RE YOUR GIMMERBURN CORRESPONNDENT.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume 33, Issue 9331, 22 August 1902, Page 1

RE YOUR GIMMERBURN CORRESPONNDENT.

TO THE KDITOII. Sir, Your Gimmerburn correspondent's reply to my article is far from being satisfactory. As it is a matter which interests many of the sheep farmers, kindly allow me space in your valuable paper to say a few words. In my former note I did not say one word for or against the merits of the Act, nor did I say one word on behalf of how it is administered, b'ut I am of opinion that any man ventilating the subject—aiding his fellow man by throwing light upon it which will assist him to protect his stock from the various ills which they are. heir to—such a vnan is, in my opinion, a j.hi'an i-st or public benefactor ; ai d any man who, from a pecuniary p lint of view, would try to evade the Act-, or perform the dipping in a slipshod, slovenly manner, and thereby be the means of infecting his neighbour's sheep if they come in contact with his, such a man is neither more nor Jess than a malefactor.

And now, Sir,-just to show your correspondent that I am not in favour of how the law relating to the Act is carried out in every particular: A year ago last February J vent to a sale held at Taieri Lake Station and purchased 300 odd lambs there, and a few weeks after took them to Waipiata sale where they were pronounced unclean. Their sale was disallowed, and I bad to take them home and dip them, and at the following sale had to accept 3s per head less than "I could have got for them at the former sale.

Your correspondent argues that my defence in court was wrong that poverty or low condition will generate vermin. I s: y that it will, and have seen young cattle that were isolated from their biith become Infected; And, further, your correspondent asserts that the ovum —or more properly speaking, the ovule, rudimentary seed or egg—-after a thorough dipping will remain intact and at a later stage generate into parasites. Such an argument about sheep that were as properly dipped as mine is a palpable absurdity. But this is not the portion of his articles that I f .-el sOre abour. Your correspondent in his former note when speaking about two Southland rams which he found in a friend's paddock infected with lice exonerates the Southland vendor—the guilty one— : and turns round raising a point in,their history and throws the whole odium on my shoulders, and this is the definition which his accusation implies : " That Tabsented myself from the sale owing to me being hauled up the month before to court, and that. I palmed oil by auction on the sly two dirty rams on some unsuspecting setiler, thereby perpetrating a vile fraud." I did nothing of i the sort: never thought of such a: thing. My sheep were clean, -were j after being dipped thoroughly and j well at Mr James. Howell's, and a | more erroneous and malign accusation I ciuld not be made. Your corre-i spondent says I have said hard things i about him. 1 L "do- not wish to say i hard things about .any man. All 1 j have said is in self defence, vindicating j the truth and asserting my innocence, j —I am, «fcc., j P. AX'Cluskev. ] August 12, 1902. j [Mr M'Cluskey intimates that this ] is his last letter on the subject.]