PRECIOUS

[Printed parliamentary reports of the 'Gold and Silver Commission'.] The three reports (First, Second, Final) of 'The Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the recent Changes in the relative Values of the Precious Metals'.

Author: 
[United Kingdom Parliament: Gold and Silver Commission, 1887 and 1888; Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the Recent Changes in the relative Values of the Precious Metals]
Publication details: 
First Report, 1887; Second Report, 1888; Final Report, 1888. All three volumes by Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.
£450.00

The three volumes in folio, in their original printed blue wraps. First Report: viii + 364pp. With fold-out table. Second Report: viii + 276pp. Final Report: x + 157pp. All three aged and worn, with the final signature and back cover of the First Report detached, and the Final Report lacking its back cover, and with front cover detached and damage to last few leaves. Second Report with withdrawn label of Owen College, Manchester. The three volumes all 'With Minutes of Evidence and Appendices'. Containing an enormous quantity of information within the minutes and supporting material.

Autograph Letter Signed to "Mr Crow" [W.B. Crow, author of "Contributions to the Principles of Morphology "], essentially reviewing Crow's book, but also givinf a Testament..

Author: 
Arthur H. Church, Chemist, Expert on Pottery and Stones
Arthur H. Church, Chemist, Expert on Pottery and Stones
Publication details: 
246 Iffley Road, Oxford, 2 April 1929.
£165.00
Arthur H. Church, Chemist, Expert on Pottery and Stones

Two pages, 4to, fold marks, four small closed tears. A difficult hand. He thanks Crow for his book, "Contributions to the Principles of Morphology", just published, suggesting that Crow must have enjoyed reviewing "older views", adding, "The Philosophy on which Biology has [?] based is much neglected ...I never came across any Botanist for example who thought the two [?] of Goethe, & his theory of meta-morphosis has been a great curse ... for 100 years. The mistake of [?] was, that we had no 'definitions' of a leaf to begin with. ...

Syndicate content