Read Ebook: Being a Summary Statement of the Investigation Made by the British Government of the Mormon Question in England by Beeley Arthur L Arthur Lawton
Font size:
Background color:
Text color:
Add to tbrJar First Page Next Page Prev Page
Ebook has 54 lines and 6036 words, and 2 pages
It is apparent, therefore, that the "extensive enquiries" would be made through the very effective channels at the disposal of the Home Secretary, viz., the different police forces. Now, it is an absolute fact, and has later become common knowledge, that the various police forces throughout the United Kingdom were instructed to make full inquiries into these allegations and to report their findings to the Home Office. The fact that eight different members of Parliament, each representing different constituencies, brought the matter before the attention of the House of Commons, is further proof that the inquiries would be thorough and universal, i.e., not confined to any one part of the country. The fact that the question was debated eight times within nine months on the floor of the House of Commons is further evidence that the question had become an aggravated one and would be dealt with "very thoroughly," as Mr. Churchill promised. Again, the fact, as stated by Mr. Churchill on the 18th of November, 1911, that the allegations which reached the Home Office were inquired into and no ground for action found, is an additional reason for believing that the inquiries would be thorough-going. In this connection let it be borne in mind that Mr. Churchill, on the 20th April, 1911, stated that "the whole question is receiving consideration," and on the 6th of March, 1911, said: "I am treating it in a serious spirit, and looking into it very thoroughly."
Now, then, in the light of these facts, the conclusion drawn by Mr. Churchill in May, 1911, and the declaration of the Home Secretary, so recent as May 22nd, 1914, to the effect "that the extensive inquiries which were made did not reveal any grounds for legislative action," prove conclusively that such allegations are untrue. And what is very remarkable is the fact that Mr. Winston Churchill made this statement and reached this conclusion in spite of himself, for on the 19th of April, 1911, he implied that he himself regarded the "Mormon" propaganda as dangerous. Now, then, since as Professor Todd further points out, that "He himself is a magistrate, and exercises a power to examine and commit for trial persons charged with offenses against the State," is it not only reasonable to suppose that in the exercise of this power and duty he would have committed for trial and punished more rigorously any and all offenders; and further, is not the argument also tenable that he undoubtedly would have proposed and introduced "effective legislation"?
The judge has rendered his decision, dear reader. The court of last appeal, after "extensive inquiries," has awarded in favor of the silent defendants. The "Mormon" elder is exonerated, and the falsifier, in spite of his prejudice, calumny and invective, has been ignominiously defeated.
The question logically rises itself here: What can be said of our accusers who persist in the circulation of these charges, who reject the findings of their own Government, and thereby insult it by tacitly implying that the British Government is aiding, abetting and conniving at the alleged infamous practices of the "Mormon" Church? Such a man is either an ignoramus or a prevaricator of the first water, and we care not which horn of the dilemma he chooses.
Add to tbrJar First Page Next Page Prev Page