WCP6911

[1] [p. 1]

To A. R. WALLACE, Esq., Professor, F.R.G.S., &c.

Sir,

The apology as dictated by yourself, has been duly signed by me this 4th day of November, 1872, and I wish you distinctly to understand that it is so signed and delivered exactly in the sense in which you yourself understand it. If your conscience assures you that every word of it is deserved and true, just so do I give it. I have the high authority of the National Prayer Book and of all the Right Rev. Dignitaries of the Church, for making statements which those who demand them and those who receive them, know to be charitable formalities and wholly devoid of any legitimate or bona fide construction.

The apology you now receive, I do not comprehend or understand, except in the sense in which you understand, comprehend or believe it. If you do not think it worth while to explain and show in what sense you ask for and receive it, you cannot charge the donor with want of honour or good faith, when its meaning is purposely and allowably misunderstood by yourself.

If it will in any way temporarily answer your purpose, or serve to appease your conscience, or satisfy your scientific associates, as well as the Court which sanctions and approves it, I shall have some faith in the remark that "Words are given to conceal our thoughts."

I wish I could assure you or myself that these formalities either in the Church or in the Law, had any other than a fictitious value and a charitable signification. But, in spite of his pious sponsor’s assurance to the contrary, the child too often belies the fond hopes of the Church, while the formal document you will this day receive, may prove equally fallacious, and be scouted as it may be thought to deserve, not only by yourself, but by scores of honest, intelligent, and practical men, in all parts of the kingdom, over whose thoughts and sentiments, I need not assure you, I have not one atom of control.

Whether the publication of an apology of which neither the party who gives it or the party who receives it, believes or understands one single word, is likely ultimately to benefit your reputation. I leave you to decide. The whole matter will, ere long, be tested and tried on its merits; and the public will then be able to judge and decide as to the true value to be attached to the document you have been so anxious to possess. If your conduct is found to be above suspicion, the terms of the apology will receive a significancy of which it is wholly devoid at present; but if, on the other hand, you should fail to establish your innocency, the fact of your having attempted to console yourself with its pretence will, I should think, add considerably to the discredit and mortification of your defeat. For to ask me to believe in and confess you innocency when you hesitate to say or show that you believe in [2] [p. 2] it yourself is fairly to trifle with your own conscience and to expose yourself to reflexions which honest men generally would shrink from incurring. Our mutual desire ought to be to put an end at once and for ever to this harassing & apparently interminable dispute. Can you suppose for a moment that the hired services of your attorneys or the prejudiced advocacy of the public press will suffice to achieve this most desirable object?

"Quem Deus vult perdere prius dementat"¹ — and nothing but the grossest infatuation could suggest the expediency of the course you are now pursuing. I am not aware that you have as yet been able to bring forward one single friend who dares publicly to espouse your cause. On the other hand, I have had scores of men, of the highest

private character and professional reputation who have published their unanswerable proofs — that you are scientifically wrong and that I am practically right! While your vindictive conduct has raised up for me a host of warm-hearted sympathisers all over the Kingdom.

At the same time, I do not hesitate to apologize in the most ample, manner for the illegality of the expressions addressed to you from time to time. But you must be as well aware as I am, that this formal apology for a breach of the law will not and cannot absolutely secure you from annoyance from other quarters, half so effectually as if you were to satisfy me or the public that you had made the smallest reasonable effort to convince me that you had just grounds for demanding it, and that, after all, I must be mistaken. This honourable conduct would at once silence me and all my friends. But, failing to do this, you may if you are infatuated enough to do so, demand and receive an apology every day in the week, knowing that, at last, they will only add ten-fold to your disgrace.

I am Sir, | Your obedient Servant, | JOHN HAMPDEN

Warwick Street, New Cross, S,E.

NOTE — Those who may be as yet unacquainted with the circumstances which originally led to all this misunderstanding between Mr. Wallace and myself should consult the pamphlets of Mr. Middleton, of Southampton, of Dr. Riches, L.L.D., of Bangor, of Mr. Bathgate, of Liverpool, of Mr. Beardsley, of Nottingham, of Mr. Brough, of Stafford, of Mr. Carpenter, and "Parallax" of London, of Mr. Naylor, of Leeds, and several of my own: all of them written with especial reference to the now notorious "Bedford Level"² experiment. Therefore, it must be evident that any attempt to burke discussion on the subject, will most surely and signally fail. The authors of these pamphlets are not anonymous hirelings, but men of independent position, most of them entire strangers to both parties, and have all expressed themselves most desirous to put a charitable construction on Mr. Wallace's conduct; and have only regretted his persistent refusal to aid them in arriving at the truth. Mr. Wallace may however console himself with the reflection that Truth will inevitably triumph at last, and hopes to do so now. — J. H.