Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CRITICS CRITICISED.

Tq the Editor of the Evening Stab. Sib, —Samuel Edger's apologist of Friday last (per morning paper) shows ignorance. He does not know, and should not have assumed that the editor of the Independent (London) was the author of the able and incisive critique on Mr E's book of sermons to which he alludes and which appears as an exscript in the Auckland Christian Times.- Few editors write all their own " leaders ;" fewer write any reviews of books; and some-7-althouga I see no obligation to inform that loose writer of so muehr—seldom write any of either; their chief function is to examine, judge, select, accept, "reject; and they are responsible.^—Then as to the matter of his complaint! why does he not go to the simple facts ? why fly off at a tangent exclaiming, biassed by a busy-body;. = or, like his . neighbour, fiendish, : personal pique, &c, &c ? Must not every unconcerned onlooker feel that all such stuff !is irrelevant? What are the facts? ih there ridiculous egotism in: preface/to that volume of sermons as reviewer affirms ? and what about the quotation of extraordinary matter in evidence from the preface? Then, again, what is the plain fact, ill feeling or good feeling notwithstanding, in regard to Mr E's supposed mare's nest anent " sin-offering?" I repeat the question, what are the simple facts of the case ? Feelings, good, bad, or indifferent, are out of the question; and, as a separate question, are, though not unimportant, quite secondary. A strong controvertist, or great debater, may have the best feeling and rank among the greatest public benefactors. The Independent's critique is good,—outspoken, keen, fair, candid. Writer of yesterday morning, in igiiominiously imputing bias, &c, again evinces ignorance. Mr E, was notoriously accustomed to criticise (I was about to say castigate) most of the particular men of Auckland; does he now believe in the give and taker " Fair play is a jewel." I am, &c, JQ W. 08. & Upper Parnell, Saturday. /

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS18711213.2.18

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 601, 13 December 1871, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
327

CRITICS CRITICISED. Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 601, 13 December 1871, Page 2

CRITICS CRITICISED. Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 601, 13 December 1871, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert