Jørgensen [a], whom my readers will probably know, says in his
parable "The Shadow" to the poet: "You do not know what you are
doing, when you are sitting and writing here and your soul is
filled by the power of the wine and the night. You do not know
how many people's fate is reshaped, created, changed by a single
line of yours on the white paper. You do not know how many a
human joy you are killing, how many a death sentence you are
signing, here, in your quiet solitude, by the peaceful lamp,
between the flowery glasses and the bottle of burgundy. Consider,
_that_we_others_act_out_what_you_poets_write._ We are as you have
shaped us. The youth of this realm repeats your creation like
shadows. We are as chaste as you are; we are as immoral as you
want us to be. The young men believe according to your belief in
or denial of any faith. The young girls are as decent or
frivolous as the women are your glorify."
[a] Jens Johannes Jørgensen (1866-1956)
In this, Jørgensen is perfectly right. His opinion coincides
exactly with my own. Yes, I will even go far beyond his. Poets
and novelists have a much greater, creative or destructive,
purifying or soiling influence than most people suspect. If it is
true what the newer psychology says, that "a person is not a
single being, but an entire drama", then an author's work might
possibly be even regarded as more akin to a divine creation than
to a creation of human labour. Because I am very much aware of
this, I am also aware of the immense responsibility which every
one of us writers has, as soon as we take up the pen. Whenever I
do so, I do it with the honest intention, to create only something
good, but never something evil. Thus, you can imagine how
astonished I was, when I found out that I had been said to have
written "abysmally indecent" books for the publishing company of
H.G. Münchmeyer. The expression "abysmally indecent" was invented
by Cardauns, who is known for having the peculiarity to indulge in
the most exaggerated harshness whenever he opposes someone. Then,
in his articles, all things are not just proven, but "evidently
proven", not made up, but "cunningly made up", not distorted, but
"distorted beyond recognition". Therefore, in describing these
Münchmeyer novels, because the were said to be written by me, the
simple word "indecent" was not enough, but it was the most natural
thing in the world that they had to be even "abysmally indecent".
The first trace of these "indecencies" of mine was discovered over
in the United States. Councillor of Commerce Pustet, who owns
branch offices there, wrote to me about this rumour and wished me
to respond to this. I did so. I answered him that I did not know
anything about any indecencies and that I would investigate the
matter, if necessary even in court. I would then inform him of
the results. This settled the matter for him. He was an
honourable gentleman, a man with a keen mind and a good heart, who
would never have even considered to go about anything in a
clandestine manner. We liked each other. He is with absolute
certainty not even in the slightest degree to blame for the
indescribably filthy and disgustingly passionate agitation
persecuting me. Because the rumour came from America, I had to
investigate there first. This required a long time, and I was
unable to obtain any specific information. I only knew that the
rumour was about those novels I had written for Münchmeyer, but I
found no one who would have been able to name the chapters and the
passages to me where this indecency would be contained. And to
laboriously search through all five novels, this are about eight
hundred printed sheets, on account of a mere, vague rumour,
without even knowing what to look for, was something for which I
did not have any time to waste, and this also would have been
asking too much of me, anyhow. Whoever had the guts to accuse me
would be required to know these indecent passages precisely and
had the duty to name them to me. I waited for this to happen.
But no one came forward, who would have done this. Pustet did not
do it either. Probably, he knew just as little about those
supposed indecencies as I. Unfortunately, I had been forced, some
time later, to stop working for his magazine for a second time.
The first time I had done something like this was when Heinrich
Keiter was still alive. He had rather significantly shorted one
of my works, without asking me for my permission. I have never
put up with any corrections or abridgments. The readers are to
get to know me as I am, with all faults and shortcoming, but not
as an editor cuts me down to size. Therefore, I informed Pustet
that he could not expect any further manuscripts from me. He
tried to change my mind by means of letters, but in vain. Then
he, the old gentleman, came personally to Radebeul. This was
moving, but equally unsuccessful. Then, he sent his nephews,
quite naturally with the same negative result, because after all,
neither of them had been the one who had violated my rights.
Then, the right man came, Heinrich Keiter in person. He promised
me that it should never happen again, and on account of this, I
retracted my refusal. Certain people are still holding this
against me. They expressed it like this: "Heinrich Keiter had to
make a kotow [a] before Karl May." I possess letters on this
topic, written to me by no ordinary person. But he had only
himself to blame, not me. I have respected Heinrich Keiter, as
everyone respected him. I recognise all of his merits and still
feel sorry for having been compelled, at this time, to show that I
had a backbone. There was no other way. I had to have the hard
cover edition of my "traveller's tales" printed on the basis of
the texts of the "Hausschatz" magazine, and therefore, I could not
permit that my manuscripts were changed in any way.
[a] Kotow (Chinese): Kneeling and knocking one's head on the
floor as a gesture of homage. Here, the term is, of course,
used figuratively, meaning to be forced to humiliate oneself.
Later, I wrote for Pustet my novel in four volumes "Im Reiche des
silbernen Löwen" <In the Empire of the Silver Lion>. I had just
reached the end of the second volume, when friends of mine among
the editorial staff of other publishers sent me a advertising
pamphlet from the "Hausschatz", the contents of which caused me to
repeat my previous refusal. I telegraphed Pustet that I had to
discontinue the work in progress and that I would write no further
word for him. He even had to send the unprinted manuscript in his
possession back to me, for which I returned the royalties to him
he had payed for it. I would not have mentioned this with a
single word, if not, a short time ago, I had received a threat,
though only from a very irrelevant party, to reveal facts from
that time. Therefore, I have used this opportunity to state the
truth here. And at the same time, I furthermore state for a fact
that I never stopped being on a personally friendly basis with
Councillor of Commerce Pustet and that I felt an honest joy and
satisfaction when, after about ten years had passed, he sent his
present editor of the "Hausschatz", the Royal Genuine Councillor
Dr. Otto Denk, to see me at Leinfelder's hotel in Munich, to
persuade me to work for the "Hausschatz" again. I then proceeded
to write the "Mir of Jinnistan" for him.
With this, I have jumped far ahead of Cardauns's accusations of
"abysmal indecency" against me and am now turning back to them, to
uncover the cause and the root of this matter. The cause is
Münchmeyer, and the root is just the same. The facts which
contributed to this affair form a chain of events, extending over
more than thirty years, the links of which are intimately
connected on the levels of logic, business, and the law. Most of
it has been proven. Some of it is still hidden in the files,
waiting to be exposed to the light of day. I am not willing to
prejudge the pending lawsuits and will therefore only discuss
those points which have been fully resolved.
I have already said that Münchmeyer knew about my prior
convictions. He even knew all the lies which had been added to
them. He wished very much that I would write a novel about this;
but I rejected this most decisively. In the circle of his friends
and acquaintances, I have not kept my past secret, but rather I
have told them about it without any reservations and explained in
detail my views on criminals and crimes, guilt, punishment, and
the penal system. Not a single member of the Münchmeyer family
has a right to pretend not to have known about this. The workers
of the company found out about it, too, the typesetters, printers,
and all others, as well as the authors, contributing to the
publications. "May has been punished; he has been to prison",
they said, sometimes quietly, sometimes louder, but soon spreading
everywhere. Thus, it is fundamentally wrong to start talking
about sudden "revelations" or even about my "unmasking", now.
Whoever pretends that he had unmasked me, is lying.
It is an important fact that Münchmeyer had a rather pronounced
preference for working with previously convicted people in
particular, for certain business reasons. Going through the list
of authors, both men and women, who have written for him, the
percentage of those with a criminal record is rather significant.
I already noticed this very soon after I had joined his company.
Walter [a], his main factotum, to whom he assigned all the task
nobody else was allowed to know about, had prior convictions as
well. Very soon after I had taken over as editor, he brought in a
former official of the postal services from Vienna, who had
embezzled money, to be one of my co-workers. When similar cases
occurred repeatedly and I asked him for his reasons, he answered:
"An author who has been punished can be made to put up with
anything, because he fears that his criminal record will be
disclosed." "So, this also includes me?!" I exclaimed, astonished
at such an honesty. "Nonsense!" he replied. "With you, the
matter is entirely different. We are friends! And after all,
you're no ordinary man, who would put up with anything! Even if I
would not honestly care about you, any attempt to cross you would
have to fail!" He tried his best to remove the mistrust which had
arisen in me, but it could not be made to disappear entirely and
was a contributing factor in my resignation, when I left my job as
an editor on account of that proposal of marriage. Later, when
after the time of six years I started to write the "Waldröschen"
for him, these second thoughts against him resurfaced again in me.
But the exceptional position, he granted me in his personal life
and in his business, the exceptional royalties he payed me, and
most of all the objections my wife made at every opportunity
against my distrust, all of this influenced me so that I finally
returned to my previous trust in him.
[a] August Walther (1827-1900). The misspelling of this name
occurs throughout the original text with only one exception.
(In German, a "th" is pronounced the same as a "t".)
That I did not receive any proof sheets to read and therefore also
did not get my manuscripts of the novels I wrote for Münchmeyer
back, I had already mentioned. Thus, I could not verify, whether
the printed version matched my original manuscript. But honesty
in this respect had been promised to me in such very certain terms
that I did not consider any fraud possible. I also thought it
impossible that Münchmeyer could later ever pretend that he had
bought my novels with all rights not just up to the twenty
thousandth subscriber, but forever, because, first of all, I had
kept all of his letters, in which he repeated everything, we had
(not) [a] put into a written agreement, one thing after another,
and secondly I also had another fully valid proof in my hands,
that he did not own the rights forever. This was that he had
made, in writing, the attempt to obtain these rights later on. He
had done so using a reciprocal bond, which he sent to me by means
of this ex-convict factotum Walter, to have it signed by me. But
I rejected this extraordinarily cunning messenger with his bond.
This Walter was also the man who always assured me, in writing and
orally, upon my inquiries that those twenty thousand had not been
reached yet. Furthermore, I was not worried in the least, neither
for my rights nor for my "fine gratification". I could be sure of
my rights, and the Münchmeyers were now financially so well off,
that they, as I thought, were more than just able to pay. That he
lost again on poorly selling novels what he earned on the
bestsellers, and that he had fallen in with bill-jobbers, causing
a severe depletion of his available funds, about all of this I
knew nothing. Thus, I was convinced that I could wait calmly and
that I had no reason at all to pose premature, and therefore
insulting, demands. Furthermore, my wife was thus completely
against all forms of urging and pushing in business matters, that
I now also had to fear for the outward peace of my home, if I had
not been as forgiving towards Münchmeyer as she wished. The
publishers of colportage also maintain that, for their
bookkeeping, it would be much harder and require much more time
than with other publishers to prove how many regular subscribers
there are. All of the time, some of them are cancelling, and new
ones are joining in, therfore I was patient.
[a] I guess, the word "nicht" <not> has been lost in the original
text. Otherwise, it makes no sense.
In the year 1891, I made the acquaintance of my current publisher
F.E. Fehsenfeld from Freiburg, Breisgau. I left it up to him to
publish in the form of books those works which had previously been
published by Pustet in Regensburg and made an agreement with him
that he would thereafter also publish those written for
Münchmeyer. He instantly tackled those first ones, and they sold
excellently. We were both convinced that we would not be less
successful with the Münchmeyer novels, but postponed the latter,
until the Pustet series would be complete. Each of the two series
was supposed to consist of thirty volumes. Wherever my past work
fell short of filling these volumes, I had to write more. For the
Pustet series, this turned out to be about ten volumes, which I
still had to deliver. This work left me no time to worry about my
Münchmeyer stuff right now. It was also because of this that the
unexpected news that Münchmeyer had suddenly died had to be, as
far as the business was concerned, entirely indifferent to me. I
only inquired who his legal successor was, and when I heard that
his widow continued the business with authorisation of the other
heirs, I for my part saw no reason to worry.
Then, something surprising happened. Mrs. Pauline Münchmeyer sent
me a messenger, who had been instructed to draw out of me, whether
I might be inclined to write a new novel for her. This messenger
was also an "ex-convict". I sent him away, without allowing him
to successfully complete his task, not giving any special though
to the reason for his errant. At this time, I did not know what I
found out only much later, which was that Münchmeyers were not as
splendidly to do as I thought. A family meeting had been held,
and the decision had been reached that the situation should be
improved by a new novel by Karl May. I had neither the time nor
the inclination to write it, but decided, in case the attempt
would be repeated, to enter into negotiations regardless, to find
out something definite about the success of my previous novels.
And the repetition of the attempt came. Mrs. Münchmeyer herself
called on us in person. She visited us repeatedly. She made her
request. She even offered to pay the royalties in advance. She
also sent Walter, the factotum, and had him write letters. I
informed them that I would not be able to deliver anything new,
before the issue of the older novels was not full resolved. First
of all, I simply had to know the current number of subscribers of
my five novels; there had to be much more than twenty thousand by
now. Mrs. Münchmeyer promised to inform me. She invited me and
my wife for dinner at her place, in order to give me this
information there. We came. She confessed that those twenty
thousand had been reached, and even for all novels, not just one
of them; but a precise calculation would have to be done first,
and this would be so immensely difficult and time consuming in the
colportage business. So, I should be patient. As far as my
rights were concerned, they were hereby mine again, I could now
fully use these novels for my own purposes. Then, I asked her to
send me my manuscripts, based on which I would have them typeset
and printed. She said they had been burnt; in their place, she
would send me the printed novels and would have them, as a special
favour for me, bound in leather, first. This was done. A short
time later, the books came in the mail; I was again in control of
my works - - - so I thought! Of course, it had been impossible
for me to publish them right away, since those written for Pustet
had to come out first. So, I put these books aside for the time
being, without being able to devote any time to an examination of
their contents. I had reached my purpose, and writing a new novel
was no longer up for discussion. Nothing was heard from Mrs.
Münchmeyer any more. I attributed this to the fact that now those
"fine gratifications" were due, the payment of which she was
trying to avoid by keeping silent about it. But I did not force
the issue; I had more work to do and could do without the money,
if need be. I do not want to omit the fact that my wife, during
all of this time, made every effort to keep me from being strict
in my business affairs against Mrs. Münchmeyer. This preference
of hers for Münchmeyer and his widow constitutes the main reason
for the otherwise incomprehensible forbearance I practised.
I was just about to begin a long journey to the Orient, when I
found out that Mrs. Münchmeyer wanted to sell her business. Right
away, I wrote her a letter, warning her against selling my novels
along with it. I explained to her everything relating to this and
started my journey in upper Egypt. After I had returned from
there to Cairo, I found letters awaiting me there, from which I
found out that the sale had gone through in spite of my warning;
the buyer's [a] name was Fischer. I did not hesitate to write to
this gentleman. He answered me in a colporteur's tone that he had
bought the Münchmeyer business only on account of the novels by
Karl May. All the rest would not be worth anything. He would
exploit this work of mine as much as he possibly could and sue me
for damages, if I would obstruct him in doing so. This tone
caught my attention. This was a style which is usually only used
on very worthless individuals. Probably, I had been described to
this Mr. Fischer, who was perfectly unknown to me, in a way which
caused him to be thus disrespectful. I wrote to my wife that she
should, instantly and in as much detail as possible, give me an
report about this case. For this purpose, I gave her the precise
route of my journey. For six weeks, I waited in Cairo, fourteen
days in Beirut, several weeks in Jerusalem. I wrote and
telegraphed, but in vain; no report came. Finally, I received a
few lines, in which she told me that she had been to Paris, but
nothing further. When in Massawa, the capitol of Eritrea by the
Red Sea, my Arabian servant brought me the mail, I was confronted
with a huge pile of German newspapers, from which I, not having
suspected a thing, learnt what had taken place at home in the
meantime against me. Fischer had taken advantage of my absence by
starting an illustrated edition of my Münchmeyer novels, and in
doing so he sounded the trumpets of advertisement in such a manner
that everyone's attention had to be drawn towards this project.
My name had been given, though I had written these novels under
pseudonym, with only one exception, and had imposed the obligation
on Münchmeyer, not to disclose this pseudonym under any
circumstances. At the same time, it turned out that the novels
were supposed to be published in revised versions. I became
terribly scared. I wrote home and instructed a friend there, whom
I could trust completely, to seek the assistance of a lawyer and
to conduct my case until I would return home, if necessary even in
court.
[a] The original book reads "Verkäufer" <seller> instead of
"Käufer" <buyer>. This must be a misprint.
This friend's name was Richard Plöhn, and he was the owner of the
"Sächsische Verbandstoffabrik" <Saxonian factory for bandaging
material> in Radebeul, which he had founded. You will soon
understand why I am going to talk about him for a while. He had
an extraordinarily happy marriage. His family only consisted of
him, his wife, and his mother-in-law. We were such close friends,
that we called each other "Du" [a] and, in an manner of speaking,
formed one single family. But to call not just me, but also my
wife "Du", was something Plöhn simply could not bring himself to
do. He assured me that this would be impossible for him. Mrs.
Plöhn is now my wife. Therfore, I am not permitted to talk about
her characteristics or even her outstanding qualities. The latter
ones were purely pertaining to her soul. My first wife had never
read any of my books. The purpose and contents of my writings was
just as unknown and indifferent to her as my goals and ideals in
general. But Mrs. Plöhn was an enthusiastic reader of mine and
had a very solemn and deep understanding for all of my hopes,
wishes, and intentions. Her husband was happy about this. He saw
my struggle, my tireless work, often up to three times a week all
night long, no helping hand, no warm glance, no encouraging word;
my soul was alone, alone, alone as always and at all times. This
pained him. Through his wife, he tried to persuade mine, to at
least take care of the disrupting task of answering the mail, but
in vain. Then, he asked me to permit his wife to do this; this
would be a great joy for her and him. I permitted these two, good
people to do so. From this time on, my correspondence was in the
hands of Mrs. Plöhn. Thousands of readers received answers signed
"Emma May", without knowing that it had not been my wife, but a
sisterly helper, who had eased my burden. More and more, she
worked herself into the world of my thoughts and my mail, so that
finally, I could, with every confidence, leave the entire
correspondence up to her. Her husband was proud of it. Almost
even prouder was her mother a very hard working, down to earth
woman, accustomed to a simple life, who would have liked so very
much to lend a hand, if it had been possible, for she also
possessed a soul which would not want to stay in the lower
reaches, but was seeking to rise upwards.
[a] See my footnote in chapter V. "Du" is the informal German
word for "you", which is only used to address close friends,
relatives, and children. Using it against anybody else would
be a sign of disrespect and an insult.
So, it was this friend whom I instructed to take my affairs as
forcefully as possible into his hands, and he did it as well as he
could. He hired a lawyer from Dresden to conduct the lawsuit and
informed the entire German press that I was momentarily in Asia,
but would not hesitate, after my return home, to defend myself
against the intended gross violation of my rights. More could not
be done for the moment, because it had been impossible for me to
abort my journey. From my wife, I received no news. She was
incapable of dealing with such serious business matters. But the
Plöhns wrote, though those letters only caught up with me in
Padang, on the island of Sumatra. They contained alarming news.
The press had started to write about my Münchmeyer novels, and had
done this in a manner which was unfavourable for me. Rumours were
spread about me, which were partially ridiculous, partially
unscrupulous. The newspapers wrote that I was not in the Orient
at all, but that I was hiding, on account of a malignant disease,
in the iodine resort Bad Tölz, in upper Bavaria. If I had
suspected that this would go on in this deceitful, hateful, and
vicious manner for an entire decade, I would have interrupted my
journey after all and would have returned home as quickly as
possible. If I had done this, I would have been spared all this
inhumane torture and pains, which I have suffered during this long
time. But unfortunately, I did not know yet at this time what had
happened to my novels and what had been the guiding ideas
concerning me, which were going around in Münchmeyer's business
and are still going around today. I believed that I could still
settle the matter from afar and thought that I needed to do
nothing more than to get precise information, from which the steps
to be taken would have to result. Thus, I wrote home that my wife
should come to Egypt with the Plöhns, where I would meet them in
Cairo. They came, though much later than planned, because Plöhn
had become ill on the way. What I found out from them did not
sound favourable at all, and it furthermore struck me as very
unspecific. The lawyer was still in the earliest stages of
preparing the case. Fischer had declared that he would fight back
with all possible means; he had bought my novels from Mrs.
Münchmeyer; they were his righteously purchased property, payed
for in cash, with which he could do whatever he wanted. The
newspapers were biased against me. My Münchmeyer novels were
described as trashy. I realised that a lawsuit against the
Münchmeyers was unavoidable, and asked my wife for the documents I
would need for this.
I have already said that I had kept Münchmeyer's letters. Their
contents had constituted such strong evidence in a lawsuit against
Münchmeyer that I simply had to win it. These letters were,
together with other thing of equal importance, kept in a specific
drawer of my desk. Before my departure, I had especially informed
my wife about this drawer and its contents, I had especially
explained the purpose of the letters and had instructed her to
make sure that not even the smallest piece of paper would get
lost. When I now in Cairo asked her about these documents, she
reassured me that they were still lying there just as I had
entrusted them to her. Nobody had touched them. This calmed me
down, because it meant a sure victory in the lawsuit. When my
wife assured me of this, Mrs. Plöhn was with us and heard it.
She gave her an astonished look, but said nothing. At this time,
I did not particularly notice this; but later, remembering this
astonished, wide-eyed, disapproving look, I knew just too well
what it was meant to say. What had happened was that one evening
my wife had come to Mrs. Plöhn and had told her that she had just
burnt our marriage certificate, on account of the omen it
constituted. And some time later, she had told her in the same
laughing manner that she had now also taken the documents from the
desk drawer and had burnt them; by this, she wanted to prevent me
from suing the Münchmeyers. Mrs. Plöhn had been horrified by
this, but was unable to change the fait accompli. Now, when she
had to listen to this assurance of my wife that the letters still
existed untouched, the first rupture of that internal split
occurred in her, which did not become externally evident until
nothing could be kept secret any more. We travelled to Egypt,
Palestine, Syria, and returned home via Constantinople, Greece,
and Italy. During this time, my wife had, upon repeated
questions, always stuck to her story that the documents were still
lying, perfectly unharmed, in the drawer in question. She finally
became angry and refused to permit any further mentioning of the
subject. But when I came home and the first thing I did was to go
to desk, I found the drawer - - - empty! Being held responsible
for this, she declared that she had indeed burnt and destroyed the
letters. She had always been a friend of the Münchmeyers and
still was their friend today. Though she knew that I was right,
she would not stand for me suing the Münchmeyers. Therefore, she
had burnt the papers. You can imagine how I felt, but I
controlled myself and did what I was already in the habit of doing
for many years in such cases: I was quiet, took my hat, and left.
In the meantime, the attacks in the press against me had been
getting more and more numerous and direct. I was accused of
having written piously and indecently at the same time. I had a
look at the novels, which Mrs. Münchmeyer had bound for me, and
found that they diverged from my original manuscripts, they had
been changed. So, that was why the manuscripts had been burnt,
instead of being preserved for me! I was not supposed to be able
to prove the changes! The first thing I did was that I informed
the press of this and asked them to wait for the decision of the
court. Then, I most quickly filed the complaint. I did not want
to pursue the matter in a civil, but rather a criminal trial, but
met with such an opposition from my wife in this that I gave it
up. I sought advice from several lawyers, not just in Dresden,
but also in Berlin and elsewhere. I would have like so much to
sue them directly on account of the "abysmal indecencies", I had
been accused of, but I was assured unanimously that this was
impossible. A suit could not be concerned with abstract concepts,
but would have to be based on material reason. Most of all, I
would have to prove that I was the legitimate owner of the novels
concerned, and that I therefore had the right to sue. The best
thing would be to sue for a "rendering of the account". This was
done.
It was about at this time that the buyer of Münchmeyer's business,
Mr. Fischer, called on me. I had no reasonable reason for sending
him away; he was allowed to enter. The conversation was highly
interesting, from a psychological point of view as well as
concerning the lawsuit. Fischer did not at all conceal the fact
that he knew that I had been to prison. He remarked that whoever
had such a skeleton in his closet would do very well to refrain
from going to court, otherwise the matter might very easily come
out differently than one might think. My novels would now be his
property. They had already been changed before, and now he would
have them rewritten once more, just as it would please him. If I
would conduct a lawsuit against him, this could take more than ten
years; but until then, I would be long since ruined. But he had
come to extend his hand to me, to avoid all this trouble. I was
supposed to pay him seventy thousand marks, then he would give my
novels up and surrender them to me with all rights included.
Then, it would be easy for me to silence the entire excitement of
the press against me with a single stroke. He would be offering
me his help in this. He would know more than I would suspect. He
knew the entire Münchmeyer business. He had been told everything.
But he could not give the rights up for less than seventy thousand
marks, since he had payed one hundred and seventy-five thousand
marks.
It goes without saying that I did not go along with this
suggestion. I made clear to him that I would not give a single
pfennig and that I was firmly resolved to sue. So, he wanted to
know whom I would sue, him or Münchmeyer's widow. He would advise
me to do the latter, because, in this case, he could probably
testify in my favour, for he was not at all satisfied with this
woman, but was rather constantly arguing with her. After this, he
left with the warning that I should be so very careful concerning
my prior convictions.
I was willing to sue Mrs. Münchmeyer. But my wife and, probably
as a consequence of this, my lawyer also urged me to refrain from
this. Thus, Fischer was sued. But as it seemed, the widow did
not feel like having herself excluded from this legal action. She
joined in as a co-intervener [a] and has remained my opponent up
to this day. I succeeded in obtaining an injunction against
Fischer, which prohibited him from continuing to print my novels.
He was only allowed to complete the series. Being in this
situation, which was very critical for him, he came to talk to my
lawyer and complained about the loss he was going to suffer on
account of this; it would already amount to forty thousand marks.
If this would not stop, he would even have to use very different
means to defend himself than he had used up to now, and he would
have to destroy me in the eyes of all of Germany by publishing my
prior convictions in all the newspapers. When my lawyer informed
me of this threat, it all became so very clear to me; I started
to comprehend and felt obliged to probe this terrain. A meeting
between Fischer and myself was arranged, in a private room of a
wine-tavern, just the two of us. There, he talked openly. He
told me everything he had found out from the Münchmeyers about me
and my novels during the negotiation of the sale. I found out
about their entire battle plan, of which I did not have a clue
before. He had been let to believe that I had been to prison for
having had intimate contact with schoolgirls as a teacher. This
would fit perfectly with the allegations in the newspapers that I
had written indecent novels. This only had to be published, then
I would be destroyed forever. Now, I was a famous man and would
have to avoid such publications; they knew this just as well I
did. What I had agreed upon with Münchmeyer concerning my novels
would be irrelevant. Münchmeyer was dead. It would all just
depend on who would have to testify under oath. And they would
know how to make sure that May would not get this opportunity.
His prior convictions would be the best help there could be for
this. He would only have to be threatened with their publication,
then he would surely give up every lawsuit. Two lines written to
him are enough, and he will be quiet. "Him, we've got in our
hands!"
[a] Intervener: A third party in a civil trial aside from the
plaintiff and the defendant. German law further distinguishes
between a "Hauptintervenient" <main intervener> and a
"Nebenintervenient" <co-intervener>. (I do not know, whether
there are any more proper legal terms for this in English.)
A "main intervener" sues both parties and thus starts a new
trial. A "co-intervener" joins an existing trial to defend
his or her own interests, without joining either one of the
two main parties.
In this manner, they had talked to Fischer, and this persuaded him
to buy the business. Of this, he assured me. That my novels had
been altered, he knew. He only did not know precisely by whom.
Probably by Walter. After all, he had nothing else to do than
these kinds of things, and he also had to read the proof sheets.
And this was not a difficult task at all and could be done very
quickly. Only one word would have to be changed or a few words
would have to be added, and already the "indecency" is there,
without which such novels are quite inconceivable. I would be
able to prove these changes quite easily; I would only have to
present my original manuscripts.
"But they have been burnt!" I interjected.
But Fischer denied this quite decisively. He insisted that they
were still there. He could get them for me, though, of course, he
would not do so under the present conditions, with me being his
opponent in a lawsuit and ruining him with my injunction. He
could only help me and testify in my favour, if I would drop this
injunction and settle with him.
This conversation was infinitely important to me. I had to be
careful. I wondered, whether I could trust him. If the original
manuscripts were really still there, I would indeed been able to
silence all accusations against me, as Fischer had said, with a
single stroke. But he might have intended to deceive me, or he
might have been deceived himself. I was not allowed to decide too
hastily; I had to observe and to think, especially since this
turn of events in my affairs occurred at a time in which severe
internal struggles kept me thus busy that I was unable to find
either time or space for other things. This was the time of my
divorce.
To be honest, I very much tend towards the Catholic view of
marriage, regarding it as a sacrament. If I would not be of this
opinion, I would have taken this step much sooner and not only
when my health, my life, and my entire internal and external
existence was at stake. This step has been held against me to a
high degree, and very unjustly so. Catholic critics, who, instead
of staying on a factual basis, let their attacks wander over into
the personal, have accused me in the same breath of being a
Protestant and of having divorced my wife. How unlogical! It is
because I am regarded as a Protestant that nobody has the right to
hold that second fact against me. To every even just mildly
decent person, a divorce is a matter which is most naturally
treated with discretion. But mine was dragged through the
newspapers, supplemented with the most disgusting marginal
glosses, and abused for the most outrageous speculations. I want
to skip all of this here, to remark on this, if I should be forced
to do so, in another place. This time was not just for me, but
also for Mrs. Plöhn, a time of almost deadly afflictions, because
it deprived her of her husband, whom she loved with a
self-sacrifice, as rarely a man was ever loved. I have already
said that Plöhn had become ill on the journey to Egypt. He only
seemed to recover. The malady was repeated, after he had returned
home. One year later, death came. Mrs. Plöhn almost collapsed.
If it had not been for her mother, she would have surely died,
following her husband. Fortunately, the correspondence she
conducted for me with my readers also offered her the spiritual
relief and support she required. She owned two rented houses in
Dresden, which she would have liked to sell, to be able to buy a
piece of land in the country, belonging to the village
Niedersedlitz, which had been offered to her. Fischer had moved
his printing-plant there. His private apartment was also there.
Mrs. Plöhn asked me to accompany her on a visit of this lot, and
once we happened to be in Niedersedlitz, the idea came most
naturally to let Fischer know about it. He invited us to his
private apartment, and there a negotiation evolved which led to a
settlement the day after.
I want to make it as brief as possible. Fischer complained that,
in buying the Münchmeyer business, he had degraded himself to the
level of a "trashy publisher"; he assured us that he was yearning
to get out of this, and he insisted that I could assist him in
this like nobody else. Of the latter, I was also convinced. He
had purchased the altered novels, without Mrs. Münchmeyer having
the right to sell them to him. If he made sure that my original
manuscripts were returned to me, he could drop the trashy stuff
and publish my originals in their place; this would help him and
me as well; he would no longer be a trashy publisher, and I would
be able to prove that I had not written anything indecent. This
was the basic idea of the settlement, and when we signed it, I was
convinced that all disputes were resolved. At this time, Fischer
attested to me publicly in the newspapers that the indecent
passages of my Münchmeyer novels _were_not_the_product_of_my_pen,_
_but_rather_had_been_put_in_by_a_third_party._
But unfortunately, my hopes turned out to be deceptive. Fischer
was unable to get my original manuscripts; they did not exist any
more; they had really been destroyed. So, it had been impossible
for him to transform from a "trashy publisher", as he described
himself in a letter to me, into a book publisher. He did make the
attempt, though, to obtain an original novel even without my
original manuscripts, in order to be able to drop the trash then,
but I had to deny him the help, he demanded from me in this. What
he demanded from me was to change the trash back into its former,
impeccable version just based on my memory; but this was,
considering the huge amount of about thirty thousand pages,
tightly filled with text, an absolute impossibility. But he
insisted on his contract, on our settlement, and though he was
unable to do as he had promised, I was still supposed to do
everything, which was, even if for no other reason than him,
impossible. From this resulted a new disagreement and a new
struggle, which extended beyond his death and was only by his
heirs brought to a peaceful conclusion. They saw things clearer
than he did, and they were of calm, unbiased minds. They were
experts, which is to say: lawyers, merchants, owners of
printing-plants and bookbinderies. They agreed on the following
declaration:
| "In a lawsuit between Mr. Karl May and the heirs of Mr. |
| Adalbert Fischer, the heirs of Mr. Fischer have declared that |
| the novels by the author Karl May, published by the company |
| of H.G. Münchmeyer, have in the course of time been altered |
| by means of additions and variations by a third party to such |
| an extent that in their present form, they can no longer be |
| regarded as Karl May's creation. Mr. May has been authorised |
| to publish this declaration. |
| "Dresden, October 1907." |
This declaration is signed by the widow Mrs. Elisabeth Fischer,
the merchant Arthur Schubert, the owner of a printing-plant Otto
Fischer, the owner of a bookbindery Alfred Sperling, the lawyer
Trummler, the lawyer Bernstein, the lawyer Dr. Elb. Irresponsible
people have pretended that this declaration had only been made by
children and mentally incompetent persons. From this, you can
also see with what kinds of weapons I am being attacked. But for
me, the section of my Münchmeyer trial dealing with Fischer has
been closed by this. But the section dealing with Pauline
Münchmeyer still exists. I now have to turn to her in the
following.
I even dare to start this section with the plan I found out from
Fischer, which was:
| "May has been to prison. He has to keep this a secret. We |
| have him in our hands. Two lines are enough, and he will be |
| quiet. If he sues us, we will destroy him by publishing his |
| prior convictions in all newspapers throughout Germany. What |
| May has agreed upon with Münchmeyer is irrelevant. What |
| matters is, who will get the opportunity to testify under |
| oath. And we will know how to make sure that May will not |
| get this opportunity." |
By no means, Fischer has only talked about this plan in private,
but he also testified about this, putting it on record, and it had
been incessantly confirmed in the course of the legal dispute,
which now already lasts for nine years. I do not want to talk
here about those things which the lawyer Dr. Gerlach, in the name
of his client Pauline Münchmeyer, has asserted and denied contrary
to the truth. But he has portrayed me right from the start as a
person who is to the highest degree unqualified for taking the
oath. I simply cannot list all those offensive swear-words here
he has showered me with for as long as the last nine years and
continues to do so without me being able to have him punished for
this, because, as a lawyer, he is protected by the very same
article of the law which forces me to put up with liberties from
him which no other person would ever take. Being repeatedly
admonished by the judges and asked to answer for himself by other
lawyers, he nevertheless remains faithful to this speciality of
his. To carry out the Münchmeyers' plan, it was first of all
necessary to obtain my criminal records. For this purpose an
unfounded complaint for gross insult was issued, which was
instantly retracted as soon as the purpose had been reached. From
that time on, more or less allusive notes appeared in the
newspapers about my past. "I know even more!" one of them wrote;
"You would know what I mean, wouldn't you, Mr. May?" another one
asked. The "destruction" began. But the spiritus rector, the
real perpetrator, always remained cleverly hidden in the shadows;
he never showed himself; he always reached his ends through other
persons. The area of his work reaches far beyond his professional
duties, his correspondence is very extensive, concerning almost
exclusively Karl May. He is in intimate contact with all of my
literary opponents, and wherever a paper is writing about me, a
letter by him or one of his confidants is sure to follow. And
almost everywhere, they believe him. They believe him just as
Cardauns used to believe this liar who told him so convincingly
that the Münchmeyer novels had been written by me precisely as
they had been printed.
This gentleman Dr. Hermann Cardauns is inseparably connected with
this very dark and very ugly chapter of the contemporary history
of literature which is referred to as "Karl-May-persecution". He
did not want to have it any other way. There, he stands in close
union with people he otherwise does not belong to. This is also
how he wanted it to be. His crushing style, his infallible way of
choosing his words, his "abysmal" or "evident" pleonasms became a
model for others, especially for those who construct those
figurative nooses around my neck, to "whip me out of the Germen
arts". But the entire conglomeration of what he has spoken and
written in lectures and newspapers against me, constitutes by no
means a sturdy column, which no one would be able to shake, but
rather a paper kite in the shape of a dragon, compiled from lots
of vague circumstantial evidence, the rope of which nobody wants
to hold any more aside from Mr. Cardauns himself. It surely takes
a lot of blind faith, to think like him that my "indecencies"
could also be proven by other means than only by the presentation
of my original manuscripts. Just making a lot of words will not
do it; assertions will also remain unsuccessful, as long as they
are not proven. Though there is a lot to be read in Cardauns's
essays against me about files, documents, and other evidence, he
claims to possess proving my guild, I have not yet been shown a
single official file and no single document. As it seems, this
gentleman owns an older printed copy by Münchmeyer and a later
edition by Fischer and presumes the first one to be a literal copy
of my original. But I regard it as truly inconceivable that a
"main or chief editor" could be thus mistaken. I am just too
willing to consent that he has no idea what kinds of things are
commonly practised by a notorious publisher of trash and
colportage and what kind of a swindle this entire business is, but
this does not excuse, but rather incriminate, him, because not
knowing this, he also should not take the liberty of drawing
conclusions from the reasoning of the filthy colportage which may
only be dawn from the reasoning of honourable people. Fischer
could only enjoy the tremendous success of the rewritten trashy
novels thanks to the excessively loud roll of the drums of Mr.
Cardauns. Even the most incompetent politician knows that these
kinds of things can only be killed by silence and not by gongs and
tomtoms. But I, who was supposed to be struck dead by these
tomtoms, these speeches and newspaper articles, have been rendered
unable by this to remove this trash entirely from the face of this
world as I had intended. My intentions were good; but since Mr.
Cardauns supported my opponents by keeping me from carrying out
those intentions, he has done Münchmeyer's colportage a service,
for which they will always think gratefully of him. During all of
this long time until now, he has been their faithful champion;
whether he had planed it this way or not, the effect remains the
same.
The second champion for Münchmeyer's cause, ranking highly above
the first one, even mentally, is the former social democrat Mr.
Rudolf Lebius in Charlottenburg, who had seceded from the
Christian church. Concerning him, I will quote a passage from my
written statements to the fourth criminal division of the Royal
Superior Court III in Berlin:
In the year 1902, I was travelling in the South, and at the Lake
Garda, the mail from home caught up with me, containing among
others a letter by a certain Lebius, who described himself in a
rather exuberant manner as a man who intimately knew and admired
my work, and he made the request to be permitted to visit me at
some time. This exuberance instantly arose my suspicion. "He
wants money, nothing else", I said to myself. I replied to him
that I was not at home and that I therefore was unable to invite
him. In answer to this, he wrote to me on April the 7th, 1904:
"Dear Sir!
"As early as one and a half years ago, I had attempted to get in
contact with you, to which the enclosed card will serve as
evidence. In the meantime, I have published a new newspaper,
here, which has won great popularity. Could you be persuaded to
write something for my paper? Something biographical perhaps, on
the way you work, or on such details which might interest the
German readership of Karl May. I would also like to interview
you.
_"With_outstanding_admiration_
"Rudolf Lebius,
publisher and editor."
So, Lebius had carefully kept my card all this time, to gain
entrance into my house. He had signed his letter "with
outstanding admiration". Again, I said to myself: "He only wants
money." The assertion that his new newspaper had "won great
popularity" was not the truth. I was to be lured in by this.
Such a visitor must not be turned away, especially when he comes
armed with a newspaper, however small it may be, or else he will
get even. Thus, I wrote to him that he would be allowed to come,
and he answered on April the 28th:
"Many thanks for your kind letter. Of course, I am happy to
accept your friendly invitation. Unless you will give me another
time, I will come to see you on Monday, May the 2nd, at three
o'clock (departure at 3:31).
_"With_great_respect_and_admiration_
"Rudolf Lebius."
He came. But I did not allow him to interview me. I did not put
up with that. My wife, who had opened the door for him, had only
showed him to me under the condition that absolutely nothing would
be published. He gave his word on this, first to her and then
also to me. He stayed for coffee, and he stayed until after
dinner. He spoke very much; he spoke almost incessantly. I
remained intentionally silent. I only said what was unavoidable.
I did not trust him, and, to be protected by a witness, I had
invited the military author and editor Max Dittrich [a] for the
same time, who conducted the conversation in my place.
[a] Julius Eduard Maximilian Dittrich (1844-1917) and Karl May
had been to prison in Zwickau at the same time. Later,
Dittrich worked as an editor in charge of articles on the
military for several newspapers. He also wrote numerous
books, mostly on military history.
Lebius drank much wine, while I only sipped. He became
increasingly agitated, while I remained calm and circumspect. He
tried very hard to convince me and my wife that he had the stuff
it took to be a "real man". This was his favourite expression,
which he often used. Incessantly, he spoke about his principles,
his views, his plans, about his great skillfulness, his ample
experiences, and his excellent success as a journalist and an
editor, as a publisher and a manager, as a leader of the flock and
a tribune of the people.
This man attempted to impress us in a manner which only a quite
ordinary, imprudent person would use, who is thus convinced of his
own outstanding qualities, that he does not even consider that
others might laugh about his conduct. When he saw that I did not
respond to any of his tricks, his efforts became more desperate.
He had to convince me of his excellent qualities, at any price!
After all, he needed money, lots of money! And I seemed to be his
final hope to get it! Therefore, in his financial angst, he
revealed to us the most secret principles of his business and his
way of life. Because of the large amount of wine, he believed he
could win us over by this, but only affirmed our repulsion. Since
I have to be brief here, I will only reproduce the three most
important ones of these principles of his. These are:
1. Editors and journalists like us usually have no money.
Therefore, we also cannot afford the luxury of a personal
opinion. We want to live. Therefore, we sell our services.
_Whoever_pays_the_most,_gets_us!_
2. Every person has some dark spots on his character or in his
life. _Even_every_employer,_every_official,_every_policeman,_
_every_judge_or_prosecutor_has_such_a_skeleton_in_his_closet._
These things have to be found out, wisely and clandestinely.
No difficulty may be a discouragement in this. And once it
has been found out, the game is won. A note will then be
placed in the newspaper, telling the person concerned that all
is known, but in a manner so that he cannot sue. Then, he
will be in our hands, and we can do with him as we please. He
will surrender. In this manner I have already often worked to
the benefit of my readers!
3. In a social respect, mankind can be divided into sheep and
rams, masters and servants, those who command and those who
obey. Whoever wants to stop being a human member of the
flock, _has_to_cast_aside_the_conscience_of_the_flock._ Once
he does so, all who are still burdened by this conscience will
come running after him. It does not matter at all which flock
he might want to belong to. He can leave one and join
another, he can switch sides. This does not hurt him. He
only has to make sure that it is done with the necessary
warmth and conviction, for this elates the crowd. If the
social democrats do not follow him, the others will!
When the three of us heard these astonishing lessons, Max Dittrich
burst out in rage several times; my wife was quiet with
amazement; but I left the room to overcome my disgust! Thus,
Lebius received neither money nor anything else from me. So, he
came to realize that this unprecedented self-incrimination had not
just been entirely in vain, but that by it he had also delivered
himself into our hands. Now, the three of us were the most
dangerous people there were for him. _He_could_never_allow_us_to_
_state_our_case_in_court,_ but rather had to do everything _to_
_portray_us_as_untrustworthy_persons,_who_had_no_right_to_testify_
_under_oath._ It is very important to me to emphasise this in
particular, for
| this is the only right key for all of his later actions, |
| which would hardly be understandable without this key, |
| because the hatred this man has against the three of us seems |
| to be almost inhuman. |
Even before he left on this night together with Max Dittrich, I
had purposefully complained about the many letters in which I, not
being a rich man at all, had been besieged with requests for
money, and did so in a manner which had to keep any educated,
honourable man from approaching me with similar wishes: As soon
as the very next day, he wrote me the following letter:
"Dresden-A., 5/3/04.
"Dear doctor!
"Cordially thanking you for the friendly reception and your
hospitality, I am asking you, in case you should visit the art
exhibit or should happen to come to Dresden on another occasion,
to have lunch or coffee with us.
"In one respect, I have to go back on the agreement we reached
yesterday. I cannot accept your offer to work for us free of
charge. We will pay ten pfennig per line, which would be the same
price you are likely to have received from other newspapers.
"What you have told me yesterday, I have considered one more
today. It would seem to me that in spite of the colossal sales of
your works, the profit could still be increased extensively. My
experiences as a bookseller and publisher have taught me that the
value of properly managed propaganda and direct advertisement
cannot be overestimated at all.
"My wife and I send our regards to your wife and you with
_admiration_ and _gratitude,_ yours truly
"Rudolf Lebius."
Let me point out that he addressed me as "doctor", though, during
his visit, I had, and not just once, made clear to him that he
should refrain from doing so. But he did not do so, for, after
all, this title was serve him as a weapon against me!
At about this time, Max Dittrich wrote a booklet about me and my
work. He was so imprudent to show the manuscript to Lebius. The
latter came rushing to Radebeul right away, to ask me to use my
influence on Dittrich that he should let him, Mr. Lebius, publish
this work. It goes entirely without saying that he and his
request were rejected, and I wrote to Mr. Max Dittrich that I
would never want to see him again, if he would consider letting
this man have the booklet.
This second visit of Mr. Lebius took at most ten minutes. After
he was gone, I was missing a photograph, he had stolen from me.
He was never allowed to return again. Nevertheless, he had
repeatedly pretended to have been a guest at my house at numerous
occasions and to have studied me very carefully.
The next day he wrote to me:
"Dresden-A., 7/12/04
34 Fürstenstraße.
"Dear doctor!
_"I_would_very_much_like_to_publish_Dittrich's_booklet_and_would_
_also_make_the_greatest_efforts_to_put_it_in_wide_circulation._
But on account of my resignation from the `Sachsenstimme' <Voice
of Saxony> - officially I will not be leaving my job until the
first of October of this year - I have become a bit short on
capital.
_"Would_you_perhaps_grant_me_a_loan_for_three_years_at_5_percent?_
Perhaps, I will pay the debt back to you as early as one year from
now.
| "To show my gratitude for this, I would promote the booklet |
| in such a way that the whole world would talk about it. |
| After all, I am particularly experienced in this area. |
"Things will work out with my newspaper, and even on a very solid
basis. Now it is up to me to work and to show _that_I_have_the_
_stuff_it_takes_to_be_a_real_man_ etc. etc. Best regards to your
wife
"Yours truly
Rudolf Lebius."
I did not answer. I was of the opinion that a man with honour
could not proceed after such a silence, especially since I had
_totally_rejected_Lebius_concerning_the_booklet._ But on August
the 8th, he nevertheless wrote again:
"On the 4th of this month, I have become the sole proprietor of
the "Sachsenstimme" at favourable conditions. I can now act as I
please. To gain some independence from the printer, _I_would_
_like_to_take_a_loan_of_a_few_thousand_marks_(3_to_6)_for_half_a_
_year._ There is no risk involved. The Jewish interested
businesses are behind me, who have, as the past season has shown,
supported me to a large extent. The Christmas sales will give me
the money to pay you back. _Would_you_grant_me_this_loan?__I_am_
_very_willing_do_something_for_you_in_return._ The large number of
academic employees allows my paper to rise above the majority the
of Saxonian newspapers. We are furthermore able to send those
articles, you might have an interest in, to 300 or more German and
Austrian newspapers and highlight the article concerned in blue.
Something like this will infallibly have its effect. In Dresden,
I am sending my paper to all public bars (1760). Most sincerely
Rudolf Lebius."
At the same time, I found out that Lebius owned nothing at all,
but had taken the oath of manifestation [a], that he had not payed
the printer of his paper, that he quite generally had nothing but
debts, and that he even owed royalties. That his newspaper had a
solid basis, was untrue, the same thing goes for the "large number
of academic employees" and other things. Intentional deceptions
like this ought to brought before the public prosecutor. Let me
draw your attention to how he starts and ends his letters: "Dear
Sir ... With outstanding admiration!" "With great respect and
admiration!" "Dear doctor ... With admiration and gratitude."
When he saw that this flattery failed to do its effect, he did not
write to me any more, but to Dittrich. He did so on August the
15th, 1904:
[a] This oath forces a debtor to disclose all of his possessions.
A debtor who refuses to take this oath can be sent to prison.
"Dear Mr. Dittrich!
"I will give you one percent for negotiating the loan. _I_do_not_
_need_more_than_10.000_marks._ But I would also make do with less.
I will sent you your fee on the 20th of this month as agreed.
"Couldn't you _USE_YOUR_PERSUASION_ on doctor May to pay me an
advance?
"Friendly greetings R. Lebius."
Then, on August the 27th:
"Dear Mr. Dittrich!
"My wife is going to see Dr. Klenke on September the 1st, to get a
small amount he owes us. She will use this opportunity to pay you
your royalties. You have my written promise that I will give you
1 percent of the money which I will obtain from H.V. or Dr. M.
(May) on account of your intervention. You will receive the money
right away . . . .
"Friendly greetings Lebius."
This refers to the fact that he owed Max Dittrich royalties in the
amount of 37 marks and 45 pfennigs, which he, though this amount
was very small, was unable to pay. As a consequence of this, a
mirror has been seized from his house by the court. When he
received an order to pay the 37 marks and 45 from Dittrich instead
of my 10.000 marks, he wrote to him on September the 3rd:
"Dear Mr. Dittrich!
"I have urged Mr. Klenke M.D. to pass the amount of 40 marks from
my account to you. Your behaviour towards me strikes me as most
peculiar, perhaps even insulting.
"Sincerely
R. Lebius."
But this Dr. Klenke also never considered paying the debts of Mr.
Lebius, and thus it was only logical and consequential that on
September the 7th, the following threat reached me in the form of
a postcard:
"Dear Sir!
"A certain Mr. Lebius, editor of the `Sachsenstimme', has told
another gentleman that he was writing an article against you. I
have just overheard it in a restaurant. A friend is warning you
of this man.
"B."
Of course, I was instantly fully aware of the author and the
purpose of this card. The report of the court's _sworn_experts_
also states _that_nobody_but_Lebius,_in_his_own_hand,_could_have_
_written_it._ Obviously, he quite definitely expected me to pay
the 10.000 marks in response to this extortion. If I would not
pay up, I could not just be sure of the vengeful article he
threatened to write now, but even of more of the kind and other
things as well; this had to worry me. But even now, I did not
respond and was facing the unavoidable article with a clear
conscience, which appeared on September the 11th, 1904, in number
33 of Lebius's paper, the "Sachsenstimme", and bore the triple
headline:
| "More light on Karl May |
| 160.000 marks income for a novelist |
| A famous author of colportage from Dresden." |
This man had given his word to my wife and me, not to publish
anything. He had even only been admitted to our house after
having made this promise, and now he nevertheless published
something, and in what manner and for what reasons! He turned
everything upside down; he twisted everything! He put all the
words he pleased into our mouths and kept to himself what we had
actually said, to avoid exposing himself to ridicule. This text
contains more than 70 immoralities, twists of the facts, and
direct lies. But this was only the beginning; the continuations
followed soon enough. This article in number 33 of the
"Sachsenstimme" had been written in such a manner that Lebius was
still able to turn around, if I should now finally give him the
money. And already in number 34 there came a very clear hint,
telling me what would happen, if I could not be moved to pay.
This hint consisted of an advertisement by Münchmeyer, which spoke
volumes to me. You ought to know that the proprietor of
Münchmeyer's business had told me: "The publication of the other
novels doesn't hurt you too much yet; but as soon as I'm done
with the `Lost Son' and start placing advertisement for it, you'll
be lost! This one will be such a blow that you'll be unable to
continue existing as an author after this!" And this "Lost Son"
had now been advertised for in number 34 of the "Sachsenstimme".
This was just as if they had written to me in gigantic letters:
"But now, finally, surrender the money, or it will go on in this
style!" The most dangerous extortionist is he who goes about his
business in this cunning manner, which is even more clear than a
spoken word, but is beyond the reach of any public prosecutor.
But I nevertheless did not pay anything. Then, in number 44,
there came a second elaboration, in number 46 a third, and in
number 47 a fourth. In number 46 the connection of Mr. Lebius
with Münchmeyer's business was demonstrated more clearly to me
than before, for it said that the owner of this business had a
large stack of old letters, written by me, in his possession and
could therefore give very detailed information on me, if he only
wanted. But the truth was that he did not possess a single old
letter from me; I, on the other hand, knew now precisely that
Lebius had taken on the job of executing the Münchmeyers' plan "to
destroy me in the eyes of all of Germany by publishing my prior
convictions in all the newspapers". I was convinced that the
payment of those 10.000 marks would silence him right away, but I
would have been ashamed to look into the mirror, if I had given
him even a single pfennig.
As I had thought, so it happened: Already in number 48, there
came without any provocation, out of the blue, the announcement:
"The four years which Mr. Karl May had been sentenced to spend in
Waldheim were, according to our information, the consequence of
the burglary of a watchmaker's shop." But I have never committed
any burglary. You see, that they did not care about the truth,
but only about "destroying". This number 48 was published on
Christmas Eve. At this time, posters were displayed in the
windows of book-stores of Dresden, announcing the "Sachsenstimme"
with these large, red letters: _"The_prior_convictions_of_Karl_
_May"._ There could not be a more striking evidence that this was
not about literature, but rather the execution of perfectly
despicable intentions! Therefore, let me put an end to this cruel
show here. I cannot bring myself to listing all these so very
great deeds of Mr. Lebius in detail. I only want to say in
summary that he proceeded in this manner, until, after some time,
he had to flee from Dresden. I have compiled the lies, he has
spread about me in his articles from his time in Dresden, to prove
them in court. In spite of the brief time, there are not less
than 142 of them. There probably never was another human being
who has surpassed this! But I am explicitly emphasising that this
list, by no means, contains everything, but rather only a
selection. I could more than double this number, though it is
already very high. I have remained silent on this issue for a
long time, until I could not bear it any longer. Once this time
had come, I finally had to defend myself. I filed a complaint
with the public prosecutor's office for extortion. I submitted
his letters, and the threatening postcard from September the 7th,
1904, as well. The experts declared that it necessarily must have
been Lebius who had written it. But the above mentioned office
was of the opinion that this was insufficient to start an
investigation. And Lebius did his best in all of his statements
to portray me as a person who deserved no credibility. The
definite proof of his skillfulness in this he had given by
reporting to the royal prosecutor's office in Dresden that the
owner of the hotel on the Mount Sinai had been in Dresden and had
been talking very badly about me. And yet, everyone knows that up
to this day there has never been a hotel on the Mount Sinai! I
guess, this sufficiently proves that the creativity of this Mr.
Lebius stops at nothing. Twice, I filed a private lawsuit against
him. One of them was retracted by me during the proceedings,
merely because I was so disgusted with all the filth I had to deal
with there. The other one got him a fine of 30 marks at the first
instance; but he was acquitted in the appeal, because my lawyer
had become ill and sent a replacement, who argued the case without
being fully informed.
This is all I have done against the attacks of Mr. Lebius, which
were just as numerous as they were incessant. This was surely
little enough! That I answered to reporters whenever they came to
ask me, goes without saying. It would be asking too much from me
to demand that I should lie to these gentlemen out of fear of Mr.
Lebius. Nevertheless, he still pretends up to this day that it
was not me who is pursued and assaulted by him, but rather him by
me.
Even after he had fled from Dresden, leaving behind a rather
sizeable amount of debts, his attacks against me did not stop.
Let me just mention the article in the Austrian teachers'
magazine, by which he stirred up about 40.000 teachers to join in
the campaign against me. I kept silent. I even kept silent, when
in Wilhelm Bruhn's magazine "Wahrheit" <Truth> in Berlin, he
published a perfectly outrageous assault against me, in which he
branded me as an "atavistic criminal", who had been, for almost
one decade, in prisons and penitentiaries on account of "continued
burglaries"! There, he asserted that I had suffered through a
serious, chronical disease, which had "obviously an antisocial"
effect. With this, he had started to continue his machinations
against me in Berlin, which had been interrupted in Dresden.
Unfortunately, I had been compelled to meet with him there in
person, because there was an unavoidable question, which I had to
pose to him in connection with the extensive lawsuit against the
Münchmeyers. For this purpose, I went to Berlin with my wife. We
discovered his apartment. He were told that he was publishing a
new paper, called "Bund" <alliance, union>. We telephoned him.
He told us to meet him at the Café Bauer. We followed his
instruction. He came with his wife and her sister. He did not
answer my question. He denied everything. I told him that I
would like to see his new paper. I meant this in a perfectly
honest and good way, without any evil intentions. But he
instantly got into a fit of rage and asked threateningly: "Are
you up to something? If so, I'll proceed against you once again
without delay! Here in Berlin, there are more than twenty papers
like the `Dresdener Rundschau'. They are all at my command, if I
should decide to destroy you! Here, this won't take long at all!"
I answered that I would not think of descending back into the old
filth. My wife said to his wife in a calm and friendly manner
that it was the most beautiful duty of married women to work
towards reconciliation and to soften the harshness of life; then
we left.
This was on September the 2nd or 3rd. _One_month_later,_ on
October the 1st, the following letter arrived from Berlin; I was
away travelling:
"Dear Sir!
"Though you would not know me, I would like to take the liberty of
asking you, whether you could give me any more detailed
information on a certain Mr. Lebius, formerly a resident of
Dresden. The above mentioned gentleman, a former social democrat,
has filed a private suit for gross insult against me, in my
capacity as the former editor in charge of the `Vorwärts' [a]. In
court, I will have to demonstrate what a `honourable gentleman'
Mr. Lebius is. On account of an advice by an colleague from
Dresden, I am now turning to you with every confidence, that you
might perhaps be able to give me any kind of information about
this gentleman. If this should be the case, I am looking forward
to your kind response, which would very much oblige me.
"Most sincerely
Carl Wermuth,
Editor of the `Vorwärts'."
[a] "Vorwärts" <Go forward!>: The newspaper of the social
democratic party.
I repeat that I was travelling and was therefore unable to grant
this wish, even if I had wanted to. On April the 5th, 1908, this
was
_a_full_half_year_later,_
I received another letter from the editor's office of the
"Vorwärts":
_"We_regret_that_you_have_not_spoken_out_yet_ regarding the
accusations against you by Lebius, or respectively that you have
_not_supplied_us_with_the_necessary_evidence_ on the slanderous
acts of Lebius in respect to you. As I have been told by my
colleague Wermuth, your wife has informed us that you were
currently travelling and that you were _unable_to_supply_us_with_
_the_desired_material_against_Lebius._ I am hoping that you have
returned from your journey in the meantime und that you will now
. . . ."
I guess, this sufficiently proves _that_it_is_not_me_who_is_
_pursuing_Mr._Lebius,_but_that_he_is_pursuing_me._ Mr. Lebius
pretends that I had approached him at that time on the anniversary
of the battle of Sedan [a] to be able to assist the "Vorwärts".
Hereby, I am proving that I did not know anything about this
complaint for gross insult at this time yet, but rather that the
"Vorwärts" only informed me about it one month later and _did_not_
_even_receive_an_answer_ to this after another six months had
passed! Thus, I had spared Mr. Lebius for a full six month,
though it had been made so convenient and easy for me by the
social democratic party to get my revenge against him. _That_I_do_
_not_pursue_him,_but_am,_again_and_again,_being_forced_by_him_to_
_act_in_self_defence,_ is, by the way, also proven by the fact
that I have avoided up to this day to testify as a witness against
him. The situation concerning this testimony in favour of the
editor of the "Vorwärts" had been like this:
[a] September the 2nd.
Lebius had sued the "Vorwärts" for gross insult, and the
"Vorwärts" had named me as a witness, of course without bothering
to ask me first. Lebius was told by his conscience that he could
probably not expect many kind words from this witness. Yes, the
thought even occurred to him that I had already known about my
role as a witness when we met at the Café Bauer. This enraged
him. He sent his wife to my wife to Radebeul, to make threats
against me. My wife wished this meeting to take place in my
house; but Mrs. Lebius refused. The two women met at the
restaurant of our railroad-station. There, Mrs. Lebius wanted to
dictate to us, instructed by her husband, what and how I had to
testify as a witness. In particular, I was supposed to declare in
court that he had not written that threatening postcard of
September the 7th in Dresden. If I did not do this, he would have
to start the old fight against me anew. My wife rejected all of
this most decisively, for were were now more convinced than ever
that he was its author. Thus, his wife returned to Berlin,
without having accomplished her mission.
Once Lebius had realized that this attempt had failed, he decided
to render me unfit to testify under oath, and he planned to do so
by means of a pamphlet, which had to be published soon enough
before the appointed time when I was supposed to appear as a
witness. But since this pamphlet, in order to be able to have its
effect, had to be written in such a manner which absolutely
inevitably had to be followed by a criminal prosecution of the
author, which Lebius did not want to bring on himself, he looked
around for a man to act as a front, who did not know him and Karl
May yet and was sufficiently inexperienced, gullible, and in need
of cash to get involved in this, for a few hundred marks, which
would quite certainly _lead_to_a_prison_sentence_ for him,
_without_even_suspecting_a_thing._ He found him in the shape of
certain Mr. F.W. Kahl from Basel, pulled him into his web, and
spun such a network of self-praise and lies around him, that this
young, perfectly honest man almost considered it to be an honour
to be allowed to put himself into the service of such an
important, mentally, socially,and also in legal matters so very
outstanding man.
Lebius, as he generally and always did, approached this matter,
too, in an extraordinarily clever and cunning manner. In the
beginning, he did not mention that it was _solely_ a pamphlet
against _me._ He let the young man believe that he was supposed to
write a SCIENTIFIC work on famous, or rather infamous, men. He
gave him their names; my name was also among them. But when Kahl
went to his work and received his instructions on a daily basis,
these were to the effect that, one after another, all of these
"famous and infamous" men disappeared, until Karl May was the only
one left. And the "scientific" work was to turn into a pamphlet
of the very lowest and most dangerous kind. Kahl realised this
with every day more and more clearly. He started to suspect that,
under the cover of perfect kindness, he was to be led to his doom.
When he told Mr. Lebius straight out what he suspected, Lebius
thought the best thing would be to confess the entire purpose of
the pamphlet to him. He admitted to the following:
| Lebius has sued the editor of the "Vorwärts" for gross |
| insult. |
| The "Vorwärts" has named Karl May as a witness against |
| Lebius. |
| Therefore, it is necessary for Lebius to destroy Karl May. |
| In order to achieve this, he will publish this pamphlet, he |
| currently working on. |
| The appointed time for Karl May's testimony is in the |
| beginning of April. |
| Therefore, it is absolutely imperative that the pamphlet will |
| be ready for distribution by April the 1st. |
| If the pamphlet should only be ready by a later date, it |
| would be useless; in this case, he would not have to bother |
| writing it at all. |
| It will be sent to the newspapers, which will report about |
| it. This shall influence the judges. |
| It will also be presented to the judges directly. As soon as |
| this will happen, May will be ruined as a witness. |
When the honest, young man heard this, his scruples became even
greater than they had been before. When he said so and expressed
his worries of being punished in court, Lebius suggested the
following to him:
| As authors, we are anyhow and always with one foot in prison. |
| To have been sentenced in court, is good advertising for us. |
| I also have already been convicted many times. |
| You have no reason at all to be afraid of the courts. You |
| have no prior convictions, you may testify under oath. But |
| May may not testify under oath. |
| May is under police supervision. He has been forbidden to |
| live in a city. Therefore, he lives in Radebeul. |
| I HAVE A GREAT TALENT FOR DEALING WITH THE COURTS. ONCE I |
| START TALKING, THE JUDGES ARE ALL ON MY SIDE! |
| WHEN A PERSON IN A TRIAL WRITES SUCH A PAMPHLET, THIS MAKES |
| AN ENORMOUS IMPRESSION ON THE JUDGES! |
| Mrs. May has begged me with tears in her eyes to have mercy |
| on her husband. |
| May has to be destroyed by this pamphlet. All the rest is |
| unessential, ONLY THERE TO CONCEAL THE TRUE PURPOSE! |
The consequence of these and similarly peculiar verbal
expectorations was that Kahl decided, to distance himself from
this matter. He prohibited Lebius to print anything he had
written or even to abuse his name for this pamphlet. He directed
the very same ban also against the publisher. He thought that by
such means he had ascended quite definitely back out of this
morass. But he did not know Lebius and his audacity yet. The
pamphlet was published, and even precisely on April the 1st. Its
title was:
| KARL MAY, |
| one who corrupts the German youth |
by
| F.W. Kahl - Basel. |
Kahl only found out from a Swiss newspaper that the pamphlet had
nevertheless been published, and even under his name. He
instantly took the appropriate steps. The appointed hearing, when
I was to be questioned as a witness, which Lebius had been so
afraid of, had not taken place. Whether he had nevertheless
presented the pamphlet to the judges or not, I do not know. But
he has, without delay, sent them to the newspapers, and even with
summaries and commentaries etc., the slanderous nature of which
you can get an idea of by just reading the following lines, which
he has sent to the "Neue Züricher Zeitung" <New Newspaper of
Zürich>:
"Mr. May has waged his revenge against me by undermining my
financial position by means of slander and driving my into
bankruptcy. As soon as I had established myself in another town,
he again appeared on the scene, the repeat the same manoeuvre. In
doing so, before striking another blow against me, he loves to
visit me at my apartment and to beg, with tears in his eyes, for
peace."
This is not the place for me to talk about the contents of this
pamphlet. It goes entirely without saying that my prior
convictions had been listed, and even more than these. He
distributed this all over the place, to "destroy" me according to
the Münchmeyers' method. I obtained an injunction against it. It
was no longer allowed to be printed and to be distributed. And I
filed a private complaint for gross insult against him. This
complaint could not be trailed in court, because my lawyer had
lost all of my evidence, and these were far more than a hundred
items. They were only found again with him, after it had already
been too late. So, I was forced to agree with the suggestions for
a settlement, which the presiding judge had made. Lebius took
back all of his accusations against me, the material as well as
the formal ones, stated that he regretted his attacks against me,
and promised to leave me alone from now on. He did so with his
signature. It was impossible for me not to believe in such a
promise, given in court. And yet, it was a betrayal and an
unconscientious act beyond comparison of his, to make this promise
to me, for he could only make it _with_the_intention_of_breaking_
_it._ This was because he had contacted with my ex-wife. She
felt, as all ex-wives do most of the time, unreasonably resentful
against her ex-husband; he was planning on using this for his
purposes. He came to see her in Weimar, where she lived. There,
she lived calmly and contently of her alimony of 3000 marks, which
I payed her, though I did not have to give her anything, because
she had been the only guilty party. I had also amply supplied her
with all conceivable things. Then, this man came to her and got
all the bitterness, she had worked herself into, out of her, to
fabricate out of this, supplemented with his own additions and
distortions, a rope to hang me with. He promised her just as
sacredly and solemnly as he once promise it to me, that nothing,
nothing at all would be published, but straight away, he went to
write for the edition of his "Bund" from March the 28th, 1909, an
article under the headline: "A spiritistic writing medium as the
main witness of the editors of the `Vorwärts'". With this alleged
writing medium he was referring to my current wife.
It is a perfectly unbelievable filth, which is there being hurled
against me and my current wife, and even by cunningly using and
adapting the embittering agents, which exist in the emotional
state of ex-wives. When the poor, unfortunate woman read this,
she was shocked. So he did not keep silent! He had not kept his
word! She instantly rushed to him to Berlin, to make him answer
for himself. Once she was there, he had her stay. He turned her
over to his brother-in-law Heinrich Medem, a former lawyer and
notary, who, together with him, became her counsel. At first,
they both persuaded her to give up her 3000 marks of alimony, and
then forced her to pawn her valuables, for this would "give a
better impression to others". This rather means that other people
were supposed to think that I was the one who had plunged this
woman into such poverty and such misery! Lebius has literally
admitted this in his letter to the concert-singer Mrs. vom
Scheidt, which is the object of the current private lawsuit, and
the presiding judge at the first instance has praised him by
saying in public: "That's very noble of you!"
Lebius had promised this woman, now that she had lost all of her
income and was facing a desolate future, to pay her 100 marks a
month for the rest of her life, Lebius with whom even attempts to
repossess his belongings for debts of two or three marks had been
futile! At first, she believed him; but he knew just too well
that this promise was not legally binding. It was all nothing but
a bombastic show! She borrowed 500 marks from acquaintances, to
be able to live. But he gave her, little by little, only 200
marks, but by no means as a gift, only borrowed, for when he
realised that she was distancing herself from him and sought to be
closer to me again, he threatened her to sue her for the payment
of 300 marks on account of these 200 marks.
And what did she get out of rejecting all of her income, throwing
herself into filthy misery and worry, abandoning her nice,
well-arranged conditions, even selling or pawning her jewelry?
Nothing, nothing at all asides from becoming the tool for the
revenge of Mr. Lebius, being trained like an animal by him to
think, speak, and write about me precisely as he pleased, and
being in every respect entirely at the mercy of him and Medem, his
brother-in-law. For when I was forced, due to the article in the
"Bund" mentioned above, to sue my ex-wife, Lebius and Medem
designed her written statements so that only Lebius benefited from
them for his attacks against me, and she had to sign things in the
process the purpose and implications of which she did not even
suspect! There had been times, when, in tears, she refused to
sign such a statement. But she was nevertheless forced to do it!
Until finally, she came around to the realisation that things
could impossibly go on in this direction and in this manner, if
she would not want to be completely ruined! She turned to me and
asked for forgiveness. I took pity on the poor, manipulated
woman. I retracted the criminal charges and the complaint for
gross insult against her. And now, I found out in what a cunning
manner she had been lured by Lebius out of her safe, calm position
over to him, to be economically destroyed and morally exploited,
or rather to be used against me with the aim of mutual ruin. He
said his letter, which is the object of this current lawsuit:
| "Being advised to do so by my lawyer, I have indeed demanded, |
| in regard to my settlement of the lawsuit with May, that Mrs. |
| Emma should first pawn a part of her jewelry, for this gives |
| a better impression to others." |
So, because I have settled my lawsuit with him, because he has
apologised in court to me for his insults, and because he had
promised in court to leave me alone from now on and forever, so
therefore, _"in_regard_to_this",_ my wife now had to pawn her
valuables, so that _I_ would be referred to as the scoundrel, by
whom she had been driven into such a wretched existence! What is
the word for such a behaviour? And after he had, in such a
manner, caused her to lose all of her former income and her
jewelry, he writes in this letter of his: "I have also instructed
my syndic, Privy Councillor Mr. Ueberhorst, to prepare steps for
me _to_get_my_money_back!"_ Could there be any expression by
means of which the train of Lebius's thoughts and the manner of
his actions would be comprehensively characterised?
This poor woman, who has, in alost every respect, been completely
stripped of all she had by Lebius, was by no means the first or
only devorcée, he got into his power to achieve his purposes. It
is rather a very particular tactical habit of his, to pit ex-wives
against their husbands. The most striking example of this is the
case of Max Dittrich. Mentioning it here only briefly, I am
asking you to pay _particular_attention_ to it, because it is _of_
_the_utmost_importance_ for the evaluation of Mr. Lebius.
As you already know, when this gentleman visited me, I had invited
the editor and military author Max Dittrich to join me as a
witness, since I was suspicious and cautious, to be protected
against possible upcoming lies and swindles on Mr. Lebius's part
by a fully credible witness. Mr. Dittrich had been present that
day, from the beginning to the end, and had heard every word I had
said. To have such a witness, became, as time moved on, more and
more embarrassing and dangerous for Mr. Lebius. He therefore
decided _to_render_him_unfit_of_taking_the_oath,_ the very same
thing he has also done to me _and_is_still_doing_today._ This is,
as will be demonstrated later, _a_personal_trick_ of his, which
regards _as_infallible_ - - - rendering a person unfit to testify!
In this, he adheres to the principle he elaborated to us at his
visit: Every person, every policeman and judge, every official
has a skeleton in his closet, is guilty of something he has to
keep secret. This has to be _discovered_ and _put_into_the_
_newspaper;_ this is the way to achieve domination and to be known
as someone who has the energy it takes to be a _"real_man"._
Lebius did so here as well. The first wife of Max Dittrich had
died; he had divorced his second wife; now his nervous system
had become severely ill due to a ship-wreck, in which he just
barely escaped death, sustaining dangerous injuries. This
presented itself as highly interesting material, which simply had
to yield something! So, Mr. Lebius ventured forth to look for the
"skeleton in the closet", the "secret" guilt and sin. He searched
everywhere, by means of letters, conversations, personal visits.
Wherever he thought he could find out something, he came to call.
He did not even have the decency to except Dittrich's relatives.
Sneakily, he obtained access to Dittrich's old sister-in-law,
Dittrich's nephews and nieces, and even Dittrich's second wife,
who had remarried and led a happy, quiet marital life. He drew
everything out of them, without them even suspecting why and what
for. They answered trustingly and without reservations. But when
he suddenly, giving them quite a shock with it, dropped the words
"court" and "oath", they felt the clutches they had fallen into.
They were unable to say anything bad and asked him to leave them
out of it. He promised it to them. Dittrich's second wife felt
especially uneasy about the prospect of being dragged into the
filth of Lebius. Her present husband was a kind and good
gentleman, but unrelenting in regard to the very strict ideas he
had in respect to his "honour". For his wife to be on Lebius's
side in _such_ an affair, would necessarily have brought on the
most severe consequences for him and her! So, she asked Lebius
not to involve her in this under any circumstances, and did not
shy away from giving her his most sacred promise. But then he
went about his business as fast as he could and published in
number 12 of his "Sachsenstimme" a report, of which I am only
going to quote a few points, which are not even the worst:
"Max Dittrich had no children from his first wife, but two from
his stepdaughter, before she was even 16 years old."
"The grief over her husband's immorality was what killed his
wife."
"Though his second wife was very tolerant, Dittrich finally went
to such extremes, that a divorce became inevitable."
"For several years, he had an affair with his wife's niece, who
was 16 years old and lived in the same house."
"Then, he started an affair with a young girl."
"His wife had him watched by an detective agency."
"During the divorce proceedings, Dittrich lived with his lover and
also had his daughter with him."
"Now, he is partially an invalid due to a severe, syphilitic
neurological disease" etc.
You can imagine how shocked his relatives had been, once they had
read this and were summoned as witnesses to appear in court,
because, most naturally, Max Dittrich had sued Mr. Lebius! The
niece had to questioned at home; she was ill and confined to her
bed. Dittrich's ex-wife, in her mental anguish, went to see the
judge and told him honestly that this disgusting matter would be
absolute murder against the happiness of her present marriage,
having hardly any chance to survive this. This outstanding
gentleman did not have solely the law in his mind, but in addition
also a human heart in his chest and dealt with the interrogation
in an accordingly humane manner.
Even if we were to suppose that all of the items listed by Lebius
were based on facts, every more or less educated and not entirely
brutish person would surely have to ask himself, whether the
publication of such things was _permissable_ according to the
_law_ or the _moral_codex_of_the_press._ I am convinced that
everyone, except for Lebius, will answer "No!" to this question.
Though this would, at any rate, suffice to characterise this
gentleman, it is not by a long shot all of it, for if someone
would take the time to look through the files of Dittrich versus
Lebius, he would, in the end of these, see yet another light being
shed on Mr. Lebius. This is because there he confesses that his
slander against Max Dittrich
_had_not_been_true,_
and declares that he was willing to pay the costs of the trial!
I believe, this is all one has to know to be now fully acquainted
with this gentleman.
Whether someone jumps out from behind a bush and murders another
person, or whether he bumps off people from the columns of an
uncivilised newspaper as often as he pleases, the legislation of
the future will surely have to regard and to treat this so very
differently than nowadays. And yet, there are, thank God, already
in this time some authorities of a high mind and of mankind's
ethos, who regard the killing of a human _soul_ as at least just
as punishable as the murder of a human _body._
On March the 27th, 1905, Lebius had hurled the accusations listed
above in his "Sachsenstimme" against Max Dittrich, and on the
following November the 18th, he declared to the second criminal
division of the Royal Superior Court of Dresden, as it has been
recorded:
| "I declare that I hereby retract the insulting statements, |
| which I have made against the plaintiff in the issue of the |
| `Sachsenstimme' from March the 27th, 1905, |
| ! ! ! as untrue ! ! ! |
| and that I am expressing my regret concerning the statements |
| made in the `Sachsenstimme' and that I am therefore |
| ! ! ! asking the plaintiff for his forgiveness ! ! !" |
Then, when a few years later, Lebius started an argument and
lawsuits with the "Vorwärts" in Berlin, they listed the military
author Dittrich as a witness against him. Instantly, Lebius
resorted to his well-known trick, to eliminate witnesses by means
of the press. He once again published precisely the same things
he had, at that other time, published about Dittrich and than
retracted before the Superior Court of Dresden
| ! ! ! as untrue, ! ! ! |
begging for forgiveness. Dittrich was therefore forced to sue him
again and to point out this retraction and plea for forgiveness.
What did Lebius do? He declared in his written statement to the
Royal Inferior Court of Charlottenburg from December the 24th,
1909, that, at that time, he had only made this apology and this
confession of the untruthfulness of his statements
| "for reasons of an economic nature". |
His conditions had been thus tight at this time that he could not
afford to travel to Dresden to attend the trial. Thus, he
personally is the one who is drawing the following moral portrait
of himself:
| In 1905, Lebius defames the military author Dittrich in his |
| paper, published in Dresden. |
| In 1905, Lebius declares to the Superior Court of Dresden |
| that these defamations were all lies and asks for |
| forgiveness. |
| In 1909, Lebius publishes in his Berliner paper these |
| defamations, he had described as lies, once again, as if they |
| were the truth. |
| In 1909, Lebius declares in his written statement to the |
| Inferior Court of Charlottenburg that he had previously lied |
| to the Superior Court of Dresden. |
And why this tangle of lies in court! And how is it possible for
a human being, who would have to possess some sense of honour and
shame, to declare himself in court as a liar and then to describe
this declaration also as a lie? He himself has given us the
answer to this question: He was in a tight situation;
| ! ! ! he had no money ! ! ! |
So, when Lebius has no money, this is a perfectly sufficient
reason for him _to_lie_to_judges_and_court_authorities_and_to_
_present_his_character_in_such_a_way_that_no_cautious_person_
_could_ever_believe_anything_he_says_again!_
I could continue for hours to talk about Lebius in this manner.
But for the purposes I want to achieve today, what I have said up
to here will suffice. I had made notes of the lies, Lebius had
spread about me, not all of them, but only the most striking ones.
By now, there are _more_than_five_hundred,_ I can prove him guilty
of in court. In the last three weeks alone, he has served me with
four plaints for gross insult, though I had nothing whatsoever to
do with these insults. This is what is commonly called an
execution! And in all this, he always insists, as I have already
mentioned, most expressly that I am the one pursuing him, not him
pursuing me. In response to his many, terrible articles from the
years 1904 and 1905, I have only sought assistance once from the
public prosecutor's office and twice from the courts. After this,
I have kept silent to all of his further attacks, until he forced
me by means of the alleged Kahl-pamphlet, to defend myself,
because I _was_to_be_"destroyed_in_the_eyes_of_the_judges"._ And
even in this case, I have forgiven him, settled the matter with
him, retracted my complaint in return for his promise to leave me
alone from then on, though the judge in charge said, that Lebius
would have to face _a_severe_punishment_ if it got to trial. See
the court files 20 B. 254 08/34, signed Schenk, Nauwerk. I bore
it, when Lebius, in spite of his promise in court to leave me
alone from then on, manipulated my ex-wife against me, exploiting
her, depriving her of her income and her jewelry, _and_almost_
_reduced_her_to_beggary._ She had been lured by him into taking
steps in courts against me, which almost have to be described as
insane. And in doing so, he had the guts to pretend in the first
instance of the current trial for gross insult,
| "that he had represented her interests and could therefore |
| claim protection according to article 193 [a]!" |
[a] I do not know how this law might have changed in the last 90
years. In its current version, article 193 of the German
penal code states that certain insulting statements are only
punishable, if the insult consists in the form, not the
contents of the statement. Among others, these kinds of
statements are those made to defend a right or to protect a
valid interest.
Never before, a greater lie has been uttered than this one! By
manipulating Mrs. Pollmer, Lebius has only pursued his own private
interests concerning the lawsuits, _while_the_interests_of_this_
_poor_woman_were_callously_trampled_upon_by_him._ It is an outrage
that, to top it all off, he even demands the protection of article
193 for this!
The newspapers have repeatedly described him as a person "to whom
the lives of others mean nothing in the pursuit of his goals". My
ex-wife had even used another, extremely bad word instead of
"person", without him daring to hold her responsible for this in
court. Whether this accusation is true, or whether it is an
exaggeration, I could prove with many examples; but I only want
to give this one: After the trial in Charlottenburg on April the
12th of this year, which had been completely misrepresented in the
newspapers' reports, the "Boston American" in Boston,
Massachusetts, published the following note, which had been sent
to them from Berlin:
"Author of pious books, a bandit. Berlin - - - Mr. Charles May,
the millionaire, philanthropist, author of pious books, and an
outstanding personality of Germany, has today been branded by a
jury as the perpetrator of many, serious crimes, committed in the
mountainous area of southern Saxony, where, 40 years ago, he led a
gang of robbers. _May_collapsed_and_was_placed_under_the_
_protection_of_his_friends,_to_prevent_him_from_committing_
_suicide_ etc." To make up such monstrous distortions of the
truth, in order to "destroy" me, this does surely constitute a
disrespect for the lives of others, or does it not? But let this
be enough on this Mr. Lebius. The place for all the rest is the
court, but not here. To let my readers see things clearly, there
is only one more fact to be stated: Münchmeyer's lawyer Dr.
Gerlach is his lawyer as well, and both are giving each other help
and assistance to the largest possible extent. There are two more
extremely interesting champions for Münchmeyer's cause I have to
mention, who, though in respect to their intelligence, neither of
them comes close to Gerlach or Lebius, nevertheless leave a
striking impression as god-fearing, Catholic monks in the company
of those pursuing the interests of the colportage, who are
Protestants or have even seceded from the church.
One of them is the Benedictine Father Ansgar Pöllmann in Beuron.
I had been facing a Benedictine Father in court once before. His
name was Willibrord Beßler and called himself a professor. He had
published a serious insult against me in the "Stern der Jugend"
<Star of the Youth>. I found out that he had his domicile in the
Benedictine abbey of Seckau in Styria; so, I travelled there and
had him summoned to the district court of Leoben. There, it
turned out that he did have the right to bear the title of a
professor at all. He gave me the following written apology:
"Responding to a request to give a more detailed definition of the
terms `professor' and `author for the youth', attributed to me in
various writings, I hereby state that I am a teacher at the
private secondary school of the abbey of Seckau and that I am a
correspondent for the youth-magazine `Stern der Jugend'.
Furthermore, I truthfully declare that I regret the article
contained in the above mentioned magazine (1903 No. 25) on the
medical conditions of the author Karl May and that I formally take
back those words he objected to in court.
"Seckau, October the 20th, 1904.
Father Willibrord Beßler
O.S.B." [a]
[a] OSB = Ordinis Sancti Benedicti (of the order of Saint
Benedict). The original book incorrectly reads "O.S.P.".
And now there was once again a Benedictine Father, I had to sue in
court! The name of the abbot seems to be Ildefons Schober in both
cases. Might it be the same person? Not in Seckau and not in
Beuron, but elsewhere, Benedictines have printed lots of illegal
copies of my "traveller's tales" without my knowledge, until I
forbade them to do so. I do not know how it is possible for an
religious order to print and distribute my works without any
permission, and still to insult and persecute me in such a public
manner, or rather to put me and these very same works under the
ban! In vain, I am making every effort to find a logical
connection between these two. After all, it goes entirely without
saying that I could not possibly have allowed this printing to go
on! By the way, this Father from Beuron is the very same who
wants to "put a figurative noose around my neck, to whip me out of
the temple of German art with it". So, first they print copies of
my books without asking me, and then they drive me out with their
whips! This is how Father Pöllmann characterises his own order,
which has truly done more than enough for the benefit of our
literature, so that it should not be given such a reputation by
one of its members!
Father Pöllmann has written a series of articles against me in the
Catholic magazine "Ueber den Wassern" <Above the waters>, and I
have answered them in the magazine "Freistatt" <asylum (literally:
place of freedom)> from Vienna. This ought to have settled things
between us, and it would have been up to the readers to decide,
whether they would take his or my side. But, while I, quite
naturally, was as factual and polite in my responses as possible,
his articles consisted of almost nothing else but insults, so that
he will have to be inconvenienced to appear in court. And
furthermore, his personal relationship and the relationship of his
writings to Mr. Lebius, the lawyer Gerlach, and the Münchmeyers'
plan, to "destroy" me in the newspapers, has to be ascertained.
He has denied to be in contact with Lebius, Gerlach, etc.; but
these kinds of relationships of his are very easily proven. This
point has to be clarified. For even he cannot deny that he had
most forcefully taken part in "destroying" me. His articles in
the "Wasser"-magazine are most eagerly used against me in both
trials, the one against Lebius and the one against Pauline
Münchmeyer. He has even been named by Lebius as a witness or
"expert" and will have to testify in Berlin in this capacity.
Concerning our trial for gross insult, Father Pöllmann adheres to
a tactic, which I cannot approve of. I have to wonder, if it is
part of this tactic of his to deceive the reading audience. At
first, from time to time, certain articles were published in an
ironic and patronising tone, making fun of the fact that I had not
carried out my threat to sue him. And now, as he has to see that
I did keep this promise, certain newspapers hostile to me keep on
pretending that my complaints for gross insult had been dismissed
by this or that court and that I would have to be liable for all
expenses. This is not fair, perhaps even undignified. The
question was only which court had the jurisdiction, nothing else.
When I filed the criminal charges against Father Pöllmann, I was
under the jurisdiction of the Inferior Court of Dresden. In the
meantime, the Inferior Court of Kötzschenbroda had been founded,
which is now in charge of my district. Therefore, the question
was raised, whether the matter, as a consequence of this, had to
be tried here or there or elsewhere. Until this has been decided,
is has to be suspended. Whoever portrays it differently, can only
be either ignorant or vicious. I know nothing about any expenses.
The situation concerning my complaint for gross insult against
Father Expeditus Schmidt in Munich is quite similar. It has been
filed in Dresden and the trial started in Kötzschenbroda. Here
also, questions concerning the jurisdiction have been raised, but
not by me. I have no reason at all to prefer the verdict to be
pronounced in one place rather than another, for my cause is just.
I do not need to weigh with subtle reasoning, if I would win or
lose my lawsuit in a certain place, with a certain court, and in a
certain case. I must not cling to such extraneous things, but
rather stick by the matter itself and the truth of it; the rest,
I leave up to the judges.
These transfers were no obstruction, but an advantage, for me.
They have given me an opportunity to see the cards my opponents
were holding. Most of all, it turned out that the two Fathers
Schmidt and Pöllmann are closely connected with the name and the
cause of Münchmeyer. Their lawyer is connected with the lawyer of
Münchmeyer and Lebius. I will prove this, and then the connection
with the Münchmeyers' plan to "to destroy me in the eyes of all of
Germany in all the newspapers" will be perfectly self-evident. To
enable my readers to briefly review the current state of affairs,
I am ending this chapter by quoting an article, which the "Wiener
Montags-Journal" <Monday's Journal of Vienna> published this year
on October the 17th. It reads:
_Karl_May_as_a_novelist._
(A redress.)
We are faced with an impressive series of volumes, the work of an
immensely productive and successful author. But at the same time,
it also constitutes his exoneration. This is because, until now,
there have not been many cases where a person's literary work has
been the reason for such abysmally vicious and underhanded
attacks, as those targeted against Karl May. Before we will turn
to a detailed assessment, recognising the so very rich imagination
of this German novelist, we want to give the defamed author the
opportunity to defend himself, which is now, after the lawsuits
against his spiteful and malicious opponents have been successful,
also a redress. Mr. May has written to us:
The entire so-called "Karl-May-persecution" has been constructed
based on lies. The first one of these lies is, that I was an
author for the youth and had written my traveller's tales for
immature, young people. Most of these tales have been published
by the "Deutscher Hausschatz", which as surely never been a
magazine for boys. And every honest eye will instantly see, when
glancing at the volumes which were published later, that they can
only be understood my mentally grown-up persons. With this, all
accusations of me allegedly "corrupting the youth" lose their
basis. The fact that, nevertheless, young people are reading my
books and even enjoy them very much, still would not prove that I
had targeted them at them, but rather that a youthful soul is
finding in them, what others are depriving it of.
A second lie is that I was fibbing in these traveller's tales of
mine. Whoever says so surely does not even suspect what a bad
testimony he is giving to his own intelligence. After all, it
only takes the analytic powers of an eighth-grader to realize that
all of my narratives only have their roots in real live, but
otherwise extend upwards into regions which are not so
commonplace. Every reader who understands me knows that I
describe countries and peoples which, up to this day, exist almost
exclusively in fairy-tales, but have to move, by and by, into
the realm of absolute reality for us. When I envision and
describe as reality what is still a fairy-tale to others, only for
ignorant or malicious people, this can be a reason to maintain
that I was fibbing.
In the past, nobody would have thought of judging me in this
insulting manner. Whoever had not understood me would not have
said more than that I had a very extensive imagination. Only
after the biggest of all lies which exist about me had been
spread, this is the lie that I had written "abysmally indecent
trashy novels", they dared to talk to me in such a tone. This
untrue statement has its source with a bookseller of colportage,
who had an interest in spreading it around, in order to make as
much money as possible by exploiting my name. In the person of
Mr. Cardauns, who used to be the editor in chief of the newspaper
called "Kölnische Volkszeitung" at that time, this lie found the
man who, by means of his publications, did more than much to
further its distribution and even took it on himself to produce
"evidence" that the indecencies in question could be the product
of nobody else's but my pen. Quite naturally, the true,
irrefutable proof would only have been possible by presenting the
original manuscripts, I had written. All other evidence could
only be based on intentional deception or self-delusion and
finally had come out as a bombastic illusion.
What kind of evidence was it which Mr. Cardauns presented? He
came forth with one unproven allegation after another. He listed
quite a number of "inner reasons", to conceal the lack of real
reasons. He talked about proofs, evidence, indisputable official
documents and such. The "Neuigkeits-Weltblatt" <Worldwide Paper
of News> from Vienna even proves that he had stated that he would
own the original document, undoubtedly proving May's guilt.
Everyone had to presume based on this that he would have my
original manuscripts in his possession, and therefore, he was
believed, especially since those papers in which he had made his
assertions persistently refused to print my responses. With his
self-delusion he started a trend: others deluded themselves as
well, until in due time they came to see the facts as they are by
themselves. Today, only a few still believe in his elaborations.
Others accept them, because they benefit from them in a lawsuit or
for similar reasons. Whether Father Expeditus Schmidt and Father
Ansgar Pöllmann, my two newest opponents, truly believe in their
friend Cardauns, I do not know; I could only guess. What they
assert is, from my point of view, far removed from any kind of a
proof. But all they do against me, they base on the old
foundation laid out by Cardauns, and they really seem to be
convinced that I will soon collapse under the accusations they and
their allies make.
These allies are: The former colporteuse Mrs. Pauline Münchmeyer,
publisher of the notorious "Temple of Venus", which had been
confiscated by the police. Furthermore, there is the lawyer of
that woman, Dr. Gerlach in Dresden, who, by now, has incessantly
waged his war against me for entire nine years. And finally,
there is this well-known Mr. Rudolf Lebius in Charlottenburg, the
socialist, who has seceded from the Christian church, who had
proposed that he would be willing to praise and laud me in his
paper, if I only gave him between 3000 and 6000 marks, and in the
end even 10.000 marks. I gave him nothing. In response, he
changed over to the Münchmeyers' side and was the most unrelenting
one of my opponents ever since. I want to state explicitly that
he also has the advocate Mr. Gerlach for a lawyer. And when I am
now adding that the Münchmeyers' Mr. Gerlach is also the lawyer
and advisor of Father Expeditus Schmidt and Father Ansgar
Pöllmann, this results in the following drastic picture of of the
chase: I am completely surrounded. I am encircled by Mr.
Cardauns, the colporteuse Mrs. Pauline Münchmeyer, the advocate
Mr. Gerlach, Father Schmidt, Mr. Lebius, and Father Pöllmann.
Every one of them is ready to gun for me at any time. Though they
deny being in contact with each other, they call upon one another
as witnesses and experts in their lawsuits and assist each other
in the collection of evidence against me and by producing
petitions and legal statements for the courts. But the most
prominent one of them all is this advocate of the Münchmeyers',
who directs everything and all of them, even the two Fathers. The
most harmless and amusing one, on the other hand, is Mr. Cardauns,
who, as far as I know, could never made to confess that he did not
possess my original manuscripts, until recently in Bonn he had to
admit in my presence, being interrogated by the judge in charge as
a witness, that he had never even seen them.
The question, whether that Münchmeyer lady will be able to bring
me down with the assistance of her five secular and clerical
comrades, has long since been decided. Nobody who knows how
matters are would continue asking it. - -
Radebeul-Dresden, October 1910.
Karl May.