THE CULVERDEN ESTATE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVI, Issue 14191, 13 October 1906, Page 12

THE CULVERDEN ESTATE.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Your correspondent “ Agriculture ” has got hold* of the wrong end of the stick when he says the Minister of Lands thinks Culverden will only he suitable to cut up into ten blocks for closer settlement. The Minister'simply read the correspondence from the Land Purchase Department, the head of which is a servant of the Crown sent to inspect those properties offered to the Government or required for settlement. It has been hie practice to report in ouch a manner against most of the properties offered to the Government in Canterbury, which have nearly oil been bought up at a higher value than had been offered to the Government. I see by a speech from the Minister of Lands that he intends reorganising the Agricultural Department. I sincerely hope this includes the Land Purchase Board. When one considers the report on Culverden, that the Minister read, anyone that knows, the -estate will think there has been some powerful engine at work. Fancy taking 2500 acres of Culverden to keep a family! There would soon be a few rich- far-mere in Culverden. There are more than ten families living on and around Culverden now, in its halfstarved condition, not cultivated and half in tussocks. Surely this Board, or part of it, has .been handed down from < former generations to us. Their opinions are on a pay with Jacob’s when ho was looking for, thd land of Oanaam He wanted a whole country to himself. The head of this Department must be a near relation of his. However, if we keep persevering ’there is little doubt we will wake up other interests that will bring pressure to bear, and before, another ten years the fallacy of the report will be proved beyond a doubt. —I am, -etc., JOHN M’LACHLAN, Jun. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —I was one of the dumfoundod ones that “ J.G.” mentions when I read the account of the deputation to Wellington. Surely the petition that went into the Government would tell Mr M’Nab better than that. It was signed by over 600 people that in most cases v,mnted land, and the majority knew the estate well. There ie no more suitable estate in the colony to-day for closer settlement. “ J.G.” and “ Agriculture” both say it is superior to Highfield. I should say it was, and more suitable even than Horsley Downs, which cut up into twice ten. Th© Government lest Glemnark, throiigh the Land Purchase Board, and if that’s their opinion of Culverdenthey will go a fair way towards losing it also. Hoping you will use your efforts towards getting the Government to take it and settle °at least fifty families.—l am, etc., WAIKARI.