New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-05-07
NOTES FROM LONDON:
MR.. CHAMBERLAIN ION THE wANE'-m
RUDYARD KIPLlNG AND MR. ROLF Boil.
DREwOOD-A PAIR OF SPECTA.
Giles AND Mr.. JOHN HARE.
London. April "a.

London. April %.
In the present dead-set MADE at Mr.. Chamber.
! lain, it is natural that he should figure as No
in that series Of articles or Politicians on N.
| Wane" which Mr.. Wemyss Reid has begun in nj,
! new weekly. The title is enough 10 show the tor.
of the paper. The substance of its three column.
! may be stated in a sentence that Mr.. CHAMBER.
! lain has fought for his own hand is an egotst.
100 ambitious ard was in too great a hurry :.
snatch the reins from Mr.. Gladstone's hands M.
| fore making quite sure that Mr. Gladstone was
ready to drop them. There is nothing very dam
| aging in all that. II. however. you believe NJ
Wemyss Reid Mr.. Chamberlain intrigued against
Mr. Gladstone in 1853. and his intrigue came nea,
succeeding IT, failed because. while IFS autho,
knew all about tactics and organization then
was one thing he did not understand: never hal
in fact been able to understand. That cria
Mr.. Reid in n noble burst, is the generous sen,i
ment which is characteristic of Engls1men and
which we are fond of describing as or national
love of fair play
True. Mr.. Reid. yon are: and it is also true tia,
for this English belief in English fair play their
is n very broad rOunditinn Whether you arc
broadening it by your present attack on Mr.. Cham.
berain is a question which suggests its own
answer You say that Mr. Chamberlain. whose
head had been turned by the hot fumes Of popu-
7 arlty in the summer OF 1885 lost all this popu-
larity before the Homc-Rule split in lsss-or
even before the actual election of 1855. II isau
assertion easy to make and difficult to prove or
disprove Probably it. would surprise most Of
/ those who now share Mr. Reds dislike Of Mr.
Chamberlain. II may well enough represent Mr.
| Gladstone's views Mr. Gladstone resented ard
resented strongly, Mr. Chamberlails independent
attitude in 1888. The UNAUTHORIZED programmes
was 10 him an abominailOn, and The author Of it.
| won't say abominabe hut certainly from that
time the idol of Birmingham was one which the
elect of Midlothian not unwilling u see
broken in pieces. That. perhaps, Is the reason
why Mr. Chamberlain was not taken into council,
and into his chiefs confidence, about the Home.
Rule scheme If hc had been. one of two things
would have followed the bill of $50 would have
been n different rill or the Cabinet would have
broken mp sooner than il did.
That however is history on which do not en-.
ter am only concerned to point out that Mr. Reds
theory is opposed to the general belief u rep
resents Mr.. Gladstones. perhaps. and If 50. The
inference is that Mr Chamberlain's exclusion from
those councils IN which Home Rule conceived
was. on the part Of his leader act Of deliberate
calculation. But what would Mr. Wemyss Reid.
a good Gadstonian if there re one. say 20 the
suggestion that it was his leaders wish 70 drive
Mr. Chamberlain into rebellion The sugges-
ton is not mine: if it be anyboly's. it is Nh
Reds | do not believe il tenable or support
able lc- the source OF il be what II may.
sprinrs Of itself from the line of attack on Mr.
chamberlain now pursued. and the fact that Il
docs may suffice 10 show how dangerous that
line is
AZ 70 Mr.. Chamberlains being on the wane
that like many other things, Is matter OF oph-
ion: whether a plous opinion or not each cf'is
is al liberty 10 decide for himself. lie i ha'ea
hy his former Radical friends with ni''erne's
which they express, IN print ana "'heF"ise' !"
LANGUAGE Of tie most extraordinary violence
Rut their rancor toward Mr.. Chamberlain IS
,o!erablv accurate measure OF their dread of him
WHY should they dread him if they think he mas
los, his hold forever on the country? They Do
no. think So They well know ne is man o.
such force and ability that he is still TO 10
reckoned with; and that is why they assail hin
as they do and talk of him as on the wane.
4 friend of Mr. Rudyard Kipling pleads in hh
behalf that he is n very young man. II Is Io'
fair IN Judge him. urges this amab.c person. as
IL he were a practis'd writer. He is but twent''
three or twenty-four years old No douot NAV
( 4 valid considerations II IS. however, one
which the oudest panegyrists OF MI hiplng uS'
as one more reason for eNtolhng INN. See they
cry. how beautiful this writing IS and the writer
is only n boy. That is not critical a'utuoe'
In truth. neither youth nor age can he peaue'
The public is concerned only with results; or az
most with the promise of results Said vi.
Whistler. who has said many tuc things we
all know that work excuses Itself only ny reason
Of its quality II the work IS foolish, II Is surrey
NOT less foolish because an honest and mlsspens
lifetime has been passed in producing H. Ana
| Il II h foolish. anybody IS privileged 10 ada'
! not less foolish because premature; because
| produced before the writer has learned no" "
write. or how 10 observe. or how TO thlhS.
Between Mr.. Ruiyard Kipling and Nh koA
Boldrcwood there is point OF contact ana .
point ~ contrast. Both sprang somewhat SUI
denly into fame. il fame 1t be. But whereas
MIR Klpirg may be described by WORD "m'a
| RHYMES easily 10 his name, Mr. Roll boldre"oo'
was veteran M his first appearance. lie was
sixty years of axe when he wrote RoDprp
Under AIMS That story of the AustraH.H
Bush has had the singular luck 10 attract 'n'
admiration Of three men of great distinction "a
| England: each of tie three extremely uhn"
! either Of he other two. The three are Ni
| Gladstone. Lord Randolph Churchill and Lo.a
Ro,ebery Ii is opcn 10 Mr. Rolf Bohlre",o"'
admirers 10 insist that there mus' he sohe'Hne
remarkable n literary work which has won mo
epplausr of ren 50 far apart from each oTher III.
rclcctually. Jet all of such brilliant ln'elec'D"
gifts rs the three above named.
Neither is this however. a critical a''i''"o.
| When the merit Of any work OF art, literary OF
other. has 10 hc considered. II aVais a's''"'y
nothing 10 say that \, OF b or I ll'"NS F" ""..
| Each member IF this eminent "''" ""' -
reasons. and each has kept them 10 himself an.
,b. ar.bority Of all of them together, great d.
j. must 1c put aside The structure oil s'oi''
| tbc style of the writer. his knowledge OF "e
| heart. or Of nature. or of human ha'u''-' =.
| or, mot matters for a plcbiscite II II is 10 ="
| understood that Mr.. Rolf Boldrewood had no eN.
| pcricncc in literature before he wrote ho"''.
| Indcr ,rns.r that want of experience is. ilOn
| ~ tom