THE "BENGER" CONTROVERSY.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VI, Issue 286, 24 July 1873, Page 10

THE "BENGE R " CONTRO VERSY.

(To the Editor.) Sic, — In regard to the controversy in your columns between " Benger " and Mr. Nicholson : not having been present at the meeting at Ormond's Hotel referred to by your correspondent. I cannot say as to the accuracy or otherwise of the statements made by him; but judging from the theatrical exhibition which " Benger " made at a political meeting at Roxburgh, I should be disposed to look with very great distrust uoon any evidence offered by him on this subject. At that meetiug ho made some reckloss assertions, which were then and there conclusively proved to be — well, to put it in the mildest language — very wide of the truth. In a -very cowardly manner he attacked behind his back the character of a gentleman, who he well knew was by his position precluded from defending himself from the unfounded insinuationa as to bis conduct in • a particular transaction ; in fact his speech from beginning to end was. a disjointed tirade of personal abuse, culminating in an- almost unintelligible history of the Island Block sale, the odium of which iniquitous affair he attempted to foist on Mr. Charles Nicholson. It is needless for me to say that that gentleman was not present So far as the transaction in question is concerned, Mr. Nicholson has at least respectable testimony on his side, which I fear is. more than " Benger." can claim. For instance the evidence of the Chief Magistrate of the Province, who distinctly stated, at the largest public meeting ever held at Eoxburgh — pointing to the gentleman who I believe to be identiqa} w,it.h" ■Banger-""

— that he was the cause ot the sale of the Island Block," and further, that Mr. J. L. Gillies confirmed this view of the matter. These are facts which " Benger '* has never been able satisfactorily to refute. Surely the evidence of the Superintendent and the Speaker of the Provincial Council on Mr. Nicholson's side of the question ought to be conclusive as against that of a mere anonymous writer. As a spectacle of passing events, my own impression is that there is something yet in the background well known to some of the parties to this controversy which, when it comes to light, will enable the public to apportion the blame of that transaction amongst one or two of those who are now foremost in disclaiming any connection with it. I would ask one question in conclusion. Has "Benger" forgotten the apologetic attitude he invariably assumed in speaking of the Moa Flat sale whenever its policy in reference to the interests of the district wa"s discussed ? His change of front on that occasion -requires explanation just as much as anything connected with the Island Block. On this latter subject " Benger " maintains a judicious silence. I am inclined to be charitable, however, and hazard a guess that poor " Benger " was not then a free agent. Permit me to explain that howevpr much I may differ from Mr. Nicholson in political matters, I like to see fair play, and with that object I venture to claim a space in your columns. — I am, &c, Fair Plat, > Mount Benger, 16th July, lS73.y^

Income-Tax of Towys. — In the financial year ending the sth of April 1871, the income assessed to incometax under Schedule D (profits of trades, professions, &c. ) amounted to 25,077,865Z in London— i.e., in, "the City ;" 10.253,742£ in the borough of Marylebone, 7,186,635?. in , Westminster; Finsbury, 4,468,360?. ; Southwark, 2,606.454?.-, Hackney, 2,264,722?. Tower Hamlets, 2,219,191?.; Lambeth, 1,904.200?. ; Chelsea, 1,057,672?, ;. Greenwich, 831,"262?. ; making a total of above 60 millions sterling for the metropilitan district, or nearly threesevenths of the whole 145 millions assessed to income-tax under Schedule D in the Parliamentary boroughs of the United Kingdom. There are 15 other towns in which the income assessed under that schedule exceeded a million sterling. In Liverpool it amountedto 8,513,363?.; in Manchester it was 8,231,203?. ; in Glasgow, 6,628.434?. : Birmingham, 3,017,046?. ; Edinburgh, 2,918,623?. ; Dublin, 2.749,329?. ; York, 2,628,424?. ; Leeds, 2.318.561? ; D^rby, 2,300,940?. ; Bristol. 2,036.272?. : Sheffield, 1,592,324?. ; Bradford, 1,556,835?. ; Newcastle-upon-Tyne, L 394.357 ; Belfast, 1,338,144?. ; Hull, 1,240;623?. It must be borne in mind that railways, mines, canals, &c,, which are. in fact; trading concerns, are classed in Schedule D. Probably their profits very greatly swell the return for the town,' in which the head ofEce is situated. The following letter appears in a. contemptory — " Cure for Tetanus. — Sir, having noticed in your paper, some time in February or March last, an. account of the death of a boy, who died from tetanus or lock-jaw, caused by a. wound inflicted by a broken glass bot-^ tie,- 1 venture to give you the following simple recipe for the prevention, as well as cure, of this terrible disease: — Dissolve in fresh water sufficient salt to make a strong brine or pickle, and then freely bathe the. wound with it ; ; should the case be very obstinate, warm the pickle as hot as the patient can bear it." Several of our people have died from this fearful disease before the remedy was made known to us by the captain of an. American whaleship. Since then we have had occasion to. apply it in five or six different cases, with the most satisfactory results. In two or three of these cases the disease had arrived at that stage where, as I have been told, doctors give up all hopes of their patient, viz., when spasmodic constriction of the muscles commences. — I am, &c, John Adams, Norfolk Island, May 15, 1867." On a certain occasion the counsel in an American Court took exception to the ruling of the Court on a certain point, and 'a dispute arose. "If the Court please," said the counsel, "I wiwh to refer to this book a moment," at the same time picking up a law-book.. " There's no use o' you referring to any books !" exclaimed the Court angrily. "I have decided the p'nt!"' " But your honor," persisted the attorney. "Now I don't want to hear any thing further on the subject!" yelled the Court. " 1 tell you again I have decided the p'nt!" " I tell: you yon are wrong !" retorted the counsel. "I am right," reiterated the Court" " Darn a nigger if I ain't." " I say you ain't,"' persisted the counsel. " Crier," yelled the Judge " I adjourn this Court forten minutes !" and jumping from the bench he pitched into the counsel, and after- a very lively little fight placed him horse de combat, after which business was resumed. But it was not long before another misunderstanding arose. " Crier," said the Court, " we will adjourn this time for twenty minutes!"' and he was about taking off his CQat, when the counsel said, " Never mind Judge, keep your seat, the p'nt is yiql-. ded. My thumb's out of jin!t, and, I'y,Qj .sprained, my : s^qujder,." 1