PHILADELPHIA EXHIBITION.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 422, 19 October 1875, Page 3

PHILADELPHIA EXHIBITION.

A meeting of the local committee of the Philadelphia Exhibition was held yesterday afternoon at 3 p.m. Present—Messrs L. E. Nathan (chairman), W. H. Lane, Duncan, P. Cnnningham, and Dr Von Haast. The minutes of the last meeting were read and confirmed. The secretary (Mr Bird) read a telegram from the chairman of the local committee, stating that they hadanofferof samplesof preserved meats from the New Zealand Produce and Provision Company, but they required an assurance from the chairman that the exhibits would be forwarded to Philadelphia. The chairman wished the Commissioners therefore to relax the rule No 16, regarding final revision of exhibits to be sent. The letter of the New Zealand Produce and Provision Company, offering to make up a parcel, was also read, and the letter from the chairman (Mr L. E. Nathan) pointing out that he could give no positive assurance that the exhibits would go forward to Philadelphia, but he had no doubt they would do so. In reply to this, Mr Watt, for the company, refused to make up an exhibit unless he was assured that his exhibit would go forward. The chairman said that he had felt so much the necessity of Canterbury being represented in so important a matter as preserved meat that he had seen Mr Watt, and had guaranteed him against loss to the extent of Is per lb, the total cost not to exceed £5. He had telegraphed to the chairman of the Royal Commission, informing him of the facts of the case, and asking a relaxation of the rule. To that Mr Mantell had replied by letter, stating that in respect to the exhibit of preserved meat spoken of by the local committee, the Commission were willing that the rule referred to should be relaxed, and the exhibit, if small in quantity, would be sent forward to Philadelphia. The letter of the Hon W. B. D. Mantell, to this effect, was read by the secretary. A letter was read from Mr Chinnery, stating that he intended exhibiting some flax, and requesting to know date and place to which he should send it in. The secretary reported that he had informed Mr Chinnery that the flax should be sent in to his office before the 15th November. A letter was read from Mr J. Gilmour, stating h|s intention of exhibiting hams and bacon at the Philadelphia Exhibition, bpt pointing out that the regulations prohibited

his sending more than one flitch and one ham. He hoped this rule would be relaxed so as to allow of the same amount being sent as to Vienna, viz, two hams and two flitches. The Secretary stated that he had written to Hon W. B. D. Mantell, asking him if the commission would relax the rule as regarded the exhibits spokeu of by Mr Gilmour, but no answer had been received. The chairman said he very much regretted to have to report that the promises of support to the sundry committee, of which he was chairman, were very meagre indeed. Beyond Messrs Gilmour, Chinnery, and the New Zealand Produce and Provision Company, they had had no response to their circulars. There seemed to be a want of support on the part of the public which augured very ill of the success of the exhibition | articles from Canterbury. He might say I that Mr T. Wilson intended sending some wool mats and leather, and had intended to get up duplicate specimens after the Agricultural Show. He now said that he could not get up duplicates, but trusted that Mr Wilson's exhibits would be in time after the show. Dr Von Haast, on the part of the timber and coal sub-committee reported that they had received no promises of support whatever. They had had two letters, one from Mr Saxton Williams and the other from Mr Coup, declining to exhibit. Perhaps, however, Mr Enys might come forward and help them. Mr P. Cunningham said that as regarded grain Mr Lane and himself had nothing more cheering to report than the chairman. The result of their labours was, that the only exhibits likely to go forward would be selections from their own stocks. It had happened unfortunately that the whole of the grain had been sold, and hence the province had very little chance of being represented as it should be. He had intended to send a collection of grain, but if he was to be treated as it was apparent Mr Gilmour was to be, he should decline to send the exhibits he had intended to. Reading the regulation as the chairman had done, he understood that he would be restricted to half a bushel, which would simply be absurd to send as representing the province. He took it that Mr Gilmour would be entitled to send 501bs of ham and 501bs of bacon, and not as the chairman seemed to think, that only 501bs would be allowed. The chairman pointed out that the various descriptions of grain might be sent in quan tities of half a bushel as laid down in the regulations. He did not read the regulations in the light Mr Cunningham seemed to do as regarded other exhibits. Mr Cunningham held that it would be quite competent for the New Zealand Produce and Provision Company to send exhibits of tongues, mutton, and beef, all of which might be sent up to the maximum weight, and not confined to 301 b for the whole exhibit. Mr Lane agreed with the idea that the various descriptions of grain could be sent each up to the maximum weight laid down in the regulations. He thought, however, that one ham and one side of bacon would be quite sufficient to show the quality of the exhibit. The chairman pointed out that if Mr Gilmour sent two different descriptions of cured meat, they would certainly be entitled to allow them to go forward as two exhibits; and therefore entitled to the maximum weight on each. It was resolved— " That the matter be left in the hands of the sub-committee." Mr L. Coates, on behalf of the sub-com-mittee for wool, reported that he had sent out some 107 circulars, and had received five replies only, one of which had intimated his intention of exhibiting. He had, however, received several verbal replies, and he thought that the wool exhibits from Canterbury would be creditable. Mr Murray-Aynsley said that he had received one or two promises, but he might say that there was some misapprehension as to whether the maximum quantity allotted to wool would be extended to the different classes of wool, or whether it meant all qualities. The chairman said so far as he read the regulations the wool exhibits might be sent up to the maximum amount for each class. Mr Duncan said the grain sub-committee wished to know whether they could send specimens of various qualities of wheat, grown on various lands and different descriptions of soils. They must remember that there were but few descriptions of wheat and oats, and if they were rigidly confined to distinct varieties they could only send some three exhibits. Mr Cunningham said if he was rigidly confined to the rule he should only be able to send three samples. If, however, he could send samples of wheat, of the same description of wheat, but grown on different land and in different localities, he could send forward some twenty seven samples. Mr Duncan pointed out that as Canterbury was the great grain producing province of New Zealand, it was all important that they should be well represented. They must remember that the American farmers would see all those samples, and it was highly important that all sent should fairly represent the various localities in which it was grown, so that they might have an opportunity of arriving at an idea of the grainproducing power of the various districts of the province. Mr W. H. Lane said that he thought the committee would be quite justified in acceding to Mr Cunningham's request, and allow of the various samples from the different districts, although they might be of the same description to go forward. It must be remembered that if they had a large number of farmers exhibiting, they would have a quantity of samples of the same grain coming in ; and as instead of a number of exhibitors sending samples, Mr Cunningham would be the one able to do so. It did not seem to him that it would make any difference whatever. Mr Murray-Aynsley coincided with the remarks made by Mr Lane. After some further discussion the matter was left in the hands of the sub-committee. Mr Duncan said that, in view of the San Francisco mail not leaving here till the 18th or 20th, he thought the Royal Commission should be asked to extend the time for receiving exhibits from Canterbury, so as to allow of the exhibits shown at the Agricultural and Pastoral Association's show in November being forwarded if necessary. He would therefore move—" That the chairman be requested to communicate with the Hon W. B. D. Mantell, drawing his attention to the departure of the ban Francisco mail at least a week after the Canterbury Agricultural and Pastoral Association's Exhibition, and pointing out to him the great'advantage to intending exhibitors if time was extended

for receiving exhibits, and further, if this is not conceded, the committee are of opinion that exhibits from Canterbury will be very few." He thought the Government would favorably consider the matter if put before them. Mr Murray-Aynsley seconded the motion, and pointed out that during the race and show week the goods traffic was partially stopped on the railway. The chairman said that the committee had taken this matter into consideration at an early date, and had telegraphed to the Royal Commission, but without result. If the exhibits were sent forward by the mail steamer, the Commission would not have time to exercise the right of selection and revision. It would at least be necessary to to send them on a steamer in advance; hence it would hardly be fair to ask the commission to allow of the Canterbury exhibits going forward without being seen by them, because if this were done exhibits might be going forward in triplicate or duplicate. He would now ask the secretary to read Mr Mantell's letter. The secretary then read Mr Mantell's letter in answer to the telegram of the chairman. Mr Duncan said that from the letter of Mr Mantell it appeared that any exhibits going forward prior to the February mail steamer would be in time. It would not be necessary to send the exhibits by the November mail steamer, and there would be several boats going between the November and February mail. Besides this, they must recollect that since the letter was written a new line of steamers had been established, quicker in passage and more punctual in their sailing ; hence he thought that they should press upon the Commission the necessity of extending the time so as to allow of Canterbury being properly represented. It was highly important that the exhibits at the Agricultural and Pastoral Association's show should be able to go forward, as that show was a most creditable one, and one which would enable Canterbury to be better represented than otherwise would be the case. The chairman said that he thought it would be a good thing to enquire of the Commission whether the local committee might not select certain articles, if necessary, at the Agricultural and Pastoral Association's show, so as to ensure the efficient representation of Canterbury at Philadelphia. It would be much better that the committee should take this power rather than leave the matter solely in the hands of the exhibitors. Mr Duncan was about to rise to make remarks similar in purport to those just made by the chairman. It would be very important that exhibits of excellence in various departments should be sent forward by the committee selecting them. He would move —"That Messrs Lane, Coates, and the chairman act as a sub-committee to secure such exhibits at the Agricultural and Pastoral Association's Exhibition as they may deem worthy of being forwarded to Philadelphia." Mr Cunningham seconded the motion, which was agreed to. The meeting then adjourned.