d 143 have been "public nor de that there was
17025 114
2702556
nor do I at present think any impropriety in my repaying at two private dinner tables, amongst my own friends, a circumstance which had occurred
at a large official party, and was already in circulation. But that I was wrong,
however,
how is it possible for
me to make to the Chief Justice, or for him to accept of me a "becoming" apology
which composes wout of cautious statement, affirms the truth of the allegation calumny?
The arbitration which his Excellency suggests may
solve the whole difficulty, if it have power to deal with the whole case; but not
otherwise. It is a question of fact-
Are
my
Statements true? I affirm their truth. If they
are untrue no apology for my
can be enough
that conceals "incaution"
The ample and public apology required by the Chief Justice in the letter quoted by his Excellency will scarcely suffice. I am in that
worthy of all reprobation and punishment, if I tell if an arbitration be resorted to, and the Chief Justice assents, I cannot dissent. I shall even be gratified to leave the Choice of arbitrators entirely to His Excellency,
on condition, as I said before, that they have power to deal with the whole subject.
No enquiry
can be satisfactory,
whether
by referees or by
the Council, which does not
proceed upon an unrestricted course of examination: And as I have represented to