ng i 
1] [i 
oar |? 
851g 
1, Whey 
EA 
er, litle 
Kaspar; 
1am Ny I 
1CCasions 
et head 
tteration 
tand any 
wed then 
$0. When 
ne onl 
meaning 
at was a 
fer was 
. then go 
1 accuses 
cinled, od 
| agent d 
te scant 
neniol 
ad $0 i 
fy, fo the 
1 danegh 
1, wishes 
Kaspar Hauser. 
173 
support, is a letter written by an aged clergyman named Pflaum 
to Dr. Julius Meyer, October 16, 1871. It is significant that 
Meyer did not see fit to quote this letter in his own book. 
The worthy canon writes as follows : “The grass has long been 
growing on Kaspar Hauser’s grave, and yet many men, otherwise 
sensible (to say nothing of women), fall into the greatest excite- 
ment if anyone ventures to say that Kaspar Hauser was an arch- 
deceiver and ended his career by suicide. Your father and Hickel 
are considered his worst enemies, and they are accused of having 
secured a large fortune to themselves through their abuse of him. 
How often have I argued until IT was hoarse against such unjust 
and absurd statements! I knew your father and Hickel as truly 
honourable men—the latter was my dear friend and fellow- 
countryman.” 
And again, October 23: There are people still living who 
believe firmly in Kaspar Hauser, and instead of desiring light 
upon the subject, prefer that it should develop into a horribly 
scandalous revelation.” 
However, he comforts himself with the belief that right-minded 
persons are convinced by the testimony of Meyer and Hickel that 
Kaspar Hauser was a sly impostor, and that his whole story, his 
whole life and being, was a lie. Still, the writer admits that as 
often as he talks over the matter with educated men, they say, 
“ Please explain how it was possible that this young man, intel- 
lectually so undeveloped, could play the part for years without 
making any mistake which could betray his falsity? ” 
Hickel tried to account for this fact by asserting that Kaspar 
Hauser was a practised impostor before he appeared in Nurem- 
berg ; but Canon Pflaum thought such a hypothesis could not be 
accepted without stronger proof than was offered by the letter 
which Kaspar Hauser brought with him, and which was evi- 
dently a lie from beginning to end. 
Canon Pflaum’s epistle is interesting, chiefly as showing that 
nearly forty years after Kaspar Hauser’s death his defenders were 
as firm as ever in their belief, and ready to uphold it with all the 
old enthusiasm.