NBC – 1853.06.25 – Emigration – #265 – F12221
TO THE EDITORS OF THE COURIER
Gentlemen, – Mr. Stockton having, in his reply, in the New-Brunswicker of Tuesday, to my communication of Friday last, accused me of stating an untruth when I said that he offered to Mr. Harris and myself, to make an affidavit that he had had no connection, directly or indirectly, with the Orange Society, for more than two years, I now beg to repeat every charge contained in that letter, with this trifling correction – that upon inquiry I find that his remarks were made to the policemen, on the street, and not in the police office, as I had understood and stated – and I also refer to Mr. Harris, whether our interview with Mr. Stockton did not take place from [he] (Mr. Harris) having particularly desired me to go with him to Mr. Stockton, to, hear him deny to me, as he had previously done to him, having had any connection with the Orange Society, for [yea..]; and I also refer to Thomas Allan, Esq., whether Mr. Stockton had not repeatedly assured him he had had no connection with the Orange Society, for years – at least Mr. Allan has several times told my father and myself so – and also whether Mr. Stockton did not leave him under the impression that his (Mr. Stockton’s) name on the Orange petition, had been put there without his knowledge or consent. Mr. Stockton must have no small share of effrontery, if, after having admitted in the first part of his letter that he told me falsehoods for the purpose of deceiving me – this is the only construction I can put upon it – he can expect the public to believe the rest of his statements. I think I may safely assert the believers are few.
TO THE EDITORS OF THE COURIER
Gentlemen, – Mr. Stockton having, in his reply, in the New-Brunswicker of Tuesday, to my communication of Friday last, accused me of stating an untruth when I said that he offered to Mr. Harris and myself, to make an affidavit that he had had no connection, directly or indirectly, with the Orange Society, for more than two years, I now beg to repeat every charge contained in that letter, with this trifling correction – that upon inquiry I find that his remarks were made to the policemen, on the street, and not in the police office, as I had understood and stated – and I also refer to Mr. Harris, whether our interview with Mr. Stockton did not take place from [he] (Mr. Harris) having particularly desired me to go with him to Mr. Stockton, to, hear him deny to me, as he had previously done to him, having had any connection with the Orange Society, for [yea..]; and I also refer to Thomas Allan, Esq., whether Mr. Stockton had not repeatedly assured him he had had no connection with the Orange Society, for years – at least Mr. Allan has several times told my father and myself so – and also whether Mr. Stockton did not leave him under the impression that his (Mr. Stockton’s) name on the Orange petition, had been put there without his knowledge or consent. Mr. Stockton must have no small share of effrontery, if, after having admitted in the first part of his letter that he told me falsehoods for the purpose of deceiving me – this is the only construction I can put upon it – he can expect the public to believe the rest of his statements. I think I may safely assert the believers are few.
Will Mr. Stockton now tell us that he was not Deputy Master of the Indian Town Orange Lodge as late as the 16th inst.? And will he say that previously to that day he did not go to Hugh Sharkey, Esq., and tell him he was not an Orangeman, and that his name on the Orange petition was a forgery, or words to that effect, and that he did not shew Mr. Sharkey his signature, in order that he might see the difference in the two handwritings? Mr. Sharkey ways he will swear he did. And will Mr. Stockton also assert that previous to the 16th he did not tell Jones and Atkinson, the policemen referred to, and Mr. Lafferty, that he was not an Orangeman? Will he also deny having said that if he obtained the office of Police Magistrate, a certain gentleman to whom under false representations he had promised his salary during his life, would very likely be disappointed, or words to that effect? Perhaps he can also tell us whether or not he joined the Orange Society with the laudable object in view of gaining its support at the General Election in King’s County, as some very shrewdly suspect?
I cannot conclude without alluding to the meanness of Mr. Stockton’s advocates in trying to construe my exposure of him to an attack upon the Orange Society. I believe the great majority of the Orangemen despise him as much as I do, and are pleased at the exposure. He had better have remained “passive.†I again defy Mr. Stockton or his friends to prove my accusations to be false, and I am willing that every one whose name has appeared in the correspondence, and as many others as Mr. Stockton pleases, be examined, (on oath, if required,) and the whole evidence be given to the public.
Your obedient servant,
HENRY G. SIMONDS.
Portland, June 24th, 1853.