THE WINTON RAILWAY ARBITRATION CASE.

Southland Times, Issue 1587, 4 June 1872, Page 2 (Supplement)

THE WINTON RAILWAY ARBITRATION CASE.

I (Southland Times, May 31.) ' CJuiona -Pni«fKo» KgKt Lao bootx tLrown Ott the Winton Railway arbitration scandal by the report of the select committee of I Council appointed to investigate the j matter. The suggestion that the work i should not be paid for in terms of the > contract deed, but on terms to be adjusted by arbitration, is clearly traced to j His Honor James Macandeew, Esq., Superintendent. On the 30th January, 1871, that gentleman, then canvassing the Southland district as a candidate for re-election to the office of Superintendent, telegraphed to the Executive a request to submit the contractors' dispute to arbitration, which ultimately was done. I This telegram, according to the estimate ! of the committee, has cost the Province • more than £11,000. The report goes on to say that " it has not been shown to the committee that any satisfactory reasons j exist, or ever did exist, for the voluntary | extinction by the Executive of the eni gineer's powers under the contract, or I the suppression of some of its most vital terms, or the surrender and abandonment of public rights." Probably not. Still, Mr M.&CANDB.EW would hardly have taken such a step without reasons which were satisfactory to himself, although they have not been shown to the committee, or if they have, are not considered satisfactory by them. No one will believe that this bold step, of tearing up a j carefully prepared contract, and referring I the price of the work to arbitration, was taken without some good reason — good at all events from Mr Macandrew's point of view. It is remarkable that Mr Macandbew should have undertaken this serious responsibility so near the close of his term of office, when the contest between himself and his possible successor was actually going on, and the issue was ! "generally regarded as extremely doubtful. The reasons must indeed hare been un- ! i usually cogent which induced him to 1 mark what might have been the close of his official career, by the release of a firm of railway contractors from the terms on which they had undertaken to do their work. The obvious inference, sure to be drawn from such a concession at the time, would we fancy have deterred most men ■ from making it, until at least the question ! of the Superintendent's election had been ! decided. But Mr Macandeew, as every ! one knows, is not a man to stick at I trifles. If it were for the public good to release Messrs Dbitee and M'Lean from the very stringent contract they had signed, he is not the man to hesitate because his motives might possibly be misconstrued. It is however to be regretted, on his account, that the committee persist in regarding the interference as uncalled for , and in its results injurious to the interests of the Province, to the very appreciable extent of £11,000. The evidence taken before the committee, confirms in every particular the account we gave of these transactions a * few weeks ago, in the hope that the') matter would be investigated. The contract, drawn up by the Southland Government, and signed by Messrs Dieivee ■and M'luE an, bound both parties to leave all disputes to the sole decision of the engineer, Mr Dundas. The extensive ppwers thus conferred on the engineer were never disputed by the contractor^

during the existence of the Southland Government. But as soon as the seat of power was transferred to Bunedin, we learn from the Report, "the contractors became active arid persistent in disputing the directions arid decisions of the engineer." This of course may have been a mere coincidence of time. It is remarkable, however, that : at the very last meeting of the Southland Executive, a communication on this -subject., was sent to the Superintendent of Otago, deprecating any interference with- the powers and responsibilities of the engineer, and concluding with : . these Wjords , : —" The question of referring any dispute in a manner not provided for in the contract is fraught with danger. Past experience, in this also tends to the full belief that iti j is better for the Government to allow j disputes of a serious nature to take their i ordinary course at law." This sensible ' and business-like advice was utterly disregarded. On the 30th of January, 1871 y Mr Macandrew telegraphed from Inver cargill to the Executive in Dunedin, ad--vising that the disputes of the contractors with°the engineer should be settled .by arbitration, and offering to have the line opened at once if the matter were left in his hands. Nineteen days later, on the Saturday preceding the polling for Superr intendent, which took place on Monday, 20th February, the Executive set aside the contract/ superseded the engineer, and, by memorandum of agreement with the contractors, referred the whole question of the price of the work to arbitration. The result was that the province incurred expenses to the extent of nearly £4,000 for arbitrators' fees, witnesses, j and legal charges, and had besides to pay j .the contractors £23,000, instead Lof £16,000, making altogether a loss, of £11,000. After the very clear warning given by the Southland Government, it is difficult to believe that this scandalous transaction was a mere piece of. official blundering. However that may be, and by whatever name it should be' most "fitly designated, it was one of the first results of that reunion from which so much was predicted in the way of better government and increased prosperity. The business is too old now to yield any prae- , tical result from the further enquiries which the committee are desirous of pursuing. It may stand as another instance of the way in which pur moneyis wasted, to say no. more, by the clique of professional politicians to which, under the provincial system, we insist on confiding the management of our affairs. The j Southland Government,, indeed, appear I for once to have acted in a sensible arid business-like manner, so long as the matter remained in their hands. With regard to the engineer, Mr Dttndas, it is also satisfactory to find the ; committee report that "he evinced great prudence and constant vigilance in seeing that the terms of the contract were fully carried out ; and throughout the whole of the nesotiations for a reference to arbitration between the contractors and the Provincial Govern ment, strongly discountenanced ! (and even after a reference to arbitration had been agreed upon, Mr Dun das protested in strong terms against) the departure in any way from the provisions of the contract."