MAEREWHENUA.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 344, 8 October 1875, Page 3

MAEREWHENUA.

■ (From our own correspondent.) : A meeting of the Miners' Association was held here on the 2nd instant, to consider a letter received from Borton and M 'Master, wishing to know the feeling of the miners at Maerewhenua regarding the water pollution,and stating they intended to wash their sheep this year, and wanting to know if-the miners would stop sluicing for a period of four weeks, say from the 10th November next. There was also a letter from the Goldfields Department concerning an unanswered petition that was. forwarded to the Government some seven months ago. The letter throws the blame on Mr. Sumpter, inasmuch as he was a member of the Government at the time the petition was declined. The letter states the Government were under the impression that Mr. Sumpter would acquaint his constituents as to the decision of his colleagues. There was also a letter from Mr. Sumpter, stating his surprise at the discourteous attack upon him, without first ascertaining the correctness of the statements sent to the Miners' Association, Maerewhenua. His letter states that he was at the celebration of the Queen's Birthday in Oamarn, and it now appears that his colleagues held a meeting on the 25th May, while he was absent, and declined the petition. He has been under the impression that the petition was never dealt with, and that it was being fully looked after ; that lie himself had written to the Government asking what progress had been mide with the petition, bnt had never received any official reply. The Chairman said, in reference to Borton and M'Master's request, he could not understand why the miners should let the water run to waste while it was available for mining purposes, when the Regulations stated any parties failing to use the water when available rendered their right liable to forfeiture, or a heavy penalty. He himself had to pay no less a sum than £45, to satisfy the law, for not usingthe water when available. He warned them of jeopardising their rights, and said he could not see but that they had as good a right to dirty the water by goldmining as the sheep-farmer by washing his sheep, and drew the meeting's attention to a judgment lately given in Tasmania, where a squatter had a perpetual injunction laid upon him for polluting the Derwent River by sheep-washing. He said the River Pollution Bill now before the Legislative Council provided for giving compensation to those who were injured. He said there m ere only two ways to get out of the difficulty—either the miners must be compensated, or the property holders. A motion was carried unanimously—" That legal advice be obtained from Mr. Stout, and that Borton and M'Master be advised accordingly." Mr. Sumpter's letter was discussed, and the Provincial Government condemned up hill and down dale. The Chairman, who has always stuck up for the Provinces, was wroth with Mr- Sumpter's late colleagues, and stigmatised them as a mean, contemptible, lot, and no gentlemen for dealing with a petition affecting one of their colleague's constituents without giving him an opportunity of being heard on behalf of his constituents, and said there was some dark design underneath. I believe another petition is to be got up to overtake the difficulty complained of by the late petition. I understand Mr. Sumpter is being written to further upon the matter. I think it is.right to say the Association has full confidence in him, but it is unfortunate for his constituents that he should not have been at the meeting when the petition was declined, as a good deal of anxiety and altercation had arisen on account of the petition not being answered sooner.