Viro praestantissimo P.G. Tait, Gulielmus R. Smith S.D.
Ad ea quae heri scripsisti paucis respondere conabor. Id vero impedit quod nescio quot studiosos praemiis, quot vero publicâ laude schedisque honorariis[3] ab ipsâ Universate collatis dignos sis habiturus. At si secundum postremi anni analogiam 30 circ.[4] nomina in Calendarum suscipienda sunt aut Gordon aut Jamieson ultimus in ordine laudatorum esse potest.
Subsequuntur quibus “optime” inscribendemum. His non multi me judice annumerandi. Ultimus sit Georgeson (65¼).
Series eorum que “bene” egerunt a Rutherford (58¾) claudi potest. Porro qui subsquuntur usque ad W. Ogilvie (49¾) non male “perhabilibus” annumerabuntur.
Denique Raleigh et eiusdem sequaces “habiles” sese prestiterunt. Series a R B Smith (40¼) claudatur. Caeterum hace omnia haud quaquam dogmatice propono quippe qui domi scribens priorum annorum analogia destitutus sim.[5]
Quid tandem de Laboratorio physico? Minime convenit ut per menses aestivas [sic] omnibus omnino accessus ad hoc institutum gratis pateat. Facilitas enim quae praemii loco proposita est parvi aestimabitur si nullum meritorum discrimen ad libetur.
Equidem de discipulis sic judico. Summe laudandi sunt Brebner, Meik, Murray, Nichol quibus etiam Marshall nec non minore gradu Kingius adscribendi. Kingius enim aliquamdiu frivolus tandem Marshallis adjunctus (missoque ignaviae irritamento Stevenson) acriter rei incubuit et teste Marshallio perutilem sese praebuit.
Ineptum esset Jacobum Wilson inter laudandos numerare. Experimenta omni industria ad finem perducere minimum curat. Nihil in animo est nisi cursorias quasdem intrumentorum methodique notiones abripere. Qui per aestivas menses maximo nobis impedimento esset.
Haud secus de Jacksonio judico. Natura segnis, preserverantia non magna. Nihil frugis prestitit quod laudare ullo mod possumus. Huie conjunctus J. Wilson similem sese praebuit. Porro haud scio annon hic meliori socis alligatus utilis esse possit. Ingenium sane non deficit. Sed et hunc priorum laudibus annumerare non possumus ne tota laudatorum series inepta videatur.
Non possum satis mirari subitum J. Low in tertium locum lapsum. Res sane inusitata! At secundum nitidissimum Syri verbum
“Fortuna nitrea est, tum quum splendet frangitur”
… Restat ut gratias tibi agam quod te librum mihi missurum promisti.
Vale
Datum Edinburgi in vias [sic] dicto
“S Charlotte St” in Aedibus “Gray”
[non, ut saepius frustra accepisti,
in aedibus Reidianis ( ] )
VII. Id. Apr. 1870
[Translation]
William R. Smith sends greetings[6] to that most eminent gentleman P. G. Tait.
I shall attempt to reply briefly to your letter of yesterday. I am at a disadvantage because I do not know how many students[7] you will consider deserving of prizes and how many of public praise and merit certificates from the University itself. But if, following last year’s pattern, about 30 students are to be listed in the [University] Calendar, either Gordon or Jamison could come first in the order of merit.
There follow those that can be said to have done “optime” [best][8]. In my view not many deserve to belong to this group. First could be Georgeson (65¼).
The list of those who have done “bene” [very good] could end with Rutherford (58¾). Then those who follow, down to W. Ogilvie (49¾), can reasonably be regarded as “non male” [very able]. Then Raleigh and those who come after him showed themselves to be “habiles” [able]. The last member of this group could be R. B. Smith (40¼). However, I make all these suggestions only tentatively because I am writing this at home and so am unable to compare the record of former years.
What indeed should I say about the physics Laboratory? It is highly inappropriate that free access to this establishment should be open to all and sundry during the summer months[9]. For freedom of entry is awarded as a privilege and will count for little if no regard is given to individual merit.
My opinion of the [junior] students[10] is as follows: Brebner, Meik,[11] Murray [and] Nichol deserve the highest praise. Marshall and King, of no less merit, deserve to be included in this list. King was for some time not serious in his attitude but when finally he was paired with Marshall (and after Stevenson, an inciter to idleness, was sent away[12]) he applied himself with diligence to his work and, as Marshall can testify, has shown himself to be most useful.[13]
It would be foolish to include James Wilson among those deserving of praise. He shows no interest at all in carrying his experiments carefully through to their conclusion. He is interested only in getting some superficial ideas about scientific instruments and methods, and throughout the summer months was a great hindrance to us. I have much the same opinion of Jackson. Idle by nature, he has little perseverance. He has done nothing worthwhile that we can commend in any way. When partnered with him,[14] J. Wilson has shown himself similar in character. I think that if he were attached to a better colleague he might be of some use. Certainly he doesn’t lack intelligence. But we cannot regard him as meriting the praise given to the above-mentioned students without making a nonsense of the whole merit list.[15]
I cannot feel adequate surprise at the sudden lapse of J. Low to third place. A strange business! But as Syrus puts it brilliantly,
“Fortune is made of glass; it is when shining most brightly that she breaks”.
It remains for me to thank you for promising to send me the book.
Farewell.
Written at Edinburgh in the street known as “S. Charlotte St” in the house “Gray”[16] (not, as you have often been misleadingly told) in Reid’s house.
7th April, 1870.
[1] NLS 1004 37-8 MS
[2] This letter is written in fluent idiomatic Latin with only minor slips: its main interest lies in the reference to Robert Louis Stevenson, a notably unwilling student by his own account as well as that of others. We are indebted to Dr Tom Pearce for the translation.
[3] Schedis: certificate of honour (scheda — piece of paper, note)
[4] Circ. from circiter.
[5] Sim would appear to be an error here for sum.
[6] S. D.: Gives greetings” (i.e. salutem dat).
[7] Lat. studiosos. The students listed here along with their examination marks seem to be a different group from those discussed later who are referred to as discipuli.
[8] The precise English equivalents of optime, bene, non male and habiles remain as uncertain to us now as they apparently did to Smith.
[9] WRS writes menses aestivas instead of menses aestivos.
[10] Lat. discipuli. WRS refers here to those in the Lower Division.
[11] Brebner and Meik (spelled “Meek” in the Calendar) were the students who drew the diagrams and, along with others in the class, carried out the experimental work on which WRS based his paper “On the flow of electricity in conducting surfaces” (cf. L&E, p.44–66).
[12] Lat. missoque: it is not clear whether Robert Louis Stevenson was literally “sent away” or merely moved.
[13] For the Physical Laboratory, the Calendar lists alphabetically those “highly commended” as: D.T. King; D.H. Marshall; P.W. Meek; J. Murray; and J.W. Nichol. This agrees with Smith’s proposals, apart from the omission of Brebner.
[14] Lat. huic coniunctus: WRS probably means that Wilson worked poorly when partnered with Jackson.
[15] Despite his performance in the laboratory, J. Wilson is placed fourth equal in the 1870/71 University Calendar’s merit list for the Lower Division.
[16] Mrs Gray, Smith’s landlady at the time. Mrs Reid occupied the adjacent flat [EPOD, 1870/71].