SIR,—I suggest that the reason why Mr. Randolp h Churchill cannot
respond to my challenge and namoe the books with which, he told us, the Archbishop f Canterbury was surrounded, indexed and cross' referenced, during his interview with Princess Mar garet, was that the books themselves never existed' They are merely a touch, to give the appearance S` verisimilitude, worked in by the author of this modern myth. Mr. Churchill says it is not within his competence, to name the books and therefore he does not ottani., to do so. I ask him to go farther and admit that ill( not within his competence to lend any sort ° atithority to the story. The interview in question was a private one betwec the Archbishop and the Princess..I find it da ,c11, to' believe that either of the parties confided tP Churchill what took place on that occasion. Of course, if he will now tell us that clic safe; of his information was either the Archbishop ur 0, Princess, or both of them, I shall be delighted retract. But until then I make no apology for this, ing this story to be the merest tittle-tattle, and 'effrontery' in this respect in no way matches that'' M r. Churchill in passing it off as 'fact; 'truth, CEor4r esponde ReligiousStreet, c News Chronicle, 12-22 Boutrie ,e
Previous page
