MESSRS BROGDEN'S CLAIMS

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 261, 26 August 1882, Page 4

MESSRS BROGDEN'S CLAIMS

[PBHSB ASSOCIATION TELEGRAM.] WELLINGTON, August 25.

The following report of the joint committee on the Brogden claim* was read in the Council to-day. The joint committee, to which was referred the question of the propriety of giving the consent of the Government to a reference of the Brogden claims under the provisions of the Government Contractors Arbitration Act, 1872, have the honor to report as follows:

That the committee find that the contracts affected by this enquiry were nine in number, and that the first six of them, amounting to £560,416, were signed on the 10th of August, six days before the Government Contractors Arbitration Act was introduced into Parliament. That three other contracts, amounting to £249,750, were signed on the 19th of Juno, 1873, eight months after the Government Contractors Arbitration Act becoming law. That on the contracts given to Messrs Brogden and Sons, without competition, and on terms exceptionally favorable to the contractors, allowances amounting to 23J per centum over and above contractors’ prices then ruling in the colony have been made to them. That, before entering into specific engagements with the Colonial Government in the year 1872 the Messrs Brogden insisted upon having provision made for the appointment of a special arbitrator to whom disputes arising out of their [projected contracts might be referred. That the usual custom which makes the engineer the full arbiter in disputes arising out of contract works was in the oase of Messrs Jb'.-ogden, and at their instance, departed from. Thau it was agreed that a Judge of tbs

Supreme’ Court having jurisdiction in the Supreme CUmrt district in which a dispute might arise, tlhonld be made arbitrator, and it became, necessary to pass an Act in order to impose these duties on the Judges, and to give them requisite powers to obtain evidence. That the Government Contractors Arbitration Act, 1872, was accordingly framed with the knowledge of Mr J. Brogden. the pauT representing the firm, and who was at the time id' who conducted the contract noge a .Tj the Government. That no disputes re». in an application for arbitration appear to have occurred during the whole period when “ progress payments ” were being made to Messrs Brogden upon their contracts or agreements. That when upon the completion or termination of their several contracts or agreements attempts to arrive at a final settle ment were made disputes arose. That it was competent for Messrs Brogden at any time when claims on their part were disputed by the Government to have caused the matter in dispute to be referred to arbitration in the manner provided by their contracts, and in terms of the Government Contractors Arbitration Act, 1872. That the Messrs Brogden did not within _the 'proper time, and in the manner preior o6c j U p on any decision, bring the c ] a { ma t 0 arbitration. That whan tb " time within which such disputes would be legally brought to arbitration had been allowed by Messrs Brogden to elapse, the Government expressed their willingness, both before and after the receipt of the letter of date March Bih, 1877, from Messrs Brogden, to allow the contractors to bring their disputed claims to arbitration under the Act. That the Messrs Brogden refused to avail themselves of the opportunities thus afforded to them, and did not until a recent period attempt to bring their disputed claims to arbitration in the manner originally agreed upon and as provided by law. That owing to the aotion of Messrs Brogden themselves several years were allowed to elapse during wtioh no effort was made to bring their claims to arbitration in the manner prescribed. That in consequence of this delay much of the evidence which would be necessary to enable the arbitrator to arrive at a complete knowledge of the circumstances of each disputed claim is in the case of the works themselves effaced, and is in the case of the evidence no longer available. That for the foregoing reasons, and after a careful consideration of all the circumstances and of the documents and evidence appended to this report, the committee cannot recommend that the consent of the Government should now be given to a reference of the Brogden claims under the provisions of the Government Contractors Arbitration Act, 1878. B. O. J. Stevens, Chairman. August 25th, 1882,