The Sun.
London, England, 1866-10-20 00:00:00

if 4
•"4..y•A7
. 3
,
as our own than the Evening Post. None V?
sQ
svzhis....z.l4ol
better the existence of the empty niche, or the consMa-
lion due' o those who honestly strive to fill it, than the
Evening Post's principal editors. The oae a poet of exalted
position, the other a laborious and scholarly historian—
the one of venerable years, the other well on in manhood's
prime, none should know better than they, with their
culture and their experience, how injurious to American
letters and society have been crude and imperfect criti-
cisms, hasty and cruel literary judgments, heated and in-
temperate political animosities, and many other evils which
we have essayed in our humble way to remedy and
assuage. Undoubtedly we may at times have made mistakes.
All are liable to err. But our errors, whatever they may
have been or may be, have never been or ever will be
such as are incompatible with the earnest desire and pro-
found ambition to cherish and advance the cause of
national literature, of sound criticism, and of good morale.
As regards the question of comparative excellence or the
means of improvement in the future, we must, of course,
use our own judgment, since none can be more interested
than ourselves in the result. Past experiments have con-
clusively shown that we should altogether be unlikely to
reach the port we aim at by steering in the wake of any
predeeesqnr. Our course must needs be hi a great measure
an original one. Nor can we, iu the different situation,
altogether follow European examples. We must be
governed by our own will, sagacity, and enterprise - such
as they are. We must be our own pilot, and guide the
helm by our own star. The track is certainly not with-
out its perils, but we have a great deal of, wo hope suffi-
ciently modest, self-reliance. No woekpasses but that wo are
striving and devising to make the Round Table a better and
stronger publication than it is. In this the public is
generously aiding us, and we trust will continue so to do ;
and, while we shall always be glad of appreciation an'l
friendly recognition from the cotemporary press, we are
well aware that it is to the public and not to newspaper;
however excellent and influential, that we must look for
the substantial assurance of our future.

Comparisons, as Dogberry meant to say, are odious.
We should certainly not have thought of originating a
discussion founded upon. so objectionable a basis. As the
case stands, hower, we may perhaps be pardoned for
`humbly exproking, an okliou--zn" opiziiut which there
is no impropriety in prefacing ty the statement that, as the
present writer has contributed largely to at least two un-
questionably leading presses in both New York and
London, ho thinks himself fairly qualified to form and
entitled to express it. If, then, the first-rato press of
London is to be regarded as the ideal or standard of ex-
cellence, we deliberately affirm that, whether in point of
paper, typos, or the brains wherewith they are used, the
Round Table is to- day nearer the mark of the leading
English weeklies than any newspaper in Now York is to
the mark of the best English dailies; and we have not the
slightest doubt whatever that any educated and unpre-
judiced person who shall carefully make the comparison
will endorse this affirmation as a candid, unvarnished, and
irrefragablo truth.—The Round Table.