Untitled

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2606, 30 October 1915, Page 3

SHAM PATRIOTISM AS A CONTACION OF BADNESS.

Sir,— I The remark has been made, that it is a proof of the divinity of Christianity that it has withstood the lives of its professors. I venture to remark that it is a proof of the loyalty of our people that it has withstood the actions of professors of patriotism. The corruption of the best thing may be the worst. There arc few things nobler than disinterested patriotism, and there are fow things more hurtful than patriotism divorced from moral ideals. Britain in 1775 was suffering from leather-lunged professors of a sham patriotism, and Dr. Johnson, knowing that 1 this meant injury to the nation, said: "Patriotism is tho last refuge of a scoundrel." "But let it be considered," adds Boswell, "that ho did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that' pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak for self-interest." We have suffered in this Dominion from a sham patriots ism that has proved itself a contagion of badness, and we are suffering from it to-day. I wish to point out this social disease, and would venture to call upon your readers in their homo life, in their social life, in their business life, and in their church life, to seek to stamp it out. Messrs. Atkinson and Hill might use their fluency of speech and pen in sounding a warning against/ a Chauvinism which shows itself in race hatred and in a disregard for the decalogue. The patriotism that has not an intense regard for the moral greatness of a country is a sham patriotism. - It has been pointed out, ten thousand times that the' tremendous war in which we are engaged is at bottom a conflict about moral ideals in the lives of nations. Germany stands disgraced among tho civilised nations of the world for her disregard of moral law, without regard for "which no nation lias a right to live. She has stood for the foul principle that in order to gain a victory any means, no matter how infamous they may be, may be used. Now is it not t'he case that the thing that sometimes has passed among us for patriotism recently is smeared and stained in a measure with tho foregoing German vices? We have been vigorously, from our front doors, sounding forth warnings about the perils that arise from the presence of a-German here and there in our midst and at our back, door we havo been welcoming German vices as the most desirable things under the sun! More'injury has been done to our Dominion by a patriotism smeared with German vices than all tho shot and shell of-the Emden flung on Wellington City could have done. Let me note one or two things by way of illustration :— ■ 1. There has been, and there is, in our midst a sham patriotism that shows itself in making our soldiers drunk. The other day, at noon, in Willis Street, one of our soldiers reeling drunk, with an expression on. his face of helpless idiocy, was trying to_ shake hands ■ with the ?assers-by. This is continually going on. have been told that soldiers prefer to come into town from camp on the Sunday rather than on a week day, in order to escape the patriotism that shows itself in thrusting drink into their hands. The example of our King and the call of Kitchener is having less effect in Wellington to-day than it had months ago. There is a strange silence concerning the scoundrels that make our soldiers drunk in certain patriotic •circles and a very loud noise about nothing at all.

2. There has been a profligate wasto of money on the part of professors of patriotism in collecting money, and revolting methods have been used. If true- patriotism means a regard for the moral greatness of one's country, then things liavo been done in the name of patriotism to rob' our country of its moral greatness. A saturnalia of fun may have its place, but a saturnalia of fun to show our sympathy with tho wounded and. the dying and tho bereaved is surely very unseemly. In Manners Street not so many weeks ago a huge Maori, stark naked (save for a loin cloth), was plunging about, rattling a collecting box and trying to make sport, and all this was done' in the name or patriotism. The white man initiated tho Maori into this revolting way of waking practical sympathy for our suffering soldiers!

3. In the namo of.a sham patriotism there has been a wholesale and widespread increase in gambling. Parliament by special legislation has opened wider the sluice gates, and tho citizens are encouraged to support their Empiro at this' crisis by, in a sense, State lotteries. I know this sort of thing is done in France and Italy, but it is highly-developed in Germany. . The whole scheme is an appeal to sordid self-interest. Why, our young children in our schools have learned that it is .a right tiling to'invest sixpence with the view of perhaps getting five pouuds. We are told that we must have the money, and'we can only get it in this way, for the people, won't give it, and a man up north has said that people who objeefc to this sort of thing "can go to blazes!" If true patriotism has a regard for a country's moral greatness, why should this evil thing bo encouraged? Even an agnostic teacher like Herbert Spencer said. long ago thatthis was a savage way of getting gain. It meant profit at the expense of another's loss, and pleasure at tho expense of another's pain. An adequato war tax at the beginning would have saved us much moral detriment, and now that we have the war tax this wretched gambling business might end. 4. In tho namo of patriotism we are to have tho Prussian Sunday introduced into our midst. This is the latest Wellington invention for tho saving of our Empire! The Xing l and Kitchener and the British Army march to church on Sunday, but our Wellington patriots are going to march away trom church. I have seen the Prussian Sunday in Hamburg and elsewhere. Prussia is a land of empty churches, and our patriots wish to make Wellington a city of empty churches. There is not a hotter way for an individual and for a nation to avow ite atheism than by developing tho Prussian Sunday. There is not a better way of brutalising a. nation's life, and the brutalisation of Germany is due to its scorning of the moral ;nd spiritual side of life. Tliis_ Sunday marching away from church is an object lesson on Sabbath keeping to about 50,000 children in New Zealand, outside of our Sunday Schools. They will learn by the marching away from church of our Wellington patriots that the Church and tho Sabbath are effete institutions, and that man's chief end is to keep his body fit. Wendel Holmes used to say. "There is a plant in my nature called reverence, and I go to church to get that plant watered."

There is a call at this time for the utilisation of all the forces in the Empiro in this war. Hie most powerful forces are tile mental, moral, and spiritual. _ There is a sham patriotism that is acting, as a contagion of badness on these forces, and I sound a cry of warning against it.—l am, etc., HUBERT WOOD. Island Bay, Octobcr 27.

PROFESSOR VON ZEDLITZ AND HIS FRIENDS.

Sir, —I cannot resist sending .you the enclosed cutting, copied from t'lie local paper, which seems to so aptly fit tlio above discussion, especially after reading Mr. Hill's letter. His mental convorsation is daily repeated by thousands who think in tlio sarao strain, and one almost gasps at the spectaclo of so-called Britishers acting in a friendly manner, to say tlio least, with ono who lias expressed himself as in sympathy with the nation which hgs

so disgraced itself in the eyes of all the world. If ho is given credit for his long service to the cause of education, and for his learning ,mcl ability devoted -to our youth, wliy did ho not copy tlw frank letters of somo of his compatriots, who, in the columns of tlio London "Times," openly disavowed their nation and resigned their citizenship on account 1 of their nation's 'foul deeds, and at tho samo time declaring their intention to acknowledge England as tlieir country, and England's King as theirs in the future? Ho did not copy them in their action, but preferred to declare sympathy witli the most criminal nation ever born. —I am, etc., M.S.H.

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS.

Sir,—As there is a general feeling arising that the near futuro holds something in store, for us of an indefinite and heart-searching nature, any examination of things past and present is of more than passing interest, as what is happening to-dav is the outcome of past doings, and these happeuings will bring about rapid changes in the future; cause and effect following each other in unerring succession. While fundamentally there is no such tiling as national destiny—nations being simply an aggregation of units vastly different in their physical, intellectual,, moral, and spiritual construction —yet as far as we have evolved in social understandings and forms of government, we are contout to group the inhabitants of a country together under the term of "nation," and deal with them on masse in a vague, vain, and often inhuman manner. Questions of the most vital importance aro usually thoughtlessly and superficially discussed and disposed of by that supremo functionary called the State or Government in a manner that brings dire confusion and disaster in its trail. How can a people possibly commit their dealings and feelings to any delegate, to trade ivith, on their behalf, with some other'nation? I have an idea that international relationships, as far as they exist, are engendered through the process, of trade transactions, and the aggregate of direct communications of all descriptions; and that _ spasmodic efforts on tho part of political delegates hinder, rather than help, to promote true and lasting relations between people at a distance from olio another. Intermediaries of any sort are at all times unsatisfactory and dangerous, and always to be deprecated; but if misunderstandings should ariseas they are bound to do —through these agencies, their commitments cannot be regarded as of a permanent or constitutional character. No law -whether local, national, or international, is likely to be observed, nor can it be long enforced, unless it can be proved beyond question not only that it* is just and equitable, but that it is constitutional; that is, suitable to the nature and condition of those to whom it is to be applied? Laws, as far as we have had them, have been produced from sources- wholly incapable of giving, satisfaction or justice; and administration, at best a faulty process, has of necessity been no better than the character of those entrusted with its interpretation and execution. Attempts to mete out abstract justice have, without anyone in particular being blamable, failed miserably, and as for the higher, more obscure, and delicate process of international dealings, Europe to-day shows how far we have got in that direction.

While small matters of State may for a time be disposed of in an off-hand, thoughtless way, questions of Imperial and international moment, such as the Prime Minister and Minister of Financo may bo called upon to discuss in London, caunot bo settled on a superficial or basis, as they are more moral and spiritual than questions of less magnitude. Moreover, the circumstances on which a- settlement way be based are not permanent, but constantly changing. But before foreign relations "can hope to begin-to take proper shape, -the problem of . home jjolitics must firstbe satisfactorily; and definitely settled. Unless an Empiro is on terms of peace, amity, ancl equity within itself, moutlnngs of unity are vicious and vain, State ravings and wreuchings are useless and unsafe, and its negotiations for ' international agreements doomed to failure. They are only a waste of We may enter into financial, commercial, or social relationships with the Motherland, or even with .our enemies, but tho terms and obligations of any such union cannot be detailed, circumscribed, and set out on parchment with any hope of stability. Human nature, the main element in human affairs, is tho part to which wo have given least attention, and it is fatuous to suppose that the human frailties in the agencies that have brought about disorder can possibly produce harmonious agreements. Tho truth is that, the heads of tho nations in conflict did not expect, and were not prepared for, a catastrophe of such stupendous dimensions. Peace and safety was their motto, when suddenly confusion and destruction came upon them, and the end is not yet. But let none despair of the future; it holds blessings and glories that life, in the ordinary sense cannot give, nor death destroy. Great and difficult questions can only ho settled on high, deep, and broad lines, and the ideals, sympathies, and interests of the future will differ vastly from those of the past.—l am, etc., WM. BARB.

PATRIOTISM V. RACE HATRED.

Sir, —So there is only 0110 Mr. H. G. Hill _ after all—we have his own word for it—and even he, if my fastidious "arbiter elegantiarum," Mr. M. Myers, will allow nxs to say so, seems to have worn a trifle thin since I first heard from him. Mr. Hill's first terrifying onset has been exohanged for a gentler gait; the flash of his eye has perceptibly dimmed; and my original alarm has entirely subsided. The limping fashion in which he now returns to the fray may be rather painful for himself, but it is certainly safer for me, and possibly for him also.

Mr. Hill makes practically no attempt to deal with my arguments on tlio ground of principle, but gives the matter a. personal turn, into which I must respectfully decline to follow him. It is evidently in no malicious spirit that ho runs to personalities, but simply because he feels so strongly on tho question that he cannot credit anybody who'differs from him as widely as I do with honest motives. Tlio crucial point in my letter ,was the. brief confession of Imperial faith which I had substituted for tho ridiculous travesty that his humour had put into my mouth—an enunciation of principle which, whether right or wrong, certainly went to the root of the matter, and surely deserved to be discussed 011 its merits. . Its concluding sentence was: "It is, on the contrary, in tho interests of the Empire that we should use those services (i.e., the services of resident enemy subjects) just as freely as the national safety permits; and to deny ourselves this benefit at tho call of ■ racial hatred, social prejudice, or personal or political hostility would only bo to cut olf our noses in order to spite our faces." How does Mr. Hill treat this confession of. faith? Ho neither affirms nor denies, but 110 prefers to indulge in a catechism of which the object is to show that I am lioti sincere in professing it. If Mr. Hill could only sco it, the soundness of the principle at stake is of infinitely greater importance than tlio soundness of my character, which, if by this timo it is not proof against Mr. Hill's arguments and insinuations, will not ho materially helped by any word from me. My statement of prinniplo seems to mo quite axiomatic in its force, and tho opinion is strengthened by Mr. Hill's evasion of the issuo 011 the side-track of personalities. It must be admitted, of course, that with this principle, as with othors which are theoretically, guito tho .practical.

application is often of considerable difficulty. But tho occasional difficulty of applying a sound principle is ne reason for substituting one that is vicious. Tho conimon-senso procedure is to judge each case oil its merits. Personally, I cannot seo that the national safety domanded the wholesale removal of enemy aliens from all branches of tho Public Service. In the Defence Department ot on tlio waterside tbero wero obvious risks against, which tho individual hardships inevitable under a general rule could not reasonably be weighed. There are other Departments which might be regarded as debatablo ground. But in such' places as the Stamp Department, the Land Transfer Office, or a University College it seems to me that it is not national safety but national hatred that would desire the complete exclusion of aliens, regardless of the merits' of the individual cases. There is ono point in Sir. Hill's last letter of which I entirely fail to grasp his application. With 'what object does he direct my attention to the sad case of the German who begged to be interned becauso he had lost his employment on account of the war, and in his so-called freedom could not earn enough to keep his wife and children from starving? As I say, Ido not understand how the oase presents itself'to Mr. Hill, but to me it is merely the logical outcomo of the cruel policy of hatred. ! "He's a German. Turn him out of his billet. Don't let him get another. Boycott him. 'Eave 'alf a trick at 'im!" These aro but different stages in the policy of hatred, and though the last is the most violent I am cortaiiily not prepared to say that' it is tho most cruel. Whero are such indiscriminating patriots as Mr. Hill going to draw the line, and why? In far more moving language than I could command, both the moral and the business sides of the policy that I am advocating have been expressed by an officer of the Russian Government. A proclamation issued to the people of the: province ,of Akmolinsk, in Western Siberia, regarding the treatment of prisoiiers of war, and published in the London "Times" on March 24 last, contains this beautiful passage: — "Hie Russian people have too noble a soul for them to bo cruel to those in misfortune. Peasants! Receive not tlio prisonors sent to you as your enemies! In the. majority they aro peaceful and hard workers, and only by force of necessity have they taken part in the battles against the Russian nation. Bear yourselves toward them with dignity! Be just and have consideration for the sorrows of othors.

"Our great ruler, His Imperial Majesty, with tlio mercy inherent in liim, has given special privileges to those prisoners, and has relieved them from any enforced labour; and they are permitted to outer into work hy voluntary agreement. Many among them are carpenters, joiners, smiths, fitters, tailors, cobblers, and many of them are experienced agriculturists. Peasants! By instituting friendly relations with the prisoners, by not oppressing them, you will meet on their part a readiness to be ■useful to you on advantageous terms, in the handicrafts, the professions, and in housekeeping." Business men like Mr. Hill should noto tho strictly business character of the sccond of these paragraphs, and especially the reference to the "professions," as a sphere ill which enemy subjects may . render good service. Others will be more impressed by tho touching appeal to justice, to sympathy, to compassion. When will little New Zealand imitate the great-hearteduess of great Russia? In time of war wo must, of course, put t'ho national interest first, and run no risks. But, subject to this paramount necessity of self-preservation, does Christianity impose 110 obligation on us as individuals to individuals of the enemy nations? Do we not owe it just as much to ourselves as to the strangers within our gates to "lie just and have consideration for the sufferings of others"?—l am. etc., A.R.ATKINSON. October 28.

MR. HILL AND MR. ATKINSON.

Sir,—Judging by Mr. Atkinson's last letter-re-the von Zedlitz controversy, it .seems to me that he desires, by the use of a multitude of words, to obscure the main points at issue.. My time is too valuable tp follow Mr. Atkinson into the depths of the unknown, so I will content myself with again drawing your corresVondent's attention to vivo facts: (1) In- one of his letters he said I made certain statements before tie Aliens' Commission, and (2) That tho Patriotic Society, of which I am chairman, did not repudiate same. I asked Mi 1 . Atkinson to produce his proof 6, but it will bo noticed in his last letter he ignores this point altogether. 1 again challenge him to produce his proofs, and shall refer to 110 aspect iu this controversy until he has done bo.— I am, etc., H. G. HILL. October 29.

THE APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS.

Sir,—There are some apparently wellfounded complaints about the selection of officers for our troops. Tho men appointed are very fine young fellows, and could not be improved on personally, but in many cases they are too young and have nothad sufficient eTperience either in the military profession or in handling men. If the Public Service wants an office hoy or a typiste they invite applications, and applicants liave to pass an examination, but in its most important business the State relies on someone recommending his friends as officers, with little Tegard to their practical qualifications. This would not be tolerated in any other Department but the Defenco Department, and it explains perhaps why the Department is so often accused of bunglingthe simplest matters. Things' are too serious now for ignorance or incompetence to be tolerated, let alona rewarded.

Until ive cease to look -upon military appointments a-s a sort of social stepladder, and recognise that the military profession is the sternest of all scientific professions, and war must be carried out on tho strictest business lines—that for every pound -wo must get full value, and for every human unit wo must get full value in tho firing line—we cannot expect success against our well-organised foes.—l am, etc., ORGANISE.

LOCAL' ORCHESTRAL EFFORTS.

Sir, —Your musical critic, in his report of last night's performance of "Elijah" by tho Wellington Royal Choral Society; has adhered to the usual proceeding (which from long use has bccorao a habit) of abusing tho orcliostra. I do not for a moment urge that tho orchestra merited any unstinted praise, nor, indeed, any praise, but I certainly am of the opinion that a little encouragement, and toleration of that suffering body, would not be wholly misplaced, not only upon tho occasion in question, but upo.'i many past occasions. I have been playing in orchestras, amateur and professional, in the Dominion and in England, for over twentyfive years, so that I have at my command at least a little experience, upon which to base my remarks, or protest, whichever olio likes to call same. Now, I am well, awaro of tho difficulties in tho way of procuring tho very bost material for amateur performances, wherever it may be, especially in theso days when • picture shows afford such a field of temptation for the instrumentalist to profit in, as soon as ho is capable—but I do not think I am in error in stating that the materia! upon which tho conductor of the Royal Choral Society had to work, last night, is capable of doiug good .tkiflCiu ind_ do;ug_

tliem well, and, further, as practically an amateur body, would not only bo a credit to (if given a. fair clianco) any town of tlio sizo of this, but is superior to a good many similar bodies produced in English provincial towns of ilio samo population. This from my own observation.

Now, tho main responsibility for wliatovor faults, defects, or weaknesses are more or less evident in. orchestra performances, as given in this City, is for the most part not to bo laid at tho door of the actual performers themselves so much as insufficient rehearsals, without which no orchestra in. tho world can perform effectively. Take, .hii instance, tho "Elijah" of last night —will it. surprise yon, sir, to learn that actually the first full practice, and tho only practice which the orchestra had with tho soloists, and chorus, was the finaJ rehearsal on Wednesday night. (Is it any wonder that mishaps occurred at the performance, and one in particular to a soloist, for which tho orchestra was blamed, in a misunderstanding, not their own.) Why, sir! tho best professional orchestra in the world would not undertake a performance in such circumstances, becauso tho.v would not risk tlieir Tcputatioii;' whilst, alas! sir, wo have no reputation to lose—or at least any wo may have has been long since blasted by your worthy musical critics.

Take, again, tho performance of "Carmen" given somo time ago under tho baton of Mr. Maughan Barnett —tho first orchestral practice fell upon a certain Tuesday evening, and the concert took place upon the following Tuesday evening, and this for a difficult work, with whi?h all of us were totally unacquainted, excepting one or two of the popular themes. Is it any wonder that the poor orchestra was dragged through the mud and ■ counted _ "Out" by your critic. Why, sir! we did wonders to get through the thing at all, even as we did.

The same order of things obtains performance after performance—three or four rehearsals without full attendance of orchestra members, tlion one hurried final rehearsal for works with which, in many cases, wo wero previously unacquainted. Rosnlt, indifferent performance and usual slighting criticism next day. Some blame is doubtless duo to members of the orchestra for not turning up to practices, but then one has to remember that wo are nearly all engaged in business during tho day, and it often happens that circumstances oonspiro towards a compulsory absoneo from rehearsal. The remedy is simple—more rehearsals. Even when wo do get to rehearsal we are often tired after the day's exertions, and not quite fit to do our best, which also applies to concert performances as well.l lam not attempting to deny the defcets which unfortunately do exist in orchestral work in this (and other) cities, nor to defend .them; ■ I am isimply detailing extenuating circumstances, and asking the mercy which should t.emper justice. Thanking you for vour kind indulgence,—l am, etc., INJURED INNOCENT. October 29.

A LITTLE JUDGMENT WANTED.

Sir,—Whilo walking clown Willis Street in tho lunch hour to-day with three other men, I noticed a soldier in khaki, a member of the A.S.C., talking to a young lady outside the Hotel Windsor. Although he was perfectly sober, three military policemen came along,* and without any questions, and not even calling him aside, they arrested him in the presence of the j'oung lady. In my opinion he was unnecessarily handled, and had ho been spoken to quietly 1 feel certain he would have gone along with thorn without any trouble. My friends were of the'same opinion.—I am etc., ■ NATIONAL RESERVE MEMBER. October 28.

A PENSION BY RIGHT.

Sir, —If the Government wish men to enlist, let them know- tliat their dependents will get a pension by right and not at the will of a board, as a more act of charity. I know as a fact this is preventing men from coming forward. Tho Government have no right to inquire into tlie private means of tlie widow. If tho husband has given his life for his country his widow* should have a right to a pension, as in Great Britain, if a man is disabled he gets a pension as a matter of course, without any inquiries as to his private means, but if killed his widow lias to answer tho most extraordinarily inquisitorial questions-, and, if possible, tho Act requires tho board to escape giving anything. 'Why'should the''widow be penalised iu this way? Why should' tho country escape liability becauso the man has been killed and not disabled? The sooner the Act is amended so that a widow gets a pension by right, tho better for the credit of tho Government and country.—l am, etc., PLAY THE GAME.

WAR CORRESPONDENTS AND THE PRESS.

Sir, —You kindly published in your columns a few : days ago a brief letter under the above heading, bearing my signature,. which elicited a reply from a critic bearing tho jiome de plume "A Visiting War Correspondent." Usually I make it a point not to reply to writers who are ashamed of their own signature. The so-called visitor craves a little spa.co in your paper and finishes up with three-quarters of a column lettor by way of reply. In the first place, I have no reason to cliange my views as expressed: previously, but would further emphasise that n war correspondent '(per medium of the Press) can render good and valuable service or otherwise to the Empiro at a critical time. I should feel extremely sorry to nnder-estimato the- good work accomplished by Ashmead Bartlett or any other war correspondent. Of course I can fully , sympathise with the "visitor" in question, as he probably suffers from some strange hallucinations through his bo.it having taken a wrong course and landed him at tho wrong destination. It is'a long time since a celebrity of tiiis calibre visited these Parts, so perhaps while here he might bo induced by the various Press representatives to givo a lecture or two in aid of the • patriotic funds. It would certainly be an educational trent from more tlian one standpoint. Trusting the rest will do liim good, and that ho may soon recover from his mental aberration, and thanldn<r vou for snaco, -I am, ctc., A. R, lIOBNBLOW.

MR. SIEVWRICHT'S QUOTATION

Sir, Everyone wlio lias road bis Boswell's Johnson, and who to-day has .read J. D. Sicvwright's statement that Johnson applied the term "Liar; blockhead, and lool" to Fielding, must have asked what reliance could bo placed on Mr. Sicvwright's quotations. Immediately upon reading tho statement I turned up tho only reference in the books to Fielding, which is to bo found in llio 16th chapter and the 28th to 30tli paragraphs ,aud I find quite au interesting criticism of Fielding, and a comparison between him and Richardson, snowing Johnson's strong preference for Ricliardson, but nothing disrespectful to Fielding. Mr. Sicvwright's words are not to bo fouftd, and I venture to say were never applied by Johnson to any author as a writer or au individual. In tho 28t'h chapter, Bth paragraph, Boswcll complains to Johnson about publishers bringing out "tinder your name what you never said, and ascribing to yon dull, stupid nonsense, or making you swear profanely as many ignorant relators of your boil mots, etc." Evidently we have in these days these people of the stamp Boswcll objected to. But, sir, have you no responsibility in such a. matter as this ? Ought quotations or statements to ho published in your or any respectable paper , without duo regard to their credibility ?J

I. say nothing about numerous transparent misquotations from matter in your columns written, by myself, but when a correspondent offends by attributing to Johnson such words regarding Fielding are we to liave your columns used by liim for other unverified matter? For convenience, I send you my Boswell, which lias an ample index, so 'that you may satisfy yourself as to my statements.—l am, etc., T\ W. HISLOP. [The index of the edition of Boswell's Life of Johnson (Routledge and Sous, 1895) submitted to us with the abovo letter contains only the one reference to Fielding mentioned by Mr. Hislop, "but wo have not had leisure to search the pages for the quotation used by Sir. Sievwright. To clear the matter up, however, we asked Mr. Sievwriglit to bo good enough to supply us with the sourco of his quotation, and lie readily did so. The quotation will be found oil page 216 of the Book of Authors. There is. a reference to it also in Nimmo's 1880 edition of the Lifei of Johnson, pago 193, where Johnson is recorded as bavin-" r"fei-cd to Fielding as a "blockhead 1 'and a "barren rascal." Wo have taken tho liberty of modifying a sentenco or tw<> in Mr. Hislop's. letter.] .