I FEEL I must have take issue with Robert Beaumont's comments about George Leeman in your feature Taking The Train Through Time (The Press, July 3).

Why do commentators need to denigrate Leeman, just because they are seeking to give Hudson praise?

Beaumont describes Leeman as “abstemious and cold” and it seems quite unfair that he should be chastised because his religious commitment led to a lifestyle which contrasted vividly with that of Hudson.

His political opposition to Hudson was shared by many other councillors and businessmen at the time, so why is Leeman always singled out?

Leeman was respected and held in affection by many citizens of York in his lifetime, and the number of people who lined the streets to witness his funeral procession in 1882 also attest to that fact.

Other historians have seen him in a better light than Mr Beaumont, and even tell us that Hudson himself acknowledged Leeman’s fairness, and “spoke well of George Leeman, who had been kind to him” (Arnold & McCartney, 2004).

In our day, there is little sympathy for politicians who are seen to be less than honest and upright, whatever their business empires have achieved. It might be wise to keep this in mind when we tried to interpret the Hudson versus Leeman history.

Dorothy Reed, Middlethorpe Drive,York.