AUTHORSHIP OF A SPECIAL ARTICLE

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXI, 13 November 1928, Page 7

AUTHORSHIP OF A SPECIAL ARTICLE

V QUESTION FOR MR ATMORjE

(To.the Editor)

Sir—To-night will be Mr Atmore s last meeting. To-night Mr Atmore will for several hours address a.large and enthusiastic audience and, apart from his usual clear and definite statements ot policv, wilt engage in affording explanations" of his past and future conduct and will delight them with his inimitable sarcasm. ' .'_ . ,''7i Whilst so engaged I should be glad at he would devote a few minutes to dealing with and answering the question, asked in this letter which, so that there-may be no misunderstanding in the : minds; oj either Mr Atmore or of the am asking you to publish .in-your. col-' umns to-night. In- order that may be clear I will set them" out. ■. ~~ On the occasion of the.--Shakespeare ter-centenary celebrations some-time: 4 agean article appeared in the Nelson "Evening Mail" dealing with Shakespeare, his life and works. The heading of the'article ran as follows :— "Shakespeare s Day. April 23rd, The WoflcTs Greatest Geiiius (by Harry Atmore)." .--', -•. T - .- This article was read with considerable interest and appreciation by a large section of the public, and. there is" na.doubt that large numbers, like myself, gave Mr Atmore very considerable credit not jonly? for his interesting subject" matter,''but! also for the extraordinarily able murmerj in which he handled his. prose.". The, essay appeared to me to be one of the; best examples of amateur' prose which i|| had been my good fortune to read, and,? to me it was almost incredible that Mr<Atmore had been able to write.:itV..'l»i was not until later that I discovered/ that the whole article was almost;a- yer v . batim transcript from Ingersoll'sTSssay; t on Shakespeare, taken from and Essays" by Col. R. G. IngersoU (first series), published by Watts' and. Co.. London. -. J' . With the limited space at your disposi. al, sir, it is impossible to askyou to set:: out the t Qriginal and counterfeit essays in* parallel columns, but the public jjijdll no:]Jj doubt take my assurance when I say-that) I have myself compared the two cfocujj ments line' for line, and that in the pub*.; lished copy out of some 440 lines 0n1y... 22 lines are attributable to Mr Atmorefj and in no sense has the inclusion of'* these lines improved the original. "; It may be said that this matter is-not:' one for politics, but I contend that the character of a candidate who is aspiring to political honours is in every'sense of public importance-, and I cannot believe that a man who has apparently trated such an impudent piece of plagiarism is the sort of person who would' ap r peal to the general bulk of the public!'. It is inconceivable that a public man'iai Mr Atmore's position could" have delibe'r* ately palmed off on the public the WorK of one of the world's greatest critics as his own. and yet it is difficult to see how he could have done it in ignorance'-' In replying to the question it would perhaps be unnecessary for Mr. Atmore to inform his audience that.the.article was published without his authority, nor can I see that his somewhat hackneyed references to black labour are likely to assist the public in understanding his explanation. I shall, therefore, put the question, which I trust he will answer with candour. If. is this: ;' ! .

Did Mr Atmore publish the article on Shakespeare in the "Evening Mail" of the 23rd April, 1928, ,unc% his own name deliberately or in igttbrance ; and in either ease why did he not either in the heading or in the -course of the article frankly acknowledge the assistance of the , great critic 'from whose work the article was culled?.. Alternately, if the article was published by mistake, why was not a correction published in a subsequent; issue ? •, ': .. I am, etc., W. CARROL HARLEM. Nelson. 13th November. [As our readers wilpfeel that, somestatement on the subject is clue from us we desire to make it clear that the article referred to was published By us in good faith. We believed it to be an original compilation.—Ed., '"The Mail."] -