New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-11-04
MR.. FROUDE.
THE TRIBUTES TO HIM-MR. .FREEMANS
ATTACKS ON HIM-THE ANlMOSlTY
OF THE STUBBS Schoolgirls
NOTION OF HISTORY-TWO
ANECDOTES.

London October %.
Mr. Froude had beensso long, and' so oiteh as
sailed In the English Press that tits a-pleasure
to see the best papers lift themselves1above'th the
controversies and animosities which beset his
life and do him some Justice. They, could hardly
refuse to recognize the fact that. great writer
and a great ornament Of English Literature mas
gone. That would remain true even II MS ute
to the name Of great historian were disputed. I
don't know that IT is disputed except by the
Dryasdusts. who filled the air with clamor'
against him while he lived.
Mr. Freeman at the head'of these. He. 20
doubt was something more than Dryasdust;-a
man Of some force of mind. with power OF see
ing some historical truths broadly. But Mr.. Free
man was a drudge. and he could tolerate no one
who less drudge than himself He was
moreover a man of unfortunate temper and I'M
fortunate manners. and he wrote for periodical
which had the least amiable temper and the
least polite manners OF all modern serials. THE
Saturday Review" That paper throve on abuse
and calumny and in its congenial columns MT
Freeman poured out abuse and calumny on the
writer whose conceptions OF historical truth and
OF the right historical method differed from his
own
Mr. Froude's offences II any, were critical ana
literary. Mr.. Freeman treated them as If they
were offences OF morals: violations of the Divine
law. and as II he Freemam had been appointed
BY the Almighty to execute justice upon this mis-
cradle sinner Such at least. was Freeman's
own notion of his duty and OF his attitude. To
the bystander. il seemed II more private mo-
tives actuated him. and as If nothing but per-
sonal hatred could explain the ferocity. or THESE
personal attacks That Freeman did hate Mr.
Froude is. fear. but too true. His hatred. how
ever had probably no other source than history
I never heard that there was any purely per-
sonal resentment. Mr.. Freeman's evident delight
in the iniliction of torture the delight of the
inquistor not due primarily to the enjoyment of
human suffering. but to the conviction ,that the
wretch ought to be tortured. and'that it is he on
whom the duty of torturing him devolves. The
rest is habit When he had once grown used to
this form OF excitement. he could not live with
out it, nor was his nature peculiarly alive to
the agonies Of others.
1t Is the fashion to say that Mr.. Froude did
not belong to the modern historical school or
this school, Bishop Stubs, Mr.. Freeman, ana
other eminent persons Of the last generation
were the founders. 1t was both critical ana
constructive. and proceeded upon sound no.
tions of what history ought 20 be like or how
1t ought to be written. But, in so far as II was
original, the true origin of 1t is 10 be sought IN
the scientific spirit which. about that time. be-
fy their views on the true method of dealing,
not with history merely but with all the prob
lens of life and of literature. The historian
went to the original documents for his account
Of a reign of revolution. just As the palae-
ontologst betook himself to the fossferous
rocks for the record of the worlds construction.
or of the varying forms OF life which during one
or another period of millions Of years had peo-
pied It, The historians. however. applied their
canon with strictness which the physicist
knows to be excessive and often misleading and
the pupils showed themselves more exactns
and exclusive than the masters.
They have alleged Mr.. Froude as an example
Of evil and ever since the first two volumes OF MS
History Of England appeared, in 1856, they
have denounced him md his history in terms
which If less violent than Mr. Freeman's dla-
tribes, belong nevertheless. to the controversial
style Of the seventeenth rather than OF the nine
teenth century. Mr.. Froude's Henry tighth
was in their view ridiculous caricature. 1t
differed from the accepted estimate and the evil
dence for the new Henry was wanting or
which comes to the same thing was not suffi-
Gent to satisfy the critics. They fastened on
certain errors Of detail. and error Of detail
was to their minds sufficient to prove the false
ness Of the whole picture. And there were state
Papers which Mr. Froude had not read. and not
10 have read all the State Papers was of itself
enough to condemn writer who should pre-
sumo to treat of the period covered by these
Papers.
The gentlemen who framed this indictment
were destined. some OF them. 10 live long enough
TO see a curious thing. They were destined to
see Mr.. Froudes view Of Henry prevail, and 10
accept It in great part themselves on the eX-
press ground that 1t had been sustained and
confirmed by the very documents TO which they
had appealed The documents were not acces-
sible when Mr. Froude wrote. He had OWNED the
zeal Henry without them. basing himself. as he
expressly declared upon the statute book as the
true mirror of the time and Of the great King
He said-I forget whether he said II In print
but | have heard him discuss the matter with
the luminous eloquence which characterized his
talk-he said that the popular notion OF Henry
made the people whom he ruled nation or In
capabes and towards. 1t is certain they were
not Their deeds are there to speak for them.
They were wise. valiant patient people. heroic
in act far-sighted in their political views; deeply
religious. 1t Is inconceivable said Mr.. Froude.
that such a people should allow themselves to
be ruled for near fifty years by sovereign
who was a selfish debauchee and brigand
And he put aside that theory Of Henry's char
acter and reconstructed the true Henry. so that
he lived once more and had new being. with
the blood throbbing In his veins and his mind
once more graspng the secrets OF the states
manshp of his time.
There is probably finer example Of the
right use Of the historic imagination. There is
certainly none which has put the pedants more
completely to shame.
Did they ever make honorable amends to the
great writer whom they had held up TO contempt
as charlatan and an impostor? Not they
II remained with them an article Of faith to re-
vile Mr. Froude. They had reved him honestly
enough at first when they honestly thought him
wrong Then he committed the INCAPABLE