KUMARA TAIL-RACE.

Kumara Times, Issue 2576, 6 December 1884, Page 2

KUMARA TAIL-RACE.

Yesterday we published some proceedings in Parliament (taken from No. 21 Hansard) relative to the Kumara goldfields water-supply and the price thereof, introducing a long letter from Mr John Gow, the local manager of the Race, to the Hon. the Minister of Mines, dated the 26th October, 1883. In the House on the following day, a letter from J. Giles, Esq., Warden, on the same subject was produced. The following is the full report from the same number of Hansard :

Mr Seddon asked the Minister of Mines, whether it is true that Mr Warden Giles wrote to the Minister of Mines a letter dated the 11th. August, 1884, in which proposals were submitted for the settlement of the Kumaia Main Tail-race dispute * and, if the answer be in the affirmative has the receipt of such letter been acknowledged or acted upon, and, if not, why not ? He had no doubt the answer to the first part of the question would be in the affirmative, because, by the courtesy of the Minister of Mines, he had received a copy of the letter that was sent by Dr. Giles. The second part of the question was rather important, because, after looking carefully through the correspondence, he did not find that there had been any answer sent to this letter, though it was dated “ 11th August, 1884.” He might also say this, and he said it as an act of justice to Warden Giles: that, having carefully gone through the correspondence, ho exonerated that officer from the charge which he made against him last session, which was that he had been biassed in dealing with the question affecting this particular work. The letter referred to in the question was as follows :

“To the Honourable the Minister of

Mines, Wellington.

“ Sir—l believe, although I have no official knowledge of the fact, that miners at Kumara are renewing their application to the Government for cheaper water. What I have to say upon this subject relates only to those who are using the Government slmWclianuel, and is intended to draw vonr attention lo a view of the matter which, although implied in former circumstances, ha* ne\ r-i j c laps been set lurth so explicitly us seems desirable,

The view I mean is this: That the earlier owners of tail-races connected Avith the sludge-channel would probably be held by any tribunal of arbitration to have a fair claim for compensation for direct loss sustained by them in consequence of the Government permitting a larger number of tail-races to open into the sludge-channel than it could properly accommodate. In the absence of any special bargain to the contrary, the agreement by the Government to allow holders of tail-races to sluice into the sludge-channel would be taken to give the right to sluice into the sludge-channel for a fair number of hours every day that they desired to do so, with some obvious exceptions, and to send down anything that in the ordinary way of sluicing would pass down their own boxes. This right has been restricted, and in great part taken away by the admission of a larger number of tai'-races than the sludge-channel would freely accommodate, owing to which the working hours have been shortened and the mode of working restricted by regulations which, however necessary in the circumstances, yet are regarded by the miners as vexatious.

“ This view of the matter may, I think, be clearly gathered from the remarks made by Mr Gordon and myself in our report of February last ; but I have thought it desirable to direct attention to it more particularly now, because, when in a quasi-judicial capacity I gave my approval to the new regulations, I felt myself debarred from entertaining the question of any claims which could not be made good in a Warden’s Court. The Government would probably find a free or cheaper supply of water the easiest mode of giving such compensation to parties who have a good claim to it; pending any further steps that may be taken for the permanent relief of the sludgechannel. The later comers or backnumber men have not so strong a claim for compensation; but even they may allege that when they were allowed to open into the sludge-channel they might fairly expect that its capacity had been calculated before permission was given them, and that their use of it would not be so greatly restricted as has turned out to be the case.

I must take this opportunity of saying that in my opinion the source of the whole complication is to' be found in the first code of regulations that was framed, the fifth clause of which prohibits any person from using the sludgechannel without the written permit of the manager. It is these permits that I think have done the mischief. The right to use the sludge-channel ought to have been inseparably attached to the registered certificate for a tail-race. In that case the priority of right would have been, like priority in all other goldfields right; a thing fixed and readily determinable, and the later comers would have been in the same position as inferior holders of water or other rights. “ I have, &c., “ J. Giles, “Warden. “Warden’s Office, Plokitika, “ August 11, 1884.”

He (Mr Seddon) regretted very much that Warden Giles had been placed in the .position he was placed in. The late Minister of Mines was to blame. It was altogether wrong to ask any Warden to advise and draft regulations, seeing the same hereafter might come before the Warden to be reviewed, ministerially and judicially; but, at the same time, he thought the Warden had acted strictly impartially.

Mr Ballance said the honourable gentleman had afforded sufficient proof to the House that the letter was received. It contained proposals which had been considered and acted upon, as the honourable gentleman well knew ; but it did not appear that there was any necessity for going further. Mr Seddon'thought the department might have acknowledged the receipt of the letter, which had never been done.