A ROLAND FOR AN OLIVER

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume VII, Issue 2145, 14 November 1885, Page 3

A ROLAND FOR AN OLIVER

Messrs Morrison and Burnett, a firm of solicitors at Woodvillo, have brought before the notice of the public a matter of grave importance to holders of land in Special Settlements. The correspondence on the subject explains itself : General Crown Lands Otiice, Wellington, 28th October, 1885. Gentlemen,—, lam directed by the Honorable the Premier, in tho absence of the Honorablo Minister of Lands, to inform you that it lias como to the knowledge of the Government that your linn, acting on behalf of tho Woodville-Tiraumea Special Settlement Association, has offered an intending ■ settler a section of land on which £lO "has been paid for a cash payment of £4O, ..at the same time charging a fee of 7s for your letter and advice to the intending settler. Mr Stout directs mo to point . out to you that speculations in sections in Special Settlement Blocks prior to tkir being allocated is wholly illegal and will . not be allowed by tho Government. The Secretaries of the three Special Sottlo- '. ment Associations which have been promoted at Woodville have been informed accordingly, and it has beon intimated to "thebjteiif such transactions are countcniHßSi, the Government will refuse to finaty'sofc apart any land. whatever for those associations.-I have the honor to ' le, gentlemen, your obedient servant, H. J, B. Elicit, Under-Secretary. To Messrs Morison and Burnett, Solicitors, Woodville. Woodvillo, October 31st, 1885. 11. J. H. ELiOTT,Esq., Under-Secretary, Crown Lauds Office, Wellington. Your letter

. .No. 1061-1 wo have received this morning. It is to be regretted that people 'who seems to be minions of and touts for .the Government in this district, should not have a greater sense of honor and truthfulness than, judging from the information thoy supply, they seem to have. We are at a loss to understand what security the public, taking advantage of the ordinary system of correspondence, havo against the practices of <i Government who, apparently, have no scruples . in procuring a knowledge of the contents of privato letters through unknown channels. This breach of known, principle is all tho more flagrant when the letter in quostion is a communication from solicitor to client, which the Courts of Justice (as Mr Stout ought to know) hold sacred. Mr Stout is no doubt aware that we are entitled to apply to the Court for ah injunction restrainnig the publication by him of a private letter, the contents of which are entirely in accordance with the law. We do not condescend to any explanation on the subject of your letter under reply, as wo consider it clearly beyond the province of even the Premier of New Zealand (who, by the wav, is the nominee and servant of the people) to interfere between solicitors and their clients. Mr Stout volunteers to us an opinion by him as to the legality of the action which, according to your letter, we have advised, When we wish Mr Stout's opinion on any point of law we shall write and ask him for it, and pay him his fee, but having a recollection of the decision in " Biggins v the Otago Land Board," we are more content, for the present, at all events, with our own. The letter under reply we deem contemptible (saving, of course, any reference to its writer, Mr Eliott) and return it herewith. MORISON AXD BuitXETT.