Correspondence.

Colonist, Volume II, Issue 101, 8 October 1858, Page 2

Correspondence.

To the Editor of the Colonist.

Sir, —In your impression ofthe 24th September, I replied to certain statements made by " our own correspondent," of Motueka, to the Examiner, and challenged him to .prove the truth of the assertions he had made. He has replied to this challenge, certainly, but not in proof of the correctness of the statements he bad published, but by an evasive answer, unworthy of a man who values truth; and in addition thereto, has again made other assertions, equally untrue, as those he first promulgated.. In his last communication, .after certain deprecatory remarks in reference ;to, the-Superintendent, he asks, <'We11,.-what are .the : "fact.? Why, iv my opinion, a little more damaging . than report made them out." : (Now mark what follows.) " In the first year of his reign, our Superintendent puts up a jetty for us about 300 feet long" &c. To repeat the very words of " our own correspondent," "Well, what are the facts ?'\, They are these— that the jetty was nearly, or quite

completed, before the

Superintendent was

elected. -, . v , • ' What can "our own correspondent *" say to this? And whilst upon the subject of the jetty, I would remark, that he stated that the jetty was to be lowered four or five feet. Was this

true ?

And now to my former challenge, which I again not only repeat, but charge "our own correspondent" with having published statements of his own fabrication, utterly devoid of truth, as follow: —In speaking of the want of a " pound" in tlie Motueka district;' he wrote, " You may say it* is our own fault, and that we ought to ask for one— so we did; sent up a memorial, signed by twenty or thirty people, I believe, to the Superintendent, but did not even get an answer. I deny that snch a memorial was ever signed, sent, or received. But a memorial was sent to the Superintendent (not for a pound, as stated by " our own correspondent") but that the " Protection of Roads Ordinance " might be proclaimed as in force within the Motueka district, signed (not by " twenty or thirty people:.*") but only by seven or eight, which said-memorial was duly aud civilly answered, and addressed to the person whose name first appeared in the memorial, viz., the Rev. T. L. Tudor, to the effect that a counter-memorial, much more numerously signed, having been received, the Superintendent did not deem it advisable to do so at present. The counter-memorial was signed by forty-seven persons. The answer which " our own correspondent" gives to my challenge, to prove the truth ofthe assertions made by him, is a, very pitiable evasion ; it is contained in the few last sentences of his communication. He says—" But I must not forget« My Lover of Truth,' with his firstly, secondly, and thirdly. Firstly,.l.have a perfect recollection of a memorial, signed amongst others, by our Justices, asking the Superintendent to put Motueka under .'some ordinance or other." " For I signed it myself, and. understood it was generally signed."

Secondly. "I did not present it nrpself, but understood it had been sent to its' address."

And thirdly. " And months afterwards, on enquiry, (of-whom pray?) was told that no answer had been received, and heard the observations quoted."

The foregoing comprise the answers of "our own correspondent" to my challenge, to prove the truth of the statements he had made. Has he done so ? Are not his replies to my " firstly, secondly, and thirdly," rather pitiable confessions that his former assertions were untrue ? Ist. He stated that tbe jetty was'to be lowered four or five feet. This was untrue.

2nd. He stated that a memorial signed by twenty or thirty persons was presented to the Superintendent. This was untrue.

3rd. He accused the Superintendent of neglecting to giye an answer to a civil request. This was untrue.

4th. In his last letter, he charges tbe Superintendent, in the first year of his reign, of putting up a jetty 300 feet long, &c. This was untrue.

I need not add more. I am, Sir, not only a " Lover of Truth," but

A HATER OF UNTRUTHS. Motueka, October 2nd, 1858.

To the Editor of the Colonist,

Sir,—-In last Friday's issue of your contemporary there, was'a portion of the newspaper devoted to Collingwood correspondence. I .was surprised to see such a sentence as follows published : "It doe 3 seem paradoxical, that a bonus should be offered for the discovery of a goldfield, and when found that no effort should be I made to keep it."

It will be. within the recollection of your readers that a bonus was offered as a stimulant to him who should first discover gold in this province. Many have attempted and some few succeeded. This bonus, so advertised, was the result of a subscription amongst gentlemen then resident in Nelson. Since that time, when the first anxiety of procuring labor to work pur gold fields acted upon their imaginations, the mutter has been allowed to drop, partly because they who would have subscribed tbe larger sums are now absent, and partly because those remaining do not feel willing to advance their promised subscriptions.. Thus, Mr. Editor, the gold bonus has become a nullity. We have had some experience of meetings of this sort, and at this latter, day it will be not too much to ask. of the energetic gentlemen who proposed the bonus, some little activity on their part to present the funds so freely offered to him who deserves the i«co_npense. " Palmam gui meruit ferdt." I am, yours &c, A DIGGER.