New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 6.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4538, 6 October 1875, Page 2

New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 6.

The short discussion in the House of Representatives yesterday, regarding the position of the colony in respect of floating the balance of authorised loans, will have this good effect, —it will let the British public know, without any element of uncertainty, whatisproposed to be done. A rumor having got abroad that Sir Julius Yogel had given an undertaking or promise of some kind to Messrs. Rothschilds, that New Zealand would not be a borrower on the London market for at least two years, it was only reasonable to expect that questions should be put to the Government on the subject. Accordingly Mr. Thomson on Monday, and Mr. Rolleston, with greater minuteness yesterday, asked Ministers what was the exact truth of the matter. In his replies, the Colonial Treasurer stated three things: first, that Sir Julius Yogel had declined, or refused, to give any promise or undertaking of the character referred to, but had expressed an opinion, to the effect, that he did not think it likely the colony would require to go upon the market with any new loan for the next two or three years; second, that the Government had written to Sir Julius Yogel, in reply to a communication from him, stating that they could not give any pledge of the kind ; third, that as a matter of fact, the outstanding balances of the authorised loans would be floated within the next two years—the unguaranteed portion on the first favorable opportunity, while the balance of the guaranteed debentures would be reserved to cover the last engagements under the Public Works and Immigration policy. This statement is explicit and straightforward. There is no ambiguity about it. The country and English bondholders will understand precisely what the New Zealand Government mean to do, and “the man in the ‘ ‘ street ” will lose much of his oracular authority. The official statement of , the Colonial Treasurer can bo quoted against any loose rumor which may be sent floating about at any time. Several collateral questions were imported into yesterday’s discussion, to which we shall briefly advert. For instance, it was argued that because the Rothschilds pressed the Colonial Treasurer of New Zealand to give an undertaking that this colony would not be a borrower again for at least two years, therefore the loan contractors understood that such would bo the case, although Sir Julius Yogel declined to pledge the colony in any way. Now, this appears to us to be going too far. It is overrefining, and shows a watchful solicitude for the house of Rothschild which its financial director apparently did not exercise on his own behalf. Rothschilds may bo safely left to look after their own interests. Their financial success proves that they possess at least an ordinary amount of business sagacity, and when they got “no” for their answer from the Colonial Treasurer of New Zealand, we may depend upon it they subscribed the four million loan with their eyes open to the possible contingency of an early issue of the unraised balances of authorised loans. They made the best terms they could; it was not their fault these terms were not better than they were ; but, having obtained the utmost concessions they could, they took took the risk and contracted for the four million loan. To think otherwise, would bo to assume a degree of simplicity on the part of these great European financiers at entire

variance with their long established reputation. The going on the market with a new loan is a different matter altogether. Rothschilds, or indeed any loan contractors, had a perfect right to guard themselves against the issue of a new loan before subscribing four millions for a colony already heavily burdened with debt ; but it is quite clear that before taking up the loan they had the exact financial position of the colony before them, and understood the limit of borrowing fixed by the General Assembly, and the engagements entered into under Act. With this information in their possession, which they undoubtedly had, Messrs. Rothschilds must have seen clearly that it was absolutely necessary to raise all the outstanding balances of authorised loans within a period of two years, in addition to the four million loan which they were invited to take up. We may dismiss the two-year non-borrowing rumor, therefore, as one of those rumors which possess Just so much truth in them as to render them unpleasant. The exact position, as we take it to be, is this : that the Government intend to raise the outstanding balances of authorised loans at convenient periods, for completing engagements entered into under authority of law, but that there is no likelihood of any new loan being proposed during the next two years.

Xr is not often that Sir Dillon Bell admits to Parliament that any question has puzzled him. When therefore the New Zealand Times forms a portion of a matter that he cannot fathom, it is needless to say that the New Zealand Times feels acutely the position it is placed in of puzzling so clear a mind. Prom a statement made by Sir Dillon Bell yesterday, it would seem that the appearance in the columns of this paper of the report of the Ohiuemuri Miners’ flights Committee, without the knowledge or leave of the House, had caused him regret. Furthermore, he had made enquiries as to how the New Zealand Times had become possessed of the report, but had been quite unable to ascertain by whose fault this had occurred. Thisproblem hasevidently caused the Speaker as much thought as the problem of how the milk got into the cocoanut did the intelligent negro. Sir Dillon has, however, the advantage of the negro. That gentleman did not attribute the presence of the milk to a fault on the part of anybody, but Sir Dillon evidently considers that without a fault on the part of somebody, the report could never have got into the New Zealand Times. This gives an opportunity of setting the Speaker’s mind at rest, even though it be only on a small point. He may rest assured that nobody was in fault, and that what is a puzzle to him resembles the recent negotiations for compromise on the abolition question, in that it is creditable to all parties concerned. There is some difficulty, however, in ascertaining why regret should be caused because certain information has been published without the leave or knowledge of Parliament. It is to be feared that if the publication of matters of interest depended on the leave and knowledge of Parliament, the leave would greatly curtail the quantity, whilst the knowledge would certainly desti'oy the quality of such matters of interest. Still it may be well to point out that, so far as the report was concerned, it was read in Parliament, and laid upon the table of the House on Monday night, when it became available to any member who might choose to copy and publish it. Perhaps this explanation may in a slight degree take away from the poignancy of the Speaker’s regret. It is offered in some such hope. It will not do, however, for Mr. W. Kelly, who followed up Sir Dillon Bell’s remarks by pointing out that, not only the report, but the evidence given before the committee, had been published hi the New Zealand Times. Of course a mere ordinary member is not entitled to receive the explanation which the Speaker demands of a newspaper, and therefore it will he impossible to go as far for Mr. Kelly as has been gone for Sir Dillon Bell. Nevertheless, it will not be undignified to explain a little for him. The way the New Zealand Times was enabled to publish the evidence was this—it had the evidence to publish. As one of the Cabinet might say in answer to a question, all available information on this matter has been afforded.