Correspondence.

Colonist, Volume IV, Issue 331, 21 December 1860, Page 2

Correspondence.

To the Editor of the Colonist. Sir —How unaccountably tenacious to an ill act some individuals are, although after having been condemned therein! If a man will do to another a private injury, what will he not ? If any one of H;M.'s Colonial J.P.. (rather Porculorum), while sitting in judgment with his fellows on the Bench, will dare to do a private injury by such an act of injustice as join in convicting any. one without evidence, it is strongly inferential that he, , as a private individual, still possessing the same animus, sitting in bis parlor, will not, fear, under a fictitions game, to stab in the dark by uttering any direct falsehood which may suit his own purposes. • Your contributor, Senex Albus, in last Friday's issue, after grossly misrepresenting a long statement of pretended facts—perfect untruths, which he laya down as truths,—and after (as he says) ** If lam ■", correct" and "presuming" the correctness of the misrepresentations of what he states as facts, bases his foolish argument on his false premises. Now, if we allow that he possibly may possess the braina to be the clerk of the Nelson Board, will he not allow it ,to be fuppiosed that the hon, memben'of the Genera) Assembly of New Zealand have any sense at all ? But, be this as it may, b> version is totally incorrect—sor> , , Fintfy. wither they nor (to KnomttU aAv

pßrs of the Crown interfered with, or in any manner usurped the prerogative of the Crown. - Nor, secondly, did they, as he alleges, reverse its judgment. Thirdly,.lt is wholly untrue, as he pretends, that my appeal to his Excellency, either after, with or without due consideration was dismissed. Nor, fourthly, did I, as he misrepresents, appeal to the Assembly at all against the prerogative of the Crown aa exorcised by its representative or otherwise. Nor, fifthly, did I dare the liberty of complaining of the conduct of his Excellency in not granting the prayer of my Petition or otherwise. Nor, sixtlily, did I pray the hon. House to reverse his Excellency's decision. ' t Nor, seventhly, "did I do so by inference or otherwise in any manner, to teach his Excellency and his responsible advisers good manners—which is only what he would wish to make the public believe he (clever man! ) is competent to do. Nor, eighthly, was the decision of the lion. House, as he again misalleges, a revocation of the Crown's decree, or a most outrageous attack (as M the case with his letter) upon the due administration ofapfs,tice—but much rather of injustice— that was ever perpetrated. True it is that, by the decision, the Bench is virtually stigmatized, and the £5 has been, and properly, repaid me—without costs, a3 I had incurred none: and true I believe it may be (the only other truth in his letter) that he " feelsfor me1' —as indeed all delinquents generally do when their fault is discovered and made public: and, "that these things Should not be suffered to pass without notice, I have not hesitated to express my opinion upon them." JOHN STAMPER. Nelson, 17th December, 1860. To the Editor of the Colonist. .Sir—The Examiner and the Nelson Contingent again! Arcades ambo ! Siamese brothers, for ever inseparable! Of old it was reckoned something terrible that a living man should be chained to a corpse; but the living Examiner has ironed himself fast to the Stafford Ministry, their friends and supporters, ana. anew astonishes the public by rattling and hugging his chains. , Your contemporary has hardly yet got over the exulting feeling that he had discovered a ' mare's nest'—the error into which he has been misguided by those who for electioneering purposes raise a hue and cry against the Wellington oppositionists, and create out of them a huge great bugbear to intimidate the electors of Nelson against such naughtiness as that of sending to parliament any independent minded men who might think it their duty in some cases 'to support the three formidable F's. Mr. Fox's letter, which you published in a late issue, shows in a vary glaring and sufficiently conclusive manner that the said nest is no nest, and the eggs are merely boulder-stones which no mortal mare might reasonably be expected to sit. upon. The Examiner however will not be deprived of his fond discovery. Again he gathers the dear stones together and re-nidificates their vain abode. Again he carries the precious heap of hard boulders in his arms, not only confident of the existence of the yolks and the whites, but actually seeing in fond fancy the sprouting tails of the foals, and the very spots where their tender noses are chipping the shells. So that at last one is obliged from sheer weariness to let him have just his own way; and without further protest even to allow it to pass as correct that the stones are really eggs and not boulders. What prudent man indeed will reason with one of those peculiar people wrongly called old women, who will have the last word, who will see bkok where white is—will asseverate square to be triangular—will protest that an old bladder torn to ribbons is still perfectly wind-tight,—will fondly trust in mares' nests—and will in stones in esse discern fools in posse? There are other points too which in the same spirit of compliance we might just now be inclined to concede to him from mere nausea, but we have a duty to perform which admits no such concession. When Goliath of Gath defied the armies of Israel, he said " Choose you a man for you, and let him come down to me. If he be able to fight with me, and kill me, then we will be your servants ; but it I prevail against him and kill him, then shall ye be our servants, and serve us.1' Considering the giant's advantages this proposition was not particularly fair; but what would it have been had the Philistine selected his own antagonist, and insisted that the issue of slavery should be cast on the defeat or triumph of an Israelite not chosen at all for his readiness to fight. Still more what would it have been had this giant ch6sen to assert that,.having completely prostrated an absent foe, he claimed all the advantages of a fair and open fight, and the consequent servitude of -the Israelitish army. It is something very similar however that the Examiner claims for the monstrous expose -of the Wellington men. In the first place the trick to which he has resorted in order to smooth the way for his own apparent triumph must be exposed. Before the rejoinder of Mr. Fox can be obtained, the election of Representatives will probably be over, and the Examiner may think that the "friends of the Stafford Ministry " will complacently secure their seats. Now I do not question the convenience of this plan, but what can be said for its fairness or decency ? The plain fact is this —Rumors are rife that the future existence of the Ministry is very problematical, grounded on the opinion which seems strong in some quarters, that they can depend only on a few of the late Representatives, should they be returned, for certain or continuous support—still less on those new members which an enlightened constituency may send to the House. Should such rumors prove true, I should certainly feel little disposed to regret the dispersal of the gentlemen who have done so much to render the General Assembly the synonyme for mistimed and inefficient legislation, supported by selfish clamor, or equally inopportune silence and subserviency. Indeed from the general tone of society in the colony it might be deduced that the present ministry (unless some very unforseen turn of events should take place) would meet Parliament with such a diminished strength both within and without the House that the first business of the session will be the formation of a new Ministry. Where is the hope of redemption from the inextricable mess into which colonial affairs are fast tending, except in the extreme case of an unequivocal expression of want -of confidence in the Stafford Ministry? Of such want of confidence assuredly the Taranaki members, who have so quietly walked over the course, exhibit no symptoms; and the ** Nelson contingent," if unfortunately they should be re-elected (which cannot for a moment be supposed possible), are confessedly prepared to give their support through thick and thin; and are therefore not likely to shake off their chains of servitude. , Such men then as the Wellington oppositionists, and men of free and independent thought, not place-seeiers, can be ill spared at a time when arguments and sophisms of a short-sighted expediency are proprogated with all the unscrupulous dexterity of practised sycophants, and when the honor and future position of this country are far too much subject to the over-bearing current of selfish craving, and selfish feeling. Among those classes who have not been admitted to the peculiar air breathed by ■** our Representatives there has been a remarkable indifference to the gentlemanly platitudes and commonplaces of Monro-eloquence, and a singular persistence (deep, but not loud) in their opposition to the penny-wise and pound-foolish theories of the intentional and unintentional friends of this province. How long this second state of public feeling may last it is of course impossible to predict V and it would be far more satisfactory if one could be assured of a conscientious conviction in the minds of the candidates for the suffrages of the .electors of Nelson which might sustain it, instead of merely looking for support, on the back of which they may comfortably ride into office, or *n.ugly nestle amongst the already too numerous raid ptoce-hoUile'B* Still when ;the specious chapter of the temptationa by which the popular ttiuiaof tfe« fitotfm hu been already assailed t*

discriminating wanner in which these allurements from the path of duty have been met, and will finally be overcome; it would be unduly suspicious not to augur a fair chance of an honorable national consistency in the great and trying crisis of our political existence. All right-minded men will feel that it is not a time to be self-seeking; they have cast aside the trammels of long-preva-lent modes of thought, and have disregarded the feeble counsels of once-cherished advisers. They have remembered only that they are Englishmen, —representatives of an energy and enterprise, the offspring of other aspirations than those connected with the immediate wants and luxuries of self—that they are now committed to an experiment which must end either in the general good of all the subjects of Her Majesty in this colony, or in the eternal disgrace of those whose vocation as colonists is the developement of a Christian character, and an enlightened policy towards those who have hitherto but feebly, if hardly at all, admitted their participation in the allegiance due to a Sovereign, whose vicegerent, the Governor, has hitherto neglected.their interests. - Nothing more has been shown in the labored attacks on Mr. Fox: than this—that he does not hesitate in making his choice at this particular juncture between the specious name of a pacificator at any price, and the more invidious position of a far-sighted advocate of an energetic prosecution of the war, in. the ulterior interests of a real and lasting peace. I can scarcely believe that electors will be car- , ried away with this virulent hue and cry against the Wellington oppositionists; but will vote for in their own province men, who will carry into j the General Assembly a conscience and a will to do their best for the welfare of the whole country at large—men who will vote for your interests in the spirit of larger patriotism and self-denial than those representatives have who hitherto professed to do you service. DELTA. December 15. To the Editor of the Colonist. Sir—l think too much publicity cannot be given to the remarks you have quoted from one of the Wellington papers in reference to our late members for the House of Representatives, as it shows that the Wellington people know how to estimate their services whatever difference of opinion may exist among us. Messrs. Monro, Curtis, Domett, and Kellingare there put at the very head of the supporters of the Stafford Ministry that is running New Zealand headlong into debt, as its chief did Nelson when he was its Superintendent. According to their own account "the debt of New Zealand exceeds One Million," "Auckland and Wellington are bankrupt," and " the Finances of the Colony are in a ruinous condition;" and yet these four gentlemen have given their unqualified and undivided support to this state of things and the policy that has brought it about. If the country cannot pay its way now, how will it be when the land revenue ceases ? Is it not time the people bestirred themselves ? Let them insist on a government on a scale in accordance with the means and requirements of the colony—a wasteful, heedless expenditure of the revenue may he all very well for a set of place-hunters, and those who have the handling of the cash, but is altogether destructive to the progress and prosperity of the colony. 1 trust the electors will not be misled by the profession, nor studiously framed addresses of these men, but will judge them by their acts; they have been parties, to extravagance, class legislators, and a centralizing policy, all of which are contrary to the interests of the masses. Yours, &c, J.G. Waimea East, Dec. 6th, 1860,

OFFICIAL STUPIDITY. There are few readers of newspapers who have not heard of Mr. John Trotmari, as the inventor of an anchor which has proved of incalculable service in the preservation of life, shipping, and merchandise. It has been the desire of Mr. Trotman to have his anchor used in Her Majesty's navy; but Mr. Trotman is simply a man with an idea in his head. He has invented something very useiul, and the official folk of the Admiralty, who, like the authorities at the Horse-Guards, detest novelties, have resolved to oppose • the adoption of his anchors in the public service. . Perhaps a noble lord never yet made a more untenable position for himself than the Duke of Somerset did, when he attempted to justify his department for rejecting Trotraan's anchors. First, the noble duke, as a ground for his prejudice against them, alleged that merchant ships provided with them went ashore in the memorable hurricane in the Black Sea, on the 14th November, 1854. What is the reply to this allegation ?—That not a single casualty occurred to any one of the steamers or sailing-ships provided on that occasion with Trotman's anchors ;—that whilst small vessels provided with these anchors rode | the storm out in safety, Her Majesty's steam frigate, I •with the Duke of Cambridge on board, was near ! being lost, and would have perished, but that she j threw overboard her guns, shot, shells, &c.; —that vessel being supplied with " Navy," and not " Trotman'a " anchors. The Duke of Somerset next declared that no officer ] of the navy would trust Her Majesty's ships to Trotman's anchors. What is the answer to that allegation?— That Her Majesty's own ship, the Victoria and Albert, the personal safety of Her Majesty and of all the royal family, when at sea, are wholly dependent upon the efficiency of Trotman's anchors. So much for the allegation of the head of the Admiralty. We now come to Lord Alfred Paget, who represents the inefficiency of the Admiralty in the House of Commons. Lord Alfred Paget's first objection to Trotman's anchors was, that the one supplied to her Majesty's yacht cost £119, instead of £90. What is the answer to that allegation?— That the difference between £90 and £119 was occasioned "by obstructiveness on the part of officials, who did their utmost to prevent the anchor being delivered on board the royal yacht ;'* thus occasioning additional expense, arising from demurrage of man and barge for more than six weeks, before the anchor was landed at her Majesty's dockyard. Lord Alfred Paget next declared that the Admij ralty would not order a particular anchor to be used. What is the answer to that allegation?— That the Admiralty would not allow Sir. Wm. Peel to use Trotman's anchor, and so forced him to take "the navy " established anchor. Lord Alfred Paget next declared that the officers of the fleet disapproved of Trotman's anchors. What is the answer to that allegation ?—That no report on Trotman's anchors from the officers of the fleet has been received at the Admiralty. It thus appears that official obstinacy and administrative incapacity have set their faces against Trofcman's anchor. They will have none of it, though it saved the Great Eastern at Holyhead on the night when the Royal Charter was lost; that on a series of experiments, it proved to be the best, and "the established Navy " the worst of anchors; and that Mr. Trotman offers to test ons of his anchors, cost £90----against an Admiralty anchor; cost £365. The jus, tice that the Admiralty officials, high and low, refused to do, they may feel assured public opinion will yet extort from them.— London Review.

Animal Food.—The health of an agricultural laborer in one of the rural districts ia the East Riding having somewhat declined, he called in a medical man, who at once put him on low diet. After a few visits the doctor found his patient so far improved as to warrapt his taking something more substantial than gruel, and he accordingly requested the man's spouse to furnish heir husband with a little auimal food onre or twice a day. Toe wife said noihing ; but no sooner had the doctor departed than she bolted out of the house and shouted to a neighbor—" What do you think, they've ordered for, our John to eat now ?—Animal food !" " And a very good thing, too," replied the neighbor. In a passion the former ex-claimed—-"Why, you're just as bad as them! How is it likely our John can eat hay, and straw, and. ouch like stuff ? Besides he bus