APPENDIX D 



REPLY TO A REVIEW IN THE NEW YORK TRIBUNE i 



To THE Editor of the Tribune : I am of course much 

 gratified at finding in your issue of February 13 so full and 

 careful a notice of the philosophical views presented in my 

 recent volume. The reviewer shows great candour, suf- 

 ficient learning, and an unusual hospitality to new ideas in 

 serious regions. I am indeed glad to have any work of 

 mine the object of a criticism marked by so many qualities 

 of the true and enlightening judge. But the one duty of 

 a reviewer that precedes all others is to apprehend his 

 author correctly ; and as, with the best intentions, your 

 contributor has somehow managed to misapprehend me in 

 several essential matters, I must beg enough space in your 

 columns to put myself right. 



THE SYSTEM INDEED PLURALISM, BUT NOT CHAOTIC 

 INDIVIDUALISM 



First of all, though I cannot imagine why, the reviewer 

 sets out with the statement, to me simply astounding so 

 far as it concerns myself, that " both Dr. Royce and Dr. 

 Howison are motiisis and idealists." (The italics are 

 mine.) I should have supposed that if any one thing 

 blazed out more than another in my book, it would be the 



1 Reprinted, ".ith omissions and immaterial changes, from the Daily 

 Tribune, March 5, 1902. 



409 



