THE BROGDEN CONTRACTS.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 55, 10 February 1872, Page 3

THE BROGDEN CONTRACTS.

In another page we republish an article on the Brogden contracts which appeared in the " Evening Post" of Monday. We have adopted this course in order that the public may be able the better to understand the corrections upon matters of fact which we intend, to make. But for the glaring display of ignorance which this article makes manifest we might have been inclined to accuse our contemporary of a wanton disregard of all truth and fair criticism for the purpose of misleading readers who may not have the opportunity of ascertaining the real facts for themselves, and who have a blind faith in the truthfulness of those who have. We may pass over the amusing mock thunder with which the article opens. It is not of much consequence what the writer in the " Post " may think of arrangements which have received the full sanction of the Legislature. High falutin language of the indignant type is so easily indulged in, and is so apt to distract attention from the statements it covers, that it has become the usual resource of writers who, having only a smattering knowledge of the subjects they presume to deal with, seek to hide their ignorance by a display of sounding brass and tinkling cymbals. But our contemporary has unfortunately for once entered upon the dangerous task of giving proof of the correctness of its broad assertions. It has told the public that the Brogden contracts are examples of " flagrant jobbery " and proposes to adduce some " striking facts" in proof of the charge. It professes, in the first place, to possess some peculiar and special knowledge of I the nature of the negotiations between i Mr Vogel and the Messrs Brogden, I and intimates that these negotiations i were at one time in danger of utter collapse because Mr Brogden " became aware that Mr Vogel had deceived him" as to the disposition of the Legislature in respect to the contracts drawn up in London. This is just one of that class of qualified perversions which contain a small modicum of truth to a very large proportion of falsehood. What are the actual facts ? They can be gleaned by anyone who will take the trouble to read the official papers on the subject and may be briefly stated as follows-—Mr Vogel arranged with Messrs Brogden two contracts, those known as Nos 1 and 2, which might be considered either as alternative contracts, or capable both of full acceptance with an undertaking that one or other should be accepted by the colony. It was well understood by Mersrs Brogden that contract No. I was outside the powers of the Railways Act, and contract No. 2 was especially prepared as the one to be fallen back upon should the Legislature not sanction No. 1. Contract No. 2 was substantially within the authority given to the Governor under the Railways Act. All that the Messrs Brogden had to rely upon as an element of probability in the completion of these contracts or either of them was the assurance that the Colonial Treasurer would use his efforts as a member of the Government to give effect to one or other. It was thoroughly understood that contract No 1 w r as ultra vires unless it received the sanction, of Parliament, but that No. 2 contract was binding unless the contracting parties mutually agreed to modifications. Where was the deceit the " Post" talks of? The only " deceit," if such a term can be employed as a synonym for the disappointment to which Mr Brogden was subjected, was the narrowminded view which the Assembly look of No 1 Contract, which was we venture to say a most favorable one for the colony. Tfte petty huckstering spirit displayed throughout the whole of the debates upon the contracts was sufficientto disgust anyone accustomed to seeing matters of that kind conducted in a broad and business-like spirit. Our contemporary goes on to state that after it became apparent that Contract No. 1 was not likely to be accepted "it was necessary to modify it," and that " Mr Brogden made new proposals to Mr Vogel— proposals that have never been published —proposals as to which the Government have been prudently reticent." And then it professes to give as exclusive information an outline of these proposals. Surely the writer must be utterly ignorant of public matters or he would never commit

himself to such absurd assertions as those above quoted. Why, the very proposals which the " Post" now professes to give for the first time as news were read to the House by Mr Vogel from the original memorandum, on the 24th October, and are to be found duly recorded in the pages of Hansard and in the Parliamentary papers. These proposals being in the direction of only a modification of the larger con tract (No. 1), which the House cancelled by a large majority could not of course be accepted. We are not going to debate whether or not the proposals of Mr Brogden referred to by the " Post" were advantageous to the colony. It is sufficient that the Assembly refused to go on with Contract No 1. in any form; and it is as preposterous as it is mendacious to say that the Government acted in any other manner than in conformity with the wishes of the Legislature. As to the mare's nest which the writer in the " Post" professes to have discovered in the shape of some other contract with Messrs Brogden, we have simply to give the most complete and explicit denial to his statements. He wishes it to be believed that the Government has agreed for the construction of railways to the extent of four millions, on a guarantee of 10 per cent, to be paid as commission to Messrs Brogden for merely taking a nominal supervision over the works, the Government finding all the plant, labor, and engineering. There is not one word of truth in this statement, and we are at a loss whether to characterise it as a display of gross ignorance or as a wilful attempt to mislead the public by a gratuitous invention. We will again give the public the actual facts—although they were substantially published by the " Post," as well as ourselves some time ago from memoranda supplied to the press of the colony by the Government. The Legislature authorised the_ Government to enter into an extension of Contract "No 2 for the construction ol railways by Messrs Brogden to the amount of one million, at prices to be agreed upon between them and the Government, but such prices to be within the limit fixed by the Legislature; the payment for any of the railways contracted for to be made in debentures bearing 5| per cent interest, or in cash, at the option of the Government. But should the Government not be able to agree with Messrs Brogden & Sons for the construction of railways under the extended No. 2 Contract the original Contract No. 2 was to be carried out as it stands.

After the termination of the session the Government were naturally anxious that no time should be lost in commencing the lines, but as they were not in a position to submit the lines lor immediate tender—only the parliamentary and not the working surveys being completed—a preliminary arrangement was made under which, until the Government was prepared to submit the various lines for tender, Messrs Brogden should go on with some of the working surveys in order to expedite the work, receiving as compensation lor their outlay ten per cent, profit, Messrs Brogden of course furnishing the Government with duly certified vouchersof the money expended. The object of this arrangement was simply to hasten the period at which the Government would be able under the contract sanctioned by the House to submit the lines to the extent authorised to Messrs Brogden. Ten per cent is not an unreasonable compensation for the outlay of money and employment of professional skill, and this ten percentage only lasts until the Government are able to submit definite lines for tender. Let it be clearly understood that this ten per cent is only paid upon work done by Messrs Brogden. Had not this arrangement been made, great and inconvenient delay would have occurred. The statement that Mr Brogden received £3BOO as commission for merely writing out a list of plant is equally true with the rest of the " mistakes," we will call them, of the " Post." To prevent any unnecessary delay the Government sent home orders for the railway plant indicated by Mr Brogden, whose firm in England have a voice with the Government in accepting the tenders for these supplies. When the goods are shipped Messrs Brogden will be credited with the ten per cent on the cost, but they are bound to

take this plant for the different lines as they contract for them, and the cost incurred by the Government in the purchase will be considered as payment to that extent under the contract. In other words the case stands thus: the Government could not expect Messrs Brogden to give large orders for plant before contracts had actually been entered upon, but to avoid the delay of waiting until Messrs Brogden were in a position to order their plant the Government said, " we will order the plant, and you must take it from us afterwards at cost price." The ten per cent. in this instance is not paid until Messrs Brogden take up this plant. It is absolutely untrue that a cheque for £3BOO, or any similar cheque, has been paid to Mr Brogden on this account. With regard to the one per cent, allowed to the Inspecting Engineer, Mr Hemaus, for examining and certifying to the plant shipped, we have only to say that this officer's duties are of the utmost importance. The officer in question is a railway engineer of considerable reputation, and had been employed by the Provincial Government of Canterbury to inspect their railway materials, and was retained in a similar capacity by the General Government. And it should be stated that whilst the charge for inspection hitherto paid had been two per cent., Mr Vogel succeeded in reducing it by one-half. The careful inspection of plant before shipment is absolutely essential, to guard against ihe many evasions which unscrupulous contractors are in the habit of practising, and to prevent the shipment of inferior or faulty articles. We have one piece of advice to offer to our contemporary, and that is: to make itself certain of its facts, and take some Utile pains to acquaint itself with the actual position of public questions, it is generally so completely off the mark that all its furious declamations and grotesque warnings become merely discharges of blank cartridge, hurting nobody and frightening only old women and children.