Default Metadata, or override by section

  Dear Walt Whitman,

I thank you for the Camden paper which you kindly sent me, containing the paragraphs anent the Ingersoll Lecture. By their refusal to let the Hall the Philadelphians have belittled themselves in the eyes of all good men and true, and their attempt to stifle free discussion shews that the spirit of intolerance and the narrow-minded ecclesiasticism which consigned Giordano Bruno to the stake still survives in your "City of Brotherly Love."  I hope you had a good time & I shall look forward with pleasure to seeing a report of the meeting.

We had a grand meeting here on Oct 6th when I read to the friends J. W. W.'s "occasional out-of-door notes" upon yourself and your teaching, which were much appreciated by all. Some of the things that were said in the discussion or rather friendly talk, which followed prompted J. W. W. to write a "Rejoinder" which he requested me to read to the friends on Monday night last (Oct 20th) when we had another delightful symposium—some of the friends, Wentworth Dixon, Thos. Shorrock & myself  contributing notes to the discussion and the others taking part in the interesting after talk

R. K. Greenhalgh has received the copy of the pocket book edition of L. of G which you kindly sent to him & is greatly pleased with it. On Sunday last he took it to the Parish Church Sunday School, where he is a teacher, & read extracts from it, including the "Prayer of Columbus," to his scholars.

I had a very cordial letter from Dr. Bucke the other day in which he said that he would probably see you on the occasion of the Ingersoll Lecture. That I know will be a great pleasure to you & I  have no doubt you will have a good time together.

By the way it so happens that Charles Bradlaugh—the English Ingersoll—is lecturing tonight in Bolton Oct 21st—same date as yours—on "Doubt, the mother of Progress."

I don't think I have told you that in April last J. W. W. made me a present of a copy of the Thayer & Eldridge (1860) Edition of L. of G. with the portrait which brings out the Dutch elements in your features.

I enclose a cutting from The Family Herald—a paper with a wide circulation—which may be of interest to you.

I hope the grippe has quite left you & that you are now in better health.

J. W. W. has got back to work but still complains of a lack of nerve energy.

With best love to you & kindest regards to all your household, I remain,

Yours, affectionately, J. Johnston
  From The Family Herald London Oct 11th 1890

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

Geo. H. Dawson.—When we spoke of Mr. Ruskin's critic, we did not argue the case between the two men. One is a practical painter who has undoubted genius, and he certainly knows what he is talking about. He thinks that Mr. Ruskin has mistaken notions about art; and we fear you will find that very many artists share that opinion. For our own part, we are pagan enough to say that we do not very much care even if any one tells us that Mr. Ruskin knows nothing about brushes and pigments. His prose is an abiding glory and delight; and, as to the question of his practical ability, we are very well content to let the artists fight it out among themselves. You are quite right—the critic is born, not made. By-the-way, you speak of Whitman's critical powers. Do you know that he is one of the most exquisitely delicate of literary critics? Some of his judgments on such men as Carlyle, Longfellow, Emerson, Scott, Whittier, Edgar Allan Poe, and even Homer and Shakspere, seem to us almost flawless. In your list of critics you do not mention Matthew Arnold. Had it not been for Arnold's most heartbreaking affectation, he would have been among the highest; but he spoiled himself by writing in a fashion which, although it was often felicitous, was more often insufferable. You mention Schlegel. Name of fear! We wish the Germans had never seen Shakspere, and we wish that a serious accident would irrevocably destroy all the works of all the commentators. When a man writes a learned essay to prove that Macbeth was the third murderer, we have got quite far enough.