BIRTH,

New Zealander, Volume 8, Issue 664, 25 August 1852, Page 2

BIRTH,

On (ho 22nd instant, in St. George's T3ay, the wife of John Woodhovsi-, Escj., of a daughter.

Tnn Smtt/crn Cro-rn has apoloyjficd this morning to its few subscribers for n repetition of the neglect (of which it is often guilty when it does not aoknow* ledpe it) hi not supplying the' Litest news, or only supplying it meagrely and imperfectly ; and lias , endeavoured to thiow the blame on us for it. de- | ficiency with respect to the intelligence broupht [by the Spvnrrr. The farts of the case are :— The I boarding officer, Mr. Mitford, br< ught us a file of Melbourne panel 9 from llic Spc?iccr, on Friday afternoon, which lie said Mr. Ucndeisoii had jjivcu him for thf N w Zailautlcr, with a request, that as he would be first on slune, he would sem l Uiem to our offifv. Mr. Mitlord kindly delivered , trie ,» papers ' himself, obseivtnp; tliat Mr. llendci.soii wms tony he IIIIU not a cop of the paper of tltc'ilst, .he day nltrr the steamer C/tumn arrived at Melbourne; bu* he did not so much as name flic Southern Ciois. On Saturday afternoon Mr. Hughes, the collector fin t' lf * CVcmt, called, and, in a tone not veiy (ivil, deuiaiah'd the papers M'hich he said Mr. Henderson had cn'ocri to be sent to the Southern Crust He was informed that we had received no such inc&snge from Mr, JJendeison—

the papers bad been given us by Mr, Mi lord, who might, for ought we Knew, accoiding to an under* standing we had with him when he bio ight us papers, en 11 lor them again ; but we crpliritly, mure than once, ajfacd to lend the pupna to Mr, Hughes for the Southern Crew, lie bind no; la* would see Mr. Henderson, who would "know how to tieat Mr. Mi t ford again when fie boimled his icssci, for not (mending to what he hud told him. 1 ' lie retui ned sonic time utter with an open no c from Mr. Henderson, nddrcsscd to Mr. Mitford, requesting the paper"! for the Cross-, upon which we at once handed Mr, Hughes every paper Mr. Mitford had brought us. They certainly were neccssaiily cut up for use, owing to tin* late hour at which we r ceived them on the night before our publication ; but the paper ot the 81st, which the Cross untruthfully asserts we kept back, was not icccived from Mr. Mitlord nt nil ;— we were kindly favored with that ivt iv much later hour by <Wr. Thomas Lewis. Jtco^ne^ vejy ungraciously from the Southern Cross, from its reporter up to the propi ictor, Mr. Brown himself, to charge us with any unwillingness to oblige them. They know that in their seveial capacities they have been under obligations to us. We have never been loath to observe t)ie practices of accommodation usual between printing offices elsewhere, ami have enabled them before now, by siipplung them will) paper, &c, to go on, when otherwise they would have been atn stand-still; And as much as ten columns ol standing type have been lent then), not long since, to aflord them an equal opportunity with our own paper to publish a report of a local mutter of importance, compiled by ourseivcs, but which they had not the magnanimity to acknowledge. We do not like to mention these things, but feel urged to say thus much' in our defence, although indeed it may be hardly necessaiy in this community to set up any defence against the attacks of the Southern Croit. If we had been desirous to an aign the pai tics connected with ilic Crow, we have too often had ample nason to do so. It is sometimes usual for persons to leave advertisements at the office of one paper, which they intend should appear in both, with a i cquest thai n copy may he sent to Ihe other office. Now we challenge them to mention any instance ol neglect on our pint in such a ca.se,— while j on theirs it is not ol sniguhu occn>ie»n\ We may give as n tetunt instance Mr. Ahlennan Ma»<m\s address to the elcctois, which had appeared twice in the Cross, befoie he called to enquire why we bad not iiifieiled it, and was. sui prised to leain that the people of the Cross had not sent us word to copy it according to his dhecttons. We might enumerate many similar inst.mces of mi -neighhoui ly treatment, and ot civilities unreciprocated, by Ihe gcnlirmcn of the Southern Cross, but we have passed over these ptiva'c niinoynnccs, to merely explain, because we think it tluc to ourselves to do so, a matter in relation to which the £ras.r has t)iougl t fit to bring not only our names before the puttie, but also that of a pcutlcinan who has incurred i.'s displeasure by doing us a favor. The Paornicrous OF the " Nkw-ZuAi.ANOi.ti."