b.
2/43
the new matter brought forward by the Memorialists it is better to clear up Some minor inaccuracies in their comments on that reply. I admit it has little connection with the main question whether I devoted eleven Paragraphs, as they state, or more to refuting an apertion, viz. that I had put up the Licensing farm to sale and granted it to the highest bidder. or whether I had stated in the last paragraph of my reply, that a refutation of apertion was the "one single object" to which they say the whole of that pretended reply to the former Memorial was devoted.
As a matter of curiosity however it may be worthy of note that the last paragraph of my reply makes no such apertion. On the contrary it founds my claim on their attention on their misstatement of a particular fact, whilst it craves indulgence for "the additional remarks" made. and I presume the fact of my introducing those remarks proved them to be at least an object and possibly a very important object of the so-called "pretended reply." I admit the justice of applying a similar arithmetical computation of the number of Paragraphs in which a statement is repeated, as a test of the value attributed to, or the force really meant to be given to such
b.
2/43
the new matter brought forward by the Memorialists it is better to clear up Some minor inaccuracies in their comments
on that reply. I admit it has little connection with the main question whether I devoted eleven Pars:, as they state, or more to refuting apertion, viz. that I had put up the
"
R
an untrue
Licensing farm to sale and granted it
to the highest bidder. on whether I had stated in the last paragraph of mij
{
I such an
reply, that a refutation of
afoution
من سد
the one "one
single object
to which they say the whole of that
#
pretended reply to the lommer Memorial
was devated."
As a matter of curiosity however
it
may
be worthy of note that the last paragraph of my reply makes such apertion. On the contrary
founds my
it
claim on their attention
on
no
to their misstatement of a particular fict, whilst it craves indulgence for
mere
"the additional remarks" made. and I presume the
fact of my introducing those remark's proved them to be at least an abject and posibly a very important abject of the so called "pretended reply. Iudmit the justice
8"
Neither
کاتا
cow
#
of applying a similar writhmeticul computation of the Nr of Paragraphs in which a statement is repented,
as a test
of the value attributed to, or the force really meant to be given to such
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.