individual obtain for his defence anything like 
the same order of publicity as the attack makes 
for itself. 
It may even happen, as the present case shows, 
that if the liar chooses his opportunity with 
care, and is not hampered with a sense of decency 
or fair play, his victim may be cut off from any 
chance at making a public reply at all, or even 
allowing it to be known that his silence is enforced 
and not voluntary. 
 
6.  When the issue of the Sunday Express for 
November 26 reached Mr. Crowley in Sicily, 
he at once wrote to you himself.  He pointed 
out that he was materially defenceless, at the 
time, against attacks in London, however false.  
He urged you, in your own interest no less than 
his, to insist on that measure of fair play which 
it was clearly in your power to give, and asked 
for an independent inquiry into the charges. 
The letter was forwarded to you by his pu-
blishers, but neither acknowledgment nor reply 
was ever received by them or him.  Instead 
on February 25 and March 4, the Sunday Express 
printed a grotesquely stupid narrative defaming 
his life at Cefalù, accompanied by insulting 
taunts to fill his purse by means of a libel suit.  
These new lies were reprinted, in part, by 
various Italian newspapers, though not by the 
Sicilian journals ; and at the end of April Mr. 
— 8 —