Mr Lee Smith and his Patron. TO THE EDITOR.

Otago Witness, Issue 1994, 12 May 1892, Page 26

Mr Lee Smith and his Patron. TO THE EDITOR.

Sir, — When. Mr Lee Smith went down to meet the electors with a Brummagem image of Mr John M'Kenzie next his heart he was good enough to base his claims to support largely upon the fact that the Hon. John M'Kenzie had, on coming into office, cut up the Shag Valley runs.

Mr Lee Smith is, of course, welcome to rejoice us boisterously as he pleases in the supposed destruction of my property by the gentleman he professes (at election time — I mean, of course, 1892 election time) to adore. I was good natured enough, indeed, to reflect that if the retailing ol the fictions with which he had been supplied should avail to assist him to catch a few badly-needed votes it would be hard that I should baulk the little enterprise. Now that it is all over, the truth cannot harm Mr Lee Smith — except, of course, that people may ask' awkward questions as to why they heard the opposite, which is not my business. If Mr Lee Smith had happened to mention to me, during a conversation we had about his electioneering arrangements, just before he made his first speech, that he was going to make a cardinal point down at Bruce of his delight, at the cancellation of my runs, I might have saved him from an awkward fix. He "omitted to mention it to me however, which was odd — but perhaps hardly to be wondered at, after all.

I am sorry to have to dispel the pleasing sensations in which Mr Lee Smith has been revelling with regard to this business of the Shag Valley runs. .Mr M'Kenzie's first act, it is true, after he came into office — about 20 minutes after, I believe— was to begin a certain course of action with regard to myself. Such people usually do such things— l expected it, and it perturbed me wonderfully little ; nor has its continuance— which has been persistent — much concerned me since. Mr M'Kenzie doubtless would have, on the occasion in question, very gladly cut up the Shag Valley runs, but unfortunately he could not do so, because his 2>redecessov t Mr Richardson, had already cut them Kg. Out of 19,000 acres then falling in in

two large runs, Mr Richardson had only left 3500 acres to be. offered on ordinary pastoral lease ! I had quietly accepted the whole thing, made no fuss, and neither by word, by letter, nor i in any other way remonstrated with Mr Richardson or auybody else. That was the position when Mr M'Kenzie came into office. Twenty minutes afterwards he cancelled that 3500 acres. It was, of course, not in any \ way earmarked to me. It was merely a piece for which I could, but for his act, have competed like' anybody else. It was a mere strip of rocky gullies, though good pastoral country ; but it connected the two halves of the property, and it was known that we (the only obher person interested, .was then serving the colony as Agent-general in London) wanted it to prevent our property from being severed into two blocks. So , it, Ivas cancelled. In order to do this Mr M'Kenzie had to" override not only the report" of the_ Classification Commissioners ; not: only the opinion' of the Chief Surveyor -and the Chief Commissioner of Crown Lauds ; not only the deliberately expressed opinion, after a careful view of the ground, of his own henchman, Mr Henry Clark — his chosen chairman at his Bruce fiasco, and the one gentleman whom he holds up as a pattern of Liberalism . in land matters— and who, notwithstanding Mr M'Kenzie's approval of him, is, singularly enough, really an excellent member of the Land 'Board ; not only the approving recommendation of his chief officers in Wellington ; but all these put together, backed by the unanimous decision of the entire Land Board of Otago itself, and by a petition from the settlers of Macraes, whose properties the - run adjoins. (I may here explain that the piece-he cancelled is many miles from any Shag Valley settler, and is even wholly outside Mr M'Kenzie's electorate ; and the people of Macraes,, who alone should have been consulted, wanted it maintained as Mr Richardson put it). I suppose this combination of opinions and desires, interested and disinterested, was never, , so unanimously brought to bear upon a piece of country in this province before. Of course, however, Mr M'Kenzie was not to be baulked by trifles of the kind above enumerated. It may have surprised a good many people (I was not one of them) at the time, that he ventured under such circumstances upon, such a course ; but after 15 months pablic experience of him in office, I need hardly say that. I do not write this letter with the slightest idea of surprising anybody now. Amusement and contempt were the only feelings I myself had at the time: one at least of them has survived the 15 months. I have little doubt, moreover, that the oth«:r will be revived, in similar fashion, shortly after the appearance of this letter. The miserable pettiness of Mr M'Kenzie's act is what Mr Lee Smith represented at Bruce as one of the evidences of the '.'nobility. of character" of the man who did it ! This, however, is a bye issue. The main fact is, that the cutting up of the Shag Valley runs was done by Mr Richardson. He believed the public interest required what he did. I never disputed it, nor uttered a solitary complaint, yet Mr Lee Smith virtually holds me up as a person from whom a vast tract of country had to b& " wrenched," and ascribes the virtue of wrenching to the man who only mischievously meddled with a miserable strip of it/ H^. has his reward. — I 'am, &c, •'• ' ■