[Communicated.]

Colonist, Issue 97, 24 September 1858, Page 2

[Communicated.]

"Whenever there is an unmistakeable difference of opinion between some of the well-meaning and well-informed members of a community like ours —and more especially when the convictions of a small but deservedly influential section of that community are at variance with the sentiments and the practice of the majority of our fellowcitizens—it becomes, we hold, the duty of the journalist to state, in precise and definite language, the case at issue—to strip it of the personalities with'which it is too often encumbered, and having thus narrowed as much as possible the field of discussion, to submit to the public his own unbiassed views of the question. '

No one can run his eye down the advertising columns of a Nelson paper without seeing that our little town is becoming, as far as public amusements can make it so, a much gayer place than in bygone days. Balls, concerts, and dramatic entertainments follow hard on each other's heels. As a body, we see more of one another than we did. Now, is all this for good or for evil ? It is, we believe, contrary to the etiquette of journalism to pass strictures upon anything that may fall from the pulpit: we forbear, therefore, to do more than allude to the fact that the pastors of the various religious denominations in this place are understood to disapprove of the public amusements in question; nor are they, by any means alone in this. Many worthy men abstain, upon principle, from these reunions; many more (professing, it may be, less firmness), frequent them, but with a feeling of shyness and of painful misgiving, which only enables them

. v " To snatch a fearful joy." Now all this is surely bad, and ought to be put an end to in one way or the other. Or, if it be too much to expect perfect unanimity with regard to so delicate a question, let us at least understand what it is that we. are disputing about. After all, the whole question may perhaps be resolved into a repetition of the old, old story of the Knights of the golden and the silver shields.

We will not, at this stage of the discussion, accuse the opponents of public amusements of being illogical enough to argue from the abuse of anything against its use. We refuse to believe, without further evidence, that a number of men can be found, in this nineteenth century, so nar-row-minded as to condemn in the mass all meetings that imply the assembling together of large bodies of our fellow-settlers, for the purposes of relaxation and enjoyment. Is it broadly asserted that the glorious harmonies of Italy and Germany, and the immortal dramas of our own Shakespearej are for. ever to remain as a sealed book to the multitude, because they cannot be publicly produced without an overwhelming accompaniment of what is vile and corrupting? If this be the line of argument really taken, further discussion would be hopeless. But, upon the milder supposition that the abuse only of public amusements is aimed at, we have still a word of friendly warning to offer.' Amusements, of some kind or other, the people will have. Would it not be wiser and more charitable to endeavour to raise their whole tone and character; to impart, by sanctioning them, an element of respectability in which they have been hitherto (it must be owned) too often wanting—to introduce a better class of performers, and, as a natural consequence, a higher and purer type of performances ?

Is it more desirable, for instance, that my neighbour should troll some bar-chanalian stave in a tavern (for sing he must and will), or that he should join some respectable society of amateurs, and contribute his mite towards giving the public really good music? And so with the drama, —by discountenancing all plays you by no means destroy, or even perceptibly diminish, the taste for them. The legitimate drama, driven from the theatre, takes refuge in a barn. Proscribe. Hamlet, and " a new and laughable extravaganza" has " an immense success."

We are well aware that these remarks are likely to be misconstrued by those well-mean ing,, but not very clear-headed, persons who resolutely and blindly set their faces against all public amusements, and who, doubtless, find it much easier to condemn, " without benefit- of clergy," the gratification of a popular want, than to set .about reforming it, or to substitute something better. To such we do not address ourselves, but trust that if we have assisted in removing some of the mists and prejudices that beset this subject, a little plain speaking will be forgiven.

We have had our attention called to an advertisement published by Messrs. Nicholson and Ridings, of this town, in reply to a paragraph in our last issue with regard to the barque Alexander. The information was derived from Mr. Smith, the captain of the Active, who has furnished us with fuller details. A few days before he left Melbourne, he saw Mr. Stuart (of the firm of Stuart, Kinross, and Co., of Wellington), who told him that the Alexander would not come on to this port, and wanted to tranship a portion of her

cargo for this port intothe Active.