his place he would not ask such a question; that he had no right to
ask it, and that he (Mr. B.) should give what orders he thought
proper to his officers without considering himself responsible to
Mr. L.; that Mr. Landells' conduct was insolent and improper, and
that he would have no more of it. This was on Monday.

On Tuesday morning Mr. L. sent in his resignation, and in the
course of the day, Dr. Beckler followed his example, giving as his
reason that he did not like the manner in which Mr. Burke spoke to
Mr. Landells, and that he did not consider that the party was safe
without Mr. Landells to manage the camels. Now there is no mistake,
Dr. Beckler is an honest little fellow, and well-intentioned
enough, but he is nothing of a bushman, although he has had so much
travelling. Landells has taken advantage of his diffidence for his
own purposes; and at the same time that he hates him, he has put on
such a smooth exterior, that he has humbugged and hoodwinked him
into the belief that no one can manage the camels but himself.

. . .

The upshot was that the committee accepted the resignations of Mr.
Landells and Dr. Beckler, and expressed their entire approbation of
the conduct of Mr. Burke.

The following extract from the Melbourne leading journal, the
"Argus,"--and with the view therein expressed all the other
newspapers coincided--shows pretty clearly the state of public
opinion on the question:--

Whatever may be the interest attached to the