Reply to. “New Chum.”

Pelorus Guardian and Miners' Advocate., Volume 4, Issue 22, 21 March 1893, Page 3

Reply to. “New Chum.”

TO THE EDITOR.

;Sm, —I noticed in your issue of Wh March, an article entitled “ Havelock as it is, and as it might be,” which you explained was contributed by two young ladies. I wish Mr Editor you had not told us that; for then, by Jove! I should have imagined the writer to be a doncherknow lah-de-dah tourist, fresh from the Old Country, and would have felt :no compunction in contradicting him ■flat as to the deadfiess of Havelock. I’d like to know if he were spinning sound with a pretty partner to the strains of a lively waltz nearly every might during the winter. months, if he would feel it dull. My word, but those dances were jolly! Surely he could never have heard of entertainments we had every fortnight. I tMnk that “New Chum” might Bave waited until he found we really were lacking in amusement before he Consigned us to a “ humdrum existence.” By-the-way, I say, “ he,” for from the wording of the article I take « New Chums ” to be a printer’s error, rag the writers evidently knew what •they were about, and seem too used to writing to make such a slip. And that reminds me I must be more careful. I really forgot I wasn t talking about a “ fellah.” That’s the worst of it Mr Editor, one feels handicapped when he knows he is differing with the .fairer sex. I’d like to know how in the world we are to reclaim iand, even if we felt inclined, when our Road Board is as deep in “ mud ” as it can get, through want of money. But no doubt in their flights of imagination—fancy comparing Havelock to go-ahead Wellington !—the writers lost sight of the need of filthy lucre; but let me assure them that nothing can be done without it, so I vote we leave progression alone till times look up a bit. Now I come to think it over their ideas are worthy of consideration, but what I object to is their leaving out the good points of Havelock. Just look at the pretty neat churches and school, the quaint post-office and convenient hall, the good accommodation for travellers 1 Great Caesar! if the Ministers of the Crown did not think Havelock beneath their notice and managed to enjoy themselves during their stay, what should we care if the camping parties, etc., do think it infra dig to honour us with their presence. Thanking you in anticipation, I am, &c., March 16/93. Hon.