To the Editor of the Calcutta Gazette.
SIR, I have read with attention the tract lately published by RAM MOHAN ROY respecting the temple at Baranagar, and I confess myself unable to determine whether the author is a reformer or a mischief-maker. That three persons are unaccounted for is asserted. That the temple is answerable for them is not demonstrated. I would ask your correspondent whether he proposes that every establishment in Bengal be held to answer for every person who quits its neighbourhood. A SUBSCRIBER.
SIR, Your correspondent of last week asks a question which answers itself. If three persons quit one establishment in two years, and the establishment offers in each case the identical form of words, the coincidence is either remarkable or it is not a coincidence. I do not accuse. I observe, and I observe further that no magistrate has thought the matter worth an hour of his time. R. M. ROY.
SIR, I have no interest in this controversy beyond the credit of the Presidency, but I would observe that the gentlemen whose generosity toward the temple in question has been so pointedly remarked upon are among the most respectable of the native merchants of this city, and that to hint at their complicity in disappearances is an injury which no evidence has been offered to support. JUSTITIA.
A paper from the Canticle of the End campaign. Print with “Background graphics” ticked, then cut the clipping out. Letter or A4 both fit.