To the Editor of the Nelson Evening Mail.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume VII, Issue 104, 1 May 1872, Page 2

To the Editor of the Nelson Evening Mail.

Sir — Mr. Richmond, in his letter to you, exhibited his occasional injustice when speaking or writing of an opponent; and he has not scrupled to assert that I, " a rival candidate," as Greville's agent, have put in his mouth sayings " bordering on falsehood." The statement is as unjust as it is discourteous; and it is both. . I copy my draft of the telegram which I transmitted : — "Richmond addressed crowded meeting last night. He denounced place-hunters generally. Declared House arena place-hunters. Discussed Vogel's financial statements, 70 and 71. Generally found fault with Yogel and Ministry. Defended his connection with Waitara war. Said war debt legacy of Fox Took gloomy view of colony, condemned Featherston's immigration. Great many questions put. Meeting more disturbed than usual in Nelson. Hunter Brown proposed vote thanks to Richmond as people leaving. Luckie's meeting to-night." Subsequently, Greville's manager asked, " Was vote thanks Richmond passed or not ? " and, in reply, was informed that the motion was not seconded, and not put to the meeting. How the sentence : " Said war debt legacy of Fox " became changed into " declared that war legacy of Fox" T cannot say: it must have occurred in transcription. It is possible that I

may have omitted the word debt; or it may have occurred in transcribing at Wellington. However the omission of the word debt may have been caused, any trifling effect it may have bad was speedily removed, for next day's telegram distinctly stated that Luckie " replied to portions Richmond's speech, and denied war debt legacy from Fox." That Mr. Richmond did defend his conduct in connection with the Waitara war is unquestionable, for, if it was not a defence, his reference to the circumstance meant nothing at all. That he did say the war debt was a legacy of Mr. Fox's is equally true ; and he must be hard pressed to catch at straws drawn from the "depths of his own internal consciousness." Let me suggest, however, that it would be judicious to abstain from imputing falsehood to me. Dr. Featherston, whom at his meeting, Mr. Richmond maligned, is at a safe distance, and can neither reply, or retaliate. I can, although it is not elevating to find such contemptible and, in the circumstances unseemly controversies possible with a gentleman whose modesty does not deter him from publicly testifying to his own loftiness of soul, and his own political purity. I am, &c, D. M. Ltjckie. Nelson, May 1, 1872.

The Tichborne Case. — The Post says : — " It is not generally known that the clrimant to the Tichborne estates was some time ago, for several months, a resident in Wellington, under the name of De Castro. During the trial just completed iv Loudon, the claimant's career was traced, with the exception of a period ofsixraouths,duriug which he disappeared, and reappeared as De Castro. It thus appears that the missing link in his life could have been supplied by means of research in tbis colony. Truth is stranger than fiction." We may add another missing link in the chain of evidence"in this case. The three-masted schooner (American) Osprey, which appears to have been treated as a myth on the trial, was in these seas at the time stated by the claimant. The year previous to the date mentioned by De Castro or Tichborne, she loaded at Auckland with potatoes and general produce for California, where gold had been discovered; and so careful were those on board not to betray the secret, that a considerable sum was refused by them for a newspaper or commercial items, until they had completed lading. They then supplied the local press with the first intelligence of the discovery of gold in California, and the " rush" there. It would appear by the evidence of De Castro, that he was picked up by the same vessel, and carried to Port Philip (now Melbourne), on her following voyage. The probability is all in favour of the truth of this part of the claimant's statement. — Auckland Herald. The Author of the new Portrait of Rev. George Whitefield relates the following well known anecdote ; There are some people who always make a great fuss on great occasions, even if they are compelled to act the hypocrite. A man of this sort once went to hear Whitefield preach. During the sermon he was thrilled, delighted, captivated, and so powerfully wrought upon that he fell to the earth. When the sermon was finished, he said to a gentleman standing by, " What a great sermon Whitefield preached to-day ! " The gentleman replied, "We were disappointed to-day: Mr. Whitefield was not present; another gentleman preached in his place." The man looked exceedingly disappointed, sayiDg, " Then that wasn't Whitefield ! " and brushing the dirt from his coat exclaimed, " I have dirtied my new coat for nothing ! " Mark Twain s Fortune told by a Celebrated Sjtar Gazer. — "Yours was not in the beginning a criminal nature, but circumstances changed it. At the age of nine you stole sugar ; at fifteen you stole money ; at twenty you stole horses ; at twenty-five you commited arson , at thirty — hardened in crime — you became an editor. Since then your descent has been rapid. You are now a public lecturer. Worse things are in Btore for you — you will be sent to Congress ; nest to the penitentiary ; and then, finally, happiness will come to your gain — you will be hanged." Universal ADULTERATiON.—Turn a total abstainer — drink water, tea, coffee, and gingerbeer. I fear (a correspondent says), if I did so I only jump out of the fryingpan into the fire. Pure water is rare ; boys bathe in it, poodles are washed in it, cats terminate in it a too lively career, all that is horrible is drained into it, and then there are the lead pipes. Take milk : Of fifteen samples examined only three were found to be perfectly genuine. Ah ! there's the cup that cheers but not inebriates. Well, I must own that there are times when nothing is pleasanter than a good cup of tea ; but where am I to get it ? A writer in the Food Journal says, of thirty-five samples of London tea submitted to him for examination, sixteen were highly adulterated, maDy of them unfit for human consumption. Chocolate, which is described as meat and drink, is adulterated with flour, potato-starch, sugar, cocoa nut oil, old sea biscuit, and bran. Beautiful drink this must be. — London Paper.