Original Correspondence.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Volume II, Issue 69, 26 December 1863, Page 6

Original Correspondence.

* * Our columns being impartially open, ice do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions of our correspondents. > To the Editor of the Lake Wakatip Mail. Sir,—l regret to intrude upon you again ; but the letter signed "J. N. Peters," in your last issue, compels me to make a short statement of facts, so that the pnblic may be aware of the true state of matters. I labored under no delusion when I stated that the plaintiff expressed a desire to settle the matter extrajudicially. I have spoken to several who were present, and they all concur in saying that the plaintiff did make such proposition. I will not, as I said in my former letter, go into the merits of the case : but I must repeat, that when a magistrate refuses to permit parties to settle their own actions at any stage of the proceedings, provided always that judgment has not been recorded, then he is guilty of an unconstitutional and illegal act. A magistrate who infringes the law is as much liable to punishment as the citizen who may infringe it; and inferior court judges ought to be well aware that their existence is only tolerated by the law in the belief that such existence is conducive to giving to the people the administration of justice at a cheap rate. Had the expressed desire of the plaintiff and defendant been attended to, a good deal of money would have beeu saved in the shape of costs. This of itself may perhaps be the reason why the plaintiff's solicitor objected to his client withdrawing the case for private settlement. I beg further to say that, so far as regards the allegation in the beginning of the letter, that I have made a " false and unjust attack upon—" &c., &c. (the rest is stereotyped and nauseous) it would have perhaps been better to have left it out. As a citizen I had a right to call the attention of the public to an act which is illegal, and still more a right when that action emanates from an administrator of the law.

In conclusion I beg to state that I very much question if Mr Beetham will be grateful to any one for toadying to him and coming forward in the weak macner in which J. N. Peters has been advised to do. He has shirked the point of my letter, viz.: the public interest in the refusal to allow the case to be withdrawn, and contented himself with giving utterance to a few commonplace compliments and a denial of what can be proved by Mr Beetham himself, if necessary. Dennis Powell.

To the Editor of the Lake Wakatip Mail.

Sir, —I observe in your issue of yesterday that Captain Ponting, of the Wakatip steamer, was instrumental in rendering assistance to the Expert steamer on Tuesday night last, and I consider it only due to that gentleman to record a similar act on his part which occurred last night. The particulars are as follows : About 10 o'clock a large boat was distinctly seen (it being a clear moonlight night) at the Point, about five miles from here, without any sails up. It was at once conjectured by those who saw it that it could be no other than Mr Rees' schooner, the Lady of the Lake, driven by the force of the wind (which was blowing strong at the time 1 ) from her anchorage. Captain Ponting having gained the assistance of two others, started in the Wakatip dingy, and succeeded in bringing her safely to her former anchorage. The anticipation proved to be correct, and but for the timely assistance rendered might have become a total wreck, which would have been a serious loss to the owner.

Yours, &c. Kingston, Dec. 24, 1863. E. Riley.