ACCLIMATISATION SOCIETY.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 387, 8 September 1875, Page 2

ACCLIMATISATION SOCIETY.

An adjourned meeting of the Council of the Canterbury Acclimatisation Society was held yesterday afternoon at three o’clock at the Public Library. Present—Messrs A. Duncan, H. B, Johnstoue, H, D, Thomas, T t Wallace, B. C. Farr (hon sec), Dr Campbell, H, J. Tancred, J. A. Bird, Lieut-Colonel Packe, Hon J. T. Peacock, W. D. Wood (hon treasurer), Marshman. On the motion of Dr Campbell, Mr H, B, Johnstone was voted to the chair. A letter was read from the Key F. A, Hare, of Riccarton, stating that he was anxious to become a member of the society. The hon secretary said he had replied, sending a copy of the last report and the rules. The hon secretary said the meeting had been adjourned for the purpose of considering certain portions of the curator’s report, relative to the trout ova, which had already been published. Mr Duncan said he had moved the ad journment of the consideration of the report seeing there was a misunderstanding betweei the garden committee and the curator. Ai Dr Campbell had tabled a definite motior respecting the curator, he would move thal Dr Campbell’s motion be considered first. Lieut.-Colonel Packe seconded the mo tion. Hon J. T. Peacock thought that the repot should be considered first. Mr Bird could see no reason why th report should not be adopted. He sat nothing objectionable in it. The motion was then put and negatived.

Dr Campbell said that by a minute of the Council it would be found that the garden committee was appointed to supervise the hatching of the ova this year, and the garden committee took steps ,to carry out tl at resolution. Mr Wallace and himself, as members of that committee, met frequently, and both took great interest in the matter, and tried to carry out the wishes of the Council, He might state that they never thought that 17,500 eggs were put into the boxes, being obtained from trout caught in the ponds, as well as about 4000 more eggs. Now the largest trout did not give more than IUUU eggs, the majority not more than from 200 to 250. The number of fish stripped did not exceed twenty-eight or twenty-nine, and many were of the first year’s spawning, consequently the committee arrived at the conclusion that there could not have been more than 7000 eggs put into the boxes. He also objected to the statements made by the curator to the effect that all the eggs which had turned out prolific were from eggs placed by himself in the boxes, whilst the failures were in eggs placed by him (Dr Campbell) and Mr Wallace. The curator also, when the eggs began to produce, marked them as being those collected by himself, although it was not until they became prolific that he had claimed them as his own. He (Dr Campbell) also denied that 9970 bad eggs had been removed, as stated by the curator. The garden committee had endeavoured to follow nature s way of hatching, and not as stated by the curator and his friends and some of the newspapers, that they were influenced solely by what they read in books, for he (Dr Campbell) had only read a paper which he received from home, and which he gave to the curator. The eggs taken from Ham and the Waikuku were healthy, and should have life in them. He objected to the report, on the ground that it was not correct. The Council might do as they liked with it, but they must either discredit the garden committee or the curator; the garden committee had stated what were facts, but the curator had stated what were not facts.

At the request of Mr Thomas, the hon sec read the minute authorising the garden committee to supervise the arrangements for hatching the ova. The curator said that he was down South when that minute was passed.

Dr Campbell said that the curator was perfectly aware of the minute. The curator inquired from Dr Campbell what number of fish were stripped ? Dr Campbell said forty-nine fish had been taken from the ponds, fourteen of which were females. There were a few others, and he held that out of that number of fish 17,500 could not be obtained. He would m o V e—“ That the objectionable parts of the curator’s report be expunged.” Mr Wallace seconded the motion.

Hon J. T. Peacock said as the garden committee did not agree with the report, and after hearing Dr Campbell’s explanation, he (Mr Peacock) did not see any good could arise by keeping the report on the minutes. The hon secretary read a resolution of the Council to the effect that all reports from the curator should come through the garden committee.

in reply to Dr Campbell, the curator said that he was not responsible for a local in the papers to the effect that 12,000 eggs had been obtained by stripping the fish, and that 5000 had died through the ill success of a new experiment. Mr Wallace—Not a single fish has been stripped by any person other than the curator.

Mr Thomas said it might be that the report of the curator was to be sent in through the garden committee, which was very different from the committee revising it.

The hon secretary pointed out that the reason why the garden committee was requested to revise the curator’s reports was because they contained so much offensive matter ; one, indeed, had to be returned to him three times,

The motion for striking out the objectionable clauses was agreed to. Before Dr Campbell’s motion was called on for the dismissal of the curator, Mr Farr suggested that the curator should retire, as he (Mr Farr) had on one occasion to do.

The curator said he would like to remain, but he did not care much whether he remained in the room or hot. He handed a paper to the chairman to be read.

The chairman said that the paper was headed “ Replies to accusations made by Dr Campbell against A. M, Johnson.” As no accusations had been made, the paper had better not be read until a future period.

Dr Campbell moved—“ That on the recommendation of the garden committee, the services of the curator be dispensed with.” He said he had a very unpleasant task to perform, but he would leave it to the council to decide after what they had heard from the garden committee whether the council would be justified in retaining the curator’s services or not. He would point out that for a long time past bad been serious differences between the curator and the various garden committees. What had been the results of acclimatisation in Canterbury ? Take fish, for instance, out of several thousand fish said to be hatched out, only about 1000 had been available for sale, the rest having been retained as stock fish, which nobody ever saw. The curator had been insubordinate ; he had sent ova to America unknown to the committee, but he said he had only sent twenty-five or thirty eggs, but he (Dr Campbell) would ask whether it was likely that the curator only sent twenty-five or thirty eggs when he knew there was so great a mortality amongst the ova. The curator ought to have informed the committee that he was going to send eggs to America. Then, too, Mr Johnson positively refused to go to Waikuku, where large quantities of ova could be obtained, because as he said he was afraid the garden committee would interfere with the gardens whilst he was away. He (Dr Campbell) would assert that the curator was either incompetent or he had wilfully neglected his duty. He contended that the curator had endeavored to throw discredit on the garden committee, and he narrated the steps which had been taken in the salmon experiment, mentioning that the curator had mixed brown trout with the young salmon, whether by design or unwittingly he (Dr Campbell) would not say. He believed that if the curator were dismissed the society would be placed upon a firm basis. The truth was, that the curator had been most insubordinate, neglecting and disobeying the orders of the committee, and he (Dr Campbell) feared that he (the curator) had au

animus against the committee. He might mention that he knew that trout had been taken out of the salmon ponds, which he submitted was a proof of the curator’s incompetency, as showing that he had allowed the fish to mix. He would ask what had they to show for all the money that had been spent ? Scarcely anything in the gardens but a few mongrel pheasants and the grounds a waste, except the curator’s own garden, which had been beautifully kept. He (Dr Campbell) had, in bringing this matter forward, simply done his duty ; personally he did not care whether the curator was dismissed or not, but he believed if he were dismissed the cause of acclimatisation would receive a great impetus, and “be placed on a firm basis. Mr Wallace seconded the motion.

Hon J, T. Peacock suggested that the meeting should adjourn for three or four days, and then come to a decision. At the request of Mr Tancred, the paper sent in by the curator was read by the chairman.

Hon J. T. Peacock suggested that the consideration of the matter be adjourned. Mr Duncan said that he thought it would be better to adjourn. He asked whether the document from the curator should not be published, seeing Dr Campbell’s remarks had been taken by the reporters, who probably had not taken the written document.

After some consideration it was decided that the curator’s statement should not be handed to the reporters, it being stated that as the matter could not be disposed of at that meeting it would be better not to publish any of the proceedings. The hon J. T. Peacock moved that the meeting adjourn to Friday, at 3 p.m., which was agreed to, and the meeting adjourned.