Wallace Letters Online

Share this:

Record number: WCP539

Add to My list
Sent by:
J. Jennings
Sent to:
Alfred Russel Wallace
On:
20 January 1913

Sent by J. Jennings, Edmonton, Middlesex to Alfred Russel Wallace [address not recorded] on 20 January 1913.

Record created:
01 June 2002 by Lucas, Paula J.

Summary

Congratulating Wallace on reaching his 90th birthday; discussing the wages of the poor and pointing out inconsistencies in Alfred Russel Wallace's articles on the Insurance Bill in the "Daily Chronicle" 14 Jan 1913 and 25 Jan 1913.

Record contains:

  • letter (1)

View item:

LETTER (WCP539.539)

A typical letter  .

Held by:
Natural History Museum
Finding number:
NHM WP1/8/68
Copyright owner:
Copyright of the J. Jennings Literary Estate.

Transcription information

View:

Transcript

[[1]]1

54 Fairfield Road Edmonton Middlesex 20/1/13

Dear Sir

I congratulate you very much on your 90th birthday and hope you will see many more of them[.] When you have finished your book on the Labour party, will you be kind enough to send me a P.C. with price as I should very much like one. As regards myself I do not believe either the Liberal or Conservative party. In Daily Chronicle Jan[uary]. 14 1913, on the Insurance Act you wrote the Act was a temporary palliative, might lower wages or increase [sic] prices ect [sic]—yet in same paper Jan[uary]. 25 1912 in an article by you, you said it was the greatest end most beneficialof all attempts yet made, ect. "That only the better paid among the skilled labourers who will pay the full contribution of 3d per week" should have read 4d)[.] Now sir, the question I should like to know is have you altered your opinion on the low wages question, or has

this paper printed it wrong, as I myself have been misrepresented by a Lib[eral] and Con[servative] paper on this subject (they both left the content out) you would have been right sir, if a casual came under the same class as those people who earn 9/- or under per week or 1/6 per day, but the trouble is, it is levied on the daily wage, not the weekly wages. If a man earns only 1/6 for one day in the week, he is stopped 4d[.] I know a case: a poor woman earnt only 10d yet she was stopped 3d, a youth earnt only 4d1/2, one hours work on the week, yet he had to pay the 4d. This is where the Act deals very harshly with the honest people[.] I have insured myself from age 17, yet my lodge only value my 4d as 3d I have to pay 3d a week to get the benefits of the Act. This kind of thing is I believe the cause of the trouble about the Act[.] Thanking you in inticipation [sic] for a reply[.] I remain

Yours Truly | J. Jennings [signature]

To Dr Russel Wallace O.M. F.R.S.

ENDNOTES

1. Written in the top left of the page in an unidentified hand 'Answ[ere]d'.

Please note that work on this transcript is not yet complete. Users are advised to study electronic image(s) of this document, if available.