Year: 1861




S1R:-I uoticean editorial in your last
paper, entitled "Our Irrepressibe Conflict"
iu'which ON charged, by insinuation, with
being the author Of two articles which have
recently appeared in the Vancouver ChoH-
icie, upon the legality Of the act removing
the Capital to Vancouver, and on this nc-
count am held up to pnblic censure as havs
ing violated my official obligations. On
reading the article, my first impulse was to
turn to the head Of the paper to see II the
depreciation in the courteous tone which
has usually characterized your paper, was
not occasioned by change in the editorial
but it surprised me to End your
name still there, and l can only now ac-
count for the style Of your insinuations and
charges, by nttributing them TO the mono
mania which seems to attack an 0lympian
at the sound Of the word Capital, TO such
an extent as often to obliterate private and
political friendship, and make strong as
saults on good manners.


l will make only one allusion to the tone
of the article 1t would seem from the
wording, to have been your intention TO ex-
press yourself in such manner that your
assault upon myself and my Official cbarac-
ter should be apparent to every reader Of
the paper, but yet should not be sufficient
ly open to justify notice on my part.


You appear to have presumed little
upon the want Of common sense, which you
are pleased to charge as one Of my misfor-
tunes feel called upon, however, to un-
derstauG what is intended TO be understood
by every one Of your readers, and to reply
when unfounded assaults are made upon my
official character.


In your paper of the week before, you
made the charge that was the author OF
the first article, using an Indian soubriquet
by which am as well known throughout
the Territory as by my-own name; but as
the paragraph appeared in the witty
column" l was unwilling to spoil the joke
by showing that it was on attempt to stab
a friend in the dark.


l now desire the public to understand
that am not the author Of either OF those
articles, or of any others that have appear
ed upon the question Of the legality Of the
act removing the Capital to Vancouver, or
upon the subject Of the removal OF the Cap
ital. Nor have 1 any other knowledge OF
them than simply reading them after they
we're published, nor do know the author
or authors.


l desire to say further, in regard to re-
moving the Capital from Olympia to Van
couver, that / never saw the bill for its re-
moval until after it had passed, and / never
knew that it was contemplated to introduce
it until late in the evening before the bill
passed.


1 have never concealed or attempted to
conceal the fact that was in favor of the
removal to Vancouver, and that, too, be.
fore the money appropriated by Congress
was expended l have entertained and
still do entertain the opinion that the inter-
est of the entire Territory demand that tho
Capital shall be at Vancouver.
and though not interested to the extent Of
q dollar in any property, either at Olympia
Or Vancouver, / have claimed and still
claim the right to entertain and express
such an opinion as l may see fit upon this
point


Regarding the act locating the Capital
as one affecting the public interests, and
not involving private rights, hold the doc
irine that Judge can as well express an
opinion upon that as upon the legality OF
secession; aud l shall not hesitate to ex-
press my opinion upon both on proper oc-
:asions. But can assure you that when
'ver do express a legal opinion, it will be
'yer my own signature, and be one which
will acknowledge am inclined to think
hat had Others been equally careful in this
espect, should have been spared the ne
essity of this letter.


BY publishing this, you will do an act OF
ustice to Yours, &c, 4


WIN. STRONG.