CORRESPONDENCE.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume VI, Issue 203, 2 September 1871, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Editor op thb NblsoI" Evbnino Mail. Sir, — I remember reading in the Colonist a few weeks since a letter headed " Cribbage," ahd signed "A Reader " or " Writer of Talk "-—I forget now which it was, but I daresay iff all the same— the object of which was to And fault with you for having copied from a West Coast paper a paragraph that originally appeared in the columns of "Talk." Until attention was called to it in so public a manner I had no idea that a mistake of such a trivial nature waa worthy of notice, but since your contemporary deemed the matter of sufficient importance to devote a portion of hia apace to it, I may be excused if I ask you to look at the Colonist of Friday last, where you will find a paragraph on the Brunner Coalmine professedly taken from the WeUington Independent, but which appeared for the first time in the Examintr a week previously. To quote, with a slight alteration, the remark made by. the writer of the letter referred to : — The only thing to be regretted is that the Colonist should wait a week, to get from WeUington what its honest admiration might have echoed a day or two after the publication of the Examiner of the 19th l Auguat. I am, &c., Tit for Tat. ; Thursday, August 31. J

To The Editor op thb N»lio» Evening Mail. ~~ Sib,— When I took it upon me to write you the letter headed " Not a nice piece to read," I did it from a sense of duty as a parent to other parents having children in the care of matters for tuition, and desirous of having them taught according to the system adopted by the Educational Board. I looked for, or rather asked to know what objection could be raised to the reading of the lessons spoken of, but I have seen none. •■ - ■ci beg! through' the medium bf your columns; to tender my thanks to Mr. Sunley lor the manner in which he replied 'to "my- letter,- ■ Notwithstanding the accusation^'thereinof'tty perversion of factsjor, in other words* deviating from the truth, •not to say lying?" an accusation I am persuaded must return on Mr. Sunley'a own head. Besides, I should be exceedingly sorry to titter falsehood; especially .when it affecti 'the diameter of my i fellowmen. '. ;:I-' said- dt-^-WM from " a : sense '■' of dutyl wrote you -before.' I^ find now that I have anothea , _dutyJtotperibrm,- that of: defending , myself from the accusations laid against me. ! I think if Mr. Sunley had delayed writing only a day;pr so, jje^wpnld-'ha-re' hfi ample propf that I did not pervert the truth. Moreover he might have saved himself from committing that of , which he has. accused __e,;unleM .he wrote in the face of facts, and against the dictates of his own conscience. lam very willing to believe that Mr Sunley would bave laid "it was a hard piece to read," especially if he had known he was going ; to hear it again, but I cannot believe he did say ' it knowing as I do what took place in the school ; on the day following the publication ef my letter. . If Mr. Sunley would but remember that on the day above-mentioned he aaked the children then ■ present whether he did or did not aay "it waa not a nice piece to read," and bonoatly state the

answer they gave him (all with the exception of two), I think the public w ould be convinced that I was not guilty of perverting the truth, as he tried to make it appear in his letter to the Colonist. Further, if Mr. Sunley would state what appellation he gave the children on one occasion, you would be further convinced that be was capable of more than that of which he accused me. I am sorry to be thus plain, and I trust Mr. Sunley will forgive me for my want of charity towards him: lam afraid it may be a part of my nature. I also suspect from the tenor of his letter he is equally able to be uncharitable. Mr. Sunley spoke of the tattling: of children. I think parents have a right to believe their own children, especially in cases like the one in hand. My information came unlocked for at first. It was while I was going through the lessons one night with my children, when one of them said of the lesson in question, "It was not a nice piece to read." I accordingly asked him who said it was not ? He told me it was the master of the school. I afterwards gathered sufficieht from other sources to prove that it was true. I think if parents were to follow tbe course marked out by Mr. Sunley, in disbelieving their children, it would be amazingly worse for them and their parents. Mr. Sunley also said he had ordered the lesson to be read, and that my children were absent.

My boys were not absent until, according to my own convictions, I kept them away; and placed them under a master in whom I could place a greater amount of confidence. In conclusion, I would beg Mr. Sunley to Comply with my proposition, and honestly state what took place in the school on the day when the children proved by their answer that I wrote the truth. If he would do so, there would be no more need of writing. He would then convince the public that what I wrote was neither untrue, uncharitable, nor out of any ill feeling to him, but simply my duty and the duty of many others, if they would but do it. Tarn aware that a certain amount of discretion should rest with the teacher regarding the degree of fitness of readintr lessons, but his own singular notions should not influence or deter him from the honest discharge of his duties. Tours, Ac, F. J. Hingston.