MR. HUGHES ON THE CRAWLEY MUTINY.
To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR."
Sra,—Will you allow me to answer, once for: all, in your columns, the many protests I receive as to the end of my late controversy with "J. 0." A few words will, I think, make everything clear.
"J. 0." considered himself especially aggrieved by my statement in your paper of November, that he had prejudged the issues then about to be tried at Aldershot. This led to an unpleasant corres- pondence between us, and to put an end to this, and avoid a quarrel (at least those were my motives), we agreed to refer the matter in dispute to a common friend. This friend, a man of high standing in the literary world, decided against my view of the case, and sent me the paper to sign which has been published in the Feb- ruary number of the Cornhill Magazine. Of course, it only remained for me to bow to the decision, and sign my name to the paper in question.
I am told that I have signed a paper expressing regret which I do not feel. The wording of that paper is not mine, therefore I cannot say what the writer's meaning was. My meaning was, and is, that I did and do regret having made, without qualification or reserve, a serious charge against " J. 0.," which a man for whom I have so high a respect as I have for our referee has deliberately decided that I was not justified in making.
The grounds of his decision (contained in a careful award) were that the paaeages relied on by me were takes from Mr. Fortescue's speech, and that this appeared on the face of the article. I quite admit that this construction is a fair one. Had the usual method of placing statements of third persons between inverted commas been followed by " J. 0." in this case, I should not have fallen into the error of taking them for statements of his own.
To other objectors I would say that the merits of the case remain precisely as they were. The only point decided is a personal matter between " J. 0." and me. Did his article prejudge the issues as I said it did—aye or no ? Our referee says "No," and, as above stated, I have accepted his decision frankly and finally.—I
[We willingly insert this communication ; but while we ap- preciate highly the chivalry Mr. Hughes has displayed in his con- troversy, we cannot but express our regret that he ever referred to a third person what is really a matter of opinion—and a matter of opinion, we rust add, in which we ourselves feel no doubt that Mr. Hughes T., es strictly.,right and his referee wrong.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
