Record

LevelFile
Finding Number (Click this to view full catalogue structure)OJL/1/105
TitleSir James Creigton-Browne
Extent7 items
Date1909-1931
DescriptionCorrespondence with Sir James Crichton-Browne [1840-1938, physician and psychiatrist].

/1 Letter from James Crichton-Browne to Oliver Lodge, written from Crindau, Dumfries, dated 24 July 1924. Crichton-Browne sends an extract from David Wilson's Carlyle to the French Revolution dealing with Carlyle's belief in 'a personal God and in individual immortality'. With enclosed manuscript extract.

/2 Copy of letter from Oliver Lodge to James Crichton-Browne, dated 25 July 1924. Lodge thanks Crichton-Browne for drawing his attention to the extract (see above) and asks whether he is able to make use of the material.

/3 Letter from James Crichton-Browne to Oliver Lodge, written from 45 Hans Place, London, dated 26 July 1924. Crichton-Browne is happy for Lodge to use his name in connection with the extract and to use the material in any way he pleases.

/4 Letter from James Crichton-Browne to Oliver Lodge, written from 45 Hans Place, London, dated 26 May 1925. Crichton-Browne writes that the Managers Meetings cannot be moved to Fridays because it would be inconvenient to hold them on the same day as the lectures.

/5 Letter from James Crichton-Browne to Oliver Lodge, written from 45 Hans Place, London, dated 1 June 1925. Crichton-Browne thanks Lodge for his book Ether and Reality, commenting: 'The Ether is incomprehensible but you have I think succeeded in showing that a belief in it is necessary to scientific salvation'. He finds it difficult to reconcile the idea of the ether as a physical presence and the home of spiritual existence.

/6 Copy of letter from Oliver Lodge to James Crichton-Browne, dated 4 June 1925. Lodge is glad they have the opportunity of meeting at the Royal Institution.

/7 Letter from James Crichton-Browne to Oliver Lodge, written from 45 Hans Place, dated 22 July 1931. Crichton-Browne thanks Lodge for his kind words.
ArrangementThese items have been renumbered from item /1 because item /5 was initially /1 and therefore not in chronological order. Also the enclosure referred to in the renumbered item /1 was numbered as /3 and the letter in which it was mentioned was numbered as /2. However, it can be assumed they should be together.
Access StatusOpen

    Showcase

    Some of our most significant collections