SOOTH AFRICAN MEAT CONTRACTS.

Gisborne Times, Volume VII, Issue 326, 29 January 1902, Page 2

SOOTH AFRICAN MEAT CONTRACTS.

OPINIONS OF ENGLISH PAPERS

By Telegraph— Trc-ss Association—Copyright

London, Jan. 27.

The Standard, sympathising with the colonies in regard to meat contracts, urges them to await tho War Office’s statement. It hopes the Government will no‘ be influenced by any small attempts at economy, but it is possible it thinks a mo luiure, and the Argentine is required to pile up the necessary stores.

The Chronicle says Mr Chamberlain is | business-like, and inclined to favor the colonics to the utmost. If the charges ! ate true, there is an unseen reason which prevents securing the total quantity of meat in Australasia. The Daily News, in a leading article headed “ Colonial Tyranny,” says the War Office is bound to procure the best food for the troops in South Africa, in the shortest time, at the smallest cost. In a commercial sense, the colonics have no claim to protection. Mr Strathcona, in a letter to the newspapers, says Canada is anxious to develop inter-imperial trades, and invites inquiries with offers of publication to stimulate business. London, Jan. 28.

Mr Copeland, in a strong protest, cm- i phasising that Australia was able to supply tho quantity of meat required for South Africa, informed tho War Office that if the contract is accepted, enabling the Argentine to supply the order instead ot Australia, such action would contrast unfavorably with the expressed desire of Imperial solidarity, as the action of the colonies during the war justified preference being made in their favor. Mr Copeland also interviewed tho War Office authorities, but, despite two urgent letters as well, he received no information whether any tender had been accepted. Lord Carrington lias announced that ho would ask a question regarding the origin of the statement which alleged that Australasia was unable to furnish adequate supplies, also as to the possibility of cancelling the Argentine contracts. The newspapers announce they would be pleased if the incident were satisfactorily explained. The Morning Post says that if tho Premiers have been hasty owing to incomplete facts, then the War Office was behindhand in obtaining useful information.

A London firm tendered for all beet and mutton required at 6J-d, including cost of distribution, stipulating that the meat should be entirely Australian and New Zealand. It is unknown if New Zealand and Queensland tendered direct. Directors of the army contracts, interviewed admitted that they had decided to accept the tendor of the Bergl Company for the whole supply. Mr Stanley, in the House of Commons, said that it was untrue that preference would be given to Argentine meat. A representative of one contractor who is largely interested in Australia said that they had given written undertaking as far as possible that dead and live meat would be secured in tho colonies.

Mr Reeves, interviewed, said that in overlooking New Zealand, the War Office had overlooked the main basis of supply, neglecting the best quality. They had been purchasing for two years past meat which any of tho butchers said was inferior to New Zealand. He had asked what proportion of the extra price paid represented the cost of distribution. Australasia was able to supply everything without asking the taxpayer to make any sacrifice. Other things being equal, they were entitled to tho preference.

By Telegraph—Press Association. Wanganui, last night.

The following wire was despatched this morning by the Secretary of the Wanganui Chamber of Commerce The Hon. the Premier, Wellington,—Your wire received in reference to the South African meat contracts. This Chamber heartily supports you in the action you have taken, aud trusts you will be successful in inducing the War Office to treat New Zealand in a fair spirit, which is due to us as members of the Empire.— .1. S. Stevenson, Secretary.”