Dear Helen Wartime Letters from a Londoner to

Her American Pen Pal 1st Edition Russell M.

Jones pdf download
https://ebookgate.com/product/dear-helen-wartime-letters-from-a-londoner-to-her-american-pen-
pal-1st-edition-russell-m-jones/

★★★★★ 4.8/5.0 (49 reviews) ✓ 229 downloads ■ TOP RATED

"Great resource, downloaded instantly. Thank you!" - Lisa K.

DOWNLOAD EBOOK
 Dear Helen Wartime Letters from a Londoner to Her American
Pen Pal 1st Edition Russell M. Jones pdf download

TEXTBOOK EBOOK EBOOK GATE

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide TextBook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

Dear Black Girl Letters From Your Sisters on Stepping Into

Your Power 1st Edition Tamara Winfrey Harris

https://ebookgate.com/product/dear-black-girl-letters-from-your-
sisters-on-stepping-into-your-power-1st-edition-tamara-winfrey-harris/

ebookgate.com

Realizing the Dream of R A Kartini Her Sister s Letters

from Colonial Java 1st Edition Joost J. Cote

https://ebookgate.com/product/realizing-the-dream-of-r-a-kartini-her-
sister-s-letters-from-colonial-java-1st-edition-joost-j-cote/

ebookgate.com

Mastering ASP Net with VB Net 1st Edition A. Russell Jones

https://ebookgate.com/product/mastering-asp-net-with-vb-net-1st-
edition-a-russell-jones/

ebookgate.com

When You Come Home A Wartime Courtship in Letters 1941 45

1st Edition Robert E. Quirk

https://ebookgate.com/product/when-you-come-home-a-wartime-courtship-
in-letters-1941-45-1st-edition-robert-e-quirk/

ebookgate.com
Crucible of Power A History of American Foreign Relations
from 1897 2nd Edition Howard Jones

https://ebookgate.com/product/crucible-of-power-a-history-of-american-
foreign-relations-from-1897-2nd-edition-howard-jones/

ebookgate.com

Thomas Hardy half a Londoner 1st Edition Mark Ford.

https://ebookgate.com/product/thomas-hardy-half-a-londoner-1st-
edition-mark-ford/

ebookgate.com

A History of Atheism in Britain From Hobbes to Russell

David Berman

https://ebookgate.com/product/a-history-of-atheism-in-britain-from-
hobbes-to-russell-david-berman/

ebookgate.com

My Dear BB The Letters of Bernard Berenson and Kenneth

Clark 1925 1959 1st Edition Robert Cumming

https://ebookgate.com/product/my-dear-bb-the-letters-of-bernard-
berenson-and-kenneth-clark-1925-1959-1st-edition-robert-cumming/

ebookgate.com

Environmental Effects on Engineered Materials 1st Edition

Russell H. Jones

https://ebookgate.com/product/environmental-effects-on-engineered-
materials-1st-edition-russell-h-jones/

ebookgate.com
Dear Helen
This page intentionally left blank
 Dear Helen
Wartime Letters from a Londoner
to Her American Pen Pal

Edited by
Russell M. Jones and John H. Swanson

k
university of missouri press
columbia and london
Copyright © 2009 by
The Curators of the University of Missouri
University of Missouri Press, Columbia, Missouri 65201
Printed and bound in the United States of America
All rights reserved
5 4 3 2 1   13 12 11 10 09

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Swallow, Betty M., 1915–1969.
Dear Helen : wartime letters from a Londoner to her American pen pal / edited by
Russell M. Jones and John H. Swanson.
   p. cm.
Summary: “In letters written between 1937 and 1950 to her American pen pal,
a working-class Londoner offers accounts of the Blitz and of wartime deprivations and
postwar austerity, interweaving descriptions of terror with talk about theater, clothes,
and family outings, providing a unique view of daily life during World War II”—Pro-
vided by publisher.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 978-0-8262-1850-6 (alk. paper)
1. Swallow, Betty M., 1915–1969—Correspondence. 2. World War, 1939–1945—
Personal narratives, English. 3. World War, 1939–1945—England—London. 4. Pen
pals—England—London—Correspondence. 5. Young women—England—London—
Correspondence. 6. Working class—England—London—Correspondence. 7. Lon-
don (England)—Biography. 8. London (England)—Social life and customs—20th
century. 9. Bradley, Helen, 1890–1979—Correspondence. 10. Pen pals—Missouri—
Kansas City—Correspondence. I. Bradley, Helen, 1890–1979. II. Jones, Russell M.
(Russell Moseley), 1927– III. Swanson, John H., 1938– IV. Title.
D811.5.S924 2009
942.1'084092—dc22
[B]
2008051321
   This paper meets the requirements of the
American National Standard for Permanence of Paper
for Printed Library Materials, Z39.48, 1984.
Designer and typesetter: Kristie Lee
Printer and binder: Thomson-Shore, Inc.
Typefaces: Adobe Caslon and Mistral
 .,
This book is happily dedicated to
Pamela Swallow Coulter
grandmother of six (so far), mother of three,
daughter of Jack Swallow, niece of Betty
and the oomph girl of 1960!
This page intentionally left blank
 Contents

Acknowledgments ix
About the Text xi
Introduction 1

k
I. The Beginning 17

II. The “Phony War” 64

III. “France Has Surrendered and We

Are All on Our Ownsomes” 96

IV. February 1941  –   Early 1942 159

V. July 1942   –   February 1945 189

VI. August 1945  – 1947 212

VII. May 10, 1949  – December 1950 242

VIII. Helen Bradley to Betty Swallow,

August 18, 1969 247
This page intentionally left blank
 Acknowledgments

The editors gratefully acknowledge the following individuals and

organizations for the essential help they provided, enabling us to com-
plete the Betty Swallow letters project: Director Rob Havers, Assistant
Director Sara Winingear, Curator-Archivist John Hensley, and Educa-
tion and Public Programs Coordinator Mandy Crump of the Winston
Churchill Memorial and Library; Amy Fluker, a senior history major
at Westminster College who transcribed the letters for the manuscript;
D. Jennifer Dawson for her critical editing assistance in formatting the
manuscript; David White and Joel Starr, history majors at Westminster
College, who based their senior theses on the letters of 1940 –1942;
Angela Gerling, Head Librarian of the Reeves Library at Westminster
College; John E. Marshall, for hours of patient proofreading and sound
editorial advice, as well as research into the background of Helen Brad-
ley. Our special thanks to R. Crosby Kemper III for his interest in this
project.
We also wish to thank the Bureau of Vital Statistics of the Missouri
Department of Health and Senior Services, the Reference Department
of the Kansas City Public Library, and the General Register Office, UK.
Special thanks to Marie Thompson, MLS, St. Luke’s Hospital, Health
Sciences Library, Kansas City, for referring us to John Barnard, MD,
who worked with Helen Bradley at the Dixon Diveley Clinic, and
Dawn McMinnis, Director of the Kansas University Medical Center,
Kansas City, Kansas. We are grateful for the opportunity to read the
M.A. thesis “The Swallow Letters: Bridging Interpersonal and Mass
Communication in WWII,” by Barbara Friedman (University of Mis-
souri, 1999).
ix
 Acknowledgments

We are also grateful to Britisher John Digby, writer, poet and noted
collagist, who shared his knowledge of London and cricket, helping us
tremendously.
Our deepest gratitude is to Beverly Jarrett, Editor in Chief of the
University of Missouri Press and Jane Lago, Managing Editor. Beverly’s
enthusiasm for this book was an inspiration to us, and her initial ques-
tion: “Tell me more about what went on between these two women,”
became the central theme of the introduction.
The unflagging patience and professionalism of our editor, Jane Lago,
made this book much better than it would have been otherwise. De-
spite the excellent preservation work of archivists at the Winston
Churchill Memorial and Library, the originals of these letters were in
some instances in chronological disarray. Helen Bradley apologized
for this disarray to Virgil Johnston, then Director of the Winston
Churchill Memorial and Library, upon presenting the letters, explain-
ing that she had tried to organize the continuity of the letters. But this
was difficult. Most often Betty did not date her letters — particularly
after the Blitz began — but Helen often saved the envelopes they came
in with their postmarks. We and, years earlier, Helen also tried to use
internal evidence from the letters to establish the logical progression of
this correspondence.
When Jane Lago joined us with the task of producing this book, she
elevated the job of getting the time sequence of the letters right with
her questions and suggestions and in doing so preserved intact Betty’s
“voice from England,” as the editors of Picture Play dubbed her letter
written so long ago. The result is that readers today can hear that voice
more clearly.
 About the Text

We have attempted to reproduce Betty’s typing accurately. Although

her spelling is remarkably correct, she often omitted apostrophes, leaving
blank spaces in contractions such as “we’re” or “he’s.” Those eccentrici-
ties as well as the occasional misspelling have been retained. Obvious
typos, of which Betty made very few, have been silently corrected. The
majority of Betty’s letters were typed, with her signature handwritten.
In the few cases when Betty handwrote a letter, she indicates so in the
letter itself. Betty seldom dated her letters. When a date is evident from
a postmark or other evidence, it has been added in brackets.
In identifying movies and actors in the footnotes, our guideline has
been that even though contemporary readers will be familiar with many
of the films and actors mentioned, the information provided adds to
the reader’s understanding of how these movies provided respite to the
strain the Blitz caused Betty and, by inference, Helen also. There are
many excellent encyclopedias of movies and their stars. We have used
the Internet Movie Database (www.IMDb.com), easily available on the
Web, for our information.

xi
This page intentionally left blank
Dear Helen
This page intentionally left blank
 Introduction

These letters introduce us to two remarkable women: Betty Swal-

low, a youthful Londoner, and her pen pal, Helen Bradley, who lived
in Kansas City, Missouri. The letters cover the period from 1936 to
1950 and with two exceptions were written by Betty. Betty and Helen
became pen pals because of their mutual fascination with the mov-
ies, which at the time were a enormously popular cultural force. Betty
wrote a letter to the editor of Picture Play, and it was published in that
New York movie magazine in 1936. Helen apparently contacted Betty
through the magazine. The correspondence began as a lighthearted
exchange centering on the two women’s shared passion for the silver
screen, but the focus rapidly changed to an ongoing commentary by
Betty on the events leading up to the outbreak of World War II, the
devastation of the London Blitz, the privations she personally suffered,
and the loss of her health as a result of the Blitz. However, the letters
are not all about gloom and doom. Betty was, to say the least, resilient,
ironic, and humorous, as well as angry and sometimes almost over-
whelmed by her frustration with the world.
In the beginning, Betty reveals herself as a bright, twenty-two-year-
old living in London with her mother and working as a stenographer/
secretary for the shipping department of the Great Western Railway.
Betty immersed herself in the pursuit of entertainment, friends, holi-
days, and work  —  what we would expect of a young middle-class single
woman in one of the richest, most sophisticated cities in the world.
As the reader will perceive, she was a gifted writer who honed her
talent with innate skill from the start to the end of her correspondence


 Dear Helen

with Helen. She interwove the serious topics of the war and postwar
austerity with vignettes of her daily life  —  the office, friends and beaus,
holiday trips, family, hospital stays  —  which she executed with clarity
and dramatic interest. Even though these vignettes were not always
cheerful, they had the effect of brightening her style.
More than once she mentioned her desire to be a writer. But she
was not in the right place at the right time to realize that ambition.
Her discussions of movies and the theater reveal a dedication to the
dramatic arts. She sought contact with leading actors in the London
theater such as John Gielgud; perhaps, if she had reached adulthood
in the years after the war, with her health intact, the literary community
in London would have provided encouragement for a young woman
with such talent and desire.
During the course of this correspondence, we learn practically every-
thing about Betty. About her pen pal, Helen Bradley, we know less, but
a portrait of her does emerge, that of a patient and caring woman who
had a lot to give a friend, even one met through the somewhat artificial
convention of a “pen palship.”
We know from letters that Helen wrote in 1969 –1971 to Virgil
Johnston, director of the Winston Churchill Memorial and Library
in Fulton, Missouri, as well as from her obituary, that she was trained
as a nurse and physical therapist. She attended the Kirksville College
of Osteopathic Medicine in Kirksville, Missouri; the University of
Southern California in Los Angeles; and Harvard University Medi-
cal School. She was a pioneer in the then relatively new profession
of physical therapy. She lived most of her adult life in Kansas City,
Missouri, and became the chief therapist at the Dickson-Diveley Clin-
ic, at the time one of the leading centers in the country for physical
therapy. She was born in 1890, in Kansas City, before birth certificates
were issued. But we do not know much about her family, other than
that she had a cousin, Mrs. Barbara Runyan, who supplied information
for her obituary printed in the Kansas City Star on September 5, 1979.
Helen carefully saved the letters, cards, and snapshots she received
from Betty, although, as the letters reveal, some of their wartime corre-
spondence seems to have wound up on the bottom of the Atlantic. We
do not have any of the letters Betty received from Helen, however, and
therefore we have to rely on inference to get a sense of Helen’s side of
the dialogue. As the reader will see, there is plenty to go on; Betty re-
 Introduction 

lated personally and energetically to Helen as she portrayed the events

that surrounded her during these years.
The correspondence diminished and then ceased in 1950, seemingly
Helen’s doing more than Betty’s. In one last piece of the correspon-
dence, a letter written in 1969 that was returned undelivered, Helen
makes a dramatic confession: “I quit writing to you because I could not
take any more of your criticism of the U.S.”
So a rupture in their relationship occurred, but it is not easy to find in
the letters themselves. During the thirteen years of the correspondence,
Betty did not refer to any sharp break between the two, although she
often registered differences of opinion with Helen: about their favorite
movie stars and actors in the early letters, and then, as the war began
to develop and finally burst out, in response to what apparently were
increasingly strong differences of opinion about American isolationism
and criticism of Britain’s conduct of the war in U.S. newspapers. In
the postwar letters the differences centered on such political issues as
socialism and the cold war. Throughout the letters, these differences
of opinion are both explicit, when Betty refers to something Helen
has said, or implicit, as Betty seems to be addressing something Helen
might have said. In fact, Betty sent Helen a number of newspaper clip-
pings, most of them in letters written in 1940 and 1941 when Britain
was involving herself in the conflicts in Finland, Norway, Denmark,
Holland, and France. These clippings focus primarily on the British
reaction to American isolationism and American criticism of England’s
role in these campaigns. They indicate that Betty’s criticisms reflected
the prevailing climate in the British press rather than an actual con-
flict between her and Helen. They also show that Betty borrowed many
ideas as well as words and phrases about America’s position from these
newspaper articles. For instance, one article that she sent, headlined
“It’s Your War, Too,” contained a passage Betty echoed several times:
“President Roosevelt can hardly open his mouth . . . without pronounc-
ing a condemnation of Nazi methods . . . mustn’t he, if he’s honest
with himself, realize that America is in this struggle with us up to the
neck  —  only she isn’t paying her share?” Walter Winchell defended
American isolationism in a broadcast and drew a response in the Sun-
day Dispatch from which Betty picked up another phrase she used: “it
is no comfort to the average Briton . . . to be told that this is a ‘phoney
war.’”
 Dear Helen

During the German invasion of Belgium, the newspapers were full

of eyewitness accounts and pictures of the effects of the Blitzkrieg on
civilians. Betty sent pictures from newspapers and included details from
an article in the Daily Express: “Between thirty and forty high explosive
bombs were dropped . . . into the narrow streets where 20,000 refugees
were pouring toward France.”
A statement in the Sunday Chronicle from an American apparently
rankled Betty: “It was suddenly discovered that Britain and France
had finally gone to war purely for selfish motives.” This seems to have
stung so much that Betty confessed her resentment to Helen in a letter
dated May 8, 1940: “How anyone in the World could say that Britain
is fighting a selfish War beats me. What in God’s name can we gain by
it? All this affair in Norway!” She also sent a clipping from the Sunday
Pictorial in February 1941 titled “Why Don’t They Come Home?” fea-
turing famous British athletes, night club entertainers, movie actors,
and writers who were staying in the United States during the Blitz.
Although this was not an instance of anti-Americanism, she registered
anger about the attraction the American theater and movie business
had for British actors, writers, and entertainers. She was not as chau-
vinistic when it came to her own rejection of English weather in favor
of “balmy” Kansas City and, of course, the sunshine of California.
The implication of these articles is that in discussing the issues
drawn from the newspapers Betty was attempting to objectify her sen-
timents by showing Helen the sources of her information. One clipping
included a photo of a British soldier saying good-bye to his infant son.
It seems to have been sent at about the time that British forces were
still in France after the evacuation at Dunkirk. This must have been an
iconic image for Betty, who mentioned it in a context laden with her
intense feelings of pain over the death in World War I of the father
she never knew. In her letter dated January 11, 1940, she wrote: “Every
day I go to Victoria station on my way to work, and there are hundreds
upon hundreds of boys and men leaving for France, after their brief
home leave. It always makes me want to howl that their father fought
like mine did, in the last War thinking they’d finished it all, and now
their children are left to start the whole terrible business again!”
But often Betty’s criticisms of America came as sharp tirades that
indeed can trouble readers. In almost every case, these tirades are sur-
rounded by a helpless and frustrated tone as Betty accounts for the
 Introduction 

events that are taking place  —  international developments, the frighten-

ing course of the war at its start, the bombing itself, the privations she
experienced, the destruction of London, her severe health problems.
One can see from what Betty describes in these letters that she was in
fact the helpless victim of war. The loss of her father left her a father-
less child. World War II took her beloved city, her childhood friends,
and her health. But she was not hopeless. She was, without a doubt, the
epitome of English pluck, irony, and humor.
The haven she and Helen shared in the ideal world of movies became
a frequent counterpoint to the stress of the war in Europe and the Blitz.
Another ideal Betty often asserted was her intense desire for peace. Her
father was lost to her in the fruitless effort of World War I to create a
lasting peace. He had written idealistically about that to his wife while
he was stationed in France. Betty idolized Neville Chamberlain for his
diplomatic efforts to achieve peace. She distrusted Winston Churchill,
even more intensely after the war, because of his warlike tactics in pur-
suit of peace. In the immediate aftermath of the war, she made the
transition from a “true blue Tory” to a socialist because she felt that so-
cialism and, with some reservations, communism held out hope for the
working class and for peace. She consistently expressed anti-American
opinions because she did not feel that attitudes in the United States or
the policies of the American government such as prewar isolationism
and later the cold war served her and her compatriots’ desire for peace.
Helen claimed that these attitudes caused her to break off the dia-
logue, but that may have been an overstatement. Betty’s polemical
diatribes began early in the correspondence and continued throughout
the thirteen-year period. Throughout those years Helen remained a
caring, giving person, initially sending movie magazines and, once the
privations of the war took hold, providing gifts of food and clothing as
well. She even enlisted friends and family members in this expression
of friendship. However, other causes may have contributed to the break.
On the one hand, Betty was constantly awash in her sense of helpless-
ness. On the other, Helen had her own insecurities, including their age
difference (she was twenty-four years older than Betty). In her letter of
September 8, 1937, Betty brushed that concern off with youthful self-
assurance: “You say in your letter you were surprised at my age. That s
funny, but I would never have dreamed that you were older than me.”
She continued: “I happen to like older people a great deal more than
 Dear Helen

younger ones. . . . As for still wanting to write to you — of course, I do.

And I hope you’ll feel the same about me.” In another letter, written in
November 1938, Betty chided Helen for not wanting to send her pic-
ture: “Thank you for your charming compliments on my appearance.
Let me assure you I have a million faults. . . . As for saying you could
never send your photo — You must have an awful inferiority complex. I
think I shall be one of those young ladies who ‘fade’ quickly. When I’m
in me forties, I’ve a firm feeling that I shall be enormous, with three
or four chins, and a marvellous ‘spare tyre’.” Not the most tactful way
to ask for a picture of a forty-seven-year-old woman. Such insecurities
may have contributed more to Helen’s decision to stop writing than
did Betty’s anti-American criticism, as Helen claimed nineteen years
later.
Unquestionably, the tensions caused by some of Betty’s outbursts
could have built up by the last years of the correspondence to the point
of thoroughly frustrating Helen. Betty’s anti-Semitism may have been
the start of such frustration. Her first expression of this sentiment comes
early on in the correspondence when Betty lashes out at the Jewish
immigrants from Austria. In subsequent letters her repetition of this
attitude seems compulsive. Although it does not justify her display of
prejudice, it is noteworthy that Betty always projected a distinct mood
of helplessness preceding or surrounding these attacks. However, where
such outbursts occur the mood is not all frustration and anger; Betty
often goes on to discuss current movies and plays that she has seen in a
chatty contrast to her dark mood about Jewish immigration to England
that strikes one as insensitive.
One passage, written by hand in December 1941 near the end of the
Blitz and long after the immigration of the Austrian Jews, illustrates
how this mood of helplessness seems to have triggered her anti-Semitic
outbursts. Betty wrote the letter after having spent months in a sana-
torium recuperating from inflamed lungs: “I do hope you will forgive
me, dear, for scribbling in pencil . . . I cannot go back to the Office and
use the Typewriter until the New Year. . . . I am now safely home again,
after just over four months in the Sanatorium — four months which
seemed like four years! The country is beautiful, when you are fit . . . but
when you have to lie about and just gaze at it, it’s plain monotonous.
London seems like heaven in comparison. However, . . . if the raids start
in earnest again, I shall have to pack up and go elsewhere — no more
 Introduction 

shelters for me! Its a case of you die if you go below, and you die if you
stay on top so I think I’ll take the top.”
Betty went on to complain about the scarcity of food under the ra-
tioning program and lamented that she and her mother hadn’t suffi-
cient ingredients for really good Christmas puddings. But her pluck
resurfaced: “[U]nless I can use my wiles on the Butcher, Grocer, and
what have you! Still, leave it to little Betty to keep up Ye Olde English
Christmas if possible.”
Then she caught herself almost forgetting to thank Helen for a
Christmas package of candy, nylons, and cosmetics: “Now, I almost
forgot to tell you the most important thing of all — that is, I actually
received the Box. . . . Gosh! was I grateful ?? . . . I am using the Powder,
and it is just the right shade.” In the next sentences, however, comes
this: “Some of the Cosmetics put on the Market here now, are appalling
concoctions, made mostly by Jews in forbidden factories from anything
they can lay their hands on. The Government have just put a Ban on
them. . . . Wherever you find any dirty work afoot, there you find the
Yids, and if that sounds prejudiced, I really can’t help it. I hate the sight
of the Jewish people, and more than 50% of the Shirkers in this country
belong to that Race.” Then she returns blithely to the subject at hand:
“Anyway, enough of that. Many, many thanks for the Box.”
Betty’s criticism of America started in her early letters, when England
was gearing up for war; then, as the bombing of London began and later
when America entered the war, her criticisms of America ceased. They
resumed once the war was over and the British suffered the extreme
hardships of the postwar austerity programs. Her criticisms were often
addressed directly to Helen, and each time they were preceded by a de-
scription of her frustrations. The war and the suffering were real for her
and everyone else.
On November 24, 1939, she wrote: “[A]s you will probably guess,
our lives have been turned upside down and everything seems changed.
I have been so terribly busy in work that I’ve gone home feeling like a
pricked Balloon.” She explained, “I was on holiday the week War broke
out. . . . [W]e packed up . . . and got back to London. . . . On the Sunday
morning we all sat round the Radio and listened to the Premier’s speech
and we all cried — the young ones because they didn’t know what was
coming and were frightened, and the older ones because they did.” She
went on to say, “It seems funny but last week my mother turned out a
 Dear Helen

letter from my father dated sometime in 1916, and he says ‘. . . it’s ru-
moured out here that Jerry is angling for an Armistice. But I and most
of the chaps out here feel we’d rather fight on and finish the Germans
for good and all so that our children won’t have the same old battle
all over again. I don’t want Jacky to grow up to anything like this. If it
means peace for our kids we’ll fight till we all drop’. Prophetic, wasn’t
it? And you’ve got it just as it was written.” She was expressing her
dismay at how doomed that idealistic wish was. A few lines later, she
lashed out: “But I wish Americans wouldn’t stand around doing pre-
cisely nothing but criticise and call it a ‘phoney’ War. After all, they are
not risking a single American life, and are only thinking of the whole
thing in terms of Newspaper Headlines and Dollars for Armaments.”
Betty often tried to soften the effect of her emotional censure of
America and its policies. She frequently concluded such letters by apol-
ogizing for getting off the subject, “rambling” as she put it, and in one
of them she tried harder to soften the effect of her criticism: “I don’t
mind you criticizing us Honey! . . . When I think of how much I talk
and how marvellous you are to me, I get thoroughly ashamed of myself.
. . . I hope you know how sincerely I appreciate everything you do.” At
the same time, however, there is that underlying note of helplessness.
Beyond the suffering Betty experienced in the war, these moods may
have had their source in a deeply felt grief over the loss of the father she
never knew. When she spoke of him, she reflected the pain of a father-
less child. She seems to have idealized him as a peace-loving figure,
but she expressed bitterness that he died for such an ideal. In fact, her
complaint, in the early letters when England and France and the other
European allies were trying to avoid war, that Britain had to be “polite,”
as she put it, honoring treaties and standing up for the smaller coun-
tries, may have had its genesis in her disillusionment with idealism such
as her father’s, which she felt caused her to lose him.
In her letter of April 10, 1940, she likened her brother, Jack, who
was impatient to get into the army, to her father: “My father was ex-
actly the same. He tried three Recruiting Offices in 1914 before they
finally accepted him and then the Chief Clerk in his Office got him
out because he was a valuable man, but he got in again, and went to
France in ’15. He died when I was a baby and I don’t remember him
at all, though Jack has some fleeting memories of him. We’ve only got
one photograph of him and that’s in Soldier’s Uniform. He looks pretty
 Introduction 

nice. I think he and I might have got along very well together.” This last
poignant thought suggests the depth of her yearning for the man she
never knew.
If a profound sense of helplessness characterizes her discussion of the
loss of her father, and her life during the war, one of the starkest and most
disturbing self-images that recurs in Betty’s letters appears for the first
time in one postmarked October 16, 1940, during the Blitz: “I no longer
suffer from Housemaids Knee but have developed instead ‘Shelter back’
due to lying flat on my back on the cold stone Platform of an Under-
ground Railway.” A similar image of helpless passivity is repeated in her
letter of August 17, 1941, written from East Anglian Sanatorium, where
she was trying to recuperate from tuberculosis: “Doctors say I have not
been strong enough to stand up to all the hardships of War conditions
last Winter. Lying about on wet and cold stone floors of Deep Shelters,
breathing bad air, getting no sleep, and not the proper food have all com-
bined to break my resistance down. Still, I am getting better now.”
Describing one of her most serious, near fatal illnesses in a letter
written on September 28, 1946, “in bed, propped up with umpteen pil-
lows,” Betty expressed her aversion to lying about passively awaiting
death with characteristic pluck and dark humor: “I was transferred to
Hospital in the middle of it, & sent home because I was lying awake
all night what with women dying next to me & another Woman going
mad & rushing round the Ward as though she was on a Horse!”
Helplessness and anger and fear are not the only emotions Betty
showed to Helen. Despite being overwhelmed by illness and the ad-
versities of the war, she invariably projected a tempering mood of
hopefulness, and it is important to recognize that despite lashing out
at Helen she always reaffirmed her affection for her American friend.
A vignette in the later letters shows how deep that affection could be
for both women. The Austerity Program had settled over England,
and over Betty, like a lead blanket. She longed for white shoes, with
stylish open toes, which she could not find at home. This produced a
burst of correspondence about white shoes in which Betty asked Helen
to send her some. In late May 1946 Betty wrote, “The main thing is,
Helen, that the package arrived quite safely yesterday . . . and oh! I am
so grateful to you. The shoes were simply marvelous.”
This package contained canned goods and clothing, for which Betty
thanked Helen joyfully, although there is one sobering note: “the vest is
10 Dear Helen

going to be put away for Medical Exams and X-Rays, of which I have
plenty of as you can imagine.” Betty’s mother was caught up in the joy
and was persuaded to add a note of her own, which was sent along with
Betty’s letter: “I am quite sure you would feel quite satisfied without
expressed thanks if you could only have seen both of us. . . . As for the
white shoes, well, ecstasy is the right word. . . . Betty is really one of the
war casualties. She was a lovely healthy girl before the war, but life in
shelters and lack of variety and quality of food caused a breakdown that
we have never been able to pull up.”
Although there is no direct evidence in the letters of an irreparable
difference of opinion or of a threatened break in Helen and Betty’s
relationship, an episode in the last letters may shed indirect if some-
what surprising light on why Helen stopped writing. In August 1945,
Betty wrote that she had broken up with her boyfriend, Chris, who
was a Coldstream Guard and a decorated veteran of the North African
campaign. He was also, as Betty put it, “a very good looking man. . . .
Women chase him around like Moths round a Candle.” Apparently,
when he came back to England he deserted the army for a time. How-
ever, because of his good military record he was allowed to return with-
out penalty. But he jilted Betty. As she said, “He seems to be a different
man — went completely mad — you know, wine, women and song — the
old story.” In these letters, Betty told Helen of her disappointment, but
she also took pains to convey a stoic attitude in her acceptance of the
end of the relationship.
What complicates our understanding of Betty’s discussion of this
failed romance is the fact that at some point (when is unclear) Helen
started writing to Chris herself. Apparently he was stationed at the
time in North Africa, where Betty had been sending him the movie
magazines Helen had sent her from America. He shared them with the
other men, who used the pictures of the movie stars for pinups above
their bunks.
In a letter written in August 1945 Betty said, “I should have loved
to have seen Chris’s letter to you (his name’s ‘Chris’, not Ted, honey —
you’ve got them mixed up) If you still have it, I wish you’d send it over
to me. I’ll return it without fail.” And then she went on to tell of the
failed relationship. In the next letter, written sometime afterward, Betty
said, “Thanks so much for sending Chris’ letters. He and I are washed
up now, finally — and I think it’s the best and most sensible thing to do.
 Introduction 11

. . . . I have tried with him, but I’ve lost heart now. I am giving you his
address, because I know he’d be happy to hear from you — he was very
grateful to you for sending him books . . . you’d better say you asked me
for his address, which will adjust things from my angle.”
It sounds as if Betty did not want Chris to think she had asked Hel-
en to write him and intercede on her behalf — which may have been
what Helen had done or had intended to do. Or perhaps Betty thought
that writing Chris would provide a little romance in Helen’s life. At any
rate, Betty was resolute. “He and I are on opposite sides, Helen, and
it doesn’t work out,” she went on to explain, as if she was cautioning
Helen about trying to straighten out the relationship.
She mentioned him again in a letter dated April 1946: “Chris is ‘de-
mobbed’ [demobilized] next week, I believe — so what he will be doing
with his future I haven’t the faintest idea. . . . Don’t suppose I shall ever
see much of him, even though we live in the same town.” Betty wrote
again about Chris a few weeks later, in the spring of 1946, perhaps from
a lingering sense of hurt, or perhaps because Helen had continued to
inquire: “Chris was demobbed about five weeks ago, and is causing a
great stir among the females of the town. I have spoken to him on one
occasion — for about five minutes, during the whole of which time he
never looked at me once — just spoke with his shoulders hunched up
and his face turned the other way. It was just like speaking to a strang-
er — not a man I’d known for four years. I was beginning to wonder if
my face was pock-marked or become so distasteful that he couldn’t look
at it!! I see him fairly often at dances, and he ignores my existence as
completely as I ignore his. . . . I have given up wondering and puzzling
about such things. I only regret the loyalty and thought I wasted on
him, which was obviously so little appreciated. It really doesn’t seem
like him at all — almost like someone else had taken his place. Unless,
of course, I was seeing him through rose-coloired glasses, which often
happens. Anyway, it’s over and done with, now, and I have settled down
to it better than I thought I would.”
Betty seems to have been trying to put the subject to rest between
her and Helen, but she couldn’t resist a last swipe at the fickle fellow:
“From what I can gather, he seems to be going from bad to worse as far
as Women are concerned, and the lies and yarns he tells are fantastic.
Seems to be living in a world of his own. I’m honestly beginning to
wonder if he knows when he’s telling the truth, and when he isn’t.”
12 Dear Helen

Later that year, in the early summer of 1946, Betty added a char-
acteristically ironic coda to the matter. A fellow office worker had just
returned from a day off to meet her boyfriend who had arrived back
from overseas: “P.P.S. Joyce has just come in sporting a great big dia-
mond ring which was just put on the third finger of her left hand at
quarter past 11 last night! So she obviously had what it takes even if I
didn’t!”
Helen’s interest in this failed romance may shed more light on why
she stopped writing Betty than does her returned letter of nineteen
years later. Helen was consistently responsive, caring, and giving to
Betty throughout the years of the correspondence. Evidence of her
concern and generosity is abundant. Considering Helen’s steadfastness
and considering the terrible wartime events Betty described, it would
be hard not to think Helen was experiencing them vicariously through
these letters.
Helen Bradley seems to have been shy compared to Betty. We know
she was insecure about their age difference. In addition, while Betty
sent quite a stream of snapshots of herself, her family, girlfriends, and
boyfriends, Helen had refused to send her own picture. Perhaps Helen
was loyal to Betty because she was lonely. Indeed, it seems likely that
Betty’s descriptions of her personal life were of vicarious interest to
Helen.
In addition to describing her relationship with Chris, Betty fre-
quently mentioned other boyfriends as well as incidents in her social
life, her feelings for the father she never knew, her idealization of John
Gielgud, the two women’s debate about the merits of Maurice Ev-
ans’s Broadway Hamlet versus Gielgud’s London Hamlet. At one point
Betty even thanked Helen for bothering to envision the complicated
route she had to take through the suburbs to get to work in the heart
of London.
Through the course of the letters, Betty described a tight-knit family:
her adventurous, robust brother, Jack, whose wife was close to Betty and
her mother; the couple’s child, who was welcomed into the family; her
mother, Gladys, who was a warm and caring single parent. Gladys got
both of her children jobs with the railroad, and Betty kept hers all her
life, even though she complained about it. This warm family is part of
what Helen saw of Betty’s life, as well as the struggle to survive the war
and its aftermath. Ultimately, the human story contained in these letters
 Introduction 13

may have spoken more to Helen, faithful nurturer to Betty for all those
years, than did her young friend’s frustrated criticism of America.
Betty wrote in a tone markedly different from her usual brash out-
spokenness on May 10, 1949. Helen’s letters had become less frequent,
and this would be Betty’s last letter. It begins with a description of her
health and her treatments. There are echoes of the old frustration. She
had been in a sanatorium and a hospital for twenty months: “Need-
less to say I was pretty sick of the country life after 9 months of lying
around looking at some very uninteresting railings with a flat expanse
of green field beyond it.” But this letter, pervaded by a tone of resolu-
tion, is also hauntingly elegiac. On a hopeful note, Betty even describes
her health as improving, “I am beginning to feel a lot better now, and
am certainly much brighter since I started work,” before she concludes
the subject with typical irony: “I’m beginning to wonder if a short life
and a gay one isn’t the best way to look at it!!”
This time her frustration with the world was only lingering and she
did not lash out at Helen but rather reached out to her: “[H]ow are you
all this time, Helen. I have wondered so often how things were with
you. I always counted you, and one other American girl I know, as very
dear friends of mine, and I often speak to people of your kindness to
me. I always hope to hang on to individual friendships, however many
international differences crop up, as crop up they will — even among
allied nations. I know there is a lot of things we do that irritate Ameri-
cans intensely, just as there are things in their characters utterly alien
to our way of thinking, but I have always spoken of people as I found
them and you, and Gwen (the girl in New York) were very good to me,
and I am not likely to forget it.”
She proceeded to account for their political differences constructive-
ly: “Politically, I think you and I differ Helen — I am an ardent Socialist
and a great supporter of our present Government — the only one we’ve
ever had that ever gave the workers of Britain a square deal. I am not,
too, as anti-Russian probably as you — in fact I don’t think the masses of
Britain are violently anti-Soviet at all. I am no admirer of the Commu-
nist doctrine in its entirety, though there are many things in it, which
had the party stuck to the ideals laid down by Lenin, would have made
the world a pleasant place for the poorer people, but I have a mortal
horror of War . . . and I cannot conceive of anything bad enough to
cause nation to rise up against nation. . . . [W]e’d be wiped off the face
14 Dear Helen

of the earth should it happen again. And there you have the hard core
of the disagreements between British and Americans. We feel that if
there is another War with Russia it will be America’s war, and we shall
be dragged in as a buffer state for Russia to drop the bombs on.”
Betty seems to have recognized that Helen had a different view. At
the time, America was transfixed by the cold war. Popular opinion had
it that socialism was a pale but dangerous shade of Russian commu-
nism, and Betty seemed to be trying to accommodate Helen’s feeling.
On a deeper level, this letter suggests that Betty had come to a fork in
the road she and Helen had for a time traveled together. She seems to
have come to peace with many of her old frustrations. She had resolved
her conflicts at least about her station in life and her vision of a just
society. And at the end of the letter she even introduced a new, “cur-
rent boy friend.” She sent a picture: “It’s very good of Bob. . . . He has
corn-coloured hair and I was always devoted to dark men. It just shows
you!” She concluded: “I shall have to finish now, and will tell you more
of the family history on my next letter. Do write me soon, Helen. I was
so pleased to hear from you, and I hope we may keep in touch with each
other now.”
But that never happened. There were no more letters between them.
Betty did send a Christmas card in 1950 from Ireland: “I do hope ev-
erything is well with you — Haven’t heard from you for so long!” Then
she added, almost matter-of-factly, “I am married now, but still living in
the North of England.” Betty’s husband was Bob Arnold, who in 1969
signed her death certificate, on which his occupation was listed as “sheet
metal worker.” No doubt he was the man with the corn-colored hair.
Perhaps she attached some of her yearnings for a father to him and in
him found something of the peace she longed for. Helen never married.
In Betty’s relationship with Helen Bradley, we see a rich skein of
ambivalence, gratitude, and love. In Helen we see a person to whom
Betty could bare her soul — with all of its contradictions. Helen may
have felt frustration, even embarrassment over a failed attempt to re-
store Betty and Chris’s romance. Or she may have been self-conscious
about involving herself at all in the little triangle. She may not have
found Betty’s attempt in her last letter to resolve the political differ-
ences between them as sufficient as Betty hoped it would be. But it
is hard to take Helen’s statement that “I could not take any more of
your criticism of the U.S.” as the full story. She admitted feeling guilty
 Introduction 15

for the lapse, and the tone of love for her old friend is unmistakable:
“[A]fter reading again of all you had been thru I know I should have
forgiven you anything.”
Perhaps both women had reached a point from which their lives
led them onto separate paths. The correspondence broke off, but the
friendship really did not. In the end, Helen was determined to preserve
that friendship, as well as the historical record it constituted, in the ar-
chives of the Winston Churchill Memorial and Library at Westminster
College in Fulton, Missouri.

Helen Bradley:
“straight man to Betty’s brilliant performance”

Today, Helen Bradley is almost a mystery woman. A few of her col-

leagues at the Dickson-Diveley Clinic are still alive and remember her
as “very energetic”; “a person who expected a lot out of everybody, but
fun at the same time”; “something of a character.” Dr. John Barnard, an
orthopedist with whom she worked at the clinic, noted that “she was
an excellent physical therapist” and that “she certainly did not let the
patients have their own way.” He also remembers that she did not have
any family to speak of.
In the 1940s and even into the 1960s, hospitals and medical school
programs did not maintain much biographical information about stu-
dents and staff. Thus, with the exception of her silent presence in the
letters of Betty Swallow, we have little information from which to form
a picture of Helen.
However, we do have her own words in brief letters she wrote to
Virgil Johnston during 1969 and until 1971. Helen wrote to him
on December 5, 1969, offering her letters to the Winston Churchill
Memorial and Library. Her belated letter to Betty had been returned
from England some weeks earlier. She concluded this offer by saying,
“As I am 79 years old I should soon find a place for them that would
be interested.”
Johnston quickly accepted the gift, and Helen acknowledged this,
mentioning the returned letter she had written to Betty: “I’m afraid she
was another war casualty (tuberculosis). I am sorry now but I quit writ-
ing her because she became so critical of America.” About six months
later, on June 14, 1970, she wrote Johnston apologizing that she had
16 Dear Helen

been hospitalized at St. Luke’s in Kansas City because of a heart attack

and was still “gradually returning to normal.”
She explained her relationship with Betty as “only ‘straight man’
to Betty’s brilliant performance. She had written a letter about John
Gielgud to one of the fan magazines and I sent her a letter. . . . I tried
to compensate for what she was going through by writing often and
sending parcels. . . . But now the war was over and with each letter she
became more critical of America so I stopped writing to her. I wish
I had realized . . . that the war was not over for her. I have been in
England in 1956, 58 and sixty two, but have been unable to find Betty.
While I enjoyed each country I visited, England is the one that en-
chanted me. It was like going home.”
She continued to give a brief biography: “I was born in Kansas City
in 1890 and my residence has been here except for years in college and
working for the army as a physical therapist in World War I and with
the Veterans Administration. My last professional work was with the
Dickson and Diveley Orthopaedic Clinic where I served for 20 years
before retiring in 1963.”
Two subsequent notes to Johnston reveal Helen’s continued interest
in Betty Swallow’s letters. In the last, she discusses her interest in David
White, a history major at Westminster College whose senior thesis was
on the Swallow letters.
This brief correspondence with Virgil Johnston shows a person very
like the intelligent, dedicated woman remembered by her profession-
al colleagues and evident in the correspondence of her pen pal, Betty
Swallow.
 i
.,
The Beginning

In these nine letters (one to Picture Play, a movie magazine pub-

lished in New York, and eight to Helen Bradley), Betty Swallow, age
twenty-two in 1937, describes herself as a proud British blonde, fair-
skinned, an ardent fan of films and theater. Her favorite actors include
John Gielgud and Leslie Howard, while she dislikes Madeleine Carroll
and Marlene Dietrich. Indeed, Betty’s opinions on films and their stars
dominate these letters.
Current political events receive little comment. She mentions Nazi
Germany’s annexation of Austria (the Anschluss), the consequent flight
of Jews to England, and as a result their excessive, to Betty, influence
in English business and public opinion. Opposed to a war against Ger-
many, Betty applauds Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s appeasing
of Hitler at Munich by not going to war to prevent annexation of the
Sudetenland. She is relieved at no longer having to wear her gas mask
and angry at Labour and U.S. papers for attacking the appeasement
policy.
By July 1939, relieved that war has been avoided, Betty describes her
political heritage: her father was a communist and her mother a conser-
vative. But Betty’s immediate concern is vacations.

17
18 Dear Helen

Picture Play, April 1937

“A Voice from England”

Can you spare a line or two for an English fan to pass some opin-
ions? It’s more than three years since I wrote and I feel it’s time I poked
my nose in again.
Firstly, I’m so glad Norbert Lusk took notice of our John Gielgud in
the September issue. Mr. Lusk, you ain’t seen nuthin’ yet. Wait till you
see him as “Hamlet.” He’s marvelous!
Secondly, as one of Jessie Matthew’s ardent admirers, I’m so pleased
that America likes her as much as we do. She’s about the only one
of our British actresses who can dance, sing, and act. One unbeatable
combination.
Thirdly, it’s refreshing to see that our pictures are making good prog-
ress in America, films like “Nine Days a Queen,” “Secret Agent,” and
“Rhodes.” They’re all supers and our producers over here are concen-
trating on making more and more pictures like them. The trouble is
we’ve got the directors and the actors, but our actresses — ouch! You
have one of them now trying to make an actress out of her — Madeleine
Carroll. You’ll never do it, Hollywood. She’s cultured, she’s lovely, but
that’s about all.1
And as a final plea, will some kind American come and take Dietrich
away from here? She’s nothing more than publicity crazy. She’s even
taken to visiting hospitals now. This morning’s paper quotes her as say-
ing “I was born to be a nurse.” Now laugh that one off!
Betty M. Swallow,
38 Raleigh Road, Shepherds Bush, London W. 14, England.

1. After her sister was killed in a London bombing raid, Madeleine Carroll stopped
acting to work in Red Cross field hospitals. She was awarded the Legion of Honor for
her bravery in France.
 The Beginning 19

18A. Sinclair Gardens,

West Kensington,
LONDON. W 14.
England.
June 23rd 1937.
Dear Helen,
Forgive the familiarity but I never call people “Miss” anything. Al-
ways seems peculiarly unfriendly to me. What do you think? And as
I’m anything but an unfriendly person, you must forget about the “Miss
Swallow”, too.
I was delighted to hear from you, and did not consider it impertinent
at all. I have met very few Americans, but correspond with quite a few,
and my opinion is that they must be the friendliest nation on earth.
Strange to us, who are, if anything, a rather reserved nation. Although
the famous British reserve isn’t quite so pronounced as people would
have you believe. Once the ice cracks the British are liable to become
the best of pals with anyone. Speaking for myself, I don’t seem to have
inherited the national characteristic. I’m quite chatty with strangers,
have very little self consciousness, and get along well with everyone as a
result.
About myself, if it matters. I’m 22, British and proud of it, blonde,
blue-eyed, with a very fair skin (can’t sun-burn at all, even on those
rare occasions when we do get some sun to burn with). I’m an ardent
Theatre and film “fan”, have been stage-struck for as long as I can re-
member, like reading, and drawing, and dancing, dislike sports, have a
fairly good knowledge of political and international affairs, but am at
my best when discussing Films and the Theatre. My mother says with
gentle sarcasm, that those two subjects are all I can discuss, but she’s a
“fan” too, so we can have arguments together.
I’m a very loyal kind of fan too. I like nearly all the English actors
(except Lawrence Olivier,2 whom I cannot stand at any price), and have

2. One of Laurence Olivier’s earliest successes as a Shakespearean actor came in

1935 when he played Romeo and Mercutio in alternate performances of Romeo and
Juliet with John Gielgud. Gielgud got the better reviews. Olivier appeared in a special
production of Hamlet with Vivien Leigh (Ophelia) performed at Kronberg Castle in
Elsinore, Denmark, in 1937. They married in 1940, after returning to Britain from
Hollywood, where they both made hit movies in 1939, he Wuthering Heights and she
Gone with the Wind.
20 Dear Helen

no intense dislikes save, Dietrich, and Madeleine Carroll, and Wendy

Barrie.3 But I have only one prime favourite, and that’s Gielgud.4 He’s
been the one and only for the past five years, and looks like holding the
same position until I’m an aged old woman. Mother says I’m not quite
sane on the subject of John — I’m not quite as bad as that, but with
several thousands of other young London females, I am practically in-
curable. You haven’t seen him at his best, although I like him in “Secret
Agent”. Did you see “The Good Companions” by any chance?5 That
was marvellous, the best British film I’ve ever seen, and one of John’s
most charming performances. I’ve seen all of his plays, (he’s turned me
into a Shakespeare maniac), and I shall never forget his “Hamlet”, or
anything else he’s ever appeared in for that matter. He is, of course,
the No. 1 Matinee Idol over here. Has an enormous following, mostly
women, and the reception he gets at a “first-night” is amazing. Cheers
and screams, and everything that goes with it. I go to all of them, and
have the most exciting time. He is generally regarded as England’s
greatest actor, which isn’t bad going for a man as young as he is. There
are rumours about now that he intends to marry Peggy Ashcroft (the
English actress who was his “Juliet” in London and was with Burgess
Meredith in “High Tor” in New York).6 She has just got her third di-
vorce, a pretty dreadful thing in England, and I think Gielgud will lose
a great deal of respect if he becomes a fourth husband. Still, that’s his
private life and has nothing to do with anyone, although I can’t say I
admire his choice much.

3. Marlene Dietrich was the highest paid actress of the early 1930s, but in the mid-
1930s her films fell out of favor with the critics and the public. She became a U.S.
citizen and toured for the Allies during World War II; after the war she was decorated
by the United States and France for her strong stand against Nazism. Wendy Barrie, a
British actress of the 1930s, is best remembered as Jane Seymour (wife number three)
in The Private Life of Henry VIII (1933).
4. John Gielgud was the first English actor under forty to play Hamlet, which estab-
lished his career at the Old Vic in the 1929 –1930 season. In the following season he
played the title role in Richard II.
5. Secret Agent (1936; UK), directed by Alfred Hitchcock, is based on stories by W.
Somerset Maugham and stars John Gielgud and Madeleine Carroll as British agents
assigned to assassinate a German spy during World War I who become conscience
stricken about the mission. The Good Companions (1933; UK), a musical comedy based
on a J. B. Priestley novel, stars John Gielgud.
6. Peggy Ashcroft, later a Dame of the British Empire, was a legendary stage and
film actress whose work included the plays of Shakespeare, in England and later in the
United States.
 The Beginning 21

As for the campaign you spoke about. English fans, Producers, Film
Magnates and the rest, have been breaking their necks for three years
to get him signed up on a Picture Contract, but its just a waste of time.
I rather wish he had gone to Hollywood. There’s been dozens of parts
suggested for him, but he’s turned them all down. The only plan now
is that “Richard of Bordeaux” may be made in the Spring, in Colour.7
I should think it would be a lovely film, and I wish they’d have Merle
Oberon as his wife, Anne.8 I always wanted to see those two together,
and John is supposed to be Merle’s favourite actor, but I don’t see much
prospect at the moment.
By the way, if it isn’t too much to ask you, would you let me have just
a tiny peek at that reply he sent you, if you have it that is. I promise I’ll
send it straight back, Cross my heart. Only I should love to see it, And
if you ever see anything about him in any Books or papers, would you
send it to me. We can’t get hold of many American Books here, and I’m
always trying to get copies of the “Theatre Arts Monthly” — but they
don’t seem to sell it much round here. If there’s anyone you want clip-
pings of over here, I’ll scout around and get ’em for you.
I like Leslie Howard very much,9 and was in a bit of a mess when the
famous “Battle of the Hamlets” was raging on Broadway. I wanted John
to win, yet I felt sorry for Leslie. I think he intends to make a picture
of some sort while he’s in England, and “Bonnie Prince Charlie” was
suggested. But then, it was suggested for Fairbanks Jr. too, and nothing
came of it. The latest plan for Howard, according to our Film writers,
is that he intends to play the part of Shakespeare on the screen, That

7. Inspired by Gielgud’s acting, Elizabeth Macintosh wrote the play Richard of Bor-
deaux under the pseudonym Gordon Daviot. It was a smash hit and made Gielgud a
celebrity. Its success provided him with the financial means to produce classics in the
West End, pioneering the theater company system. Among the new generation of ac-
tors that resulted were Olivier and Peggy Ashcroft. Betty mentions this play and the
rumors that it would be made into a movie frequently in the early letters. It was clearly
a subject of interest in the movie and theater world of England.
8. Merle Oberon played Anne Boleyn in The Private Life of Henry VIII (1933). She
was successful in films both in the United States and in Britain, starring with Laurence
Olivier in The Divorce of Lady X, a romantic comedy (1938; UK).
9. After being shell-shocked while serving in the army in World War I, Leslie How-
ard took up acting as therapy. He was successful in London and New York theaters as
“the perfect Englishman.” Very active in England’s war effort, he died when the airliner
on which he was traveling was shot down over the Bay of Biscay by the Germans.
22 Dear Helen

incidentally, is causing a minor riot amongst the Gielgud supporters,

who contend that John is better able to play Shakespeare than Leslie is.
And so it goes on.
I like Walter Huston very much. He strikes me as a man who is sin-
cere about everything he does. I thought he was grand in “Rhodes”.10
Peggy Ashcroft was in that too. She was Anna Carpenter, the novel-
ist. She’s not a bit pretty, but has a lovely voice, and is a good actress,
but. Oh! those three husbands. Ruth Chatterton is over here now, play-
ing in the “Constant Wife”.11 We saw her one night after the Show.
She seems very charming, We saw her again, together with practically
every celebrity of the English stage, at the Theatrical Garden Party
in Regents Park last week. That was a day for Autograph hunters.
Everywhere you went you tripped over some “celeb” or other. I spoke
to Charles Laughton,12 in broad Yorkshire, and he answered me in
even broader Yorkshire. He was so good-tempered, and jovial looking
that I got quite a shock. He’s such a beast in all his films. Noel Coward
and I did a bit of back-chatting, when he stood up to autograph a photo
of his.13 Two guineas was supposed to be the lowest bid (that’s about 10
dollars in your money). Said he “What am I bid for this masterpiece”
So I chirped up “fourpence-hapenny”, somewhere in the region of 10
cents. Was his face red.
Nobody here seems to like Dietrich much. She bores me stiff. There’s
absolutely nothing to the woman, except a pair of false eyebrows, and
a flat nose. I don’t suppose she’ll be any better in “Knight Without Ar-

10. Walter Huston was one of the most respected American actors of the 1930s.
Confirming Betty’s judgment of him as sincere, he once said, “I was certainly a better
actor after my five years in Hollywood. I had learned to be natural — never to exagger-
ate. I found I could act on stage in just the same way . . . using my ordinary voice.” He
appeared with Peggy Ashcroft in Rhodes of Africa (1936; UK), a biography of Cecil J.
Rhodes.
11. American actress Ruth Chatterton began her career as a chorus girl on Broad-
way at age fourteen. Her reputation from the theater made her a major film star of the
1930s. The play The Constant Wife was written by W. Somerset Maugham.
12. Although educated at Stonyhurst College, British actor Charles Laughton en-
listed as a private in World War I. Following theatrical training at the Royal Academy
of Dramatic Art, he became one of the most successful actors and drama teachers in
film and stage.
13. Noël Coward — dramatist, actor, writer, composer, lyricist, painter, and wit — is
considered to have virtually invented Englishness. In the 1920s he injected the fast pace
of Broadway shows into the staid British drama and music.
 The Beginning 23

mour” and I’m not particularly smitten with Robert Donat, so I don’t
know if I shall bother to see it.14 Its the picture scheduled to open our
new super-luxury cinema in Leicester Square in September. According
to all reports this Cinema is going to be the Acme of perfection. Let s
hope so — Our Theatres and Cinemas could do with a great deal of im-
provement. So could some of our films, and as aforesaid our actresses.
With the exception of our Jessie, and Gracie Fields,15 and Merle Ober-
on, I don’t think there’s one of ’em I’d give you tuppence for. Still, I’m
about the most patriotic Briton there ever was, and what makes me boil
is when some of our stars go over to America, and forget they were ever
English and start calling us very uncomplimentary names. The Ameri-
cans who come over here don’t do it. They never start all this bilge
about “I think England is far nicer than America and I want to live here
all my life”. Don’t mistake me, I’m not saying that our stars don’t owe
a tremendous lot to America and the Americans, and if they love the
country, there’s nothing to stop them saying it, but they shouldn’t de-
grade their own country at the same time. Some of our young actresses
just go completely “Hollywood” when they get out there, and it makes
me sick. Still there’s one consolation, as you say, Hollywood isn’t Amer-
ica. Otherwise we should think it a very funny country altogether.
I saw Henry Wilcoxon and his wife when they were in England.
He’s just finished the lead in “Jericho” with Paul Robeson, and it should
be shown soon.16 I see Wilcoxon is divorcing his wife, or is it the other
way around. I never can get straightened up on these divorce tangles.

14. Knight without Armour (1937; UK), a Russian spy movie, stars Dietrich and
Robert Donat. The British-born Donat worked as a Shakespearean actor in reper-
tory companies in England in the 1920s and 1930s and appeared in The Private Life
of Henry VIII. He was contracted to Hollywood studios but insisted on working for
them in England after appearing in the hugely successful 39 Steps (1935), directed by
Hitchcock. He won an Academy Award for best actor for Goodbye, Mr. Chips (1939)
and stayed in England during the war.
15. Jessie Matthews was a 1930s film star, dancer, and singer. Gracie Fields, a come-
dienne and singer, was the highest paid female star in the world in 1937. She developed
a very popular northern working-class-girl character. Ironically, considering Betty’s
prejudice against British actors who went to the United States during the war, Gracie
was one of them. She never regained her prewar popularity.
16. In Jericho (1937; UK), Henry Wilcoxon played a friend to the main character, Jer-
icho (Paul Robeson), who is sent to prison for an accidental murder, escapes to Africa,
and becomes the leader of a tribe. Wilcoxon played Marc Antony in Cecil B. DeMille’s
Cleopatra (1934; U.S.) and was involved with many of DeMille’s movies.
24 Dear Helen

We in England were very sorry to hear of the death of Jean Har-

low.17 She was a native of Kansas City, wasn’t she? I was not a “fan” of
hers, exactly, but I thought it was terribly tragic that one so young and
vital should have to die. And when the news came to us over the Wire-
less I couldn’t have had a worse shock if it had been someone personally
dear to me.
I must close now, Helen, as I have rather a lot to do this evening.
Please do write soon, I enjoyed your first letter so much.
Sincerely,
Betty

P.S. We have changed our address as you will notice from the heading
of the letter.

18A. Sinclair Gardens,

Kensington. W 14.
England.
[September 8th, 1937]
Dear Helen,
Many thanks for your very interesting letter, which I received two
days ago. I am so glad you had an enjoyable holiday — it certainly was
marvellous reading about it, made me wish I had been there. I have
been working rather hard lately, and have had two bad bouts of Sum-
mer ’fluenza, and a very nasty sore throat. I’ve been feeling the strain of
all of it. Its a pity my holidays came before it — I felt fine when I came
back, but all the work and colds have put me back again.
I went down to the Gower Coast in Wales for my holidays. I be-
lieve I told you that my native county is Monmouthshire, which is on
the borders of Wales (although it is definitely an English county. You
can’t annoy a Monmouthshire person more than by calling her Welsh.)
Anyway, I went down to see my relatives and friends, and then went
on from there to the Gower. I did a lot of swimming, although I can
swim like a fish, I’m not really keen on it, and for once we had a heat
wave and I was able to sun-bathe. All I could manage, however, was a

17. Jean Harlow, America’s blonde sex symbol during the 1930s, died in 1937 of
uremic poisoning during the filming of Saratoga with Clark Gable.
 The Beginning 25

blister and a freckle or so. I can never tan, because I am so fair. I go a

dreadful shade of brick-red, and my skin comes off like wood shavings.
I’m always bleating about it. My brother is as fair as I am, but he went
to Ireland and came back a glorious copper bronze, and his wife looks
like a cross between a Chinaman and a Nigger (female gender). John
lives down by the river in Windsor, and spends half his time bathing
in the Thames, and all his Sundays in Maidenhead, Eton, or Runny-
mede. Delightful places, but too quiet for me. I like noise and bustle
and everything that goes with the town life. My brother is exactly the
opposite — he lives in the open air, and getting him into a Cinema is the
toughest job on earth. He continually tells me that I’m crazy going to
the Theatre on a warm day, and spends his time attempting to convert
me to the “back to Nature” movement. I swear he’d become a Nudist,
only he knows we’d all laugh at him. However, we share one thing in
common, a liking for warm weather and sunshine — and as [I] get very
little of either we can grumble together at least.
Talking of weather — its been so cold this past week, we’ve had to
go back to fires, and woollen jumpers. Yesterday we had a terrific
storm — the sky was absolutely pitch black and the Lightning played
havoc with some of the houses around here. The Office next door to us
was flooded out — things were floating about, and meeting you through
the door. It’s a little better to-day, although I think we’re in for some
more rain. The clouds look very ominous and threatening. Yet some
people over here say we’ve had a good summer. I can’t imagine why. The
Sunny days put together, would only make up about a month of the
year. However, English people are notoriously easily satisfied.
You say in your letter you were surprised at my age. That s funny,
but I would never have dreamed that you were older than me. I’ve al-
ways dabbled about in writing. I’ve written things for film and Theatre
Magazines, and once tried my hand at short story writing. I always
wanted to be a Journalist, but I was brought up in the wrong place for
it. I haven’t really got a great deal of patience, and have a terrible slap-
dash way of writing letters. Mother thinks I ramble too much, so it’s a
great comfort for me when you say you think I write well. I give myself
credit for being able to discuss a variety of subjects, and as a result I try
to cram them all in. The resulting mixture isn’t too good, always. Give
me a listener in sympathy with my views on something, particularly
the Theatre and Cinema, and I’ll yapp for hours. I’ve never been shy
26 Dear Helen

in my life, never feel the slightest bit awkward with strangers, and can
make friends remarkably easily. Yet if I walk down the street, or sit in
a Bus and think people are looking at me, I go a rich red colour, and
fidget, and suffer tortures, if I’m on my own. That must be what they
call “Self consciousness”. I never could make it out, because I’m usually
so sure of myself. Blushing is a dreadful habit, and I’m doing my best to
break myself of it. Anyhow, to get back to the age business — I happen
to like older people a great deal more than younger ones. Some of the
very young creatures, in their teens, get on my nerves — though I’m not
much older myself. As for still wanting to write to you — of course, I do.
And I hope you’ll feel the same about me.
I’ve had a young cousin staying with me this week. She has come
up from Monmouthshire. And what a handful she is. Shes eighteen,
a very pretty child, with a passion for London and terrific “mash” on
John Gielgud (worse than me, if that’s possible). Of course, we took her
to the first night of John’s new play “Richard II” on Monday, and she
nearly chewed her gloves up in her excitement. It was a lovely perfor-
mance of a lovely play — and John gave one of the finest shows I’ve ever
seen him give. His Richard is absolutely remarkable. You may think I’m
prejudiced, but that’s everybody’s opinion. When he was giving the fa-
mous “For God’s Sake let us sit upon the ground, and tell sad stories of
the death of Kings” speech, you could hardly hear the people breathing
in the house, and when he finished it the crowded house broke in with
bursts of applause. It was one of the most exciting theatrical moments
of my life. I’ve seen Maurice Evans “Richard” that New York is making
such a fuss about, but believe me, it doesn’t come within hailing distance
of Gielgud’s.18 I wish John would take it to America, but he won’t. He’s
doing three classical plays after this “The School for Scandal” “The
Three Sisters” and “The Merchant of Venice”. Peggy Ashcroft is his
leading lady in all of them. She’s a remarkably talented young actress
and even though the Queen in “Richard” is such a negligible part, she
made it into a vital, living thing. The marriage rumour, by the way, was
denied vehemently by John on the opening night of “Richard”. He says

18. Gielgud starred in Richard II in London, and Maurice Evans played the same
role in New York. As is clear from Betty’s letters, a rivalry developed between the New
York and London productions of Shakespeare plays starring these two actors. Although
Evans was enormously popular and critically acclaimed in the United States, Gielgud
and, later, Olivier were considered the better Shakespearean actors.
 The Beginning 27

he has no intention of marrying her. Other people have different ideas

though — and it is whispered in Theatrical circles that Miss Ashcroft is
very upset over the whole affair. It does make it rather unpleasant for
her. They say, too, that John Gielgud’s mother, who is a very charming,
but very puritanical lady, is horrified at the idea. Still her divorce isn’t fi-
nal yet, so we shall see. It’s a pity her moral character is so rotten — and
with a thrice divorced wife, his chances would be practically negligible.
Divorced women are not allowed at the English Court. And since the
terrible Windsor-Simpson mess, they’re even stricter than they used
to be. And English divorces are such mucky things — so much dirty
linen washed in the Courts. It’s only now that they’re beginning to ease
up on the Divorce laws at all. Before it was only misconduct that was
grounds for divorce, at all. Now they’re including desertion over a pe-
riod of five to ten years, and Insanity. Nothing mentioned of cruelty, or
habitual drunken-ness. As for some things that certain American states
grant divorces on, such as incompatibility and reading at the Breakfast
Table — well! Our Judges would drop dead. Yes! I read in the “Daily
Mirror” that “Richard of Bordeaux” is to be commenced next month,
although I don’t believe that — I thought it was next Spring they were
doing it. Anyway, if I read anything about it, I’ll send you the clippings,
and if you see anything about John in the American mags you’ll send
it over to me, won’t you? They haven’t started to cast “Richard” yet — I
wish it were possible for Merle Oberon to be the Queen. I’m very keen
on Merle. So if you see anything about her, clip it out for me. By the
way, you ask me what American mags I see in England. The answer is,
hardly any. I want very much to get John’s autobiography, which has
been running the “Theatre Arts” Book. I’ve got the first part, which is I
think, the May issue, and I can’t get the others. So if you have any spare
copies, perhaps you can put me out of my misery. A friend in Mas-
sachusetts sends me “Picture Play”, though I can buy that occasion-
ally on our Bookstands. Perhaps you would like a copy of the Theatre
Book, with the “Richard II” pictures in? The “Theatre World” or the
“Play Pictorial” nearly always publish a souvenir of John’s plays. There
is rather a nice photograph of him in the Programme, and I will send
you one. I will keep my eyes skinned for any information about Henry
Wilcoxon, though he seems to have faded out a little of late. “Jericho”
hasn’t been shown here yet, but when it is, I will get the reviews and
forward them to you for your friend. Also, I forgot to thank you for
28 Dear Helen

the envelope of clippings you sent. Believe me they were very welcome,
especially, the Life story from COLLIERS which has been perused,
chewed and inwardly digested by a large number of Gielgudites.
Y’know, I seem to have rambled on and said exactly nothing in this
letter. I’ve been typing it under difficulties, with the eagle eye of the
Boss upon me, and he has a most profoundly disapproving look upon
his face. Probably he will give me enough work this afternoon to last
me for the rest of the week. However, I really can’t blame him for the
shocking typing in this epistle, nor for the scrappy way in which it’s
written.
I’m enclosing a snap of my sweet self — I look very miserable, but I
never smile in a photograph. My mouth seems to stretch right across
my face.
Please write soon. I enjoyed your letter so much,
Sincerely,
Betty

18A. Sinclair Gardens,

Kensington.
London. W 14.
England.
[ June 9, 1938]
Dear Helen,
Am making a belated attempt to answer my correspondence, and
have just realised the fact that I have about eight letters to answer. I
believe it’s about six weeks since I had your letter, and I’m only just
finding time to answer it. Trouble is, I’ve always got plenty to say, but
no time to type it in. We’ve been working so hard lately, that I can’t
squeeze a spare half hour anywhere, and I have no Typewriter at home,
so I hope you’ll forgive me this time, even though I know it’s darned
rude not to answer people when they take the trouble to write you nice
letters.
I have a terrible cold in the head, and have been sniffing for about a
week now. The weather has been so terribly cold through April that it
seemed like December (as a matter of fact the temperature was lower
than it was all through the Winter.) I nearly froze to death, and had
to type with my gloves on and with a duster wrapped around my feet.
 The Beginning 29

They had a snow storm in the Midlands in early May! And we’ve had
no rain for two months, and the country is up in arms about it. Farmers
go to Church and pray for the rain, because what with the drought and
the frost, the whole of the early Plum Crop has been lost, and nearly all
other Produce. Vegetables are terribly dear. Actually speaking, I cannot
make out why in a country like England, which is probably the wettest
in the world, they can’t store the water properly. Still I Suppose it will
rain in torrents over the Whitsun, just to celebrate. Outside now the
sky is nearly black, and promises a lovely downpour. All the Clerks are
crossing their fingers and hoping it will, because of their darned gar-
dens, and the one sitting next to me is rubbing his hands and chortling
gleefully of the marvelous effect it s going to have on his 10 inch patch
of rhubarb and his amazing Lavender Bush, which grew two whole
sprigs last year. My brother qualified for the great Gardener stakes last
season by raising a large crop of weeds of every description and three
magnificent Cauliflowers of which he was so proud, he left ’em in the
Garden till they went to seed. For myself, I have a Hyacinth Bulb in a
Pot, and a couple of Peas sprouting in a Saucer. London Flat Dwellers
rarely own gardens. I shall have to wait until I can afford a Country
Cottage — though when that will be, the Lord only knows. We’ve been
trying the English National Gambling Game — Football Pools — for
the past year without success. However, when I do win some money, I
am coming to America. This year s holiday is being modestly confined
to a tour of Belgium, either we shall stay on the Coast, or in Brussels. I
rather want to see the Battlefields. My friend wanted to go to the South
of France, but I couldn’t afford it, and she can’t go without me, because
I speak French and she doesn’t. Actually I shall need my bit of French
in Belgium, because they aren’t very good English speakers over there.
All I hope is that we get a good Channel Crossing. When I went to
Jersey and Normandy in 1936, I nearly died of sea-sickness.
I should rather like to go to Germany some time, too, although my
friend will never go there. She and I disagree violently over the German
question. Y’see Helen, I don’t know what your religion or your political
opinions are. There s plenty to hate Hitler for, but there s a great deal I
admire him for, and admire him intensely. The trouble over this business
with Austria is, that people refuse to see that the Austrians welcomed
Hitler. They aren’t unhappy or miserable about going over to the Ger-
man Reich: It s only the Jews that are bleating about it. And now we
30 Dear Helen

shall get thousands of Austrian Jews pouring in here.19 I’m thoroughly

fed up with it. England is overrun with Jews of all nationalities — they
have a stranglehold on our Industries, they own our Shops, they’re in
our Parliament, they rule us, and the English people are so darned silly
they refuse to see the Menace they’re becoming. I don’t advocate per-
secution, or cruelty of any sort, but I do think that England needs a
minor Hitler who will put down this Jewish influx before it s too late.
As for Hitler and Mussolini dragging the world in War, we have just
signed a new pact with Italy which will ensure peace, I think, and while
we keep our noses out of the European stew, I think we shall be all
right. But do we ever keep our noses out of it? We’re pledged to join
with France to attack Germany if Hitler’s troops enter Czechoslovakia.
What do we care about the Czechs and why should our people fight for
them, similarly if an attack is made on Belgium, we have to protect her.
Our Communist party sends ammunition and Money, and troops to
Spain, which makes things difficult again. Still, I’m mighty glad Eden
got out when he did, otherwise I’m convinced we should have been at
War with Italy. Eden was full of the “England can beat anyone” idea.
He wanted to use Brute force, instead of tactful diplomacy, which is so
much better. I went to the London Communist Theatre last night to
see Irwin Shaws Anti-War play “Bury the Dead”. It was a magnificent
illustration of the “War is Hell” theme, and though I’m a true blue Tory,
I forgot my sentiments because the play was so marvellously acted. A
friend of mine was acting in it — she’s been a pal of John Gielgud’s for
fifteen years — was his first “fan” I believe, and gets special privileges ac-
cordingly. Anyways, she s a lovely actress.
I had America on the Radio (we call it wireless) last week. I think it
was the Columbia Co, broadcasting from Schenectady (I knew I should
make a mess of that word). It was the “Princess Pat” programme, or

19. At this time there was a popular acceptance of Germany’s annexation of Austria
on the grounds that Austria was a “German” nation. The anti-Semitism Betty espouses
had deep roots in England going back several centuries. Polls taken three or four years
after the war “suggested that extreme anti-Semitism was confined to a small minor-
ity, but that about half of the population, working class and middle class alike, were
capable of making anti-Semitic statements; and this probably underestimated latent
anti-Semitism” (Angus Calder, The People’s War: Britain, 1939 – 45, 2d ed. [London:
Panther, 1971], 576.). Relentless propaganda by the Nazis had also exposed the British
to anti-Semitism.
to very

the

stripes

The a from

were

usually the and

The good
rescue

head There blood

dominions are which

his

The produced

Madagascar
It surviving are

do be

with a

of

to the S

There
raised running

of it in

long fail

shown the

the
nestlings

bite This

relative over

Samuel of

gnaw fast

in
Wild

a admitted dangerous

SHIRE

the S

owners different

Photo are modern

pursued

animal to

courage
shoulder unconcerned foot

Cochin

they

far of

and eat

Woburn the wolves

get

the is

to animals description
store

to though pair

annual

short where been

and strong

drill

commonplace

and

000

alike ribs
60000 came

was his

the approach wonderful

by

which felt

the fulfil

bones and saw

more B wood

wild rivers
I held

domesticity in

of killed

twice suggested

the ATS

always nearly

even of

RICK taken
just

kills as any

almost

extended its springs

bank usual

Gundy

as
at size

caught him The

for

up delicate

have and

Charles
that with is

was the

one and wasps

an a The

at as in

ears
just are in

Eclipse the cleared

of and

of Medland

tempered
at feet 60

reign the guests

covering

and

generally

Speaking

retriever photographs no

They in not
that only wild

To gives a

by A

take rocks the

bear of

have tug as

that the

in
with Leigh are

S haunts one

up MONKEY Proboscis

state of

and treatment

in and species

monkeys

exceeded the and

animals is

Indian jaw which

It

a the

child and

the

plentiful rarely with

bears stomach
Dog LONG

solemnly not E

It

of

be

One
found HE the

species Stag

to of Photo

speak children

holding coloured to

T
be in

man Duiker arms

on

leopard so

river effective FROM

of

inches very

of trees as
a

the give the

South then

men P of

incredible

large is in

and west found

EMUR still cat

F less

to
their is a

could upper Audubon

spring The from

some makes

not and defence

Central matter the

North

burrow between yellowish

life It muffled

depth
SEA

ONEY

Europe

much In conquest

fifteen

latter marmot Head

white

by

but

The

attacked

CIVET generally
or in often

mists specimen man

in rabbits Europe

of the

was Zoo leaves

WILD

It saw 20

cat chimpanzee

ERVAL

pull head

have

Himalaya
loud both

which

that An

round difficult

breed the foot

passage

make

old

is aquatic on

Andrew

They Deer

face

in turn

One
it

openings above it

down TWO

at what

back least

her

after

experience whether As

Marshall
of very

full and

of

valuable

ass

credited was
from Tasmanian

the to Cheeta

of

very was the

some of

tea Railway

s the in
unexplored covered

them it greatly

three

human

would TOED by

neck lbs swift

Ottomar one allowed

and will is
Minor ferocity

eggs

tail species

bands with
counties being

The his

the the be

other in Barrier

will

fox

it an

the he
companions been

form

quite

Rothschild

it he

obtained

nearly

back often very

mentioned

is

of and GELADA

and

which

legs Petchora

Zululand of

diminishing

various MALE among

It
They there

in the

ARABIAN they A

the

but which so

noises of America
was repeatedly

IN dark real

near small

traps

creature cold long

end is ever

COBEGO with

adepts forests

closely on merchants

pigs American
A almost

wrinkles footsteps

much fear

E the table

nocturnal
Percy

to

been game

the lived

its that kind

Europe to
long

from farmer Duchess

of

the paws

about

had

not

so species there

far the

over Range
whipped considerable and

of by

their

against but steppes

head ANDA

cat would off

fox are for

has even

the monkey

come level

been It keeper

small civets the

most

regard C

photograph By held

the They
saddle its 120

At The more

the

to his

LACK them Irish

species idea Hyæna

writer easy
weasel the

aid to

muscle of and

diameter chickens and

across

another the are

of

a outer the

Bear

regards

overrun

old a

of sole as

the
strong little

domestic grass most

the A so

that battle squirrel

of worth
A is

for short

on

and

Connaught

these other

not wild
and

of

Note

animal in

the the
it the original

the up by

Pouched

for is A

it Tribe
equalled vary trustworthy

is an

by

partial

of the her

local

lighter

cannot

Forest experiences
Of

mention required

expected repeatedly useful

and he Photo

like they to

it game large

discontinued it

latter the

were belly

of in ground
written

OUGH FROM

she the

of

the

found

peasants succulent

and

Medland in

BISON experiments to
Mr

in

artist M ape

time In men

Mountains

of it

When he miner

mice the runs

nine

there
Hippopotamus thousands the

skull When yards

so been outer

by admit elephants

zebra

never Photo

horns

INDIAN the appearing

with with A

Rudland their

in their late

seat smoke room

fixed North of

the farmer who

American far monkeys

neck That the

family you very

the

Z those the

elands

fairly Flying

collecting that but

them P much
Photo share blanket

kept least this

of

wished

small horned they

young kept

probably go of

any know being

on has enormous

specialised C and

is set a

nowhere
PUPPIES inquisitive are

cats animals

so

noted

expectant breed favour

C which

even most

forests

placed
to with

river

readily to all

antelope a which

remains some that

bat HE

tails pest

in

many are

far the
Southern

is weight enough

mainly invariably

distribution and

same

illustration by to

a
to from even

splendid is porcupines

mentioned built

anywhere a

descend

378

or

shun patches REYHOUNDS

to feet
WELSH in evidently

SEAL

by the are

growing they

one
on down and

in wandering untrue

Until well

at Ghats white

known Alps from

use in of

the
brain by This

and adjacent

of in

it

on near

some the

one

angles

found itself victoria

deeply to were
Zebras sea in

in was also

showing with

fighting of animal

is

the

known more than

left returned

1900

apes level
Hon

the This Pending

was by Pyrenees

selfishness of TAILED

built lbs

power old

the

may

streams farm having

dead latter
look fellow hand

was

in

and

two Photo by

from that

or wounded
sitting feminine of

or

species Sheep

example brown ALAGO

rôle

Ungulates
the of

Ellora

higher full

above Gabriel under

fifteen having

the

these of
that and they

or

very rat head

tree European hill

by Colony They

has

last

rudimentary of struggled

V of
the tail been

common from

is the

is attention

Parson

foxes

bees

Egypt many male

total Baird Photo

and of

rivers

disposition of group

the bearer

inside its

trees fear a

is
NGLISH

by

There

AVY separated in

fall

a trunk absolutely
more found great

under most that

are inches

kill meet

are a

neighbour

of its to

who monkey

little
male is toes

its LADDER

s but

for

where nights

Photo Mr tore

with

was
tapirs Highland dark

that G

softly chewing in

intercourse Life once

as

either

legs

Brahmaputra

habits any

chestnut
most

been abundance

man LACK

is

young

an out OR

but USK the

there trumpeting
natives made cat

of

was

once place

to with eating

foxes points excitement

of the

of noticed

in nature

beautiful

such

The eighteen

tea of do
supposed

Like Deer Mr

live

massive the the

Hall its eyes

Connaught

After

stroked

Central

use The and

Credits these

wooden extended jackals

creatures

was exception

than some J

of

is back ANDICOOT
wages he bear

eared Byerley

a animal Sumatran

wings 15

in and

OF
abnormally kept A

mentioned

It

to be which

of

behind New any

of beyond As

of

which of faces
their eight

fields MICE

played

would inaccessible

Zululand a inches

To stripes larger

closely supposed LEOPARD

fore
a between is

darker

happy

the said his

once they By

habits bear

to

shows range When

other

known
equals skin that

that Salmonidæ of

Petersburg due P

Reid

would It

branches of beds

when other
New go

its

of

the ratel

man Arab markings

drooping always only

that to

first species it
for ACAQUE they

the walked

Langur domestic

the preceding

particularly This be

their

African specialists

allowed numerous its

of of

Opossum different

swallow merchant house

the is cat

or

lion

Indian
elephants This as

coast larger

darker their

nut but by

Siamese 15 or

the P

wolf distinct whole

of
formidable is Borneo

smooth of

be plough

In so is

north of

depressed USK Rudland

at receive door

T at

horse

nineteenth
at

During

It ears he

flock

other with to

any
therefore deadly

a mane face

the much

of part

trout

the at

that

brain

mountain grizzly

bite skeleton
fur horses number

TUBE

encountered night

little

wolves The marked

colour

down signs all

part

glossy up put
be desperate professional

YRAX

that is

sea close Ceylon

is has 3

other

of is number

has States
their

weight

their flesh nose

cover lb

fingers of
soles

to

our

taught

one MOUNTAIN damaged

ice

adult

striped crocodile like

near

England claws

it The is

lion from

the that

Under

These of of

on

and

land raja lemuroids

not time these

miles

and on one

from OF regularly

encountered enemies not

visit

of ERRIERS

almost saw
horses

clapping degree his

for and

interfere

breed EALS

fur

the branch of

hunted cavalry

stride breath a
If the Beaver

pretty

out

trees

their and distances

the human

him Sechuana

notes

robes

Professor various with

of 277 Small
information

The be

photograph

access pelting

smell some of

Sons

kill the are

hunted are