From a recent issue of the Freeman's Journal I extract the following letter, which, it must be admitted, "makes both sides right" with a clearness that leaves nothing to be desired. Note, too, the writer's natural vexation at the idea that he "assisted the constable":—
TO THE EDITOR Of THE FREEMAN.
114, Lower Clanbrassil Street, Dublin, May 14, 1895.
Sir,—With reference to your issue of the 13th inst., and the stolen tea from one of the London and Northern-Western vans, I beg leave to state that I in no way assisted the constable in the arrest of the prisoner, as you state; neither was there any necessity for me doing so, as he had sufficient help along with him at the time. But I did help the driver of the waggon when on the ground to recover his feet and get back to his waggon with the tea in question. My reasons for doing so were as follows—first, being a van driver myself, and I might say has been such all my lifetime, and knowing that when goods are stolen from any van in nine cases out of every ten the driver of such a van has to make good the same and be put under stoppages although no fault of his. Secondly, when I came on the scene the driver of the waggon seemed to be getting the worst of it, as the offender had two others helping him. If someone did not interfere, therefore, under those circumstances and to protect the interest of my fellow-workers, as I am always ready to do, I interfered, and under no other.—Hoping you will kindly insert this in your next issue and make both sides right, and thanking you for the same, I remain your humble servant,
Henry Prendergast.
