498 Life and Letters of Francis Galton 



A good way to mark an enlarged print is by a fine needle (not ]>in) prick and making 

 a pencil circle O round the hole at the back, with a number attached to identify it hereafter. 

 (You may prick through a blank paper underneath at the same time, so as to have a duplicate.) 

 The prick holes do not in the least damage an enlarged print. 



Believe me, Faithfully yours, Francis Galton. 



42, Rutland Gate, London. November 7, 1896. 



Dear Mrs Gardiner, The prints of the baby, with "Winifred Palmer, arrived safely, and 

 I have carefully gone through, picked out, and mounted the most effective ones, for future 

 photography. It is indeed difficult to take legible prints of such young creatures. The following 

 seems the most hopeful direction for improvement. In your sets the only fairly clear ones were 

 those taken on the 7th, 8th and 37th days, and all these happened also to be dark. I suspect 

 that on those days the ink was in a more suitable condition than at other times; therefore that 

 great care as to the right fluidity of the ink is an important condition of success. As you are 

 doubtless aware the mixture of a very little "drying oil" makes a great difference in its con- 

 sistency. Another point in these very delicate printings is to grasp the baby's finger firmly 

 and to print from it rapidly. There are signs of its having moved in the great majority of the 

 prints. The marks left by the ridges below the joint are often very sharp and clear, while 

 those on the bulb are illegible. The last thing I would mention is the use of the same sort of 

 smooth paper as the enclosed, which is employed in all those high class illustrated journals in 

 which the delicate photo-process printing is used — such as Harper's Journal. I wonder whether 

 the more or less dampness of the baby's hand has much to do with the success in printing? It is 

 needless to say how much I should prize any more baby prints you may send me. A few, ivell 

 printed, taken at an early age, and not necessarily of many fingers, would be the most welcomed. 

 Of course with the hope of getting prints from the same fingers a few years later. 



Very faithfully yours, Francis Galton. 



[Winifred Palmer is the daughter of Charles Skeele Palmer, at the time of this letter and 

 tor some years Professor of Chemistry in the University of Colorado. I obtained prints of 

 Winifred when she was (I believe) less than a day old, certainly less than two days, and con- 

 tinued from time to time as subsequent letters will indicate. M. G. O.] 



42, Rutland Gate, London. July 7, 1897. 



Dear Mrs Gardiner, Thank you very much for the two sets of ringer-prints. I am glad to 

 infer from the firm, plump marks of your child that she thrives well. Both hers and Winifred 

 Palmer's are very good records and I will put them carefully with the rest. But I cannot now 

 have them enlarged as I am packing up for a summer on the Continent. Thank you also about 

 the hope you hold out, of sending me next September some prints of American Indians. They 

 will be very acceptable. I wonder if by any chance you happen to be acquainted with any 

 authority (of a scientific bent) on American trotting horses and their pedigrees. I ask, because 

 I have just been able to verify a law of heredity (which I proposed tentatively a few years ago) 

 on a certain pedigree stock of hounds. If I could get the racing speeds of the pedigree stock 

 of the trotting horses, with some completeness for three generations back, i.e. at least the 

 grandparents and better the great-grandparents of the "subjects," I could make good use of 

 them. The first notice of my paper (which is not yet published but will be published in the 

 Proceedings of the Royal Society, in three or four weeks) appeared yesterday in Nature, p. 235. 

 (That is the name of our principal scientific weekly paper.) Excuse my troubling you on the 

 distant chance of your being able to help me. I know and have written to Mr Weston, Pittsfield, 

 Mass., and I also know of the existence of the American Trotter by H. T. Helm, 1878. Also of 

 yearly Year Books which up to 1896 contained the speed of nearly 13,000 trotters, but I do 

 not know particulars about them. Mr David Bonner of New York (I do not know his further 

 address) seems to be one of the principal authorities. 



Believe me, faithfully yours, Francis Galton. 



