A REPLY.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume II, Issue 129, 18 August 1871, Page 3

A REPLY.

(To the Editor of the Mount Ida Chbonicle.) August 7, 1871. Sir, —I have noticed, in your issue ns^ a letter signed " Union Jack," and another sigued " Enn-go-Bragh." Now, I have analysed these two letters, and 1 have coine to the conclusion that "Union Jack " and " Erin-go-Bragh " mean only different names for one person. It* I can show—which I intend to do—that "Union Jack" is "Brin-go-Bragh," and that " Erin-go-Bragh is "Union Jack," you wiil allow me to make one compound name of the two by joining them together. It would be a pity, in my opinion, to separate them. Well then, the name is " UnionjackISringobragh." I see it is a pretty long name, but the fellow deserves it. (T understand he has a long head, and a longer stretch of imagina'ion than most people have, for he is first-class at guessing.) Well, there is something peculiar about him too. In my opinion he is either a dethroned king, a broken down editor, or author: because he sometimes uses the plural " we," and at other times the singular " I." Now, Mr Editor, you know (as a scholar) tnat this is a privilege which grammarians allow only to kings, editors of newspapers, or authors. Any person holding any of the above-named positions h entitled to use the plural " *ve" for the singular "1." fn the first case " we ' in, ludesthe councillors by whose advice kings are supposed to act; and with regard to editors and authors, the " we " implies that they are expressing opinions not exclusively their own. Such persons of cour.se, from long custom, naturally get into a habit of doing those things ; and if ever the king gets dethroned, the editor dismissed, or the author broken down, they still think that they hold their old positions, and hence it is that, if they do not watch themselves narrowly, they are likely to be found out, just as I have found out " Unionjack-Eringobragh." I cannot picture to your readers at present what reluctance I feel at getting into a newspaper warfare with such a character as I have now before me, not knowing whether I am better to address him as sire, or may it please your majesty, or otherwise say Mr. Editor o* author. I think 1 shall take him to be the middle man, and this reminds me of asking you, Mr. Editor of the ' Mount Ida Chronicle,' Have you got a sub-editor? If you have, and if you allow him to write against us poor fellows, we have a poor show ; for you must bear in mind that when you allowed " Union-jack-Eringobragh " to write articles in your paper, and use the plural " we " for the singular " I," you have given opportunity to a person to think" that you yourself had a share in the "lato effusions." Now, this is a tiling that I do not believe, but you will agree with me, I think, that'there is room for suspicion. I know you are not so ungenerous as to allow " Union Jack" to monopolise the whole paper to himself, and close the doors of communication against "Digger," "One of Three," and poor " Thiggin Thu." If y m do you will turn the current of local talent in another direction. 1 hope you will not sacrifice an or to a fly. Not only that, but you would be sacrificing the poor man's cause altogether if you take any notice of :t Union Jack," for it is plain to be seen that he is all there for the " big fellows." He wants to gag us, I sun" pose, fearing lest we "should make known, through the columns of your paper, any of our loi-al grievances ; for he sees it is always open for such things, and may it long continue. What is ho frightened of? Ho minds mo of the antiquary, Dr. Woodward, who trembled to have his shield scoured, for ftj::r it should be discovered to t>e no better than an old pot lid He won't allow us poor fellows to say one word, or if we do he cuts it into

atoms, and makes so little of it that, we ourselves almost disgust what we way, and only we are fellows who have strong nerves, he would frighten us from ever again saving one word about local grievances. Now, sir, I must confess I cannot yet rightly nrike him out. I am bewildered about him. Many a time I ask myself tacitly What is he? Is he a writer for the ' Chron icle' ? Well, if so, perhaps he get paid for those articles; and it may be that he is frightened, seeing such a large amount of correspondence coming weekly to the 4 Chronicle ' office, that he will not get demand for his own. This argument vanishes from before me like a shadow, when i think of the cleverness of the writer knowing that he can, with a few scratches of his pen, cut the " effusions " of myself and others into pieces in a few minutes ; so it is plain to be seen there is nothing to fear from that quarter. Well, J. must leave him and see what I can maKe out of his thoughts committed to paper. I hope your readers shall excuse me if I have occasion here and there to use " we," because they will remember that u Union Jack" sent a joint letter to three or four of us last week. 1. hope Digger " and " One of Three," &e., shall excuse me for mentioning their names; but, as we have a common cause, 1 cannot well plead my own without now and again mentioning theirs. Heie goes to prove tliut "Union Jack" is either a dethroned king, a dismissed editor, or an author. "We wonder if ' Digger ' has ever heard of a certain bird that never builds a nest for itself, but is always on the qui vive to jump another's wherein to make a home—cuckoo! Then, on the principle that ' opposition provokes aggression,' wa have a reply to ' Digger'—a perfect deluge of expletives and invectives —wherein the writer makes no remarks controverting former statements ; but evidently has not forgotten the old joke of the lawyer, when advising his client—viz., No case, so you can abuse the the witnesses." I think it would be more in accordance with the rules of grammar if " Union ■Jack " had said advising their clients. I pass on to case three. " Union Jack" says here again that " Case three does not require the skill of an CEdipus to discover the writer, belonging, as he does, to the genus ' horsefied gents.' " Here he gives a stretch, as it were, to his imagination, and tries to carry the reader with him into a labyrinth of heathen mythology, when he refers to the skill of CEdipus. Ido not think CE lipus had so much skill as *' Union Jack" would lead a person to think, although he was fortunate enough to explain the Sphvnx riddle, lie killed hi:j father, and married his own mother; after that he tore out his eyes as unworthy of the light, and ran mad. Now CEdipus, in my opinion, had not so much skill as " Union Jack" seems to have; I do not think he would know a person by seeing his " effusions "in print. Ah ! but here is something to amaze your readers in case fourth—a man " shot at through his scholar*." It no wonder now that my pulse should beat quickly. I am now the victim. You all know well, I dare say, what it is to shoot a man; and not that, but it appears I have more than one shot, for 1 have " shot a man through his scholars." Now, how this could be L own I cannot account for. I never fired a shot from either pistol or gun since I left my native land, and that dear old sod is, I suppose, nearly 18,000 miles from here. Tffiaow Tiiu. (To be continued in on' nex',)