Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: June 21, 2025
Royce ordered for me. After a while the doctor came down the line and looked at each of us, stopping for a moment's chat. The more serious cases were below, and all that any of us needed was a little encouragement. "Won't you sit down a minute, doctor?" I asked, when he came to me, and motioned to Mr. Royce's chair.
"You can't exactly blame her, Tom, because she knew nothing of Royce's visit to the office; and as you sent the message, and you and Nellie are so intimate "Oh, I understand, Dick; and I shan't blame her. I'm too happy to blame anybody," and Tom's face broke into a broad smile. "I'm going to send a telegram to Cedarville this minute."
This is the purport and the spirit of Dr. Royce's ostensible review, "as a whole." Is it the "fair criticism" which the law allows? Or is it the "libel" which the law condemns? Is it the fair and critical judgment which your silence shall sanction, as Harvard's official verdict on my work?
Royce's insistence that my reply to his first libel should not be published at all without his second libel, and Dr. Adler's weak submission to this unjust and pusillanimous demand of his associate. The whole matter was thus most inequitably postponed to the July number, primarily at Dr. Royce's instigation.
"It is simple enough, my boy," observed the senior investigator, stroking his grey, pointed beard. "Three minutes after you'd gone for Mr. Royce's parson the whole thing came out. You know that pasty-faced servant in the black gloves who stopped the train?" "I should know him anywhere. Somehow he rather gave me the creeps."
And on this voyage I was reminded of Josiah Royce's splendid summary of the American philosophy of the American religion as set forth by William James: "The spirit of the frontiers-man, of the gold-seeker or the home-builder transferred to the metaphysical or to the religious realm. There is a far-off home, our long lost spiritual fortune.
Royce's libel; and, even if it should be concluded to come under any legal definition of 'libel, I maintain that it is self-evidently a 'justifiable libel. If I pay any heed to your notice, it is merely because your notice strengthens my case. You do not mention when Dr.
I could be of little use, since English was an unknown tongue at Beuzeville, and even Mr. Royce's French was sorely taxed, but we succeeded at last in securing a horse and light trap, together with a driver who claimed to know the road. All this had taken time, and the sun was setting when we finally drove away northward.
"Let's see thirty-five now, ain't you?" "Right," answered Packard. "An' big?" asked Royce. "Six foot or better?" "A shade better. About an inch and a half." "Not heavy, though? Kind of lean an' long, like Phil Packard before you?" Packard nodded; then, with Royce's sightless eyes upon him, he said hastily: "Right again, Bill; kind of lean and long. You'd know me."
Royce himself, recalling his original consent, procured the final rejection by the "Journal of Ethics" of my reply to his own attack. On June 19, I was notified that the July number had been made up without it. But already, on June 9, I had received from Mr. J. B. Warner, acting as Dr. Royce's counsel, this formal protest against any other use whatever of my reply: "On Dr.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking