| caption: |
musings on family and father's estate in England |
| text: |
James & Stevenson called in morning. Did a lot of office work, feeling much better & when the English letters came in I felt ever so much better. But as I walked out of the bungalow in the moonlight after my solitary dinner it did make me laugh as I looked at its tumble down appearance that the [the following section has been scored through with a pencil: heir of Shalford sd be living in such a place when not one single member of that family is now or ever has gone through so much discomfort or put up in such piggish places. & why is this ? Perhaps my father wd answer it is Haversham's wish & all he cares for. But the question if I die out here is - Why did the father take so little interest in his son? Why did he not take that pride which a father sd take to shew his son the estates he is to inherit ? That he might in his turn take that proper interest in them that his ancestors did before him. No quite the reverse, every matter connected with the Estates & family affairs was always a sealed letter - his son not to be brought forward & much kept dark. & when that son asked for a settlement that wd bring his annual income up to 600 pounds a year he refused it. A son that had never cost him a fraction or had received for years & years ever since he embarked for India in 1852 a single penny. Whose education cost but 50 pounds a year, while at Sandhurst 620 pounds for 4 years - 415 commission- yet after 17 years service in India the moderate request of 500 pounds a year was refused out of the income of an estate in Surrey of 5000 acres in extent.] (On the evening of the 17th Mr Sullivan & Mr Hughes came to dinner.) |
