CONCERNING THE SUPPRESSED BOOK. 435 



troversy between Frederic Harrison and Herbert Spencer,' tbat newspaper para- 

 graph would only be relevant if it referred to practices in which I had some part, 

 or which I approved. It is well known that I have nothing to do with anything 

 of the kind, and never countenanced it. Nothing of the sort has ever been heard 

 in Newton-hall, where for years past I have presented Positivism as I understand 

 it. The matter is a small bit of polemical mischief ; those who are engaged in 

 plunder are not likely to be fair. But I think it is quite unworthy of a place in 

 a volume for which you are responsible, and which you have authorized and 

 adopt. 



" You now propose to me to republish this volume in England, where you 

 admit it could not appear without the consent of all concerned. After what you 

 have done I must decline to act with you. I leave your conduct to the judgment 



of men of sense and of honor. 



" I am faithfully yours, 



" Mr. Herbert Spencer. Fkedeeio Harrison." 



[7'imes, June 1st.] 



MR. FREDERIC HARRISON'S CHARGE. 



To the Editor of the Times. 



Sir: Will you oblige me by publishing the following letter, which is a copy 



of one to Mr. Harrison, referred to by him in his letter contained in The Times 



of Friday : 



" 38 Queen's Gardens, Bayswater, W., May 27, 1885. 



" Dear Sir : Here are my replies to the questions put in your note of yes- 

 terday. 



" Just before the middle of January I received from my American friend, 

 Professor Youmans, a letter dated January 2, containing, among others, the fol- 

 lowing paragraphs : 



" 'And now we have something of a new embarrassment upon which I must 

 consult you. There is a pretty sharp demand for the publication of your con- 

 troversy with Harrison in a separate form, and the publishers favor it. The 

 question is not simply whether it is desirable, for we can not control it. There 

 is danger that it will be done by others, and if that should occur it would be 

 construed as a triumph of the Harrison party the Spencerians having declined 

 to go into it. 



'"If I thought no one else would print the correspondence (i. e., the 

 Nineteenth Century articles), I should be in favor of our not doing it. In the 

 first place, for general effect, rhetoric against reason counts as about ten to one. 

 The Comtists are reviving Harrison is coming over to lecture in this country, 

 and much will be made of his brilliant conduct of the controversy. In the next 

 place he has this advantage of you. Your main work bearing upon the issue is 

 to be sought elsewhere, while Harrison had accumulated all the materials of his 

 assault and gives his whole case, so that the popular effect could not fail to be 

 much in his favor. To the narrower circle of readers who can really appre- 

 ciate the discussion, the republication would undoubtedly be an excellent thing, 

 and I suppose after all it is only these that we should much care for. On the 

 whole it may be politic to reprint. "What do you think about it ? ' 



" There was thus raised a quite unexpected problem. I had supposed that 

 the matter had ended with your letter to the Pall Mall Gazette; and having 

 expressed (in the Nineteenth Century) my intention not to continue the contro- 

 versy, I hoped it would drop. Here, however, came the prospect of a revival in 



