DEPUTATION FROM ROXBURGH.

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 2038, 16 November 1869, Page 2

DEPUTATION FROM ROXBURGH.

To day, at one o’clock, Messrs Ireland and Mcrvyn, M.H.R., waited upon his Honor the Superintendent and the Executive, to press upon them the advisability of withdrawing the Island Block from sale. The deputation •were introduced by Mr J. C. Hughes. M.P.C., who in a few words stated that the object was, if possible, to enduce the Executive to reconsider their decision in reference to the land in question, and urged that, in consequence of the promises of former Governments, there was a moral expectation by the settlers that the land would be allowed to be occupied under agricultural leases, and that the sale of it would tend to interfere with mining. His Honor said a memorial had been received expressing the opinions of the residents in the district on the subject. Mr Mkrvtk said it was thought by the inhabitants that the views expressed in the memorial should bo supported by a deputation. The memorial was read by his Honor. It stated that, in the opinion of the rrsidents, the sale of the land would be a breach of faith on the part of the Government, as in the month of February last the land was gazetted ns open to application for agricultural leases. Numbers of persons were in consequence induced, at great incmvenience and loss of time, to make application ; that the Warden, on insufficient grounds declined to entertain the applications ; that the sale of the land would tend to prevent the deve’opment of mining, as much of it was supposed to be auriferous ; and on these and other grounds praying it might be withdrawn from sale. Mr Mf.rvyn gave a history of the correspondence that had taken place at different times with respect to the Horseshoe Block. He said that under the late Executive, it was the intention to throw open the Island Block for settlement by granting agricultural leases, and that, therefore, there was an implied contract between the Government and some of the applicants for leases in the district. He urged th'*t it had been decided that it should be withdrawn from sale on additional grounds. First, that it should be prospected for gold ; secondly, that it would be inexpedient to sell it before the survey was completed. When he returned from Wellington he found that the Government had decided that the land should not be leased, but put into the market for sale to the highest bidder. The inhabitants of the district looked upon this as an act of repudiation on the part of the Government. Moreover, when Mr Gidies was in the district, he gave the inhabitants reason to believe that the Government would not sell the land, but lease it. His informant was Mr Beigbton. The action proposed to be taken would cause gr.mt dissatisfaction, and create a feeling of insecurity in the minds of those who were similarly situated with those parties applying for that block. Mr .Sellars’s application was favorably repoided on by theWardc, but it was not granted, and this led some parties I o ask him to see the Executive, and ask if they had sufficient security to justify them in going on fencing. The majority of the inhabitants thought it undesirable that the land should he sold, as it might interfere with mining, through being an obstacle to bringing in water. Another objection was that, if selling land on goldfields was adopted, the inhabitants should have grazing rights reserved. The Otago Hundreds Regulation Bill provided for that to some extent. He thought thought, as the Government by leasing got per cent, on the upset price of land, it was more the interest of the Province to lease than to sell the land. Mr Ireland would base his objections on different grounds from some of Mr Mervyn’s. He was convinced that mining in Otago was iu its infancy. If the Government were satisfied that the Province could do without mining, then let them sell goldfields’ land : if not, let them not throw any impediments in the way. That was the broad ground he took. It was better to do so than to confine the argument to an isolated case like the Island Block. He would not put it on the ground of unfair treatment. He believed that in a few years, ground not now dreamt of would be worked, for large companies would be formed, and large quantities of water brought into operation. In Nelson auriferous ground had been sold, and the people were in consequence dissatisfied. It would be better to give the miners assistance in prospecting ground. In taking out a miner’s right a miner argued that the goldfields j were extensive, and he looked upon auriferous ground as capital to work upon. By selling laud on the goldfields he considered it a narrowing of his capital ; and to cuptqil thift was to stop mining. If there was water available, the bapks of the M qlyneux would have five or ten miners where now there was but on", He. noticed that Mr Thomson, iu one of his reports, said he was surprised that miners bad not invented some cheap method of raising water from the Molyneux. If encouragement were given by the Government, and such an invention applied, it would tend to increase population. By selling the block in question, it would interfere with bringing in water by means of races ; and it was the feeling of the people in the district that it would fall into the hands of speculators. Assume that it did so : many who had been waiting for agricul-

tural leases would feel themselves greatly disappointed. Mining parties liked mixed occupations ; perhaps four or five would bo mining, while two or three devoted them* selves to agriculture. Assuming the land to be sold, it would shut out access to the country, and interfere with mining operations. For these reasons he would respectfully urge upon the Government the propriety of acceding to the earnest wishes of the people of the district, and allowing the land to be leased as proposed some months ago. There cou'd be no reason for injuring one class of workers for the sake of another, and by selling that land the impression would be left on the minds of the people of the district that they had been unfairly treated. Mr J. L. Gillies, M P.C., said, in reference to the promise alleged to have been made by him, he could only say, from memory, and from a note made at the time in Mr Beighton’s house, that he gave no such promise. The statement ho made was, if Clark will take ss, then sell; if not, then lease (for compensation for the block). So distinct was bis recollection that, in referonce to that part of the country, he would not recommend the Government, on any account, to grant leases. He saw that cr ps had. been taken off land which was then abandoned. Other land had been leased for years and no rent paid. It was soil of that kind that looking to the interests of the country it ought not to be leased. Ho distinctly denied having made any promise such as was alleged ; as for speculators, applicants for agricultural leases were as likely to be speculators as purchasers of land. Mr Warden Wood said there were so many applications that the only fair way of dealing with the applicants was by putting up the laud to sale to the highest bidder. That was the reason why Mr Wood recommended its being put up for sale. After some further conversation his Hono>the Superintendent said the Executive wou 4 consult and forward an answer to the deputation. The deputies thanked his Honor and the Executive and withdrew.