2007/10/30, Donald J. HARLOW <[log in to unmask]>:
[Commentary by G. Waringhien: The matter did not long remain in the
favorable confidential atmosphere. Because Couturat -- whether by
oversight or intentionally -- despite the promised secrecy that both
parties were supposed to guard during the discussions, as early as
October 26 had sent a copy of the Ido grammar to Corret, who was not
a member of the Language Committee and consequently did not consider
himself tied down to any kind of silence. He immediately informed
Bourlet (who, as a member of the Language Committee, would receive
that document only on November 2!), and Bourlet in his turn sent up
the alarm in the Esperantist camp, which swarmed like an offended beehive.

On October 30, 1907, Boirac replied to Ostwald. The essence of his
reply can be taken from his]


I replied to this letter, officially noting the preference given in
principle to Esperanto by the Delegation Committee, protesting in
advance about the right that the Permanent Commission seemed to be
adjudging to itself to bring about in Esperanto under its own
authority the changes that it thought necessary; pointing out that
the study could not be as fast as one might wish, because of material
hindrances, and because this important question would demand mature study.

[Boirac's entire report can be read at
http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/Historio/raporto.LK.1908.html . -DH]

Opinions (in English): http://www.harlows.org/don/opinions/
Esperanto (in English): http://www.harlows.org/don/esperanto/
Literaturo (Esperante): http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/Literaturo

It must have been exciting back then when they all thought the languages were going somewhere. I wonder what their approach would have been like if they knew it was going to result in two world wars and then one century later one with a few hundred thousand, two with a thousand or so each, and the rest forgotten and ignored along with the movement as a whole.