I humbly beseech Your Excellency for the favour of some fourteen days' leave of absence within the town for the purpose of observing a particular diet to combat the gastric trouble of which I have symptoms. At the same time I feel it a duty to myself to justify myself in a step which, though it is entirely unconnected with my artistic duties, I should not like you to misunderstand.
Now that it is admittedly the right of the least educated to speak his mind on the state of public affairs, the educated man will feel it a strict duty to make full use of this right. No observer can fail to view with anxiety the acute clash of opinion which party collisions of the last fortnight have brought to a head amongst our townspeople. I have myself joined an association in which the views of the party of progress find very decided expression, on the one hand because I recognise that the party of progress is the party of the future, on the other because I consider this party particularly needs intellect and moderation of sentiment to restrain it from wild excesses. I have, however, seldom attended its meetings except as simply an observer. Thus I have recently formed the opinion that a very serious spirit of defiance is being fostered there, mainly by the violent attacks of so-called Monarchists.
According to present-day ideas the opinion that a republic is the best form of government is in itself no crime. Most people, however, go on to link this opinion up with a belief that the Monarchy must necessarily be done away. I have never known a speaker or political writer pay attention to the idea that the Monarchy might remain the sacred focus round which popular institutions might gravitate; they always reason as though the abolition of monarchy were the logical outcome of the republican idea. I accordingly felt it incumbent on me to show the public quite clearly that, while we might strive to achieve all that is attainable, the Monarchy does not in itself stand in direct opposition to our aspirations; in fact, that our ideal would accord well with, and be more durable under, the Monarchy. Now, the present constitution of the Court with its numerous forms and ceremonies from earlier ages, is an offence to the democratic party. I have heard men of by no means the roughest class speak of it in terms which have given me deep insight into the mind of the people. They argue, approximately, that “If the King goes, the Court will go!” I ask, then, is the Monarchy to be threatened on account of mere forms and ceremonies? Surely, no! These forms may pass away and with them a source of the dissatisfaction which tends to be directed against the Throne.
Following this line of reflection, I pondered on what the effects of such a change would really be, and came to the conclusion that with it the causes of grievance against the Monarchy would disappear. I naturally then felt the desire to convince both parties, Monarchists as well as Republicans, upon this line of argument, and if possible to lead them to make common cause on the basis of the preservation of the Monarchy with the consequent safeguarding of civil order. At the same time I wanted to try to throw light on the noble word “Republic,” the real meaning of which is so misunderstood by the Republican Party, and finally, to demonstrate that within the Republic the Monarchy would at last find its noblest sphere of action. This desire alone urged me to compose my pamphlet.
When last I attended a meeting of the Association I again heard the kind of talk which inextricably links the republican idea, now undoubtedly the chief idea of a large proportion of the populace, with the idea of the overthrow of the Throne. In the full conviction that I ought to put sound and wholesome ideas before the minds of those present, I decided, upon the spur of the moment, to read my pamphlet forthwith, and even if this step of mine failed of its good purposes in general, it yet undoubtedly achieved one in particular, for never, certainly, in the assemblies of this Association have the praises of our King been so enthusiastically proclaimed, nor so enthusiastically received, as at the close of my talk in which I lauded his high virtues. It is just this applause and the reason for it which has awakened envy and opposition against me. I will not further develop here my views of many of these popular leaders, but I am filled with the gravest fears, for it was just my enthusiasm for the Monarchy which particularly displeased them.
I am quite indifferent, however, to what I may have to suffer at the hands of these people. It will be a very different thing if I have to fear the complete misunderstanding of the other side, if the King himself, whether or not he thinks my formula practicable, should think it ill-judged in me to have held up a poetic vision of the Monarchy as I conceive it before a very prosaically led section of the populace. I must admit that I am much grieved at seeing many indications that I have in fact been misunderstood. I recognise thereby the danger at such times as these of expressing some independent line of thought, not entirely the property of one or other party, and it did not need my wife's entreaty to make me resolve never again to take part in such a public declaration. I sorrow that the time for intellectual weapons is past. A gloomy and terrible foreboding weighs on my spirit that the struggle will soon be conducted by the roughest elements of the populace. If my dark predictions prove baseless, so much the better. But if the step I took has aroused bitterness it has failed of my intention. If it has brought offence instead of reconciliation, it has been a mistake for which I earnestly ask pardon of all those I have injured.
Richard Wagner
Source: Letters of Richard Wagner, Volume 1, ed. Altmann/Hull (London: Dent, 1927), No. 140