THE TEVIOT MEMORIAL AND MR. WARDEN HICKSON.

Tuapeka Times, Volume I, Issue 20, 27 June 1868, Page 3

THE TEVIOT MEMORIAL AND MR. WARDEN HICKSON.

(To the Editor of the Tuapeka Times.) Sir, — In your issue of the 20th June appears a letter signed "Honesty," accompanied with copy of memorial, and also a copy of Mr. Warden Hickson's report respecting township of Roxburgh. The writer appears desirous of leaving the memorial without comment ; but refers very strongly to Mr. Hickson's report upon the memorial, and states some apology to be due to Mr. Mackay on account of Mr. Hickson reporting Mr. Mackay's letter, and the memorial accompanying it, being " almost destitute of truth." I may inform your readers that the memorial contained in all only fourteen signatures ; and as your readers /are now acquainted with the statements it contained, 1 shall simply ask their perusal of the following copy of memorial, also forwarded to the Superintendent, signed by thirty-seven residents ; and then they will be in a position ' to decide whether Mr. Hickson was not correct in stating that the memorial was " almost destitute of truth " :—: — "To James Macandrew, Esq., Superintendent. "The memorial of the undersigned, &c, respectfully showeth - "That the mining interest of this district will in no way be impaired or prejudicially affected by the sale, of such land as has been surveyed off in the township of Roxburgh, on the west bank of the jVlolyneux river. "That your memorialists, while believing such land to be auriferous, believe it to be less so than any other land in the neighborhood, and not sufficiently rich to pay for the working of it. " That the land in question has been tested by the assistance of a water-race in several places, and abandoned. "That owing to the rocky formation of the river bank on its western side, it is impossible that the land can be affected by the action of the current." In publishing the copy of Mr. Hickson's report, you have apparently misprinted the word in Italics, now payable, instead of ram-payable, — a slight mistake, but one making a great difference in the nature of the report. Respecting this annoying and very vexed question of re-survey of Roxburgh, I wish to say a few words. It is now about two years since the Government first ordered a survey to be made of the township, the surveyor's instructions being to lay off a trwnship in such a position as to interfere as little as possible with any substantial buildings which might be erected. He found that, owing to the very close proximity of most of the buildings to the edge of the river bank, it would be impossible to survey in such a manner as to include the frontage of those buildings, the only buildings of a substantial character at that time erected being the Commercial Hotel, built at a much greater distance from the' river. The surveyor laid off the first line of the survey in a line with this building. Almost immediately afterwards, Mr. Beighton erected his large and substantial store on the site of the survey, as laid off. Some time afterwards, the Government advertised the land for sale ; and then some of the residents made an effort, and succeeded in postponing the sale, in order to have the survey altered, so as be made nearer the river, so as to comprise the frontages occupied by them. Mr. Pyke was then appointed by the Government to make a report, which he did, and they subsequently intimated that they would not alter the Survey, but sell according to the plan. The land was again advertised for sale ; and the memorial which you published in your last issue was then sent to Government, asking survey to be made further away from the river. This memorial was signed by the same parties as previously asked for the survey to be made nearer the river ; but finding they could not succeed in having their own buildings placed on the survey, they wisrfed now to injure those who had built on the survey. The Government again postponed the sale, and ordered another survey, the second survey not suiting the views of the memorialists, because it comprised the frontage of the Commercial Hotel and Assembly Rooms, and also Mr. Brighton's new store. A third survey was then ordered ; and now, because this last survey also comprises the frontages of these buildings, Mr. Mackay, along with Mr. Nicholson, of Moa Flat, have apparently succeeded in having another survey ordered, which, it is understood, will be so contrived as "to place Mr. Beighton's store and the' other buildings on a reserve, and thereby put the occupiers under the necessity of continuing to pay business licenses, and prevent their ever acquiring a right to the freehold of the land on which they have erected their buildings at so much cost. You must .excuse the length of this letter ; but 1 think you will aor^e witli me in saying the importance of the subject demands a thorough investigation and it is to be- hoped the Governmeni will cause a' proper enquiry to be made not only in justice to the injured parties but also to Mr. Hickson, on account o his report. — I am, Ac. , ,' ' lv., .>.. . ' Y.EXXTAS,