New-York tribune., 1922-03-12

Of 1909'10 19lO-'1l. Illness, however,
prevented him from conducting the
concerts after February "a, when Mr..
Theodore Spicring relieved him. Be-
fore then, however, differences be-
tween the guarantors and officers of
tho society and the conductor had
reached an acute stage and the an
nouncement had gone out from Mr..
Mailer, as we'll as his hackers, that he
would not return to New York for the
third season which had been con-
templatcd.
The reasons for this disagreement
were not set forth in The Tribunes
article to which Mr. Karpath makes
reference, although they had long been
matter of public comment in New
York That Mr.. Krchbiel confined him
self to a discussion Of artistic ques-
tions which were surely dcbatablc the
Niennese writer admits. He neglects,
however, to state that the "violent re
proachcs,' as he calls them, written by
Mr.. Ossip Gabrilowitsch, were pub
lishcd i'll pamphlet form in Europe,
though, no doubt, designed for crcula-
tion in America. Germany and Austria
biel's opinions. The reproaches were
not criticisms OF those opinions, but
merely personal vituperations which
Mr. Gabrilowitsch succeeded in getting
printed in part in weekly trade sheet
IN New York and one daily newspaper
in Cincinnati. That in attempting to
ridicule Mr.. Krehbiel's capacity for
critical judgment the pianist was de-
preciating the value of the favorable
opinion which the writer had always
expressed concerning him, did not
seem to enter Mr.. Gabrilowitsch's mind.
In any event he had reason to feel in
different in the matter. He had taken
up residence in Munich and was look
ing forward to q career as a conductor.
When the fortunes of war sent him.
Russian as an exile out of Germany.
he returned to the United States. but
MS American spirit did not find utter
ance until opportunities Tor conductor
sh'ps opened to him here. The war be-
gan IN 1914; he received his naturali-
zatlon papers as an American citizen on
April IL, 1921-less than a year ago.
Another matter: Mr.. Karpath con-
lesses ignorance of how Mr. Krehbiel
has conducted himself" toward Mr.
Stransky Since he was willing to ad-
NIT that the appreciation of Mr.. NAH
ler's New York career bore evidence of
expert professional knowledge (Sach-
Sentrlss), he might well have assumed
that Mr.. Stransky's activities had heer
discussed in the same spirit. The per-
sonal relations between Mr.. Krehb;o,
and Mr.. Mailer were more exterded
and more intimate than those which
nave existed between Mr. Krehbiel and
Mr. Stransky. But those relations have
had nothing to do with the writer,s
artistic opinions of the artistic activi-
ties Of the two men. If the fact that
personal equation has no bearing on
Inc Iribune's musical criticisms has
not always been in evidence, there has
been a large waste of evidence in this
Journals columns for forty years.
Things written with personally un-
preJudiced pen may not always be read
with an unjaundiced eye. Against such
reading the most generous writer in
the world (not only Mr.. KrehbieN is
helpless.
Concerning New York Audiences
What the Viennese writer calls Mr.
krehblels "anger" because Europeans
refused to recognize the intelligence Of
the New York public may best be an