THE BUSHY PARK SCANDAL.

Otago Witness, Issue 2252, 29 April 1897, Page 30

THE BUSHY PARK SCANDAL.

(Daily Times.)

Bel'ore his departure for the Home country the Premier broke a lance in support of the Government candidate for Wellington Suburbs, and Mr Wilson, the gentleman in question, whose sensibilities have been so keenly wounded as to move him to tears, must have felt on the occasion that it would be a merciful dispensation if some power were to save him from his friends. At the meeting someone interjected : "What about Bushy Park?" and it was very evident that the interjection was planned, and that the principal object of the speech was to defend the action of the Assets .Realisation Board and clear the .Minister for Lands from complicity in securing for his own family a property which no fewer than 88 bona fide settlers so recently as in August last declared to be suitable for cutting up, and that in the most practical way by professing their readiness to take it up. Qui s'c.vatse, s'accuse ; and Mr vSeddo>"'s ostensibly voluntary explanation at Newtown absolutely gives rise to new suspicions in place of those which the lapse of time had begun to allay. • He produced and read amass of correspondence which showed that the Lands Purchase Board visited the land in 1894 and reported adversely upon its purchase for settlement purposes. They gave what they no doubt considered adequate reasons for stating that the estate was worth more as a whole than it would be if it were, cut up. But their report was not considered sufficient. A person who is with difficulty to be believed piles up needless proofs. A later report seems to have been called for from Mr M'Kerhoav, and he, after reiterating that the Olago Board inspected the land " about two years ago," concludes by saying that he "does not see that there is any likelihood of acquiring the lands referred to in the petition." What petition? Obviously that from the 88 Shag VaHey settlers in August last, to which it was replied that the Lands Purchase Board " would shortly take steps towards ascei'taining as to how far the prayer of the petition could be given effect to." The steps taken appear to have consisted of a reference to a visit a couple of years back, and it is noteworthy that no other reply was ever sent to the petitioners, who were thunderstruck when they saw the announcement of the lease with purchasing clause to the sons of the Minister for Lands. Mr Seddon was not content Avith summoning this cloud of witnesses to prove that the settlers of Shag Galley are fools, who do not know what is best for them — he laboriously tried to show that the Assets Realisation Board had exhausted every attempt to dispose of their lands. Mr Foster, the general manager for the board, is produced, and made to say that " the result of the general advertisement inviting applications for the purchase or lease of the various properties was without satisfactory response." There is little matter for surprise in this circumstance, seeing that the " advertisement " consisted of a ridiculously small space merely drawing attention in a general •way to the fact that the Assets Board had properties for sale. In no sense could it be honestly termed an advertisement notifying that the Bushy Park property was in the market. So much has now been said about this matter that fuller explanations are necessary, and we trust Parliament will lav bare

the whole matter. The proceeding was so much out o£ harmony with the professions of the Government, and especially with those of Mi 1 JM/Kexzie himself, that the suspicion is engendered that the temptation to brave inevitable public comment must have been very strong. If this result has been produced Mr Seddoits clumsy resurrection of the matter must be blamed.