Meanwhile, I had furnished a paper for him, entitled "Men and Women; or, A Brief Hypothesis concerning the Differences in their Genius." My object was to show, that, although unlike, they were not unequal; that each had a standard for itself. I did not urge that Arabs, who are reckoned pretty good judges of horse-flesh, always give the preference to mares for endurance and swiftness,--that the female bird of prey is larger and fiercer than the male,--that the female body-guard of the King of Dahomey are terrible Amazons,--nor that, where women reign, men rule, and _vice versa_; but that, by endowing woman with a more sensitive organization, our Father had given her what was better than a mane for the lioness, a beard for the goat, or a voice and plumage to the female singing-bird, etc., etc. This also appeared, and was handsomely paid for. "In this number," he says, "you will see, that, though we have given an additional half-sheet, we have only had room for your 'American Writers.'... I hope you are going on with the series; and that you do not dwell more than is necessary upon the _Poetae Minores_, whom no one cares about. This is what has sometimes been objected to your articles; and among other remonstrances I have received, I extract the following from the letter of a gentleman for whom I have a great respect. He says your article contains 'misstatements, and some of them of a mischievous tendency; but what mostly concerns you to know is the odium which is likely to be thrown on your Magazine, in America at least, by the manner in which (from malice or blundering) some meritorious individuals are dealt with, _who have every claim to the shelter of private life_.'" As the meddling gentleman from whose letter the passage was taken did not particularize, all I could do in reply, and that I lost no time in doing, was to give him the lie direct, and offer my name to the publisher. I called for specifications and proof, which never came; and have an idea that the writer was an artist--a great coxcomb--of whom I had spoken too well, on paper, though not well enough to satisfy his inordinate vanity. "I make no apology to you," continues "Old Christopher," "for giving you this extract from my friend's letter. He is, I trust, writing under some strong feeling of something or other, which has concerned some one whom he knows; but I am sure he is perfectly sincere in what he says. I hope, therefore, you will be particularly on your guard against saying anything which any one would be entitled on good grounds to say was unfair or ungentlemanly. I regret that, in the hurry of the sheet going to press, what is said of Hall (John E. Hall of Philadelphia) was not modified. '_Blackguard_' is a shocking appellation; and had my friend seen this number, I should not have wondered at his remarks. You will, I am sure, excuse me," etc., etc.