Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MR CALCUTT AND THE WASTE LAND BOARD.

The following is the letter of Mr Calcutt which was alluded to at the meeting of the Waste Land Board this morning :

Goodwood, April 5, 1875. To the members of the Waste Land Board,

Dunedin.

Sirs, —Absence (until recently) from the Province prevented my sooner acknowledging the receipt of a communication from your clerk returning a letter addressed by me to the Chief Commissioner, and dated the 2nd February last. I beg to assure you that had I known of the Chief Commissioner’s absence I would have detained my letter until his return, as my remarks were, for certain reasons that may hereafter appear, specially directed to that gentleman. As, however, the Board has thought proper not to receive the letter officially, it has deprived the Chief Commissioner of the oppor tunity, if he so desired, of answering it; or of even thanking me, as I feel sure he would have done most heartily, for the compliment paid to his official life. Passing this, I have the honor to state :

1. That nearly six months past the Board impliedly undertook to give me an answer to a question of business relative to the price of a piece of land over which the Board alone had control.

2. That nearly five months since the Board passed a resolution to get a report thereon from the ranger. 3. That more than two months after the resolution had been passed (and which in the commonest justice should have been acted upon) I met the ranger and asked him if he had received any instructions thereon. He replied that-, up to that date he had heard nothing of the matter, nor had he received any instructions.

4. That my impression is—as I believe the fact to be—that between the date of the resolution (28th October) and the date of my letter (2nd February) the ranger never was instructed in conformity with the Board’s resolution. If this assumption be correct I ask the Board who is to blame ?

5. That on the 22nd December last the land in question was offered for sale at Hampden without any answer to my application having been given me.

6. Having depended upon the Board dealing with my application, as I had every right to believe it would do, I gave no instructions to any one to act for me, and was 100 miles distant when the land was offered for sale. 7. That the land in question, as the Board well knows, is a portion only—and that much the least valuable portion—of one original section, °

8. That the other and most valuable portion of the said section was put up at LI per acre, am'informed, tho suggestion of the Lhi( si Commissioner, and sold at that price to Mr F. D. Rich; but directly lam desirous, for the purposes of my business, of acquiring this eleven acres, it suddenly strikes some one that the price should be L2 instead of LI, and that in the face of the report of the Board’s own officer, who, if I mistake not, declared the land to be utterly valueless.” Other facts in confirmation of my reasoning could be adduced, but I do not wish unnecessaniy to take up the time of the Board, nor should I have done so at all. only for the impression I hold that a majority of the members of the Board were not cognizant of this state of matters. A good deal (as reported) was said at the Board meeting the other day about disrespect; allow me, airs, in self defence to say that no man holds the majority of the members of the Board in higher respect than I'do, and nothing was further from my intention than to create an impression otherwise : indeed I labored hard so to write as to plainly show the distinction ; but with reference to disrespectful treatment and conduct, I thought, and still think, that for a public body of gentlemen in their official capacity first to entertain an application, think it of sufficient importance to postpone and order additional reports thereon, promise an answer, keep the applicant in suspense (without, as I respectfully assert, any valid reason therefor) four or five mouths, and finally, not only not then give any answer, but adopt a totally different course—if that is not evidence of disrespect I am at a loss to know what is.—l have, &c., Thomas Calcott.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18750414.2.17

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Evening Star, Issue 3787, 14 April 1875, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
743

MR CALCUTT AND THE WASTE LAND BOARD. Evening Star, Issue 3787, 14 April 1875, Page 3

MR CALCUTT AND THE WASTE LAND BOARD. Evening Star, Issue 3787, 14 April 1875, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert