New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1842-12-21
vol. III. NO. els.
twelve hundred pages contained in his Life of


Columbus
The editor also refers to the fact that Irving s
work has received the need ofapplause from Ban
croft, Prescott and other eminent historians. This
is tho substance of the EDITORS reply and he apollo
gises for "devoting so liberal space to the sub
ject," by saying that he was pledged to brush
away the stingless insect that had lighted upon his
friends reputation and that wanted bu, the power
to infict deadly wound
The rejonder to this is contained in the Novem-
Der number of the Messenger and is dismissed in
the summary manner of which we spoke in our
notice Of the Knickerbocker. The writer makes
a full reply to each point of defence; and the
following is the substance of his positions
|. As 10 the statement, that Navarette himself
was satisfied with the Acknowledgements in the
work of Irving, the writer thinks 1t entitled to lit
tie weisht-for the question is ne. whether Ma
varette is satisfied but whether Irving is original
and fair Still, he that Navarette is guard
ed in his expressions-and says nothing about how
far Mr.. Irvings opportunities foror gnalresearcb
were improved His aim, in the work he
writing, was not to vindicatc his personal
fame but 10 propagate truth for its own sake.
3 The statement in the Knickerbo that all
the facts which Irving did derive from Navarettc,
not accessible elseuhere, would not Gil six pages,
is vague and unmcanng. IF taken literally, the
writer says, it is doubtless true-for all the aocu-
ments in Navarette's collection accessible
elsewhere And so was America as accessible
before lis discovery after yet Columbus s'lil
has some merit for having found out its accessi-
bility-as has Navarette for having discovered
those documents. The writer proceeds TO show
that the History of Columbus contains the result
of every new discovery that Navarette had made,
and avails itself with perfect freedom of all the
narratives he had brought to light The citations
from the work are more than one hundred: and
there is reference through Irving's whole work to
but two original documents not TO be found in
Navaret,e. These facts, and the brief time in
which Irypg's History was completed, the writer
thinks sustain the charge that he was indebted to
the Spanish historian to greater extent than the
acknowledgements in his Preface would imply.
g. As to the authority of Prescott referred toby
the Knckerbocker, the Messenger quotes para
graph from his Ferdinand and Isabella in which
lvpg's Life of Columbus is spoken of as having
g enabled the world to derive the full benefit OF
Navarette's researches by presenting their rcs"Its
in connection with what before known of Co.
umbus in the lucid and attractive form which en-
cages the attention of every reader"
This we believe presents fairly the substance OF
the points in controversy, with the evidence by which
theyare urged and repealed. The writer in the Mes
senger certainly does not deserve the spthets which
the Knickerbocker bestows upon him: there is no
evidence in his papers that he is hypocritical,'
impudent,' impotent or malignant for they
are written with great ability, apparently with al
accurate knowledge of the subject, aud certainly
with all the courtesy and fairness which any one
can ask. How far the defence of the knicker-
booker is satisfactory is matter for every one, OF
course, to decide for himself. We confess that
thus far, it seems to us the writer in the Messen-
ger has decidedly the best of the argument. We
think the Editor of the Knckerbocker errs too, i'll
deemng him and his charges beneath farther
notice.