New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-08-31
London, August 10.


..hich the living are bound TO respect.
Two of these letters are letters which
mt il beyond doubt that Charlotte
pronts's attachment 70 Heger was a
,oesionate attachment; not less pas
sionate because pure. The letters were
unanswered and the attachment was
urreouited. They lay bare the womans
soul AS you read them you ask:
could Charlotte Bronte, could any
n.oran. have written them If she imag-
ired they would ever. for any reason
ar In any circumstances, be given TO
the public? And if not. what right has
he public 10 them or in them?
Hers was a nature Of singular self
concentration and reserve. When she
gave her confidence she gave it com
pletely. She gave it to Heger. She
trusted him. Ii can never have oc-
curred 10 her that he would betray her
,rust She did indeed suspect that her
letters might fall into wrong hands If
cont BY post. and she therefore sends
them by a friend TO be delivered 10
him personally. She omitted no pre-
caution Of privacy. But il does not
seem that she took account % what
might happen after Heger's death;
and Of what has happened So little
value did he set upon the letters that
ne scrubbed on one Of them-the one
which to most men would have been
mos sacred-the address OF a Brussels
shoemaker Then he tore them up.
The fragments were rescucd-it does
not appear by whom-and pieced to-
rether with paper and string Whether
they came to Madame Heger's knowl-
edge is not clear. She was the woman
against whose prying Charlotte tried to
safeguard herself. She was the orig
inal Of Madame Beck in 'Ninette."
But upon Constantin Heger's death
they passed into the care OF his son
Paul. For long years they were sup
uosed TO be lost CARRIED extracts from
them appeared in Mrs. Gaskell's Life
Of Charlotte Bronte Finally Dr. Paul
Heger former President of the Royal
Academy Of Medicine Of Belgium. Com
msnder Of the order of Leopold. LII.
D. Of ST. Andrews and member of. the
British Association, took counsel with
Mr. Marion II. Spielmann, a writer on
art. and upon his advice offered the
letters to the British Museum, which
accepted them.
II was not with Or. Paul Heger a
question Of money. No reproach can
be addressed to him on that score. He
declined all compensation whether from
the Museum for the letters themselves,
or from the publication Of them. But
he authorized Mr.. spielmann TO publish
them. in 1.-THE Times" or elsewhere;
knowing that you will act with the
delicacy that the situation requires!
Whatever money was paid for them
was 10 go. on Mr.. Spielmann's sugges-
tor. 10 the Royal Literary FUND o.
Great Britain. II is not quite clear
whether Mr.. Spielmann himself was 10
profit. or did profit. by his services as
intermediary and by his editorship OF
the material; including Or. Heger's let
ters 70 him on the subject Nor does
that much matter. Or. Heger writes
AT some length. He thinks that the
letters ought TO be in the possession OF
the writer's countrymen. He considers
further that they ought TO be published
IN order ito put an end" as The
Times" remarks editorially, ito all gos-
sip and speculation about the relations
between his father and Charlotte
Bronte." DR.. Heger himself says:
There is nothing in these letters
which is not entirely honorable 70 their
author as to him TO whom they are ao-
dressed. 1t is better TO lay bare the
very innocent mystery than 10 let II
be supposed that there is anything 10
hide. I hope that the publication OF
these letters will bring to an end a
legend which has never had real exist
ence in fact. hope so, but iegenus
are more tenacious OF life than simple
reality"
do not know what title Or. Heger
has TO pronounce on such a matter
OF judgment which he evidently IN
tends TO be taken as final There must
be. in the great public to which Char-
lotte Bronte appeals. some VINO 90
not accent il. For me. l do not accep'
.nher DR.. Heger's opinion or Mr.
spielmann's as to the propriety OF put-
ting them into print. / cannot accept
even that Of THE Times" TO which !
should naturally defer. ! write 10 you
on the subject in order to challenge
these judgments: 10 challenge them on
both the grounds alleged as excuses
for publication, and I'm the hope thai
Charlotte Bronte's American pupuc
will dissent from them. ! think de-
plorable mistake has been made. II
is unhsppily irreparable. The mischief
has been done. But It is still possible
10 point out that 1t is a mistake ana
why 81 is a mistake.
English opinion. am bound to al
nit, seems 10 be with Or. Heger and
Mr.. spielmann and The Times A
fortnight has passed since the letters
were published. There has been SO
far az have seen. no authoritative
protest: not even an important pro-
test The British press seems 10 have
acquiesced in the decision OF It's lead
ing journal. In some papers, mostly
even,rs, ,,a,,ere tbare has been support