SAN FRANCISCO MAIL SERVICE.

Evening Star, Issue 2995, 24 September 1872, Page 2

SAN FRANCISCO MAIL SERVICE.

EXPOSURE OF THE SO-CALLED DEBATE IN CONGRESS. (From the Cross.)

A month or two ago we published an exposure of a so-called report of the debate in Congress upon the Australian Steamship Bill, which the Opposition Press of New Zealand had published, and made the text for innumerable homilies levelled against the San Francisco Mail Service. Various reasons were then adduced to show that the report in question -was a complete fabrication, or at least had taken place upon a totally different question, and long before the subsidy to Webb’s line was brought before Congress. We were inclined at that time to view in the most favorable light the action of our contemporaries in publishing what was altogether untrue, and concocted for the express purpose of deceiving the public and injuring the mail service. We therefore stated our belief that those papers which published the report really believed the debate had taken place, and were themselves imposed upon. It has been subsequently disclosed that the report was forwarded by W. M. Neilson, alias M'Cann, who is bitterly opposed to the service. Since the publication of the exposure we have alluded to, we were repeatedly attacked by a journal which had taken a leading part in circulating the slander against the service ; the truthfulness of the published report of the debate was also re-asserted, and altogether a strong effort was put forth to vindicate the veracity of the account given of the supposed debate on the authority of the Congressional Globe. We have waited patiently, anticipating an exposure of the imposture would come from San Francisco, where the information either to verify or contradict the report was available, We are not disappointed, the following letter in the Alta California of August 18 confirming in every particular the charges made more than a month ago against the report : I will state that the debate, as furnished the Colonial press, in which over a column is given as Senator Chandler’s speech, on the Australian Bill, and other Senators, I pronounce a base deception. No such speech was ever uttered, nor was the Bill ever pending at the time that speech was made. The Congressional Globe is in half a dozen libraries in this city. Let the curious examine for their own satisfaction. This debate is said to have taken place May 7th, 1872. 1 invite them to go back to the Globe of April 18th, 1872, pages, 2,482 to 2,474 inclusive, when the Bill was discussed, and they will not find this infamous libel in that del ate, nor within the pages of the Globe or out of it at any time within this decade. The cunning exhibited to give plausibility to one point I will give : There are two Morrills in the United States Senate—one, the Hon, Lot M. Morrill, of Maine, is the waim friend of the Australian Bill; the Hon. JustmS. Morrill, of Vermont, is the bitttr opponent of .all subsidies. The same steamship which carried this libel to the Colonies took files of California papers. Among the Press despatches was a paragraph that Senator Morrill, of Maine, would propose an amendment to the Appropriation Bill granting this subsidy to the Webb line, Did those interested parties say there were two Morills in the Senate ? By no means ; but to nail the despatch as a lie they quote that Senator Morrill moved to table the bill. Was not that highly honorable {!!!) In conclusion, i will state where these interested parties obtained their'stock-in-trade p incipally. When the Pacific Mail Bill was before the Senate at the session of 1870 aud 1871, a bitter onslaught was made ou the Bill by Senator Chandler, in which he denounced the China steamers as rotten old hulks, only tit to be taken out to sea and

blown up with glycerine. This speech is sent to the colonies as the views uttered when the Australian Bill was before the Senate. For the information of the colonial press I state a simple fact, that the Australian Steamship Bill, unanimously recommended by both Senate and House committees at the last session of Congress, was not defeated nor brought to a final vote either in the Senate or House. Tiie Bill was reported and discussed at length on April 16th, 1872, and has its place now on the ‘ Order of Business’ of the Senate, standing No. 49 on a list of several hundred bills. That it will pass early the corning session is the firm opinion of ‘Truth.’” . The Alta Californian, remarking editorially upon the service, says “ The Australian Colonies seem to be divided, all jealous of each other, each wanting the terminus, ami refusing to support an enterprise so beneficial to them all, New Zealand alone standing forth as its supporter. The press of Australia seems to have lost sight of the enormous impetus given to the wool trade by the opening of this route. Wool that sold a year before at 12c, per lb. rose in value to 25c. per lb ; sheep stations that the owners were almost glad to sell at any price rose in value at least 200 per cent. All this has been caused by the American wool-buyers in the Australian market. There are two men who brought about this state of things, the farseeing statesman, the Hon. Julius of New Zealand, aud W. H. Webb, of New York, the latter gentleman at a loss of over 300,000 dol., and the former at temporary sacrifice of his popularity. We say to our friends in Australia, be just, be patient. You have so far paid nothing j you have had letters carried free; you have no right to grumble. A private gentleman, by indomitable enterprise, is loosing 300,000 dol. a year in trying to establish a first-class line of steamers. We say to our friends in New Zealand, You have paid L 40,000 a year towards developing an enormous trade in the future; you have had an imperfect service, but there are a quarter of a million of you to pay the amount, while there are two American gentlemen trying to help you who have lost L 60.000 in the same time. Be patient; wait a little longer.