and maccarate.
21
Colonel Hall did not repeat to General Mitchell what Dr Eitel had told him. N.13. The Governor makes a good deal of this but Dr Eitel does not say that Colonel Hall did so. Aprie's case shews (which I do not think it does) that Dr Eitel was told to refer people to the Governor for explanations.
30.
I do not attach much importance in itself to Dr Eitel's letter of the 5th of November challenging the accuracy of Mr Johnson's account of what had passed between them, because I do not think that the points in dispute were themselves important, although the Governor appears to have made a good deal of what I consider to be the unimportant point whether the book containing the indecent picture was the one catalogue or the other. But it may be important to notice that Dr Eitel says that this letter was virtually dictated by the Governor, whereas the Governor says that this was not the case and that the letter was written by Dr Eitel under the fear of losing the private secretaryship.
23:
MINUTE PAPER.
The Governor writes as if he had dismissed Dr Eitel from the Private Secretaryship, and as if he had compelled him to resign. But Dr Eitel says that he offered to resign it, once on the 24th of October and again on the 4th of November (the day before the date of the letter in question), and that on both occasions the Governor refused to accept his resignation. It was not until the 17th of November that the Governor accepted his resignation.