52 



British Museum, Oct. 27, 1874. • 



Sir, I beg leave to acknowledge the receipt of jour letter of this day's 

 cate, which shall receive due consideration. 



I remain, your very obedient servant, 



Stefan Poles, Esq. J. Winter Jones. 



November 4, 1874. 



Sir, — I am in receipt of your letter of the 27th October, promising 

 due consideration of my request for an inquiry into the conduct of one 

 «»f your officials named M. Naake. While thanking you for this 

 courtesy, I am constrained to press for an immediate inquiry, as the 

 matter is one of the utmost consequence to me. Could you see a trans- 

 lation of the infamous pamphlet which this man exerted himself to in- 

 troduce surreptitiously into the National Library, you would I am sure 

 i ully sympathise with my indignation. 



I feel it impossible to rest for a moment until not only that anony- 

 3ii ous pamphlet is cast out from the British Museum, but also prompt 

 jueasures are taken to punish the man who has so disgracefully abused 

 his position in order to gratify private malevolence. Should you be 

 unable to act more promptly in this matter without the direct inter- 

 ference of the Trustees, I am encouraged to think that a repetition of 

 my appeal to them, backed by numerous English friends, will not be 

 without the desired effect. 



I am, Sir, yours, &c, 

 J. Winter Jones, Esq. Stefan Poles. 



British Museum, Nov. 7, 1874 

 Sir, — In reply to your letter dated the 4th of November, I beg leave 

 to say that, understanding the pamphlet to which you allude to be 

 libellous, I have taken steps to prevent its being seen by any person 

 whatever. I have not read it myself nor am I at all anxious to do so. 



I remain , Sir, your obedient servant, 

 Stefan Poles, Esq. J. Winter Jones. 



December 17, 1874. 

 Sir, — You may have seen from the papers that the action which I 

 was compelled to take^against the printers and distributors of a pamph- 

 let introduced into the British Museum by one of your subordinates 

 named Naake has terminated in the conviction of the defendants, one of 

 whom, who claimed to be a friend of M. Naake, absconded, while the 

 other two pleaded guilt}'. It was perhaps too much to expect that you 

 should take action before the case was decided: but you kindly pro- 

 mised me to deal with the circumstances as soon as the Central ( Vriminal 

 Court should have pronounced its opinion Had not the defence so 

 suddenly collapsed I should have placed Naake in the witness-box y and 



