WHO PUT BACK THE CLOOK ?

Wellington Independent, Volume XXVI, Issue 3325, 21 October 1871, Page 2

WHO PUT BACK THE CLOOK ?

TO THE EDITOR OF THE INDEPENDENT.

Sic, — Sir David Monro may well exclaim, " Save me from my friends," for no man ever bad such injudicious bottle-holders. They expect apparently that the mere assertion of an auonyinous writer in the " Evening Post" is to outweigh the positive affidavits of Mr Pox and Mr O'Rorke, and the cotemporary evidence of the reports of four independent newspapers, which recorded the facts of the case at the time they happened. It is a pity that these newspaper reports have not been printed by you, as they prove every word of Mr Fox's allegations to be true, and Sir David Monro'a and hia apologists' version to be altogether erroneous.

If, as those gentlemen say, Mr For never made the motion, how came tbe newspapers of the day to report the speech which he made on the occasion of his doing so ? How did Mr Carter contrive to second a motion which Sir David and his backers say was never made ? How came Sir David to comment upon what Mr Fox had said on making the motion, and to acknowledge that his " remarks" were quite justified P Whan and how did these event* happen, if, as is asserted, Mr Foi never made the motion ? It is perfectly clear, from the entry in the journals of the House, made' under Sir David's own eye ; from the affidavit of Mr O'Rorke ; and from the cotemporary reports of the newspapers of the day, that Mr Fox'a statement is correct, and that his allegation that Sir David's affidavit was marked by " very loose swearing" is perfectly justified bj the facts.

I think it would be only fair that you should reprint the extracts from the journals and the newspapers above referred to. — I am, &c,

M.H.R.