London Star - Thursday, April 25, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
OSCAR WILDE.
Lord Queensberry Defines His "Sym-
pathy" for the Dramatist. TO THE EDITOR OF "THE STAR."
SIR,--I must take exception to the word "sympathy" that is placed in my mouth. I never used it. In my time I have helped to cut up and destroy sharks; I had no sympathy for them, but may have felt sorry, and wished to put them out of pain as soon as possible.
"I must take exception to the word 'sympathy' that is placed in my mouth. I never used it. In my time I have helped to cut up and destroy sharks. I had no sympathy for them, but may have felt sorry, and wished to put them out of pain as soon as possible.
What I did say was that as Mr. Wilde now seemed to be on his beam ends and utterly down I did feel sorry for his awful position, and that supposing he was convicted of those loathsome charges brought against him that were I the authority that had to mete out to him his punishment, I would treat him with all possible consideration as a sexual pervert of an utterly diseased mind, and not as a sane criminal. If this is sympathy Mr. Wilde has it from me to that extent.--Yours, &c.,
"What I did say was that as Mr. Wilde now seemed to be on his beam ends and utterly down. I did feel sorry for his awful position, and that, supposing he was convicted of those loathsome charges brought against him, that were I the authority that had to mete out to him his punishment, I would treat him with all possible consideration as a sexual pervert of an utterly diseased mind, and not as a sane criminal. If this is sympathy, Mr. Wilde has it from me to that extent."
24 April. QUEENSBERRY.
SIR,--As Mr. Buchanan allows his indignation in such a worthy cause to run away with his courtesy and discretion, I claim your indulgence in reply. I need hardly apologise for the grave misfortune of having irritated your correspondent by pure chance--nor do I desire to do so.
I have sufficient manners not to wish to use expletives which lose all meaning, and terms which merely indicate egotistical intolerance of divergent views. The tone Mr. Buchanan adopts appears to me grotesque. Why does he not discover such abject "cowardliness" in the epistle of "Helvellyn," to whom I responded directly and only indirectly and accidentally to Mr. Buchanan's touching appeal for disinterested "charity"? The opinions of a most "ordinary citizen" may be expressed, I presume, even when they differ from these of a less ordinary person of some renown. Everyone does not enjoy or desire the particular notoriety which Mr. Buchanan is accustomed to. It is not desirable for everyone to court it. In the one case it is a not unwelcome necessity; in the other it may be otherwise. My name and address are with the editor; the views expressed are with the public, and stand by themselves.
I disclaim Mr. Buchanan's misapplied verbs in his first paragraph; they are as irrelevant as his adjectives, and both are equally undignified. The opinions given in my letter were temperate and free from extravagant verbiage, which is only necessary to cover a weak position. No one disputes the statement that
"QUITE UNEXPECTED EVIDENCE"
caused Sir Edward Clarke to take the only possible course. It was also the last course that would have been taken without the best reasons. Mr. Buchanan can place his own interpretation on the proceedings, but I neither discuss the "case that has not been tried" nor assume guilt. The traversing of my only serious statement is evidently intended to be humorous. At least it appears to be so, and was a very equivocal process if a serious one.
Virtue--valor, courage, and virtue as we understand it--did exist in pagan times, but I spoke of pagan viciousness. A very slight knowledge of literature elucidates the meaning, and it is not necessary to split hairs. There was no Christian Charity to sneer at and fall back upon as the last resort then, and "courage" was a self-dependent quality.
Mr. Wilde's literary efforts have been ironical and harmless, perhaps--to some extent. Can we go further a step, and say they have been elevating and beneficial? Mr. Buchanan's pen has often adorned the columns of the Daily Telegraph, and he may have read in its columns's leading article which appeared on the day following the conclusion of the Queensberry-Wilde case. That article went far beyond any utterances of mine, and was an admirable expression--
VIGOROUS AND JUSTIFIED.
The fact is Mr. Buchanan drops the affectation of broad, brotherly, generous disinterestedness, and shows that he views the whole business through toned glass, and to remedy it implies that everyone else is color blind.
I am surprised to learn that I, with others, clamor for lynch law and retribution; it is one thing to expect justice, retribution, and postpone Christian Charity to the time when a man justifies his expectation of it, but quite another to clamor for "lynch law." That is evidently Mr. Buchanan's humor.
Approval of Sir J. Bridge's judicial fairness can only be reiterated, and the great majority of the public will not question it. It could not be expected that in the circumstances he would allow his impartiality to be warped by weak-minded sentimentality.--Yours, &c.,
DIKE.
Whitehall, S.W., 24 April.