community, and that the letters signed ‘H.’ were your own skilful, if somewhat bitter, caricature of the Philistine as drawn by himself.  I admit that something of the kind had occurred to me when I read ‘H.’s’ first letter—­the one in which he proposes that the test of art should be the political opinions of the artist, and that if one differed from the artist on the question of the best way of misgoverning Ireland, one should always abuse his work.  Still, there are such infinite varieties of Philistines, and North Britain is so renowned for seriousness, that I dismissed the idea as one unworthy of the editor of a Scotch paper.  I now fear that I was wrong, and that you have been amusing yourself all the time by inventing little puppets and teaching them how to use big words.  Well, Sir, if it be so—­and my friend is strong upon the point—­allow me to congratulate you most sincerely on the cleverness with which you have reproduced that lack of literary style which is, I am told, essential for any dramatic and lifelike characterisation.  I confess that I was completely taken in; but I bear no malice; and as you have, no doubt, been laughing at me up your sleeve, let me now join openly in the laugh, though it be a little against myself.  A comedy ends when the secret is out.  Drop your curtain and put your dolls to bed.  I love Don Quixote, but I do not wish to fight any longer with marionettes, however cunning may be the master-hand that works their wires.  Let them go, Sir, on the shelf.  The shelf is the proper place for them.  On some future occasion you can re-label them and bring them out for our amusement.  They are an excellent company, and go well through their tricks, and if they are a little unreal, I am not the one to object to unreality in art.  The jest was really a good one.  The only thing that I cannot understand is why you gave your marionettes such extraordinary and improbable names.—­I remain, Sir, your obedient servant, Oscar Wilde.

16 Tite street, Chelsea, August 13.

AN ANGLO-INDIAN’S COMPLAINT

(Times, September 26, 1891.)

To the Editor of the Times.

Sir,—­The writer of a letter signed ‘An Indian Civilian’ that appears in your issue of today makes a statement about me which I beg you to allow me to correct at once.

He says I have described the Anglo-Indians as being vulgar.  This is not the case.  Indeed, I have never met a vulgar Anglo-Indian.  There may be many, but those whom I have had the pleasure of meeting here have been chiefly scholars, men interested in art and thought, men of cultivation; nearly all of them have been exceedingly brilliant talkers; some of them have been exceedingly brilliant writers.