To the Editor of the Colonist.

Colonist, Volume II, Issue 175, 24 June 1859, Page 3

To the Editor of the Colonist.

Sm, —I shall feel obliged by your allowing me to reply to the remarks of the Chief Surveyor, which appeared in youi* column? on Friday last. Mr. Brunner states, that in moving an address to the Governor for the dissolution of the Provincial Council, I made two direct charges against the department of which he is the responsible head, and accordingly ho undertakes to refute these charges. Until informed by Mr.-.-Brunner that I bad made charges "against his department, I was not aware of the fact; ancl if the Chief Surveyor will turn again to the report of the speech' he refers to, ho will see that I made no allusion to "the department of which he is the responsible head;" but that for the blunders committed in the construction of roads I considered the Government was chargeable, for having permitted works to be undertaken and carried on without proper supervision. I did not suppose the Chief Surveyor would have questioned this assertion ; I was of opinion that gentleman must have discovered long ago, that in addition to his duties as Chief Surveyor, which required, if properly performed, the whole of his time and attention, it was impossible he could superintend all the roads ancl other public works in progress in the province. If I have mistaken Mr. Brunner's opinion on this matter, and he thinks himself equal to the performance of a Provincial Engineer's duties, in addition to those of the Chief Surveyor, then I say. he must have a wonderful opinion of-his own übiquitary .qualities. But since Mr. Brunner has thought proper to defend the laying out of the road through the Big

Bush, and also that ofthe Waitohi bridle track, I will offer a few remarks in reply. Mr. Brunner is persuaded "the present track through the Big Bush is belter than any other," and has previously spent a month in exploring for a better one without finding it. The Chief Surveyor is quite 1 ight; (he present track through the bush is undoubtedly better than any other, because no other exists, except in places where the original line bus been abandoned; but if Mr. Brunner means to say that the present line of road through the hush is tbe best that can be obtained, and that neither 'wholly nor in part, is it capable of improvement, then I must inform that gentleman that, in this opinion be stands alone. It may ho said, however, that after a month's exploration in the bush, Mr. Brunner must be better qualified to give an opinion respecting a road there than any mere traveller, however frequently he might journey through it. I might think so too, only, unfortunately, it has happened that since the exploration made by Mr. Brunner (which, I presume, took place about five years ago,, when that gentleman superintended a gang of natives, engaged to clear the track of a portion of the timber), the line has been.materially improved by Mr. Maddox, who, by clearing away the brushwood and felling a few trees, opened abetter track in two places several hundred yards in length. I do not think Mr. Maddox spent a month in exploration to enable him to effect this improvement. I doubt whether the exploration and labor together cost him a week's labor.

Mr. Brunner's defence of the Waitohi bridle track satisfies me as little as does his defence of the road through the Big Bush. As I have al--1 ready^said, I was disposed to throw the blame of that wretched piece of work on the Government for imposing on a public officer, more duties than he could possibly perform ; but since the Chief Surveyor insists on taking the responsibility of the work on his own shoulders, I am content to let it rest there. First, then, I think Mr. Brunner is wrong in saying that the money advanced to the Government by certain gentlemen connected with the Wairaft was to cover the expense of cutting a bridle track between Waitohi and Wairau, and "preparing tlie necessary specifications for a dray mad." The money, as I'understood, was subscribed solely to open a bridle track with a view to enable the Wairau settlers to reach the steamer afc Waitohi at a time when that vessel did not resort to the Wairau River. I repeat now, what I stated in the Council, that the money spent.in forming this bridle track was thrown away, because a considerable portion of the road would always have been under water for'several months together in every yea_r. In July last, when I rode from the Wairau to Waitohi, I found at least eighteen inches of water on portions of the road, although none of the large rivers were at the time flooded, nor had heavy rain fallen for several days previously ; and the causeways which had been made over the swamps were the most dangerous places I ever took a horse over in my life. Practically, therefore, no bridle track wa3 made with the money subscribed, for I assert, without fear of contradiction, that the road was wholly unavailable for traffic of any kind. Mr. Brunner informs us, that " provision has been made in the specifications for raising the whole line of road above the level of any hitherto known flood;" I suppose, however, this refers to tbe road now making, and not to the bridle track of which I complained, and therefore has nothing to do with the question. Although I cannot but admire the chivalrous feeling which has induced the Chief Surveyor to come forward and present himself as a scapegoat for his employers, I think the gentleman is trying to put tho saddle on the wrong horse, for I cannot believe but that had he been allowed time to superintend the cutting of the Waitohi bridle track, he would have taken care that a better job should have been made of it. I am, &c, C. ELLIOTT.

To the Editor of the Colonist. Sir,—l wish to call the attention of the proper authorities to a nuisance in one of the public streets of the town, viz., in Hardy-street, near Waimea-street, where the refuse from the Raglan Brewery is sent down through private property, and is stopped at the side of Hardy-street to the great annoyance ofthe people living in its vicinity, and moreover, to the public generally. I can assure you, Sir, that it not only effects the olfactory nerves of the passers by, but the people living close to it can scarcely get sleep at night in consequence ; besides which, the smell taints the water of the wells in the neighbourhood. Some time ago the Board of Works was applied to to remove it, and I believe they sent a letter to the owner of the brewery, and the answer was, to come and look at his drains and see how clean they were. Now, Sir, I would ask who is to remove it—is it the duty of the owner of the brewery to see that the refuse from his premises does not annoy his neighbours, oi* can the owners of the private property adjoining stop it.from coming through their ground ; or is it. the duty ofthe Board of Works to see that it is properly carried down into the sea, and not allowed to remain stagnant in one place, to the great detriment of the health of thos*** who live near it. Is there not an Inspector of Nuisances, and if so why does he not; act ? If ifc is the duty of the Board of Works to remove it, I think they ought to remove the nuisances iv the public streets first, before they commence to make a bowlingalley of Trafalgar-street. I do not complain of improvements made in any of the streets ofthe town, but 1 do complain that this nuisance has not been removed before this time, seeing that it has continued for about two years and nothing Ins been done with it. Sir, I hope that the authorities will do something with it before the summer comes in, otherwise it will become intolerable. Trusting you will be kind enough to insert the above in your valuable journal, 1 remain, yours &c, A RESIDENT. Nelson, June 13, 1859.