THE SURVEYOR-GENERAL AND MR HENRY JACKSON.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 2, Issue 111, 18 March 1879, Page 2

THE SURVEYOR-GENERAL AND MR HENRY JACKSON.

♦ (From the New Zealand Times.) Wo regret to have to state that Messrs R. G. Fountain, W. Gray, and R. C. Hannnei'ton, the throe commissioners appointed by his Excellency the Governor to investigate certain charges of insubordination and disobedience to orders, made by Mr J. T. Thomson, Surveyor-General of New Zealand, against Mr Henry Jackson, chief surveyor of the Wellington Laud District, have reported adversely to Mr Jackson, and that the Government have decided to call upon Mr Jackson to resign. We believe that there were nine charges brought against Mr Jackson, being specific allegations of insubordination and disobedience. The principal grounds of complaint were that Sir Jackson had refused to conform to the new general system of survey for the colony introduced by the Governmeut; that he had continued to work on magnetic meridian when directly ordered to alter his work to true meridian; that he had shown passive resistance to Mr Thomson's rule, amounting to obstruetiveness. The evidence taken by tho commissioners was exceedingly voluminious, and a large part was of a very technical charactor. In fact, it might be said that the expediency of Mr Thomson's orders from scientific and economic points of view was placed on trial, in order to justify Mr Jackson's action, but the defence was a general denial. Mr Thomson, Mr McKerrow (Assistant Surveyor-Goneral), Mr Barron (chief clerk in the Surveyor-General's office), Mr Williams (Inspector of Surveys for the Wellington Land District), Mr Baker (chief surveyor in the Canterbury District), and others were all examined in support of the charges; while Captain Hewitt, R.N., Mi' Cass, Judge Heale, and others gave scientific evidence for Mr Jackson; and Sir William Fitzherbcrt, Mr Bunny, Mr Brandon, Mr Halcombe, and Mr J. G. Holdsworth gave evidence as to Mr Jackson's general demeanor as a civil servant during a long term of office,

all declaring ho had never to their knowledgo iliown any disposition to neglect orders or to bo obstructive. Mr Jackson in a long written defence declared ho had not been guilty of the charges laid against him. He had been instructed by Mr Thomson with overbearing tyiianical conduct towards him, and asserted that every possiblo annoyance had been heaped upon him, to make him feel his official inferiority to Mr Thomson. However, the report is against Mr Jackson, and we are sorry to bo able to state that Ministers in Cabinet yesterday decided that the finding of the commission left them no option in the interests of the service, but to call upon Mr Jackson to resign. If lie will consent, to do this, consideration will bo given in the way of pecuniary recognition of lon* services; but in any caso Mr iheksou's connection with the service wst cease. We believe we are correct in stating that Mr Jackson charges the commission with partiality, and that he has i already determined to petition Parliament I for an inquiry before a select committee. It is a matter for very great regret that such a dispute should have arisen, for beyond question Mr Jackson is one of the ablest men in the service. His administration of the surveys in this province has been marked by the greatest success, his work being unsurpassed for accuracy and completeness, so far as it could be pushed forward in the straitened financial circumstances of the province.