Sir,--I am much obliged to Mr. J. S. Trotter for the letter which you published this morning. It furnishes evidence, which I much desired to possess on the following points:-- 1. The author of "The New Papacy" is a responsible, trustworthy person; otherwise Mr. Trotter would not speak of having had "the pleasure of an interview" with him. 2. After this responsible person had taken the trouble to write a pamphlet of sixty-four closely printed pages, some influence was brought to bear upon him, the effect of which was that he refused his consent to its publication. Mr. Trotter's excellent information will surely enable him to tell us what influence that was. 3. How does Mr. Trotter know that any passage I have quoted is an interpolation? Does he possess that other copy of the "two" which alone, as he affirms, were printed? [279] 4. If so, he will be able to say which of the passages I have cited is genuine and which is not; and whether the tenor of the whole uninterpolated copy differs in any important respect from that of the copy I have quoted. It will be interesting to hear what Mr. J. S. Trotter has to say upon these points. But the really important thing which he has done is that he has testified, of his own knowledge, that the anonymous author of "The New Papacy" is no mere irresponsible libeller, but a person of whom even an ardent Salvationist has to speak with respect. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, T. H. Huxley. [I may add that the unfortunate Mr. Trotter did me the further service of eliciting the letter from Mr. Hodges referred to on p. 277--which sufficiently establishes that gentleman's credit, and leads me to attach full weight to his evidence about the third barrel.] January, 1891. [280] VII The "Times," December 27th, 1890 SIR,--In making use of the only evidence of the actual working of Mr. Booth's autocratic government accessible to me, I was fully aware of the slippery nature of the ground upon which I was treading. For, as I pointed out in my first letter, "no personal habit more surely degrades the conscience and the intellect than blind and unhesitating obedience to unlimited authority." Now we have it, on Mr. Booth's own showing that every officer of his has undertaken to "obey without questioning or gainsaying the orders from headquarters." And the possible relations of such orders to honour and veracity are demonstrated not only by the judicial deliverance on Mr. Booth's affidavit in the "Eagle" case, which I have already cited; not only by Mr. Bramwell Booth's admission before Mr. Justice Lopes that he had stated what was "not quite correct" because he had "promised Mr. Stead not to divulge" the facts of the case (the "Times," November 4th, 1885); but by the following passage in Mr. Hodges's account of the reasons of his withdrawal from the Salvation Army:--