TUB COLONIAL IRON COMPANY.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLVI, Issue 7820, 20 October 1903, Page 2

TUB COLONIAL I RON COMPANY.

As- so much 1 is being heard just now about the above company the following report of a debate in the House is of interest. The extract is taken from the Hawke's Bay Herald :—: — In the House of Representatives, Mr James Allen received an answer to his question regarding statements in a booklet issued in London by Mr M. Farmer King, of the Colonial Iron and Coalfields Construction Company. Tho question had been put- with a view to ascertaining the nature of the undertaking, stated to have 'been given by the Government, to place all possible contracts' in the way of the proposed company,^ aad the nature of the promise m>ade for Government contracts, including orders for 7o),000 tons of material for the construction of railway bridges, etc., which in themselves would enable the proposed coinpa-ny to Pay 5 per cent, per annum for the first five years. The Premier's reply was that he had not seen the booklet referred to, and certainly accepted no responsibility for the said publication. The Premier presumed that the booklet gave in a way no 1 doubt satisfacfcory.to the parties immediately concerned the concessions which, with the knowledge and approval of Parliament the Government were prepared to grant with the view of establishing the iron and steel industry in the colony. A comparison of what appeared in the blue books of the colony with what is contained in the booklet would disclose how far the one tallied with the other. Not having seen the booklet the Premier had not been able io make the comparison. If the honourable member who had the booklet would kindly make the comparison and let the Premier have the result the services thus rendered would be much appreciated. Mr James Allen said that what the Premier stated was no reply to the question at all. What ho wanted to know was whether promises had been made by the Governlinent of this colony with regard to contracts. H© thought the House was entitled to know what obligations the Government had entered into ; or if they had made no promises the House should be told so, in order that the British public might not be misled ; for the booklet was really a prospectus on which .people were asked to take up shares. The Minister for Mines said that all the promises the Government had 'made had been made public, ami appeared in the Mines report for 1902. , The Leader of the Opposition : That moans -that no proinlise has been. Mr McGowan : No promise except what is contained in the report I have quoted. ■• \ Mr E. M. Smith, in a speech an the ! subject, said the chairman of the company and an expert were now on the way to New Zealand, and would be in the colony next month. He was convinced it would result in iron being sold in New Zealand at half the present cost. Mr R. McKcnzie complained that the Parapara lease was being held on application, and that not a penny of rent had so far been paid. As a matter of fact, no lease, had yet been granted, and the warden had in the first instance exceeded his duty in granting two applications for one thousand acres each when only one application for a thousand acres should have been entertained Ho (Mr McKenzie); had also been informed that the Parapara leas© had been so surve3"ed as tq include the whole of the outcrop of iron ore for six miles in the Cadman company's lease Ho contended that if the Minister for Mines did his duty, he would throw the lease open to anyone who wished to take it up. Other companies had been refused it, though they had applied before tho Cadman company. He held | that the Minister- had no right to favour one person againsfc the whole community. Mr McGowan stated that every means had been taken to see that the lessees were possessed of sufficient capital