THE SLUDGE-CHANNEL NEW REGULATIONS.

Kumara Times, Issue 2487, 9 June 1884, Page 2

THE SLUDGE-CHANNEL NEW REGULATIONS.

[to the editor.]

Sir—ln your issue of Monday last I read a letter signed "H. H. W.," and the the first thought that occurred to me was the manager has got one of his flunkeys to take up the cudgels in his behalf; and I think so still, because I cannot conceive it possible that any man worthy of the name could advocate any such restrictions as are sought to be imposed upon the miners by the new regulations. He also seems to be in a quandary why four parties out of the eight are striking at all, for, as he says, the manager "distinctly told some of them that he would not enforce the bar," &c. Now, your correspondent must be a greenhorn himself if he thinks that any man whose permit expired last year would take the manager's word for anything, and for the reasons I have advanced I think the production of your correspondent was inspired because the " back number " men, as they are styled, have been so busy during the last week they have scarcely had time to think; and, besides, they would be glad if the eight parties never started to work again. Now I say your correspondent is wrong when he says the Government constructed a sludge-channel to accommodate the whole of the miners, or why did they not make it capable of carrying more stuff away? because it is absurd to suppose that a box three feet three inches in width would carry water and. tailings from nine or ten parties at once. And I contend the oldest rule probably in existence would be carried out in this instance—that the first come would be first served. I have been wondering would " H.(H. "W." exhibit the same unselfish spirit (supposing he is interested in the sludge-channel—-which Ido not believe is) toward a few more parties who may start to open up claims into the sludge-channel as there is plenty of good ground available yet if water and channel accommodation could be got to work it with. Ido not think he would be inclined to give his butter away, and take dry bread himself—which is the meaning of the argument put forward in " H. H. W.'s " letter.

In conclusion, I have been waiting all the week for someone to reply to him, and as no one has done so (for fear be may think his views are unanswerable), I have indicted this, which I

hope will prevent "H. H. W." from puzzling his brains, if he has any, any further.—One of the Eight, Spero Meliora. Dillman's, June'7th, 1884.

[to the editor.] Sir—lt is amusing to an onlooker to see the scheming and cajolery that is being brought to bear this last few days by the Government "Water-race Manager, and the small fry under him, to induce the parties whose permits are oat (and some that are not out) to sign the new regulations. Promises have been made by the manager to some parties that the Governor has not in his power to fulfil—some have been promised the first right in the channel, others cheaper water, and so on, ad infinitum, which any man with a grain of sense must know he cannot fulfil, even if he was disposed to do so. The manager must think the miners a gullible lot of fools if he imagines they can be caught with chaff. After paying so heavy for their experience, they ought to be proof against any such folly, and demand any promise he may make to them in writing, which I believe is the only way to deal with a man who has so much soffc soap in his composition, and knows how to use it when he can got a fiat to rub it into. What advantage the new rules can be to the parties who have from one to three years to run beats me, and I can see no other reason for their signing them except it be to put a weapon in the manager's hands to assist him in forcing other parties to submit to be trampled on, and coercing them to surrender any claim tbey have to freedom and liberty, and the rights of: free men; and any man that assists in enslaving his fellowman is a slave himself. No Surrender. Larrikins, June 7, 1884.