Original Correspondence.

New Zealander, Volume 4, Issue 307, 9 May 1849, Page 3

Original Correspondence.

To the Editor oj the New Zealander. Sir —It appears from Mr. Wm. Brown's letter, (not dated), publiihed in last Saturday's « Southern Cross,' that I have been mistaken in attributing to him the authorship of the letter signed " Fair Play/ which Mr. Brown says was most " unwarrantable and ungentlemanly" conduct. Now, Mr. Editor, if I have sinned at all in doing so, it must be in a very slight degree indeed, seeing that if the production in question was not that of the Great Southern Light himielf, it was the pro. dnction of one of his satellites / —one of tnoie inferior beings who does his mailer's bidding. Jesting apart, however, I am quite prepared to shew, that I was perfectly justified and had a right to attribute to Mr. Browu the authorship of the letter in qupstion, inasmuch as Mr. Brown is the Editor and Pioprietor of the "Southern Cross," and as such, must be held responsible for every article that npjieari in that paper, more particularly for all cowaidly anonymous product iocs. As for diaeging Mr. Brown's name beforp the public in an " unwnrrantable and unqentlemanlv" nay— l deny having done so ; I do not consider Mr. Brown the best qualified to judge of what is, or what is not, gentlemanly conduct. He is by no means an authority in such matters. It is not my intention to trespass on the p<iges of your journal, in going over Mr. Brown's Jong letter, but will confine myself to the fol'owing remarks Mr. Brown assumes credit to him*elf (or net taking " advantage of an opportunity within his power to pass an amendment condemning his Excellency for the falir statements in his despatches ;" whan, in fact, he had no such advantage in his power, the original resolution (upon which Mr. Brown's arnendmsnt was moved) being withdrawn, Mr. Brown had not a leg to stand upon. And Mr. Brown. •' if he had had the courage to be candid on such a matter, would have said" that his amendment could not have been en er« tamed by the meeting as it was then constituted, even if he had brought it forward ai a separate and distinct motion. With Mr. Brown individually I have nothing whatever to do, except in to far as he was connected with the Public Meeting in question, and also with the references since made in hit paper, the "Southern Cross," to this meeting and t<i myself as chairman. To be plain and candid with Mr. Brown, I must inform him that I consider hie conduct at that Meeting (so far as concerns the said Amendment) was the result of a preconcerted plot to entrap the meeting and make a tool of me as its chairman. 1 would refer Mr. Brown to an extract in your paper of 28th ult. from the ' Spectator' having reference to the regulation of Public Meetings. I am sure Mr. Editor that the p^ges of your Journal and my own time can be much more profitably employed, than by taking any notice of my old friend Isiael—l think therefore that treating him with contempt will be the proper course to adopt. Apologising for ag«m troubling you, I am, Sir, &c, W. S. Gbahame. Auckland, May 8, 1849.