| + — | Ath. 1905, 2: 73. Jl. 15. 200w. |
“That he has failed ludicrously, pathetically, merely marks his limitations by proclaiming his total innocence of the one quality that would make success possible. The machinery of the story is clumsy, its progress slow, and its conclusion an absurd evasion of whatever problem might conceivably be raised. Whether from carelessness or sheer ignorance, the book is a storehouse of weak, awkward, slovenly writing.” Edward Clark Marsh.
| — — | Bookm. 22: 69. S. ‘05. 1560w. |
“The reason why Mr. Benson has not succeeded better is that he lets us too much behind the scenes.”
| — | Ind. 59: 575. S. 7, ‘05. 190w. |
“In the would-be serious parts the author carries no conviction, and in lighter passages he is far below his own best level.”
| — | Lond. Times. 4: 209. Je. 30, ‘05. 540w. | |
| N. Y. Times. 10: 392. Je. 17, ‘05. 120w. |
“The quiet, intense conviction of Mr. Benson’s pages cannot fail entirely of a certain impressiveness.”
| + — | N. Y. Times. 10: 479. Jl. 22, ‘05. 1100w. |
“This tale is cleverly written, but disappointing.”