CORRESPONDENCE.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XII, Issue 303, 22 December 1877, Page 4

CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Editor op the « Evening Mail.'

Sib,— We are told that Feversham won the battle of Sedgemoor iv bed. Our city members ssem to have performed a similar feat, if it be true, as I am told on good authority, that they wara comfortably ( aaooaipg while the Nelson Bills were being paused through tba House by the exertions of Messrs Sheehaa, Baigent, and Gibbs. They seem, however, to have accepted the thanks of the City Council as complacently as Feversham did bis knighthood and promotion. — I am, etc.,

A Student of Historical Parallels.

To ihe Editor op the « Evening Mail.'

Sir, the late hour at which Mr Curtis'fl meting commenced last night, and the, length of time necessarily taken up by the questions of Mr Levestam, and the following eloquence of Mr Nias, prevented several who could have further refuted Mr Curtis's statements from going on the platform, and I shall therefore ask your indulgence while I m?ka a few short comments.

Mr Curtis was very strong on the point that clear as MrLarnach'a Financial Statement was, be ought to have confined himßelf, to the truth, but as " what is sauce for. the goose is sauca for the gander," it is rather a pity he did not follow out the same rule himself in. bis speech last night. Taking, for instance, his assertion that Sir George Grey wished to induce the Governor to exercise the prerogative of lha Crown with regard to The Land Bill, and tbat thia was a power which had not been exercised by the Crown for some hundreds of years. Now I would call to hia memory the Army Purchase Bill, which, I think, presents a precisely parallel ease, for after it had been thrown out by the Lords, a Royal Warrant was procured for it by Mr Gladstone, the then Premier.

As Mr Curtis himself admitted last night the Land Bill was twice thrown out by the Legislative Council, and it Waa oajy with reluetauce tbat their esaent waa obtained to it ; so that exactly the game power as Sir George used to reject this measure was used quite lately in England to pass one. Aa to ihe passing of the Gas and Waterworks Bill, which Mr Curtis mentioned, perhaps he can tell us whether he waa iv the House at all during the second reading, or whether he and Mr Baigent were in their beds at the time.

Mr Curtis told us tbat he voted for the grant of £3,000 to Sir Julius Yogel because he thought that such expense had been incurred for the colony, and therefore ought to be paid by ife, perhaps he can explain why he did nos hold this opinion last year, When he voted against £2,700 for the Same purpose.

Enclosing my card, I remain yours Etcetera,