I am no lover of Charlie Chaplin hut I have more admiration for him than I have for the writer of London Letter (Alas Poor Charlie, Jan. 1). Chaplin, of course, is a much more oopular and better known man than Baxter, which makes this nasty and unwarranted criticism quite ridiculous. —John William Ireland, Calgary.
• Alas Poor Charlie? Poor Beverley Baxter!—Lilian Smith, Campbellford, Ont.
• Baxter wants all the LIMELIGHT to himself.—H.R. Milligan, Vancouver.
• He writes tripe.—George Morrison, Camelon, Falkirk, Scotland.
• I was amazed to see Baxter’s articles so severely criticized by a section of your readers. It is evident that these people simply refuse to face facts.—J. Vernon, Montreal.
• My gorge rises at most of the drivel you accept from that self-exiled Canadian who tries to be more British than the staunchest Briton and who, in my opinion, ends up by proving to be neither. —Sid Simpson, Transcona, Man.
• Baxter has a British Commonwealth outlook which, in effect, means a worldwide outlook. “Little men” cannot understand how one can be loyal to Canada and at the same time be proud of the Commonwealth connection.—H. Wilson, Toronto.
• Has that man Baxter gone completely nuts?—H. I. Hunsbedt, Vavenby.
• I have heen privileged to follow Baxter’s work from the beginning . . . my appreciation for his articles has
increased to the point that the London Letter is the gem, the pièce de résistance with each edition.—Mrs. Naomi W. Williams, Los Angeles.
• Baxter is an honest and straightforward writer whom I much admire.
Mrs. Robt. Fowler, Fort Macieod, Alta.
• EGO! EGO! EGO!—S. A. O’Hara, Midnapore, Alta.
• In London Letter (Jan. 15) Baxter says, “And the Prince of Wales, the son of Edward VII, was to inspect us in person.”
The eldest son of Edward, Prince of Wales, later Edward VII, was the Duke of Clarence who died Jan. 14, 1892— that is, while his father was still Prince
of Wales. This left George, the second son, the heir presumptive. When Edward became King, George was Duke of Cornwall and York, and as such he visited Canada in 1902. He never was Prince of Wales.—Austin Evans, Toronto.
George was created Prince of Wales, Nov. 9, 1901.
• Please ask Baxter (Rebellion at the Seaside, Dec. 15) to return Morecambe immediately—it has been established on the west coast for too long for Yorkshire, dead or alive, to claim it for the east.—Mrs. N. Hall Humpherson, Toronto.
Back goes Morecambe to Lancashire.
• I much enjoyed Baxter’s Rebellion at the Seaside. He is constantly amusing in the role of a prophet. —J. P. Griffith, Fort Macieod, Alta.
• May one reader complain about the suddenly so bitter anti-German article (Krupp, Schacht and Rommel, Dec. 1) by that tired royalist, Beverley Baxter, which can hardly promote good feeling or international sportsmanship at this time. — Dr. Roger Shaw, Hartford, Conn.
• ln Krupp, Schacht and Rommel, Baxter gives a clear picture of international bungling that no one should miss.—G. M. Kerkhoff, Vancouver.
• Beeswax and baxter,
Aunt Jemima’s plaster,
The more you try to pull it off
The more it sticks the faster.
Never knew what baxter was, but it must have been tenacious stuff. Long may Maclean’s and Beverley Baxter be as inseparable. — Mabel Cowan, Galt, Ont.
• However did Baxter get mixed up in geography, where he writes of passing Carlyle’s birthplace before reaching the border between Scotland and England. I always thought the great author was a Scot and born tit Ecclefechan in Dumfriesshire in Scotland.—William Young, Cayuga, Ont.
Young right; Baxter wrong.
• I have just read Beverley Baxter’s letter, My Heart’s in the Highlands, and I should like to express my appreciation of such a beautifully written article. 1 am a Canadian from away back and, after reading the letter, 1 could find it in my heart to be regretful that I can not number among my ancestors any who came from north of the border.—R. H. Triekey, Saskatoon.
• As a Scot I dissent strongly from his sentiments and arguments.—George Ross, Dunedin, Scotland.
• In Edinburgh there are still a few noisy royalists but Scotland generally does not care whether there is a royal family or not.—Colin Lamb, Victoria.
• So the great Baxter finally spent a week end in Scotland! This pompous, self-appointed custodian of the con-
science of the British people says there is no political or moral significance to his article. Why should there be?— thousands make the same trip annually and think nothing of it. Ease off, Beverley, you’re getting yourself confused with somebody important. —George Williamson, Vancouver.
• Baxter redeems your magazine. Never let him go. With the magic of his pen he keeps aglow the wholesome interests, the splendid loyalties, the refinements, indeed the very orderliness that preserves the best in human relations.—Christina Mondey, Bowden, Alta.
Thank you for the editorial, A Fond Farewell to Harry S. Truman (Jan. 15). It says things I’ve longed to have said by some voice that could be raised.—Louise Burehell, Windsor, N.S.
• History will accord Truman a place of greater honor than that permitted by contemporary critics.—F. A. Lewis, Halifax.
Your Dec. 1 cover by Bill Winter was of profound interest to our twoyear-old son. He was especially inter-
ested in what the cat was planning for the two birds. He picked out all his little friends too.—Mrs. A. S. Lamb, Melfort, Sask.
• I wish I could express my great pleasure on seeing your Jan. 1 cover (by Franklin Arbuckle).—E. R. Kobald, San Rafael, Calif.
• I wish to express indignation about the Jan. 15 cover by William Winter. Voluntary Sunday school workers certainly don’t deserve to be ridiculed in this way.—W. D. Bayley, Winnipeg.
Congratulations! The Karsh articles on Edmonton and Winnipeg were superb.—A. P. Gleave, Biggar, Sask.
• More beautiful photographs I have never seen. — Mrs. D. Vuchovich, Sarnia, Ont.
• What impressed me most about Vancouver (I lived there four years) were the delightful smell of freshly cut lumber, the Sikhs, the North Shore mountains from the city—in fact everything depicted in Karsh’s article. Mrs. D. N. MacMillan, Maywood, Calif.
• Some citizens of Saint John are of the opinion that Karsh’s photographs far from do their city justice. We have more than slums and broken-down wharves.—Edith A. Davis, Saint John.
• An apology is due Saint John.Mrs. M. E. McKinney, Saint John.
• Horrors! This is Saint John?—Janice Horgan, Saint John.
• What is Karsh trying to prove?—H. Hyslop, Toronto. A
The story you want is part of the Maclean’s Archives. To access it, log in here or sign up for your free 30-day trial.
Experience anything and everything Maclean's has ever published — over 3,500 issues and 150,000 articles, images and advertisements — since 1905. Browse on your own, or explore our curated collections and timely recommendations.WATCH THIS VIDEO for highlights of everything the Maclean's Archives has to offer.