The Gonzales inquirer. [volume] (Gonzales, Tex.) 1853-current, 1853-09-03

that the Editor intended to convey that i'm.
preston. yet the fact Of his abiding to these
reports, in connection with the rumors which
nc charges us with, would naturally lead those
who read his article, 10 form such conclusions.
Our friend Is well aware that we have never
said anything derogatory to the health Of his
or any other town; OIL the contrary, we have
invariably copied extracts from his and other
papers, published Immediately around us.
relative To their health. We hope our friend
viii do us the justice to correct such i,n,,rcs.
sions.
One word more and NC have done. The
late gold fever is yet fresh within the memory
ofour citizens. Only four months have elapsed
since the excitement was created, and news
scnt abroad announcing the discovery Of vast
gold mines III our State. The press Of New
Orleans rcechocd the startling, but glorious
intelligence, in laundering tones, and in due
course of time our vessels were landing crowds
of anxious emigrants at Galveston and Indian.
ola, who came tlrsting for the glittcring ore
that lay buried in the dark rccesses Of Hamil.
tons valley. Now, since the Bulletin IL so
very particular that the whole press of Texas
should publish only stubborn facts, and not
"unioundcd and injurious reports" VIC would
most respectfully ask, what paper in tho State
first announced in bold capitals and flaming
paragraphs, that great gold discoveries had
been made in Texas? IL we mistake not tho
lndianoa Bulletin was the first TO spread the
news, and the Gonzales Inquirer the first to
pronounce the whole q speculative humbug.-
The papers published in the immediate vicinity
of the gold region were silent, while those
printed at n respectable distance" seemed to
know all about the important discoveries.
! So much, friend for ''rumors." We men
ton this TO show that all Editors publish moro
or less of them, and that stubborn facts canno,
always he had when wanted What we have
said is through the best of feelings for our cs.
tccmcd contemporary, rs in both his public and
private character, we regard him highly.
eay" Some Of the New York papers are
discussing the question whether the Crystal
Palace will pay as n speculation. One Of them
Pounds an opinion adverse to its pccuniary
profit, on the following grounds which may
or may not be correct: The structure cost
100000, while the cost of keeping things IL
order runs away with $1,000 per week more
The receipts, thus far have averaged about
$4,000 per week. Should these receipts con
tinuc till the grant of the ground expires, two
years from last May, the stockholders will b,
treated to tho following exhibit: Cost o
building 100000; weekly expenses for l0i
weeks, at $1,000 per week, $l5G,o00; two
years interest OH first cost of building, So
900; total outgocs, $4,000. Income Oh
weeks receipts, $3.50, 900; value OF tho build
ing ut tho expiration Of tho show, $50, 600
whole amount of receipts, $sS2,000. From
this deduct the expenditure, $4,000, and W,
have balance of $4,000 as the net profit
of the exhibition. But what right have we e
suppose that the receipts will average any
such sum as we have fixed upon. For III,
first six months, receipts may equal, not only
$4,000, but go beyond it; but what will thu
succeeding six months do? In all probability
not over $4,000 per week. BY December next
the foreign contributions win commence leay
ing for home, and with their departure will &,
some Of the leading attractions Of the cxhbi
ton. Now, If the second six months pay i,
$4,000 per week, what are we TO expect from
the second years Barely enough TO pay cur
rent expenses.