Tuapeka Times. AND GOLDFIELOS REPORTER & ADVERTISER. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1871. "MEASURES, NOT MEN."

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 201, 7 December 1871, Page 4

Tuapeka Times. AND GOLDFIELOS REPORTER & ADVERTISER. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1871. "MEASURES, NOT MEN."

Again the v Bruce Herald " rushes to the front to shield the Provincial Executive from the storm of just indignation their conduct in regard to the 50,000 acre job has brought upon them. By daring misrepresentations, and unscrupulously distoitino; facts, the " Herald " tries to effect its object,, but although its fearfully and wonderfulty constructed sentences are difficult of comprehension, its motives are understood and appreciated by those it attempts to deceive. With sublime impudence the •' Herald " remarks : — " Every conscientious man must acknowledge that the evidence taken before the Select Committee j of the Legislative Council, if it does j not entirely relieve those two members of the Executive (Messrs. Reid and Bmdshaw) of the personal responsibility of the sale as eflected, at all events proves that they were not consenting parties to the transaction {>s carried out." Turning to the evidence, we find the following : — "In conclusion, Mr. Reid desired to state that, with the exception of the sale of the land beyond the boundary of the red line referred to (the 3000 acres) he considered the sale a beneficial one, both for general and provincial interests." Can this be the Mr. Reid who during the . contest for the Superintendency denounced the Island Block sale as the most iniquitous transaction ever perpetrated in the Colony ! — who promised to rescue the land from j the grip of the squatter and throw ; it open for agricultural settlement ! i — who vaunted his honesty and inI tegrity so much, that people believed i he possessed those qualities," and on the strength of their belief very nearly elected him to the position he sought ! Surely the Mr. Reid whom the Teviot people almost worshipped, when he omne amongst i them as the apostle of the people's ' j rights, cannot be the same man who " desired to state that he considered . the sale of the 47,000 acres of land in one block to a foreign capitalist beneficial both for general and pro- | vincial interests." " Mr. Bradshaw's I conduct in regard to the sale is j simply despicable. The land to be i sacrificed was in his own district, J and he well knew that the contemj plated sale would inflict incalculable j injury on the iuterests of his constituents, and y«?t he did not apprise those who reposed confidence in him of the blo.w that was about to foil on them. No ; he preferred to draw his wretched salary to manfully protecting the interests of his constituents, and he has well earned his reward — the execrations of all true men. He, too, though he did not say so in so many words, did not see anything wrong in the sale I of the 47,000 acres — he was perfectly willing to let that slip. The 3000 acres, which all the members of the Executive took such an intense interest in, he at the last moment discovered was auriferous. If it is auriferous, does Mi-. Bradshaw for ! one moment suppose that the miners would allow it to ue taken up under agricultural lenses ? How, then, would it have been available for settlement, which he said he intended to reserve it for ? In his frantic endcavo-urs to exculpate himself, Mr. Bradshaw managed to make his bad case infinitely worse. The " Herald " enquires whether the action of Messrs. Reid and Bradshaw in regard to the Moa Flat sale is to be compared to that of Mr. Bastings in the matter of the purchase of auriferous land in Acton's Flat, Switzers. This is another example of the ad oa/ptandwm style of reasoning adopted by our contemporary. We find no fault with Mr. Clarke for purchasing 50,000 or 500,000 acres, if he can get the chance, and has the money, nor do we choose to enter into the merits of a private transaction. But we can inform the " Herald " that Mr. Bradshaw's Switzers constituents will require a very good explanation from him, how, as a member of the Government, he allowed the rights of the mining public to be flagrantly violated, as in the instance quoted. The " Herald " attempts to excuse the Moa Flat sale by the oft-reiterated statement that the Treasury must have closed had lit not been effected. This we consider merely a bugbear to frighten 'the public. Could not our sapient rulers have raised a few thousands on the security of the Southland Railway ? And what relief was given tq the Treasury by the sale ? £9000 was paid in, and the overdraft was £80,000 Wliat a miser-.

able attempt to hoodwink the public ! We beg to inform the "Herald" that we do not intend, noi- do vvg counsel others, to rush j blindly into the hands of our per- • sistent and determined enemies. , But who are our enemies \ Those ' who boldly face us and tell us that our interests are to a certain ex- ; tent inimical to theirs, and that they will endeavour to secure themselves, , no matter at what cost to us ; or > the men who come to us loudly j advocating our interests, and having • gained our confidence and lulled us into the repose of security, rob us of our heritage, under the pretence j of conferring a benefit on us. Between the Reid party and the squatters, the Goldfields are between the " devil and the deep sea." The "Herald" judiciously refrains from ! mentioning about the '2000 acres ] surrounding the woolshed, the > 11,000 acres which, under the co- i venant, could have been taken without compensation, the 2s. per acre, ! for survey, the lossofasse.«stnent,and ] other matters. Probably they were | too trivial for the gigantic intellect of the editor of the " Herald " to notice. We have not spaon to pursue the matter further ; but we j cannot conclude without heartily j congratulating the " Herald " in its j performance of a feat which no | other journal in New Zealand could j have accomplished half so successfully, viz., the utter demolition of the cause it advocated.