ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

New Zealand Gazette and Wellington Spectator, Volume IV, Issue 325, 17 February 1844, Page 2

ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

To tht Editor of the " New Zealand Gazette and Wellington Spectator." Sir, — Perhaps you will allow me to reply to the Committee on/sailing match. The cheque for the prize was made out in Cemino's nante. The Committee heard evidence in p/upport of the charge, and decided without offording Ceraino an oppportunity of disproving it. Hence from their evidence it appears to be an established rule in such caset,' to hear evidence on one side only. j Captain Rhodes and Mr. Mathieson, two of the Judges, both saw the Fidele pass the Iloyal Wtlliam, and' both, after the match ended, said the Fidele had won. But the fowling is said to have been notorious to all' the spectators.

Satisfactory evidence to tbe contrary would have been brought forward had the parties been allowed.

Cemino on a former occasion had his boat disabled by another boat in the match, and wished it to be sailed over again, but was refused. This led Him to object to sail this over again. No one doubts that the Committee did what they thought right. Whether they did right is the question. The caution implied in the last paragraph of their letter might have been reserved for their own use on a future occasion. Your's obediently, R. Hart, February 9, 1844.

To the Editor of the " New Zealand Gazette and Wellington Spectator." Sir, — As a foreigner, and one of the earliest settlers here, I respectfully request the liberty of answering the untrue statements in the letter which appeared in your paper on Wednesday last, in reference to the late regatta. In that letter they state they took pains to procure satisfactory evidence of the race. Such is not the fact. I was wholly ignorant of any intention to oppose my right to the first prize until I attended on Saturday night to receive the money ■ with the exception of being struck and abused on the race ground by the crew of the Happy Jack, and was only saved from further illtreatment by the Chief Constable, for the crime of beating him in the race. When the claim was raised by the crews of the loosing boats before the members of the Committee present on Saturday night, my imperfect knowledge of the English language rendered me incapable of explaining or defending myself when so unexpectedly opposed ; and then Captain Rhodes publicly stated that I was the winner — and Mr. Bethune told me to bring evidence of my winning or the match should be sailed over again ; or if not, the 2nd and 3rd boats should have Ist and 2nd ! prizes. I certainly declined doing so after the meeting broke up, well knowing as a Sub Committee they usurped an authority they had no right to. On my road home, several members of the Committee induced me to consent to sail the match over again ; | and on Monday morning I wrote to the Treasurer my wish to do so, or abide the decision of the general Committee. Instead of doing this, as the council of three decided on, they gave up the money to the owner of the pet boat before 1 1 o'clock on Monday morning, without my presence or knowledge, and at least 14 out of 20 of the Committee not knowing anything of their doings. I now ask those gentlemen, and the public, if I did not win the first prize ? Why give orders to publish me as such ! Why write the cheque in my favour, or why the indecent haste on Monday morning ? — so much anxLty to sail again, or hear evidence as expressed by them on Saturday night? and yet on Monday morning they have acted in the unjustifiable manner described ! They state, in their Siamese letter, that I fouled twice during the race. I could then or now disprove this statement. It is true my fore sheet got entangled with the bow sprit of the Royal William, which was instantly hauled in, and this is the miserable pretext thfy have for depriving me of my right, — while they sagaciously overlook the fact of the Happy Jack fouling the City of London astern of the Gannett brig — which disqualified her from being a winner. In taking leave of certain gentleman (not in black,) who, like the Welsh Justice, if they hear one side they can decide, but hear both sides they are puzzled. I now beg to inform them that I will never again trouble them, and I believe no other boat owner, and they can now ask each other " when shall we three meet again," being fully aware that rowing and sailing is held in contempt .here, where every man who owns a horse or donkey is anxious to exhibit his animal, I have the honor to be, Your humble servant, Sat-vatore Cimino. Wellington, February 9, 1844.