The Nelson Evening Mail. THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1868.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume III, Issue 119, 21 May 1868, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1868.

When, last night, Mr Donne abased his privileges as a member of the Provincial Council by procuring, for the third time s the exclusion of the reporters from the Council Chamber, he made an assertion to which we are justified in offering some rejoinder. Although the representatives of the public Press were excluded from the House at the time when Mr Donne was delivering to the Impatient ears of the members his second tedjous invective against the ' tyranny ' of the Press, we, thanks, possibly, to the peculiar acoustic properties of the building, which may admit of the speeches of certain honorable members. being heard within its immediate precincts ; thanks, possibly, to other providential intervention, were enabled to obtain a very fair verbatim report of Mr Donne's observations during our absence from the Council Chamber, which, it is only fair to other honorable members to state, were received with the most undisguised impatience and disgust. After referring personally to the Editor of this ! journal, Mr Donne, addressing the Speak- ! er, gave utterance to the following words, i which we give verbatim , — ' I draw your attention to the fact, sir — that, sir — that, sir — that I was actually told within the precincts of this House, sir, that it was like my impudence to draw your attention to the conduct of the members of the Press. Is a member of this Council to be insulted like this ? ' Although the assertions made by Mr Donne are now probably appreciated at their proper value by members of the Provincial Council, the above statement is so entirely at variance with the true facts of the case, and so evidently designed with a view to impute a want of respect on the part of the representative of this journal towards the body of which Mr Donne has proved himself so unworthy a member, we are yet desirous of placing on record a true version of the conversation which passed between Mr Donne and the Editor of this journal, after the rising of the House on Thursday night, a conversation which, we would observe, was overheard by more than one honorable member. Mr Donne, approaching the reporters' table, requested the Editor of the Evening Mail to allow him to see, on the following morning, the report of his speech that evening, adding that he did not allude to the remarks which he had made with reference to the reporters, but to those made by him on the debate touching the continuance of support to thie v Brighton Hospital. To this the Editor replied that he (Mr Donne) need give himself no trouble about that matter, as, after his impertinence that evening towards the members of the Press, it could hardly be expected that they would take the trouble to report his speeches, and that, in fact, the representatives of the three papers had made a compact not to do so in future. This terminated the conversation, which, it will be admitted, bears a very different meaning to that put upon it by Mr Donne last night. It may not be out of place, with reference to the alleged interruption from the reporters' table, upon which Mr Donne has founded theextraordiDary action which has caused, such obstruction to the public business, on two consecutive nights, to state j that, as a matter of fact, such interruption

never occurred, 'to the truth of which we have the spontaneous testimony of the Speaker and of a large number of honorable members who happened to be in the House at the time. It is well known that the interruption which induced the Speaker to interfere, proceeded from two of the members of the Council, who were standing at some considerable distance from the reporters' table at the time.