"HILL 11,380,200."

Nelson Evening Mail, 22 July 1916, Page 5

"HILL 11,380,200."

{To the Editor.) Sir, —There to no fewer than, three letters to the editor in your paper, < last night—two signed plain "H. G. Hill," and one "H. G. Hill, Mount-street." The latter purports to "be a reply to aletter of onine in Thursday's: but is really a hotch-potch..'of flippancy 'and personalities. If Mr Hill tlunks -he can side-track the pointsat issue "by-this, old and wom-out dodge, -lio KjuJly •-unr der-estimates the ■ intel'ligeaicte ofi ? his v fellows. The .. .position- is that your, correspondent While floating a .company has addressed meetings of -"fruitgrowers in various parts of the district, and a. feature, of his speeches was;, an estimate and a forecast" of-future production of fruit"' in the/ Dominion. ■>..;;St> proud was he of these figures" tlia;fc tho, whole fabric has been immortalised, in. ! the newspapers. '. So ; there can) be no mistake about it. Mr Hill's estimate of the fruit production in New Zealand for 1915 is 10,209.485. for 1916 11,380,200 (a trifling increase for .one year of 7l5); and he prophesies that ,bv -,' 1921 the output wJH.reach i8,533;448/ .'•" ••Y*\ Gods! Truly "a deal in millions"!' The published" -computation adds: '"Nelson; -Province jhas approximately 25 per. cent t of acreage in New Zealand : Ergo, Nelson Province in 1916' must- have pro-, idiiced over two and threequart.er;. milliorf cases! I hope, Mr Editor,, alllybnr, iiotea of exclamation are not "being used lip 1 )- .li have already shown that ; 'the' c riufc i production -of" the Nelson. Province 'for 1916' is little 'more than 430,000. - cages. What about the phantom threequarter millions? I hope to'he;able to publish shortly the actual tpM production of the Dominion for 1916,' and' J, .for one,. will be surprised if Mr •■ Hil?s 11,380,200 does not come, down-to. a modest 2,000,000 or so. Certain it ;;.is, tliat the" pip fruits—the only class : "of fruit that matters in_ the argument—3ibes not amount: to a single million cf cases for the whole Dominion. I' hold, Sir, that any man who-rushes into print in tho role "of prophet and piiblic mentor should take the 'trouble to acquire fuller knowledge of what Tie'talks a'bout;. ; ete;e v harm may be done! Harm has been done ihi. this case. ':'■' Soinei giv>wers ' have, accepted Mr Hill's figures as and "instead;of taking shares in nis cOiripany, fhave' become alarmed and : m of selling out. It is therefore "ini.'ihi©piihlic interest" that it .should be. made known that thesfe "Deal in figures are not based, on'.ofljciail l information , but adhiittedlyt emanate from tho vivid imagination; of the author. Those who are striving to organise industry dn sound lines, without the aid\ of limelight and fireworks,'.''resent misleading l statements. Tho only -.honourable course for your correspondent is to frankly admit his mistake, try ."to counteract the ill-effects of his "scare" figures,'.and '. b© moi'e careful and discreet in the'.future. 1 lam, etc., ; "•* ; ARTHUR McKEE: < tP.S'.—I have, not been drajvn from the point at iasue, which Mr HSll evades; but it is difficult to pointing out that Mr Hill says lie based his calculations on 130 trees to the acre~ not on 160, the number .'now. being■ pEantfid in this . district.' 'How fortunate'for Mr Hill that; his modesty, and' '"sweet reasoii'ableriess'/' deprived" us of a. few moi'e million cases last year! '"""'