From: France
8 July 1917

Dearest Mother -

I am answering some letters of yours this time. Last Monday on July 2nd, I received two from you - your letters of June 6 and 13. That is pretty fair now isn't it to get an answer to a letter in five weeks? The letters were so interesting especially the latter one with enclosure from Gladys. Do you know that when that little photo fell out, I couldn't be sure at first just who it was. You think it, do you now, by far the best picture she has ever had taken? The way she had her hair was new to me. No, it is hard to realize that she has gone there to Normal and so evidently taken a prominent place in the sport scholarship and society of the school. That winning of the Ladies' Championship was fine - something that appealed strongly to me as it is a thing I could not have done. I am afraid I shall be rather in awe of my sister after this. You know she said she had had a larger snap but a Normalite had taken it. Yes, I am sure he would like to have it. I showed the picture to the other fellows in our "bivy". They thought it fine and said there was a great likeness to me. We like to get pictures very much. I have seen pictures of the other fellows' sisters and sweethearts.

So there was a Prof. MacDonald from Queen's in Caintown some time ago. There may be more than one Prof. MacDonald at Queen's - I don't know. But, I knew one there that we all liked immensely - prof. in English - rather tall and well built - a former athlete - reddish face and sandy hair - very humourous. I don't think that he has a son old enough to work on a farm tho. If I remember right, he had only two very young children.

On July 5, I had a letter from Violet Cook. She, you may remember, was the young lady who enclosed a letter in the Xmas parcel I had from Arts'17. I answered her letter at that time. She wanted to send me Queen's Journals if I was not getting them. I told her they would be greatly appreciated. Now, she writes that she has sent nearly all the Journals for the term. It will be too bad if I have to tell her they have gone astray, but it looks like it now. The only papers I have ever got were three of those bundles you sent me - two of them went astray. I have every reason to believe that Aunt Lettie has sent me some, maybe quite a few, but none have yet arrived. I don't care a great deal about papers, only I would like to get what people send. In this last Canadian mail, I saw several Toronto and Brantford papers (as recent as June 13) which the other fellows got.

Last night, I received a third letter from you (June 20). You see, I am getting them all right now and you will have learned long ere this that I must now have all you wrote. Of course, I knew all along that the delay was due to my change of address (partly), mostly I fear to some oversight somewhere. I knew that it was never your fault at all and it didn't worry me at all, altho, of course, it is so nice to get them.

Gladys seems to have the idea that letters to me are censored - such is not the case - they never yet have been. She is planning to knit me some sox this summer. That will be nice. I reckon they will be just as nice as any I have received. Tell her that I should, I suppose, write something to her but after all is it necessary to write two letters on the same day to the same house? She will probably share this with you.

Also, last night, I had a letter from Florence Rahmer. She gives as her address - c/o R.G. Brown, R.R. #4, etc. Can that be right or has her wits been wandering so that she put my name where she should have put another? Still, I don't know but what I can risk it. She calls him Uncle Rob which would account for the "R" and I seem to have a faint recollection of having heard somewhere once that she sometimes stayed with Browns in Lansdowne. If her letters are any criterion, this same Miss Rahmer must be a remarkably clever girl. Oh, I don't mean that she says that in her letters but I refer to the wording and way she writes. I have received letters from five or six different girls, I suppose, and of them all, Miss Florence's is by all means the soundest, most sensible, and neatest of them all, not even excepting Miss Cook's, tho you can tell from the manner of her letter that she has been thru college. For instance Miss Florence begins "I do not know how far excuses go with you and so had better not make any, but I have intended to answer ..." and ends, "I received a card from a friend who is a prisoner in Germany and since I must write to him, I shall close, hoping to hear ...." - a rather neat start and finish I thought.

This is getting to be quite a lengthy letter but there is no substance to it and I greatly fear it will not even be interesting. Odd that it should be thought Lorne Cummings looks like me. I hardly know him - saw him very, very little - not nearly as much as I saw his brother, Allan. I am afraid I can hardly help but envy him. If he looks like me, he must look young, and to be so fluent, so free and easy in public, so well versed in philosophies and religion - oh!, it must be grand. To have all this and to be so young looking - he has a great opportunity to make much of himself - he can do with ease what I could hardly do. But, I shouldn't think this for I am clever too and there must surely be something I can do much better than he could do it. Our work lies along different lines, that is all.

Harold and Cecil would find lots to do on our own gardens. It is healthy but hard work and they are small and not as strong as the other boys around there. So Wilbert happened to be in when you were writing. I suppose you see quite a bit of him. Dear me, I should write him. Do you know I believe he would like to spend a day with Gladys at Butternut Bay sometime. Yes, I know I should write more to cousin Grace. Maybe I can do that now.

"Beaucoup" love to all
Au revoir
Gordon