CORRESPONDENCE.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume IV, Issue 244, 16 October 1869, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

A REMONSTRANCE. To the Editor of the Nelson Evening Mail. Sir, — You will, I think, admit that certain newspapers render themselves interesting only by the calumnies they desseminate, but I cannot understand how you can not only read but quote from them. Surely you are not desirous of obtaining , their unenviable distinction. Happily, in <this place, we are not pleasurably entertained with accounts of the two convent scandals. The first, " the Duel between the two Nuns," has not been noticed in any of my European papers. And as to the second about the nunnery at Cracow, if you would see also the other side of your ridiculous tale, you might quote from the papers Catholic Opinion, and Univers, tthatt t the nun in question was of unsound mind and charitably taken care of at the convent, in preference to sending her to a lunatic asylum, which latter establishments are greatly wanting in judicious management, according to the opinion of the most learned doctors. The judical investigation by the authorities was not concluded when the Mail left, but it had already been proved that what you are pleased to terra " the filthy den " in which she was confined was the cleanest and best ventilated room in the convent. I presume to say the nuns are not surprised at being persecuted with calumny; they have read and meditated upon the words of our Saviour : — " The servant is not greater than his master; if they have persecuted me they will also persecute you." — (John xv. 20). I am, &c, Heae both Sides. Nelson, Oct. 15. [We are very much surprised, and not a little annoyed, to find that our correspondent has put such a construction upon the appearance in this journal of two paragraphs which were copied from the European Mail, a paper which generally bears the character of supplying authentic information. The attempt to shift on to our shoulders by such expressions as "your ridiculous tale," " what you are pleased to call a filthy den," the responsibility of the paragraphs in question, which were manifestly extracts from another paper although the authority was not given at the time, is as unfair as, considering the quarter from which such insinuations come, it was unexpected. — Ed. N. E. M.