ell
mentions the courtesy of his reception, and relates how the prisoner
played the host and insisted on showing his visitor those attentions
which Spanish politeness considers due to a guest, saying that these
must be permitted, for he was in his own home. The interviewer found
the prisoner perfectly calm and natural, serious of course, but not
at all overwhelmed by the near prospect of death, and in discussing
his career Rizal displayed that dispassionate attitude toward his
own doings that was characteristic of him. Almost as though speaking
of a stranger he mentioned that if Archbishop Nozaleda's sane view
had been taken and "Noli Me Tangere" not preached against, he would
not have been in prison, and perhaps the rebellion would never have
occurred. It is easy for us to recognize that the author referred to
the misconception of his novel, which had arisen from the publication
of the censor's extracts, which consisted of whatever could be
construed into coming under one of the three headings of attacks on
religion, attacks on government, and reflections on Spanish character,
without the slightest regard to the context.

But the interviewer, quite honestly, reported Rizal to be regretting
his novel instead of regretting its miscomprehension, and he seems
to have been equally in error in the way he mistook Rizal's meaning
about the republicans in Spain having led him astray.

Rizal's exact words are not given in the newspaper account, but it is
not likely that a man would make admissions in a newspaper interview,
which if made formally, would have saved his life. Rizal's memory
has one safeguard against the misrepresentations which the absence
of any witnesses favorable to him make possible regarding his last
moments: a political retraction would have prevented his execution,
and since the execution did take place, it is reasonable to believe
that Rizal died holding the views for which he had expressed himself
willing to suffer martyrdom.

Yet this view does not reflect upon the good faith of the reporter. It
is probable that the prisoner was calling attention to the illogical
result that, though he had disregarded the advice of the radical
Spaniards who urged him to violent measures, his peaceable agitation
had been misunderstood and brought him to the same situation as though
he had actually headed a rebellion by arms. His slighting opinion
of his great novel was the view he had always held, for like all
men who