Truth About the Split — Page 116
116 him. What I say is that the Ahmadiyya Community did not regard the book in the light suggested by Maulawi Muhammad Ali and this, because we find that in the accredited organ of its central executive— the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya—a very emphatic and favourable notice of the book was published by the editorial staff, it matters not whether by the pen of Maulawi Muhammad Ali or by any other writer. If the book was considered as objectionable as Maulawi Muhammad Ali would have us believe, such a review of it was quite impossible. It should be remembered that there is one important difference between 'articles' and 'reviews' published in any paper. Articles may sometimes be published which express views opposed to those of the editor. It is not necessary that opinions of correspondents should always conform to those held by editors. But with reviews the case is different. Commendatory notices of books are always evidence of the fact that the editorial staff of the paper is in full agreement with the views expressed by the reviewer. If, however, in this instance, it was a case of mistaken judgment on the part of the reviewer, then it was the duty of members of the Community to raise a voice against the reviewer. And the least one could expect was that as soon as—according to Maulawi Muhammad Ali, Khalifatul Masih I ra , after reading the