Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-11-19

from the reply of Mr.. Fortesque
that he no longer en%tertains these
sentiments, and that he had intend
ed to withdraw them and apologize
for them in his address to the ca
diets at West Point, had he been
permitted to give that address. In
a public statement given out to the
newspapers in an effort to square
himself with American opinion Mr..
F%ortesque says to begin with, that
the remark quoted was contained
in a book published in 1911 and
which comprised reports of his
lectures given at dates %considera-
bly, before that time, and not at the
time intended for publication. The
great war" referred to was the war
Of the French revolution and the
Napoleonic wars that followed. As
for the basis of the charges made,
he says: When I wrote this pas
sage there was fresh in my mind
an incident in the Bering sea nego-
tiations and an unfortunate lapse
in good craftsmanship on the part
Of an American competitor in in
ternational sports which had re-
Gently been held in England. All
this is now ancient history"
But it is not very ancient his
tory inasmuch as the book contain
ing that passage was published only
II years ago, and the assumption is
justified that the proofs passed
through the authors hands at that
time and received his approval. 1t
is possible that some American
athlete won some event on a foul
at some international contest, but
it is much more probable that there
was a dispute as to whether there
was a foul or not, and the judges
decided against the English view
point. There are always questions
Of fairness arising in such contests
and violently contradictory views
of fact held by the opposing sides,
but that a historian should charge
a whole race with bad sportsman
ship on the strength Of a single al
legation of breach of the rules in
a single game, and then fail to
state what the game was, where it
was played, and what evidence sup
ported his charge of a foul, does
not indicate a fair mind on the
part of a historian. In fact he was
guilty of a foul in the game of
history making. The same criti-
cism applies to his charge that doc
uments were altered in Washington
to support our side Of an arbitra-
ton case. He should, in common
fairness, supply facts, dates, and
proof of his charges.
Mr.. Fortesque has certainly
convicted himself Of the lack of
good craftsmanship and honest
dealing in his reply. The Spring
field Republican, in commenting on
it very justly says:
But is it history at all? The
author in an interview on Saturday
further explained that the first in
cident referred to in his formal
statement was an alleged disclos-
ure by the British foreign office
that the American state department
had altered a copy of a section OF
some treaty. He could not give
the details. but remembered that he
had taken his information A. the
time from a blue book issued by
the foreign office. The American
athlete, he recalled, had won on a
| foul. but further particulars he had
forgotten.
1.-THE charge against the Ameri-
| can state department which Mr..
Fortesque seems to intend still to
include in his history, while with
drawing the sweeping differences
based upon it, would be serious if
the author were entitled to be
taken seriously. In spite Of his
position at Windsor castle and an
English newspapers assurance OF
his acknowledged standing as a
scholar he is evidently not SO en-
titled. He is too temperamental.'