as merely temporary.
On his re-appointment to the Acting post in April last, Mr. Bridges, then Acting Attorney General, objected, but without effect.
So lately as the 16th ultimo, Mr. Attorney General Anstey made a strong representation against the Confirmation of Mr. Bevan.
In that letter, Mr. Anstey alludes to certain libels, written by Mr. Bevan and published in the paper of which he is the acknowledged Editor or Sub-Editor, in which from time to time every Head of Public Department, from His Excellency downwards, is slandered, with the one exception of the Chief Justice.
I was not, nor am I, aware of any particular libels on myself.
...
181/5
in the Hongkong Register before the date of Mr. Anstey's letter, but a few days after, on the 20th ultimo, a gross and scurrilous attack was made on me in an article notoriously Mr. Bevan's, an attack so unfounded and so venomous; yet to that, the four Mercantile firms whose cause he was professing to advocate voluntarily addressed me and repudiated all share in the shameless slander.
I mention this solely to show the reputation of Mr. Bevan, and I would add that the attack in question is the first of the kind made on me during a Service in the Colony of over 12 years.
Further, I would say that my objection to Mr. Bevan is not induced by this attack; as stated above, I remonstrated upwards of 1 year ago against his even...