The Inangahua Times. PUBLISHED TRI-WEEKLY. FRIDAY, JULY 20, 1883.

Inangahua Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1272, 20 July 1883, Page 2

The Inangahua Times. PUBLISHED TRI- WEEKLY. FRIDAY, JULY 20, 1883.

It seems that the resolutions passed at the late railway meeting, and which were forwarded at the express wish of the meeting to Mr Shaw, requesting to have them published in the Welling" ton papers .have not yet been so published, nor has any reason been assigned for the omission. The resolutions were duly wired through by Mr Hankin to the member for the district, who, as we stated on Monday last, had. not even had the courtesy to acknowledge their receipt We do not know whether it is the intention of the movers and seconders of those resolulutions, as well as the meeting itself, to quietly submit to such cavalier treatment at the hands of Mr Shaw, but may fairly presume that they will not The resolutions embodied a distinct and emphatic expression of opinion on the part of the public here in reference td the East and West Coast railway, and that at a very important political juncture, and in taking upon himself to burke its publicity Mr Shaw hae certainly been guilty of a very grave affront, not only to the meeting, but to "the district generally. In the opinion of the meeting it was

desirable that the resolutions should be published in Wellington, so that the Government might thoroughly underk stand public feeling here on the subject 1 of the Royal Commissioners' Report, and also- how far the Reefton League [ was in harmony with the action ot bir ' George Grey and the Canterbury mem--1 bers, and that the meeting was right there cannot be a doubt. The Government were at the time pursued hotly on the subject of the railway, and were - evidently in a mood to make concessions, and it is at such times that the pressure of public opinion is most efficacious. But Mr Shaw, who serves the Government first and his constituents afterwards, has chosen to set the meeting at defiance, and so reduced its resolutions to a nullity. It has been said that - some communication on the subject has > passed between the member for the district and the County Chairman, but leaving out of consideration the dis- | courtesy with which Mr Hankin, the • secretary of the meeting, has been treated by Mr Shaw, the explanation is simply an aggravation of the office. The County Chairman is not the public meeting, and if we remember rightly, was not even present at it, and therefore is not the proper medium for any communications of the kind. Any explanation or excuse which Mr Shaw may have had to make for disregarding -the wish of the public should have" come either to the chairman of the • meeting, or to the secretary, and in x I disregard of this — toputitinthemildest > j form — agreatwant of courtesy has been shown. The explanation of Mr Shaw's conduct which has been suggested is that the members of the County Council did not take part in the public Q meeting, and, consequently, as the repesentative for the district is only t inspired from that source, he declined to act upon the representations made to him. We do not know whether this is correct or not, but it seems about " the only explanation of which the subject is capable. Had Mr Shaw felt that it would be inconsistent on his part as a government supporter to be instrumental in giving the resolutions . publicity, or that doing so would be in j any way distasteful to him, his obvious s duty was to say so at once to the secretary of the meeting, but for him „ to quietly stuff the resolutions in his . pocket, and seek directions from the j County Chairman, is, to say the least of it, a most impudent proceeding. The whole thing affords a good illus- '. tration of the disadvantages which many sometimes result from the represen- . tation of a Government hack having no community of interest with bis constituents.

It is notified that jurors summoned for the District Court on Monday next are not required to attend. Mr 0. E. Watkins, of the firm of Johnston and Watkins, mining surveyors, has been appointed surveyor to the Just-i-n and Imperial Companies . respectively. In our notice of the Masonic ballon Tuesday evening last we omitted to meution that the catering was undertaken by Mr J. Dawflon, who, it is needless to say, provided a spread worthy of the occasion. From a report we publish this morning it will be seen that the attempt made to deprive the public of the Strand Reserve has "fizzled out." The Reserve as it stands is inalienable without special legislation, and therefore is as secure to the use of the publio as is Broadway, or any other proclaimed road in the district. The Nelson Waste Lands Board, or the County Council, have just as much power to grant any portion of it to private persons as they have to grant a slice off the moon. The fact wiJl prove rather discomforting to the verdant expectations of the petitioners. The thanks of the community are due to Mr Trennery and the other gentlemen who have been instrumental in exploding the fallacy under which the petitioners were labouring, and who have thus been released from all anxiety on the subject. The fixity of the Reserve being now ascertained, all that remains is for the Council to follow up the resolution already passed, and insist upon the removal of all occupants. It has been suggested that efforts should be made to get the Reserve vested in a Board of Public Trustees, in order that it may be cleared and made available as a permanent recreation ground. The idea is a good one, and worthy of being acted upon. In the Warden's Court on Wednesday last, the case of Lynch v. Inangahua County Council, was brought to,a close. Plaintiff clamed £150 damages from the Council, for alleged wrongful interference with, and damage done to, certain registered mining privileges at Boatman's. The case was heard before Mr Warden Revell and assessors, the latter consisting of Messrs H. Masters (foreman), R. Dash, A. King and W. Cochrane. The Assessors having visited and inspected the ground, evidence at considerable length was tendered, and counsel having replied, the Warden summed up at considerable length, reviewing the full facts of the case, after which the jury retired, and returning after an absence of half-an-hour , found for the plaintiff, assessing the damages at £40 with full costs, the defendant in addition to restore the plaintiffs race. The Warden in discharging the assessors expressed his concurrence with the verdict. Mr Jones appeared ' for the plaintiff, and Mr lynch, County 1 Solicitor, appeared for the local body. ] The Court then adjourned. The recent fatal explosion of dynamite at Kumara, has brought to light some i curious facts concerning the explosive. It 1 is shown to have been quite a common r practice amongst miners, to place large , parcels of the compound near the fire in order to soften it for use, and this in diggers' huts, at blacksmiths forges, and even

at the kitchen fires of hotels. One instance is reported where a considerable " lump " of dynamite was placed near the fire in a miners hut, and igniting during the temporary absence of the occupant, was actually consumed without doing the slightest harm. We may add to the foregoing the following remarkable circumjstance which happened in Reefton some time ago:— "A parcel of dynamite caps was stored in a company's office in Reefton, and the parcel having been broken in delivery, a few of the caps -ten or a dozen-fellinto thehands of some children and were by them dropped in the street. One of the caps was picked up by a gentleman who, not knowing what it was, pulled out his pen-knife, and with the small blade began scraping out the contents, and actually succeeded by this means in removing every particle of the detonating compound without ill-effect. The strange part of the affair is, that the gentleman was himself smoking a pipe during the operation, and for the greater part of the time was conversing with a friend, who was also smoking a cigar. Later in the day one of the caps was picked up by another gentleman, Mr Homberg, who unaware of its nature, was examining it, when it exploded with a tremendous report, blowing off two of his fingers. Mr Homberg was smoking a cigar at the time. * **' A deputation consisting of Mr J. Trennery, Mr H. G. Harikin, Mr W. J. Potts and others, waited upon Mr A. Greenfield, Commissioner of Crown Lands, yesterday, with reference to the proposed alienation of a portion of the Strand .Reserve, Reefton. It was pointed out that a petition had been signed by certain interested persons living on the south side of Broadway, praying for the extension of sections on thot side of the street by 66 feet, and that the petition had been recommended by the County Council, three members of which body were among those who would be benefitted by the extension. The objections to the petition were urged at some length by Mr Tronnery, on the part of the deputation, and in the course of his reply Mr Greenfield said, that in 1877 the Strand Reserve, on the application of the then local body, had been proclaimed a public road, and duly gazetted as such, and it could not therefore be now dealt with in any way, or alienated without a special Actiof Par liament being passed for the purpose. Should any legislation on the subject be undertaken the matter would, no doubt, be first referred to the Nelson Board, when the objections against the grant would be fully considered. In the meantime, the deputation were assured that the Board would see that the interest of the public was not prejudiced in any way. The deputation having thanked Mr Greenfield for his courtesy in the matter, withdrew. ... " . The resurrection business is hardly ever likely to flourish in Reeftou, and it is a branch of industry we are in no way jealous of. The disposal oi:.tbe^as^.^ Cox v. Cum Yen lets tliecurtaitf down upon an incident which deserves to be soon forgotten, because associated directly or indirectly, as the case may be, with one of the most heartless and degrading offences ever perpetrated in the Colony. Of the circumstances of the dastardly theft of the coffin from the cemetry, and its subsequent recovery, we know nothing beyond what has been elicited in Court ; but that the coffin was stolen there is not a shadow of doubt, and that being the case, the first duty of those who found it was to at once make the information public, but, instead of this, it was imparted to Cox, who, in his over-anxiety to drive a hard bargain with the . Chinese, has been slipped up, and for which he has gained, or indeed deserves, very little sympathy. The only regret there can be in, any well-regulated mind over the whole affair is the fact that the mean and despicable scoundrel or scoundrels who removed the coffin in the first instance have so far eluded the clutches of the law. The Hospital concert last night was well attended, in spite of the unenticing weather, and proved a very enjoyable and successful affair. Our report is unavoidably held over.