The Sun.
London, England, 1870-01-06 00:00:00

INTER' NATIONAL MISREPRESENTATIONS.

(Prom the Anglo:Arn:erican Times.)

The Harvard Boat Crew have published in the
American papers a statement denying that the article
in Harper's Monthly Magazine for December, en-
titled "The University Rowing Match," was sanc-
tioned by them. Though tempted by the numerous
mistakes and misrepresentations about the race to
unite in correcting errors, they considered that both
good taste and judgment prescribed a rule of silence,
which they had hitherto faithfully kept. No state-
ments made either in that article or elsewhere,
printed or oral, with or without an appearance of
authority, had been sanctioned by or had in any
way proceeded from them. While refraining from
pointing out the errors in that article which assumes
to speak as by their authority, being signed too by
a gentleman styling himself the "Secretary of
the Harvard Boat Crew," as this would involve
the very controversy they wished to avoid, they
say, " We received the best of treatment from
the English people, and were fairly beaten in the
race." We who endeavour to occupy a neutral
standpoint, equidistant between America and
Europe, often see the misrepresentations, the deli-
berate lies, and the articles written on such texts
as if these lies were fact—in England regarding
the United States, and in the United States regard-
ing England. Unfortunately there are many men
on the American Press who are not gentlemen in
manners, tone of thought, or education. Doubt-
less there are many in England of whom the same
may be said ; but the difference is, that iu the
United States they assume a more prominent posi-
tion, and succeed in forcing themselves more con-
spicuously to the front. All men in America are
readers of newspapers, and the unrefined masses
create a greater demand there for the productions
of such persons. To understand the position of the
Harvard crew, the way in which their countrymen
took up the race, should be known. It was regarded
as an International affair—the young men of Ame-
rica against the young men of England—although
the Harvard boys expressly repudiated this. In-
sensibly both nations came to look upon the crews
as their representatives, and so eager is the Union
to triumph over what it considers the greatest of
nations excepting itself, that a victory ou the Thames
on the 27th of August would have carried more
general rejoicing than that which had greeted many
a great triumph in arms. The disappointment was
in proportion to the confidence inspired by the
statements of many unscrupulous writers, and it
then remained for those pere.ems to account why the
superiority they had with such assurance asserted
did not meet its legitimate consequence. The race
came off in England, and but few Americans saw it ;
hence it was easy in America to misrepresent it, and
shortly after the fair accounts of the correspondents
had been published, some of these men set to work
to manufacture facts to fit with their previous as-
sertions. To malign England, to call in question
the fair-play of her people, to represent the ele-
ments, the vicious English river, the equally vici-
ous English food, backed by the still more vicious
English climate, as well as the vicious English peo-
ple, all conspiring against the young Americans,
was their way of accounting for the undeniable
defeat. On their return the young collegians were
waylaid, " interviewed," chance expressions were
picked up, and words they had never uttered put
into their mouths, while a pressure was brought
to bear to got all, or even one, to give solve colour-
' ing to these inventions. Not only did these gen-
tlemen resist, but knowing the unscrupulous news-
paper men with whom they had to deal they care-
fully refrained from permitting themselves to be
drawn, even under the greatest provocation, into a
controversy, and the captain of the crew had to
bear the mortification of seeing misrepresentations
in his name going the round of the papers, and
calling forth severe comments in England. What
surprises us is the self-restraint practised by the
Harvard men, more far than Englishmen are aware
of, and now in speaking they show what tho-
rough-bred gentlemen they are. We rejoice that
they have at last spoken, knowing the effect their
words will produce in England. Americans attach
' but little weight to the writings of the men to
whom we allude, and they cannot understand a
foreign people attributing importance to words
which with them convey so little. They are in-
clined to laugh at the Europeans who quote the
utterances of such persons in support of an argu-
ment, wondering how ignorance can so mislead au
Englishman, just as the American would appear to
Englishmen who brought up ZADKIEL as an autho-
rity on prophecy, or FINLEN on politics to refute
them. Americans forget that the writers aro wholly
unknown in Europe, but the journals are not,
Englishmen regarding the opinion as that of the
organ, and where many papers repeat the same
they are supposed to give expression to the feeling
entertained by a large section of the people. The
reporter, interviewer, or whatever he may be, who
feels only:the sentiment around,him, never gives it a
thought that what he writes may be repeated in the
London papers, and read by the men under whose
eyes the race was won, many of whom will conclude
that no more untruthful people exists ; probably all
otheraccouutsof events,beingin the same waygar-
bled. They are unaware that such is the style of a cer-
tain class of reporters ; that it is accepted at a liberal
discount, and that the statements made by the very
different class of correspondents and reporters em-
ployed by the leading journals gave a fair account of
the facts, the later additions being mere garnish,
intended to amuse the crowd, but not designed
for publication abroad. It was too much, however,
for the Harvard crew when their secretary under-
took to put the story " in the light in which it is
regarded by the actors themselves," without con-
sulting any of them, or really giving that light.
hence the joint statement which not only asserts
good treatment and fair play, but denies all other
statements as coming with any authority from them,
although one in particular had been accepted inEng
land as the words of their captain. When we glance
on this side, we see assertions made the text for arti-
cles as untruthful as any manufactured in America.
We doubt whether a single English paper did not mis-
represent the late Mr. liactraansoN in the RICHARD-
SON-APFARLAND affair. The case may have been
as bad as they say, but there would then in
their desire to lay on black paint be the less neces-
sity for misstating the facts. Take the Saturday
Review of last week on the PRESIDENT'S Message.
Its arguments hinge on two points, both false—
the one is the PRESIDENT'S assertion, that the United
States is the first of all nations, which is taken and
expatiated upon as a fine specimen of American
buncombe. Yet the PRESIDENT never said anything
of the sort, nor would any man who read his mes-
sage with attention have imagined for a moment
that he did so, though the daily papers may have
turned freest into
.first with other typographical
errors in hurrying into print the words received by
telegraph. There was, however, no excuse for the
Saturday Reviewer, for the Times, to which he
alludes, had given the word correctly in its long
summary received by cable, and a glance at our own
report will show that the blunder did not escape us.
Yet this misprint is deliberately accepted, although
simply absurd, in connection with the text of the
Message, by the reviewer, as a subject on which to
write half a column. The other has •reference to
Mr. BouTWELL, and is a deliberate fabrication. He
states that the Secretary of the Treasury recom-
mends Congress to force American citizens to ship
their produce in American vessels only, and the re-
mainder of the article is made up in an attack on
this proposition and the ignorant Executive elected
by the ignorant nation whence it emanates. The
difference between the wilful English misstate-
ments and the wilful American misstatements is
that the former are made for and adapted to the
taste of the higher classes, and appear in such
journals as the Saturday Review, while the latter
are made for and adapted to the lower classes,
though it is to be regretted that they also appear
in journals which ought to be above fabricating
falsehoods to pander to any taste. ANTe cannot con-
ceive what good either to the journal or to its readers
can be derived from such a course ; indeed it must
end iu discomfiture, such for instance as that which
has overtaken those who attempted to show that
England had treated the gallant young Harvard
graduates unfairly. The .Saturday Review has be-
come a by-word on American Topics, and those
who have got a glimmering of what rubbish it
often writes on the United States must view with
scepticism all other subjects of which it treats.