he published his famous letter, beginning with
the words _J'accuse_, a letter which altered the whole course of events
in France. It is difficult now to realize the effect of Zola's action
in this matter; he was attacked with a virulence almost unexampled, a
virulence which followed him beyond the grave. Four years later, on the
day after his death, the Paris correspondent of _The Times_ wrote: "It
is evident the passions of two or three years ago are still alive. Many
persons expressed their joy with such boisterous gestures as men indulge
in on learning of a victory, and some exclaimed savagely, 'It is none
too soon.' The unseemliness of this extraordinary spectacle evoked no
retort from the passers-by." The feeling of resentment is still alive in
France, and it is necessary to take it into account in the consideration
of any estimates of his literary work by his own countrymen. It is a
mistake to attribute Zola's campaign for the rehabilitation of Dreyfus
to mere lust of fame, as has been freely done. He certainly was
ambitious, but had he wished to gain the plaudits of the crowd he
would not have adopted a cause which was opposed by the majority of the
nation. As a result of the agitation, he was obliged to leave France
and take refuge in England, till such time as a change of circumstances
enabled him to return.

On 29th September, 1902, the world was startled to learn that Emile Zola
had been found dead in his bedroom, suffocated by the fumes of a
stove, and that his wife had narrowly escaped dying with him. A life of
incessant literary labour had been quenched.

The reputation of Zola has suffered, it is to be feared, in no small
degree from the indiscretions of his friends. In England he was
introduced to the notice of the reading public by Mr. Henry Vizetelly,
who between 1884 and 1889 published a number of translations of his
novels. The last of these was _The Soil_, a translation of _La Terre_,
which aroused such an outcry that a prosecution followed, and Mr.
Vizetelly was sentenced to three months' imprisonment. Without raising
any question as to the propriety of this prosecution, it is difficult to
avoid pointing out that Mr. Vizetelly was singularly ill advised not to
have taken into account the essential differences between English
and French literature, and not have seen that the publication of this
particular book in its entirety was an impossibility under existing
conditions. It is regrettable also th