The Evening Star THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 1872.

Evening Star, Issue 2842, 28 March 1872, Page 2

The Evening Star THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 1872.

At last the Waste Laud .Board has dene what should have been done when first the proposition was made : it has settled the question of the sale of land to Mr J. Clarke. When Mr Clarke’s agent offered tonus as a compromise, which that Board had no right to expect in the face of those originally agreed to, ho shewed a desire to avoid litigation that should have been met by a corresponding conciliatory spirit by the Board. He was not the dissentient: from the very first his conduct was fair, upright, and honorable. He evinced no desire to take any unfair advantage : the offer made on his behalf was specific, and included the land which the Board, after some pressure, claimed the right to throw out j he consented to a reserve for a school, and in every way shewed a disposition to meet the Board on terms less advantageous to himself than were originally offered to him. These facts are undeniable and had the Waste Land Board been free from the political element, the difficulty would never have arisen. The offer that was accepted yesterday was made on the 15th January, on which day £35,000 might in need have been in the Treasury. We believe we are justified in stating that for want of this money several contractors have had to wait for payment ; so that although the Provincial Government may not have actually to pay interest on that sum, what is worse the loss of interest has very unjustly fallen upon individuals who might have turned the money to much better account had they had it in possession when due. This really is a far greater loss to the Province than if the Government had bor rowed the money and paid them ; and, moreover, as uncertainty of receiving payment when due renders Government contracts in some degree speculative, contractors must add something to their tenders to cover the additional risk. On these grounds we may fairly estimate the loss at least at the rate of 10 per cent, so that directly or indirectly, through not agreeing to the terms accepted yesterday, it is about £7OO. Nor does this cover the whole loss. In addition to this, the Government has incurred expenses for legal advice, and put Mr Clarke to a good deal of useless trouble and cost in drawing up cases and in professional correspondence and consultations. Putting party feeling altogether aside, and impartially weighing all the facts of the case, as a business transaction, it has been conducted by the Waste Land Board in a manner calculated to bring discredit upon the character of the Province. We have nothing to do with the right or wrong of the oiiginal bargain: it was made, and ought to have been abided by ; and, since honor and fair dealing have been outraged by our Waste Land Board, it becomes a matter of duty to trace the cause, so that a remedy may be intelligently applied. The obvious method of doing this is to consider the constitution of the Board, and from the known opinions of its members to infer their motives. Of the Board the Chief Commissioner is supposed to have no political motives ; at aiiy rate, he should have none, neither should Mr Hughes, who is not now a member of the Council. Of the rest, Messrs Keid, Cutten, and Bathgate, are all members not only of the Council, but of the Executive, and Mr Duncan is a member of the Council. It is therefore worth while to consider the part which each has played in this very expensive farce ; and we think each Executive member has made a great mistake. Mr Cutten, through his colleagues being absent, was the leading actor. He it was who concluded the bargain. Since that time, however, he has disappeared from the scene. He has allowed the whole tiling to take its course. We have no doubt ho could give very good reasons for what he did, and, in our opinion, was bound to sustain the contract he entered into, but he seems to have taken to sulking, and to have acted something like a spoilt child found fault with by his playmates, who may be supposed to have said, “ I played my best, it does “ not please you, sol won't play any “ more.” Then there is Mr Bathgate, How can he excuse his silence 1 In Wellington he would offer no opinion as the matter might come before him as legal adviser to the Executive. But, as a member of the Waste Land Board, he appeared in a different personality. He was required to assist in its decisions or he was useless. The question of right and wrong is very different

from that of law. He must have had an opinion j and either he had not the courage to express it or some unrevealed motive for his silence was behind. We must say that although we do not coincide with Mr Reid we infinitely prefer the straight forward stubbornness in wrong which he displayed to a course of action, leaving an expression of opinion open to the accident of a future course of events. Mr Reid’s opinions on the land question are well known, but they had no right to influence his conduct in his position as a member of the Board. His only duty was to consider what the terms were that had , been agreed upon, and to insist upon their being observed. Instead of this his whole effort was how to get rid of that portion of it that boro politically upon the doings of the Executive. The only consistent member of the Council was Mr Duncan, and to him and Mr Hughes are mainly owing the acceptance of the favorable compromise ottered by Mr Clarke. Mr Reid may have been politically consistent, but in this affair, as in the whole of his political career, he has sacrificed the interests of the Province to his political theories. It is plain, however, from a consideration of the course taken by the political members of the Board, that, in future, they should have no seat there. It would be a great advantage to the Province that the Board should, in future, be non-political.