NAPIER.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume II, Issue 99, 25 October 1873, Page 2

NAPIER.

[from a CORRESPONDENT.] October 18. The great event of the week has been the Agricultural dud Pastoral Society’s Show, which was held at Havelock, on the 15th instant. The weather, tliat had been unusually wet, appeared the previous day to have set in fair, and everybody in town had made up their minds to enjoy themselves in the country, but before morning, rain again set in, and on the Wednesday heavy clouds threatened to discharge their watery contents upon all who ventured out of doors. Notwithstanding there being every chance of getting a ducking, a large number of persons rode and drove out to Havelock, and that little village was crowded at noon by visitors. The show, so far as the mere quantity of entries was concerned, was only a partial success, because the live stock exhibited did not nearly represent the various flocks and herds of the best breeds in the province. Indeed, most of the animals shown came from within a radius of a few miles surrounding the district. Regarding the exhibition, however, as affording an evidence of the quality of the stock imported, and of the improvement of the flocks owned by some of our most enterprising settlers through those importations, the show could not have been much more satisfactory to all concerned in pastoral pursuits. For further particulars, I refer you to our local journals (I conclude you exchange) in which you will find a full account of the animals exhibited. The proceedings of course terminated with a dinner, when the Chairman alluded to the absence of several leading settlers from a gathering at which in other places it is deemed a privilege to attend. The remarks referred chiefly to the absence of the Superintendent, who, as President of the society, and one who is vastly indebted to his pastoral pursuits for his position, might have been expected t.o take a lively interest in all that tended to promote the wealth and prosperity of the province. But Mr. Ormond is not singular in this respect, though I believe that his official duties prevent him in a great measure from doing many things that he would like. There is not the same excuse to be made for many of the settlers, whose parsimony with regard to public matters is only equalled by their selfishness in private life. One of these gentlemen, who exhibited his stock last year, and has recently sold his station, realised a fortune, and bought another extensive property, refused to pay his subscription of two guineas to the society because he hud no animals to send tothe show. This very public spirited individual is not likely to be heard much more of, and he may safely give up all idea of ever occupying the Superintendent’s chair. In connection with the society, another one is about to be established, more especially for the purpose of encouraging the industry of small farmers, dairy men and horticulturists. The members of these classes apparently do not care to exhibit their produce at the large annual show, and, indeed the period of the year at which it is held is not the best time for them, besides which, there is just a bare suspicion prevailing amongst them that they themselves and their exhibits are regarded as inferior to the lordly run holders and their valuable animals. They have not therefore looked upon the Hawke’s Bay Agricultural and Pastoral Society as an institution established so much for the promotion of their interests as for those of the sheepfartners. The proposed new society will smoothover the difficulty, and if its members agree to it being affiliated to the parent institution, the two can work harmoniously, and prove of much benefit to all classes. A case has just been disposed of in our Magistrate’s Court that has excited a good deal of attention and interest. It was one in which a fancy goods warehouseman (Mr. N. Jacobs) was sued by the Custom House authorities for having wilfully and knowingly attempted to defraud Her Majesty by an evasion of the Customs duties. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, as brought out in evidence were these:—Mr. Jacobs imported from Sydney sundry goods, a portion the contents of which was for re-sale wholesale, to a Mr. Dennett. In order to obtain a trifling profit upon the sale to Mr. Dennett, Mr. Jacobs made out a false set of invoices placing high prices on some of the goods, lowering the value of others, and foolishly omitting mention of some more. These invoices were forwarded to Mr. Routledge as Custom House Agent, who, with the assistance of his clerk, prepared the import entries and finally paid the duty on the goods. The Collector’s suspicions being aroused, he determined to detain the goods till after they were examined, and on examination, they of course did not tally with the invoices. A seizure was the consequence, and a prosecution. During the hearing of the case, it transpired that Mr. Routledge was not, according to the Act, an authorised Custom House Agent, his license having been issued in 1869, and not having been renewed since then. It also appeared that all the other recognised Custom House Agents at Port Ahuriri were in a similar position. Now, it is illegal for the Collector to permit entries to be passed except by duly authorised Agents, and as Mr. Routledge cannot come under that category, the entries passed by him for Mr. Jacobs were null and void, and therefore could not be made the grounds of an action. So much was admitted by the Bench of Magistrates, as they stated that the import entry produced could not be taken into consideration, inasmuch as Mr. Routledge was not an authorised agent. It further appeared that the actual duty paid was in excess of that

to which the goods were liable by the true invoices which had been delivered to the Collector by Mr. Jacobs when the goods were seised. But, in spite of all this, the Bench, in their collective wisdom, fined Mr. Jacobs £25 and costs ! Whether the judgement will be appealed against, Ido not know. Public opinion is that, in moral point of view, it served Mr. Jacobs right, butthat the verdict was wholly wrong and could not be justified by the evidence. My letter has already reached the limits of the space you can allow me, and I must defer noticing some topics of public conversation till another occasion.