ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 312, 19 December 1862, Page 4

ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

THE THEATRE ROYAL. {To the Editor of the Daily Times.)

Sir,—l observed in your issue of this day a paragraph regarding the Theatre, Royal, in which you lament the scanty attendance,-night after iii«ht, and charitably ascribe it to the weather; but you add, or "to some oth^r cause at present undivulged." Now, siv, I fancy I can enlighten you in some measure on the matter. The Theatre Uoyal was, at its erection, leased to Mr Holt, and from its position and management obtained an eqnal, if not greater, support, than its older rival, the Princess. So much for its former success. If Mr Holt had thrown up his' occupancy, the explanation might be simple. He lias not, nor, as far as I can learn, does he intend to doso; but he has preferred throwing over the pi-o-prietor by taking the Princess' also, and removing the most attractive portion of his company thither^ with, as I am informed, the express intention of" reducing the Royal to a second-rate establishment.

With the private reasons or under-current at work to effect this change I have nothing to do, but I submit it cannot he for tiie public benefit. For one man to hold both theatres means, in plain English, ruin to one through the success of the other, and the intended successful one is pretty well indicated. It also means complete control over the public as to the rates of admission, the style of play submitted, ifcc. Now, as a lover of fair play, I consider there is» something radically \vron3 in this; and I trust the public will see it in the same li^ht, and express tticir disapprobation in a plain, unmistakeabie manner. I write from no interested views, savingl that, being a resident in the portion of the city surrounding the Koyal, I am anxious for its success ; and knowing it can support a well-conducted house, feel sorry its interests and amusement should be thrust asi'ie to pamper one man's craving ambition. I am, &c, It. G. Stratton. Princes-street, Dunedin.

THE HILL SLUICERS MEMORIAL. (To the Editor of the Otago Daily Times.}

Sir-- Thanking you for the insertion of my previous letter, I trust you will not consider me troublesome in replying to the letter signed "Veritas," who, bye the-bye, evidently appears to be ashamed or afraid of his name. In consequence of the language expressed in his letter, designating miners loafers, 1 can assure you, Sir. if the writer of that letter -would show a bold front amongst the miners he would find a resentment.

Your correspondent "Veritas" writes theoretically on mining matters, but your valuable Manual clearly shows the fallacy of the statement of your croaking correspondent, referring to Tuapeka being worked out.

I should like to know wLat new discovery has been made by the Hill Sluicers? Why, they are only working the ground that was partially worked, and known to be auriferous. How they claim to be the pioneers lam at a loss to understand. So far as engineering, no more skill is required to convey the •water to a hill claim than to a claim across the Gully. What " Labor-saving civilisers of mankind" has to do with minina: matters I aui at a loss to understand. Also, there is other extraneous matter contained iv the letter which, calls forth no remark.

Such was the clandestine manner in which the business of the Hill Sluicers memorial was arranged, that the adjoining claims knew nothing of it.- Why not conduct it as usual in Victoria and other gold fields ? When a bye-law proves injurious to miners they are consulted prior to petitioning the Mining Board, or Government—not insulted by the mouthpiece of a clique by being called loafers. I might state so far as enmity existing amongst diggers towards the self-styled pioneers, it is in consequence of the Hill Sluicers diverting the water which naturally belonged to the Gullies and Flats, whkh ought to be allowed to flow in its original channel, for the use of the miners, till they are worked out; if there is surplus water for the Hill Sluicers, as I before stated, no objection has been offered to them using the same. Trusting the Government will not rescind the byelaw, so often referred to by " Veritas," as there is an overwhelming majority opposed to the rescinding of the clause, I am, &c, Frederick Bower. Gabriels' Gully, Dec 13, 1852. MR TAYLOR AND THE HAUBOR DEPARTMENT. (To the Editor of the Daily Times.) Sir, —In your report of the proceedings of the Provincial Council, published on 17th instant, Mr Tayler remarks that " he is convinced that the Custom's boat is more frequently employed and more exposed than those in the other boats, apart from having1 to work on Sundays." He is evidently ignorant of the subject on which he is speaking, for it is plain that the duties of the harbor boat, extending as they do from the Port to., the Heads, must necessarily be the more severe of the two ; and as for Sunday work, he is equally at fault, as the harbor boat, for nine consecutive Sundays, has j had to go to the Head 3 once, and sometimes twice, j through the day. ; Perhaps some one more able than myself, may notice the inaccuracy of Mr Tayler in the above re- • marks. Hoping such may be the case, I am, &c, Hugh M'Kiniay, Ose of the Harbor Crew, Port Chalmers. Thursday, 18th Dec, 1862.