"ENGLISHMANS" LETTER.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume X, Issue 39, 15 February 1875, Page 2

"ENGLISHMANS" LETTER.

TO THB EDirOR OP THE ' EVENING MaII, ' Sjr — As one who, for some inacrutub'e reason, has been repeatedly and pu liely taxed with the authorship of the letters signed " Englishman," I feel my<selt entit'ed, were it on.y for the annoyance I have undergone, to say a few words on the subject. I may premiso that I have not the slightest intention of rekindling the embers of aconiro- [ ver9y that is now fairly *pent. Nor i'o I propose adding my drttret to the torrent ot cheap and somewhat exubeiant loyalty with which your columns have Utely I een saturated—a loyalty that, fortunately, is not at all ; likely to be tested, neither her Majesty the Queen nor the Britieh Constitution being at precent in the least dnnger. Lst bygones be bygones, and let it sumco, so /ar «s I am personally concerned, that I cordially agree with the gist of the first of " Englisnian's " letters. Alter the frank and full explanations of several of those assailed, nothing "more need surely be said on tint head, it, indeed, mare thsm enough has not been said already. But one or two questions are raised, i especially by the second letter of "Englishman," thq,t it seems to me would be well worth consideiing, even though the matter from which the controversy originated were I forgotten. Ist. How far is any writer justified j especially in so simll a community as this,' | where we all live, as it were, cheek by jowl ia holding up to the execration of his fellow townsmen, in an anonymous letttr, several gentlemen, the peculiarity of whise position may, in more than one instance, debar them them from making an effective reply ? It matters not that no names were mentioned i An attack by way of allusion and inuendo i generally more deadly and rrore difficult t"> repel than one where the namesaregiveninfuU. Nor does it affect the argument that the writer was, not only in my own opinion, but in the opinion of nine-tenths of his fell iwsettlers, substantially right in what he said He miy be wTong in the next personal on slaught he makes, but will doubtless qu<re the present instance as a justification of his withho ding h.B name. His being bo clearly right in the mitter of what he said is, to my mind, the strongest condemnation of his manner of saving it. 2nd. Is it io be h-nceforth an accepted doctrine among us tint he who does doreply— apparently within twenty-four home —to an anonvmi us cha'ge made in a local newspaper, isto be condemned without benefit of clergy? It is simply to beg the whole question to pleid that more than one of the accused parties have in this case admitted that they had made a mistake. False charges will yet be made by writers who dare not give their names. Is judemeut, in eyery instance, to go by default? Who is to he the ju-Jge as to when a charge is to be answered, or as to whether it is worth answering at all? lne public, who has only heard an ex parte statement, or the accused, who, it may well

be, knows his innocence, and is too proud to justify himself? Let us be careful how we introduce into this peaceful community one of the wo st practices of the American press, which se ems not only to consider every man's doings, public or priva e^jfit matter for public discussion, but insists upon every man giving a public account of every action of his life that may be called in question, on pain of being branded with infamy. This ra»y easily degenerate into the moat galling tyranny, "Engl'shman" has had his innings. A very moderate expenditure of ability and courage has called forth a prodigious chorus of praise. He bas enjoyed to the full the pleasure, such as it is, of taunting and goading several of his mcc prominent fellowtownsmen. Let him now, in compliance Avith the affectionate appeal of <■ True Blue," disclose his name. Possibly the offer of " Protestant" to have it emblazoned in letters of piMfe gold may tempt him from his obscuijty. At the risk of being added to the victim! of his trenchant pen, I venture to BubscAe myself. I W. C. Hodgson.