Ferdinand von Mueller

Melbourne, 29th March 1883

A. Le Souef Esq

The difficulty which you point out, dear Mr. Le Souef, seems easily solved, if you would kindly write an official letter to Mr. Pigdon, who could lay it before the City Council. Such a letter could be signed, if you preferred it, by the chairman of the last meeting, Dr. Thos. Black. I did not take any active interest in the matter nor was I aware that you had written already to Mr. Pigdon. A strictly official letter from the assembled Trustees may have additional weight, as the City Council may look on Mr. Pigdon as a representative of theirs among the Trustees. As he sought the protection of the Trustees against those who charged him with dereliction of duty as a member of the Trust, the board could not well refuse to arm that gentleman with an official note, holding him free of any shortcomings.

1

'The question whether or not Cr. Pigdon, as one of the trustees of the Royal Park had consented to the dedication of parts of the Royal Park [as roads] was 'warmly discussed' at a meeting of the Melbourne City Council on 9 February 1883 (Herald (Melbourne), 9 February 1883, evening edition, p. 3). Argus, 10 February 1883, p. 13, has a more detailed report.

I myself do not remember that the matter of the new roads was ever brought before the Trustees, but as our meetings are at long intervals and I was not present at the one before the last, this concern may have been under the cognizance of the subcommittee entrusted with watching the interests of the Park in regard to the new railroad.