20 July 1892

Madrid

Madrid, 20 July 1892

MR. JOSE RIZAL

DEAR PEPE,

I am bewildered by your various letters that I have read concerning my unfortunate article of the 15th April last. I am sorry indeed that you should continue with your procedure little consistent with good friendship. If you believe yourself offended, why do you not write me, author of the article, and not as you do writing to everybody except to the one who can explain to think of his idea? Is it disdain? Is it anger? I do not like to think of and do not allow yourself to be controlled by more or less unpleasant impressions. At any rate, I do not have to alter my purposes for that, nor do I consider my self-esteem lessened by communicating with you; I dispense with it whenever it concerns you; also because I know you. You write Pilar, Ponce, Rojas, Reyes, and I do not know who else and you do not bother writing me even one word. What are your complaints? On what do you base your grievances? Why should you be the target of my article? Sad is my mission if I do not do anything that is not directed against you! It is odd! How is it that no one has considered himself offended except you? Are they your actions that are depicted in my article? Are you by chance an imprudent man? Are you among those who believe that a revolutionary movement can be started with a sentry-box? Are you among those who believe that patriotism does everything? No? How is it then that it hurt you so much? Yes? Then, what fault have I that without intending to allude to you, you consider yourself alluded to? It is necessary not to rush in judging a question. But before continuing, I must reject indignantly your insinuation, I don’t know if it is your letter to Reyes, that the article was written in anger because of what was being said that you were depriving us of our means of livelihood. Never have we subordinated to our personal interests the higher interest of our country. We work with full consciousness that we are doing good, guided by the best good faith, without thinking that anyone would take away our bread, which after all matters little. Do we not have perchance, each one of us, a house in the Philippines where we can live more or less comfortably? Do we not know how to work to earn our living? We do not attack any idea for the sake of our bread and less for this did it ever occur to us to attack anybody. Our friendship and our patriotic sentiments are more important than our stomach. Moreover, who said that you were the cause of the lack of funds of La Solidaridad? Who told us that you took away anything from us? You eternal suspiciousness makes you see shadows where there are none and you look for reasons without thinking that some of them can do us harm. Let us look back. We know well who is undermining the peace; it is not you. News of hostile and provoking tendencies reached us, of actions, separation, bands, and pessimism capable of bringing to naught whatever advancement has been made on the road of freedom. The optimists or better the prudent, resigned ones, call them what you please, favored caution, the continuation of the work we have been doing while another comprehensive plan, surer of success, is being prepared. The pessimists, the skeptical, rejected every kind of open work. To them the press is useless, as well as everything done in the demand for progress. They say that the only thing that can save us is force; let us abandon peaceful methods and throw ourselves into the battlefield. That was the state of mind when the director inspired me and ordered me to write the article. The optimists are in my articles, those who oppose the pessimists, who commit the madness of surrendering. That was the true state of our camp when I arrived and I told the skeptical: I am enamored of your ideas as I hold the opinions as you do. But, have you means to fight? Have you thought of preparing them? Have you insured your retreat since you may not win? Is great love of the homeland enough to win? Does it not seem to you that while we cannot fight with some probability of success we ought to suppose ourselves to be good assimililists, possibilists, or opportunists, as you like, and obtain for our people a lenitive medicine for their sorrows or at least bestow reason to them so that they now ask what formerly we alone aske: Deputies. In short, I appeared and said to them: How? When? With what? While we are preparing other things, shall we stand by with folded arms? Shall we throw out of the window what is done and won? In order to fight we need something more than patriotism, I said then. But sir, my idea can be understood by merely taking note of two words in my article – Anverso y Reverso. Indeed this reverso [reverse] gives the measure of my good faith, patriotic sentiments, and methods. What more? Indeed that article is an appeal to reflection so that they may act reflectively. It is, to say it at once, the same intention of adding up the forces of defense, guiding the ends towards a common ideal, taking advantage of all the resources, all the combined initiatives without excluding any. It is, how can it be said better, to endeavor not to endanger the success of the designs in favor of the common cause. Why do you consider yourself hurt when nothing in it is against you, why should I not do it face to face? Do you believe maybe that I do not have enough courage to act openly? Your character Simoun says that those who ask for reforms deceive the country; do you think we would have done well to be offended? What more? Indeed my exclamation. “And Villailusa remained enslaved!” is the synthesis of my sorrow and my hardships with respect to my country. How must I make a profession of my faith so that no one may doubt my good intention? I do not pretend to have made my discovery because what I say is in the mind of sensible persons; but believe me, I have written the article for those who persist in their ideas, for whom profiles and the strokes must be enlarged in order that they may understand by the rough contrast that the good road is another. That I have sold myself? May it be at the proper time at last I have done it on gratuitous pretense for the same reason that nobody buys. Any way everybody knows what my ideas are and I do not act modestly in making them public on honorable pretense to the extreme of becoming an enemy of some friend of my family. That . . . .

[The last page of the above letter is missing, which must have been lost while it was still in the possession of Mr. Ponce. The letter therefore has no signature, but by the handwriting and style, it seems to be an authentic letter of Lete.][1]

03-756 [Reformists]