H. G. WELLS REGRETS He cannot lunch any day

One of the first copies of " Was It Worth it, Wells? " (the Editor's answer to " Crux Ansata ") was forwarded to Mr. Wells with the following letter:
Dear Mr. Wells, — Herewith my autographed copy of " Was II Worth it. Wells?" I hope 'cry 11111Ch it will he possible for 14.5 to have our proposed meal, with the hook as the basis of a friendly conversation. I imagine. however, that it would he hest to postpone this ?MN' till UPC'S'
Christmas. Please let me know what you think.
Yours very sincerely. Michael de la Redoyere (Editor).
The following answer came by return of post:
Deo, Mr. de in Bedoirre.— Thanks for the autographed book. I shrug my shoulders. Ir is what Jon are I enclose a letter from Father Sinrcox, I hope you will print in due course in THE CATHOLIC HERALD. I am doubtful about lunching with you be
cause I do not think 1 can feel sole against your subsequent misrepresentation ol the occasion.
Yours very sincerely. H. G. Wells.
It may be noted that Wells has given no evidence, nor even any example, of alleged misrepresentation, yet in the end this is made the excuse for avoiding the meeting. In " Was It Worth It, Wells? " every line of the correspondence has been published, and the world must judge of the sincerity of H. G. Wells in, first, changing th conditions for a meeting in order to postpone it, and then refusing it altogether on an excuse for which he has not given the remotest hint of substantiadon,
Father .)imcox says
The letter of Father Simcox was sent for publication in this paper, though, oddly enough, the tits( sight of the text of it in THE CATHOLIC HERALD office was in the copy which was sent by Father Simcox lo H, G. Wells in order to give him, apparently, some badly needed moral support. Father Simcox is the Professor of Canon Law in St. Edmund's College, Ware.
The letter is as follows.
Sir,—I am sorry that you have not included in your reply to Mr. Wells the list of 44 misstatements. It would have been a useful guide to disput
. able points in Mr. Wells's book.
Also, since the list of misstatements was the cause of Mr. Wells's change of tone and mind, its absence from your introduction is rather like what the absence of the Prince of 'Denmark flout Handet would be.
Though your pamphlet is very clever and amusing and contains many good points, I regret to say that it does not seem to me to be very candid.
I have already told you in a private letter that your position regarding the prohibition of books to Catholics seems to me to be very far flora frank. I take the same view of your suggestion on page 22 that the Jesuits are simply dying to tell everything they know about Dr. Coulton's accuracy. My own experience has been that the Jesuits are sometimes very unwilling to make any reply whatever to plain questions about certain incidents in which Dr. Coolton's accuracy has been the main issue at stake. For instance, I once tried to elicit from Father Brodrick, S.J., whether or not Dr. CoulIon had been accurate in his chief charge against Cardinal Gasquet. So far from inviting mc to lunch to 'explain everything to me, Father Brodrick would not reply at all.
This point is distinct from your own estimate of Dr. Coulton.. I do not know enough either about general history or about Dr. Coulton's work to dispute With you on that paint. Dr. Coulton's frank confession of error in the Lea-Thurston matter seemed to me to' be greatly to his credit. John V. Simcox (Rev).
Editor's Comments :
In reference to this letter the following points may be made:
(1) Wells would have pounced on us had the full list of 44 misstatements been published without a full refutation of each. This would have entailed a very much longer and very much heavier book. It may be that the niaterial prepared -will be used at a later date in a full answer to Crux Ansata by another hand. The misstatements selected were chosen simply because their refutation could bc easily and quickly stated without entering into theology, philosophy and history. The booklet was not meant to be mere controversy, but another stage in the apparently hopeless attempt to make Wells see some reason.
(2) The question of the Index was not raised again by Wells himself, nor
mentioned in Crux Ansata. What it comes to is this. Fr. Simcox in a private letter stated that all books against Faith and Morals are forbidden even though not listed on the Index. Hence Wells was correct in suggesting that Catholics could not read Crux Ansata. Later, he wrote to correct this so far as Crux Ansata was concerned, " because it is not a liber. To be a fiber a work must run to 160 octavo pages."
(3) The accusation against the Jesuits can best be answered by then:selves if they think it worth it.