New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-06-05
NOTES FROM LONDON.
TIE DUKE OF ARGYLL AND Mr. GLADo '0''D
"A WARNING TO AUTHORS TIE rinoi
FoLIo-THE NEW HALFPENNY PRESS.

London Nay "a.
The Duke of Argyll is one Of those men OF eie'O
abilities and stainless character-tney are
where too numerous-who have, ncNci'no'
fallen out of touch with tEe time 10 INC poii
tic,an. that perhaps disposes OF him. lie Nv
Longer available" But there are OTHER "iai
political standards and, judged BY the hlgnes' 'ha'
can lie applied the Duke deserves no h1h' ne"'".e
Of respect. In politics, he committcu DIN so
aso the objectionable sin OF dlnering lro.n W.
Gladstone Let 40 much be acknowledged -.
continues to differ from him. lie preierfeu, am
still prefers. the cause Of the Empire and the
unity OF this kingdom to any personal ties or con-
siderations whatever. lie speaks OF his old ieaier
with freedom The idolates accuse him OF In
gratitude; emitting, however, TO specify t'e
grounds Of this accusation
Some of the Dlkes "reminiscences OF the DAYS
when he and Mr.. Gladstone were colleagues a'e
excellent. They attract less attention tian they
deserve from the Gadstonian press; when cam
indeed shut its ears TO incOnvenient facts' sh"'
them as tight as Mr. Gladstone himself IL seems
that not long before the great Lloerai tooA III.
,,r.o. nlpnoe he was accused by the Tories OF
coouettinr with Home Rule. The charge, ne an
.wcred. was AN impudent fiction" In the hgh'
Of what has happened since, the language seems n
little strong.
There was once says the Duke Of Argyll,
member of one of Mr. GladstOne's Cabinets VINO
said TO him-said TO the Duke have the same
feeling for Gladstone that can suppose dog mas
toward his master No name is given. IL may
le hoped none will be-. Nobody cares 70 see q
man who has been thought fit to be Caolne'
Minister stOop 20 low as that
A more serious matter is the alusion to re-
morkabIo speech by Mr.. Gladstone in November
q fbo MIll0fllan
campaigns lie was then appealing to the coun-
try to give Inn a majority strong CROUCH :"
settle the Irish question independently vi V'e
Irish members; and he said this
If the Liberal party was IN position where
il WAS only a minority dependent on the irish
vote for converting it into majority, tell you
sincerely and solemny that, although | believe
the Liberal party itself to DC honorable, patriotic,
sound and trustworthy, yet in such position
as that it would not be trustworthy. In such
positon as that, it would not be safe for II TO
enter upon the consideration Of the principle OF il
measure with respect TO which, at every step OF
its progress, il would he in the power OF party
coming from Ireland TO say, Unless You DO THIS
or that we will turn you out tomorrow
II that was sound view in 1885, what has
since happened to make IT lees sound? The later
history OF the Liberal and Irish parties fulils
Mr. Gladstone's account 10 the letter The Liberal
party has never since Home Rule became It's
gospel. been anything but a minority, dependent
on the Irish vote for majority Thus dependent
II has attempted TO deal with Home Rnle Az
every step of its progress. 1t has been in the power
Of the Irish party 70 say, Unless you DO TINS OF
that we will throw you over tomorrow III IL
comes back 70 office will still be In that position
in the position in which, according TO MI
- th,-A N
1885, Mr.. Gladstone did come in with majority
Of 20. including the Irish, and the Irish numbered
S. Those were the circumstances in which he
embarked upon his Home Rule career. Mr.. Bright
accused him of deceiving the people. lie had
obtained his majority 10 resist Mr. Pamell; he
used il to surrender to Mr.. Parnell.
II YOU have been, as you seem 70 have been,
Shocked by what Lord Salisbury said about
Ulster. you will no doubt he shocked to find that
the Duke of Argyll, whose name has long been
honored in America, backs up Lord Salisbury.
Il endorse him." says the Duke. l not only
endorse him, but I so further l say that not
only was the language Of Lord Salisbury warn
ing Of what might be. but it was doctrine OF
what was in itself right We have right 10
expect the allegiance Of the minority in Ireland
il we cast away their liberties The American
idolater of Mr.. Gladstone. who tolerates no cx-
posure Of his rccklessness NAV say that the Duke
OF Argyll is a Tory lie is no more Tory than
Mr. Bright Tory. but of Mr.. Bright also
he used TO say the same thing. and it comes there
fore to this that any man is a Tory who docs not
agree with Mr. Gladstone; change when he
changes and adore to-day what yesterday he was
ready TO burn.
The Society Of Authors has lately enlarged its
sphere Of usefulness. II now publishes an adj
vcrtscmcnt on the first page OF The Times, as
follows:
Writers are earnestly warned against answer
ing the advertisements of persons who invite
MSS without first communicating with the So
cicty."
This seems 20 be intended 10 meet that mark
able American appeal To British Authors, which
figured for some time in the advertising columns
Of the literary wcekics in London. Lest there
should be any doubt about il. the too enterprising
American who made II is named in the May num-
her of The Author the organ Of the Society
II ia alleged that the too entcrprlsing American
has been laying hands on stories whose copyright
is uncertain that A novel written for Tillotson
& Son exclusively has very recently figured in
three successive issues Of the American Once a
Week. Then Mr. Besant adds:
I'VE can only repeat former 'aution Do
not entrust MSS. 70 any advertiser without care
full business agreements beforehand and proper
guarantees
These cautions are not without effect on the
mind OF the British Author. nor. perhaps. wholly
without effect on the mind Of the too cntcrpris-
ing American publisher. His too tempting adver-
tiscment has lately disappeared from the columns
in which II once figured with regularity. Can II he
that the British Author dill not show thr expected
alacrity in walking into the American parlor so
inv,ingy opened To him.
II is said here that well-known firm of book
sellers in New York has lately disposed Of a First
Folio Shakespeare for 81, 900. II that be 20. some
particulars Of the transaction would he welcome.
know OF no Instance in which any similar sum
has been paid for the book in England. and it must
Lc nrcslmcl TINT this cnnY a reuaIk bic one: