New-York tribune., 1872-12-07
MR.. FROUDE'S POSITION.

OF SCOTS AND HER LATEST ENGLISH nisr0-
RAM
To the BdftOr or Ths Tribune.
SIR: When | answered TRIBUNE. 2Sd N0y.b your
question why should not Mr. MeIino accept tho
challenge which Mr. Froude has Just utterod in Bos
tonT it was my intention to say upon the
subject. But our American hospitality has been -
liberal 10 our distinguished English guest that.
while his Boston proposition has been every whero
reprinted my reply to it has had scant notice
petition. While do not complain Of this IL ~ but
simple justice that the objections To Mr.. Froudes
specOus challenge should be understood and histme
position made known.
For One lind it TO be my duty 10 protest against
the reception Of that gentlcman's History Of In
gland as work unworthy of the name. and 10 DO
all in my power to avert the calamity Of having such
a trayesbe of history read by and impressed upon
the minds of the rising generation in this country
as Trustworthy record. The grounds on which |
base this protest are very fully set forth in MARY
Queen of Scots and her latest English liis-
torianP and ] declined to accept Mr. Froudes
so-called challenge" for the following. among
other reasons: If Mr.. Frouds had been ac-
cused IN merely general and sweeping terms OF bad
faith in his treatment of historical documents, he
might Justly say that it is impossible for him 70
reply 10 the vague and the indefinite, and dcmand
something specific. But that is not his case. Tho
charges made in the book to which you rcfcr-' MARY
Queen Of Scots and her latest English Historian b.
are clear all explicit in every instance citing page
and volume. chaptsr and verse. Wherever tho ms
torian is charged with Unauthorized assertion or
suppression, with Interpolation with ad0ruing his
own language with inverted commas. with changing
expressions which do not suit him for such a. do
every such Objectionable passage is designated by
italics or otherwise, and where he claims quotation.
confronted with the original in such manner g -
leave no possible room for mistake Now these
originals not always English state papers Many
of them are published works; some relate to French
history some TO the Simancas papers. very large
number of Mr.. Froude's historical assertions aro
totally without support Of reference, and what
charged as his grayest citenses-his suggestions,
concealnent nnuendo. attIibuting Of motives, PIC
toral exaggeration and pretended psychological IN
trospectiOn-are all matters which utterly clude any
such test rs he proposes
In his lecture at Association Hail. on the evening
of Nov 30 Mr. Froude refers delicately and carefully
to this reply. giving it treatment anonymous, and
evading answer to any Of the charges advanced ia
the work above mentioned. And here l avail my
self Of the opinion of of our leading dailies We
DO not mean 70 be 80 dscourteOus to say that IA,
deliberately eyades them But nc practically eYad''
! them." (The World, Dee l.. And, referring to Mr.
! Froude's Boston proposition. the same paper adds
This has an appearance of candor and fairness in
deed but while it keeps the word of just criticSmto
the ear it breaks the of just criticism to tho
mind"
That Mr. Froude al this or at any other time would
answer the charges presented in "Mary Queen ot
Scots and her latest English Historian" have
! expected. He cannot 10 it and better his position
! aud am, moreover sufficiently familiar with ms
"manner Of fence" with critics at home 10 know that
! e wonld not attempt serious response IN 4 cass
| of any gravity. Mr.. FrOude cannot reply 10 my
allegations because, he says, Il am on one side Of
! the Atlantic aud my booksland papers are 'on tho
! other:' and he then repeats the plaintiye wall made
several years ago in The Pail iaH Gazette touching
| his gigantic labors with documents and MSS. in
/ half dozen languages" But during all the yeas
| Mr. Froude was at home among his books and pa
pers his most aggressive critics and those Of bluntcst
speech succeeded no better than have Ia 0btainng
answer explanation or apology from bin. In reply
70 the most damaging imputatioDs to the most often
siye accusations me had nothing TO sayand, wisely.
said nothing Take one instance. In his ninth vol
! ume in describing the scene whore B)thwel at tho
! head of 1000 horsemen mercepts aud carries OH
Mary Stuart, Mr. Froude represents that her eu9rd
ew TO her side to defend her, but that with singu
lar compOsure she said she would have no boodshed;
her people were Outnumbercd and rather than any
of them should llose their lives she would
20 wherever the Earl OF Boutwell, wished"
Upon this passage, Mr.. Hosacll in his Mary Queen
of Scots and her Accusers' Up. Boz. makes this wIth
eriug comments But this is The speech, not of the
Queen Of Scots, but of Mr.. Fronde, who has put 10
into her mouth for the obYiOus purpose Of leading
his readers to conclude that she was an accOmplicr
in the designs Of Boutwell," Is the accusation suff-
cienty explicit! Now this little speech Of % words
I Ia upfM Mr fnrv IA. WIS
" abstains from quoting any authoriyis one Of the
hundreds of instances of fragrant literary outrage
winch could not be brought within the purview of
Mr. Froudc's clever Boston proposition. He cites
neither state paper anything else for n. aud
thus the thruuxing crowd OF ctions with which hls
novel is filed would totally escape tri and ndcn-
nation. OF yet another passage roade vol. iN. p.
119i, Mr. Hosack remarks u. 3iG For the crrum-
stances here so graphically detailed. Mr.. Frorde IA
indebted entirely 20 his inlagnaton.' Mr. Hosacks
work WAS published in 1859 at London, the abode of
Mr. Froude aud Of his books and papers. but 10
tsese peculiar charge, nr has never attempted de-
ftnsr or reply.
Another instance: Alp. 9g5. vol iv, Ng. Frouds
speaks OF the examination ol the ,o-cailed casket
letters submitted to The Dake oftNofolk aud others
as Commissioners for Queen Elizabeth. aud says:
" Hc lpdhe Of Norf0lk ncloSed extracts from The
lcters in his dispatch and he left il TO Elizabeth 10
say whether II they were genuine rhicb he and his
c,n'pa ons Jsiiered them 70 be, there could be- any
doub. OF the Queen OF Scots guilt The portion Of
tbi, passage most damaging 10 Mary stuart. the one
which give in italics. and which alOue MIR.
Froudo llorns with quotation marks is presented 10
his readers as an extract from NOgiolks dispatch.
Here is lIr. Alexander McNce Cards comment upon
it: There no such words in IT. nor anything
like thom.' MARY Stumt-Her Guilt or limo
= IL. 4 " al IL. iafssLs