CAMBRIDGE FARMERS' CLUB.

Waikato Times, Volume X, Issue 932, 13 June 1878, Page 2

CAMBRIDGE FARMERS' CLUB.

A meeting of the Club was held m the Club house on Monday last. Present : — Messrs E. Maclean (President m the Chair), E. B. Walker, R. H. D. Fergusson, James Runciman, John Runciman, Henry Reynolds, Richard Reynolds, George E. Clarke, Captain Walmsley, John Hunt, Reuben Parr, W. L. Martyn, Francis Hicks, F. J. Brooks, R. R. Hunt, Henry Buttle. The minutes of the lasfc meeting were read and confirmed, also those of the special private meeting held on May 21st. A considerable amount of cowespondence was also read. Mr Joseph Banks was admitted a member of the Club. Mr Buttle then proposed the motion of which he had given notice last meeting, that the Annual Agricultural Show of 1878 be held m Hamilton. Mr Clark seconded. It was agreed to let this motion stand over till the prize list, prepared by the Cattle Show Committee was submitted for the approval of < the members, at a later period of the meeting. The special meeting of May 21st. had beeu called m conspquence of a letter having been received by a member of the Club, from another member m Auckland, stating that the writer had heard that the Waikato Steam Navigation Company were endeavoring to arrange with the railway authorities for a monopoly of the river traffic. The Secretary was therefore instructed to write to the railway manager Mr A. Y. Macdonald. The following letter was accordingly sent. Cambridge, May 11th, 1878. Sir, — I am requested by the Committee of the Cambridge Farmers' Club to write to you asking if there is any truth m the report which Aye have heard — viz., that the Waikiito Steam Navigation Company were negotiating with the Government for the purpose of obtaining from them a monopoly of the carrying trade between Auckland and the various stations on the Waikato. Any information which you may be able to furnish us with we shall be obliged for. — I have the honor to be, sir, yours faithfully, Hkney Buttle, Secretary C.F.C. To A. V. Macdonald, Esq., Auckland. '

Public Work's Office (Constructed Railways), Auckland, May 1 4th, 1878. $ir,— ln reply to your letter oi the 11th in-^i; asking whether Government havo granted a monoply to tho Waikuto Steam Navigatian Company, I beg to state that no intimation has been given to me of any such action, although, from what I have observed, I have not the .lighted doubt the Waikato Steam Navigation. Company are trying hard for it. I sincerely hope, both m the interests of the railway and the public generally, that concessions will not be made to any company othor than those mado to the public generaUy. . I understand that Dean, who was about starting, the Alert on tho river from Newcastle to Cambridge has made some arragement with W.S.N. Co. Aa tho Commissioner for Railways hi this island is expected here shortly, I Bhould be obliged if the Cambridge Farmers' Club would give me their views on this question and the Waikato traffic generally, m order that I may lay the case before him at once on arrival, it being one of the most important to be dealt with on this section. — I remain your obedient servant, A. V. Macdonald. To H. Buttle, Esq., Secretary, Cambridge Farmers' Club. The meeting therefore of May 21, was to discuss these letters, and Major Wilson and the Secretary were appointed to write to the Minister of* Public Works, stating the great inconvenience to which the settlers of Cambridge were placed m consequence of the very unsatisfactory arrangements now existing for the conveyance of goods to and from Auckland, and urging the necessity of a branch line being- constructed as soon as possible from Hamilton to Cambridge. Mao, to write to Mr It. li. Hunt, manager of the Waikato Steam Navigation Company, and request his attendance at the next meeting of the Club, to say whether the report was true or not, and answer otber questions relating to the river traffic. Mr Hunt was accordingly m attendance, and emphatically denied that the Company were endeavouring to get a manoply of the carrying traffic on the river, they were merely trying to get through traffic at truck rates as they had before the line was opened to Hamilton. The arrangements now were very unsatisfactory, as m the case cf loss or damage j if a claim was made against tho Company they Would lay the blame on the Railway, and the railway authorities would lay the blame on them. There was a case m point, Mr Clark had two bundles of bap;s he only received one, he applied to the Company and the Company said they had not received them, ana referred him to the Railway. Then Mr Clark had to write down about them. Again, according to the cast-iron rates of the railway, ten, twenty, or thirty tons were charged for at the same rates as one ton or half a ton. If they were recognised as through carriers they could reduce the freight and make liberal allowances for large consignments. Tnis would also be found more satisfactory for the Railway. There were no other charge before him to rebut at present. The Chairman said ihe Steam Company seemed at the mercy of the railway, there was no accomodation either at Hamilton, or Newcastle, no building whatever. But he would like to ask why a certain class of merchandise was very low rated, and other gooda such as fencing wire were charged at higher rates. The shopkeepers m the township got up their goods much cheaper than the settlers. He then called on . other gentleman to make observations, after which Mr Hunt would reply. Mr Hicks said that they could hot get their business done to their satisfaction, they had agitated about this matter before, and there was still no convenience for taking stock to Aucklaud. The steamers were not regular, and could not be depended upon, and the long and short of it was that if he had sheep to send to Auckland, he had to drive them to Hamilton, and if they were fat sheep this would tako three broken days and of course a loss. The best thing to do would be to ge m for the railway to Cambridge. The Company may try to be as punctual as they can, but a railway would be bound to be punctual. Seeing that our credit was so good at home, the true thing for them to do wouid be to go m for the railway. Mr Fergusson quite agreed with Mr Hicks. Bat he thought it would be better for the settlers if there was another steamer on the river, ho spoke for himself only. On the 20th of last month a tent which had been sont from Auckland arrived m ribbons, it having been eaten by r&}s. he sent it back immediately to the Company requesting them to , send for a new one, and it had not yet beeu sent. He went to the agent, and asked him about it ; he said he had heard nothing about it, these things could not be done m a day. This he thought a great piece of impertinence. He thought it would j be better if there was some competition. Would it not be better for the Company to carry goods from Newcastle to Cambridge, and not try to run the railway off the line from Mercer to Newcastle. Mr Clark had oue question to ask Mr Hunt if he expressed such regret at what he calls the cast iron freights of the railway, why did the Company follow us bad an example. When tbe Lillie was running ho could get goods up for 50s per ton now he was charged 525. By table A. goods could be sot up at 52s per ton, 32s and at 40s by table B. perhaps .here -was another table C. or D. at which ot.her goods could be got up ut a still lower rate, it was no? at all

satisfactory, but p.rhaps Mr Hunt could explain it. j No other gentlemen having any- ' thing to bring forwurd the Chairman called upon Mr Hunt to reply. Mr R. R. Hunt said, he did nofc know that any amount of opposition would prevent rats from eating a tent m a store. He thought that the mattertftf the tent was not a very great one to lay before the Club. He had certainly seen the tent the rats m the store at Mercer had got at. He had ordered ooe of his men to get some calico and 012 nd it, but it was not done as soon as he intended. Men cannot be got to be perfect ; but he thought it was now done, and would be up by the nexfc steamer. With regard to carrying goods to Newcastle instead of Mercer : Carrying goods from Mercer they could make great concession, as they got; 30s per ton, while from Newcastle they only got 10s. They could, of course, make greater concessions out of tlie larger amounts. Tho railway authorities were trying to run them off the river from Mercer to Newcastle, and fchey had even ordered them to take down their buildings ab Mercer. He had seen M r Sheehan about the Railway, and he acknowledged that they seemed to be hard upon the Company, but he belonged to a different department, but, nevertheless, suggested that some of the leading merchants of Auckland shonld be selected to enquire into the ca.e, and more satisfactory ar. rangements might be made. The Company were now getting a uew boat built, 120 feet m length and 20 feet m breadth, and they were also finding out the cost of, and were likely to order a steel steamer from England. With regard to the 52s a ton freigHfc fchey were obliged to alter their table m accordance with thoso of the railway, and the reason why storkeepers got up certain goods cheaper m proportion than foncing wire <sbc. drapery goods were now charged by weight, if the difference between the freight of a case of drapery by weight and by measurement were examinedit would be seen that the charge of 52s by weight was less than the charge of 40s by measurment. With regard to wharf aecomodation at Cambridge, they did not feel inclined to do anything as the Cambridge Town Board had imposed upon tbem a tax of £1 a week, and a new board might come m and impose other taxes. They did not think that the Bqard liad legally the power to enforce this tax, but they paid it, thinking that some improvement would be done fco the landing, but nothing had been done. The settlers should try and get ifc put to lease with the understanding that improvements were to ! be effected upon it. If the settlers | want to have a voice m the management of the Company, why do they j not take shares m ib ? The Company would increase their capital, ! and then the shareholders would have a right; to vote at the annual meeting for the appointment of directors. They should also go m for river convolution. When Sir George Grey was m Waikato he had reported to him that something like £250 had been promised towards" improving the navigation of the river, and Sir George had promised pound for pound, but had asked him to put his ideas m writing. He thought of writiug to the County Council and getting them to take ifc up. The River might b 9 made navigable beyond Cambridge, and the banks ought to be planted with willows. A cordial vote of thanks was passed to Mr Hunt for his attendance, and for the satisfactory manner m which he had answered the questions put to him. This closed the question of the Waikato carrying traffic. The nexfc question before the Club was the AWLEGED WAIKATO SCAB CASE. Mr Fergusson moved that Rule 6 be suspended to enable him to bring forward a resolution, re the recent Scab Case. Mr Clarke seconded the motion, and it was carried unanimously. Mr Jolly was present at the request of the Committee of the Club. Mr Fergusson then said, Mr President and Gentlemen, I feel that I have undertaken a most invidious task hi attending with a view to the investigation of the late case of alleged scab hi Waikato, but I shall feel myself perfectly recompensed if such means are taken as will put the matter on a satisfactoiy footing. It appears, by public print, that on the 18th of last May Mr Thomas Jolly was charged with permitting sheep infected with scab to be driven on the high road. The following is Mr Jolly's statement of the case : — I have been sending a truck load of sheep to Auckland weekly for some time. The eighth truck load of sixty-six sheep, sent down April 30lh, were condemned by Mr Lewis for scab. On reoeiving a telegram from Hunter to that effect I immediately wrote to Mr Runciman to examine remainder of flock. I went to Newmarket the following moming. # At Newmarket I saw the sheep heino- carted away, sold to a Mr Clayton. 3!he men there did not know anything about it, but told me Mr Hunter was ah Papakura. I went to Papakura, and saw Mr Hunter. He told me Mr Lewis hai condemned the sheep I for scab, and thafc Mr Short, of Te Awamutu, was there, -\vho told him it was not scab, but a bitcfrom a dog, that my sheep had been often, worried. Mr Lewis ordered Mr Short tc mind his own business. Mr Hunter diJ not know scab himself, but the sheejv appeared to be much torn. Q n m y return journey I met ' Lewis at v Pokeno. He returned with me to Mercer, i*xd on the way he told me that he had beoa up to Hamilton, but, not finding me at how., had returned without examining t_e sheep on the farm. Ho asked me when r dipped last and other questions. I as.ked him if he had examined the condemned sheep with glass xirlwil told by Short of the worrying. He said ihovo wfts }>o occasion;" it was too palpable. It was his opinion that the sheep had been improperly dipped. I told him I had sent for Runciman. He said I would have to dip on my return, and, if Runciman g»av3

me a xslean certificate, he world come up • and show scab. Mr Ruu.iman came the ' second day after my roturn, and, aftor a j prolonged examination, passed thorn as I clean and freo from scab. I wrote to Mr Lewis asking him to come up ; he sent a summons instead. In the meantime, Mr Runciman telegraphed instructions to the Slaughterhouse Inspector to send the skin- up for examination. The answer was to the effect that the akin could not be found. Mr Runciman and myself went to Newmarket and saw Mr Clayton ; saw, also, the skin m Mr Clayton's stable (sent there by Mr Lewis to Mr Clayton on account of a pending prosecution against Mr Clayton for selling scabby mutton). Subsequently, Mr Blunter and myself took the skin to Mr Roskruge and Mr Joseph May, who both gave their opinion it was not scab. After the case for the prosecution was heard, the Court adjourned. Mr Hesketh then proposed that we should look at the skin. The Bench, prosecution, and defence were all there. Mr Lewis, after identif ying different portions, searched for the large scab as big as the palm of his head, which ho had previously testified to. On not discovering the scab, he Mr Clayton of changing the skin. When the Court again met it was proved, by evidence, it was the identical skin marked by Mr Lewis, picked out by himself, and sent to Mr Clayton. Mr Lewis admitted it. Then my solicitor offered the skin itself as evidence. Mr Lewis refused to examine it, and the Bench refused to admit it as evidence. Mr Short, my only witness who saw the sheep, was examined. Roskruge, Joseph May, and Runciman were the only ones who had examined the skin with a microscope, and could find nothing. The Court then adjourned, and on meeting again the verdict was the lowest fine, £i> and costs, amounting to £14 19s 6d ; >this and witnesses' penses and solicitors' feesnds amounted to £50. My sheep sold for, half value. The mischief does not end here, for, according to the ruling of Mr Barstow, my sheep at home ars infected, and at the same time our Inspector . says they are not. Mr Fergusson asked Mr Jolly the folllowing questions, and received the answers accordingly : — 1. Q. Have you at any time since you came to Waikato had scab or any sign of scab m your flock, or have any of your neighbors P A. -I have never had scab m my fiock to my knowledge, neither have any of my neighbors. 2. Q. — Have you at any time given leave to any person to put sheep m any of your paddocks or yards which have come from a scabby run, or have before been or afterwards become scabby ? A. — I have never taken m any scabby sheep for any one. 3. Q,. — Were the sheep on your farm bred by yourself or bought; if bought, were they from any infected district ? A. — The ewes on my farm were purchased m Auckland three years and two years since The lambs were their produce with, the exception of 25 bought at Hammond's sale some, two months' since. Mr Fergusson then went on to say: Mr Jolly was fined, but tKe fine was a trifle compared to the loss. he and whoever amongst them owned sheep'had sustained. It seemed that on the 4th ultimo Mr Jolly's flock was inspected by the Inspector for the Waikato, who pronounced them free from disease. They have since the trial been inspected by the said Inspector, a veterinary surgeon, and Mr Coates, who he was informed had great experience m the disease. The pecuniary loss was not Mr Jolly's alone ; it hits the whole district very hard indeed, and especially those who breed good sheep. For instance, say any breeder of rams sends a draft of them for sale, who on earth can tell that they will not travel to Auckland m the identical truck that contained Mr Jolly's sheep, and from his personal experience he could tell them that the insect would live six months or more m an inanimate object. The fact of the matter is that the district is scabby by the deoisicn of those luminaries who occupied the Auckland Bench ou the 18th of May. The whole matter lies m a nutsheU— Either Mr Jolly's sh3ep are scabby or they are not. If they are, the sooner a change of inspectors for Waikato is made the better. If they are not scabby, Mr Lewis' services should be dispensed with, for indeed we are m a pitiable state when a man holding the position of Inspector can, either from incompetency, spite, or any other reason, declare that clean sheep, with the certificate of only fourteen days, are scabby, and so depreciate their price by fifty per cent, as well as cast a slur on the rest of the owners' flock, and of his neighbours. Ha would, propose that Messrs P. Leslie, E. B. Walker, and the mover shall examine Mr Jolly's sheep, and if they feel confident that no scab exists m them, they, on behalf of this Club, shall petition the Colonial Secretary to investigate the case thoroughly, with a view to the dismissal of the Auckland Inspector, or if they find scab with a view to the dismissal of the Waikato Inspector. Some arrangement should also be made whereby the Waikato Inspector shall be responsible for any case of scab within fourteen days from the date he has given a clean certificate. Mr John Runciman (the Waikato Inspector) seconded the motion. On the motion of the Chairman, the Club resolved itself into Committee to discuss the question. Mr James Runoiman said it was a very serious charge. He would like to know if any gentlemen present could inform him as to whether any action had been taken with regard to having the yards disinfected m which the alleged scabby sheep had been penned ? It would be a dangerous thing if any gentlemen was buying sheep from the same yards. He might buy sheep there, and if the yards had not been disinfected, he would certainly bring them by rail to Hamilton, but if he drove them on to Tamahere then every telegraph post might communicate the disease to any other flock which might be passing. Mr Clark said the matter was too serious to he passed over without grave consideration. Be had never seen scab m his life, and hoped he never should. It seemed that Mr Lewis stated that the scabby part was an old wound improperly dressed. If so there must have been disease before. There was a class of people who wanted to run down the Waikato; they might just as well try to stop the sun from shining. The Waikato was a fine agricultural district, and it could not be depreciated by anyone ; but they were not going to allow the stigma of scab to bo laid on the district. The matter ought to have full investigation. Mr Hicks would like to ask if the sheep was branded with Mr Jolly's brand, or whether it could have got into the flock from somewhere else ? He thought the Magistrates on the bench were most to blame. Before they passed evidence on the matter a commission ought to have been appointed to further mv estigate the case. It seemed to him that according to the account m the newspaper the weight of evidence was on tho sido of Mr Jolly, thafc there was no scab. He never Xeard of a decision being given against tffc> evidence, not m these days at any rat\ QajjL Wfthnsley said that Mr Lewis was a\ealqus officer, and had difficulties to contend with. He thought he shoul d havo been., present to refute any false j stat oments Wde, | Mr jolly siid that unfortunately he

could not swear to the identity of the sheep. He sont down a certain number, and Messrs Hunter and Nolan received that number. It was very improbable that a sheep from another flock could have got m, and one of his own been lost. He was not m town at the time, and only saw the skin aftor the sheep had been killed. * Mr Maclean said that the fine m which Mr Jolly was mulcted was a trifle as compared with what he and other breeders had suffered m reputation. By condemning Mr Jolly's sheep, the whole district was condemned likewise. Mr Lewis had no doubt great difficulties to contend with. Some tune ago, some sheep were being sold m a private yard. Tkey were valuable sheep, aud belonged to Mr Hurst. was there., and said privately, "What a pity I can't open, my mouth, as this is a private yard ! Last week, scabby sheep were m that yard." Mr James Runciman had heard a great deal about the Inspector not being able to interefere m a private yard. The yards, of course, were Mr Buckland's. It was no use to minca matters. It was well known, but he could not understand it at all. If he had scabby sheep on his farm, he had no doubt that 'the Inspector would have a right to inspect them, and he could not order him off the place. Even if he put his sheep m his bedroom, the Inspector might go there after them. He thought there must be some flaw m the Act if that was the case, and the Inspector couldnot go into Mr Buckland's yards. The Sheep Act was produced nd clause 20 read,— "lt shall be lafaiui for the Inspector of Sheep for any sheep district and for any person whom the Superintendent may m his behalf from time to time by writing appoint to enter at all reasonable times into and upon all lands and places m his district for the purpose of acertaining whether the sheep therein are infected with such disease as aforesaid, and any person who shall obstruct such inspector or deputy m discharge of such duty shall forfeit and pay for every such offence any sum not exceeding £50 and not less than £5." Mr James Runciman thought private yards ought to be visited by the Inspector from the reading of the Act, as well as any settlers farm. Mr Hicks said he thought the Magistrates were more to blame than the Inspector. Mr Hunt thought that the Club ought to pass a resolution on £ c conductof the Magistrates (Mr R. C. Barstow and Mr Benjamin Maclean) , who seemed to have condemned tho whole district on very slight evidence, and when the evidence was. against the decision. Mr Maclean hoped the Club would do no such thing, it had no right to take action on the report of the evidence m the newspaper. They might send to the court for a copy of the evidence. Mr Jolly said the only reason why he felt aggrieved at ;the Magistrate was that they would not allow the skin to be taken m as evidence. Mr Fergusson's motion was then put and carried, and it; was decided to write to the court for the evidence of the trial 5 alsa to ask Mr Lewis to attend at a special meeting of the Club to be called when the evidence had been received and the commissioners appointed by tho Club had examined Mr Jolly's sheey. This closed tbe sheep case. [The remainder of the report of this meeting is hold over to our next.]