New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-06-18
EMERSON AND WHITMAN.
MIR. oCoNyoR REPLIES TO THE REV. MR..
CHADWICK.

D'@@-'
MITE AND ANTHROPOPHAGY.
TO ne Editor Of The Tribune.
SIR: Some attention is due to the Rev. John W.
Chadwick who lately enters your columns ana
tries TO make me out compound OF Mendez flnto
and Ananias / will not, at present dwell upon the
exquisite manners Of his composition, because am
mainly impressed by its heavy verdanoy lie mas
in The Critic of December g. 1881, jotted -remin-
iscence penned with careless bonhome, OF talk
Emerson had with Walt Whitman about the pas
sapes whose courage of treatment" he had COM
mended FIVE years before; and even supposing IL
bears the construction he puts upon II, which it
does not. would anyone but tits gentle shepherd
imagine that the powerful and absolute pupnc
statements of the Emerson letter OF 1902 couiu
be retracted or qualified by what Emerson salu Ill
n private conversation on Boston Common, NOT re-
norted for tweny-one years afteri Yet this is the
Rev Mr. Chadwlck's position, at its best; ana ne
is so vain IN the possession OF MS TOY gun l9tucu
with a single green pea and so well fortified does
he think himself in his cobweb Gibraltar, that ne
blandy imagnes the force of my former letter Gute
DESTROYED by his counter-blast. and ventures tie
length of supposng me guilty OF wlliul Ialscnoou'
| beg to introduce little dynamite INTO thes1
placid dreams. But first as matter Oh genera,
interest in this connection, allow me lew WOfus III
regard TO the relations between the two princlpal
hguTes under discussion
THE FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN EMERSON AND WHIT
MAN.
Emerson had much more of personal friendship
for Walt Whitman than has been generally sup
posed. This was first evidenced by his making
determined visit TO Brooklyn, soon after the APP
pearance of Leaves OF Grass twenty-five years
aco walking out to the little cottage in the suburbs
several miles from the ferry, where the poet then
lived From that time regularly for years alter
ward whenever Emerson came to New-1ork, ne
appointed meeting, and the TWO generally dlneu
together and spent some hours. When the author
of Leaves of Grass in Boston III 1860,
Emerson was his frequent and cordial visitor. Inc
| fl.., nj N "
scene of his long and devoted service i'll the hos
pitals and where he renamed Ter number OF
wears of course made protracted interim III per
sonal communication, but | doubt II 1t could be
said that Ralph Waldo Emerson affections land
few knew hos deeply he could love- ever went out
more warmly 10 anyone, ana renamed from hrst 10
last more ii ed under the circumsi ances than to-
ward Walt Whitman. To my apprehension mere
is nothing more affecting or emphatic III his whOle
career-a sort of final c0ruscatlon IN It's evening
twihght-than the last sweet and gracious atten,
tone ne paid the noble poet whose deep-thOughted
words bad stirred the enthusiasm OF his prime: |
refer 20 the time in September 1881, when Walt
Whitman was staying at Frank SanbOrns IN Con-
cord and Emerson droYe over TO deliberately pay
those " rrspects for which he had obligated him
self twenty-five years before. Nor can the unusual
compliment of the hospltable but formal dinner
party made the next day for Walt whitman by Mr;
and Mrs. Emerson be regarded as without marked
significance. | wilt not uwell upon the occasion,
but if the scene of that beautiful autumn SaDbaln
afternoon. there in his own mansion surrounded
by all his famy-wife, SON. daughters. ron-in-law,
friends-a company of those closest to his spirit
aod W,It Whitman chosen TO be there among them
If that does not mean how Emerson, by this
simple, almost solemn rite, wished, before he de
parted t. Ieiterate and finally seal his verdict of
1870 upon the noet and the man he loved then
there Is significance in human life or its emo
tons aDd actions.
THE TALK on BOSTON COMMON.
This general statement of the relations between
the two men explains the talk upon Boston Com
mon in 1850, Walt Whitman's brief and nonchal-
ant reference to which gives the Rev. Mr.. Chad
wick opportunity for some strokes OF exegesis not
surpassed by Sir Isaac Newton's happy treatise on
the Book of Revelations. The year after EnersOns
comprehensive and absolute eulOgum, the attack
upon the book began. 1t was led of by Mr. tltz-
James Bren, an athletic young irish SAINT; whose
eminent sanctity of life and conversation did not
prevent him from wearing his halo with the most
rakish slant possible. other holy hefinlts OF the
press and oyster cellars joined him, and from that
time forward the magazines aud newspapers TO
winch these men had free access, teemed with every
form of Misrepresentation and abuse and the
fortunes of the book were involved in cloud;
Under these circumstances Emerson, who wished
the prosperity of his friend and spoke out OF his
personal affection, tried to convince him that he
would better omit the passages upon which the
storm had been raised. This was in perfect accord
ance with q leading trait in EmersOn's mind. Does
Mr. Chadwick remember that noble funeral culOgy
upon Theodore Parker in the course of which
Emerson, though in perfect and ayowed agreement
with ParKer's beliefs censured him Tor the direct
ness of his attacks upon the old cruel theOogics
1t was not canny. he said, thus squarely assault
venerable superstiions similar notion probably
actuated him IN his vehement arguments WIN
Walt Whitman about the passages in his book
which had been made obnoxious. The fact that
they had occasoned uproar combined with the
fact that the uprOar likely to wreck his friends
fortunes to him sufficient reason for the book
proceeding without them; In retract0n OF his
letter of 1855, he uttered not one word, nor-let
Mr. Chadwick mark it well-did he utter one word
on moral grounds concerning anything in tho vol
ume. How could he! Mr.. Chadwick himself says
do not believe that Mr. Whitman has written 2
line which is not pure and high in its Intention"
How cOud Emerson urge on moral grounds any
thing against poetry containing not line which
is not pure and high in its intention'f Mr.. Emer,
sons arguments slmD consisted OF splendid and
sincere unfolding of the technical literary and con-
ventionat points applicable with view TO induce
Walt Whitman to conform to them, and leave ont
some lines in his volume. OF the higher reasons Tor
leaving those lines in he said not syllable and
years ago Walt Whitman. talking with several of
us here in reference to this interview, SAID that
apart from EmeTsons socitnde for him. II was the
saddest conversation he ever had in his llfe mas
much as Emerson, in all his cOpiOus and splendid |
talk concerning the mooted passages, had, after all
nothing better to urge than that their withdrawal
would maze the book sell better.
wmrMAN's CONVICTIONS UNsHAKEN.
In a recent letter to me, Walt Whitman says:
What made, and ever makes, the argument of |
Emerson in that walk on the Common dear and |
holy to me- its personal aifectonateness as of
an elder brother to younger 1t was vehe- |
ment even passionate well wishing, which felt |
then, and feel to this hour, the gratitude and |
reverence of my life cOdd never repay. Although |
perfect from an intellectual and conventional point
of view il did not advance anything had not al |
ready considered. And my arrlero and citadel |
positions-such as / have indicated i'll my June |
North american RerieaC memUrandum-were not |
only not lacked they were no. even alluded to-"
Mr. Chadwick may try TO say that If Walt Whit |
man had 49, case TO state that hour wi Emerson |
in 1860 was the time On the contrary, the ques- |
ton of the poets eternal duty to his day and gen
Grafton being laid in allegiance, and the question of |
Difference to convention being alone brought for |
ward think that Walt Whitman'S silence was the |
sublimer answer. It is in times like these that |
speech is SILVER but silence is gold. 1t is obvious |
that Emersons arguments did not touch Walt |
Whitman's principle OF treatment IN sexual |