MR. RAMSAY MACDONALD AND LEICESTER, [To THE EDITOR or THE
"SPECTILTOR:1 SIR,—When you were good enough a fortnight ago not only to tell me what I ought to do in reply to an offensive state- ment, but what I had to do, I was under the impression that you had taken the trouble to make yourself acquainted with the facts as they had been disclosed at the time you wrote. On that assumption I sent you further information. The note you add to my letter—which I had no intention you should have published, but to the publication of which I do not in the least object—shows, however, your pretty habitual method of laying down the law for other people in ignorance- of what you are writing about. In your very beat " Little Jack Horner" style you put certain questions to me, every one of which were answered before you wrote your first note. I authorized no one to make a statement to anyone ; the state- ment that was made to Sir Maurice was not only without my instructions, but without my knowledge. I did not know that any statement had been made till the Friday afternoon (two days afterwards). I did not know its gist till the following Monday. Perhaps when you interfere in such matters in future you will take the trouble to ascertain the facts, and not put those whom you lecture to the inconvenience of instructing you upon your subjects.—I am, Sir, stc., [0 ur readers, we think, will not fail to be amused by this. letter, -which, as it is addressed to the Editor and not marked " Private," and is evidently regarded by the writer as " crushing," was no doubt meant to be published. Mr. Ramsay MacDonald's manner of answering inconvenient inquiries by abusing the inquirer is ingenious, though not, of course, original. We should like now to hear Mr. Roberts's account of who authorized him to speak to Sir Maurice Levy.— ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
