The semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1882-1886, 1882-11-15
S9rgland and the United States.

Charles Dudley Warner cont triua,tes
Remarkably lerse and penetrating
eaa'ay ~ "Englantl' to the Nuveu,,-
l,er CExTURY, in which his abilities
~ = journallst and publtci-t appear
To the b.'st advant &C. After making
60eca6le statement If the elements
os England's material and inteIirr-
lual domination aid of the in.lei.,.
1sess Of the United States 70 the
mother Of the country:
TIE reDatls'ns Of England and the
United States are naturally Of tic
tirst .terest to u. Our love aud our
hatred have always been that Of true
relatives. FOr three-luarteus OF
e.'niury Our UsaO,,r l25ulNr wa% c"n-
. amlly kept raw Oy the u,ost super
c'li"us patronage. During the pas,
'it'cade, when the quality Of EngIAhd'-
rsEArd bus becs'nle iuOre and H,O:e y
matter Ut in,li6 rrlce to u, we nave
t's.en the ruaject Of u more Intelligent
c"rjO-ity, VI Increased RESPECT, :.c-
cssenpsmted with = sincere de~i Z 10
uuden.tand US. In the diplomatic
scale Washington ranks below Subj
lissse 0ste, bat this ANOMALY is due
lO tradition, and d0es ns,t r..prc>..ll:
Euxlaud's real estimate of the status
VI the rppoLlic. There j., and mus,
BE-, good deal Of seiiisllne>s mingled
IN our neutrality-suspicious. i,s.l!
('etnx torn Of seltIsl ness but our
ilSeas Ut civilization sd nearly ct'ncitic
and " have 80 many t.'l.in"n a.
lsisations for humanity III t We n:,i.t
draw nearer l0xe. her. nt,twiti,-tai,,i-
ing old grudgrs and present differ
eilsses IN ss,:isl structure. Our intcf-
course h likely to t'e ciO,cr, OIc b;l>i-
Isess relations will Gc"I,e ,.i.re in
3 I.esa.Ie. I tan nc<ive Of nothing
~ lsnsentaLle tor the prOgre>s "f the
wOrDd ~ quarrel between these two
Emxljsb-speakihg pes'pic.
Hut, In one reSi iect. We are likely
to dtveree. 1 refer to literature; in
that a-si,uilatiOn Is neither l.r..b bic
nDr desirable. We were brought up
IN the literature Of England: our
flrst efforts we're limitations Of il: we
were criticised-we criticised our
selves-On Its st,nslartis. We c0n'-
,arxd every new aspirant III let ers I"
slDnle Eng fish writer. We wcr:
PATEL an the back ii we resemble!
iue English mMAie!s; We were Stared
at Or siseereL vt II VIC dbl not. N::cn
W bexan t. pr.,tiucc ,IiietliiEg ia:
WAS tlie l,r.s0uct Uf OUR own soil and
our own s,n.iai conditions, 1t was >:i!!
ju.tgrd ~ tie Oiti Standards, or, II 1t
was la,O original for that, II Was only
,sa.cel,lsd brx.,at,sc it Was curiuus "r
i.ixarre interesting for It's "tdiiH.
Tie criticism that We received f"r
.,ur b<st was evidently tout -tI+si "'
such indifference or tOi ration that !;
was calling. At first We were sur
lrisesl: then We were grirvt!; i!'rn
W. were Indignant. W. have l"ny
uxO l,essse,t 10 he either surpri:' It
xrieve,i or indignant NJ anything tac
Engli-h critics SAY Oi Us. We rave
recovered eur balance. We Know
that sIs,c.. Gu'iiver there has h~.I ="
,.i.ce. Of original l,unr'r l't.ni,.ct"l III
Ew.la, ,,.i equal tO 'knrk -r'n'cker'~
New y .rk;" that not in is::s s"r.
lury has airy English writer e4uai'c';
tue Wit and satire M tl'e 'sigi"w
,'al,ers." We Us~ti to iI<' irrii"tC.. -,
what We eali..,t I e >lltl'''i-l'm.>s y!
English critics Ofa certain sri,'"s': we
are sO u, E,iiger, tor wc ss'e THAI its
criticism, is only the result If is',o:-
auc, simply nf iha:i.i;: I" uhd,:'
stand.
&
M, We must expect i continual al
yer. enc.. In our litrr.tGr,-. Ana Il
Is BEST that there should i.r. There
cun bc no development Of :, naiI'"'*
worth anything that i not
on Ns own lines, cut "f IL own ":'-
tive materials.