ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE

Dunstan Times, Issue 573, 11 April 1873, Page 3

ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE

—o — Wo do not identify ourselves with the opinions that may be expressed by our correspondents.] —o—{TO THK EDITOR OF THE DUX STAN TIMES. Sir. — ln your issue of the 4th instant, you e larged upon the rich leads of gold supposed to exist on the west bank of the Molyneux river, and in a marked manner eulogise th<- action of a few persons who have taken upon themselves the responsibility of s Iving the problem. So far as I am concerned, 1 am entirely of your opinion, but after so many years of inactivity in a locality languishing for want of now industries, it seems strange that a belief of that kind should have taken possession of the minds of a few, simulaneoualy with a scheme I had in view of the same nature, and which 1 imparted t a few honorable g -utlemen in the district. I am not egotistical enough to suppose that I, acornpirative stranger in the locality, am justified in considering my knowledge superior in every instance, to that of others who have been familiar with every hill and ho e for ye ts. Still we know that a ferti’e brain, coupled with a practical mind, is far superior to the plodding individual whose actions arc controlled by others. 1 admit fiat most stupendous efforts are being ma leby thecitizens of Clyde and Alexandra to retrieve piist losses, ?and as you very j sly remark, the act of releasing—or ex t -acting the hidden treasures from the bed of tl— river, has been taken in hand with a with a will, but not with the will of tho people in the Dnnstan District. Y-u also state three companies, each on a different principle, are committed to this g eat undertakin ■, |,-ind that, before any of the above principles, with the exception of the pneumatic dredge (which you say is) are proved perfect in practice, three other tubes are in contemplation. All have a right to succeed, and every enterprise b -ought forward for individual and collective good deserves support. But it seems to me as if the personal devil we have had lately in Dunedin had scattered envy and jealousy broadcast among the residents of your district to such an extent that the small capital they have at their disposal is being frittered away in small objects, in far too diminutive a character to pay ; while larger enterprises, on approved and scientific principles, with plenty of capital, will reap tho results of their disorganised efforts. I am, 4c., R. W. NUTTALL. Dunedin, April 6, 1873.

■(to THE KDITOII OF TIIK DUNSTAN TIMES) Sir, —Not having bosn permitted reply in Court to an accusation made against mo by Joseph Berry in his evidence in the case of Hall v. Gibson, re Royal Standard cla: m. heard in Warden’s Court, Cromwell, on the 7th ultimo, and the Editor of the Cromwell Arytt) having-refused to publish a let er from mein contradiction, and as I have ro .son to believe that silence on my part has cause I soma persons to infer guilt, the only resource I have left is to bog that in the c ;usa of justice you will permit me space for a few Hues to the same purport «s those I sent the Argus. The accusation was a charge against mo by Berry of at' empting, by offering him money, to influence said .1. Berry in my favour in giving his evidence in the above case, in which I was defendant. With your permission I will briefly staco the circumstances bearing upon the matter. Being for some time previously well ao--quaiutod with Berry, and of opinion that he would not swear falsely, I determined to have him subpoenaed as a witness, knowing that he saw me arrive upon the claim before Hall on the evening that it was thrown op -u to this public by the War.len’a decision. This was the only evidence I wanted or could possibly expect from him as bearing upon the case. It.is necessary to say that during the time I was acquainted with Berry. I formed ■a more correct estimate of his wardrobe, than I did of himself, as 1 could not possibly think anything good of it, and knowing it to be very deficient, I felt it unpleasant to compel him to appear before the public, and to remove the difficulty, I offered, although not flush of cash, to lend him a couple of notes to purchase clothing, saying, he might pay me when ho could. He received my offer so coldly, that it at once occurred to me that ho was interested on the other side, and miyht havo a purpose in so receiving it. This proved to be the, case, Hall having offered him a share, should they prove successful in getting the claim. I said, f hoped he would not put any misconstruction upon my offer; his answer was. to say something about time anil circumstances, attempting a quotation, which ho considers as good at any time as if original; I left him; feeling greatly disgusted. Now, considering tho simplicity of the evidence which 1 could expect from him, will the public tbink (even supposing me capable of doing so) that I had a sufficient motive for attempting to bribe him? I deny the charge, and permit mo to say that I 1 ok upon any such attempt as more contemptiblothan false swearing. Mr. Berry must allow me to place him in one of two categories—.He either cannot understand a generous offer, and cannot think generously himself, or worse, understanding the offer as intended, ho proved himself capable of twisting it t,o my disadvantage and his own profit. He may take which he pleases. I know I am open to a charge of bad taste in exposing anyone’s poverty, and o ly in self defence would I do so. In Berry’s case however I feel the less reluctance, that he himself in his evidence, went out of his way to proclaim whjningly hia distressed circumstances. I expect him

to feel grateful to mo for assisting him in so doing. The Editor of the Argus will permit mo to say in reference to the concluding remarks of my letter addressed to him (with which I fear to trouble you Mr. Editor) to tho effect that Berry, and Prospector, tho contributor of the letter beaded “ Struggle for tho Standard,” published in tho Argus, may be identical; il so, Berry may probably belong to the distinguished staff of the Argus. Might not the Editor of the Argus have given as the true reason, (instead of those he did give) for refusing to publish my letter, that he hesitated to have exposed in tho Argus ouo of his “Own Correspondents?” But Mr. Editor, I hope you will agree with me that the reason is a bad one, and that persons connected with the press, should not be shielded from castigation, when deserved, any more than outsiders. Imn, 4c., JAMES GIBSON.