[The fragment of the original letter is in a private collection; the full draft is in the British Library.]

[fragment]

R. Hunt Esq

Lacock Abbey, Chippenham
Dec 23/51

I am much obliged by the speedy insertion of my last communication ^<1> but the Printer unfortunately forgot to send me any copies of it, so that I was unable to send them to my friends.

I have rec^d a letter from D^r Woods, enclosing a copy of one which he wishes inserted in the Athenæum – If it is inserted, I request that my reply (which I enclose) may also be inserted. ^<2>

But my opinion is that the whole matter is a complete mistake. There is not the slightest resemblance between my new pictures and those produced by the process – described by D^r W in 1845.^<3> And the process itself differs in every particular, except in the sole point of using iodide of iron (not the syrup of it, as D^r W. erroneously states in his letter).-

I never knew a reclamation (as the French call it) which had less foundation. I suspect indeed that D^r W. has not seen my paper in the Athenæum but only heard some vague report of it otherwise he could not have so entirely mistaken it.

Altho' I regret the loss of time occaisioned by a controversy so needlessly raised by him, I have thought proper in deference to his merits as a photographer [final leaf missing - see draft]

[draft version:]

Hunt
Dec 23/51

I was m^ch obliged by the speedy insertⁿ of my last comm^t but y^e printer unfrt^ly forgot to send me any copies of it, so that y^e fr^ds / whom I was to send it, had to go without I was unable t send cop^s them / my fr^nds I have recd a l^r f^m Dr Woods, enclosing a copy of one w^ch he has sent wishes insert^d in y^e Ath^m – If it is inserted, I request that my reply (w^ch I enclose) may also be inserted – But my opinⁿ is that the whole matter is a total complete mistake – I There is not y^e slig^st res^mblce betwⁿ my new pict^s & those prod^cd by [illegible deletion] y^e p^ss – descr^d by Dr W in /45 – And the p^ss itself diff^s in ev^y part^r except in y^e sole p^t of using ii (not the syrup of it, as D^r W. ^erronsly states in his letter). I never knew a reclamⁿ (as the f^ch call it) w^ch was less had less foundatⁿ – Dr W. has gt a g^t courtesy I suspect indeed that D^r W has not seen my paper in the Athen^m but only heard some vague report of it otherwise he could not so entirely have mistaken it to send me a copy of his l^r to y^e Ath^m I feel th^t it right to send him a copy of my ans^r – altho’ I regret the loss of time occas^d by such a needless controv^sy on his so needlessly rais^d by him, I have thought proper in defer^ce to his merits as a photogr^r to write the enclosed reply

[expanded version]

Robert Hunt
December 23,1851

I was much obliged by the speedy insertion of my last communication but the printer unfortunately forgot to send me any copies of it, so that the friends to whom I was to send it, had to go without I was unable to send copies them to my friends. I have received a Letter from Dr Woods, enclosing a copy of one which he has sent wishes inserted in the Athenaeum – If it is inserted, I request that my reply (which I enclose) may also be inserted – But my opinion is that the whole matter is a total complete mistake – I There is not the slightest resemblance between my new pictures and those produced by [illegible deletion] the process – described by Dr Woods in 1845 – And the process itself differs in every particular except in the sole point of using iodide of iron (not the syrup of it, as D^r Woods erroneously states in his letter). I never knew a reclamation (as the French call it) which was less had less foundation Dr Woods has granted a great courtesy I suspect indeed that D^r Woods has not seen my paper in the Athenaeum but only heard some vague report of it otherwise he could not so entirely have mistaken it to send me a copy of his letter to the Athenaeum I feel that it right to send him a copy of my answer – although I regret the loss of time occasioned by such a needless controversy on his so needlessly raised by him, I have thought proper in deference to his merits as a photographer to write the enclosed reply ^<4>

---

Notes:

1. WHFT, ‘On the Production of Instantaneous Photographic Images’, The Athenaeum (London), no. 1258, 6 December 1851, pp.1286–1287.

2. Dr Thomas Woods (1815–1905), Irish physician, photographer, inventor & friend of Lord Rosse. This letter and its enclosure have not yet been located - WHFT loaned it to Robert Hunt and it is possible that it was not returned - see Doc. No: 08749]. .

3. The Electrolysotype. [See Doc. No: 05209].

4. Wood’s letter and WHFT’s reply were published under ‘Photography’, The Athenaeum (London), no. 1262, 3 January 1852, pp.22–23.