The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1869-09-21
The D,ron Scandal "A word from
Mrs, stowe,

The Hartford Courdm publishes the note
preiixcd by the editor Of MdcnNldn'S Mdgd-
zinc to the "Truc Story OF Lady Byron's
Life" and adds the following remarks,
which We suppose may be regarded as M
informal communication from Mrs. Stow,
herself;
This note, it will be observed, hints at one
of the most notable things In the "True
Story of Lady Byron's Life" which the crit.
les have either strangely misunderstood or
have failed wholly to notice; II Is trait OF
Lady Byron's character Gas this Is the story
of her iifc) and not of Lord Byron's. Mrs.
Stowe has been very sharply dealt with for
representing Lady Byron as clinglng to her
husband after discovery, or at least strong
suspicious of his crime, In the hope Of snatch:
ing his soul out of the hell into which II had
fallen. The critics call this Islander upon,
Lady Byron. Gen. Butler calls II condonin"
crime. Yet, If any point Is plain In Mr.
Stowc's paper, 1t Is Just this that II rcprE
sents and intends TO represent Lady Byron
such pure, chlyalrous, religious woman,
| moved by as divine tenderness for her hus-
band as mother ever feels for q ruined, sim
| full son, that she was capable Of making any
personal sacrifice for him. This Is the Q A.
| for Lady Byron, whom plenty Of cotcmpo-
rary testimony called the most SANITY and
| noble woman In England. Perhaps the world
Perhaps II is more angelic than womanly.
Il certainly Ia exceptional. But 1t is not,
| Mrs. Stoves invention. 1t Is her rcprcsen.
tation of Lady Byron as she saw her and
knew her, and as others saw her. Ii II has II
1t something suporhuman, II Lady Byron
was q religious enthusiast, We yet can under,
| stand Ii, for such characters have appeared
In history before. But, common or uncom-
| mon, this narration Of Mrs. Stowe plainly
Intends to represent Lady Byron as actuatcd
| by as lofty motives rs ever moved pure
mothers heart. And her relations TO Byron
are to be judged by this view OF her charoc'
| ter.
One thing more. The intimatlon in one
or two American journals that Mrs. Stowe
was induced by merconary motives In the
publication of this story Is caught up on the
| other side, and appears In such paragraphs
| as this, which we cut from London paper
"The 4theneHni, believing In Mrs. Stoves
high principles, hopes for her denial Of the
| receipt of honorarlum for the story. II is
sure she holds, with all morallsts, that gold
unworthily earned, leaves an indellble stain"
We are happy to be able to say, as We are
authorized to do, that Mrs. Stowe received
nothing more for this paper than she re-
ceyes for her ordinary contributions to the
Atlantic, having, we presume, fixed ar
rangement with the publishers. That she
did not, this being 50, write this for money,
Is evident to those who know how pressed
she Is with literary engagements on all sides,
and in a position, so TO say, to name her own
terms of remuneration. She would have re-
ceiyed the same from Messrs. Fields, os-
good IL Co. for anything else published IN,
their magazine occupying tho same space :
| We trust that the journals when nave
given currency or color to this aspersion will
have the justice to repeat our statement.