RUN No. 425 a.

Tuapeka Times, Volume XIII, Issue 643, 23 June 1880, Page 3

RUN No. 425 a.

{To the Editor.)

Sib, — I perceive by your report of the discussion which took place at the last meeting of the County Council re leasing the above run that Mr Mervyn stated that the Ranger knew nothing whatever of the land nor the locality. Perhaps Mr Mervyn may be under the impression that as he is a member of the County Council, and me in [the employment of that body, I will scarcely venture to contradict him ; but I prefer dismissal to submitting to him making false statements at my expense. Having lived for the last sixteen years at a distance varying from three to five miles from the run in question, and for ten weeks on it, it is scarcely feasible that I know nothing of the land or the locality. Mr Mervyn is well aware that I know it, as in a conversation we had about it, he told me that he intended to try and prevent Cargill and Anderson getting any right to it whatever, as he intended putting sheep there himself. I think the County Councillors have sufficient evidence in their possession to cause them to doubt the genuineness of MrMervyn's zeal on behalf of the settlers so far as pastoral matters are concerned. About fifteen or eighteen months ago, when Mr Mervyn had sheep on the commonage, and the settlers were trying to get them removed, Mr Mervyn stated at the County Council meeting, in my hearing, that the commonage was too high and unsuitable for cattle. Now, then, I would ask him, is run 425 a suitable when it lies considerably higher. He also seated that there was not sufficient cattle in this district to stock the commonage, and subsequently he stated that the grass on the commonage was actually rotting and going to waste. If Mr Mervyn's statements at that time were reliable, I fail to see that there ha? been any perceptible increase in the number of cattle (the number registered for the year ending 31st March being 520, and for the current year 508), so that on Mr Mervyn's authority the County Counoil would scarcely be justified in setting aside more grass to rot. lam of opinion, Mr Editor, that if that portion of the commonage already set aside for cattle with the adjoining 3,000 or 4,000 acres of run 423 a (wbioh Cargill and Anderson dd not want) is kept clear of sheep, then, the majority of cattle-owners will be well satisfied. Ac a proof of how cattleowners are treated at the hand of Mr Mervyn I have seen him during the last summer drive their cattle off Crown lands, adjoining his pastoral deferred-payment section, on to the road wherp they might starve or stray away aa they chose. I refer to the section lately purchased by Mr Robert Tubman. In conclusion, I would advise Mr Mervyn to attach a little more fact to his statements. It would certainly reflect more credit on him, and more honor on the position he fills. — I am, &c, Gideon A. Smith, Ranger. Roxburgh, 21st June, 1880.

ptemises.

BILLIABPS, BAXH-BOOM, &0,