MINERS' GRIEVANCES.

Kumara Times, Issue 1371, 22 February 1881, Page 2

MINERS' GRIEVANCES.

[to the editor.] Sir— lf your correspondent “A Larrikinite ” has any grievance of his own to complain of, he hRd better say so, and not rush into print and endeavor to manufacture imaginary ones against Mr Warden Stratford, and that at the expense of others. If the case of Restano and party is the strongest point in your correspondent’s indictment, thOn his Charges most lamentably (for himself) fail, inasmuch as that he has not written a word of the truth in connection with Restano and party’s case. “ A Larrikinite ” says : “ the Warden adjourned the application to the 16th, in order that the clerk might find oat if there was ally agreement in the office.” Now* sir, he did not adjourn for that purpose* consequently, be could not have “ lost sight of the cause of the case being adjourned” on the 16th. He (the Warden) found out on the 9th that the obstacle, the lapsed certificate existed, and not on the Kkh, as your correspondent asserts, and had the application adjourned to the 16th, in order to have the books searched as to how long the certificate had lapsed and whether it was cancelled or not ; this course being imperatively necessary in order to deal with the matter legally. Your correspondent says ; “ Restano and party must apply again, and the objecting parties object again.” Why this assertion is just as truthful as the other portion of his letter, inasmuch as Restano and party need not apply again, their application being finally dealt with on the second day of hearing ; consequently the objecting parties need not object again, or lose time, aa

your correspondent wouldjendeavor to make the nublic believe. I have no doubt .that the question at i.«sue will be " satisfactorily solved" without more annoyance to your correspondent either by loss of time at Court or concocting something .therV aneiit. : If anyunnecessary delay has arisen.in reference to this application, Restano and party are to Bldnie,, in consequence of not describing in Iheii* application ihat it was a lapsed tunnel, and giving the number and date of certificate. In not doing so they misled the Warden in the first instance, and necessitated tfie adjournment for one week} which jit was impossible to have avoided under the circumstances. If the Warden threw out the.application for being informal in the first instance, it might suit your correspondents purpose better, inasmuch' as Restano 1 and party would not within the time that lapsed since be in as good a position to have their title perfected. With regard to other matters referred to by your correspondent, I have nothing to say, with the exception that Mr Price, in his, busiest time never had as Mr Strafford Has" to—hold twenty r three Court sittings in one month, and those over such a wide scope of coun : try.—Yours, &c, D. Hannan, Agent for Restano dnd party! Kumara, Feb. 22, 1881.