“MR CROY’S” STATEMENT REVERSED.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume III, Issue 633, 11 May 1882, Page 2

“MR CROY’S” STATEMENT REVERSED.

To the Editor.

Sir, —A correspondent signed “ James Croy,” has undertaken to enlighten the public on the fair play principle, in connection with Mr Saunders’ late meeting at Ashton. Ho has read the latter gentleman’s letter, which is “ greatly distorted,” and then follows the proverbial flat contradiction. With regard to my reply to Mr Saunders, in which I am made to say that the report of the Ashton meeting as it appeared in the Ashburton Mail, was false, I am always willing to abide by whatever I write or say, but when wo have men such as “James Croy ” coming forward and making such an. erroneous and false accusation, it shows at once whether he is a partisan or not. My letter or reply to Mr Saunders had no reference whatever, nor in any way called in question the Mail's report oi the meeting at Ashton. It may have been, as your correspondent states, a faithful record, but seeing I never referred to it in any way, I fail to see wherein my statement was false. What I did write about, was in reference to a leading article which appeared in the Mail subsequently to the meeting in question, and which mainly referred to the imprisonment case of Mr Saunders. It was simply in regard to some very uncharitable strictures, placed upon Mr Saunders in his reply to Williams, and more particularly that part referring to the Judge. In this he (Mr Saunders) had every reason to feel agrieved. Mr Croy seems, however, to think differently, as in his letter he says that that part referring to the meat and drink given to Judge Johnston “is accurate.” We shall see, after I have put the two versions before your readers, whether Mr Croy is the lover of fair play that he assumes to be in his letter, and whether he stands forth in the present case as a true or a false witness. Speaking in reply to a question put by Mr Williams, respecting his imprisonment, Mr Saunders said “ that his case had been surrounded by many untoward circumstances, on the Judge’s arrival in Nelson just previous to his trial he had happened to dine morning and evening with two gentlemen, both of whom he (Mr Saunders) had previously displeased, and who he knew were rather bitter against him. He mentioned this because such company would certainly strive to prejudice his case ” Now this was almost word for word used at the Ashton meeting. This is how the Mail put it: —“ Mr Saunders informed the electors of Wakanui at Ashton that the sentence he received was the outcome of a good feed which was given to the worthy Judge the night before the trial. Mr Justice Johnston supped at the house of an evening, when he was not only primed with eatables and drinkables till he - was as full as a tick, but primed with uncharitable thoughts.” —and so on, sir. Your readers will see here what Mr Maunders really did say, and they will also see the very accurate account given by the Mail, and which Mr Orc.y so freely asserts is a “ faithful record” of the “ meat and drink business,” as be terms it. Any men who says he was present at the meeting and comes before She public with such a statement as that given by Mr Croy, must be possessed of ui extraordinary range of imagination and very elastic conscience. Mr Croy has n'idently been hoaxed into, if not writng at least givinglns name to, a lett.r for mrely party purposes. Should Mr Croy ;vor essay to write another letter, he may wrhaps come to know that it is always iscessary to ascertain what he is really vriting about, and while professing to ispouse the cause of truth and fair play,

find also calling in question the veracity of Others, ho should at the same time not overlook the. fact that it is also necessary, on his own part, to make his statement by all means in accordance with the truth, —lam, etc., G. Giimook. Ashton, May 10.