The Sun.
London, England, 1861-10-31 00:00:00

LORD IVOIairANBY AND 211 R. GLADSTONE.

The following correspondence has passed between
Mr. Gladstone and the Marquis of Normanby on
the subject of the recently published Vindication
of the Duke of Modena

"Downing-street, Oct. 25.

"Dear Lord Normanby,—l propose to make known to
the public the fact of which your letters have informed me,
that you are not. the author of the recently published Vin-
dication of the Duke of Modena, but only of the Introduc-
tion to it.

"I should have felt bound, even while charged with my
present duties, to reply to some arguments and statements
contained in this vindication had they proceeded from your
Lordship, but I do not intend to enter into controversy with
a harmless antagonist.

" The title-page, which misled me when I took the Vin-
dication to be yours, has also apparently misled such writers
in the periodical press as have commented upon the work.
It runs as follows A Vindication of the Duke of Modena
from the Charges of Air. Gladstone, from official docu-
ments and other authentic scources. Selected and re-
vised, with an Introduction, by the Marquis of Normanby,
K.G.'

"In its evidently studied ambiguity it forbears to tell
whether the Vindication, the selection and revision, and the
introduction are all, or only some one or more of them by
the person whose distinguished name winds up the sentence
in bold and attractive capitals. I shall, by publishing this
letter, supply the information you have kindly given me ;
and I may add my perfect confidence that your Lordship
was not the author of the title liege any more than of the
body of the pamphlet.
I have not asked to be allowed to add your two notes :
but it will, of course, be done should you desire it.
"I remain, &c.,
" W. E. GLADSTONE."

you
DshldeoaurMr. Gladstone, -r
hotter oßfotyhset 02n5, t
hO
was
for-
warded to me here. lam sorry that you should still see
ambiguity in the title-page, and lam indeed surprised
you
that ambiguity to be studied. By whom
and for what purpose it could have been so, indeed, I am at
a loss to understand. I approve of the title-page because I
thought it accurately stated the facts, for I have already
said, in answer to your inquiry, the Vindication was givOn
to the world with the authority of the Duke of Modena. The
materials for the task were previously submitted to me, and
the execution revised, or rather superintended, by me. In
answer to what I conceived to be a personal inquiry as to a
matter. of fact, I told you that it must be evident that the
body of the work was not written by me, as it spoke of me
in the third person. The Introduction, incidentally touch-
ing the general question of Italy, was as evidently my own.
The Vindication had been intrusted by others to very corn,
gI a
tte
hhh
ei eliciting
think
on :
igt
petent hands. Should you carry out your intention of pub-
lishing the note I have just received, I should think it.
necessary you should add these few lines, as
wlontewbaeehwlenw7hidseeern
might be inferred that I had disAaimed concurrence some
portion of a defence which I conceive to be unanswerable..
thef r om
truth. the authori t a t i v e character
it As I see that you yesterday
to avoid delay I make up duplicates 0
su, as
all
naturally do not intend to publish.
tiehsretchsoaamtferwt 'yiwnoulocrapdusiblish younratlia.osnt.note to
onfl'expla
nwei
es
ehs
st
ao r aydhtdoo
um lyd af
requestodrdm
Me, you .3
44 Yours very faithfully,
ii. "NORIVANISY."