THE SURAT.

Evening Star, Issue 3418, 4 February 1874, Page 2

THE SURAT.

To the Editor. Sib,—Several of Captain Johnson’s sympathizers (but only for his too severe, un-Eng-lish, and hard, if legal, two-fold punishments) defor having given publicity to W. E. and ‘SouthlanderV’ letters, with which they wish to express their concurrence. They also suggest that, not improbably, as tending to some better course—or, at all events, as preparatory to doing as proposed, the p,roseoutora should be—and they therefore are hereby—respectrally asked what authority had the R. M to muict the repeated punishment?—! am br' QuasbyNonCor amT*

To the Editor.

Sik, With your kind permission, will you allow me to correct some remarks of yours made letter in last nights Star, which, if not contradicted, may lead many people to believe that the loss of the fcmrat was partly owing to the want of discipline of the crew of said vessel. In all the evidence given in that case there was not Drought forward one single case to prove the crew wanting in their duty or discipline, or to nave acted contrary to orders given to preserve passengers and ship,. Without blowing our trumpet, I will safely assert that had had it not been for the crew neither passengers nor ship would have arrived even so far or so safe. I believe the passengers, one and all, will bear me out in this assertion. With your kind leave I may hero also mention that several times within my hearing have gentlemen (?) and others remarked that he (the too severely (?) punished captain) ought to have drowned the whole d-n lot of them- (that he did not do so was not his fault.) Now I tlunk if some of Captain Johnson s sympathizers were to keep such opinions to themselves and not think quite so loud, it might further then- philanthropic work in hand But !do hope, and it is not a Christian-like wish, I know, but then, sir, I am only an emng mortal like my neighbors) if they succeed in their enterprise, and Captain Johnson Sin carues emigrants with a like result, some of those well-meaning gentlemen (?) above referred to may be on board with him, and taatecffthc sweets he may provide for them in Wch case! instdc and provided. &c,. onlv wiHi flWo -i;** ' that he give tIW aSm of SSttabE yond, and when convinced of what is in store for them there, no doubt thev will than nk their tune to “ Not tw Jo?' rim* ,say that I have no personal animosity

either captain or officers, as during the whole passage (the end excepted) they merited our due respect, and that therefore these lines are not influenced by criminal motives. In giving place for this in your valuable paper, you will oblige one of the Crew.

THE SHOTOVER TERRACE COMPANY. To the Editor, Sir, — I observe an answer to your correspondent’s letter, by the late mining manager, in reference to the tunnels in the above company’s claim. Besides the contradiction, it states, ‘‘ The only communication that ever existed is Eagar’s main tunnel, which can be repaired and put in excellent working trim for the sum of fifteen pounds sterling.” As this claim is so prominent in the mining world of this Province, and so much money being expended in the utilisation of its tunnels, &c., I will simply give you the facts of the circumstances referred to. The tunnel is 1,009 ft long, the first breakdown is 483 ft from the mouth, or 600 ft from the tip. To commence the repairs, it would require 1,200 ft 4in by 2in rails (timber here is L2 per 100 ft), sleepers, and laying, after which, driving with close timber through a junction, and how far the other side it is impossible to say, as the tunnel, from this point, had been driven in a decomposed slate, termed here “ The Mullock Reef and, reckoning miners’ wages at 70s per week per man, your readers can easily judge how much can be done for fifteen pounds sterling.—l am, &c., Fred. Evans, Mining Engineer to the Company. Shotover, January 29.