6 JANUARY 1906, Page 25


[To THE EDITOR OP THE " kirseratort."

Sin,—I call it handsome in your reviewer of "The Empire and the Century" to find space at all to discuss my essay among so many better and better-known names. But he has got my point about the Uberniensch wrong. I meant it to be (allowing something for the dangerous figure called irony) almost exactly the point he makes himself. That we differ in our estimates of Mr. Rhodes I do not deny. I, as he remarks, knew Mr. Rhodes, and no doubt that has something to do with the difference. But I do agree with the Spectator that if a Rhodes, a Cavour, or a Bismarck runs up moral bills, he has to pay them just as much as any Kipps or Buggins. That, surely, is what the context says ; will say to your reviewer on a second glance. If not, the eloquence he is good enough to find there must be of that kind which is at the expense of clear meaning,—a kind I would fain shun. As to bracketing the three names, that was in oratio obliqua. For myself, I should not press it as to historical scale : morally, I think Rhodes fully the equal of his company.—I am, Sir, &c.,