Evening star., 1901-12-21

The furore caused by w. E. Henley s
recent criticism of Robert Lewis Stevenson,
epropOs of Graham Balfour's biography,
continues unabated il. London and is be-
ing felt on these shores, where Stevenson
is as highly considered in his native
country. Henley's structures upon Stew
enson are regarded as ill-timed and ILL
naturcd He attempts to draw the line
between the Stevenson who left England,
spontaneous and unaffected and the Stew
enson who returned from America. self
conscious and artificial. This characteri-
zatiOn has caused much bitterness, despite
Henley's assertion that he spoke out of
the depths of real affection for Stevenson's s
memory. The lovers of the dead novelist
cannot forgive the slight of his charge
that Stevenson was a poseUr, that he could
not pass a mirror without regarding his
features. that he had become ''inCesSantly
and passOnately interested in Stevenson"
Nor do they accept the suggestion that
Stevenson's dying labors were undeserv-
ing of commendation. Henley sought to
draw a parallel between the fast-collaps-
ing writer and the consumptive seamstress
Both. he declared, must work because their
natures impell them. Stevenson wrote in
the face of death because writing was
his life impulse. The seamstress sews
struggle against want, and toll is sec
ond nature
The circumstances of Stevenson's last
days have undoubtedly done much to en-
dear his memory to the reader Of today.
His self-impOsed exile in Samoa. the sin
cere affection of the natives for their
white chief" the idyllic life of the house
hold at Valima the day-by-day addition to
the manuscript of the last story and, after
death had come. the tokens of intense
grief which the islanders diSnl3VP1
to StevensOn's twilight a touch of min
gled romance. pathos and tragedy which
this prosaic age has not duplicated. And
all this Is apart from the merit OF the
work. which stands monument-like in the
midst of a great plain of commonplace
ness. Mr.. Henley's part of volunteer COM
mentatOr upon life and a work such as
this ungraciously chosen. in the face
of certain diSapprOVal There may be
disposition to herOiZe Stevenson, perhaps
to over-rate his works at times, perhaps
to accept everything of his production
without discrimination. But while one may
admire the courage of so hardy critic
Henley, one is compelled to deprecate the
manner of his charge that the Stevenson
cult is hysterical and his intimation that
1t is in some part insincere.
recent writer has sought to analyze
the reasons why women are better capable
of producing great novels than men. yet
are unable by reason of temperament to
actually compete with men In this field.
He points out that women have the more
leisure for reseaI Ch and thought, well
as the higher degree of impressionableness
ard emotion requisite for fine literary con-
ceptions- Yet the majority of women, de-
spite the tendency of the time toward a
broadening of the feminine field. still lead
secluded lives, encounter fewer of the
worlds phases than do men. and so acquire
a smaller stock of the realistic fundamentS
which are the essence of successful books
and stories. Again. he AYERS, women lack
the quality of continuous effort They are
I-g1z
to become respondent over their failure
TO shape the situation or the expression to
suit their keen sense Of fitness and their
nicely discriminating taste and abandon
their task in despair For this reason,
declares this commentator. there are
doubtless today many good, even great,
novels half-written in the desks of women
who, with bit more courage mental
strength, would press their products on
TO successful completion.
1t has recently been pointed out that the
law on the subject of publishers liability
for manuscripts submitted voluntarily by
authors remains in unsatisfactory state
An English judge has held that there is
no obligation whatever on the part of the
publisher to return such a. manuscript
whereas American courts have held quite
TO the contrary, but with differing con-
structlonS of the publishers liability. The
majority Of magazines and many news
papers plainly declare their terms upon
which manuscripts may be sent to them
ana IN tne absence OF such notification il
Is assumed that there is no obligation to
return. In the case OF novels the manu-
script Is almost invariably restored to the
writer If not accepted, but this rule does
not warrant the writer in intrusting his
conception to single copy. The publi-
cation business has become so highly Or
ganiZed that there is today comparatiyelv
little difficulty on this score, although oc-
casionally a suit is brought in court to
determine the liability of a publisher who
has lost or mislaid a manuscript The
tendency of the decisions, despite the lack
OF definite and uniform statutes on the
subject. is to hold that the publisher by
the nature of his business invites the
submission of manuscripts. and in general
terms becomes accountable for them IL
submitted The unknown writer sending
ms novel forth on its quest for publisher
Is safe only when he retains a perfect COPY
and provides in his letter of transmittal
Tor some means Of restoration.
1t has been noticed of late that COM
parauvely few distinctively Christmas
books are published for the holiday season
Whereas once scores of such books for
Children especially, were put forth each
season now there are scarcely a dozen
notable instances of such timeliness The
reason doubtless is that reading has be-
come hXed habit, with both young and
Old and the giving of books as Christmas
presents has been established as a feature
OF the holiday beneficence The choice of
such books lies along the lines of general
preference Thus the Christmas gift Sc
iected from the book stalls is more fire.
quentiy the latest popular novel than a
collection OF Christmas stories or noems
rms may mean in some degree a shading
on in the popular acceptance of the
christmas idea 1t is more likely how
ever, TO be merely the result of the read
Ing habit as reflected in the efforts of
n