Original Correspondence.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Volume II, Issue 60, 25 November 1863, Page 5

Original Correspondence.

• # * Our columns being impartially open, we do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions of our correspondents.

"ENTRE DEUX COQUINS QUEL CHOISIR?"

To the Editor of the Lake Wakatip Mail.

Sir,—The Daily Times has been particularly unfortunate in its choice of correspondents from this district, each appearing to serve some idea, caprice, or private spite of his own, in preference to fulfilling his duty as a faithful chronicler. Few who were on the Lake in its early days will forgei the mis-statements of the first, whose flatulent verbosity in favor of Frankton was the cause of considerable damage to this township; and now the second seems to emulate his predecessor in his strict regard for truth, which must gain him the admiration of all here. I will not advert to his report (?) of the Hospital Committee meeting which appeared in the Times of a fortnight back, in which a private conversation anent an absent officer was substituted for the real business of the meeting—an oversight which can only be accounted for by his spleen o'erreaching itself in his desire to work that gentleman an injury in favor of correspondent No. 1, whose paid services now take the place of the gratuitous efforts of the officer alluded to, and who, indeed, furnished the report to correspondent No. 2. 1 say I need not allude to this report, for it has been ably answered and triumphantly disproved by the unanimous voice of the Committee itself. Still less need I remark on his persistent defamation of the Hospital and the Committee — they are patent to all who have had time or patience to wade through the bi-weekly column of misrepresentation, illiberality, and infamy dated from Queenstown, but in reality written at the Arrow, and published in the Time,. But I will deal with one specific subject—his recent vilification of Dr. Pelley and his friends at the late election for resident surgeon for the Hospital. His charge of bribery and trickery I beg leave to return, and will state the real case. Dr. Douglas, the representative of the Arrow township, it was resolved by his local friends should be returned against Dr. Pelley, who had fulfilled his onerous duties to the satisfaction both of the public and the patients, under great and manifold disadvantages. For some time the Hospital was not half-finished—unglazed, almost unroofed, crowded with patients ill to extremity; with an almost impossibility of obtaining sufficient necessaries for their comfort, and an absence of assistance in watching and tending them. Still he nobly persevered, and the effect is to be seen in the fact that no charge was laid against him publicly, and the patients voted for him to a man. It is impossible to please everyone, especially when the intention is expressed of finding fault and giving no meed of praise. So Dr. Pelley was to be removed to make way for Dr. Douglas. The Arrow poured forth its legions, who loudly expressed their determination of putting their man in; and for the first half-hour the scrutineers were rushed by Dou^lasites— and tome say the very pure-minded correspondent of the Times was one of the busiest in whipping-m voters, writing out the voting papers, and obtain-

ing cards of membership for those of his opinion ; j but this of course I don't believe/ The Queenstown folks, naturally expecting the whole affair would be a matter of form, were surprised at this u roll-up," and were nearly out-manotuvred, when they opposed energy to artifice, and succeeded in bringing sufficient of their friends to the spot in time to secure the return of Dr. Pelley. This, Sir, is a truthful account of the whole transaction, and I cannot help feeling regret that any gentleman in the position a correspondent of a daily paper should hold, should make the mistake (no doubt unintentional) he did in his report, and which, as it stands, is an insult to the public, an insult to the Committee, and an insult to the candidates, calculated to do injury both to themselves and us, by creating a false impression in the minds of those at a distance. What should we think of a gentleman, who, after benefitting the public by his successful efforts in his practice of the professions of a dentist, (sic) actor, and serai-lawyer's clerk, prostitutes his very diverse, but without doubt, shining talents to vilify and blacken the characters of men as far above him and his petty machinations as the eagle is above the grovelling insect ? Of course I don't for a moment mean the respected corre>pondent of the Times ; but what should we think of such a man? If time, in place of maturing judgment, calming passions, and giving experience, brings nothing but grey hairs in his train, the respect we owe to age will soon fall to a minimum, like that of all right-minded men for the Lake correspondent of the Otago Daily I Times. | P. D. Queenstown, Nov. 20,1863.

SABBATH DESECRATION.

To the Editor of the Lake Wakatip Mail. Sir—l have delayed writing to you for a week, in hope that a pen more skilful than mine might answer the letter that appeared in your issue of the 14th inst., in reference to the excursion of " Sabbath, the Bth," and which your correspondent has been pleased to dub "desecration." The offence seems to be that a party of gentlemen engaged a steamer for & private excursion, and secondly, obtained a band. What profanity there is in this lamat a loss to understand. Is it pleasure-seeking on a Sunday ? If so, your correspondent does wrong in hinting thnt an equal amount of pleasure may be obtained through a "quiet stroll" among our "beautiful terraces and almost invaluable scenery," and should at once advocate that an embargo be laid on everything conducive to Sabbath amusement or " profanity." Is it the music that induces the qualms of conscience experienced by your correspondence—that conscience so delicate and susceptible that the dulcet strains of " Old Dog Tray" or the wicked tunes of some " uncanny" opera pierces it with a poignancy that can only be alleviated by a dose of printer's ink ? If so, he passes a censure upon all those who not only

tolerate, but approve, of Sunday music—both sacred and secular—at whose head stands our gracious Queen herself. Music is played by military and other bands in every public garden or park throughout England; and does your correspondent arrogate to himself the right, or ability, to decide a question which has engaged the serious attention of the best and most talented men in the British empire ? I will not ask your correspondent in what manner he spends his one leisure day in the seven; but I think I may assume that he goes regularly to church, and reads nothing but the most serious of religious works, whatever he may do during the week. I think this may be safely inferred, for there runs throughout his whole communication a degree of bitterness in his abuse of the <( good(P) folks of Queenstown," the "cockle-shell" steamers, the " apology for a band," &c, as well as such a regard for " self & C 0.," as expressed by his phrase of the " lovers of Sabbath observance"— that is in the highest degree saintly, and respectable. It is almost unnecessary for me, Sir, to enter into any defence of what is in itself a very harmless and innocent recreation, as this whole question has been discussed by others of far greater ability than myself; and reproduction of their arguments here would be a mere waste of time and trouble; lam quite willing to leave the case to the common sense of the community. Your correspondent signs himself " Not one of the Old Identity ;" but from several peculiarities in his letter I feel convinced he is from north of the Tweed. If his notion of Sabbath observance is that of Scotland, and truth to say, it seems like ] it, I beg leave to recommend to his attention the following quotation from Punch on this very i subject:—

Kehave yoursels before folk, Behave yoursels before folk, Sin if ye will, but keep it still, And dinna sin before folk. It's no through hate of walks or whisKey toddy that we ask ye this, But losh, we takesair amiss To be shown up before folk. Behave yoursels before folk, Behave yoursels before folk. Sin's sin, nae doot, but sin found out Oh, that's the sin to floor folk ; We'll just agree we've been as free 0' Sabbath days our glass to pree; But naue can say he e'er did see Us waur for drink before folk. Behave yoursels before folk, Behave yoursels before folk, And dinna care for caller air Like sinfu' out-o'-door folk. Yours, &c, A Long-handled Shovel. Queenstown, Nov. 23,1863.

THE SHOTOVER. (from our own correspondent.)

It affords me much pleasure to refer to the ! excellent weather which we have enjoyed during the last few weeks, and many are of opinion that it is the commencement of a repetition of that which was so favorable to mining operations at the same period last year. Already the miners have taken advantage thereof, and several splendid yields have been reported from Sutherland's beach. Dunn and party realised from a small paddock, 157 ozs., and the extreme end of their claim has already been tested and found of equal richness ; they consequently have every expectation of making a handsome sum. Owen's claim, adjoining, is also first-rate. In M'Masters river claim they have been enabled, although nearly defeated by water, in getting out two paddocks of washdirt; the result has been about 65 ozs.

Morris and party have erected a water wheel; this is situated about half-a-mile below Moke creek, on a large beach which they have been unable to bottom with the ordinary hand pump. It is to be hoped that they may be rewarded.

Arthur's Point is still the scene of active operations, the most important being the construction of the large race; both upper and lower race parties are working with an assiduity and will, showing a determination to carry the work to a successful termination. On Cartwright's beach, mining does not appear so lively as it did some few weeks back; this, however, is not caused by any dimunition of the yield of gold, but it was found advisable to erect a large water wheel on the lower portion of the beach, on account of the excess of water, and a call was made for that purpose, which was promptly responded to, and over £IOO collected on the spot. The work is now being pushed forward, and pending its completion some parties have deemed it advisable to suspend work. In a commercial view this place is assuming an importance which few anticipated; a few substantial buildings have lately been added to the township, among which Mr Robinson's is one of the best. Mr Green's new store, and Mr Grimes' new building is intended for a Hotel. Frontages which a few weeks ago went a begging, are not to be had for less than from £2 to £3 per foot. One enterprising gentleman of Queenstown is about to erect a new gold office.

POLICE COURT, QUEENSTOWN. (Before R. Beetham, Esq., R.M.) Friday, November 24, 1863.

John Limpus was charged with damaging the Police boat while sailing on Lake Wakatip. Sergeant Bryant, sworn, said, that while sailing towards Queenstown yesterday in the police boat, the u Telegraph" bore down upon them and run into their quarter; she was on the starboard tack, and ought to have gone on the port tack, seeing how near the boats were one another. That is the rule always adopted. John Limpus. sworn, said, he did his best to keep his boat away from th 3 police boat; he eased off the sheet directly he saw the danger. Inspector Morton said he did not want to press the charge, but he wished it to be a warning to the boatmen on the Lake to prevent collisions in future, and to make them keep a good look out. Police v. Mcßeath.—Charge of exposing goods in Rees-street, on Nov. contrary to the Act. Sergeant Naden said Mr. Inspector Morton requested him to caution persons in Rees-street not to expose their goods to such an extent before their doors as they had been in the habit of doing. He took no notice of the caution. Mr. Mcßeath's brother was there when he spoke. The storeman said he preferred having the case brought into court. Mr. Mcßeath said he misunderstood the order of Sergeant Naden. He thought they could put goods three feet outs ide the verandah, as long as there was a free passage left between the house and the verandah posts. Fined 20s. Police v. Bullen.—Same charge. No appearance. Michael Hunt proved delivery of summons. Sergeant Naden, sworn, said he cautioned Mr. Bullen to remove his goods from the verandah outside the store. Inspector Morton said that was the second offence of this kind. Fined £5.