urther offended, to acknowledge his answer,
in Saturday's paper.

After much matter, he comes unexpectedly upon a clear understanding of
my letter--"It will be observed," he says naively, "that Mr. Whistler
is merely seeking to create an impression that your Reviewer never saw
the work he criticized,"--herein he is completely right, this is
absolutely the impression I did seek to create--"which," he continues,
"is surely not a creditable position to take up"--again I agree with
him, and admit the sad spectacle a "Reviewer" presents in such
position.

He further "declares," and calls upon you, Sir, to "corroborate"
him, "that a printed copy of Mr. Whistler's misleading lecture was
placed in my hands for review"--and moreover, that "the notice did not
appear until the pamphlet was duly advertised by Messrs. Chatto and
Windus as ready."

Pausing to note that if the lecture had not seemed misleading to him,
it would surely not have been worth uttering at all, I come to the
copy in question--this could only have been a printed proof, quaintly
acquired--as will be seen by the following letter from Messrs. Chatto
and Windus, which I must beg you Sir, to publish, with this note--as
it deals also with the remaining point, the advertisement of the
pamphlet,

And, I am, Sir,

[Illustration]

The following is the letter from Mr. Whistler's publishers:--

DEAR SIR--In reply to your question we have to say that we
certainly have not sent out any copy of the "Ten o'Clock" to the
press, or to anybody else excepting yourself. The work is still
in the printers' hands, and we have for a long time past
been advertising it only as "shortly" to be published; indeed,
only a few proofs have so far been taken from the type.

Yours faithfully,

CHATTO and WINDUS.

_An Apostasy_

[Sidenote: Mr. Whistler's Lecture on Art, by Algernon
Charles Swinburne.

_Fortnightly Review_, June 1888.]

To speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth may
justly be required of the average witness; it cannot be expected, it
should not be exacted, of any critical writer or lecturer on any form
of art....

... And it appears to one at least of those unfortunate "outsiders"
for whose judgment or whose "meddling" Mr. Whistler has so imperial
and Olympian a contempt....

[Sid