A REPLY.

Evening Star, Issue 4164, 1 July 1876, Page 4

A REPLY.

To the Editor.

Sir,--You h*ve a correspondent who seejns to be affiled with a crave of some nqrt or other. His letters appear at short intervale with different signatures, but " the t»mo bold Roman hand" 13 eeen in all. Whose ever the voice may bo the hand is always Esau's. Nor docs this many-naiaod ' writer confine his favors to your columns. I have seen at least cue letter of his signed " Observer " iu one of your morning contem■jjpraiies. The writer I allude to is easily recognised by his frequent nso of ■uci epithets as "tippling christians,' "■ hypocriticaltemplaifi ""traitors," "dupes,' "treacherous hypocrites," " rnm-sollers,' " Tingites " and suoh like. H is letters also. as a rulo, contain serionß charges of all manner of evil doing 3 levelled against every one in general but no one in particular, of which if anyone is guilty he should be aoouted from .the society of all honest man. These vilo accusations arc, however, sot forth on no other authority than that of the anonymous writer. When principles are being discussed, or undisputed .matters of fact are beiug dealt with, then ancminuty may bs preserved without injury to anyone, arid sometimes with considerable advantage, bat when a writer ventures on such statements as are made by the correspondent I allude to, as, for instance, in his ujbter signed, "Pro Bono Publico," Wl your Wednesday evening's paper prgpor nam fGFliPji so tnitt tke.imlyiic ?ble'V indg© of the reliability of,.his'statement Rwfrring on Wednesday to th.. Gwa

Templars of this City this accuser of the brethren says, "There is treachery in the \ little camp here. The loudest leaders are known to be traitors. They make nice speeches to deceive their poor dupes of brethren and sisters." Now who is it that attacks the Good Templars of Dunedin in this way, and what evidence has he to support these statements ? I think, sir, not only the members of the order, the "poor dupes," bnt the general public have a right to know. If he has no other evidence than that which he appears in his letter to rely on he must stand charged as a false accuser, a bearer of false witness against the bi ethren, for the statements he makes as to the election of Mayor and other matters of public notoriety are all incorrect. It is not true that the present Mayor was elected by the assistanceof Good Templars. No one knows better than his Worship that he was in 1574 defeated by the Temperance vote, and that in ] 1875 the Temperance party, for reasons which appeared torthem sufficient, were indiffere>nt to the result. Some Temperance men voting one way, some the other, and many not voting at all. Nor is it understood, except perhaps by your correspondent, that Good Templars are to vote for the present Mayor again. It is equally untrue that "thearchitect and.builder of Mr Walter's new hotel are Good Templars" as one would infer from " Pro Bono Publico's" statement. True he guards himself carefully, here by the saving clause, "said to be," but the inteution of the writer is obvious. I should be glad if your correspondent would also ex plain what he means by and his reason for the following :

Is it right; for those "rk>£?ites" to bo croinsj about abusinsj privately those who merely desire to expose their rascality for the stood of the Order and the snored cause of Temperanee ?

I call on this champion of the "sacred cause" either to adduce independent evidence of the truth of his accusations or to come forth frnm his obscurity into the light of day that we may see and know him, and so be able to judge of the value of his unsupported testimony.—l am, &c,

A Good Temi>lat?

Dunedin, Juno 30,