On 17th September he writes to Mr Horne:--“I have just returned from
Iceland, where I have had some very hard but very interesting work.
What a country! Fancy me riding eleven hours over lava-beds, mountains,
etc., devil a road or even path! However, all was fresh and new.”
By this time the question of changes in the Survey was becoming acute,
and James Geikie was beginning to debate with himself as to whether he
ought to try for the Chair in Geology at Edinburgh for his children’s
sake. The indecision he found very unsettling. “I can settle to
nothing--reading and writing are alike out of the question.” More than
a month later he writes:--“I am pulled two ways--my own desire and wish
is to remain in the Survey.” “My repugnance to that Chair,” he says a
few days later, “increases as the days go past.”
Perhaps nothing, however, shows better his fundamental repugnance to
all the weighing of questions of worldly advantage, to the scheming
and plotting and wire-pulling which go to the making of appointments,
than a letter written to Mr Horne in the thick of the conflict. This
begins with an account of information which had reached him in regard
to the position of affairs as to the Edinburgh Chair, and glides off
insensibly into an account of letters just received from Prof. Penck
and Prof. Gandry, the one a German and the other a French geologist.
Both letters contained much of great interest to him, and the letter
becomes a full discussion of the points raised, the question of his own
future meantime sinking entirely out of mind.
Obviously he wanted to be let alone and allowed to do his work in
peace, to have reasonable security for his children. In one letter he
laments his own lack of worldly wisdom, and his willingness to take
advice from his various friends; and the rather pathetic balancing of
the advantages of one apparently possible position against another,
merely meant that his mind was set on other things altogether, and
that in consequence he allowed himself to be swayed by the different
influences brought to bear upon him. His own candour and frankness made
him singularly willing to accept advice offered under the guise of
friendship, without stopping to investigate the question whether his
advisers were or were not wholly disinterested. But his unwillingness
to be separated from his old colleagues remains the dominant note, even
when he yielded to what seemed sound arguments brought to bear upon
him. His instant response to kindliness is shown by the following
quotation:--“Isn’t old Ramsay a trump. He wrote me a short, but such
an affectionate letter that I declare I could not read it without wet
eyes.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account