New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1876-12-02
LONDON LITERARY TOPICS.
SUBJECTS OF CURRENT DISCUSSION.

THE MARQUIS DE NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. STRIC-
TUREs on THE UNITED STATES UPHELD BY THE
ATHENEUM-HENRY NJ. STANLEY AND THE
ROYAL GEOGRAPHICAL soCIETY-HIs PRINCIPAL
AssAILANT INCONSISTENT - TENNYsON's NEW
POEM, "HAROLD7-A VOLUME BY MR.. CONWAY,
ANNOUNCED.
IRON THE REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF TIE TRIBUNE.l
LONDON, Nov. 1S.-A defender of the Marquis de
Talleyrand-P6rgord has been found The AhcEGHm,
which for some time past has done its best to per-
suade its readers that American literature deserves
only contempt, welcomes, naturally enough,
French ally of the same opinion. The Times in an
article full of cordial good viii to America,
c1iticses the Marquiss book. The AdhepGum ac-
cordingly attacks The Times, complaining that the
conclusions of the Marquis have been condemned
without his premises having been examined
the English of the phrase quoted being the English
of The AthenGUR, not mine. One of the conclusions
of the Marquis de Talleyrand-P6rigOrd is
that in America (" there are no men of letters.
no public men, no statesmen, no works
of art or at least very few TO attest the existence Of
civilized nation" Premises" that are the basis
of such conclusion" as that do not seem to re-
quire much examination. Perhaps the Marquis de
Talleyrand-Pe rigord, and The AheaGum are not
alone in holding that opinion, but in its eager search
for third witness, The AtbenGum hashad to 90 back
to the Able Raynal, who said something ike it
ninety years ago. Moreover, the mistake, ii it be
one is an error of opinion not OF fact, The AhcaGm
tells us. This il says, not only OF tins particular
statement but of the whole ninth and concluding
chapter. In the judgment Of this journal OF En-
glsh and Foreign Literature as The AHcaGdm
describes itself its title-pagc, it is matter of
opinion whether there are or not in the United
States any men of letters any public men, any
statesmen or any works of art And its own
opinion appears to be that there are none.
drew attention some time ago to the systematic
hostility of The AHtHGHm against American au-
thors. quoted some passages from what thought
a scaudalous and dishonest attack upon one author
in particular; one of the first and priest names
in American literature. said then that the propri-
etor of The AtcRolm was Sir Charles Dixie and
that since he had been known heretofore as
friend to America and Americans, such attacks
could hardly have been permitted had he been IN
England at the time He was then in Japan. But
l cannot say that there was any perceptbe change
in the tone Of the journal after his return. He Is
nowin Toulon Ii is charitable to suppose that he
did not see this particular article before II was pub
shed, but it is difficult to suppose that he has re-
NAMED ignorant of the animus uniformly, or al
most uniformly, shown by his paperin dealing with
American TOPICS One can hardly fancy an English
Radical approving the opinion of the Marquis de
Talleyrand-PGrgord that England, had she pursued
wiser policy might still be mistress of Der former
American colonies and that the colonies wonld
have been the chief gamers had the mother country
acted with greater sense! These opinions and
differences of the French Marquis are in the opinion
If The AthenGum, "entirely correct" 1t would not
be fair to infer that Sir Charles Dixie is capable of
talking such nonsense as this. Nobody would think
Of holding the proprietor of journal who is not its
regular editor responsible for isolated or exceptional
opinions But he may be, and must be, held rcspon-
sible for the general tone Of the Ournal and when,
for many months together, this journal pursucs a
steady policy upon particular subject and an I'M
nortaut subject he may be, and must be, supposed
TO approve that policy The attitude Of The Atbc-
nr,un toward a whole class of books, books written
bv Americans, must he considered important; to
the journal and its proprietor, if not TO Americans
How such an attitude maintained by the proprietor
Of The AeaGua is consistent with the reputation Of
frieudliness to America once maintained by Sir
Charles Dixie, must be left for him TO explain.
A very lively controversy has sprung up respect
ing the proceedings of Mr. Stanley in Africa, and
more particularly, respecting the question whether
the Royal Geographical Society ought, or ought not
to pronounce a condemnation on Mr. Stanley's
method of prosecuting his discoveries. lis princ-
nal antagonist appears to be Mr.. II. NJ. Hyndman,
f. r. g. S. Mr.. Hyndmau, indignant at what he
deems the wantOn c-Ieltes practced upon the
natives by Mr.. Stanley, has cndeavored 10 bring
before the Royal Geographical Society resolution
condemning them. The President, Sir Rutherford
Alcock, ruled this out of order, and thereupOn
arises a correspondence and discussion in The PdH
liaU Gazette which threaten to be interminable.
long letter from Mr.. Hyndman explaining his at
tempt and how il failed and restating complaints
against Mr.. Stanley, reply from Sir Henry Raw
az t1n tu
ing Mr. Hyndman's conduct as unusual and
improper; a letter from the Assistant Secretary
of the Society," inclosiDg a copy Of previous letter
to Mr.. HyndEan advising him that his proposed
resolution was irregular; and, finally, long edit
Orial article in The PdU MAI Gazette, constitute,
thus far the literature of this dispute. sorry to
have to say that The Pail Mall Gazette prOnOunces q
distinct condemnation upon Mr.. SANKEY'S conduct.
AT the same time in the general interests ofhumanty
IT is comfort TO find that this journal, which has
certain position among certain classes of English
society, is not wholly devoid of those sympathies
which, when found in Others. it so often derides.
Ever since the atrocities in Bulgaria were brought
to the knowledge of the English public, The Pal
Mall Gazette has been one of the most ardent part-
sans of the responsible authors Of those atrocities
In company with The Daily 1elegGph-strange COM
panv indeed lit is the euogist and defender of the
Porte, ana OF Jne iufhlsH polCy VI i<Viu DS"N''''
field. On many previous occasions it has ndiculed
the introduction of sentiment into political discus
sion as theory quite out of place, and in its we'll
stocked arsenal of terms of contempt, there is none
tits in the habit Of employing frequently orwth
more deadly effect against its opponents than the
word sentimental To be sentimental politician is to