Mr. A.B. WALKLEY said that he had long suspected KLINGSOR of being a
crypto-Aristotelian, but the arguments of the writer in _The Daily Mail_
had converted his suspicion to a certainty. He proposed to deal with the
matter more fully in an imaginary dialogue between KLINGSOR and Sir OSWALD
STOLL (who was a devout follower of HERBERT SPENCER) which would shortly
appear in _The Times_.

Mr. DEVANT professed himself delighted with the vindication of KLINGSOR,
who was undoubtedly, like ROGER BACON, a first-rate conjurer, far in
advance of his time, and with limited resources was yet capable of
producing illusions which would not have disgraced the stage of St.
George's Hall.

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY excused himself from pronouncing a definite
opinion on the subject, but pointed out that it would doubtless come within
the purview of the inquiry into Spiritualism undertaken by high clerical
authority.

Mr. JACOB EPSTEIN made the gratifying announcement that he was engaged on a
colossal statue of Mr. LLOYD GEORGE in the character of the modern
_Merlin_. His treatment might not commend itself to the leaders of
Nonconformity in Wales, but his own artistic conscience was clear, and he
felt he could count on the benevolent sympathy of the Northcliffe Press.

The Editor of _The Times_ strongly demurred to the statement that KLINGSOR
was an Arabian. The great authority on KLINGSOR was the anonymous
thirteenth-century epic poem on _Lohengrin_, the father of _Parsifal_, and
he had no doubt (1) that the author was either a Czecho-Slovak or a
Yugo-Slav; (2) that KLINGSOR, as the etymology suggested, was of the latter