The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1884-05-20 00:00:00

WIEBOAffi MINSTER_ CHORAL ASSOCIA•

nors CONOSBT.
To Mo SoLior.

account of • oonoert given by the Wimborne
Koster Choral Aasociation appeared in your paper
the 9th inst., and was not rernarkable for the good
kute or 111111401 Li judgment of your critic, and I should
hke to correct a few of the errors which appeared
there&

_—
la the first piece • most undeserved insult is
sgered to Dir. Whitehead-Smith, who is well-known
to be the conductor of the association. It was very
iStairent on that occasion that be had resigned his
lame for the more onerous duty of leading the
_..tcheian. A better substitute than Mr. Curtis could
tsly have been found in the provinces, certainly not
Wimborne. As regards his "beats " not being
unct, think it would puzzle your correspondent to
Wat them,
The merits of the Wimborne Harmonic Society, who
*we answerabie for the instrumental portion of the
rims's*, are too well known to need any defence
.I+in
Wah regard to the vocalists, your correspondent
ismt have good opinion of himself to feel competent
criticise the style of the soprano and tenor soloists
Me latter being, as I am informed, an
who had devoted their lives to the study of music and
"" Production, and who certainly on this occasion
"II Intuited their reputation.
I doubt whether another bass could have been found
Wimburne with a voice of 111 good quality as the one
! Ward that evi n,
g nor one who could have rendered
'7is Jolly to /Tiara " better than he dad, bud which I
'PM Pbalad to hear encored, although it was not
o_ntsated. I wish the samej gentleman was more
1
"1,1'007 heard in the solos at the Minster.
• nave attended every concert given by the societt
uld, I thought that on the evening in question
9oruses were better rendered than ever whilst the
/Austthupil of Mr. Whitehead-Smith, is to be con'
'celton the way in which he accomplished his
the criticism a second time, one finds it
to nem who can have so foully maligned • good
r.rnance. I did see one gentleman taking notes
°C°l4.:O, but I give him credit for more know.
of muse than to have been the author—Yours,
7,
97i (hoe or nut Arougae.
nt.
•^Jrne. Igth May, MI.

PARISE AFFAIRS.
ro gditor.
1,484',""Ai you have pubLiabod in your
_e•Per„.. of the,
....j• w • copy of a mrcular from Mr. Dag. •
'NM Mk IMMO to moment Oa the 46010.

I cannot hope to emulate the politeness, good taste,
and force f Mr. Boor's language, and therefore I
will content myself with saying that be is mistaken in
the cosiclusions at which be has arrived. The follow-
ing letters from Mr. J&ILICA Rawiu. (111 gentleman
well known and deservedly respected in this neigh-
bourhood bug before we had the 'assure of
Boor's acquaintance) will show that my statement in
defence of the assistant overseer' male at the meeting
..f the Board of Guardians on the lath April lest, was
Coerce, and 1111,10 that Mr. Rawlins did .04 *lurk his
duty, as suggested by Mr. it,s,r. The lint letter in
addressed to the Local Government Board, in reply to
their inueh.talited-of letter of the 2tith March, and is
as follows:

••Hadord, Wiwi-sortie, 12th April, 1881.
"Sir,—lieur letter, dated 26th March last, directed
to the uveret.ere of Winabonie, nneMed we through the
wet at about 10 I..CIIICk on the worming of Friday, the
Stith March, the day after the annual vertry meeting
fur Wimbonie iwrish ; consequently, at that meeting
neither the overseers nor the assistant over could
be aware of the corrtepondenee which had pawed
between Mr. Boor and yourrelf, or that it war the
wish of the Board that the curreetemdenoe relative
to the \Viniberne parish account,. ehould be brought
before that meeting, ~therwise the Ntille elmuld have
been laid before the ratepayers. 1 believe, however,
the matter is to be considered at • future vestry meet.
lug. I must state that I was present at the audit of
the accounts referred to, and the only complaint the
auditor made was the galM.l am he afterwards reported
to the Local Government Board • but the auditor did
certainly not 'severely reprimand the /kOlOitAllt otet•
seer, nor did he say that the accounts were in • dis-
graceful elate, a.. etated by Ur. Boor, but iIAVOLd
pointed out to me the, few inattrrs which he has
reported to the Board, he appeared satisfied, and
'weird and signed the secounts.—l am,
..ar, your.
faithfully, . _

'•J. FLtwtms.
"'The Secretary Local Llovernment Board, White.
hall, S.W."
The second letter i, addressed to myself, in reply to
one drawing attention to Mr. likior's manifesto, and
is as billows :

"lJear Sir,—lu answer to your of this morning,
respecting the letter from the Local Government
Board, 1 did wit receive it until the morning post 11
Friday, the Aith March, "wing to it beams sent by
tutataite to the other 4.f MCAsits. ktawlida, solicitors.
If you will apply to the %Vituburne Puet-udice they
will confirm what 1 state.—Yours truly,

"JAMES RAWLINS.
" Itarford, Wimbome, May 6th, 1864."
Mr. lloor's well.known sense iif rectitude will surely
now prompt bun to retract his mis-statements ouncern•
ing the Local Government Board correspondence ea
widely and fully as be has published them.
In conclusion, I quite agree that there have been
and are many ••queitionalgo pariah matters ;" some
have been set right, but not by Mx. Boor. I also
think that the pareduouers' eyes are being " opened,"
but whether they will hereafter see through Mr. Bour's
spectacles, is quite another matter.—Yours truly,
alum Wit. DMUS.
Wimburne, 10th May, 1861