o only to be
judged. It is an instance of the imperfect sympathy which Charles Lamb
finely celebrated--only here it is acknowledged, and the "imperfect
sympathy" pled as a ground for claiming the full insight which only
sympathy can secure. If Mr Henley was fair to the Louis he knew and
loved, it is clear that he was and could only be unjust to the Louis who
went away in 1887 and never came back.

"At bottom Stevenson was an excellent fellow. But he was of his
essence what the French call _personnel_. He was, that is,
incessantly and passionately interested in Stevenson. He could not be
in the same room with a mirror but he must invite its confidences
every time he passed it; to him there was nothing obvious in time and
eternity, and the smallest of his discoveries, his most trivial
apprehensions, were all by way of being revelations, and as
revelations must be thrust upon the world; he was never so much in
earnest, never so well pleased (this were he happy or wretched), never
so irresistible as when he wrote about himself. _Withal_, _if he
wanted a thing_, _he went after it with an entire contempt of
consequences_. _For these_, _indeed_, _the Shorter Catechism was ever
prepared to answer_; _so that whether he did well or ill_, _he was
safe to come out unabashed and cheerful_."

Notice here, how undiscerning the mentor becomes. The words put in
"italics," unqualified as they are, would fit and admirably cover the
character of the greatest criminal. They would do as they stand, for
Wainwright, for Dr Dodd, for Deeming, for Neil Cream, for Canham Read, or
for Dougal of Moat Farm fame. And then the touch that, in the Shorter
Catechism, Stevenson would have found a cover or justification for it
somehow! This comes of writing under a keen sense of grievance; and how
could this be truly said of one who was "at bottom an excellent fellow."
W. Henley's ethics are about as clear-obscure as is his reading of
character. Listen to him once again--more directly on the literary
point.

"To tell the truth, his books are none of mine; I mean that if I
wanted reading, I do not go for it to the _Edinburgh Edition_. I am
not interested in remarks about morals; in and out of letters. _I
have lived a full and varied life_, and my opinions are my own. _So_,
_if I crave the enchantment of romance_, _I ask it of bigger men than
he_, _and of bigger books than his_: of