ON CORRESPONDENCE.

Patea Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 1025, 23 April 1883, Page 2

ON CORRESPONDENCE.

TO THE EDITOR. . 0 that sqme ? pp\yer the gift would give, us To see ourselves as others see us. J Siß,r—l am glad to find the. Augean stables of your correspondence -columns are .likely to be cleansed at last. Your correspondent “ Y.C.” seems to- think that be has received a particular “ call ’’.for that purpose, \yhat a. square-thinking, square-reading, arid square-headed lie must be. I should fancy be would bo just the person who could live in perfect harmony with his mother-in-law. What a happy time we should have if we could Tririly borae'tipTd'iii’s'standard 1 ‘Bobberies, jobberies, &c., in high places, and-spiteful-ness by disappointed would-be Councillors wpnld be sinoqjbed,. kid-glove Slyle j no expression stronger for that;sort of thirig ithan “.slight:irregularity ” and bit of “ boisterous fun,”.and if any* person, is foolish enough to’.express his honest indignation againstthe system, it must be put down (to use perfumed- and polite language) to “,Iqw malice and personal abuse,” and to “citr^.” I have looked over a file of the Mail tot the last six months, and found the correspondence mildness itself in comparison with “ Y.C.’s” effusion. The whole tenor of his letter is an attempt to create illfeeling in the; community with a side-slap at poor Ireland’s Invinciblea (poor misguided men—and well abused) -but I can inform “Y.C,” that they would scorn doing some of the actions of those he defends ; and that there are many Englishmen (notably John Bright) who cannot see much difference between Sir Garnet Wolesley .killing Egyptian patriots, and 5 Irish, . patriots , killing whom they' think the enemies of their country. The idea, “ to ray mind,” of “ Y.C.’s ” on non-election to the Council is hardly conect. The real cause ; is the Mayor, suitable candidates objecting to be made parties to the way Council - business has been muddled since he took office.—-Yours, &c., Bebahalg. [We agree with our correspondent that some of the remarks of “ Y.C.’s ’’ were uncalled for. With' perhaps one exception our correspondence, during , the. last six months lias never exceededrtlie; license | which is allowed to,anonymous writers in ' the Press, whose .letters are generally taken cum grano. To prevent.misconception, we may as well state that “ Y.C.’s ” letter was not written, by a disappointed Councillor.—Ed.] ..