FEOUDE AND BURKE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume X, Issue 2788, 4 January 1873, Page 2

FEOUDE AND BURKE.

Mb. Proude, the well-known historian, Las been lecturing in America on tbat sequence of events which forms the subject of his spleudid fragment of English history. He has many faults as a writer; but of all his failings, his special craze is hatred of Eoman Catholicism and Ireland. Headers of his history cannot but observe this great blot, which prevents Mr. 3?roudo recording events, and interpreting motives, with that judicial impartiality which is so essential in a historian. lie is, in fact, a partizan;—an enthusiastic zealot, we should rather term him ;—who sees no good in that which he dislikes, and no bad in that which he likes. In the great cities of America, Mr. IVoude has lectured, as we have said, and his lectures have been marked by the same blemish as his history. But in such a country, where so much of the Celtic element is to be found, it would be wonderful indeed if Mr. Froude passed unchallenged He has met an antagonist by no means inferior to himself in erudition and eloquence, namely, a Dominican, Father Burke. This priest lectures alternately with Mr. j?roude ; and their contest has been a fruitful theme for the leading journals in the United States. It is, however, conceded that both champions are prejudiced; the one as greatly in favour of the Catholic Church and its belongings as the other, is against these. The result is, that the truth not unfrequently suffers through the partisanship of the lecturers.

We notice this singular controversy, partly on account ofits novelty, partly for the impetus it must give to the study of modern history, and partly also because of its political bearings. The only result, in a political point of view, that we consider likely to accrue, is that an intensely antiEnglish feeling will be created among a large section of the people of the United States. The history of British misrule in Ireland "was the Subject of several of these lectures; and the topic lost none of its colouring by the mode iu which it was handled. Then, again, Mr. Froude, in one of his lectures, touched the Celtic race on its most sensitive point—military fame. He declared, as the result of experience, " that the Irish are no " good at handling a rifle." The American newspapers point to the

part the Irish took in the civil war ae a complete reply to this, and inquire whether Mr. Kroude thinks the American people are a set of arrant fools to believe his statement, inquiring, at the same time, whether the honor of the British arms has not been largely upheld by Irish troops. On the whole, from a perusal of the reports of some of these lectures, we think the Dominican ia more than a match for the historian as a lecturer; —but we are satisfied that they are both equally prejudiced in regard to races and creeds. It will be matter for deep regret, however, if Mr. Froude, by his American lectures, should revive Fenianism in the United States. The probability is entirely in favor of his doing this, which would be a greater mischief in itself than ho could ever hope to repair.