CARRINGTON ESTATE BALLOT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 472, 2 April 1909, Page 2

CARRINGTON ESTATE BALLOT.

AN APPLICANT'S COMPLAINT. ALLEGED BREACHES OF FAITH. feomo dissatisfaction lias been expressed by a number of applicants for Carrington JOslate allotmonts, balloted lor under the Goveminent renewable lease system on Saturday at Carterton. Tho dissatisfaction lias been caused by tbo manner in which sonic of tbo better dairy sections were withdrawn from the ballot. The matter appears to bo of genoial interest, and tbo appended statement by one applicant, conlirmed by audther, ia made in good faith:— I applied lor section 9, comprising 93 acres 7 perches, situated about lour and a half miles from the Clarcville railway station, capital value £1500, yearly rental £70 Js. Applications closed at Wellington and Carterton on Tuesday, March 23, at 4 p.m. My deposit money accompanied my application, but on the day of tbo eloso of tho applications I received a telegram from tho commissioner stating that section 9 had been withdrawn from tbo ballot. Tho telegram was sent from Wellington about half-past ono m the afternoon, but, being away in tho afternoon, I did not rcccivo it until after 4 ■ p.m., when, according to tbo Government directions to applicants, applications bad closed. I contend that an injustico has been done to applicants through tbo withdrawal of sections at the last minute. Ono of tho applicants for section 9 was, from Greymouth, and lie was so disgusted at tho condition oi things that ho immediately left Carterton. Thero is absolutely no doubt that proceedings of tbo description stated by mo aro an injustice to settlers who may bo applying for Government leasehold lands, and should be stopped. "Another )>oint is this: When tbo commissioner informed mo that section 9 had been withdrawn, ho offered to substitute ailother section, if there wore any. Now, tho applications closed at 4 p.m. on March 23,, and this offer was peculiar, to put it mildly. No doubt tbo official will plead • that his offer was open only for tho timo ho sent his telegram to mo at 1.35 p.m. till 4 p.m. on the same day. Still, look at tbo hotch-potch created—simply because somcono had blundered. My application was sent some consid- , erablo timo before the closing day, but it was left to tho last minute before I was informed that tho property for which I had applied had been withdrawn from tile ballot,. The cstato was open for selection for six weeks, and at .tho Land Hoard meeting it was shown that there was only one applicant who would havo a preference clause, and this applicant was not tbo ono who now holds suction 9. I can honestly deelaro that scores of people liavo left Carterton dis- ! gustcd at tbo manner in which tho preference clauso business was worked. It amounts almost to a scandal,_ and should bo inquired into. Ono woman—it is true that sho is a widow—has been given a section as a result of a petition. Sho never worked on tho station, nor did her husband, and, previously to receiving this Carrington section, sho was ■ a part owner of 500 or 600 acres, which arc now in tho markot. Sentiment is all very well, but there should bo more equity to ail when it is tho public money which is being utilised. "Another applicant who has been given a section which was withdrawn from tbo ballot is stated to havo been at tho time tho owner of 65 acres of freehold land, and a dairy farmer, taking milk to a factory. "Another is said to havo been also an. owner of a Government leasehold section. In my complaints to tho commissioner at Carterton I received what I considered to bo very little consideration, and I make tho foregoing statement in tbo interests of tho ' public so as to prevent such a state of tilings continuing in regard to other similar allocations of Government lands."