evolution and ethics and other essays-第56部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


that　the　deed　is　a　mere　deed　poll　by　Booth　himself；　without　any　other
party　to　it；　who；　as　a　contracting　party；　would　have　a　right　to
enforce　it。

〃Whether　there　are　any　objects　of　the　trust　I　cannot　say。　If　there　is；
as　the　recital　indicates；　a　society　of　enrolled　members　called　'The
Christian　Mission；'　those　members　would　be　objects　of　the　trust；　but
then；　it　appears　to　me；　Booth　has　entire　control　and　determination　of
the　application。　And；　as　to　the　trusts　enuring　for　the　benefit　of　the
'Salvation　Army；'　I　am　not　aware　what　is　the　constitution　of　the
'Salvation　Army；'　but　there　is　no　reference　whatever　to　any　such　body
in　the　deed。　I　have　understood　the　army　as　being　merely　the
missionaries；　and　not　the　society　of　worshippers。

〃If　there　is　no　Christian　Mission　Society　of　enrolled　members；　then
there　are　no　objects　of　the　trust。　The　trusts　are　purely　religious；
and　trading　is　entirely　beyond　its　purposes。　Booth　can　＇305＇　'give
away'　the　property；　simply　because　there　is　no　one　who　has　any　right
to　prevent　his　doing　so。

〃Ernest　Hatton。〃

It　is　probably　my　want　of　legal　knowledge　which　prevents　me　from
appreciating　the　value　of　the　professed　corrections　of　Mr。　Hatton's
opinion　contained　in　the　letters　of　Messrs。　Ranger；　Burton；　and
Matthews；　〃Times；〃　January　28th　and　29th；　1891。

The　note　on　page　301　refers　to　a　correspondence；　incomplete　at　the
time　fixed　for　the　publication　of　my　pamphlet；　the　nature　of　which　is
sufficiently　indicated　by　the　subjoined　extracts　from　Mr。　Stead's
letter　in　the　〃Times〃　of　January　20th；　and　from　my　reply　in　the
〃Times〃　of　January　24th。　Referring　to　the　paragraphs　numbered　1；　2；　at
the　end　of　my　letter　XI。；　Mr。　Stead　says：

〃On　reading　this；　I　at　once　wrote　to　Professor　Huxley；　stating　that；　as
he　had　mentioned　my　name；　I　was　justified　in　intervening　to　explain
that；　so　far　as　the　second　count　in　his　indictment　wentfor　the　Eagle
dispute　is　no　concern　of　minehe　had　been　misled　by　an　error　in　the
reports　of　the　case　which　appeared　in　the　daily　papers　＇306＇　of
November　4；　1885。　I　have　his　reply　to…day；　saying　that　I　had　better
write　to　you　direct。　May　I　ask　you；　then；　seeing　that　my　name　has　been
brought　into　the　affair；　to　state　that；　as　I　was　in　the　dock　when　Mr。
Bramwell　Booth　was　in　the　witness…box；　I　am　in　a　position　to　give　the
most　unqualified　denial　to　the　statement　as　to　the　alleged　admission
on　his　part　of　falsehood？　Nothing　was　heard　in　Court　of　any　such
admission。　Neither　the　prosecuting　counsel　nor　the　Judge　who　tried　the
case　ever　referred　to　it；　although　it　would　obviously　have　had　a
direct　bearing　on　the　credit　of　the　witness；　and　the　jury；　by
acquitting　Mr。　　Bramwell　Booth；　showed　that　they　believed　him　to　be　a
witness　of　truth。　But　fortunately　the　facts　can　be　verified　beyond　all
gainsaying　by　a　reference　to　the　official　shorthand…writer's　report　of
the　evidence。　During　the　hearing　of　the　case　for　the　prosecution；
Inspector　Borner　was　interrupted　by　the　Judge；　who　said：

〃'I　want　to　ask　you　a　question。　During　the　whole　of　that　conversation；
did　Booth　in　any　way　suggest　that　that　child　had　been　sold？'　Borner
replied：

〃'Not　at　that　interview；　my　Lord。'

〃It　was　to　this　that　Mr。　Bramwell　Booth　referred　when；　after
examination；　cross…examination；　＇307＇　and　re…examination；　during　which
no　suggestion　had　been　made　that　he　had　ever　made　the　untrue　statement
now　alleged　against　him；　he　asked　and　received　leave　from　the　Judge　to
make　the　following　explanation；　which　I　quote　from　the　official
report：

〃'Will　you　allow　me　to　explain　a　matter　mentioned　yesterday　in
reference　to　a　question　asked　by　your　Lordship　some　days　ago　with
respect　to　one　matter　connected　with　my　conduct？　Your　Lordship　asked；
I　think　it　was　Inspector　Borner；　whether　I　had　said　to　him　at　either
of　our　interviews　that　the　child　was　sold　by　her　parents；　and　he
replied　〃No。〃　That　is　quite　correct；　I　did　not　say　so　to　him；　and　what
I　wish　to　say　now　is　that　I　had　been　specially　requested　by　Mr。　Stead；
and　had　given　him　a　promise；　that　I　would　not　under　any　circumstances
divulge　the　fact　of　that　sale　to　any　person　which　would　ma　ke　it　at
all　probable　that　any　trouble　would　be　brought　upon　the　persons　who
had　taken　part　in　this　investigation。'　（Central　Criminal　Court　Reports；
Vol。　　CII。；　part　612；　pp。　1；035…6。）

〃In　the　daily　papers　of　the　following　day　this　statement　was
misreported　as　follows：

〃'I　wish　to　explain；　in　regard　to　your　Lordship's　condemnation　of　my
having　said　〃No〃　to　＇308＇　Inspector　Borner　when　he　asked　me　whether
the　child　had　been　sold　by　her　parentsthe　reason　why　I　stated　what
was　not　correct　was　that　I　had　promised　Mr。　Stead　not　to　divulge　the
fact　of　the　sale　to　any　person　which　would　make　it　probable　that　any
trouble　should　be　brought　on　persons　taking　part　in　this　proceeding。'

〃Hence　the　mistake　into　which　Professor　Huxley　has　unwittingly　fallen。

〃I　may　add　that；　so　far　from　the　statement　never　having　been　challenged
for　five　years；　it　was　denounced　as　'a　remarkably　striking　lie'　in　the
'War　Cry'　of　November　14th；　and　again　the　same　official　organ　of　the
Salvation　Army　of　November　18th　specifically　adduced　this　misreport　as
an　instance　of　'the　most　disgraceful　way'　in　which　the　reports　of　the
trial　were　garbled　by　some　of　the　papers。　What；　then；　becomes　of　one
of　the　two　main　pillars　of　Professor　Huxley's　argument？〃

In　my　reply；　I　point　out　that；　on　the　10th　of　January；　Mr。　Stead
addressed　to　me　a　letter；　which　commences　thus：　〃I　see　in　the　'Times'
of　this　morning　that　you　are　about　to　republish　your　letters　on
Booth's　book。〃

I　replied　to　this　letter　on　the　12th　of　January：

＇309＇　〃Dear　Mr。　Stead；I　charge　Mr。　Bramwell　Booth　with　nothing。　I
simply　quote　the　'Times'　report；　the　accuracy　of　which；　so　far　as　I
know；　has　never　been　challenged　by　Mr。　Booth。　I　say　I　quote　the
'Times'　and　not　Mr。　Hodges；*　because　I　took　some　pains　about　the
verification　of　Mr。　Hodges's　citation。

　　　　*　This　is　a　slip　of　the　pen。　Mr。　Hodges　had　nothing　to　do
　　　　with　the　citation　of　which　I　made　use。

〃I　should　have　thought　it　rather　appertained　to　Mr。　Bramwell　Booth　to
contradict　a　statement　which　refers；　not　to　what　you　heard；　but　to　what
he　said。　However；　I　am　the　last　person　to　wish　to　give　circulation　to
a　story　which　may　not　be　quite　correct；　and　I　will　take　care；　if　you
have　no　objection　（your　letter　is　marked　'private'）；　to　make　public　as
much　of　your　letter　as　relates　to　the　point　to　which　you　have　called
my　attention。

　　　　　　　　　　　〃I　am；　yours　very　faithfully；
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　T。　H。　Huxley。〃

To　this　Mr。　Stead　answered；　under　date　of　January　13th；　1891：

〃Dear　Professor　Huxley；I　thank　you　for　your　letter　of　the　12th　inst。
I　am　quite　sure　you　would　not　wish　to　do　any　injustice　in　this　matter。
But；　instead　of　publishing　any　extract　from　my　letter；　might　I　ask　you
to　read　the　passage　as　it　＇310＇　appears　in　the　verbatim　report　of　the
trial　which　was　printed　day　by　day；　and　used　by　counsel　on　both　sides；
and　by　the　Judge　during　the　case？　I　had　hoped　to　have　got　you　a　copy
to…day；　but　find　that　I　was　too　late。　I　shall　have　it　first　thing
to…morrow　morning。　You　will　find　that　it　is　q