hornsby (BSN 1981)

Description: Nightingale writes to Mr. Whitfield, praising and making recommendations concerning a sanitary report written by his nephew, Thomas Gillham Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay. She also comments on Sydney Infirmary, recognizing the likeness of health abuses in all countries.

Transcript:

Copy - Miss Nightingale to Mr. Whitfield - 35 South Street - Park Lane - London W. - June 8/67
Dear Mr. Whitfield

I feel like a criminal for not having answered your note before about your nephew, Mr. Hewlett's, truly magnificent work as Health Officer of Bombay. It is most instructive, full & graphic. The illustrations are a great addition, as it is always well to speak to people through their eyes. It is much better & more full of information than the Reports of Officers of Health in England usually are, as to what is to be done as well as what is to be observed. It is very good on the subjects to which it is especially devoted, namely nuisances resulting from bad management & want of sanitary works.

I do not allude to the appendix on trades, simply because it is a matter on which, of course, I am no judge. But it forms a most important addition to the Sanitary Report.

If you see your way to making this suggestion I should add, not as if it were a want in the Report, because, of course, as Health Officer he has reported completely, but as a suggestion as to how it should be followed up immediately; before we can know really what Bombay & other Indian cities require, we must have Engineering reports showing all the existing Engineering defects & the plans of water supply, sewerage, house drainage, & surface paving, improved streets, &c &c necessary to make the cities what they should be. We have sent minutes to this effect over & over again, not that European Health reports embody the Engineering points one bit more than Indian Health Reports do but that Sidney Herbert established a new principle in our Reportings which, had he lived, he certainly would have extended to India. He insisted upon the evils to be pointed out, the engineering remedies to be proposed, the constructive arrangements to be carried out, always appearing in the same Report.

Otherwise a Sanitary Report is only a report to somebody else, that, somebody else is to examine into & report what are the essential improvements necessary.

I fear too there is a disposition in India not to take the advice of those whom she has herself constituted as her advisors, e.g. a Health Officer, or Sanitary Commissioner ought to be the responsible adviser, if constituted the adviser. Instead of that, they send the foolscap round India to see how many heads it will fit, of course it fits a good many, & then they decide to by the majority (fools heads).

Also: I think there is a tendency "to make the best of things" (not in Mr. Hewlett) "to make things easy & pleasant" &c &c &c. When I see people "making the best of things" then I know that somebody is to pay for it somewhere.

Sir Bartle Frere has arrived in England & I hope he will introduce something better into our India Council here.

You cannot praise your nephews work too highly, I wish I could send him something as full of good as he has sent me. I have never thanked you for your long & valuable letters on the Sydney Infirmary which formed the basis of my letters to Bd of Directors.

I send you a printed paper which the Colonial Secretary sent me on the Infirmary. It is to be hoped such a state of things is over. It is curious how like abuses are in all countries.

I send it only for your information and it does not appear that it reports evils now in existence. Perhaps you will return it to me at your leisure. I hope that you may be able to go to Liverpool to inspect the Workhouse Infirmary.

Ever yours faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Letter 3 of 4

Larry G. Hornsby, CRNA (BSN 1981, BS 1985) and Carol Cochran Hornsby (BSN 1981)

Description: Nightingale writes to Mr. Whitfield, praising and making recommendations concerning a sanitary report written by his nephew, Thomas Gillham Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay. She also comments on Sydney Infirmary, recognizing the likeness of health abuses in all countries.

Transcript:

Copy - Miss Nightingale to Mr. Whitfield - 35 South Street - Park Lane - London W. - June 8/67
Dear Mr. Whitfield

I feel like a criminal for not having answered your note before about your nephew, Mr. Hewlett's, truly magnificent work as Health Officer of Bombay. It is most instructive, full & graphic. The illustrations are a great addition, as it is always well to speak to people through their eyes. It is much better & more full of information than the Reports of Officers of Health in England usually are, as to what is to be done as well as what is to be observed. It is very good on the subjects to which it is especially devoted, namely nuisances resulting from bad management & want of sanitary works.

I do not allude to the appendix on trades, simply because it is a matter on which, of course, I am no judge. But it forms a most important addition to the Sanitary Report.

If you see your way to making this suggestion I should add, not as if it were a want in the Report, because, of course, as Health Officer he has reported completely, but as a suggestion as to how it should be followed up immediately; before we can know really what Bombay & other Indian cities require, we must have Engineering reports showing all the existing Engineering defects & the plans of water supply, sewerage, house drainage, & surface paving, improved streets, &c &c necessary to make the cities what they should be. We have sent minutes to this effect over & over again, not that European Health reports embody the Engineering points one bit more than Indian Health Reports do but that Sidney Herbert established a new principle in our Reportings which, had he lived, he certainly would have extended to India. He insisted upon the evils to be pointed out, the engineering remedies to be proposed, the constructive arrangements to be carried out, always appearing in the same Report.

Otherwise a Sanitary Report is only a report to somebody else, that, somebody else is to examine into & report what are the essential improvements necessary.

I fear too there is a disposition in India not to take the advice of those whom she has herself constituted as her advisors, e.g. a Health Officer, or Sanitary Commissioner ought to be the responsible adviser, if constituted the adviser. Instead of that, they send the foolscap round India to see how many heads it will fit, of course it fits a good many, & then they decide to by the majority (fools heads).

Also: I think there is a tendency "to make the best of things" (not in Mr. Hewlett) "to make things easy & pleasant" &c &c &c. When I see people "making the best of things" then I know that somebody is to pay for it somewhere.

Sir Bartle Frere has arrived in England & I hope he will introduce something better into our India Council here.

You cannot praise your nephews work too highly, I wish I could send him something as full of good as he has sent me. I have never thanked you for your long & valuable letters on the Sydney Infirmary which formed the basis of my letters to Bd of Directors.

I send you a printed paper which the Colonial Secretary sent me on the Infirmary. It is to be hoped such a state of things is over. It is curious how like abuses are in all countries.

I send it only for your information and it does not appear that it reports evils now in existence. Perhaps you will return it to me at your leisure. I hope that you may be able to go to Liverpool to inspect the Workhouse Infirmary.

Ever yours faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Letter 4 of 4

Larry G. Hornsby, CRNA (BSN 1981, BS 1985) and Carol Cochran Hornsby (BSN 1981)

Description: Nightingale writes to Mr. Whitfield, praising and making recommendations concerning a sanitary report written by his nephew, Thomas Gillham Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay. She also comments on Sydney Infirmary, recognizing the likeness of health abuses in all countries.

Transcript:

Copy - Miss Nightingale to Mr. Whitfield - 35 South Street - Park Lane - London W. - June 8/67
Dear Mr. Whitfield

I feel like a criminal for not having answered your note before about your nephew, Mr. Hewlett's, truly magnificent work as Health Officer of Bombay. It is most instructive, full & graphic. The illustrations are a great addition, as it is always well to speak to people through their eyes. It is much better & more full of information than the Reports of Officers of Health in England usually are, as to what is to be done as well as what is to be observed. It is very good on the subjects to which it is especially devoted, namely nuisances resulting from bad management & want of sanitary works.

I do not allude to the appendix on trades, simply because it is a matter on which, of course, I am no judge. But it forms a most important addition to the Sanitary Report.

If you see your way to making this suggestion I should add, not as if it were a want in the Report, because, of course, as Health Officer he has reported completely, but as a suggestion as to how it should be followed up immediately; before we can know really what Bombay & other Indian cities require, we must have Engineering reports showing all the existing Engineering defects & the plans of water supply, sewerage, house drainage, & surface paving, improved streets, &c &c necessary to make the cities what they should be. We have sent minutes to this effect over & over again, not that European Health reports embody the Engineering points one bit more than Indian Health Reports do but that Sidney Herbert established a new principle in our Reportings which, had he lived, he certainly would have extended to India. He insisted upon the evils to be pointed out, the engineering remedies to be proposed, the constructive arrangements to be carried out, always appearing in the same Report.

Otherwise a Sanitary Report is only a report to somebody else, that, somebody else is to examine into & report what are the essential improvements necessary.

I fear too there is a disposition in India not to take the advice of those whom she has herself constituted as her advisors, e.g. a Health Officer, or Sanitary Commissioner ought to be the responsible adviser, if constituted the adviser. Instead of that, they send the foolscap round India to see how many heads it will fit, of course it fits a good many, & then they decide to by the majority (fools heads).

Also: I think there is a tendency "to make the best of things" (not in Mr. Hewlett) "to make things easy & pleasant" &c &c &c. When I see people "making the best of things" then I know that somebody is to pay for it somewhere.

Sir Bartle Frere has arrived in England & I hope he will introduce something better into our India Council here.

You cannot praise your nephews work too highly, I wish I could send him something as full of good as he has sent me. I have never thanked you for your long & valuable letters on the Sydney Infirmary which formed the basis of my letters to Bd of Directors.

I send you a printed paper which the Colonial Secretary sent me on the Infirmary. It is to be hoped such a state of things is over. It is curious how like abuses are in all countries.

I send it only for your information and it does not appear that it reports evils now in existence. Perhaps you will return it to me at your leisure. I hope that you may be able to go to Liverpool to inspect the Workhouse Infirmary.

Ever yours faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Letter 1 of 3

Dr. Velinda J. Block (DNP 2010) and Mr. J. Branson Block

Description: In this letter, Nightingale explains to Madame Schwabe how to get funds to Princess Alice of Hesse Darmstadt, daughter of Queen Victoria, for her charity aiding the sick and wounded of the Austro-Prussian War. Nightingale also makes reference to friends from nursing school who were helping in the war hospitals.

Transcript:

Private - Embley - Romsey - Hampshire - Sept. 21/66

Dearest Madame Schwabe

Five minutes only have I to say that Princess Louis of Hesse Darmstadt joyfully accepts your kind offer of the £50 odd for the sick & wounded. It should be sent to herself, for she, it appears, does these things herself. She has great powers of business & of self-denial - & perhaps will dispense the money better than any one. She, thinking it is in England, says it will reach her directly & most safely thro' Buckingham Palace. But I enclose a letter to her by which, if you send it from where you are, it may reach her direct. But if it should, after all, be easier to send it by letter of exchange or London, then please destroy any letters enclosed, & send the money to me. And I will still send it thro' Buckingham Palace to her. Of course, the danger is that it may fall into the hands of some official, & not reach her own, if not sent by the Queen's bag. You will know best which to do. I believe the money is a perfect godsend to her - for her charities are quite drained. I doubt whether either the Queen or Prince Louis know their extent.

43 of my old friends, the Deaconesses of Kaiserwerth on the Rhine, (near Dusseldorf) served in the War Hospitals at Sadowa near Koniggratz. I wish you had time to go & see Kaiserwerth & my old mistress, Pastor Fliedner's widow.

Pray believe me Dearest Madame Schwabe
Ever yours
Florence Nightingale

Letter 2 of 3

Dr. Velinda J. Block (DNP 2010) and Mr. J. Branson Block

Description: In this letter, Nightingale explains to Madame Schwabe how to get funds to Princess Alice of Hesse Darmstadt, daughter of Queen Victoria, for her charity aiding the sick and wounded of the Austro-Prussian War. Nightingale also makes reference to friends from nursing school who were helping in the war hospitals.

Transcript:

Private - Embley - Romsey - Hampshire - Sept. 21/66

Dearest Madame Schwabe

Five minutes only have I to say that Princess Louis of Hesse Darmstadt joyfully accepts your kind offer of the £50 odd for the sick & wounded. It should be sent to herself, for she, it appears, does these things herself. She has great powers of business & of self-denial - & perhaps will dispense the money better than any one. She, thinking it is in England, says it will reach her directly & most safely thro' Buckingham Palace. But I enclose a letter to her by which, if you send it from where you are, it may reach her direct. But if it should, after all, be easier to send it by letter of exchange or London, then please destroy any letters enclosed, & send the money to me. And I will still send it thro' Buckingham Palace to her. Of course, the danger is that it may fall into the hands of some official, & not reach her own, if not sent by the Queen's bag. You will know best which to do. I believe the money is a perfect godsend to her - for her charities are quite drained. I doubt whether either the Queen or Prince Louis know their extent.

43 of my old friends, the Deaconesses of Kaiserwerth on the Rhine, (near Dusseldorf) served in the War Hospitals at Sadowa near Koniggratz. I wish you had time to go & see Kaiserwerth & my old mistress, Pastor Fliedner's widow.

Pray believe me Dearest Madame Schwabe
Ever yours
Florence Nightingale

Letter 3 of 3

Dr. Velinda J. Block (DNP 2010) and Mr. J. Branson Block

Description: In this letter, Nightingale explains to Madame Schwabe how to get funds to Princess Alice of Hesse Darmstadt, daughter of Queen Victoria, for her charity aiding the sick and wounded of the Austro-Prussian War. Nightingale also makes reference to friends from nursing school who were helping in the war hospitals.

Transcript:

Private - Embley - Romsey - Hampshire - Sept. 21/66

Dearest Madame Schwabe

Five minutes only have I to say that Princess Louis of Hesse Darmstadt joyfully accepts your kind offer of the £50 odd for the sick & wounded. It should be sent to herself, for she, it appears, does these things herself. She has great powers of business & of self-denial - & perhaps will dispense the money better than any one. She, thinking it is in England, says it will reach her directly & most safely thro' Buckingham Palace. But I enclose a letter to her by which, if you send it from where you are, it may reach her direct. But if it should, after all, be easier to send it by letter of exchange or London, then please destroy any letters enclosed, & send the money to me. And I will still send it thro' Buckingham Palace to her. Of course, the danger is that it may fall into the hands of some official, & not reach her own, if not sent by the Queen's bag. You will know best which to do. I believe the money is a perfect godsend to her - for her charities are quite drained. I doubt whether either the Queen or Prince Louis know their extent.

43 of my old friends, the Deaconesses of Kaiserwerth on the Rhine, (near Dusseldorf) served in the War Hospitals at Sadowa near Koniggratz. I wish you had time to go & see Kaiserwerth & my old mistress, Pastor Fliedner's widow.

Pray believe me Dearest Madame Schwabe
Ever yours
Florence Nightingale

Letter 1 of 4

Patricia A. Patrician, PhD, RN, FAAN
In memory of her aunt, Josephine Czyzycki Evans, RN

Description: Description: Nightingale responds to Madame Schwabe's concerns regarding the efficacy of the British war relief for the Franco-Prussian War. She sympathizes with Schwabe, but maintains the necessity of working with the National Society for Aid to the Sick and Wounded.

Transcript:

Aug 28/70
Private

My dear Mrs Schwabe

I do most truly feel with you. The sufferings of the Wounded are insupportably ghastly & hideous. To me who have seen the thing in all its ghastly reality on a small scale, tho’ we called it a colorful calamity at the time, to think of it now multiplied in all its horrors on a scale which could never have been calculated upon, - I assure you that it haunts me day & night. I feel as if I must set off to do what I can at the front. I think of nothing else.

But, what use is it offering to God one thing when He asks of us another? That is what I say to myself.

I will not waste a post, tho’ much hurried by business, in answering your question, as you are so good as to think my opinion of any service:

I do not think the Gentlemen’s Committee or any Gentlemen’s Committee could or ought to accept the offer which you are generous enough to think of making. And, speaking for myself, I never would make an offer which would be thought inadmissible, because it lessens one’s influence for good.

Take myself, suppose me in perfect health.

I am of a very proper age to do what you propose doing. I have a kind of experience in Wounded & in battle fields, & in supplying the needs of the War Hospitals of three large Armies that no other woman can have had. I am not in the least afraid of anything but doing what is foolish. Yet I would not, speaking for myself, make such a proposal, because I am quite sure no Committee would accede to it. And one should never make a proposal of which there is not a reasonable prospect of its meeting with the concurrence of reasonable men.

In this, I am sure, dearest Mme Schwabe, you will agree with me.

Besides, as you are aware, the Aid Socy have received frequent petitions (from abroad): send us surgeons - men in charge of things - don’t send us ladies.

I make no apology. Because I know I may take you at your word. You ask me frankly to say what I think. And if I frankly say what I think, I know I am doing what you kindly wish.

Next: I quite understand I feel with you how wearing it is to think that people are not doing enough or now doing it quickly enough or not in the right way when one feels that one’s own information is so much better. I think that the Aid Socy has been dilatory, has been inefficient. But I think it is improving every day - & that a great deal of good work is doing now - which, in some individual parts might be better done by individuals, no doubt - but which in the whole could not be done except by a National Society recognized as part of an European Convention.

No one has suffered more than myself, throughout my whole life, from having to work with Government Offices, Committees, Commissions &c &c.

But one cannot have two contradictions. If you distribute by a few individuals, you must collect in the names of those individuals. Certainly only a National Committee could have collected so much money & material. All the local Committees of the large towns choose, you see, to work through it. But, if we have such a National Committee to collect money, we must defer to its methods of spending & distributing it. I myself think it might have been quicker. I myself have had deluges of applications from French & German War Hospitals, pressing for immediate help. I may have thought it would have been better to grant some of these at once. But we must, if we choose a head (& fountain spring,) leave much to its decisions, even when we don’t agree with them.

Dear Mrs. Schwabe, how I wish I could soothe & comfort you. I thoroughly understand what you feel, I feel it too. But I am sure it is better to work in collecting for the Socy, without being able to always to agree with it’s methods of distribution and that is what I do. I feel how hard it is for you. I think our people are quite convinced that what they do is “only a drop in the ocean”.

{The enclosures you mention were not in your letter}
In greatest haste
Ever yours F. Nightingale

Letter 2 of 4

Patricia A. Patrician, PhD, RN, FAAN
In memory of her aunt, Josephine Czyzycki Evans, RN

Description: Description: Nightingale responds to Madame Schwabe's concerns regarding the efficacy of the British war relief for the Franco-Prussian War. She sympathizes with Schwabe, but maintains the necessity of working with the National Society for Aid to the Sick and Wounded.

Transcript:

Aug 28/70
Private

My dear Mrs Schwabe

I do most truly feel with you. The sufferings of the Wounded are insupportably ghastly & hideous. To me who have seen the thing in all its ghastly reality on a small scale, tho’ we called it a colorful calamity at the time, to think of it now multiplied in all its horrors on a scale which could never have been calculated upon, - I assure you that it haunts me day & night. I feel as if I must set off to do what I can at the front. I think of nothing else.

But, what use is it offering to God one thing when He asks of us another? That is what I say to myself.

I will not waste a post, tho’ much hurried by business, in answering your question, as you are so good as to think my opinion of any service:

I do not think the Gentlemen’s Committee or any Gentlemen’s Committee could or ought to accept the offer which you are generous enough to think of making. And, speaking for myself, I never would make an offer which would be thought inadmissible, because it lessens one’s influence for good.

Take myself, suppose me in perfect health.

I am of a very proper age to do what you propose doing. I have a kind of experience in Wounded & in battle fields, & in supplying the needs of the War Hospitals of three large Armies that no other woman can have had. I am not in the least afraid of anything but doing what is foolish. Yet I would not, speaking for myself, make such a proposal, because I am quite sure no Committee would accede to it. And one should never make a proposal of which there is not a reasonable prospect of its meeting with the concurrence of reasonable men.

In this, I am sure, dearest Mme Schwabe, you will agree with me.

Besides, as you are aware, the Aid Socy have received frequent petitions (from abroad): send us surgeons - men in charge of things - don’t send us ladies.

I make no apology. Because I know I may take you at your word. You ask me frankly to say what I think. And if I frankly say what I think, I know I am doing what you kindly wish.

Next: I quite understand I feel with you how wearing it is to think that people are not doing enough or now doing it quickly enough or not in the right way when one feels that one’s own information is so much better. I think that the Aid Socy has been dilatory, has been inefficient. But I think it is improving every day - & that a great deal of good work is doing now - which, in some individual parts might be better done by individuals, no doubt - but which in the whole could not be done except by a National Society recognized as part of an European Convention.

No one has suffered more than myself, throughout my whole life, from having to work with Government Offices, Committees, Commissions &c &c.

But one cannot have two contradictions. If you distribute by a few individuals, you must collect in the names of those individuals. Certainly only a National Committee could have collected so much money & material. All the local Committees of the large towns choose, you see, to work through it. But, if we have such a National Committee to collect money, we must defer to its methods of spending & distributing it. I myself think it might have been quicker. I myself have had deluges of applications from French & German War Hospitals, pressing for immediate help. I may have thought it would have been better to grant some of these at once. But we must, if we choose a head (& fountain spring,) leave much to its decisions, even when we don’t agree with them.

Dear Mrs. Schwabe, how I wish I could soothe & comfort you. I thoroughly understand what you feel, I feel it too. But I am sure it is better to work in collecting for the Socy, without being able to always to agree with it’s methods of distribution and that is what I do. I feel how hard it is for you. I think our people are quite convinced that what they do is “only a drop in the ocean”.

{The enclosures you mention were not in your letter}
In greatest haste
Ever yours F. Nightingale

Letter 3 of 4

Patricia A. Patrician, PhD, RN, FAAN
In memory of her aunt, Josephine Czyzycki Evans, RN

Description: Description: Nightingale responds to Madame Schwabe's concerns regarding the efficacy of the British war relief for the Franco-Prussian War. She sympathizes with Schwabe, but maintains the necessity of working with the National Society for Aid to the Sick and Wounded.

Transcript:

Aug 28/70
Private

My dear Mrs Schwabe

I do most truly feel with you. The sufferings of the Wounded are insupportably ghastly & hideous. To me who have seen the thing in all its ghastly reality on a small scale, tho’ we called it a colorful calamity at the time, to think of it now multiplied in all its horrors on a scale which could never have been calculated upon, - I assure you that it haunts me day & night. I feel as if I must set off to do what I can at the front. I think of nothing else.

But, what use is it offering to God one thing when He asks of us another? That is what I say to myself.

I will not waste a post, tho’ much hurried by business, in answering your question, as you are so good as to think my opinion of any service:

I do not think the Gentlemen’s Committee or any Gentlemen’s Committee could or ought to accept the offer which you are generous enough to think of making. And, speaking for myself, I never would make an offer which would be thought inadmissible, because it lessens one’s influence for good.

Take myself, suppose me in perfect health.

I am of a very proper age to do what you propose doing. I have a kind of experience in Wounded & in battle fields, & in supplying the needs of the War Hospitals of three large Armies that no other woman can have had. I am not in the least afraid of anything but doing what is foolish. Yet I would not, speaking for myself, make such a proposal, because I am quite sure no Committee would accede to it. And one should never make a proposal of which there is not a reasonable prospect of its meeting with the concurrence of reasonable men.

In this, I am sure, dearest Mme Schwabe, you will agree with me.

Besides, as you are aware, the Aid Socy have received frequent petitions (from abroad): send us surgeons - men in charge of things - don’t send us ladies.

I make no apology. Because I know I may take you at your word. You ask me frankly to say what I think. And if I frankly say what I think, I know I am doing what you kindly wish.

Next: I quite understand I feel with you how wearing it is to think that people are not doing enough or now doing it quickly enough or not in the right way when one feels that one’s own information is so much better. I think that the Aid Socy has been dilatory, has been inefficient. But I think it is improving every day - & that a great deal of good work is doing now - which, in some individual parts might be better done by individuals, no doubt - but which in the whole could not be done except by a National Society recognized as part of an European Convention.

No one has suffered more than myself, throughout my whole life, from having to work with Government Offices, Committees, Commissions &c &c.

But one cannot have two contradictions. If you distribute by a few individuals, you must collect in the names of those individuals. Certainly only a National Committee could have collected so much money & material. All the local Committees of the large towns choose, you see, to work through it. But, if we have such a National Committee to collect money, we must defer to its methods of spending & distributing it. I myself think it might have been quicker. I myself have had deluges of applications from French & German War Hospitals, pressing for immediate help. I may have thought it would have been better to grant some of these at once. But we must, if we choose a head (& fountain spring,) leave much to its decisions, even when we don’t agree with them.

Dear Mrs. Schwabe, how I wish I could soothe & comfort you. I thoroughly understand what you feel, I feel it too. But I am sure it is better to work in collecting for the Socy, without being able to always to agree with it’s methods of distribution and that is what I do. I feel how hard it is for you. I think our people are quite convinced that what they do is “only a drop in the ocean”.

{The enclosures you mention were not in your letter}
In greatest haste
Ever yours F. Nightingale

Letter 4 of 4

Patricia A. Patrician, PhD, RN, FAAN
In memory of her aunt, Josephine Czyzycki Evans, RN

Description: Description: Nightingale responds to Madame Schwabe's concerns regarding the efficacy of the British war relief for the Franco-Prussian War. She sympathizes with Schwabe, but maintains the necessity of working with the National Society for Aid to the Sick and Wounded.

Transcript:

Aug 28/70
Private

My dear Mrs Schwabe

I do most truly feel with you. The sufferings of the Wounded are insupportably ghastly & hideous. To me who have seen the thing in all its ghastly reality on a small scale, tho’ we called it a colorful calamity at the time, to think of it now multiplied in all its horrors on a scale which could never have been calculated upon, - I assure you that it haunts me day & night. I feel as if I must set off to do what I can at the front. I think of nothing else.

But, what use is it offering to God one thing when He asks of us another? That is what I say to myself.

I will not waste a post, tho’ much hurried by business, in answering your question, as you are so good as to think my opinion of any service:

I do not think the Gentlemen’s Committee or any Gentlemen’s Committee could or ought to accept the offer which you are generous enough to think of making. And, speaking for myself, I never would make an offer which would be thought inadmissible, because it lessens one’s influence for good.

Take myself, suppose me in perfect health.

I am of a very proper age to do what you propose doing. I have a kind of experience in Wounded & in battle fields, & in supplying the needs of the War Hospitals of three large Armies that no other woman can have had. I am not in the least afraid of anything but doing what is foolish. Yet I would not, speaking for myself, make such a proposal, because I am quite sure no Committee would accede to it. And one should never make a proposal of which there is not a reasonable prospect of its meeting with the concurrence of reasonable men.

In this, I am sure, dearest Mme Schwabe, you will agree with me.

Besides, as you are aware, the Aid Socy have received frequent petitions (from abroad): send us surgeons - men in charge of things - don’t send us ladies.

I make no apology. Because I know I may take you at your word. You ask me frankly to say what I think. And if I frankly say what I think, I know I am doing what you kindly wish.

Next: I quite understand I feel with you how wearing it is to think that people are not doing enough or now doing it quickly enough or not in the right way when one feels that one’s own information is so much better. I think that the Aid Socy has been dilatory, has been inefficient. But I think it is improving every day - & that a great deal of good work is doing now - which, in some individual parts might be better done by individuals, no doubt - but which in the whole could not be done except by a National Society recognized as part of an European Convention.

No one has suffered more than myself, throughout my whole life, from having to work with Government Offices, Committees, Commissions &c &c.

But one cannot have two contradictions. If you distribute by a few individuals, you must collect in the names of those individuals. Certainly only a National Committee could have collected so much money & material. All the local Committees of the large towns choose, you see, to work through it. But, if we have such a National Committee to collect money, we must defer to its methods of spending & distributing it. I myself think it might have been quicker. I myself have had deluges of applications from French & German War Hospitals, pressing for immediate help. I may have thought it would have been better to grant some of these at once. But we must, if we choose a head (& fountain spring,) leave much to its decisions, even when we don’t agree with them.

Dear Mrs. Schwabe, how I wish I could soothe & comfort you. I thoroughly understand what you feel, I feel it too. But I am sure it is better to work in collecting for the Socy, without being able to always to agree with it’s methods of distribution and that is what I do. I feel how hard it is for you. I think our people are quite convinced that what they do is “only a drop in the ocean”.

{The enclosures you mention were not in your letter}
In greatest haste
Ever yours F. Nightingale

Letter 1 of 8

Dr. Lynn M. Stover (BSN 1989, MSN 1993, PhD 2000)

Description: Nightingale writes to Madame Schwabe about a difficult associate in the Franco-Prussian War relief effort. Later she talks about her brother-in-law, Sir Harry Verney. She also expresses grief about the sadness of the war. Though thankful that Britain is not in it, she is frustrated that she is not there nursing.

Transcript:

Dec 27/70 - 35 South Street - Park Lane W.

My dearest Mrs. Schwabe,

I ought long since to have returned you the enclosed - It answered its purpose - I am sure you were a very kind friend to her not to publish the scrap you have sent me (with the rest).

I believe we have succeeded in sending her another £30 from the "Society". Of her devoting every penny & herself too to the Patients there is no doubt. But she seems to have the most irrepressible spirit of intrigue & meddling:- & she is not clever enough to know that of course men are influenced by it only once - & the second time they see that it is she & not the persons she intrigues against whom they have to avoid. E.g. She wrote to our Agent (at Versailles,) - denouncing, tho' not by name, the very person who got her in the Lycee for having received the goods she offered. Of course the Agent shewed that letter to the person concerned. [The writer does not know this.] But of course she is not now trusted by either. She has played the double game, without the cleverness to carry it out, about the Johanniter -This is the worst I know against her - & this I did not know till lately - [I have never seen her.]

How miserable it is that, in these overwhelming crushing calamities which, one would think, would at least crush out all jealousies, all conceit, all meanness, we should not be able to work all as one! I should have written to wish you Christmas' best blessings - & so I do wish you them with all my heart & soul - but this Old Year is so sad & dreary & bloody & wicked.

People tell me to be thankful that we are "not in it" - And so I am, truly thankful that our country is not in it - but that I am "not in it" is the greatest regret of my life - My whole head & heart & hands are panting to be with those wretched sufferers of the Loire. And I wake every hour of the night fancying I am with them.

I continue to have the most horrible letters from both sides in France - But we will not talk about this. You have, no doubt, more - I am glad that you have had that one great pleasure of your son's marriage. I am sorry that you have not heard from Sir Harry Verney & that he was not able to answer your kind invitation. But I must just explain that he was not in London at the time & that he has only slept in London one night in each of two weeks during this month having been very busy in the country. [He was in that dreadful Harrow accident to the Express Mail train on the Saturday before your party. And, tho' not much hurt, we wish that he would have been quieter since. But the very night of your party he was at an Education Meeting at Buckingham.]

If you could kindly send me more of the "War Victims' Fund Society" papers, I could make use of them. I had given away all I had - & I hope have secured some good contributions.

[Mr. Bullock is gone to the villages round Paris - a vast congregation of misery.]
In haste, believe me, ever, dearest Mme Schwabe, yours,
F. Nightingale

Let me not forget to thank you for sending me that enclosure from a good clergyman, Clare, (some verses.) I do dislike those things in general very much. But this I consider a real boon. It is true feeling towards God & man, to whomsoever addressed.
Thank you for sending it me, dear friend.
F. N.

Letter 2 of 8

Dr. Lynn M. Stover (BSN 1989, MSN 1993, PhD 2000)

Description: Nightingale writes to Madame Schwabe about a difficult associate in the Franco-Prussian War relief effort. Later she talks about her brother-in-law, Sir Harry Verney. She also expresses grief about the sadness of the war. Though thankful that Britain is not in it, she is frustrated that she is not there nursing.

Transcript:

Dec 27/70 - 35 South Street - Park Lane W.

My dearest Mrs. Schwabe,

I ought long since to have returned you the enclosed - It answered its purpose - I am sure you were a very kind friend to her not to publish the scrap you have sent me (with the rest).

I believe we have succeeded in sending her another £30 from the "Society". Of her devoting every penny & herself too to the Patients there is no doubt. But she seems to have the most irrepressible spirit of intrigue & meddling:- & she is not clever enough to know that of course men are influenced by it only once - & the second time they see that it is she & not the persons she intrigues against whom they have to avoid. E.g. She wrote to our Agent (at Versailles,) - denouncing, tho' not by name, the very person who got her in the Lycee for having received the goods she offered. Of course the Agent shewed that letter to the person concerned. [The writer does not know this.] But of course she is not now trusted by either. She has played the double game, without the cleverness to carry it out, about the Johanniter -This is the worst I know against her - & this I did not know till lately - [I have never seen her.]

How miserable it is that, in these overwhelming crushing calamities which, one would think, would at least crush out all jealousies, all conceit, all meanness, we should not be able to work all as one! I should have written to wish you Christmas' best blessings - & so I do wish you them with all my heart & soul - but this Old Year is so sad & dreary & bloody & wicked.

People tell me to be thankful that we are "not in it" - And so I am, truly thankful that our country is not in it - but that I am "not in it" is the greatest regret of my life - My whole head & heart & hands are panting to be with those wretched sufferers of the Loire. And I wake every hour of the night fancying I am with them.

I continue to have the most horrible letters from both sides in France - But we will not talk about this. You have, no doubt, more - I am glad that you have had that one great pleasure of your son's marriage. I am sorry that you have not heard from Sir Harry Verney & that he was not able to answer your kind invitation. But I must just explain that he was not in London at the time & that he has only slept in London one night in each of two weeks during this month having been very busy in the country. [He was in that dreadful Harrow accident to the Express Mail train on the Saturday before your party. And, tho' not much hurt, we wish that he would have been quieter since. But the very night of your party he was at an Education Meeting at Buckingham.]

If you could kindly send me more of the "War Victims' Fund Society" papers, I could make use of them. I had given away all I had - & I hope have secured some good contributions.

[Mr. Bullock is gone to the villages round Paris - a vast congregation of misery.]
In haste, believe me, ever, dearest Mme Schwabe, yours,
F. Nightingale

Let me not forget to thank you for sending me that enclosure from a good clergyman, Clare, (some verses.) I do dislike those things in general very much. But this I consider a real boon. It is true feeling towards God & man, to whomsoever addressed.
Thank you for sending it me, dear friend.
F. N.

Letter 3 of 8

Dr. Lynn M. Stover (BSN 1989, MSN 1993, PhD 2000)

Description: Nightingale writes to Madame Schwabe about a difficult associate in the Franco-Prussian War relief effort. Later she talks about her brother-in-law, Sir Harry Verney. She also expresses grief about the sadness of the war. Though thankful that Britain is not in it, she is frustrated that she is not there nursing.

Transcript:

Dec 27/70 - 35 South Street - Park Lane W.

My dearest Mrs. Schwabe,

I ought long since to have returned you the enclosed - It answered its purpose - I am sure you were a very kind friend to her not to publish the scrap you have sent me (with the rest).

I believe we have succeeded in sending her another £30 from the "Society". Of her devoting every penny & herself too to the Patients there is no doubt. But she seems to have the most irrepressible spirit of intrigue & meddling:- & she is not clever enough to know that of course men are influenced by it only once - & the second time they see that it is she & not the persons she intrigues against whom they have to avoid. E.g. She wrote to our Agent (at Versailles,) - denouncing, tho' not by name, the very person who got her in the Lycee for having received the goods she offered. Of course the Agent shewed that letter to the person concerned. [The writer does not know this.] But of course she is not now trusted by either. She has played the double game, without the cleverness to carry it out, about the Johanniter -This is the worst I know against her - & this I did not know till lately - [I have never seen her.]

How miserable it is that, in these overwhelming crushing calamities which, one would think, would at least crush out all jealousies, all conceit, all meanness, we should not be able to work all as one! I should have written to wish you Christmas' best blessings - & so I do wish you them with all my heart & soul - but this Old Year is so sad & dreary & bloody & wicked.

People tell me to be thankful that we are "not in it" - And so I am, truly thankful that our country is not in it - but that I am "not in it" is the greatest regret of my life - My whole head & heart & hands are panting to be with those wretched sufferers of the Loire. And I wake every hour of the night fancying I am with them.

I continue to have the most horrible letters from both sides in France - But we will not talk about this. You have, no doubt, more - I am glad that you have had that one great pleasure of your son's marriage. I am sorry that you have not heard from Sir Harry Verney & that he was not able to answer your kind invitation. But I must just explain that he was not in London at the time & that he has only slept in London one night in each of two weeks during this month having been very busy in the country. [He was in that dreadful Harrow accident to the Express Mail train on the Saturday before your party. And, tho' not much hurt, we wish that he would have been quieter since. But the very night of your party he was at an Education Meeting at Buckingham.]

If you could kindly send me more of the "War Victims' Fund Society" papers, I could make use of them. I had given away all I had - & I hope have secured some good contributions.

[Mr. Bullock is gone to the villages round Paris - a vast congregation of misery.]
In haste, believe me, ever, dearest Mme Schwabe, yours,
F. Nightingale

Let me not forget to thank you for sending me that enclosure from a good clergyman, Clare, (some verses.) I do dislike those things in general very much. But this I consider a real boon. It is true feeling towards God & man, to whomsoever addressed.
Thank you for sending it me, dear friend.
F. N.

Letter 4 of 8

Dr. Lynn M. Stover (BSN 1989, MSN 1993, PhD 2000)

Description: Nightingale writes to Madame Schwabe about a difficult associate in the Franco-Prussian War relief effort. Later she talks about her brother-in-law, Sir Harry Verney. She also expresses grief about the sadness of the war. Though thankful that Britain is not in it, she is frustrated that she is not there nursing.

Transcript:

Dec 27/70 - 35 South Street - Park Lane W.

My dearest Mrs. Schwabe,

I ought long since to have returned you the enclosed - It answered its purpose - I am sure you were a very kind friend to her not to publish the scrap you have sent me (with the rest).

I believe we have succeeded in sending her another £30 from the "Society". Of her devoting every penny & herself too to the Patients there is no doubt. But she seems to have the most irrepressible spirit of intrigue & meddling:- & she is not clever enough to know that of course men are influenced by it only once - & the second time they see that it is she & not the persons she intrigues against whom they have to avoid. E.g. She wrote to our Agent (at Versailles,) - denouncing, tho' not by name, the very person who got her in the Lycee for having received the goods she offered. Of course the Agent shewed that letter to the person concerned. [The writer does not know this.] But of course she is not now trusted by either. She has played the double game, without the cleverness to carry it out, about the Johanniter -This is the worst I know against her - & this I did not know till lately - [I have never seen her.]

How miserable it is that, in these overwhelming crushing calamities which, one would think, would at least crush out all jealousies, all conceit, all meanness, we should not be able to work all as one! I should have written to wish you Christmas' best blessings - & so I do wish you them with all my heart & soul - but this Old Year is so sad & dreary & bloody & wicked.

People tell me to be thankful that we are "not in it" - And so I am, truly thankful that our country is not in it - but that I am "not in it" is the greatest regret of my life - My whole head & heart & hands are panting to be with those wretched sufferers of the Loire. And I wake every hour of the night fancying I am with them.

I continue to have the most horrible letters from both sides in France - But we will not talk about this. You have, no doubt, more - I am glad that you have had that one great pleasure of your son's marriage. I am sorry that you have not heard from Sir Harry Verney & that he was not able to answer your kind invitation. But I must just explain that he was not in London at the time & that he has only slept in London one night in each of two weeks during this month having been very busy in the country. [He was in that dreadful Harrow accident to the Express Mail train on the Saturday before your party. And, tho' not much hurt, we wish that he would have been quieter since. But the very night of your party he was at an Education Meeting at Buckingham.]

If you could kindly send me more of the "War Victims' Fund Society" papers, I could make use of them. I had given away all I had - & I hope have secured some good contributions.

[Mr. Bullock is gone to the villages round Paris - a vast congregation of misery.]
In haste, believe me, ever, dearest Mme Schwabe, yours,
F. Nightingale

Let me not forget to thank you for sending me that enclosure from a good clergyman, Clare, (some verses.) I do dislike those things in general very much. But this I consider a real boon. It is true feeling towards God & man, to whomsoever addressed.
Thank you for sending it me, dear friend.
F. N.

Letter 5 of 8

Dr. Lynn M. Stover (BSN 1989, MSN 1993, PhD 2000)

Description: Nightingale writes to Madame Schwabe about a difficult associate in the Franco-Prussian War relief effort. Later she talks about her brother-in-law, Sir Harry Verney. She also expresses grief about the sadness of the war. Though thankful that Britain is not in it, she is frustrated that she is not there nursing.

Transcript:

Dec 27/70 - 35 South Street - Park Lane W.

My dearest Mrs. Schwabe,

I ought long since to have returned you the enclosed - It answered its purpose - I am sure you were a very kind friend to her not to publish the scrap you have sent me (with the rest).

I believe we have succeeded in sending her another £30 from the "Society". Of her devoting every penny & herself too to the Patients there is no doubt. But she seems to have the most irrepressible spirit of intrigue & meddling:- & she is not clever enough to know that of course men are influenced by it only once - & the second time they see that it is she & not the persons she intrigues against whom they have to avoid. E.g. She wrote to our Agent (at Versailles,) - denouncing, tho' not by name, the very person who got her in the Lycee for having received the goods she offered. Of course the Agent shewed that letter to the person concerned. [The writer does not know this.] But of course she is not now trusted by either. She has played the double game, without the cleverness to carry it out, about the Johanniter -This is the worst I know against her - & this I did not know till lately - [I have never seen her.]

How miserable it is that, in these overwhelming crushing calamities which, one would think, would at least crush out all jealousies, all conceit, all meanness, we should not be able to work all as one! I should have written to wish you Christmas' best blessings - & so I do wish you them with all my heart & soul - but this Old Year is so sad & dreary & bloody & wicked.

People tell me to be thankful that we are "not in it" - And so I am, truly thankful that our country is not in it - but that I am "not in it" is the greatest regret of my life - My whole head & heart & hands are panting to be with those wretched sufferers of the Loire. And I wake every hour of the night fancying I am with them.

I continue to have the most horrible letters from both sides in France - But we will not talk about this. You have, no doubt, more - I am glad that you have had that one great pleasure of your son's marriage. I am sorry that you have not heard from Sir Harry Verney & that he was not able to answer your kind invitation. But I must just explain that he was not in London at the time & that he has only slept in London one night in each of two weeks during this month having been very busy in the country. [He was in that dreadful Harrow accident to the Express Mail train on the Saturday before your party. And, tho' not much hurt, we wish that he would have been quieter since. But the very night of your party he was at an Education Meeting at Buckingham.]

If you could kindly send me more of the "War Victims' Fund Society" papers, I could make use of them. I had given away all I had - & I hope have secured some good contributions.

[Mr. Bullock is gone to the villages round Paris - a vast congregation of misery.]
In haste, believe me, ever, dearest Mme Schwabe, yours,
F. Nightingale

Let me not forget to thank you for sending me that enclosure from a good clergyman, Clare, (some verses.) I do dislike those things in general very much. But this I consider a real boon. It is true feeling towards God & man, to whomsoever addressed.
Thank you for sending it me, dear friend.
F. N.

Letter 6 of 8

Dr. Lynn M. Stover (BSN 1989, MSN 1993, PhD 2000)

Description: Nightingale writes to Madame Schwabe about a difficult associate in the Franco-Prussian War relief effort. Later she talks about her brother-in-law, Sir Harry Verney. She also expresses grief about the sadness of the war. Though thankful that Britain is not in it, she is frustrated that she is not there nursing.

Transcript:

Dec 27/70 - 35 South Street - Park Lane W.

My dearest Mrs. Schwabe,

I ought long since to have returned you the enclosed - It answered its purpose - I am sure you were a very kind friend to her not to publish the scrap you have sent me (with the rest).

I believe we have succeeded in sending her another £30 from the "Society". Of her devoting every penny & herself too to the Patients there is no doubt. But she seems to have the most irrepressible spirit of intrigue & meddling:- & she is not clever enough to know that of course men are influenced by it only once - & the second time they see that it is she & not the persons she intrigues against whom they have to avoid. E.g. She wrote to our Agent (at Versailles,) - denouncing, tho' not by name, the very person who got her in the Lycee for having received the goods she offered. Of course the Agent shewed that letter to the person concerned. [The writer does not know this.] But of course she is not now trusted by either. She has played the double game, without the cleverness to carry it out, about the Johanniter -This is the worst I know against her - & this I did not know till lately - [I have never seen her.]

How miserable it is that, in these overwhelming crushing calamities which, one would think, would at least crush out all jealousies, all conceit, all meanness, we should not be able to work all as one! I should have written to wish you Christmas' best blessings - & so I do wish you them with all my heart & soul - but this Old Year is so sad & dreary & bloody & wicked.

People tell me to be thankful that we are "not in it" - And so I am, truly thankful that our country is not in it - but that I am "not in it" is the greatest regret of my life - My whole head & heart & hands are panting to be with those wretched sufferers of the Loire. And I wake every hour of the night fancying I am with them.

I continue to have the most horrible letters from both sides in France - But we will not talk about this. You have, no doubt, more - I am glad that you have had that one great pleasure of your son's marriage. I am sorry that you have not heard from Sir Harry Verney & that he was not able to answer your kind invitation. But I must just explain that he was not in London at the time & that he has only slept in London one night in each of two weeks during this month having been very busy in the country. [He was in that dreadful Harrow accident to the Express Mail train on the Saturday before your party. And, tho' not much hurt, we wish that he would have been quieter since. But the very night of your party he was at an Education Meeting at Buckingham.]

If you could kindly send me more of the "War Victims' Fund Society" papers, I could make use of them. I had given away all I had - & I hope have secured some good contributions.

[Mr. Bullock is gone to the villages round Paris - a vast congregation of misery.]
In haste, believe me, ever, dearest Mme Schwabe, yours,
F. Nightingale

Let me not forget to thank you for sending me that enclosure from a good clergyman, Clare, (some verses.) I do dislike those things in general very much. But this I consider a real boon. It is true feeling towards God & man, to whomsoever addressed.
Thank you for sending it me, dear friend.
F. N.

Letter 7 of 8

Dr. Lynn M. Stover (BSN 1989, MSN 1993, PhD 2000)

Description: Nightingale writes to Madame Schwabe about a difficult associate in the Franco-Prussian War relief effort. Later she talks about her brother-in-law, Sir Harry Verney. She also expresses grief about the sadness of the war. Though thankful that Britain is not in it, she is frustrated that she is not there nursing.

Transcript:

Dec 27/70 - 35 South Street - Park Lane W.

My dearest Mrs. Schwabe,

I ought long since to have returned you the enclosed - It answered its purpose - I am sure you were a very kind friend to her not to publish the scrap you have sent me (with the rest).

I believe we have succeeded in sending her another £30 from the "Society". Of her devoting every penny & herself too to the Patients there is no doubt. But she seems to have the most irrepressible spirit of intrigue & meddling:- & she is not clever enough to know that of course men are influenced by it only once - & the second time they see that it is she & not the persons she intrigues against whom they have to avoid. E.g. She wrote to our Agent (at Versailles,) - denouncing, tho' not by name, the very person who got her in the Lycee for having received the goods she offered. Of course the Agent shewed that letter to the person concerned. [The writer does not know this.] But of course she is not now trusted by either. She has played the double game, without the cleverness to carry it out, about the Johanniter -This is the worst I know against her - & this I did not know till lately - [I have never seen her.]

How miserable it is that, in these overwhelming crushing calamities which, one would think, would at least crush out all jealousies, all conceit, all meanness, we should not be able to work all as one! I should have written to wish you Christmas' best blessings - & so I do wish you them with all my heart & soul - but this Old Year is so sad & dreary & bloody & wicked.

People tell me to be thankful that we are "not in it" - And so I am, truly thankful that our country is not in it - but that I am "not in it" is the greatest regret of my life - My whole head & heart & hands are panting to be with those wretched sufferers of the Loire. And I wake every hour of the night fancying I am with them.

I continue to have the most horrible letters from both sides in France - But we will not talk about this. You have, no doubt, more - I am glad that you have had that one great pleasure of your son's marriage. I am sorry that you have not heard from Sir Harry Verney & that he was not able to answer your kind invitation. But I must just explain that he was not in London at the time & that he has only slept in London one night in each of two weeks during this month having been very busy in the country. [He was in that dreadful Harrow accident to the Express Mail train on the Saturday before your party. And, tho' not much hurt, we wish that he would have been quieter since. But the very night of your party he was at an Education Meeting at Buckingham.]

If you could kindly send me more of the "War Victims' Fund Society" papers, I could make use of them. I had given away all I had - & I hope have secured some good contributions.

[Mr. Bullock is gone to the villages round Paris - a vast congregation of misery.]
In haste, believe me, ever, dearest Mme Schwabe, yours,
F. Nightingale

Let me not forget to thank you for sending me that enclosure from a good clergyman, Clare, (some verses.) I do dislike those things in general very much. But this I consider a real boon. It is true feeling towards God & man, to whomsoever addressed.
Thank you for sending it me, dear friend.
F. N.

Letter 8 of 8

Dr. Lynn M. Stover (BSN 1989, MSN 1993, PhD 2000)

Description: Nightingale writes to Madame Schwabe about a difficult associate in the Franco-Prussian War relief effort. Later she talks about her brother-in-law, Sir Harry Verney. She also expresses grief about the sadness of the war. Though thankful that Britain is not in it, she is frustrated that she is not there nursing.

Transcript:

Dec 27/70 - 35 South Street - Park Lane W.

My dearest Mrs. Schwabe,

I ought long since to have returned you the enclosed - It answered its purpose - I am sure you were a very kind friend to her not to publish the scrap you have sent me (with the rest).

I believe we have succeeded in sending her another £30 from the "Society". Of her devoting every penny & herself too to the Patients there is no doubt. But she seems to have the most irrepressible spirit of intrigue & meddling:- & she is not clever enough to know that of course men are influenced by it only once - & the second time they see that it is she & not the persons she intrigues against whom they have to avoid. E.g. She wrote to our Agent (at Versailles,) - denouncing, tho' not by name, the very person who got her in the Lycee for having received the goods she offered. Of course the Agent shewed that letter to the person concerned. [The writer does not know this.] But of course she is not now trusted by either. She has played the double game, without the cleverness to carry it out, about the Johanniter -This is the worst I know against her - & this I did not know till lately - [I have never seen her.]

How miserable it is that, in these overwhelming crushing calamities which, one would think, would at least crush out all jealousies, all conceit, all meanness, we should not be able to work all as one! I should have written to wish you Christmas' best blessings - & so I do wish you them with all my heart & soul - but this Old Year is so sad & dreary & bloody & wicked.

People tell me to be thankful that we are "not in it" - And so I am, truly thankful that our country is not in it - but that I am "not in it" is the greatest regret of my life - My whole head & heart & hands are panting to be with those wretched sufferers of the Loire. And I wake every hour of the night fancying I am with them.

I continue to have the most horrible letters from both sides in France - But we will not talk about this. You have, no doubt, more - I am glad that you have had that one great pleasure of your son's marriage. I am sorry that you have not heard from Sir Harry Verney & that he was not able to answer your kind invitation. But I must just explain that he was not in London at the time & that he has only slept in London one night in each of two weeks during this month having been very busy in the country. [He was in that dreadful Harrow accident to the Express Mail train on the Saturday before your party. And, tho' not much hurt, we wish that he would have been quieter since. But the very night of your party he was at an Education Meeting at Buckingham.]

If you could kindly send me more of the "War Victims' Fund Society" papers, I could make use of them. I had given away all I had - & I hope have secured some good contributions.

[Mr. Bullock is gone to the villages round Paris - a vast congregation of misery.]
In haste, believe me, ever, dearest Mme Schwabe, yours,
F. Nightingale

Let me not forget to thank you for sending me that enclosure from a good clergyman, Clare, (some verses.) I do dislike those things in general very much. But this I consider a real boon. It is true feeling towards God & man, to whomsoever addressed.
Thank you for sending it me, dear friend.
F. N.

Letter 1 of 2

Jeannie and Brandon Horton
In memory of her “adopted” grandmother, Fannie Taylor Bolling, RN

Description: On behalf of her mother, Florence Nightingale thanks Miss Thore for a sonnet and includes details about returning a parcel to Thore in London.

Transcript:

My dear Miss Thore, I have only one moment to thank you, in mama’s name, for Wordsworth’s pretty sonnet – & to say that we sent a parcel you left behind, by an opportunity today to London, where it will be left, at 6 Whitehall, till called for. I am writing in a great hurry, & must beg you to believe me, in deliberation & in haste always your affecte

Florence Nightingale
Embley. Tuesday.

Letter 2 of 2

Jeannie and Brandon Horton
In memory of her “adopted” grandmother, Fannie Taylor Bolling, RN

Description: On behalf of her mother, Florence Nightingale thanks Miss Thore for a sonnet and includes details about returning a parcel to Thore in London.

Transcript:

My dear Miss Thore, I have only one moment to thank you, in mama’s name, for Wordsworth’s pretty sonnet – & to say that we sent a parcel you left behind, by an opportunity today to London, where it will be left, at 6 Whitehall, till called for. I am writing in a great hurry, & must beg you to believe me, in deliberation & in haste always your affecte

Florence Nightingale
Embley. Tuesday.

Letter 1 of 4

Patricia J. Cleveland (BSN 1973, MSN 1975)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about the Bombay Village Sanitation Draft Bill, and about her correspondence with the native Ahmedabad President, Mr. Runchorelal Chotalall. She also asks Hewlett about positions in Bombay for researching and evaluating the status of sanitation.

Transcript:

Nov 27/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

I was very much obliged to you for sending me a copy of your triumphant answer to the Govt. of Bombay, which ought to have the desired effect.

I am glad that Sir J. Peile says the Bombay Village Sanitation Draft Bill is "unworkable" - And I am not without some hope that a change may be effected in it.

Thanks for Mr. Runchorelal Chotalal's good letter. He has sent me almost the facsimile which I was just going to send you. Good as it is, I was afraid you would not like the Govt. Engineers having charge of the works - I mean that you would be afraid of mistakes being made.

I return your letter - And on second thoughts I think I will still send you mine, if you will kindly return it, & suggest what I should answer.

I grieve to hear of your loss - Was General Ducat Col. Ducat's brother? Thank God that you are so well. I trust this continues.

Pray pardon this scrawl. But I would not delay my answer any longer - I have much anxious work.

ever sincerely yours
F. NIGHTINGALE

T. G. Hewlett Esq.
Could you kindly tell me what Chair of Hygeine & Sanitary Science & practice there is at Bombay - I mean under a Professor (such as Dr. Parker was) with two laboratories under his control - one for Chemical (water, food, & air analysis) one for practical physiological instruction & work, including bacteriology? And are these laboratories more than little rooms? And could you tell me whether Medical Officers are instructed how to do the analysis of water supply in the field, I don't mean quantitative analysis, but enough to prevent troops being poisoned with bad water?
F. N.
>T. G.Hewlett Esq.

Letter 2 of 4

Patricia J. Cleveland (BSN 1973, MSN 1975)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about the Bombay Village Sanitation Draft Bill, and about her correspondence with the native Ahmedabad President, Mr. Runchorelal Chotalall. She also asks Hewlett about positions in Bombay for researching and evaluating the status of sanitation.

Transcript:

Nov 27/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

I was very much obliged to you for sending me a copy of your triumphant answer to the Govt. of Bombay, which ought to have the desired effect.

I am glad that Sir J. Peile says the Bombay Village Sanitation Draft Bill is "unworkable" - And I am not without some hope that a change may be effected in it.

Thanks for Mr. Runchorelal Chotalal's good letter. He has sent me almost the facsimile which I was just going to send you. Good as it is, I was afraid you would not like the Govt. Engineers having charge of the works - I mean that you would be afraid of mistakes being made.

I return your letter - And on second thoughts I think I will still send you mine, if you will kindly return it, & suggest what I should answer.

I grieve to hear of your loss - Was General Ducat Col. Ducat's brother? Thank God that you are so well. I trust this continues.

Pray pardon this scrawl. But I would not delay my answer any longer - I have much anxious work.

ever sincerely yours
F. NIGHTINGALE

T. G. Hewlett Esq.
Could you kindly tell me what Chair of Hygeine & Sanitary Science & practice there is at Bombay - I mean under a Professor (such as Dr. Parker was) with two laboratories under his control - one for Chemical (water, food, & air analysis) one for practical physiological instruction & work, including bacteriology? And are these laboratories more than little rooms? And could you tell me whether Medical Officers are instructed how to do the analysis of water supply in the field, I don't mean quantitative analysis, but enough to prevent troops being poisoned with bad water?
F. N.
>T. G.Hewlett Esq.

Letter 3 of 4

Patricia J. Cleveland (BSN 1973, MSN 1975)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about the Bombay Village Sanitation Draft Bill, and about her correspondence with the native Ahmedabad President, Mr. Runchorelal Chotalall. She also asks Hewlett about positions in Bombay for researching and evaluating the status of sanitation.

Transcript:

Nov 27/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

I was very much obliged to you for sending me a copy of your triumphant answer to the Govt. of Bombay, which ought to have the desired effect.

I am glad that Sir J. Peile says the Bombay Village Sanitation Draft Bill is "unworkable" - And I am not without some hope that a change may be effected in it.

Thanks for Mr. Runchorelal Chotalal's good letter. He has sent me almost the facsimile which I was just going to send you. Good as it is, I was afraid you would not like the Govt. Engineers having charge of the works - I mean that you would be afraid of mistakes being made.

I return your letter - And on second thoughts I think I will still send you mine, if you will kindly return it, & suggest what I should answer.

I grieve to hear of your loss - Was General Ducat Col. Ducat's brother? Thank God that you are so well. I trust this continues.

Pray pardon this scrawl. But I would not delay my answer any longer - I have much anxious work.

ever sincerely yours
F. NIGHTINGALE

T. G. Hewlett Esq.
Could you kindly tell me what Chair of Hygeine & Sanitary Science & practice there is at Bombay - I mean under a Professor (such as Dr. Parker was) with two laboratories under his control - one for Chemical (water, food, & air analysis) one for practical physiological instruction & work, including bacteriology? And are these laboratories more than little rooms? And could you tell me whether Medical Officers are instructed how to do the analysis of water supply in the field, I don't mean quantitative analysis, but enough to prevent troops being poisoned with bad water?
F. N.
>T. G.Hewlett Esq.

Letter 4 of 4

Patricia J. Cleveland (BSN 1973, MSN 1975)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about the Bombay Village Sanitation Draft Bill, and about her correspondence with the native Ahmedabad President, Mr. Runchorelal Chotalall. She also asks Hewlett about positions in Bombay for researching and evaluating the status of sanitation.

Transcript:

Nov 27/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

I was very much obliged to you for sending me a copy of your triumphant answer to the Govt. of Bombay, which ought to have the desired effect.

I am glad that Sir J. Peile says the Bombay Village Sanitation Draft Bill is "unworkable" - And I am not without some hope that a change may be effected in it.

Thanks for Mr. Runchorelal Chotalal's good letter. He has sent me almost the facsimile which I was just going to send you. Good as it is, I was afraid you would not like the Govt. Engineers having charge of the works - I mean that you would be afraid of mistakes being made.

I return your letter - And on second thoughts I think I will still send you mine, if you will kindly return it, & suggest what I should answer.

I grieve to hear of your loss - Was General Ducat Col. Ducat's brother? Thank God that you are so well. I trust this continues.

Pray pardon this scrawl. But I would not delay my answer any longer - I have much anxious work.

ever sincerely yours
F. NIGHTINGALE

T. G. Hewlett Esq.
Could you kindly tell me what Chair of Hygeine & Sanitary Science & practice there is at Bombay - I mean under a Professor (such as Dr. Parker was) with two laboratories under his control - one for Chemical (water, food, & air analysis) one for practical physiological instruction & work, including bacteriology? And are these laboratories more than little rooms? And could you tell me whether Medical Officers are instructed how to do the analysis of water supply in the field, I don't mean quantitative analysis, but enough to prevent troops being poisoned with bad water?
F. N.
>T. G.Hewlett Esq.

Letter 1 of 4

Sue Ellen (MSN 1980) and Mike Lucas
In honor of Dean Doreen C. Harper, PhD, RN, FAAN

Description: In this letter to T. G. Hewlett, Nightingale speaks of strategies they should consider in attempting to educate the women of India about sanitation, and to organize them into a women's Sanitary Mission.

Transcript:

Dec 2/85 - 10, South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

You are aware of Lady Dufferin's scheme for "reaching" the native "female population" of India, in order to "teach the most ordinary facts relating to health to the women themselves, & to the young girls in schools".

You have kindly offered to give your invaluable help in this important matter which must be begun quite from the beginning: Dy Surgeon Genl. Dr. Hewlett, Sanitary Commissioner of Bombay The special points of information required as a very first step would be, as I think we agreed:

1. how to organize a female Sanitary Mission

2. what books or Sanitary Primers to put into the hands of the (so-called) `Missioners'

3. if a Sanitary Primer for native women is requisite: who should write it? [and, what is of equal consequence, who shall read it?]

4. to find out a native gentleman who could write a practical Sanitary Primer, & submit it before publication to the Sany Commissioner who, if he approves of it, would send it on to Government with a request that it might be translated & printed in the Vernaculars

5. to enquire from your native friends (Medical men) whether they know of any woman who would go into the native houses with these tracts.

The advice you would give on these points would be simply priceless -

Success to the endeavour to get the women of India on our side.

And success to all your noble endeavours in the great cause of Sanitary progress in India which have wrought such great results as to be almost a revolution to the right way.

Pray believe me
ever your faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Letter 2 of 4

Sue Ellen (MSN 1980) and Mike Lucas
In honor of Dean Doreen C. Harper, PhD, RN, FAAN

Description: In this letter to T. G. Hewlett, Nightingale speaks of strategies they should consider in attempting to educate the women of India about sanitation, and to organize them into a women's Sanitary Mission.

Transcript:

Dec 2/85 - 10, South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

You are aware of Lady Dufferin's scheme for "reaching" the native "female population" of India, in order to "teach the most ordinary facts relating to health to the women themselves, & to the young girls in schools".

You have kindly offered to give your invaluable help in this important matter which must be begun quite from the beginning: Dy Surgeon Genl. Dr. Hewlett, Sanitary Commissioner of Bombay The special points of information required as a very first step would be, as I think we agreed:

1. how to organize a female Sanitary Mission

2. what books or Sanitary Primers to put into the hands of the (so-called) `Missioners'

3. if a Sanitary Primer for native women is requisite: who should write it? [and, what is of equal consequence, who shall read it?]

4. to find out a native gentleman who could write a practical Sanitary Primer, & submit it before publication to the Sany Commissioner who, if he approves of it, would send it on to Government with a request that it might be translated & printed in the Vernaculars

5. to enquire from your native friends (Medical men) whether they know of any woman who would go into the native houses with these tracts.

The advice you would give on these points would be simply priceless -

Success to the endeavour to get the women of India on our side.

And success to all your noble endeavours in the great cause of Sanitary progress in India which have wrought such great results as to be almost a revolution to the right way.

Pray believe me
ever your faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Letter 3 of 4

Sue Ellen (MSN 1980) and Mike Lucas
In honor of Dean Doreen C. Harper, PhD, RN, FAAN

Description: In this letter to T. G. Hewlett, Nightingale speaks of strategies they should consider in attempting to educate the women of India about sanitation, and to organize them into a women's Sanitary Mission.

Transcript:

Dec 2/85 - 10, South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

You are aware of Lady Dufferin's scheme for "reaching" the native "female population" of India, in order to "teach the most ordinary facts relating to health to the women themselves, & to the young girls in schools".

You have kindly offered to give your invaluable help in this important matter which must be begun quite from the beginning: Dy Surgeon Genl. Dr. Hewlett, Sanitary Commissioner of Bombay The special points of information required as a very first step would be, as I think we agreed:

1. how to organize a female Sanitary Mission

2. what books or Sanitary Primers to put into the hands of the (so-called) `Missioners'

3. if a Sanitary Primer for native women is requisite: who should write it? [and, what is of equal consequence, who shall read it?]

4. to find out a native gentleman who could write a practical Sanitary Primer, & submit it before publication to the Sany Commissioner who, if he approves of it, would send it on to Government with a request that it might be translated & printed in the Vernaculars

5. to enquire from your native friends (Medical men) whether they know of any woman who would go into the native houses with these tracts.

The advice you would give on these points would be simply priceless -

Success to the endeavour to get the women of India on our side.

And success to all your noble endeavours in the great cause of Sanitary progress in India which have wrought such great results as to be almost a revolution to the right way.

Pray believe me
ever your faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Letter 4 of 4

Sue Ellen (MSN 1980) and Mike Lucas
In honor of Dean Doreen C. Harper, PhD, RN, FAAN

Description: In this letter to T. G. Hewlett, Nightingale speaks of strategies they should consider in attempting to educate the women of India about sanitation, and to organize them into a women's Sanitary Mission.

Transcript:

Dec 2/85 - 10, South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

You are aware of Lady Dufferin's scheme for "reaching" the native "female population" of India, in order to "teach the most ordinary facts relating to health to the women themselves, & to the young girls in schools".

You have kindly offered to give your invaluable help in this important matter which must be begun quite from the beginning: Dy Surgeon Genl. Dr. Hewlett, Sanitary Commissioner of Bombay The special points of information required as a very first step would be, as I think we agreed:

1. how to organize a female Sanitary Mission

2. what books or Sanitary Primers to put into the hands of the (so-called) `Missioners'

3. if a Sanitary Primer for native women is requisite: who should write it? [and, what is of equal consequence, who shall read it?]

4. to find out a native gentleman who could write a practical Sanitary Primer, & submit it before publication to the Sany Commissioner who, if he approves of it, would send it on to Government with a request that it might be translated & printed in the Vernaculars

5. to enquire from your native friends (Medical men) whether they know of any woman who would go into the native houses with these tracts.

The advice you would give on these points would be simply priceless -

Success to the endeavour to get the women of India on our side.

And success to all your noble endeavours in the great cause of Sanitary progress in India which have wrought such great results as to be almost a revolution to the right way.

Pray believe me
ever your faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Letter 1 of 1

Dr. D’Ann W. Somerall (BSN 1995, MSN 1999, DNP 2011) and Dr. William E. Somerall, Jr.
In honor of their children and grandchildren

Description: Nightingale thanks T. G. Hewlett for two documents he sent to her, one concerning sanitation in Ahmedabad, and the other, the Annual Sanitary Blue Book Proof. She reports to him the steps she has taken regarding both.

Transcript:

Claydon Ho: Winslow: Bucks - Oct 3/88 - Private

My dear Sir,

How can I thank you enough for your two most valuable letters & papers? - the one on the drainage & water supply of Ahmedabad - & the other a critique of the Annual Sanitary Blue Book Proof. I have sent in my papers on the latter, including every point in yours.

And I wrote a letter to Mr. Runchorelal which I trust will answer the purpose. I was well aware that you had inspired every step he had taken. And I wished to be in the same `Story' as yourself - & to say what you would have said. I hope he will send full plans & details to Col. Ducat, & take his advice in combination with yours.

I write in haste, but will write again -
Pray believe me ever Sincerely yrs
F. Nightingale

T. G. Hewlett Esq
I think it is well to represent the "Resolution" as a great step forward - & to rest our exhortations on that as a beginning.
F. N.

Letter 1 of 6

Karen Meneses, PhD, RN, FAAN and M. Patrick McNees, PhD, FAAN

Description: This is a letter of reference for Thomas Gillham Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay and former Sanitary Commissioner. The position he seeks is not noted. Nightingale's review is very complementary regarding Hewlett's abilities and knowledge. She speaks particularly of his experiences and successes in dealing with cholera and the Famine of 1876-8 in Bombay.

Transcript:

London October 10 1888

I have been asked to give my testimony to the work of Mr. T. Gillham Hewlett, C.I.E. Deputy Surgeon Genl in H. M.'s India Service, late Sanitary Commissioner for the Govt of Bombay.

I have known him for many years. I have known his work well whether as Health Officer of Bombay city, or in the Famine, or as Sanitary Commissioner. I have been in the constant habit of consulting him on all Sanitary Subjects, to which his life has been devoted, head & heart & body & soul. Whether his work lay among our troops, European & native - or among the native populations, gentle or simple - men, women, or children.

He was the first Health Officer of Bombay, and for upwards 7 years, he was a Sanitarily engineered city in himself: up at 2 or 3 a.m. himself leading & organizing his army of scavengers. In this war against the Death rate, it fell from 35 to 23 per 1000. And Cholera in its intensity almost disappeared.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Famine of 1876-8, while acting as Sanitary Commissioner - travelling often for 20 hours out of the 24, without tents - sometimes without food - organizing, arranging, supervising, advising, providing health for the relief camps & centres - truly a noble work - & which added immensely to his experience of the rural inhabitants.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Presidency, as Sanitary Commissioner, for the last five years, & on two previous occasions for several years: instructing, teaching the people, whether native gentlemen, who might be Presidents of Municipalities or Panchayats, headmen, villagers, as to the causes of death & disease among them, & how to remove these causes of the sad degeneration of their physical strength.

Without this, without the engaging the people themselves on our side - without convincing them of what is their own interest, we may pass what Sanitary Acts we please, but they remain a dead letter: We may have the most exact knowledge of what is wanted, but we cannot carry it out.

Mr. Hewlett has the most remarkable influence over the people - from his unrivalled practical experience: his knowledge of the customs & habits of townsmen and villagers: his sympathy & insight not only as to the cities but as to the villages where live the greater part of an Indian population.

As to water-supply, conservancy, sewerage & drainage, surface & subsoil, as to buildings & ventilation, his practical knowledge is unequalled: his powers of work are unrivalled. No expert knows better how a Sanitary bill for Villages should be drafted. No writings or reports give more essential practical information. No man is better versed, perhaps no man is practically so well versed in all Sanitary problems & details, & how to deal with them: his is no mere theoretical knowledge; and he has the requisite Sanitary Engineering knowledge to tell the Engineer what he wants to be done.

As I have spoken of Mr. Hewlett's great influence with the people, I may perhaps mention a curious instance - one out of many: When he began work in Bombay, the people might die of Cholera at the rate of 200 or 300 a day; & none would take any notice except to scold the Goddess of Cholera or Small-pox. Now they will cry out, if there are 2 or 3 Deaths by Cholera: Bestir yourselves, Gentlemen; don't you see we are all dead? This is a great step. But that of bestirring themselves is a greater; & one begun by Mr. Hewlett.

I give the Government joy which enlists his services whether for home or for India.
Florence Nightingale

Letter 2 of 6

Karen Meneses, PhD, RN, FAAN and M. Patrick McNees, PhD, FAAN

Description: This is a letter of reference for Thomas Gillham Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay and former Sanitary Commissioner. The position he seeks is not noted. Nightingale's review is very complementary regarding Hewlett's abilities and knowledge. She speaks particularly of his experiences and successes in dealing with cholera and the Famine of 1876-8 in Bombay.

Transcript:

London October 10 1888

I have been asked to give my testimony to the work of Mr. T. Gillham Hewlett, C.I.E. Deputy Surgeon Genl in H. M.'s India Service, late Sanitary Commissioner for the Govt of Bombay.

I have known him for many years. I have known his work well whether as Health Officer of Bombay city, or in the Famine, or as Sanitary Commissioner. I have been in the constant habit of consulting him on all Sanitary Subjects, to which his life has been devoted, head & heart & body & soul. Whether his work lay among our troops, European & native - or among the native populations, gentle or simple - men, women, or children.

He was the first Health Officer of Bombay, and for upwards 7 years, he was a Sanitarily engineered city in himself: up at 2 or 3 a.m. himself leading & organizing his army of scavengers. In this war against the Death rate, it fell from 35 to 23 per 1000. And Cholera in its intensity almost disappeared.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Famine of 1876-8, while acting as Sanitary Commissioner - travelling often for 20 hours out of the 24, without tents - sometimes without food - organizing, arranging, supervising, advising, providing health for the relief camps & centres - truly a noble work - & which added immensely to his experience of the rural inhabitants.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Presidency, as Sanitary Commissioner, for the last five years, & on two previous occasions for several years: instructing, teaching the people, whether native gentlemen, who might be Presidents of Municipalities or Panchayats, headmen, villagers, as to the causes of death & disease among them, & how to remove these causes of the sad degeneration of their physical strength.

Without this, without the engaging the people themselves on our side - without convincing them of what is their own interest, we may pass what Sanitary Acts we please, but they remain a dead letter: We may have the most exact knowledge of what is wanted, but we cannot carry it out.

Mr. Hewlett has the most remarkable influence over the people - from his unrivalled practical experience: his knowledge of the customs & habits of townsmen and villagers: his sympathy & insight not only as to the cities but as to the villages where live the greater part of an Indian population.

As to water-supply, conservancy, sewerage & drainage, surface & subsoil, as to buildings & ventilation, his practical knowledge is unequalled: his powers of work are unrivalled. No expert knows better how a Sanitary bill for Villages should be drafted. No writings or reports give more essential practical information. No man is better versed, perhaps no man is practically so well versed in all Sanitary problems & details, & how to deal with them: his is no mere theoretical knowledge; and he has the requisite Sanitary Engineering knowledge to tell the Engineer what he wants to be done.

As I have spoken of Mr. Hewlett's great influence with the people, I may perhaps mention a curious instance - one out of many: When he began work in Bombay, the people might die of Cholera at the rate of 200 or 300 a day; & none would take any notice except to scold the Goddess of Cholera or Small-pox. Now they will cry out, if there are 2 or 3 Deaths by Cholera: Bestir yourselves, Gentlemen; don't you see we are all dead? This is a great step. But that of bestirring themselves is a greater; & one begun by Mr. Hewlett.

I give the Government joy which enlists his services whether for home or for India.
Florence Nightingale

Letter 3 of 6

Karen Meneses, PhD, RN, FAAN and M. Patrick McNees, PhD, FAAN

Description: This is a letter of reference for Thomas Gillham Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay and former Sanitary Commissioner. The position he seeks is not noted. Nightingale's review is very complementary regarding Hewlett's abilities and knowledge. She speaks particularly of his experiences and successes in dealing with cholera and the Famine of 1876-8 in Bombay.

Transcript:

London October 10 1888

I have been asked to give my testimony to the work of Mr. T. Gillham Hewlett, C.I.E. Deputy Surgeon Genl in H. M.'s India Service, late Sanitary Commissioner for the Govt of Bombay.

I have known him for many years. I have known his work well whether as Health Officer of Bombay city, or in the Famine, or as Sanitary Commissioner. I have been in the constant habit of consulting him on all Sanitary Subjects, to which his life has been devoted, head & heart & body & soul. Whether his work lay among our troops, European & native - or among the native populations, gentle or simple - men, women, or children.

He was the first Health Officer of Bombay, and for upwards 7 years, he was a Sanitarily engineered city in himself: up at 2 or 3 a.m. himself leading & organizing his army of scavengers. In this war against the Death rate, it fell from 35 to 23 per 1000. And Cholera in its intensity almost disappeared.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Famine of 1876-8, while acting as Sanitary Commissioner - travelling often for 20 hours out of the 24, without tents - sometimes without food - organizing, arranging, supervising, advising, providing health for the relief camps & centres - truly a noble work - & which added immensely to his experience of the rural inhabitants.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Presidency, as Sanitary Commissioner, for the last five years, & on two previous occasions for several years: instructing, teaching the people, whether native gentlemen, who might be Presidents of Municipalities or Panchayats, headmen, villagers, as to the causes of death & disease among them, & how to remove these causes of the sad degeneration of their physical strength.

Without this, without the engaging the people themselves on our side - without convincing them of what is their own interest, we may pass what Sanitary Acts we please, but they remain a dead letter: We may have the most exact knowledge of what is wanted, but we cannot carry it out.

Mr. Hewlett has the most remarkable influence over the people - from his unrivalled practical experience: his knowledge of the customs & habits of townsmen and villagers: his sympathy & insight not only as to the cities but as to the villages where live the greater part of an Indian population.

As to water-supply, conservancy, sewerage & drainage, surface & subsoil, as to buildings & ventilation, his practical knowledge is unequalled: his powers of work are unrivalled. No expert knows better how a Sanitary bill for Villages should be drafted. No writings or reports give more essential practical information. No man is better versed, perhaps no man is practically so well versed in all Sanitary problems & details, & how to deal with them: his is no mere theoretical knowledge; and he has the requisite Sanitary Engineering knowledge to tell the Engineer what he wants to be done.

As I have spoken of Mr. Hewlett's great influence with the people, I may perhaps mention a curious instance - one out of many: When he began work in Bombay, the people might die of Cholera at the rate of 200 or 300 a day; & none would take any notice except to scold the Goddess of Cholera or Small-pox. Now they will cry out, if there are 2 or 3 Deaths by Cholera: Bestir yourselves, Gentlemen; don't you see we are all dead? This is a great step. But that of bestirring themselves is a greater; & one begun by Mr. Hewlett.

I give the Government joy which enlists his services whether for home or for India.
Florence Nightingale

Letter 4 of 6

Karen Meneses, PhD, RN, FAAN and M. Patrick McNees, PhD, FAAN

Description: This is a letter of reference for Thomas Gillham Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay and former Sanitary Commissioner. The position he seeks is not noted. Nightingale's review is very complementary regarding Hewlett's abilities and knowledge. She speaks particularly of his experiences and successes in dealing with cholera and the Famine of 1876-8 in Bombay.

Transcript:

London October 10 1888

I have been asked to give my testimony to the work of Mr. T. Gillham Hewlett, C.I.E. Deputy Surgeon Genl in H. M.'s India Service, late Sanitary Commissioner for the Govt of Bombay.

I have known him for many years. I have known his work well whether as Health Officer of Bombay city, or in the Famine, or as Sanitary Commissioner. I have been in the constant habit of consulting him on all Sanitary Subjects, to which his life has been devoted, head & heart & body & soul. Whether his work lay among our troops, European & native - or among the native populations, gentle or simple - men, women, or children.

He was the first Health Officer of Bombay, and for upwards 7 years, he was a Sanitarily engineered city in himself: up at 2 or 3 a.m. himself leading & organizing his army of scavengers. In this war against the Death rate, it fell from 35 to 23 per 1000. And Cholera in its intensity almost disappeared.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Famine of 1876-8, while acting as Sanitary Commissioner - travelling often for 20 hours out of the 24, without tents - sometimes without food - organizing, arranging, supervising, advising, providing health for the relief camps & centres - truly a noble work - & which added immensely to his experience of the rural inhabitants.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Presidency, as Sanitary Commissioner, for the last five years, & on two previous occasions for several years: instructing, teaching the people, whether native gentlemen, who might be Presidents of Municipalities or Panchayats, headmen, villagers, as to the causes of death & disease among them, & how to remove these causes of the sad degeneration of their physical strength.

Without this, without the engaging the people themselves on our side - without convincing them of what is their own interest, we may pass what Sanitary Acts we please, but they remain a dead letter: We may have the most exact knowledge of what is wanted, but we cannot carry it out.

Mr. Hewlett has the most remarkable influence over the people - from his unrivalled practical experience: his knowledge of the customs & habits of townsmen and villagers: his sympathy & insight not only as to the cities but as to the villages where live the greater part of an Indian population.

As to water-supply, conservancy, sewerage & drainage, surface & subsoil, as to buildings & ventilation, his practical knowledge is unequalled: his powers of work are unrivalled. No expert knows better how a Sanitary bill for Villages should be drafted. No writings or reports give more essential practical information. No man is better versed, perhaps no man is practically so well versed in all Sanitary problems & details, & how to deal with them: his is no mere theoretical knowledge; and he has the requisite Sanitary Engineering knowledge to tell the Engineer what he wants to be done.

As I have spoken of Mr. Hewlett's great influence with the people, I may perhaps mention a curious instance - one out of many: When he began work in Bombay, the people might die of Cholera at the rate of 200 or 300 a day; & none would take any notice except to scold the Goddess of Cholera or Small-pox. Now they will cry out, if there are 2 or 3 Deaths by Cholera: Bestir yourselves, Gentlemen; don't you see we are all dead? This is a great step. But that of bestirring themselves is a greater; & one begun by Mr. Hewlett.

I give the Government joy which enlists his services whether for home or for India.
Florence Nightingale

Letter 5 of 6

Karen Meneses, PhD, RN, FAAN and M. Patrick McNees, PhD, FAAN

Description: This is a letter of reference for Thomas Gillham Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay and former Sanitary Commissioner. The position he seeks is not noted. Nightingale's review is very complementary regarding Hewlett's abilities and knowledge. She speaks particularly of his experiences and successes in dealing with cholera and the Famine of 1876-8 in Bombay.

Transcript:

London October 10 1888

I have been asked to give my testimony to the work of Mr. T. Gillham Hewlett, C.I.E. Deputy Surgeon Genl in H. M.'s India Service, late Sanitary Commissioner for the Govt of Bombay.

I have known him for many years. I have known his work well whether as Health Officer of Bombay city, or in the Famine, or as Sanitary Commissioner. I have been in the constant habit of consulting him on all Sanitary Subjects, to which his life has been devoted, head & heart & body & soul. Whether his work lay among our troops, European & native - or among the native populations, gentle or simple - men, women, or children.

He was the first Health Officer of Bombay, and for upwards 7 years, he was a Sanitarily engineered city in himself: up at 2 or 3 a.m. himself leading & organizing his army of scavengers. In this war against the Death rate, it fell from 35 to 23 per 1000. And Cholera in its intensity almost disappeared.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Famine of 1876-8, while acting as Sanitary Commissioner - travelling often for 20 hours out of the 24, without tents - sometimes without food - organizing, arranging, supervising, advising, providing health for the relief camps & centres - truly a noble work - & which added immensely to his experience of the rural inhabitants.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Presidency, as Sanitary Commissioner, for the last five years, & on two previous occasions for several years: instructing, teaching the people, whether native gentlemen, who might be Presidents of Municipalities or Panchayats, headmen, villagers, as to the causes of death & disease among them, & how to remove these causes of the sad degeneration of their physical strength.

Without this, without the engaging the people themselves on our side - without convincing them of what is their own interest, we may pass what Sanitary Acts we please, but they remain a dead letter: We may have the most exact knowledge of what is wanted, but we cannot carry it out.

Mr. Hewlett has the most remarkable influence over the people - from his unrivalled practical experience: his knowledge of the customs & habits of townsmen and villagers: his sympathy & insight not only as to the cities but as to the villages where live the greater part of an Indian population.

As to water-supply, conservancy, sewerage & drainage, surface & subsoil, as to buildings & ventilation, his practical knowledge is unequalled: his powers of work are unrivalled. No expert knows better how a Sanitary bill for Villages should be drafted. No writings or reports give more essential practical information. No man is better versed, perhaps no man is practically so well versed in all Sanitary problems & details, & how to deal with them: his is no mere theoretical knowledge; and he has the requisite Sanitary Engineering knowledge to tell the Engineer what he wants to be done.

As I have spoken of Mr. Hewlett's great influence with the people, I may perhaps mention a curious instance - one out of many: When he began work in Bombay, the people might die of Cholera at the rate of 200 or 300 a day; & none would take any notice except to scold the Goddess of Cholera or Small-pox. Now they will cry out, if there are 2 or 3 Deaths by Cholera: Bestir yourselves, Gentlemen; don't you see we are all dead? This is a great step. But that of bestirring themselves is a greater; & one begun by Mr. Hewlett.

I give the Government joy which enlists his services whether for home or for India.
Florence Nightingale

Letter 6 of 6

Karen Meneses, PhD, RN, FAAN and M. Patrick McNees, PhD, FAAN

Description: This is a letter of reference for Thomas Gillham Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay and former Sanitary Commissioner. The position he seeks is not noted. Nightingale's review is very complementary regarding Hewlett's abilities and knowledge. She speaks particularly of his experiences and successes in dealing with cholera and the Famine of 1876-8 in Bombay.

Transcript:

London October 10 1888

I have been asked to give my testimony to the work of Mr. T. Gillham Hewlett, C.I.E. Deputy Surgeon Genl in H. M.'s India Service, late Sanitary Commissioner for the Govt of Bombay.

I have known him for many years. I have known his work well whether as Health Officer of Bombay city, or in the Famine, or as Sanitary Commissioner. I have been in the constant habit of consulting him on all Sanitary Subjects, to which his life has been devoted, head & heart & body & soul. Whether his work lay among our troops, European & native - or among the native populations, gentle or simple - men, women, or children.

He was the first Health Officer of Bombay, and for upwards 7 years, he was a Sanitarily engineered city in himself: up at 2 or 3 a.m. himself leading & organizing his army of scavengers. In this war against the Death rate, it fell from 35 to 23 per 1000. And Cholera in its intensity almost disappeared.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Famine of 1876-8, while acting as Sanitary Commissioner - travelling often for 20 hours out of the 24, without tents - sometimes without food - organizing, arranging, supervising, advising, providing health for the relief camps & centres - truly a noble work - & which added immensely to his experience of the rural inhabitants.

He was the Sanitary Missionary of the Presidency, as Sanitary Commissioner, for the last five years, & on two previous occasions for several years: instructing, teaching the people, whether native gentlemen, who might be Presidents of Municipalities or Panchayats, headmen, villagers, as to the causes of death & disease among them, & how to remove these causes of the sad degeneration of their physical strength.

Without this, without the engaging the people themselves on our side - without convincing them of what is their own interest, we may pass what Sanitary Acts we please, but they remain a dead letter: We may have the most exact knowledge of what is wanted, but we cannot carry it out.

Mr. Hewlett has the most remarkable influence over the people - from his unrivalled practical experience: his knowledge of the customs & habits of townsmen and villagers: his sympathy & insight not only as to the cities but as to the villages where live the greater part of an Indian population.

As to water-supply, conservancy, sewerage & drainage, surface & subsoil, as to buildings & ventilation, his practical knowledge is unequalled: his powers of work are unrivalled. No expert knows better how a Sanitary bill for Villages should be drafted. No writings or reports give more essential practical information. No man is better versed, perhaps no man is practically so well versed in all Sanitary problems & details, & how to deal with them: his is no mere theoretical knowledge; and he has the requisite Sanitary Engineering knowledge to tell the Engineer what he wants to be done.

As I have spoken of Mr. Hewlett's great influence with the people, I may perhaps mention a curious instance - one out of many: When he began work in Bombay, the people might die of Cholera at the rate of 200 or 300 a day; & none would take any notice except to scold the Goddess of Cholera or Small-pox. Now they will cry out, if there are 2 or 3 Deaths by Cholera: Bestir yourselves, Gentlemen; don't you see we are all dead? This is a great step. But that of bestirring themselves is a greater; & one begun by Mr. Hewlett.

I give the Government joy which enlists his services whether for home or for India.
Florence Nightingale

Letter 1 of 8

Marie Bakitas, DNSc, CRNP
In honor of her sister Connie, UAB SON, Palliative Care Nursing, and UAB Center for Palliative and Supportive Care

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about a recently proposed act concerning Bombay village sanitation and the establishment of an executive agency and local and district boards to link the villages together.

Transcript:

Most Private - "Resolution" of Govt of India - Oct 17/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane W.

My dear Sir

I received on Monday a letter from Simla saying: "We are, however, now engaged in remedying this defect" (viz "defect" in "fostering the village organisation in Bombay," & in "establishing an executive Agency,") "and I have at present under consideration a proposal for the introduction into the Bombay Council of an Act which not only provides for Sanitation in villages, & establishes that executive agency to which you refer, but will also link the village community to the larger territorial area under the control of the local & District Boards".

I feel so very anxious as to whether this "proposal" is practically satisfactory. Can you tell what it is? It must be something It must be something, I suppose, on the lines of which Sir Raymond West is to draft the Bill of which you told me. Lord Dufferin is evidently in earnest in laying down those lines - in pursuance of his "Resolution- for the 'Subordinate Administrations' to work on, as far as he can, in preparation for his successor.

2. I am reminded that the "recently re-cast" Municipal Acts "confer large powers for promoting Sanitary & other improvements" & for "entertaininq the agencies necessary for these purposes". In the Municipalities in Bombay Presy are you satisfied with these "powers" & these "agencies? Or is Ahmedabad the only Muny which uses them properly?

3. In the same letter from Simla he refers again, in answer to the question "how funds are to be provided for the sanitation of villages, to the fact that some of the local Govt Acts "give power to impose taxation locally for local purposes". And that Madras especially exercises it & that others (other Local Govts) I suppose, Bombay - are being "urged to arm themselves with it". Copies of the Madras & Bombay Acts (of which last you kindly sent me an abstract) of the N.W.P. Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Central Provinces Act, & of the Bengal Act, are sent me from Simla.

I have glanced thro' them, but do not find them very satisfactory. I always remember what you told me that "villagers" do not so much object to be taxed as to find that nothing is done in their own village of what they have paid for. Only in one act (Madras) do I find a provision even of this sort: viz. that each Taluq shall receive back from the District Fund for certain approved purposes at least half of the amount of (taxes) taxation said Taluq has paid. However I have had time to look but cursorily at these Acts. And I had much rather hear your opinion of all these things.

ever sincerely yrs
F. Nightingale

I bear in mind your excellent Notes on the "Resolution itself - how to work it out.

What other Province has a village organisation workable like that of Bombay?
F. N.

Letter 2 of 8

Marie Bakitas, DNSc, CRNP
In honor of her sister Connie, UAB SON, Palliative Care Nursing, and UAB Center for Palliative and Supportive Care

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about a recently proposed act concerning Bombay village sanitation and the establishment of an executive agency and local and district boards to link the villages together.

Transcript:

Most Private - "Resolution" of Govt of India - Oct 17/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane W.

My dear Sir

I received on Monday a letter from Simla saying: "We are, however, now engaged in remedying this defect" (viz "defect" in "fostering the village organisation in Bombay," & in "establishing an executive Agency,") "and I have at present under consideration a proposal for the introduction into the Bombay Council of an Act which not only provides for Sanitation in villages, & establishes that executive agency to which you refer, but will also link the village community to the larger territorial area under the control of the local & District Boards".

I feel so very anxious as to whether this "proposal" is practically satisfactory. Can you tell what it is? It must be something It must be something, I suppose, on the lines of which Sir Raymond West is to draft the Bill of which you told me. Lord Dufferin is evidently in earnest in laying down those lines - in pursuance of his "Resolution- for the 'Subordinate Administrations' to work on, as far as he can, in preparation for his successor.

2. I am reminded that the "recently re-cast" Municipal Acts "confer large powers for promoting Sanitary & other improvements" & for "entertaininq the agencies necessary for these purposes". In the Municipalities in Bombay Presy are you satisfied with these "powers" & these "agencies? Or is Ahmedabad the only Muny which uses them properly?

3. In the same letter from Simla he refers again, in answer to the question "how funds are to be provided for the sanitation of villages, to the fact that some of the local Govt Acts "give power to impose taxation locally for local purposes". And that Madras especially exercises it & that others (other Local Govts) I suppose, Bombay - are being "urged to arm themselves with it". Copies of the Madras & Bombay Acts (of which last you kindly sent me an abstract) of the N.W.P. Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Central Provinces Act, & of the Bengal Act, are sent me from Simla.

I have glanced thro' them, but do not find them very satisfactory. I always remember what you told me that "villagers" do not so much object to be taxed as to find that nothing is done in their own village of what they have paid for. Only in one act (Madras) do I find a provision even of this sort: viz. that each Taluq shall receive back from the District Fund for certain approved purposes at least half of the amount of (taxes) taxation said Taluq has paid. However I have had time to look but cursorily at these Acts. And I had much rather hear your opinion of all these things.

ever sincerely yrs
F. Nightingale

I bear in mind your excellent Notes on the "Resolution itself - how to work it out.

What other Province has a village organisation workable like that of Bombay?
F. N.

Letter 3 of 8

Marie Bakitas, DNSc, CRNP
In honor of her sister Connie, UAB SON, Palliative Care Nursing, and UAB Center for Palliative and Supportive Care

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about a recently proposed act concerning Bombay village sanitation and the establishment of an executive agency and local and district boards to link the villages together.

Transcript:

Most Private - "Resolution" of Govt of India - Oct 17/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane W.

My dear Sir

I received on Monday a letter from Simla saying: "We are, however, now engaged in remedying this defect" (viz "defect" in "fostering the village organisation in Bombay," & in "establishing an executive Agency,") "and I have at present under consideration a proposal for the introduction into the Bombay Council of an Act which not only provides for Sanitation in villages, & establishes that executive agency to which you refer, but will also link the village community to the larger territorial area under the control of the local & District Boards".

I feel so very anxious as to whether this "proposal" is practically satisfactory. Can you tell what it is? It must be something It must be something, I suppose, on the lines of which Sir Raymond West is to draft the Bill of which you told me. Lord Dufferin is evidently in earnest in laying down those lines - in pursuance of his "Resolution- for the 'Subordinate Administrations' to work on, as far as he can, in preparation for his successor.

2. I am reminded that the "recently re-cast" Municipal Acts "confer large powers for promoting Sanitary & other improvements" & for "entertaininq the agencies necessary for these purposes". In the Municipalities in Bombay Presy are you satisfied with these "powers" & these "agencies? Or is Ahmedabad the only Muny which uses them properly?

3. In the same letter from Simla he refers again, in answer to the question "how funds are to be provided for the sanitation of villages, to the fact that some of the local Govt Acts "give power to impose taxation locally for local purposes". And that Madras especially exercises it & that others (other Local Govts) I suppose, Bombay - are being "urged to arm themselves with it". Copies of the Madras & Bombay Acts (of which last you kindly sent me an abstract) of the N.W.P. Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Central Provinces Act, & of the Bengal Act, are sent me from Simla.

I have glanced thro' them, but do not find them very satisfactory. I always remember what you told me that "villagers" do not so much object to be taxed as to find that nothing is done in their own village of what they have paid for. Only in one act (Madras) do I find a provision even of this sort: viz. that each Taluq shall receive back from the District Fund for certain approved purposes at least half of the amount of (taxes) taxation said Taluq has paid. However I have had time to look but cursorily at these Acts. And I had much rather hear your opinion of all these things.

ever sincerely yrs
F. Nightingale

I bear in mind your excellent Notes on the "Resolution itself - how to work it out.

What other Province has a village organisation workable like that of Bombay?
F. N.

Letter 4 of 8

Marie Bakitas, DNSc, CRNP
In honor of her sister Connie, UAB SON, Palliative Care Nursing, and UAB Center for Palliative and Supportive Care

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about a recently proposed act concerning Bombay village sanitation and the establishment of an executive agency and local and district boards to link the villages together.

Transcript:

Most Private - "Resolution" of Govt of India - Oct 17/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane W.

My dear Sir

I received on Monday a letter from Simla saying: "We are, however, now engaged in remedying this defect" (viz "defect" in "fostering the village organisation in Bombay," & in "establishing an executive Agency,") "and I have at present under consideration a proposal for the introduction into the Bombay Council of an Act which not only provides for Sanitation in villages, & establishes that executive agency to which you refer, but will also link the village community to the larger territorial area under the control of the local & District Boards".

I feel so very anxious as to whether this "proposal" is practically satisfactory. Can you tell what it is? It must be something It must be something, I suppose, on the lines of which Sir Raymond West is to draft the Bill of which you told me. Lord Dufferin is evidently in earnest in laying down those lines - in pursuance of his "Resolution- for the 'Subordinate Administrations' to work on, as far as he can, in preparation for his successor.

2. I am reminded that the "recently re-cast" Municipal Acts "confer large powers for promoting Sanitary & other improvements" & for "entertaininq the agencies necessary for these purposes". In the Municipalities in Bombay Presy are you satisfied with these "powers" & these "agencies? Or is Ahmedabad the only Muny which uses them properly?

3. In the same letter from Simla he refers again, in answer to the question "how funds are to be provided for the sanitation of villages, to the fact that some of the local Govt Acts "give power to impose taxation locally for local purposes". And that Madras especially exercises it & that others (other Local Govts) I suppose, Bombay - are being "urged to arm themselves with it". Copies of the Madras & Bombay Acts (of which last you kindly sent me an abstract) of the N.W.P. Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Central Provinces Act, & of the Bengal Act, are sent me from Simla.

I have glanced thro' them, but do not find them very satisfactory. I always remember what you told me that "villagers" do not so much object to be taxed as to find that nothing is done in their own village of what they have paid for. Only in one act (Madras) do I find a provision even of this sort: viz. that each Taluq shall receive back from the District Fund for certain approved purposes at least half of the amount of (taxes) taxation said Taluq has paid. However I have had time to look but cursorily at these Acts. And I had much rather hear your opinion of all these things.

ever sincerely yrs
F. Nightingale

I bear in mind your excellent Notes on the "Resolution itself - how to work it out.

What other Province has a village organisation workable like that of Bombay?
F. N.

Letter 5 of 8

Marie Bakitas, DNSc, CRNP
In honor of her sister Connie, UAB SON, Palliative Care Nursing, and UAB Center for Palliative and Supportive Care

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about a recently proposed act concerning Bombay village sanitation and the establishment of an executive agency and local and district boards to link the villages together.

Transcript:

Most Private - "Resolution" of Govt of India - Oct 17/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane W.

My dear Sir

I received on Monday a letter from Simla saying: "We are, however, now engaged in remedying this defect" (viz "defect" in "fostering the village organisation in Bombay," & in "establishing an executive Agency,") "and I have at present under consideration a proposal for the introduction into the Bombay Council of an Act which not only provides for Sanitation in villages, & establishes that executive agency to which you refer, but will also link the village community to the larger territorial area under the control of the local & District Boards".

I feel so very anxious as to whether this "proposal" is practically satisfactory. Can you tell what it is? It must be something It must be something, I suppose, on the lines of which Sir Raymond West is to draft the Bill of which you told me. Lord Dufferin is evidently in earnest in laying down those lines - in pursuance of his "Resolution- for the 'Subordinate Administrations' to work on, as far as he can, in preparation for his successor.

2. I am reminded that the "recently re-cast" Municipal Acts "confer large powers for promoting Sanitary & other improvements" & for "entertaininq the agencies necessary for these purposes". In the Municipalities in Bombay Presy are you satisfied with these "powers" & these "agencies? Or is Ahmedabad the only Muny which uses them properly?

3. In the same letter from Simla he refers again, in answer to the question "how funds are to be provided for the sanitation of villages, to the fact that some of the local Govt Acts "give power to impose taxation locally for local purposes". And that Madras especially exercises it & that others (other Local Govts) I suppose, Bombay - are being "urged to arm themselves with it". Copies of the Madras & Bombay Acts (of which last you kindly sent me an abstract) of the N.W.P. Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Central Provinces Act, & of the Bengal Act, are sent me from Simla.

I have glanced thro' them, but do not find them very satisfactory. I always remember what you told me that "villagers" do not so much object to be taxed as to find that nothing is done in their own village of what they have paid for. Only in one act (Madras) do I find a provision even of this sort: viz. that each Taluq shall receive back from the District Fund for certain approved purposes at least half of the amount of (taxes) taxation said Taluq has paid. However I have had time to look but cursorily at these Acts. And I had much rather hear your opinion of all these things.

ever sincerely yrs
F. Nightingale

I bear in mind your excellent Notes on the "Resolution itself - how to work it out.

What other Province has a village organisation workable like that of Bombay?
F. N.

Letter 6 of 8

Marie Bakitas, DNSc, CRNP
In honor of her sister Connie, UAB SON, Palliative Care Nursing, and UAB Center for Palliative and Supportive Care

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about a recently proposed act concerning Bombay village sanitation and the establishment of an executive agency and local and district boards to link the villages together.

Transcript:

Most Private - "Resolution" of Govt of India - Oct 17/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane W.

My dear Sir

I received on Monday a letter from Simla saying: "We are, however, now engaged in remedying this defect" (viz "defect" in "fostering the village organisation in Bombay," & in "establishing an executive Agency,") "and I have at present under consideration a proposal for the introduction into the Bombay Council of an Act which not only provides for Sanitation in villages, & establishes that executive agency to which you refer, but will also link the village community to the larger territorial area under the control of the local & District Boards".

I feel so very anxious as to whether this "proposal" is practically satisfactory. Can you tell what it is? It must be something It must be something, I suppose, on the lines of which Sir Raymond West is to draft the Bill of which you told me. Lord Dufferin is evidently in earnest in laying down those lines - in pursuance of his "Resolution- for the 'Subordinate Administrations' to work on, as far as he can, in preparation for his successor.

2. I am reminded that the "recently re-cast" Municipal Acts "confer large powers for promoting Sanitary & other improvements" & for "entertaininq the agencies necessary for these purposes". In the Municipalities in Bombay Presy are you satisfied with these "powers" & these "agencies? Or is Ahmedabad the only Muny which uses them properly?

3. In the same letter from Simla he refers again, in answer to the question "how funds are to be provided for the sanitation of villages, to the fact that some of the local Govt Acts "give power to impose taxation locally for local purposes". And that Madras especially exercises it & that others (other Local Govts) I suppose, Bombay - are being "urged to arm themselves with it". Copies of the Madras & Bombay Acts (of which last you kindly sent me an abstract) of the N.W.P. Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Central Provinces Act, & of the Bengal Act, are sent me from Simla.

I have glanced thro' them, but do not find them very satisfactory. I always remember what you told me that "villagers" do not so much object to be taxed as to find that nothing is done in their own village of what they have paid for. Only in one act (Madras) do I find a provision even of this sort: viz. that each Taluq shall receive back from the District Fund for certain approved purposes at least half of the amount of (taxes) taxation said Taluq has paid. However I have had time to look but cursorily at these Acts. And I had much rather hear your opinion of all these things.

ever sincerely yrs
F. Nightingale

I bear in mind your excellent Notes on the "Resolution itself - how to work it out.

What other Province has a village organisation workable like that of Bombay?
F. N.

Letter 7 of 8

Marie Bakitas, DNSc, CRNP
In honor of her sister Connie, UAB SON, Palliative Care Nursing, and UAB Center for Palliative and Supportive Care

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about a recently proposed act concerning Bombay village sanitation and the establishment of an executive agency and local and district boards to link the villages together.

Transcript:

Most Private - "Resolution" of Govt of India - Oct 17/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane W.

My dear Sir

I received on Monday a letter from Simla saying: "We are, however, now engaged in remedying this defect" (viz "defect" in "fostering the village organisation in Bombay," & in "establishing an executive Agency,") "and I have at present under consideration a proposal for the introduction into the Bombay Council of an Act which not only provides for Sanitation in villages, & establishes that executive agency to which you refer, but will also link the village community to the larger territorial area under the control of the local & District Boards".

I feel so very anxious as to whether this "proposal" is practically satisfactory. Can you tell what it is? It must be something It must be something, I suppose, on the lines of which Sir Raymond West is to draft the Bill of which you told me. Lord Dufferin is evidently in earnest in laying down those lines - in pursuance of his "Resolution- for the 'Subordinate Administrations' to work on, as far as he can, in preparation for his successor.

2. I am reminded that the "recently re-cast" Municipal Acts "confer large powers for promoting Sanitary & other improvements" & for "entertaininq the agencies necessary for these purposes". In the Municipalities in Bombay Presy are you satisfied with these "powers" & these "agencies? Or is Ahmedabad the only Muny which uses them properly?

3. In the same letter from Simla he refers again, in answer to the question "how funds are to be provided for the sanitation of villages, to the fact that some of the local Govt Acts "give power to impose taxation locally for local purposes". And that Madras especially exercises it & that others (other Local Govts) I suppose, Bombay - are being "urged to arm themselves with it". Copies of the Madras & Bombay Acts (of which last you kindly sent me an abstract) of the N.W.P. Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Central Provinces Act, & of the Bengal Act, are sent me from Simla.

I have glanced thro' them, but do not find them very satisfactory. I always remember what you told me that "villagers" do not so much object to be taxed as to find that nothing is done in their own village of what they have paid for. Only in one act (Madras) do I find a provision even of this sort: viz. that each Taluq shall receive back from the District Fund for certain approved purposes at least half of the amount of (taxes) taxation said Taluq has paid. However I have had time to look but cursorily at these Acts. And I had much rather hear your opinion of all these things.

ever sincerely yrs
F. Nightingale

I bear in mind your excellent Notes on the "Resolution itself - how to work it out.

What other Province has a village organisation workable like that of Bombay?
F. N.

Letter 8 of 8

Marie Bakitas, DNSc, CRNP
In honor of her sister Connie, UAB SON, Palliative Care Nursing, and UAB Center for Palliative and Supportive Care

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about a recently proposed act concerning Bombay village sanitation and the establishment of an executive agency and local and district boards to link the villages together.

Transcript:

Most Private - "Resolution" of Govt of India - Oct 17/88 - 10, South Street - Park Lane W.

My dear Sir

I received on Monday a letter from Simla saying: "We are, however, now engaged in remedying this defect" (viz "defect" in "fostering the village organisation in Bombay," & in "establishing an executive Agency,") "and I have at present under consideration a proposal for the introduction into the Bombay Council of an Act which not only provides for Sanitation in villages, & establishes that executive agency to which you refer, but will also link the village community to the larger territorial area under the control of the local & District Boards".

I feel so very anxious as to whether this "proposal" is practically satisfactory. Can you tell what it is? It must be something It must be something, I suppose, on the lines of which Sir Raymond West is to draft the Bill of which you told me. Lord Dufferin is evidently in earnest in laying down those lines - in pursuance of his "Resolution- for the 'Subordinate Administrations' to work on, as far as he can, in preparation for his successor.

2. I am reminded that the "recently re-cast" Municipal Acts "confer large powers for promoting Sanitary & other improvements" & for "entertaininq the agencies necessary for these purposes". In the Municipalities in Bombay Presy are you satisfied with these "powers" & these "agencies? Or is Ahmedabad the only Muny which uses them properly?

3. In the same letter from Simla he refers again, in answer to the question "how funds are to be provided for the sanitation of villages, to the fact that some of the local Govt Acts "give power to impose taxation locally for local purposes". And that Madras especially exercises it & that others (other Local Govts) I suppose, Bombay - are being "urged to arm themselves with it". Copies of the Madras & Bombay Acts (of which last you kindly sent me an abstract) of the N.W.P. Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Panjab Act, of the Central Provinces Act, & of the Bengal Act, are sent me from Simla.

I have glanced thro' them, but do not find them very satisfactory. I always remember what you told me that "villagers" do not so much object to be taxed as to find that nothing is done in their own village of what they have paid for. Only in one act (Madras) do I find a provision even of this sort: viz. that each Taluq shall receive back from the District Fund for certain approved purposes at least half of the amount of (taxes) taxation said Taluq has paid. However I have had time to look but cursorily at these Acts. And I had much rather hear your opinion of all these things.

ever sincerely yrs
F. Nightingale

I bear in mind your excellent Notes on the "Resolution itself - how to work it out.

What other Province has a village organisation workable like that of Bombay?
F. N.

Letter 1 of 5

Teena M. McGuinness, PhD, CRNP, FAAN and Colonel John P. McGuinness, MD

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay, about a village conservancy bill that is in the drafting process. She questions him about the problems he sees with one of the drafts.

Transcript:

10 South St - Private - Nov 4/88

My dear Sir

I am extremely grateful to you for your great kindness in sending me such a valuable paper on that abominable little Draft, which yet we must try to make as good as we can, as a stepping-stone to something better.

You will see a Sanitary Dept yet in Bombay, tho' I shall not. As you kindly offer it, I shall telegraph to you first thing tomorrow morning to ask you to send me by 12 o'cl. post, or earlier, if there is any, Mr. Crawford's (Confidential) letter of Aug 21 1885 & his Draft Village Conservancy Bill - of which I saw a copy at the time.

2. I am anxious to understand exactly why you think the proposed Cognizance (in this Bill) of the Committee (Panchayat) of offences against the Bill will be an "engine of private spite" on the part of the members of the Committee & why Mr. Crawford's Bill would not have been. Is it because the "inhabitants" might "establish" Mr. Crawford's Panchayat & the one proposed now would be selected & appointed by the Collection?

Also 3. What are the names of the Districts where there are no hereditary Officers & no Govt land granted to Mahars? Are they the Konkurs & Kumaon? Please write the names clearly.

Also 4. I presume, Part III., the "magistrates" are native "magistrates." Are they what you call Mamlutdars? I presume they are incorruptible, but know nothing necessarily of Sanitation.

5. Why will this Bill be such an "interference" & so "irritating" to the people, while the others tho' much fuller, would not be - I agree that it will but should like to be able to put it in a correct manner to carry conviction, as you would do - to do "Precis" for me & "procure information." I think I trouble you enough in giving me information & advice.

Yours very sincerely
F. Nightingale
T. Gillham Hewlett Esq &c &c

Letter 2 of 5

Teena M. McGuinness, PhD, CRNP, FAAN and Colonel John P. McGuinness, MD

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay, about a village conservancy bill that is in the drafting process. She questions him about the problems he sees with one of the drafts.

Transcript:

10 South St - Private - Nov 4/88

My dear Sir

I am extremely grateful to you for your great kindness in sending me such a valuable paper on that abominable little Draft, which yet we must try to make as good as we can, as a stepping-stone to something better.

You will see a Sanitary Dept yet in Bombay, tho' I shall not. As you kindly offer it, I shall telegraph to you first thing tomorrow morning to ask you to send me by 12 o'cl. post, or earlier, if there is any, Mr. Crawford's (Confidential) letter of Aug 21 1885 & his Draft Village Conservancy Bill - of which I saw a copy at the time.

2. I am anxious to understand exactly why you think the proposed Cognizance (in this Bill) of the Committee (Panchayat) of offences against the Bill will be an "engine of private spite" on the part of the members of the Committee & why Mr. Crawford's Bill would not have been. Is it because the "inhabitants" might "establish" Mr. Crawford's Panchayat & the one proposed now would be selected & appointed by the Collection?

Also 3. What are the names of the Districts where there are no hereditary Officers & no Govt land granted to Mahars? Are they the Konkurs & Kumaon? Please write the names clearly.

Also 4. I presume, Part III., the "magistrates" are native "magistrates." Are they what you call Mamlutdars? I presume they are incorruptible, but know nothing necessarily of Sanitation.

5. Why will this Bill be such an "interference" & so "irritating" to the people, while the others tho' much fuller, would not be - I agree that it will but should like to be able to put it in a correct manner to carry conviction, as you would do - to do "Precis" for me & "procure information." I think I trouble you enough in giving me information & advice.

Yours very sincerely
F. Nightingale
T. Gillham Hewlett Esq &c &c

Letter 3 of 5

Teena M. McGuinness, PhD, CRNP, FAAN and Colonel John P. McGuinness, MD

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay, about a village conservancy bill that is in the drafting process. She questions him about the problems he sees with one of the drafts.

Transcript:

10 South St - Private - Nov 4/88

My dear Sir

I am extremely grateful to you for your great kindness in sending me such a valuable paper on that abominable little Draft, which yet we must try to make as good as we can, as a stepping-stone to something better.

You will see a Sanitary Dept yet in Bombay, tho' I shall not. As you kindly offer it, I shall telegraph to you first thing tomorrow morning to ask you to send me by 12 o'cl. post, or earlier, if there is any, Mr. Crawford's (Confidential) letter of Aug 21 1885 & his Draft Village Conservancy Bill - of which I saw a copy at the time.

2. I am anxious to understand exactly why you think the proposed Cognizance (in this Bill) of the Committee (Panchayat) of offences against the Bill will be an "engine of private spite" on the part of the members of the Committee & why Mr. Crawford's Bill would not have been. Is it because the "inhabitants" might "establish" Mr. Crawford's Panchayat & the one proposed now would be selected & appointed by the Collection?

Also 3. What are the names of the Districts where there are no hereditary Officers & no Govt land granted to Mahars? Are they the Konkurs & Kumaon? Please write the names clearly.

Also 4. I presume, Part III., the "magistrates" are native "magistrates." Are they what you call Mamlutdars? I presume they are incorruptible, but know nothing necessarily of Sanitation.

5. Why will this Bill be such an "interference" & so "irritating" to the people, while the others tho' much fuller, would not be - I agree that it will but should like to be able to put it in a correct manner to carry conviction, as you would do - to do "Precis" for me & "procure information." I think I trouble you enough in giving me information & advice.

Yours very sincerely
F. Nightingale
T. Gillham Hewlett Esq &c &c

Letter 4 of 5

Teena M. McGuinness, PhD, CRNP, FAAN and Colonel John P. McGuinness, MD

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay, about a village conservancy bill that is in the drafting process. She questions him about the problems he sees with one of the drafts.

Transcript:

10 South St - Private - Nov 4/88

My dear Sir

I am extremely grateful to you for your great kindness in sending me such a valuable paper on that abominable little Draft, which yet we must try to make as good as we can, as a stepping-stone to something better.

You will see a Sanitary Dept yet in Bombay, tho' I shall not. As you kindly offer it, I shall telegraph to you first thing tomorrow morning to ask you to send me by 12 o'cl. post, or earlier, if there is any, Mr. Crawford's (Confidential) letter of Aug 21 1885 & his Draft Village Conservancy Bill - of which I saw a copy at the time.

2. I am anxious to understand exactly why you think the proposed Cognizance (in this Bill) of the Committee (Panchayat) of offences against the Bill will be an "engine of private spite" on the part of the members of the Committee & why Mr. Crawford's Bill would not have been. Is it because the "inhabitants" might "establish" Mr. Crawford's Panchayat & the one proposed now would be selected & appointed by the Collection?

Also 3. What are the names of the Districts where there are no hereditary Officers & no Govt land granted to Mahars? Are they the Konkurs & Kumaon? Please write the names clearly.

Also 4. I presume, Part III., the "magistrates" are native "magistrates." Are they what you call Mamlutdars? I presume they are incorruptible, but know nothing necessarily of Sanitation.

5. Why will this Bill be such an "interference" & so "irritating" to the people, while the others tho' much fuller, would not be - I agree that it will but should like to be able to put it in a correct manner to carry conviction, as you would do - to do "Precis" for me & "procure information." I think I trouble you enough in giving me information & advice.

Yours very sincerely
F. Nightingale
T. Gillham Hewlett Esq &c &c

Letter 5 of 5

Teena M. McGuinness, PhD, CRNP, FAAN and Colonel John P. McGuinness, MD

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, Health Officer of Bombay, about a village conservancy bill that is in the drafting process. She questions him about the problems he sees with one of the drafts.

Transcript:

10 South St - Private - Nov 4/88

My dear Sir

I am extremely grateful to you for your great kindness in sending me such a valuable paper on that abominable little Draft, which yet we must try to make as good as we can, as a stepping-stone to something better.

You will see a Sanitary Dept yet in Bombay, tho' I shall not. As you kindly offer it, I shall telegraph to you first thing tomorrow morning to ask you to send me by 12 o'cl. post, or earlier, if there is any, Mr. Crawford's (Confidential) letter of Aug 21 1885 & his Draft Village Conservancy Bill - of which I saw a copy at the time.

2. I am anxious to understand exactly why you think the proposed Cognizance (in this Bill) of the Committee (Panchayat) of offences against the Bill will be an "engine of private spite" on the part of the members of the Committee & why Mr. Crawford's Bill would not have been. Is it because the "inhabitants" might "establish" Mr. Crawford's Panchayat & the one proposed now would be selected & appointed by the Collection?

Also 3. What are the names of the Districts where there are no hereditary Officers & no Govt land granted to Mahars? Are they the Konkurs & Kumaon? Please write the names clearly.

Also 4. I presume, Part III., the "magistrates" are native "magistrates." Are they what you call Mamlutdars? I presume they are incorruptible, but know nothing necessarily of Sanitation.

5. Why will this Bill be such an "interference" & so "irritating" to the people, while the others tho' much fuller, would not be - I agree that it will but should like to be able to put it in a correct manner to carry conviction, as you would do - to do "Precis" for me & "procure information." I think I trouble you enough in giving me information & advice.

Yours very sincerely
F. Nightingale
T. Gillham Hewlett Esq &c &c

Letter 1 of 1

Dr. Kathleen A. Ladner (MSN 1974) and Mr. Gordon L. Ladner
In memory of their son, Benjamin L. Ladner

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett about sanitary and health conditions in India. She mentions the possibility of a famine in Western India and a new report on sanitary conditions in Madras.

Transcript:

10 South Street
Park Lane - 10th. Dec 1888

My dear Sir

Thank you very much for your kind note. Will you kindly tell me what you hear about the probability of having a famine in Western India? We have heard so many threatenings this year.

Another private bulky Report "of the Sanitary condition of the city of Madras, which possibly you may not have heard of, has come in to the President of our Army Sanitary Commission. This looks as if India meant business. The Sanitary state of Madras is represented as abominable. I have never known so many appeals to the Army Sanitary Commission come in direct.

I will write again in a day or two.
Yours faithfully ever
Florence Nightingale
T. Gillham Hewlett Esq.

Letter 1 of 3

Patricia A. Patrician, PhD, RN, FAAN
In memory of her aunt, Adeline Markiewicz Mukerjee, LPN

Description: Nightingale explains to an unknown recipient that she is forwarding a letter she wrote to the native Indian associations concerning the Bombay Village Sanitation Bill. She also mentions problems with her eyes.

Transcript:

10 South St. Park Lane W. - 2 - May 21/89 - Bombay Village Sanitation Bill

My dear Sir

I am very much obliged to you for sending me the 'Pioneers' with your letters in them, which I will return as soon as I have read them. But I am sorry to say my eyes are suffering so much from over-work that I cannot read difficult print or difficult hand-writing as much as I would.

I take the liberty of sending you a copy of a letter which I was requested to write (by a Govt man) to the leading Native Associations in Bombay on the subject of the Bill, & which has been translated, & very fully commented on in the Bombay newspapers. I will ask you to return it to me.

I am sure I shall relish your printed letters when I am able to read them And I am Certain that you are master of the old fable that, when they wanted to the sharp & violent wind which succeeded strip a man's cloak off him, It was he only held his cloak tighter - It was the Sun Shining which made him throw it aside.

I had received a copy of the Bombay Village Sanitation Bill before writing it.

I have many things to write about, but cannot to-day.

My eyes are now so bad that consulting letters not plainly written or papers not plainly printed blinds me for a week.

I cannot say how glad I am that your health is so good.
God bless you.
Yours ever Sincerely
F. Nightingale

Letter 2 of 3

Patricia A. Patrician, PhD, RN, FAAN
In memory of her aunt, Adeline Markiewicz Mukerjee, LPN

Description: Nightingale explains to an unknown recipient that she is forwarding a letter she wrote to the native Indian associations concerning the Bombay Village Sanitation Bill. She also mentions problems with her eyes.

Transcript:

10 South St. Park Lane W. - 2 - May 21/89 - Bombay Village Sanitation Bill

My dear Sir

I am very much obliged to you for sending me the 'Pioneers' with your letters in them, which I will return as soon as I have read them. But I am sorry to say my eyes are suffering so much from over-work that I cannot read difficult print or difficult hand-writing as much as I would.

I take the liberty of sending you a copy of a letter which I was requested to write (by a Govt man) to the leading Native Associations in Bombay on the subject of the Bill, & which has been translated, & very fully commented on in the Bombay newspapers. I will ask you to return it to me.

I am sure I shall relish your printed letters when I am able to read them And I am Certain that you are master of the old fable that, when they wanted to the sharp & violent wind which succeeded strip a man's cloak off him, It was he only held his cloak tighter - It was the Sun Shining which made him throw it aside.

I had received a copy of the Bombay Village Sanitation Bill before writing it.

I have many things to write about, but cannot to-day.

My eyes are now so bad that consulting letters not plainly written or papers not plainly printed blinds me for a week.

I cannot say how glad I am that your health is so good.
God bless you.
Yours ever Sincerely
F. Nightingale

Letter 3 of 3

Patricia A. Patrician, PhD, RN, FAAN
In memory of her aunt, Adeline Markiewicz Mukerjee, LPN

Description: Nightingale explains to an unknown recipient that she is forwarding a letter she wrote to the native Indian associations concerning the Bombay Village Sanitation Bill. She also mentions problems with her eyes.

Transcript:

10 South St. Park Lane W. - 2 - May 21/89 - Bombay Village Sanitation Bill

My dear Sir

I am very much obliged to you for sending me the 'Pioneers' with your letters in them, which I will return as soon as I have read them. But I am sorry to say my eyes are suffering so much from over-work that I cannot read difficult print or difficult hand-writing as much as I would.

I take the liberty of sending you a copy of a letter which I was requested to write (by a Govt man) to the leading Native Associations in Bombay on the subject of the Bill, & which has been translated, & very fully commented on in the Bombay newspapers. I will ask you to return it to me.

I am sure I shall relish your printed letters when I am able to read them And I am Certain that you are master of the old fable that, when they wanted to the sharp & violent wind which succeeded strip a man's cloak off him, It was he only held his cloak tighter - It was the Sun Shining which made him throw it aside.

I had received a copy of the Bombay Village Sanitation Bill before writing it.

I have many things to write about, but cannot to-day.

My eyes are now so bad that consulting letters not plainly written or papers not plainly printed blinds me for a week.

I cannot say how glad I am that your health is so good.
God bless you.
Yours ever Sincerely
F. Nightingale

Letter 1 of 3

Dr. Elizabeth A. Crooks (DNP 2013) and Dr. David S. Geldmacher

Description: In this letter, Nightingale is asking her doctor, Henry Power, to visit her about the worsening condition of her eyes and general health.

Transcript:

Henry Power Esq - 37a Great Cumberland Place W. - F. Nightingale - 23/1/93
23/1/93 - 10 South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

I feel my great stupidity in not consulting you again about my eyes which are worse.

My health being worse too - indeed for the last few weeks I have scarcely left my bed.

Could you fix some day & hour to come kindly in the afternoon to see come by me?

Yours faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Henry Power Esq

Letter 2 of 3

Dr. Elizabeth A. Crooks (DNP 2013) and Dr. David S. Geldmacher

Description: In this letter, Nightingale is asking her doctor, Henry Power, to visit her about the worsening condition of her eyes and general health.

Transcript:

Henry Power Esq - 37a Great Cumberland Place W. - F. Nightingale - 23/1/93
23/1/93 - 10 South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

I feel my great stupidity in not consulting you again about my eyes which are worse.

My health being worse too - indeed for the last few weeks I have scarcely left my bed.

Could you fix some day & hour to come kindly in the afternoon to see come by me?

Yours faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Henry Power Esq

Letter 3 of 3

Dr. Elizabeth A. Crooks (DNP 2013) and Dr. David S. Geldmacher

Description: In this letter, Nightingale is asking her doctor, Henry Power, to visit her about the worsening condition of her eyes and general health.

Transcript:

Henry Power Esq - 37a Great Cumberland Place W. - F. Nightingale - 23/1/93
23/1/93 - 10 South Street - Park Lane. W.

My dear Sir

I feel my great stupidity in not consulting you again about my eyes which are worse.

My health being worse too - indeed for the last few weeks I have scarcely left my bed.

Could you fix some day & hour to come kindly in the afternoon to see come by me?

Yours faithfully
Florence Nightingale

Henry Power Esq

Letter 1 of 7

Donated by Friends, Colleagues, and Family
In memory of Laura Nivens Riser (BSN 1980, MSN 1997)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, CIE Health Officer of Bombay, 1867-1889. She thanks him for sending a copy of his "Report on the Prevention of Cholera", and she comments upon it. Her remarks concern methods for the disposal of house sewage.

Transcript:

September 3/67
35 South Street
Park Lane
London, W.

Dear Sir

I have to thank you very much for your kindness in sending me your Report on the Prevention of Cholera.

I had also received a copy, with the Municipal Commissioner's letter prefixed to it, from the India Office.

Let me also thank you very much for your kind letter.

You will perhaps be glad to hear any little hints I can collect from Europe on both sides on the subject of your pamphlet. T. G. Hewlett Esq.

The best scientific opinion in Europe rather tends now to consider that on which the prevention of Cholera is here based as a groundless theory. And we have nothing to do with theories.

The system of disposing of house sewage which you mention is essentially the same as has been tried for 30 years at an enormous cost in Paris, & which the Emperor is now putting an end to by having Paris drained.

In a Report on Madras drainage, by Capt Tulloch R. E., which he has just brought to England, he shows that the dry system costs more than ten times as much as much [sic] as the sewer system.

But it is not only the cost which is fatal to the dry earth system in towns. Is it not the fact that it is impossible to carry it out with the same safety to health as the sewer system?

I know of at least one large institution where an outbreak of Cholera was distinctly traceable to this.

It is always interesting to know what has been said on both sides.

In the Madras report, the Medical Officer recommends the adoption of the dry system & gives an estimate. The Engineer shows that it will be ten times as much.

Doubtless I am not telling you anything new. Doubtless you know all that can be said much better than I do.

All the Paris sewage is now to be taken away in pipes & applied to agriculture. The Dutch Method removes only about a two hundredth part of the sewage of a town.

As to value, the latest estimate is just published in the "Rivers Commission" Report, & shows that sewer water gives actual produce equal to £100 per acre.

Would it not be at once concentrating & intensifying the energies of each side & preventing waste of power if, as a general rule, the Officer of Health deals with pointing out causes of diseases; the Engineer deals with removal of those causes & estimate of cost? And tho' the one Report should never be made without being accompanied or closely followed by the other--yet it would save much time & energy if neither were confused with the other.

We have grievously erred in this respect in England- And often I have observed (especially since Sidney Herbert's death) that the Engineering Officer has usurped the Medical Officer's functions and vice versa -

It is probably most easy to avoid this when the two go together - I hope to send you shortly some Reports which our Government officers are about to issue on the subjects on which you write so ably.

And therefore I will not write at greater length.
Pray believe me
Ever your faithful servant
Florence Nightingale

If I can get you anything worth your notice to send by this mail, I will not re-open this letter but you will know that it comes with my kind regards.
F. N.

Letter 2 of 7

Donated by Friends, Colleagues, and Family
In memory of Laura Nivens Riser (BSN 1980, MSN 1997)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, CIE Health Officer of Bombay, 1867-1889. She thanks him for sending a copy of his "Report on the Prevention of Cholera", and she comments upon it. Her remarks concern methods for the disposal of house sewage.

Transcript:

September 3/67
35 South Street
Park Lane
London, W.

Dear Sir

I have to thank you very much for your kindness in sending me your Report on the Prevention of Cholera.

I had also received a copy, with the Municipal Commissioner's letter prefixed to it, from the India Office.

Let me also thank you very much for your kind letter.

You will perhaps be glad to hear any little hints I can collect from Europe on both sides on the subject of your pamphlet. T. G. Hewlett Esq.

The best scientific opinion in Europe rather tends now to consider that on which the prevention of Cholera is here based as a groundless theory. And we have nothing to do with theories.

The system of disposing of house sewage which you mention is essentially the same as has been tried for 30 years at an enormous cost in Paris, & which the Emperor is now putting an end to by having Paris drained.

In a Report on Madras drainage, by Capt Tulloch R. E., which he has just brought to England, he shows that the dry system costs more than ten times as much as much [sic] as the sewer system.

But it is not only the cost which is fatal to the dry earth system in towns. Is it not the fact that it is impossible to carry it out with the same safety to health as the sewer system?

I know of at least one large institution where an outbreak of Cholera was distinctly traceable to this.

It is always interesting to know what has been said on both sides.

In the Madras report, the Medical Officer recommends the adoption of the dry system & gives an estimate. The Engineer shows that it will be ten times as much.

Doubtless I am not telling you anything new. Doubtless you know all that can be said much better than I do.

All the Paris sewage is now to be taken away in pipes & applied to agriculture. The Dutch Method removes only about a two hundredth part of the sewage of a town.

As to value, the latest estimate is just published in the "Rivers Commission" Report, & shows that sewer water gives actual produce equal to £100 per acre.

Would it not be at once concentrating & intensifying the energies of each side & preventing waste of power if, as a general rule, the Officer of Health deals with pointing out causes of diseases; the Engineer deals with removal of those causes & estimate of cost? And tho' the one Report should never be made without being accompanied or closely followed by the other--yet it would save much time & energy if neither were confused with the other.

We have grievously erred in this respect in England- And often I have observed (especially since Sidney Herbert's death) that the Engineering Officer has usurped the Medical Officer's functions and vice versa -

It is probably most easy to avoid this when the two go together - I hope to send you shortly some Reports which our Government officers are about to issue on the subjects on which you write so ably.

And therefore I will not write at greater length.
Pray believe me
Ever your faithful servant
Florence Nightingale

If I can get you anything worth your notice to send by this mail, I will not re-open this letter but you will know that it comes with my kind regards.
F. N.

Letter 3 of 7

Donated by Friends, Colleagues, and Family
In memory of Laura Nivens Riser (BSN 1980, MSN 1997)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, CIE Health Officer of Bombay, 1867-1889. She thanks him for sending a copy of his "Report on the Prevention of Cholera", and she comments upon it. Her remarks concern methods for the disposal of house sewage.

Transcript:

September 3/67
35 South Street
Park Lane
London, W.

Dear Sir

I have to thank you very much for your kindness in sending me your Report on the Prevention of Cholera.

I had also received a copy, with the Municipal Commissioner's letter prefixed to it, from the India Office.

Let me also thank you very much for your kind letter.

You will perhaps be glad to hear any little hints I can collect from Europe on both sides on the subject of your pamphlet. T. G. Hewlett Esq.

The best scientific opinion in Europe rather tends now to consider that on which the prevention of Cholera is here based as a groundless theory. And we have nothing to do with theories.

The system of disposing of house sewage which you mention is essentially the same as has been tried for 30 years at an enormous cost in Paris, & which the Emperor is now putting an end to by having Paris drained.

In a Report on Madras drainage, by Capt Tulloch R. E., which he has just brought to England, he shows that the dry system costs more than ten times as much as much [sic] as the sewer system.

But it is not only the cost which is fatal to the dry earth system in towns. Is it not the fact that it is impossible to carry it out with the same safety to health as the sewer system?

I know of at least one large institution where an outbreak of Cholera was distinctly traceable to this.

It is always interesting to know what has been said on both sides.

In the Madras report, the Medical Officer recommends the adoption of the dry system & gives an estimate. The Engineer shows that it will be ten times as much.

Doubtless I am not telling you anything new. Doubtless you know all that can be said much better than I do.

All the Paris sewage is now to be taken away in pipes & applied to agriculture. The Dutch Method removes only about a two hundredth part of the sewage of a town.

As to value, the latest estimate is just published in the "Rivers Commission" Report, & shows that sewer water gives actual produce equal to £100 per acre.

Would it not be at once concentrating & intensifying the energies of each side & preventing waste of power if, as a general rule, the Officer of Health deals with pointing out causes of diseases; the Engineer deals with removal of those causes & estimate of cost? And tho' the one Report should never be made without being accompanied or closely followed by the other--yet it would save much time & energy if neither were confused with the other.

We have grievously erred in this respect in England- And often I have observed (especially since Sidney Herbert's death) that the Engineering Officer has usurped the Medical Officer's functions and vice versa -

It is probably most easy to avoid this when the two go together - I hope to send you shortly some Reports which our Government officers are about to issue on the subjects on which you write so ably.

And therefore I will not write at greater length.
Pray believe me
Ever your faithful servant
Florence Nightingale

If I can get you anything worth your notice to send by this mail, I will not re-open this letter but you will know that it comes with my kind regards.
F. N.

Letter 4 of 7

Donated by Friends, Colleagues, and Family
In memory of Laura Nivens Riser (BSN 1980, MSN 1997)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, CIE Health Officer of Bombay, 1867-1889. She thanks him for sending a copy of his "Report on the Prevention of Cholera", and she comments upon it. Her remarks concern methods for the disposal of house sewage.

Transcript:

September 3/67
35 South Street
Park Lane
London, W.

Dear Sir

I have to thank you very much for your kindness in sending me your Report on the Prevention of Cholera.

I had also received a copy, with the Municipal Commissioner's letter prefixed to it, from the India Office.

Let me also thank you very much for your kind letter.

You will perhaps be glad to hear any little hints I can collect from Europe on both sides on the subject of your pamphlet. T. G. Hewlett Esq.

The best scientific opinion in Europe rather tends now to consider that on which the prevention of Cholera is here based as a groundless theory. And we have nothing to do with theories.

The system of disposing of house sewage which you mention is essentially the same as has been tried for 30 years at an enormous cost in Paris, & which the Emperor is now putting an end to by having Paris drained.

In a Report on Madras drainage, by Capt Tulloch R. E., which he has just brought to England, he shows that the dry system costs more than ten times as much as much [sic] as the sewer system.

But it is not only the cost which is fatal to the dry earth system in towns. Is it not the fact that it is impossible to carry it out with the same safety to health as the sewer system?

I know of at least one large institution where an outbreak of Cholera was distinctly traceable to this.

It is always interesting to know what has been said on both sides.

In the Madras report, the Medical Officer recommends the adoption of the dry system & gives an estimate. The Engineer shows that it will be ten times as much.

Doubtless I am not telling you anything new. Doubtless you know all that can be said much better than I do.

All the Paris sewage is now to be taken away in pipes & applied to agriculture. The Dutch Method removes only about a two hundredth part of the sewage of a town.

As to value, the latest estimate is just published in the "Rivers Commission" Report, & shows that sewer water gives actual produce equal to £100 per acre.

Would it not be at once concentrating & intensifying the energies of each side & preventing waste of power if, as a general rule, the Officer of Health deals with pointing out causes of diseases; the Engineer deals with removal of those causes & estimate of cost? And tho' the one Report should never be made without being accompanied or closely followed by the other--yet it would save much time & energy if neither were confused with the other.

We have grievously erred in this respect in England- And often I have observed (especially since Sidney Herbert's death) that the Engineering Officer has usurped the Medical Officer's functions and vice versa -

It is probably most easy to avoid this when the two go together - I hope to send you shortly some Reports which our Government officers are about to issue on the subjects on which you write so ably.

And therefore I will not write at greater length.
Pray believe me
Ever your faithful servant
Florence Nightingale

If I can get you anything worth your notice to send by this mail, I will not re-open this letter but you will know that it comes with my kind regards.
F. N.

Letter 5 of 7

Donated by Friends, Colleagues, and Family
In memory of Laura Nivens Riser (BSN 1980, MSN 1997)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, CIE Health Officer of Bombay, 1867-1889. She thanks him for sending a copy of his "Report on the Prevention of Cholera", and she comments upon it. Her remarks concern methods for the disposal of house sewage.

Transcript:

September 3/67
35 South Street
Park Lane
London, W.

Dear Sir

I have to thank you very much for your kindness in sending me your Report on the Prevention of Cholera.

I had also received a copy, with the Municipal Commissioner's letter prefixed to it, from the India Office.

Let me also thank you very much for your kind letter.

You will perhaps be glad to hear any little hints I can collect from Europe on both sides on the subject of your pamphlet. T. G. Hewlett Esq.

The best scientific opinion in Europe rather tends now to consider that on which the prevention of Cholera is here based as a groundless theory. And we have nothing to do with theories.

The system of disposing of house sewage which you mention is essentially the same as has been tried for 30 years at an enormous cost in Paris, & which the Emperor is now putting an end to by having Paris drained.

In a Report on Madras drainage, by Capt Tulloch R. E., which he has just brought to England, he shows that the dry system costs more than ten times as much as much [sic] as the sewer system.

But it is not only the cost which is fatal to the dry earth system in towns. Is it not the fact that it is impossible to carry it out with the same safety to health as the sewer system?

I know of at least one large institution where an outbreak of Cholera was distinctly traceable to this.

It is always interesting to know what has been said on both sides.

In the Madras report, the Medical Officer recommends the adoption of the dry system & gives an estimate. The Engineer shows that it will be ten times as much.

Doubtless I am not telling you anything new. Doubtless you know all that can be said much better than I do.

All the Paris sewage is now to be taken away in pipes & applied to agriculture. The Dutch Method removes only about a two hundredth part of the sewage of a town.

As to value, the latest estimate is just published in the "Rivers Commission" Report, & shows that sewer water gives actual produce equal to £100 per acre.

Would it not be at once concentrating & intensifying the energies of each side & preventing waste of power if, as a general rule, the Officer of Health deals with pointing out causes of diseases; the Engineer deals with removal of those causes & estimate of cost? And tho' the one Report should never be made without being accompanied or closely followed by the other--yet it would save much time & energy if neither were confused with the other.

We have grievously erred in this respect in England- And often I have observed (especially since Sidney Herbert's death) that the Engineering Officer has usurped the Medical Officer's functions and vice versa -

It is probably most easy to avoid this when the two go together - I hope to send you shortly some Reports which our Government officers are about to issue on the subjects on which you write so ably.

And therefore I will not write at greater length.
Pray believe me
Ever your faithful servant
Florence Nightingale

If I can get you anything worth your notice to send by this mail, I will not re-open this letter but you will know that it comes with my kind regards.
F. N.

Letter 6 of 7

Donated by Friends, Colleagues, and Family
In memory of Laura Nivens Riser (BSN 1980, MSN 1997)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, CIE Health Officer of Bombay, 1867-1889. She thanks him for sending a copy of his "Report on the Prevention of Cholera", and she comments upon it. Her remarks concern methods for the disposal of house sewage.

Transcript:

September 3/67
35 South Street
Park Lane
London, W.

Dear Sir

I have to thank you very much for your kindness in sending me your Report on the Prevention of Cholera.

I had also received a copy, with the Municipal Commissioner's letter prefixed to it, from the India Office.

Let me also thank you very much for your kind letter.

You will perhaps be glad to hear any little hints I can collect from Europe on both sides on the subject of your pamphlet. T. G. Hewlett Esq.

The best scientific opinion in Europe rather tends now to consider that on which the prevention of Cholera is here based as a groundless theory. And we have nothing to do with theories.

The system of disposing of house sewage which you mention is essentially the same as has been tried for 30 years at an enormous cost in Paris, & which the Emperor is now putting an end to by having Paris drained.

In a Report on Madras drainage, by Capt Tulloch R. E., which he has just brought to England, he shows that the dry system costs more than ten times as much as much [sic] as the sewer system.

But it is not only the cost which is fatal to the dry earth system in towns. Is it not the fact that it is impossible to carry it out with the same safety to health as the sewer system?

I know of at least one large institution where an outbreak of Cholera was distinctly traceable to this.

It is always interesting to know what has been said on both sides.

In the Madras report, the Medical Officer recommends the adoption of the dry system & gives an estimate. The Engineer shows that it will be ten times as much.

Doubtless I am not telling you anything new. Doubtless you know all that can be said much better than I do.

All the Paris sewage is now to be taken away in pipes & applied to agriculture. The Dutch Method removes only about a two hundredth part of the sewage of a town.

As to value, the latest estimate is just published in the "Rivers Commission" Report, & shows that sewer water gives actual produce equal to £100 per acre.

Would it not be at once concentrating & intensifying the energies of each side & preventing waste of power if, as a general rule, the Officer of Health deals with pointing out causes of diseases; the Engineer deals with removal of those causes & estimate of cost? And tho' the one Report should never be made without being accompanied or closely followed by the other--yet it would save much time & energy if neither were confused with the other.

We have grievously erred in this respect in England- And often I have observed (especially since Sidney Herbert's death) that the Engineering Officer has usurped the Medical Officer's functions and vice versa -

It is probably most easy to avoid this when the two go together - I hope to send you shortly some Reports which our Government officers are about to issue on the subjects on which you write so ably.

And therefore I will not write at greater length.
Pray believe me
Ever your faithful servant
Florence Nightingale

If I can get you anything worth your notice to send by this mail, I will not re-open this letter but you will know that it comes with my kind regards.
F. N.

Letter 7 of 7

Donated by Friends, Colleagues, and Family
In memory of Laura Nivens Riser (BSN 1980, MSN 1997)

Description: Nightingale writes to T. G. Hewlett, CIE Health Officer of Bombay, 1867-1889. She thanks him for sending a copy of his "Report on the Prevention of Cholera", and she comments upon it. Her remarks concern methods for the disposal of house sewage.

Transcript:

September 3/67
35 South Street
Park Lane
London, W.

Dear Sir

I have to thank you very much for your kindness in sending me your Report on the Prevention of Cholera.

I had also received a copy, with the Municipal Commissioner's letter prefixed to it, from the India Office.

Let me also thank you very much for your kind letter.

You will perhaps be glad to hear any little hints I can collect from Europe on both sides on the subject of your pamphlet. T. G. Hewlett Esq.

The best scientific opinion in Europe rather tends now to consider that on which the prevention of Cholera is here based as a groundless theory. And we have nothing to do with theories.

The system of disposing of house sewage which you mention is essentially the same as has been tried for 30 years at an enormous cost in Paris, & which the Emperor is now putting an end to by having Paris drained.

In a Report on Madras drainage, by Capt Tulloch R. E., which he has just brought to England, he shows that the dry system costs more than ten times as much as much [sic] as the sewer system.

But it is not only the cost which is fatal to the dry earth system in towns. Is it not the fact that it is impossible to carry it out with the same safety to health as the sewer system?

I know of at least one large institution where an outbreak of Cholera was distinctly traceable to this.

It is always interesting to know what has been said on both sides.

In the Madras report, the Medical Officer recommends the adoption of the dry system & gives an estimate. The Engineer shows that it will be ten times as much.

Doubtless I am not telling you anything new. Doubtless you know all that can be said much better than I do.

All the Paris sewage is now to be taken away in pipes & applied to agriculture. The Dutch Method removes only about a two hundredth part of the sewage of a town.

As to value, the latest estimate is just published in the "Rivers Commission" Report, & shows that sewer water gives actual produce equal to £100 per acre.

Would it not be at once concentrating & intensifying the energies of each side & preventing waste of power if, as a general rule, the Officer of Health deals with pointing out causes of diseases; the Engineer deals with removal of those causes & estimate of cost? And tho' the one Report should never be made without being accompanied or closely followed by the other--yet it would save much time & energy if neither were confused with the other.

We have grievously erred in this respect in England- And often I have observed (especially since Sidney Herbert's death) that the Engineering Officer has usurped the Medical Officer's functions and vice versa -

It is probably most easy to avoid this when the two go together - I hope to send you shortly some Reports which our Government officers are about to issue on the subjects on which you write so ably.

And therefore I will not write at greater length.
Pray believe me
Ever your faithful servant
Florence Nightingale

If I can get you anything worth your notice to send by this mail, I will not re-open this letter but you will know that it comes with my kind regards.
F. N.