23 OCTOBER 1909, Page 3

Some correspondence has been published between Mr. George Edwardes and

the editor of the Westminster Gazette which bears on the question of the independence of criticism. Mr. Edwardes, being annoyed by the manner in which the critic of the Westminster Gazette wrote of one of his plays, announced that he withdrew his order for advertising in that paper. Mr. Edwardes explains that he did not take action when the original notice of the play appeared, but only when a disparaging reference to the play was introduced unneces- sarily into the notice of another play. In this reference he discovered malice. This is as though one should require an art critic never to illustrate his thoughts about one picture by reference to others,—in other words, to forfeit the whole value of his experience. Mr. Edwardes's explanation, of course, makes his case no better. While arguing that be himself is injured, he does not hesitate to make the most offensive and injurious charge that can possibly be made against a man whose business is criticism. It is not only in the interests of critics, but of the public, who rightly expect critics to be free agents, t.. ` Mr. Edwardes's absurd contention should be

shown in itk. light.