INDICTMENT OF THE MINISTER OF LANDS.

Press, Volume XLVIII, Issue 7872, 25 May 1891, Page 6

INDICTMENT OF THE MINISTER OF LANDS.

SOME HARD HITTING.

Mr J. Spence, the late Commissioner of Crown Lands for Southland, in returning thanks for an address which had been presented to him by a body of citizens in Invercargill, in the course of his remarks, eaid:—

The civil service of the colony is now under a reign of terror. Officers are discharged and kicked about from pillar to post, as if Government were simply a big game of football. The object to be gained is only known to the man or men now holding the reins of power. The whole process is so idiotic that one begins to wonder whether our rulers have recently made their escape from a lunatic asylum. Were a private person to act on the same principles, he would soon be in the Bankruptcy Court, receiving the attention of my good, friend Mr Rout. The Government's chief adviser at present is tittle-tattle, and at her advice the lives of civil servants are made miserable, and their homes spoiled and rendered desolate. The blind goddess of Justice, with her scales in hand, seems to have left the colony, never to 'return; and clannishness, ignorance, despotism have set up their triple throne in her stead. Can a country flourish under such circumstances ? Tbose who think so must expect grapes from thorns and figs from thistles. I will now, however, deal with the recent departmental changes. Having been in the Government service for the last twenty-five years, and having held the position of Chief Surveyor of Southland for the last fourteen years, and of Commissioner of Crown Lands for the last eight years, I trust that, without egotism, I may claim that my remarks on the state of the Civil Service and on the recent departmental changes are entitled to a little weight. I will first deal with the recent local changes in the Lands department, and thereafter with the system of administration as a whole. For some years back the present Minister of Lands (Mr McKenzie), in his capacity as an Opposition member, has been firing away at the Government of the time in reference to the " mal-administration " of the forests in Southland. As Mr McKenzie did not represent a Southland constituency, and seldom honored the south with his presence, his knowledge of the Southland forests must either have been got by intuition, or a dear friend of his living in the south must often have reminded him that so long as he, the said dear friend, was outside the pale of the Government service, so long and no longer would " maladministration " continue. It was therefore to bo expected, on Mr McKenzie's advent to power, his dear friend being still out in the cold, that the " maladministration " would suddenly rise to a climax, and necessitate Mr McKenzie's immediate presence in Southland. He accordingly came down with the publicly expressed object of " sifting the matter to the bottom." As a Government official I treated the political head of my department with every courtesy and honor. Though I noticed with regret that his friend was always with him, and that his friend's influence over him was evidently supreme, I was impressed with Mr McKenzie's honesty and straightforwardness, and congratulated myself on the fact that my official head, though somewhat suspicious and severe, was yet a man of strict justice and integrity. We discussed several matters that had been the subject of complaint, and I was able to show him that in regard to the matters referred to I could not have acted otherwise than I did without either violating the law or doing a gross injustice to some one. Mr McKenzie seemed well satisfied with my explanations, and expressed himself as glad to have met mc. Throughout the conversation, however, Mr McKenzie was always bringing in the claims of his friend. He was evidently desirous of having him appointed here and of sendidg the present officer further north, his excuse being that the present officer had no family. As the present officer has a- family of at least five, it looks as if his friend had unwittingly misinformed him. I thought it my duty to tell him' that though his friend 1 was courteous and obliging, it was undesirable in the interests of the service that he should be appointed, and in the Minister's own interest I recommended that he should not be appointed here, but elsewhere. I said that I would be glad to see him appointed somewhere else, but his appointment here would create remark. Mr McKenzie took my suggestion apparently in good i part, and we parted on excellent terms; a i very favorable impression having been left on my mind in regard to the new Minister. Judge of my surprise whon, after his return to Wellington, down came a mandate that I must remove to Westland, that the present ranger must remove to Canterbury, that Mr Royds and Mr Townshend must be discharged, and that Mr Kelson must prepare to remove. This is the bane, but behold the all-powerful antidote : His friend must be appointed ranger at a high salary as the only means of saving the forests and averting the destruction of the country. As I challenge investigation in regard to any and all of my public acts, and as the Minister himself could not find a single fault with what I had done, my solemn conviction is that both commissioner and ranger were to be removed to make way for one whom Mr McKenzie evidently regards as the one only man who ie fit for a place in the Civil ! Service. I cannot make out why he did not appoint him as commissioner, but possibly he holds this honor for him i in reserve. # • * * • *' Mr McKenzie's sheer ignorance of what he is doing lies at the bottom of the whole business. His telegram in reference to the supposed petition got up in favor of Mr Mussen [the ranger who is being removed from Southland] shows all the cruel tyranny of the Eastern despot; and some of his recent memorandums to the land office, asking the officers to make a declaration that they have not perpetrated a swindle, are an insult to the moral character of the service. He might as well ask the officers to declare that they have not been guilty of : theft, or perjury, or murder. The civil service here has recently been passing through a reign of terror. I can hardly think that the ' people of New Zealand will stand this sort of thing. Men who have been years in the service have been hounded out of it. Their experience, their character, their services j go for nothing. There is no inquiry, no justice. A clannish feeling that covers all moral defects seems to trample all notions of equity or justice beneath its feet. My belief is that the wisest head should rule. Does our system of party Government bring the wisest heads to the top ? For successful I practical administration, character, intellect, and experience are required. These are not picked up at random. You do not pick up a man in the street, and without training, without examination, without a guarantee of fitness elevate him at once to be Chief Justice of the colony. Then why, seeing that the functions of an administration are quite as delicate and important as those of a judge, do you pick up a man from the hillside or from the badly managed farm, and without a single test as to character, training or fitness, place the destinies of the country in bis hands ? In administration ane likes to see vigor when robed in justice and based on knowledge, but the recent exhibition of vigor in the Lands Department is the vigor of a bull in a china shop. There must be something radically wrong in a system of government when there is such a violation of the fitness of things, and the sooner the country recognises the incongruity and goes in for a more sane and rational method of administration the sooner will it emerge from its difficulties and realise its true destiny. I may say that I have no spite against the present Minister of Tands, and I forgive him from the bottom of my heart. I desire, however, to call a spade a spade, and to tell him in plain and direct language the impression which Mr McKenzie's action has left on my mind. His recent action in seeking to injure and remove mc without cause, except that of standing in the way of his the whole of my life- it ±c the cflTTTwe azicL copestone of a. persistent; series of • I" "' \« !| !!' redactions, and baa filled, mo witn a feeling of profound distrust and of intense disgust.

-■ Tfce «* Otago XJeily TSttww m Itaa tlie followiog ;—Jt $n»y int«wetiog to oar to know that) ""» pf > riK > Tii vhest Mr Mt»lT<m»ia

has appointed as ranger is a Mr Duncan Campbell, who was defendant in the case Jenklnson v Campbell, tried at the Supreme Court in 1889, the action having -been the outcome of an attempt by Campbell to obtain possession of two sections of land in Invercargill, the particulars of which were reported in the "Southland Times" of 4th March, 1884, as follows :—*.« Assessment Court, Invercargill Borough, before H. McCullock, Esq., Judge. Duncan Camp- ! bell applied to nave his name inserted on the roll as occupier of section 16, block LXXL, and section 19, block LXHL—Mr Scandrett (valuer) objected. Hβ said the sections belonged to two children who were in the Industrial School, the offspring of one Robert Jenkinson, deceased. The applicant had no right to occupy the sections, I and he (Mr Scandrett) did not look upon him as the occupier.—The applicant said he had been in occupation of the sections since 1861. He had fenced them and taken crops off them. The Robert Jenkinson who had bought the sections was now in Scotland, was a single man, and had no children in the Industrial School.—Mr Scandrett said he did not believe applicant had ever seen Jenkinson, but had only known the original purchaser, John Westlake. He objected to allowing applicant to obtain any sort of title, and he would endeavor to protect the interests of the infants." "The boys referred to, having attained their majority, took steps to prove their identity, and lodged the deeds and an application to bring the land under the Land Transfer Act. Itfr Campbell lodged a caveat against this being done, and presented an application for a title to himself on the ground of occupation and claim for money advanced. Recently Messrs Stout and Monday, of Dunedin, commenced an action of ejectment in the Supreme Court on behalf of the sons of Robert Jenkinson, and Sir Robert Stout came specially to Invercargill to conduct the case. The defendant averred that. Jenkinson came to Invercargill in 1861 on his way to the West Coast and borrowed £100 from him (Campbell), and told him to hold possession of the sections until he was repaid. The plaintiffs had therefore to procure information of the movements of Jenkinson from his arrival in New Zealand until his death in 1875. In this they had, we understand, been entirely successful, having brought witnesses who could prove- that Jenkinson was a man of considerable means between 1860 and 1872 j that he bought the sections from a friend, who wanted the money, in 1860, without ever having seen the property, and that he had never visited Invercargill from the day of his arrival in Dunedin until his death. Several local persons were also subp>enaed who were prepared to declare that the sections were entirely vacant land until after the fire brigade station was removed to Don street in 1872, when Mr Campbell some time afterwards fenced the frontage, which made the land a paddock. As will be seen from our report, the defendant has withdrawn from the case, the plaintiffs allowing him- £10, being about one-fourth of the amount paid by Mr Campbell as rates. The young men will therefore come into possession of their own, and as the land is worth something approaching £1000, it should give them a good start in life."