EAST COAST.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume VI, Issue 948, 12 November 1879, Page 2

EAST COAST.

[from our own correspondent.] The country hereabouts is looking splendid. There is abundance of green feed for stock, and the Natives have larger crops than usual under cultivation, so that it is to be hoped they will be rewarded with abundance of food ere long, as they have certainly suffered mnch from scarcity of fpod lately. Maoris are very fond of exaggeration freely, but there are others troubled with the same weakness. Quite recently certain Natives spread a report about up this way, that a Pakeha who is m charge of a run had poisoned their pigs, and they narrowly escaped poisoning, as they, not knowing that the animals had been so treated, were about to eat them, and were oaly warned m bare time to prevent them from doing so. They alleged that no notice of poison beins? laid was either given verbally or published, and stated they had had a number of dogs poisoned (by the way these latter want poisoning), and said they would not be content with a fine but would drive the Pakeha off the land altogether. The truth, however, was that verbal notice had been giVen of the intention to lay poison by the Pakeha m q\iestion (which, however, is not legally sufficient), and certain pigs and dogs were killed by it. Poisonwas put m the carcase of a dead bullock belonging to the station for the purpose of killing dogs, hawks, &c, when the Maoris happened to come across it, and considering it a prize forthwith began to cut it up and distribute it amongst them. They were, however, warned m time to prevent the wholesale poisoning that must undoubtedly have ensued. Since then I suppose by way of making up for their disappointment m recheap beef , they stole and slaughtered another bullock belonging to the same station, sa they have had their beef good this time, and on the cheap too after nil. The above is a very fair sample of Maori exaggeration ; the Pakeha being the injured party of the two. In a late issue of your paper under the heading " More Seizures by the Maoris," you describe the e i try by 40 Maoris on Mr. A. 0. Arthur's run, and the driving m his .sheep m a small space, &c. So far the paragraph m question is unfortunately too true, and every one of the gettlers up this way sympathises with Mr Arthur under the circumstances. The Natives say that the estimated loss of 300 lambs is altogether wrong and exaggerated, but they no doubt rush off to the opposite extreme when they say there was no loss at all. Their tale is (but Heaven only knows whether it is true or false), that the principal owners of the land never agreed to let it to Mr. Arthur, and never signed his lease, and that he kept back the whole of the rent for two years, being advised to do so by a gentleman m Gisborne, m the hope of coercing them to sign the lease, and it has had an opposite effect ; but whether Mr. Arthur is perfectly right or wrong, I know not, as personally, I know nothing, whatever of the merits of the dispute, but one thing is certain, and that is the whole affair is merely a private dispute between the Natives of Tokomarn and Mr. Arthur.