Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1843-01-06

published as such in several If our most res
pectab!e journals, rs tina, it vas written in
the same scurrillous vein which had formed !
so conspicuous feature in the writings Of
other English travellers in this country. -
We also said we were glad Mr.. Dickens was
no, its author, and expressed the hope "that
tho hasty remarks we made upon the often
sve publication might nercr bc justified by
any productonfrom him Of an equally repre-
hensible character hereafter" Tho mean
ing of which is, not that he migh,nevcr write
another such letter-but that he might new
er write such a letter-and all the scolding
of Vermont, land ho certainly strikes US as
being much moro expert at scolding, than at
making syllogisms) can't torture ii into any
other meaning. Nor have we any desire to
alter the apology in the least particular, even
to soothe the pctulant spirit Of this sweet
tempered friend Of Mr.. Dickens" One
point more of personal character. awe
spoke of Dickens as The writer of that let
ter" and not as the author of"Olver Twist"
But, says Vermont, Dickens is Dickens,
whether you speak Of him as the author of
of letter, or a book. Very true. But in
the one character he may be deserving of
censure, and in the other Of applause. And
this also strikes us as being too clear, even
for the I" star that nerer sets " to mistify We
ry successfully. We must, therefore, beg
leave respectfully to decline perusal of the
learned treatise Of Gabler, on the /" Identity
of self CONSCIOUSNESS" 10 which our guam
dam friend affec,ionately exhorts US. YER
mont is " Gabbier" enough for US in all
conscience. Thus much in answer to YER
mont's attack upon us. We have spoken in
plain language and without mincing our
words, because we thought the circumstan-
ces of the case were such as not only to JUS
tify but 10 require it. We declined to pub
of motives. We desired no personal quar-
, rel with its author. We desire none now
But since he has procured the publication OF
his attack in respectable quarter, we have
felt called upon to speak of it as we have
We cherish no feeling of personal unkind-
ness towards the writer of ii. We would
cheerfulIy extend to him the right hand OF
fellowship to day, if he were here. If he
chose 10 accept 1t, we should certainly grasp
his with as much cordially as ever. But il
he should decline it, Qhough it would cer-
> ,ainly occasion regret), why then we should
; just thrust our " dexter paw" into our peck.
ct, and go our way rejoicing, with equan
unity and composure." We hope our read
. ers will pardon us for dwelling at SO muci
, length upon matters Of merely persona
= character. If we have offended agaius
: good taste in SO doing, there is high author
> ty for the principle, Gas Vermont well knows
I for he is as intimate with the Greek classics
] as he is with Diekcns) that the blame mus
b. be imputed to the original aggressor-for h
h it was who made such deencef necessary
0 The response to "Vermontcr ought tC
, be examined at length, for it is in reality
: much the best part Of Yermon,'s communi
e cation, though, like an Artful DOdger, he
y evades the true issue, the propriety of the at
: tentions paid 10 Dickens in this country
e namely, and flies of into a certainly eloquent
= but somewhat Supplemented rhapsody II
It praise of that gen,leman's works. Much 0
c what he says on this head we are sure Yer
r. mon,cr would subscribe ,o--but he woulc
~ doubtless still insist that there is good dea
n of low life in Dickens characters, and some
S. thing Of the police reporter in his compost
c ton. Nor would he, in Our Judgment, b
1t the less inclined to maintain this posito
n either because "Lord Bacon took bride
a and sadly soed the erriinc," or becaus
e "Tristram Shandy contains scenes of NOR
n than ordinary vulgarty," or because "Shaks
ID peare himself was sometimes obscene."-
a Vermonter would probably dnmnrr to a
l. these allegations. He would be inclined I
l. ask, we fancy, how the faults either {
Of Sternc, or Lord Bacon, or Shak speare
= could magnify Mr.. Dickens into saint, c
N elevate either his characters, or compost
,e tionl And we shrewdy suspec, that Ver
IS mont, with all his logic, would prudenlly de
n cline "the somewhat formidable task ofhi
re enlightenment" Ilo might, however, reso
= to his syllogisms, for with them he coul
1t prove almost anything. But Vermont con
,t times the argument C) and asks, with gres
q point, if Jack Falslafl' was a spiritual phi
j. losopher," or Dame Quickley a sentin,en
ID talist, or Caliban beauty! Nermonte
" wonld unqueslionably say no-and he migl
'g also enquire what if they are not! Does
l. therefore follow that Sam Weller, and tn
III Arful Dodser, and Dick Swiveller, and Nj
I'd Bundle, and Mrs. Corney are! And W
t. fancy Vermont would again be compelled
m resort to his syliogisms. Our hero next pu
l. in requisition, several sentiments, given
OF honor Of Mr.. Dickens, by certain conspicr
m ous gentlemen who attended the Boston DIR