Explanatory.

Poverty Bay Independent, Volume II, Issue 171, 10 July 1886, Page 3

Explanatory.

The following correspondence has taken place between His Honor Chief Justice Prendergast and Mr E. P. Joyce re certain remarks which were reported in the Herald in connection with the case Baldwin v. Porter, heard in the Supreme Court, Gisborne : — Gisborne, 7th July, 1886. His Honor Sis James Prendergast, Chief Justice, New Zealand. Sir, —I have the honor, with all due respect to you, and without in any way desiring to impugn your judgment in the case of Baldwin v. T. W. Porter, to draw your attention to the printed report in the Poverty Bay Evening Herald of July Ist, 1886, herewith forwarded. You will notice the report as underlined, and your remarks as reported have cast grave references upon me. For years I have lived in this district and held responsible positions, and I may, without fear of contradiction, say that no person in this or any other community can say that I ever swindled or tried to swindle or dealt dishonorably to him or her. Only last night I happened to be in the bar parlor of the Albion Club Hotel when I was twitted with dishonorable imputations, and that in the presence of several respectable citizens of this town, more especially as to the remarks used by you ; and this was not the only time your remarks were referred to.—l have the honor to be, Sir, your obedient servant, Edward P. Joyce. Gisborne, July Btb, 1886. To Edward P. Joyce, Esq,, Gisborne. Sir, —The Chief Justice directs me to inform you that he believes the report as to the latter alternative put to you is not accurate. He has sent a communication to the newspaper in which the report appeared. The alternative put was intended to refer not to the action but to the purchase of the plant, and the acceptance of that alternative involves no imputation on you.—l have the honor to be, Sir, your obedient servant, Alex. C. Hatfield. Secretary to Chief Justice.