170 THE EDITOR OP THE "SPECTATOR. "] Silk—Under the heading of
"How it Strikes an Australian " you are publishing weekly articles by the well-known Australian writer, Mr. Abbott, and in your issue of Sep- tember 16th a letter appeared from " Civilian " taking good- natured exception to Mr. Abbott's rather extravagant condemnation, the week before, of the British uniform, and —by implication—of the English people for liking their soldiers to look " smart " in times of peace. In an editorial footnote to this letter you are rather "down" on " Civilian," and express yourself strongly in favour of Mr. Abbott's views, though I can assure you—being more than half an Australian myself—that ninety-nine out of a hundred Colonists would think with " Civilian" on this point and differ with Mr. Abbott and yourself. Further on in the same issue there is another letter from a New Zealander, Mr. Vaile, on the " Tonelessness of Englishmen." In the footnote to that you appear to congratulate the writer on the correctness of his " first impressions " by reminding him that this same Mr. Abbott " received at first a somewhat similar impression of the English," but that he " ended by changing his view." Why, then, do you attach a weight to Mr. Abbott's utterances which he himself disclaims ? The author of " Tommy Cornstalk " can write so pleasantly that the publication of his first impressions of the Mother-country —if he is prepared to accept the consequences to him- self—is certain to amuse or interest the reader. But if, Sir, in editorial footnotes you intend to insist on his being taken seriously and attended to as the spokesman for a continent, it is more than likely, I am afraid, that a feeling of resentment will be aroused, not only in the minds of those Britons at home whom he is criticising, but in the minds of those other Britons abroad also for whom
you would make him speak.—I am, Sir, &o., F. A. A.
[Our correspondent forgets that Mr. Abbott in his strictures on showy uniforms which are quite unfitted for "the red business " of war went no further than we have repeatedly gone ourselves in our protests against the stage-super ideal for the soldier. The great Bishop Berkeley asks somewhere why it is that the sailor is the only man in this country who is allowed to wear a sensible dress. The answer is still to seek when Mr. Abbott puts much the same question.—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
