CORRESPONDENCE.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume IX, Issue 452, 2 November 1850, Page 142

CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Editor or the Nelson Examiner.

Sir— lt is not my intention to answer the strictures upon my conduct for the last seven years, which you have extracted from the Wetlington Independent. I believe I could show that their author has misrepresented my actions, has falsified my opinions, and put into my mouth words which I never uttered, and sentiments which I repudiate and disavow : but even were the subject one of any public fnterest r we should not meet on equal terms. As long as lam willing to accept the full responsibility of all I write, whilst my antagonist, "shooting privily" at me from his anonymous covert, fancies he can escape from the moral discredit attaching to those who deal in assertion without proof, in rjjisquotation of words and in perversion &? facts — so long must I decline a contest with weapons which I am unaccustomed and unable to wield — " Usum non habeo." .For the mere refutation of this week will not guarantee me against an attack equally baseless in the next ; urged in the hope that some random arrow may at last find out the weak point in my harness, and wound me to the death. Instead of courtr ing, I confess- 1 rather shrink from such a continued'personal inquisition. Not many, perhaps, could stand the ordeal; or, if .such there be, I am not one of them. We have all need of forbearance and a charitable construction- of our deeds and motives: few, in my opinfSb, more so than the reputed author of the attacks? in question. Far from being backed by public 1 opinion in the course be is pursuing, I belief •he stands alone ; and that his endeavours to evade a charge which -applies to him -only, or to blow into a flame the dead ashes of forgotten strife, will be equally futile and unavailing. jGte wishes to be unknown; he shall be\unnoticed also. Henceforth he may, unques* tioned, follow the natural bent of hi* disposition; etill " Do good by atealth, alfrbhuh to find it fame.;"

-secure from censure, and safe from observation or reply. In taking leave of him, I would however recommend the following v quotation to Jus. careful study and meditation— « " Whatever must be misrepresented in drdfr to be ridiculed, is in fact not ridiculed, but the thing substituted for it. It is a satire on something else, coupled with a lie on the part of the satirist ; who knowing, or having tteeh c c means of knowing the truth, chooses to call one thing by the name of another."

" I am, sir, yours, &c.

J. D. Greenwood.

To- .the Editor o»-the -Nelson Examines.

I Sir— There are too many "<Observers " to be found in the pages of every newspaper for it to be expected that there are not incorrect as well as correct ones among them : and in the former class- 1 think may be placed your correspondent of last week. In reference to the new new ford at Stoke, about- 100 yards of grave], he complains, had to be moved in no difficult situation, for which

•fd. a yard would have afforded excellent wages, and a foot-bridge put up which would be liberally paid for at £1, which work, however, cost £10, if not £12. Such is "Observer's" view of the matter. Better information would have suggested the following : — About 150 yards of gravel had to be moved under circumstances of difficulty (since the whole haft to be wheeled up hill out of the cutting, and -carefully spread over the surface of the adjoining- road), for which' 6d. per yard, or any thing at all-ap-proaching it, would not afford wages such as | men now expect to make in this settlement in. works of tbis description ; which work, including the foot-bridge and the small dam under it, cost £10. But perhaps it is not so much a question^ what sum would, in the opinion of this person or of that, " afford excellent wages," or at what price men would be " liberally paid," but rather, for what sum, or at what price men can be induced to undertake the required work. A bridge is washed away, leaving a deep, wide, impassable chasm -across a public-road, bearing about four-fiths of the whole traffic of the settlement. On hunting about, it is found that s sort of rough and dangerous crossing may be-effeoted a little higher up the stream — not, however, -superseding the instant necessity for a safer and more effectual remedy. Specifications are consequently drawn up for the formation of a ford across the stream «at the site of the bridge just washed away, and tenders are sought for in the usual manner by public advertisement. One tender wasv received, and accepted. On the receipt of a tender I imagine that there are but two possible course* to be followed — 1. To accept it; or

2. To reject it. Had the latter course been adopted, and the public been consequently confined to the dangerous passage it had been compelled tr -idopt (in which, by-the-bye, several accidccrs bad already occurred}, what an outcry would have arisen, and what a beautiful opportunity it would have afforded for the denunciation of a heartless Government that, for -the purpose of saving a-paltry £10, still persisted io endangering those lives and that property it was its duty to protect, together with long etceteras of the

usual cant. • It is very probable that under the circumstances of the case, considering the immediate necessity of the work in question, and the opportunity which a very small place affords for collusion on the spart of the few who are disposed to undertake the execution of a contract, that that the Stoke Ford might have been paid for at a rather high rate. This seems, probable ; but I do not assert or deny its truth. I am well aware that in both public and private employ, the demand* of the workman often rise"

in proportion to the urgency of the work. No Act of Parliament or Ordinance in Council can compel men to be reasonable in their demands, any more than in their complaints. The work had to be done, and that quickly, the whole population interested grumbling loudly and incessantly in the mean time. Were such complaints to be disregarded, and the property of the settlers, and even more, to be risked until cheap labonr could be procured ? Or was the safety and convenience of the public to be consulted by conceding a sufficient inducement to men to undertake the work ?— after taking, of course, the usual precaution* to secure that publicity from which competition and cheapness are supposed to result.

I never before heard of the New Zealand Company being "abused for throwing away Jnoney in the construction of roads" — in th* sense intended by your correspondent. The great complaint against the Company was not so much the costliness of the works executed by them as their uselessness; of their expenditure, in short, of large sums altogether beside the wants of the settlement, and from which it ifrjikely to derive no benefit between tbisjnd the day of doom, or that of the receipt of tb* Trust Funds. In should be remembered, however, that no*" fatr comparison can be instituted between th* New Zealand Company and the present Government. The former bad all the labour in th* settlement at its command at its own price, Lwhile the latter has to contend against the of labourer*, who are only induced to P^rk for hire by (in comparison with former ppe'riod*) some extraordinary pecuniary inducement. **T>bserver™ seems to think that the Stoka ymdge might have been saved by a small judiH*V outlay in diverting the course. of thjß. Stereaha, Tbis is not the general opinion. The Afownfall of the bridge was occasioned by the insufficiency «f (as it is flow learnedly termed) The vacuum. I believe it to have been as easy for a-camel to pass through the eye of a nsedl* a* for the very unprecedented flood of last month to have found its way under tb* bridge in ■But a general accusation seems to be insinuated by " Observer " of the waste of money on public works. -In reply, one need only appeal to those who knew the Waimea Road "before it 4?a* made •" begging then to recall the long and hideous succession of canal* of liquid mud hemmed -in between two* high wall* of flax, •nough to break the poles and wheels of cart*, and the backs, hearts, and leg* of men, horse*, and bullocks — now converted into a wide, bandcome road, presenting throughout the year a smooth, xflrm, unyielding surface, bearing up without shrinking the huge loads that are incessantly rolling along.: when it is recollected that these and many other improvements have' been effected «en one-road alone out of the many, towards the formation or improvement of which the limited Government funds have been devoted, 4 think it will be evident that in spite of " Observer's " insinuation to the contrary, the public -money cannot have been wasted. „ I am, -sir, &c, Another Observer.

To the Editor or thk Nelson Examiner.

Sir — There was a letter in your paper last week complaining of the ezpens* which had been incurred in forming the ford aVStSfce, in lieu of the bridge lately taken away by the flood. That letter contains several mistakes, which I wish to point out. First, the amount of work is much understated. Though it is difficult now to estimate correctly the quantity of gravel removed,^ -believe it to have been nearer 200 than 100 yards, and this bad to be wheeled in part to a distance of perhaps 120 yards, and spread over the road. So of the foot-bridge. No person examining this now would appreciate to the full the trouble it took, because the work was done in -a loose shingle, into which the water kept breaking. At all events, whatever " Observer " may think, I can assure you, sir, and the public, that taking into account the hours which the men employed on the job worked (it was a joint contract of four working men), and the manner in which they worked, that the wages made were not those paid to men in time of harvest, or for any similar extra labour; and I should like much to have seen him work the pick or the barrow more briskly. The writer is also wrong about the cause of the destruction of the old bridge. It was not, as he supposes, destroyed by the stream getting behind the abutments, but by the stream being too large for the aperture it had to flow through. Some little time before the bridge went, th* water was seen to have risen above the crown of the arch, and after it had gone, the abutmsnta were observed to be standing. A * ■ Onb of the Contractor* for the Ford. ~»

To the Editor or the Nelson Examine*, j Sir — I was pleased to hear the other day* from your correspondent," G. F. 8.," that tlis disease, of scab in sheep was become inch a rarity in our settlement — so much so, that this ingenious gentleman had found it impossible to . test the efficacy of a fancied cure from hi* uh ability to procure a patient. Riding the otherv day through the Waimea, and within ten or twelve miles of the town, judge of my surprise at seeing two or three distinct flock* in which this hateful disease was manifest to ell be* holders, so that I apprehend "G. F. B." had jumped too hastily to the conclusion, that th* scab had been eradicated from our flocks.

But it k net on the efficacy of the sulphur bath that I wish to address you, but on the disagreeable fact that diseased sheep are allowtd to run the year through over the whole country in spite of a Scab Ordinance and a Scab Inspector. I* it no* the duty of this officer to •«•

that the sheep depasturing on the uncultivated lands of districts contiguous to the high roads, are in a clean and healthy state ? What is the «•• of «atisfying himself that all sheep are landed clean from vessels, while so many sheep already in the settlement are allowed, when in the most filthy state, to infest the roads, and spread themselves over the whole face of the country; so that however clean a flock may be landed, it is impossible it can long continue ■o r Perhaps a word from your pen, calling the attention of the "powers that be" to this evil, may lead to its redress. Yours, &c, i Anti-Scab.