New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-11-06
MR. RICHARD GRANT WHITE AND DIR.
FIIZEDWdRD HALL.
70 IA. Editor Of Ths Tribune.

To TIE Edff0f OF Ihe TrtONne
SIR: THE TRIBUNE, while ii has not with
held Just criticism OF writings, has often given
them at quite all the commentator they deserved,
that with the freedom ask the favor OF being
allowed say something in regard to casual remark
olumns upon my article IN the November number
OF The GALAXY. IL not upon the literary meris or
critical value Of that article; either censure or com
rendation of which I should, of course, receive IN
sileDce. Touching q point which / regard as OF
far moro importance, II characterized the article
as a searching examination Of Mr.. Ftzedward Halls
PATHOLOGICAL pretensions" made with more vehemenee
than is needed for the calculation OF verbal questions
The latter remark is in itself entirely true The erro-
impression conveyed by IL is due to misappre
expressed in the former That in the writing OF
n few lines upon my article such expression should
have been used not at all surprising; but, neverthe
less beg leave 1t entirely misrepresented the
purpose of review which has appeared in two num-
bers Of The GALAXY and which Will be closed IN the next
Whatever may be the effect of those articles upon the
reputation Of Dr. Hail. he has only himself 10 thank Tor
IT, have neither the desire nor, under ordinary CIR
eumstances the intention make searching exanina-
tons into the literary pretensons Of any man. Wltlout
expressing opinion upon the nature Of such work.
will only say that it * not TO my liking. IL
seems 10 the pleasantor way anu ONO
perfectly consistent with the best interests VI
literature 20 direct adverse criticism solely 10 on4ons
and 10 censure those they must be ensured without
or the motives or tho writers WHO bring them
And although unfortunately for myself and. WIZ add
not quite by my own free choice much OF "'"' nov
written has been critical, am happy TO be aDo 10
that believe that cannot truhfuly DC ohhR'u WIN
having written one personally disparagng Or diepec
fnl remark OF any other OF letters even III rS' ~
his literary pretensOns until felt called upon TO resent
and refte the personal attack me in Recent TX
emplifcatons of False PhlOlogy." For lndeed IL does
seem 10 be both ridiculous and shameful that men, now
over widely they may differ upon literary ana linguistic
snbeets should not able TO discuss them ana even
10 dispute about them, seeking, hneeds be- TO eAloue
faaees and coutroyert misstatements, without treat
lnr each other with personal drespect, with contempt
and with ridcule Above all does TINS seem 10 ' 10 nc
true with regard discussions of language ana teXtna
criticism That OF letters should fan to lorgerheads
about those call each other hard names and say rri-
tatur dsrespectful things Of another in the dis
erson OF such purely abstract matters as an etymOogy
the right use words the correct reading OF eas
sioaI author surely among the absurd. not among
the ineomprehensible, exhibitions OF human weakness.
Yet it has been often notably IN Shakespearean
literature and particularly that literature az the end
Of the last and the beginning Of tnis century But
Oct, / pray the occasion excuse the egoisn) ID tine
concentrations with which THE TRIBUNE favored NY
Bhakespearean writings, from Shakespoares Scholar
down TO the Life and Genius of Shakespeare nothing
was more valued by me than the remark Cn when II
was not aone) that those writings entirely aud
fact is that although have less differed FROM
and have criticised, nearly every coemporaTy Shakes
fearean scholar, have been upon terms OF friendly
communication with them all, without other Interrupt
ton than that death the Of Mr. Dyce although
Ihave never seen OF them except Mr.. Hudson.
The unpleasant task which have just partly and very
inadequately performed forced upon me II was IN
no proper sense an attack, IN its motive searching
examination Of literary pTetenSi0ns but purely resent
full defense myself against violent and vruient per-
sonal attack, which meant mischief from beginning TO
ord and any eucidaon Of verbal questions or criticism
OF DR.. han Is merely incidental TO that defense Upon
The appearance of Recent EXemplfcatons,' &c. TIE
TRIBUNE published a long, sharp, and searching review
of the style in which II written but IL was very
easy for you TO forget the ceaseess personal re
Elections upon which filled the BOOK ana us
studied tone Of personal detraction throughout
These were entirely from the purpose proiossed by
Its author might have refuted every Opinion and
eontrovered every in "W0rds and their Us esq
without giving the slightest ofeuSe 70 me- II you VIII
take trouble to look through Dr. Hairs Little BOOK
again you Will sure, see that what have written
about 10 ~ merely against injurious per-
sonaI attack which Disgrace 70 literature, aud which
bore some time IN silence Let ne add that learned
very directly the other day that gentleman, whose
namc send you, and whom you VIII recognize
as one OF the IrUfoGndcst classical scholars
in the country, said that he mad bought
.Receut EXEMPT .icatiOns, g." when 10 appeared
hoping TO derive benefit from II, but that aIier
reading It somewhat than hall through, he mad
flung d. aside IN disgust that of letters could
set ot to be personally offensive TO another and that
be had not taken 10 up again. As mad at last thought
il best 20 gave this matter GOOD airing l. not unTcason-
ably think wished it, merits TO nc thoroughly under
stood With thanks this opportunity, AIN, Sir
Obedlent servant, MCHAkD GEAHi WhIIE'
Noo York, Nov. 2, 1873.
I'VE have looked over DR.. HJlfs book, and have 10
hesitation in saying that Mr. Richard Grant White
has received ample pTOyOcation.-EdI