UNION STEAMSHIP COMPANY AND JOHN STEDEFORD, J.P.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1234, 28 December 1882, Page 2

UNION STEAMSHIP COMPANY AND JOHN STEDEFORD, J.P.

TO THE EDITOR. j Sir,—lii reply to a letter signed “John j Stedeford, J.P., West Melbourne, Victoria,” j I must inform John Stedeford, J.P,, that I j am the second correspondent referred to by ; him, but am in no way responsible for any slang terms used by the first correspondent Ire Union S. S. Company. Neither do 1, in ! any way, approve of the terms “flunkey” • j being used. Still, John Stedeford, J,P., : states that your second correspondent’s letter j was a repetition of the first, with one or two exceptions. Now any person reading ! both letters can easily understand that the two letters were written in two different strains. J am sorry that John Stedeford J.P., cannot comprehend the difference, but the tenor of his letter will immediately indicate its worth. In replying to my letter, : he states “ there are gentlemen on board at present who state the food on the end table was superior food to any in the ship.” How John Stedeford, J.P., can state that the food was superior to any in the ship I am at loss to know, as the table referred to was actually in the ship. John Stedeford, J.P., then states “ the final paragraph with whi :h he closes his letter is most amusing to those who a little time since remember the difficulties of travelling on the New Zealand coast.” Now I must inform John Stedeford,

J.lthat if travellers pay for comfort they are duly entitled to receive it, just as he is entitled to be addressed “ worship,” since fortune favored him with the minor title of J.P. John Stedeford, J.P., also states “it was hardly to be expected that those who had occupied seats for several days should vacate them for one who had just joined the ship, and who could scarcely expect to have more than one meal on board ; therefore, I think the stewards were perfectly justified in informing your correspondent that the seats were engaged.” I can also inform John Stedeford, J.P., if he engages his passage he could not engage a public table as private property. If this is the manner in which John Stedeford, J.P., administers justice on the East Melbourne bench, save me from East Melbourne J.P.’s. John Stedeford, J.P., then goes through a lot of nonsensical language, such as he might administer to a person brought before him for drunkenness when in his sauctum as a J.P. I will now inform John Stedeford, J.P, that I have travelled over Australia and New Zealand by public railway, public steam boats and public carriages, and have sat at public tables possibly as often John Stedeford, J.P., and am capable of judging right from wrong equallv as well as John Stedeford, J.P.. and have not seen a similar act. I can also inform John Stedeford, J.P., that I am not addicted to stating falsehoods and there are several in Gisborne, one of them a J.P. also, who can verify my words in reference to the end table, and who travelled for some days by the steamer previous to my joining her. In"conclusion, I may tell John Stedeford, J.P., that I am not surprised at his letter not containing any interesting matter, as he seemingly knew nothing of what he wrote, only through others who were possibly interested in the reputation of the Company. Still I should j expect a more solid reply after eight days’ • ruminating over the subject.—l am, &c., Second Cobrespondent. |;