Search >> The Diamond Lens Controversy
An electronic version (off-campus Lehigh access) of this text is available at American Periodicals Series Online, a subscription database of U.S. newspapers from 1740 to 1900 available to individuals and institutions that purchase a license for its use. (Viewing the electronic version of this text will lead you to an external website. Please report dead links to email@example.com.)
Picton, Thomas. "The Diamond Lens Controversy." New York Times. 27 Feb. 1858: 4.
Type: newspaper ; Genre: letter to the editor, literary criticism
Thomas Picton, former editor of the Sachem, adds his voice to the debate over the originality of The Diamond Lens.
People Mentioned in this Work
- North, William
- Thomas Picton asserts that William North was particularly proud of two of his works: The Living Corpse and the unpublished Microcosmos.
- O'Brien, Fitz-James
- Thomas Picton compares O'Brien to William North stating, "[a]ny person acquainted with the two parties cannot fail to draw a disparaging distinction between the scholastic attainments of the late Mr. North and the Hibernian pretensions of the ever-present and somewhat pertinacious Mr. Fitz-James O'Brien, whose sole merit in Saxon literature must be derived from his apochryphal descent from the Kings of old Erin."
- O'Brien, Fitz-James. "Note from Mr. Fitz-James O'Brien." New York Times. 1 Mar. 1858: 4. [more about this work]
- [North, William]. "The Living Corpse." Putnam's Monthly. Jan. 1853: 32-39. [more about this work]
- [O'Brien, Fitz-James]. "The Diamond Lens." The Atlantic Monthly. Jan. 1858: 354-367. [more about this work]