THE TEVIOT BLOCK

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 155, 26 January 1871, Page 6

THE TEVIOT BLOCK-

(To the Editor.)

Sir, — A paragraph appeared in your issue of 12th inst., to the effect that it was the intention of Messrs Cargill and Anderson, to dispute the right of the Government to exchange the shingle block Roxburgh east, for a block of land at the foot of the ranges, recently declared open for agricultural purposes, and further, that legal advice has been sought, and an opinion given, that the action of the Government is morally wrong. I beg to state that no exchange has been effected; for the simple reason that the Shingle Block was opened under the 33rd and 34th sections of the Goldfields Act, whereas the block in question was cancelled under the 16th clause of the same Act, which makes it apparent that no such exchange was attempted, as the above paragraph would imply. I Avould ask whoever heard of a lawyer giving an opinion on the moral aspect of a case if there was the slightest legal loophole through which to escape, it is certainly contrary to all experience, and would shew that this case has not a leg to stand on.

Can you inform me Mr. Editor how long it is since lawyers have takenyfeb giving moral opinions, and if it is likely that actions taken on purely moral opinions would be sustained in a court of law ?

How rmich bettor would it be for the squatters, if instead of throwing obstacles in the way of settlement which they may retard but cannot prevent, they would gracefully bow to circumstances and make a virtue of necessity. I am &c, 24th Jan. 1871. Argus.