THE STANDARD. SATURDAY, AUGUST 9, 1873.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 77, 9 August 1873, Page 2

THE STANDARD.

SATURDAY, AUGUST 9, 1873.

“ We shall sell to no man justice or right: We shall deny to no man justice or right: We shall defer to no man justice or right.”

The pertinacity with which Mr. John Henderson, C.E. — Messrs. Brogden’s representative in New Zealand—pursues the subject of his firm’s proposals to the Government, is worthy of all admiration.

It will be in the recollection of our readers that in the early part of last session, Mr. James Bbogpen submitted, for the consideration of the Cabinet, certain bases on which he proposed that the firm of Messrs. Brogden & Sons should form a Company in London to construct railways in New Zealand. The proposals were baldly, and rather curtly, replied to by Mr. Ormond, —who held the Portfolio of Minister of Public Works at the time, —to the effect that the Government could not “recommend them “ to the Legislature.” The main features of the proposed undertaking were:—l. The Company to take over existing contracts, plant, &c., repaying to the Government all monies paid to Messrs. Brogden. 2. The Company to pay Messrs. Brogden compensation for loss of time, and outlay of money, including interest. 3. The railways to be constructed, to be divided into three classes-Continuo us Mai n Lines; Detached Main Lines, and Branch Lines. 4. Two

Main Lines to be constructed —one in the

North Island running from Wellington tojlaranaki, ultimately to form a junction with the Auckland and Cambridge fine ; the other in the Middle Island, leading from Invercargill via Dunedin, along the Timaru plains to Christchurch, Nelson and Picton, with branches to Greymouth and Beefton. 5. Detached Main Lines, such as the Picton and Blenheim ; Napier and Paki Paki; Nelson and Foxhill, to be constructed as Government may require. 6. The Company to construct such branch lines as it may consider necessary for purposes of traffic. 7. Government to exercise power of acquiring land at the request of the Company. 8. A 3ft. 6in. gauge not to exceed £BOOO per mile, and to be subject to inspection and reasonable control of the Government. 9. The Company to take over all existing lines in both islands; the lines at original cost, and the plant by instalments running up to two years without interest. 10. Government to

provide land for Stations, Wharves, &c. 11. The Company to have absolute power to fix traffic rates, the Government to demand a reduction if net profits exceed 10 per cent. 12. The Government to give a guarantee of £5 10s per cent, per annum net profit on capital expended for forty years. 13. If, during the guarantee, the profits of the Company exceed 5| per cent., guarantee to cease ;if profits exceed per cent., Government to get one half of excess. 14. All lines to be the property of the Company, in perpetuity. These proposals, are to be re-submitted to Parliament this Session ; and as it is possible that the Legislature may give an extended consideration to them, they having been prepared by Mr. Henderson with much force and ability; and as it is desirable that public opinion should be brought to bear as much as possible upon a matter of such vital importance, we purpose noticing some of the principal objections which seem to us to stand out in rather rugged contrast to the general outline.

It is very evident that, although Mr. Henderson, through his amanuensis—whose proclivities on Colonial matters are observable—has mastered a good deal of New Zealand politics in a short time, he nevertheless argues the whole question from a Loudon point of view. He studs New Zealand facts with English ideas. Through 27 pamphlet pages Mr. Henderson has labored in vain to pro-'e that English capital, running away, annually, with New Zealand dividends will be “ satisfactory to the inhabitants of the Colony in general.” It is useless pointing to the fact that many influential men at home are forming companies with large capital to work in our many fields of industry, as an argument in favor of his proposals. These companies are the work of private enterprise, set agoing by men in the Colony who have neither the means nor the credit in the English Stock market that the New Zealand Government has. The proposals now before us are equivalent to playing trumps into your opponent’s hand, instead of into your partner’s. If a Company formed in London can raise a huge capital by the employment of 3 and 4 per cent. Consols, and take 8 or 10 per cent, from the Colony in dividends—s| percent, of this being guaranteed,—surely the Colonial Government can, by saving the guarantee, work as advantageously in the interests of the Colonists, by keeping the railways in its own hands.

The guarantee of “5} per cent, net profit for 40 years” has an air of modest coolness about it which serves the more forcibly to illustrate the ex parte views entertained by the proposer. But why stop at, or reach, 40 years ? Why not say 30 or 50 years ? The Government, at the end of the fourth decade, would have good cause to exclaim, “ Forty years “ long was I grieved with this genera- “ tion 1” And it must not be overlooked that the extra guarantee, on Branch Lines (Section 18) added to the guarantee of 5| per cent, on compensation paid by the Company to the Messrs. Brogden ; plus the bonus of 1| per cent, on the total cost of railways ; plus the actual outlay in “ purchasing existing lines and cori- “ structing projected lines,” together

with “ simple interest at £5 10s per cafit? “ per annum computed on xa&fithly out“lay” (Section l9),'Wuld augment the pledge of the Colony to an amount not conteiapiated by it, and certainly not apparent at first sight; while the terms would place the Company in aposition of undoubted security against loss of any kind, and we should be taxing ourselves heavily for the pleasure of seeing English capital-monopolists march off with the dividends.

Again, the influence and power of direction to be taken from the Colony and planted in London are matters not to be trifled with. Mr. Henderson says, that arrangements “ for the appointment and “ duties of local Directors and Agents “ shall be made the subject of enactment;” but does Mr. Henderson really wish to make the settlers of this Colony believe that a local Directory, under the instructions of Lombard-street and the StockExchange, would be “ satisfactory ” to the former ; or, the head-quarters of the Company being in London, that such a Directory would be permitted to rule the commercial destinies of New Zealand “ in perpetuity ?” Verily, this would be handing ourselves over, body and soul, to the PhiH stines!

Mr. Hendbrscn i Iso says, that one of the benefits to be derived from the form, stion of a Company, would be the

“ avoidance of all political scrambles,” and “ partisan influences.” We think to the contrary; at any rate it is not attempted to be shown that no “ political “ scrambles ” or “ partisan influences ” would be at work, under a Directory of business men in England ; and the proposal that the Government may “ require “ the Company to contract certain Main “ Lines,” and may exercise a “ reasonable “ control ” over them, is, in itself, highly suggestive of opportunities, in which to attach the “ influence ” or “ partisanship ” of some one within the the pale of Governmental authority, and to secure the “ special parliamentary support of “ certain individuals ” interested. But, apart from the question of Profit and Loss, we candidly do not like the monopolising spirit of the proposals. We do not like the idea of being handed over for an indefinite period to any set of commercial men whose interests would be diametrically opposed to those of the Colony ; and we cannot but think that it is that part of the scheme which decided the Government in rejecting the matter altogether. The Company want “ power to take arid survey Lines through “ private property ; to enforce order on “ the Lines and at the Stations,” and, in short, to monopolise the whole of the internal resources of the Colony to its own benefit. A little sprat is thrown in to catcb a big mackerel. “ The Legisla- “ ture would, of course, take care that, *in so handing over one of its present “ functions to be performed by a commer- “ cial, instead of a political machinery, “ the Colony should be secured against “ any such abuse of the monopoly con- “ ceded, as could be injurious to the “ public interest.” That’s all very plausible ; but as it is next to impossible to foresee the many ways in which the interests of the public might clash, the Legislature will best serve the welfare of the Colony by declining the proposals submitted by the Messrs. Brogden with its best compliments and thanks. In conclusion, we entirely coincide with Mr. Henderson that the “ established “ position and experience of his firm in “ the railway world, specially fit them to “be the founders of a comprehensive “railway system for New Zealand;” but wo submit that the future welfare of the colonists renders it imperatively necessary that our own people must guide their own affairs. Messrs. Brogden have rendered good service to the Colony —they have been paid well for it —and they may yet do much more, but not in the direction indicated in the pamphlet now under consideration.