MR CALCUTT AND THE WASTE LAND BOARD.

Evening Star, Issue 3630, 10 October 1874, Page 2

MR CALCUTT AND THE WASTE LAND BOARD.

To the Editor, •i R ’ir Your leadiB 8 M ‘ 6 iclo this evening is evidently not intended to eoneey to «n“ readers an honest account of themiserable display at the Waste Land Board ySSSiw but rather to give an opportunity for the expression of some of the extraordinary S- ££«£ »»4tonnwly took our article is built almost entirely on a misconception of the special case refold to and On . others preceding it. U» (Vlnntf»l case m this : he fads n«ar hxs property which he' be

Set cheap by representing that it would save im some fencing ; the Board, to oblige him, gets an officer sent to examine it, who reports that the stone in it is valueless for metal, and the land might therefore be sold. He does not say the land is valueless, The Board, looking at the fact that it is on the main north road, says, we will offer it for sale by auction at an upset price of L2 an acre, as it is only a small piece—ten or eleven acres—and it will even then do little more than pay the cost of adveitising and sending an auctioneer to sell it. Mr Calcutt thinks by a little persistence he might induce the Board to let it be put up at LI instead He states his case at length, giving all the reasons why it should be so reduced. The Board’s own officer said it was valueless. He (Mr Calcutt) said it was a mere mass of conglomerate, &c., &c. The Board, remembering the old proverb—“it is naught : .it is naught, saith the buyer; but when be is gone his way, then he boasteth ” -takes his statementwith a pinch of salt, smiles blandly, and asks him if he has finished. Mr Calcutt says he has. Chief Commissioner gives kis opinion price should remain as fixed, and appeals to other members for theirs. One or .two give a like opinion. Poor C. thinks his eloquence might be added to, and reiterates, explains, and chucks in the mass of conglomerate, and when sharply told had finished hia case, and must be quiet, 'uses not like it j and the prospect of paying LlO more for the same conglomerate being particularly gallinsr, persists in his interruption and will not be brow-beaten, not he. The proper course then would have been to have sent for a policeman and have turned the man out; and in not doing so the Board displayed a want of dignity. But the man who had so little manners as net to know when to speak and when to be silent, and to ignore the respect which any body so constituted as the Board is entitled to, certainly does not deserve to be supported by a leading article in the Star. I should like also to notice a few of your remarks which bear on another ease. The readers of your article might infer from it that the Chief Commissioner did alter a record in the minute book. This is not true. Again, the Chief Commissioner invariably asks the members of the Board their opinion in each case. It may occur that some of the members have formed no opinion— cannot make np their minds, or do not give their opinions express on, and the case is decided by those who do give tbeir voices, it is quite imaginary to suppose a case in which what you ar- pieced to call the amour proprt of the Chief Commissioner has been offended by an expression of opinion by a member of the Board. I quite agree with your statement that the “ function of the Hoard is that of equitably administering the laud laws of the Province,” and would add to it that it is not to yield to the niggardliness or whim of any member of the public. The Board would c§rry out iis function better if it paid leas attention to such trifles, and gave important matters greater deliberation, so that its decisions should have proper consistency. . Amicus Curiae. Dunedin, October 10.