SAN FRANCISCO MAIL SERVICE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 4133, 19 June 1874, Page 3

SAN FRANCISCO MAIL SERVICE.

DEBATE IN THE ASSEMBLY OF NEW * SOUTH WALES. On the 28th ultimo Mr. Parkes submitted to the Legislative Assembly of New South Wales the following motion : —“ That this House approves of the contracts made by this Government and the Government of New Zealand (copies of which were laid upon the table on the 28th of January) for Ocean Mail Services between this Colony and San Francisco, and between New Zealand and the same port.” In the course of the debate some singular personalities were indulged in, but ultimately.the motion was carried by 25 to 5. The Sydney Hominy Herald summarises the discussion as follows :

Mr. Parkes moved that the House approved of the contracts for the mail service between this Colony and San Francisco, and between the latter place and New Zealand. Ho gave a history of all the circumstances leading up to the contracts. On the 2nd August, 1872, the House authorised the Government to enter into engagements, subject to the ratification of Parliament, for a fortyeight days’ service between Sydney and London, via San Francisco ; and on the Sfh of the same month, notice was issued by the Government that tenders would be received for the service. The tenders sent in were from Mr. H. H. Hall, the A. S. N. Co., Messrs. Gladstone, Robertson, and Co., and General Burnside. The subsidies demanded were-—by Mr. Hall, £-11,000 ; by the A. S. N. Co., £70,000 ; by General Burnside, £-10,000 per annum ; aud by Gladstone, Robertson, and Co., £IOOO per voyage. General Burnside stated his willingness to increase the speed of his steamers to twelve knots. No tender was then accepted. On the 23rd April, 1873, the House again authorised the Government to enter into arrangements for a four-weekly service of not more than forty-five days each way for a subsidy from this Colony not exceeding £30,000, and with a condition that the co-operation of the Government of New Zealand should be invited. The Government declined to accept any tender for a forty-eight days’ service, because they felt that such a service would not suit tile Colony ; but they thought it woidd be wrong to delay making arrangements for a service, and the Cabinet was at first disposed to communicate with General Burnside, of New York ; but they saw the difficulties which would attend negotiations by telegraph, aud that idea was given up. About this time Mr. Hall offered to enter into a contract for the shorter time, and lie was told in reply that no tender wovdd ho considered by the Government unless the sureties were persons of commercial standing and ability for such a contract. Mr. Hall submitted the names of Messrs. Dunn and Cameron, and they were approved by the Postmaster-General. Mr. Samuel at once proceeded to New Zealand, but could not then succeed with the Government of that Colony, aud he next went to London, where ho arrived on the 11th August. On the 27th August Mr Samuel was able to inform the Government by telegraph that he had obtained the co-opera-tion of Mr. Russell, the representative of New Zealand, hut it was not until the 30th October that the representatives of the two ‘Colonies were informed of the concurrence of the New Zealand Government. On the (Jth October the representatives sent a joint intimation to Mr. Hall that unless his contract were carried out in forty-eight hours it would be cancelled. It was thought that there was some difficulty between Mr. Hall and his sureties, but Messrs. Cunningham and Forbes, who stood even higher in the commercial world, took the places of. bis first sureties, and the report of Mr. Laniach, the agent for the Bank of New South Wales, respecting Messrs. Cunningham aud Forbes, was so satisfactory, that tile contract was made, but before it was ratified it was submitted to and approved by the Post Office authorities in London. The honorable gentleman then enlarged upon the advantages to accrue to the Colony from this service, contending that if it had not been established the Colony would have been without a service, or would have been compelled to sue on bended knee to Victoria, which entered into a separate contract with the P. aud O. Company. Ho said that the first of the new boats would bo launched in June or July, and ho believed the service would he performed in forty to forty-two days, and would be the fastest aud most successful in the world. The essence of the contract was for a ten-knot service, but the contractors were to bo paid according to the time. He also maintained that tile temporary service was a great success, and contrasted favorably with the Gallo and Torres Straits services, and ho claimed for the Government that in all they had done in reference to the mail service, they had been actuated by a desire for the public good. Mr. Speaker ruled, in answer to an objection made by Mr. Garrett, that the motion was in order.

Mr. Forster replied to remarks which lie understood bad been made by the Colonial Secretary personal to himself. Mr. RAI’iIAKL supported the motion in view of the benefits that wore likely to be conferred upon the Colony by the San Francisco mail service.

Mr. Lackev moved tho adjournment of tho debate till Wednesday next, which was discussed, and negatived, on division, by 20 to 7.

Mr. Hoskins had always been in favor of a service via San Ifrancisco, but disapproved of various circumstances connected with this contract. Ho reviewed the whole of the proceedings of the Government in relation to tho business, and insisted that tho service could have been conducted far more efficiently by General Burnside or tho A. S. N. Go. than by Mr. Hall, to whom privileges had been granted which there was nothing to justify. Both General

Burnside and the A. S. N. Co. could have placed boats on the lino much earlier, and could have commanded greater resources and influence in carrying out the service, and yet they were denied the opportunity of competing for it with Mr. Hall. G eneral Burnside had a large influence with Inman’s lino of steamers, and one of his proposed sureties (Mr. Scott) was manager of the Pacific Bailway, which were guarantees such as Mr. Hall could not offer for the transmission of mails between San Francisco and London as early as practicable. He denied that the House ever authorised Mr. Samuel to proceed to Loudon to make arrangements, and he remarked upon Mr. Hall accompanying him on his mission. He held that the privilege of using the Fitzroy dock which had been given to Mr. Hall was unfair to other tenderers as well as to Mr. Mort, who had been assured by Mr. Hiddell, a former Colonial Secretary, that the Government dock would never be allowed to compete with his juivate dock. It was therefore his intention to vote against the motion. Mr. Cooper, Mr. Fitzpatrick, and Mr. Burns, spoke in favor of the motion. Mr. Lucas opposed the motion at some length, and moved an amendment to the effect that the House was of opinion that a more efficient and econoiiiical agreement might have been adopted. Mr. Garrett also addressed the House in opposition Ifc the motion, and was followed by Mr. Cooper, who again supported the motion.

Mr. Paukks combated the objections to the contract, and denied that any preference had been given to Mr. Hall. He also stated that from information obtained from the London agent, and from Sir Edward Thornton, the British Resident at Washington, the Government would not have been justified in entertaining the tender of General Burnside. The amendment was negatived on division, by 25 to 5, and the original motion was carried without division..