Dr. Conan Doyle (letter)
Dr. Conan Doyle
Sir, — I will not again take up your valuable space by discussing subjects which are foreign to the issue. Since my views are quite open on the suzerainty question, what does it matter to me whether Mr. Marks thinks the 1884 Convention makes for it or against it? As to the compensation which Britain got for the concessions upon that occasion, I share the general opinion that it was worthless. Lord Salisbury was not in office at that time, and I presume that Mr. Marks does not always regard that statesman's opinion as final upon every question.
On the bullet question I cannot see any difference between Mr. Marks's opinion and my own, save that where I say "hundreds of thousands" he desires to substitute "millions." I have a letter before me from the very highest departmental authority which begins, "It is not the fact that at any time the expanding (Mark IV.) bullet was the normal bullet of our army. It was approved for service use as required, and was used at Omdurman. The idea always was that it should be used (if required) in wars against savages." The fact is that both bullets were made, but the expansive bullets were probably most numerous, our "savage" wars are the more frequent. Since Mr. Marks does not dispute my assertion that this war was fought with the solid bullet, what has all this talk about expansive bullets to do with the argument? — Yours faithfully,
A. CONAN DOYLE.
Undershaw, Hindhead, Haslemere.