Personal
Omaha, April 11, 1906.

Dear Wolcott:

I have just received a letter from Trostler, with which he encloses
draft of a letter which it appears he sent to you yesterday, the 10th.

Please reserve your judgment regarding his letter, and keep it tight
under your own hat if you will, until I have a chance to write you at
length tonight.

Trostler has such good judgment as a rule that I am entirely at a
loss to understand what he expected to gain by his observation regarding
the "validity" of the action taken, and the "standing" of the Lincoln
members!  Ye gods! - But I can't do anything without access to my files;
will write tonight and state what basis he had for making this very un-
tactful comment.  I sincerely hope you have not taken up his letter with
others.

Hastily,

Personal
 Omaha, April 11, 1906.

Dear Wolcott:

Referring to my letter of this morning:

In order that you may know just what basis Trostler had for his
remarkable letter to you of the 10th instant, I enclose the carbon copy
of my letter addressed to him on March 18th.  The third page contains
all the mischief, but I send it all, in order that you may see that
the subject which impressed him so unhappily was only an incident of
the letter, and not the main feature.  You and Trostler are the only
members of our association to whom I feel free to express myself fully,
and my letter to him was simply a confidential statement of my feelings
on the subject.  I do not approve of the plan adopted for the coming
year, as regards publication; but the action was taken in open session,
in a perfectly regular way, and I have no complaint to offer.  I wrote
freely to Trostler, stating explicitly that the views expressed were
intended for his confidential information, and nothing was farther from
my thoughts than that he would hand it to you in such an unreasonable
way.  I am amazed at his questioning the "validity" of the action taken,
and deeply chagrined over his making use of the information given him
regarding the delinquency of many of the Lincoln members - which I
mentioned only because it was such a surprise to me, as I had considered
our Omaha aggregation as the "tail-enders" in that respect.  It was
not intended as criticism, nor had I the remotest idea of talking behind
any one's back; as I have stated, I have always felt free to exchange
ideas at great length with Trostler, as I have with you, regarding our
association matters.

While I feel that the course taken is not the wisest one, I am sure
you will understand that I do not propose to let it affect my interest
and activity in the least.  I am not "sore" but only somewhat disap-
pointed, and the fact that I question the wisdom of the plan chosen
shall not have the remotest influence on my efforts to discharge my
duties as treasurer to the best of my ability.  I think you will fully
understand the spirit in which I wrote my letter of March 18th, and the
surprise with which I read Trostler's letter to you, in which he makes
free use of the comments made to him in confidence.

Just how much of a muss it all makes will depend on what you did
upon receipt of his letter.  If it is still between "us three" we can
straighten it out very prettily; and I hope it has not gone further.
I shall write him soon and smoothe him the right way; will send you carbon 
copy of my letter.

Tell me just what you think of me; if I was wrong to have impressions 
and to express them confidentially to one of my friends, have me
impeached and hanged.     With sincere regards and regrets,

THE COLLEGE OF MEDICINE
 THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA
(THE OMAHA MEDICAL COLLEGE)

HENRY B. WARD, DEAN, LINCOLN                                        
HAROLD GIFFORD, ASSOCIATE DEAN, OMAHA                                                                           

ANATOMY
ROBERT H. WOLCOTT
C. W. M. POYNTER
                                                                           
LINCOLN NEBR.,
Apr. 23, 1906

Dear Shoemaker-
I enclose your copy. Have explained the matter 
to Bruner and Swenk and neither blames you in the least. But
they, of course, feel that Trotter acted with little judgment and are sup
prised at his use of your statements

Let me correct one or two misapprehensions of yours - by printing
"up to the limit of our resources" it was not meant to print up to the money
at hand at the time of each issue; but to reckon conservatively our re-
sources for a year, divide into four parts, secure bids for the year, and
print up to our resources available for that length of time. Then at the
end of the year figure anew for another year.

"The Kite" was Swenk's name ~ it has long since been abandoned -
he himself made up his mind it was not good He now is in favor of
continuing the same title - Proceedings of the N.O.U.

As to yours and Trotter's papers I wish to go over the thing with you
again in conversation. You didn't get my idea at all.

Smith brought me a nice lot of denverensis from Broken Bow, taken du-
ring the vacation ~ I believe the 16th ~ but I have been so busy on my gar
den I have done no collecting myself.

Isn't it a pity ~ the California Academy destroyed ~ do you know
how much that means? In what form were their resources, and what
will they have left? A museum, a library, or an art gallery ought never
to be put anywhere but in a park where loss from fire, except from
within, cannot occur.

When are you coming down? Apr. 28? May 6? May 13? May 20?
On the 23d of May I shall be in Omaha. Isn't Miss Van Sant coming too?

This isn't much of a letter but I'm mighty busy ~ and, anyhow, I'd rather 
talk.

With very sincere regards to all, and assuring you
that by all us here you are completely exonerated,
Your friend,
Robt. H. Wolcott