Former Editor Attacks Criticism of MagazineTo ttifl editor:As former editor of “The North American Review’’ and the man at least partly responsible for its revival this side of the Mississippi River, I feel it incumbent upon me to speak up in its defense...State Senator Francis Messerly attacked the most recent'issue of N.A.R. on the grounds that it published a poem that “borders on pornography,” that it published an article (unspecified) rejected by “The New Yorker,” and further charged that N.A.R. is “a libera! propaganda organ.”To reply to Mr. Messerly is repugnant to me, because . . . where criticism is based on complete ignorance, there is no argument, I reply . . . because many people , . .will mistakenly regard Mes-serly's words in print as authoritative and well-informed. ... I would like to say to them:Mr. 'Messerly is wrong, and you can prove- it to yourselves if you so desire. ... First,-consider the charge that “The North American Review” is a “liberal propaganda organ.” ... Mr. Messerly has produced no evidence that N.A.R. has excluded any writing of merit on the basis of its being other than liberal. His charge, at most, might prove that the best material available tothe editors for any given issue was written by authors of liberal' persuasion.Secondly, when Mr. Messerly attacks the N.A.R. for publishing a poem that “border^ on the pornographic,” the facts, once again fail to bear him out ... Pungency [the poem] has. Directness it has. Ribaldry it has. But none of these add up to “pornography”. Or carry us even to the border of that shabby country.Finally, Mr. Messerly attacks N.A.R. for publishing an article rejected by “The New Yorker.” What order of crime is that? Then, he forgets that his target is “The North American Review” and begins to spray the bird-shot of his ignorance over a wider literary landscape. “The New Yorker,” he says, is not very “choosy” about what it publishes. To anyone who has -read- this magazine, this remark is, like all the others herein discussed, patently ridiculous ..........To anyone who rc^ds, who loves literature, who values it — it is perfectly clear that Mr. Messerly, on any of the three counts with which he attempts to club “The North American Review,” is simply utterly wrong. Totally uninformed. “Most ignorant,” as one of Shakespeare’s characters, says, “of what he’s most assured.” ... — Robert Dana, Mount Vernon, la.