view however is not compatible with the
text
of
the last two paragraphs in
Mr Forth's letter.
But whatever that Gentleman's
object may
be there is no doubt that
his letter complains of the manner in
which he has been treated in having
"Aspersions cast upon his character
" and official position", and therefore
it is necessary
that his statement
should be accompanied by explanatory
remarks.
Mr Forth's statement is that
a Clerical error (import) was
of no legal defect
committed by his
Department in inserting the
dates in notices for the
wrong payment of
Taxes. Mr Forth admits the error,
28
but even now does not see the gravity of the mistake which might, had not the Judge of the Court of Summary Jurisdiction used his discretion in
refusing to issue the Warrants, have led to
illegal levies and laid the
Treasurer open to actions
for damages.
He goes on to observe
that he is at a loss to conceive how
it is that expressions
are attributed to
him which cannot be traced in his
letter No 55
of
13th October-
far less
discover by what principle of rectitude his veracity could have been brought
into doubt
It is
very often difficult
to