The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1869-11-03
not even II rose from the dead; and to them w
can alone commend the further revelations Of Mrs..

not even II one rose from the dead; ana to them W.
can alone commend the further revelations Of MrS.
from the London Advertiser, Oct. III
we refuse TO go into the very indecent and impro-
Per controversy with which some OF our cOntem-
poralles have favored their readers We fear that
upon Q very rehned.American auth0ress we must
but IL rather an error Of Judgment in accentin1
go very equivocal commission, than of wanton
rasnness In Its execution. Mrs. Stowe II she erred
III accepting such duty, had no alternative except
TO break her pledged and lrrevOcaDle word to the
ered as " nanseoas S na ha wc ns cos
since that period we have been treated to irrelevant
quotations from the poets writings as Il it were
not the very essence OF our law not to cCuden upon
WV SUM i III g sn q Ss sa nSs
tory story OF the accused az IN the least valuable
Ii Lady byron got story burned which would
have earlier forced from her damnlng story IN
which she at least believed 1t was only continue
ton Of Tie noble sell denial which bore so much from
one waom she had rashly vowed TO cherish and TO
care for. Nobody denies that his lordsnlp did not
act, not perhaps, able to act as he ought to
a lady VINO mad given up her independence for him.
mercy to leave the question ere as we believe that
no victory exposure can be worth the pains taken
with OF the other hateful consequences OF ma.
ing an admired poet to be wholly despicable man.
The poets Hienus will achieve dear victory II they
succeed; some Of them are unc0mmoniy m1S Mr:
can hardly impate the simplicity OF the sentimental
Iupman TO them all.
More Letters.
To THE EDITOR OF THE LONDON Standard
The saturday Reviewer appears to be haunted
with the little gram OF conscience which sours.n
DIsquieted lest the scholarly portion or the public,
realng the contribution to the Byron controversy in
the Academic should see In II ever so slight afurtheY
confirmation OF the position maintained by your
journal, that however bad man Byron was there
his sister was an ncetuous adultress he breaks the
silence which he told us lii former article he was
determined having ascertained to his own Satstac-
ton her guilt tnenlerorth to observe The light BY
which ne has read the Academy am glad to see u
light iorm. The article contains an implied false
hood, as the "Revlcwer' ought to know. 1t asserts
tnat Lady Byron undoubtedly believed him
to have committed the crime OF lncestuous
adultery;'' although the writer knows that Lord
wentworth asserts Ihat no such accusation is made
In Lady Byrons papers, and Lady Byron's solicitors
have assured tnat Mrs. Stoves charge Is not &C.
curate. The silence OF Mrs. stowe, and tine numer-
Gus proofs adduced ON all hands that the inculpated
Mrs. Leigh Lady OF stainless reputation during
her lire produce no effect on this Ingenious not 70
of the yinT or Inc reputation of the deans ia has
written down Byron the West OF mankind and his
sister the West OF women Tney are dead. and can
MT prove HIM O calumnlOus and mendacious Scrb.
bier, ana as lie probably knows little Latin, he
quotes Lns Of Horace to ninsef-
Popuus spiat; at mihi plaudo
Ipse dom sinul &c nunmos cononipor in
Parties, as al advertisement would say, about to
adopt anal determination and settlement
III favor OF q matrimonial squabb,e will find
advice In the article Us to the course de-.
manded OF them, though, to be sure, the tenor
OF 1t shows that the writer has no belief In or
weakness III favor Of honor or Kindness. "What Lord
Byron ought TO have done,n says our Mentor s.was
to decline 10 consent to the separation and threaten
q suit for restitution or conjugal rlghts;n and
again, me ought TO have gone into court and pro-
ceeued against ner.n No doubt the saturday Re-
VIEWER" uevoid Of shame or pity, would have thus
d0ne but 1t dues not follow that every man, though
bad husband, is OF such superhumGn COO ness and
determination 10 Justify himself at all hazards OF
pain and some lnequity towards woman. / am,
however wilnout hope OF the writer; he has put
shade on his lurld light and has learned the mean.
ing OF Authorization. He is still, ever, fond Of
dosmatism and aDuse this time adding MIR. M. Lewis
ana the Countess OF Besslngt0n to his catalogue OF
Infamous persons Is not The description therein
contained OF morals OF visitors and their habtual
conversation borrowed from some scene in his own
chambers little retreat at Br0mptOn or even may
suggest, from the AaymarketP / audc to these
passages particularly which convey such charming
view OF English Interiors II they are true-'A dreary
frivOlity pervades the circle which not even the
scandalouS tongue OF fashionable spinsters can
lieve." And a9a H. still ncer-s'TO descend and find
whose scandaious chronicles &c. Poor Saturday
Reviewer ! NO wonder he scents incest and adultery
In "My sster-my sweet sister;'' he who finds
prurent spinsters ana dowagers in every hall, re-
b. A. OX0N.
To THE EDITOR OF TIE LONDON Standard
The writer or article in Temple Bar states his
disbelief IN Mrs. stoves specific charge; his own
conjecture is that Byron attempted TO poison his
vile. SO far the Spectator in is last issue. 1 have
now got Temple Bar by me- but read the article in
question most carefully before leaving England o
week ago. and In IL the writer distinctly states that
his wife than he believes that he committed incest.
lie says that he uses such a suppOstlon only as
convenient hypothesis, in order to pursue line OF
speculative argument into which need not enter.
less but IT ought to warn the public against the
journal which has been guilty OF 1t. l have the
honor TO be- sir, your obedient servant,
FLORENCE oct. -, 1869. ALFRED AUSTIN