SAN FRANCISCO MAIL SERVICE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4891, 24 November 1876, Page 3

SAN FRANCISCO MAIL SERVICE.

We publish the speech of the Hon. Mr. Whitaker on this subject in extenso, so that the facts of the case as he placed them may be fully before the public, Mr. Whitaker.— -Sir, I beg to move, —That it is expedient that the existing San Francisco Mail Contract be modified as follows :—(1.) That the service be direct from San Francisco to Sydney, calling at Honolulu and at Auckland. (2 ) That the coastal service be performed by the Company by ten-knot boats, to be approved of by the Government. (3.) That the share of New Zealand’s contribution to the subsidy be reduced by £7500 at the least. The House is already aware that at the commencement of the session a committee was appointed for the purpose of inquiring into this Californian service especially with a view of having some modification made in it. . The Committee have reported, and their report has remained over for consideration for some time. The reason for the delay has been that correspondence has been going on with the New South. Wales Government and the contractors, with a view to ascertain how far any modification would be agreed to on the part of that Government and the contractors. The matter has now reached this point: that they are pressing for the consideration by this House as to whether or not the terms proposed by the New South Wales Government, or the terms proposed .by the contractors, or the terms proposed by the Select Committee, with a slight modification, shall be accepted by this House. Tire House is aware that the contract was made in July, 1875, and it was to begin in the November following. The contract was very carefully drawn, with all the usual conditions and stipulations for due performance. It was for eight years. Next month it will have run for one year. I need not describe the terms of the contract; it has been for some time before the House, and is well known, to hon. members. One important stipulation in the contract which will be a subject for our consideration is that, in the event of the contractors not performing their contract, they are to pay a penalty of £25,000. That £25,000, assuming it to be obtained, would be divided equally by New South Wales and New Zea--1 >.nd. Of course, at the commencement of all /•Services of this kind very considerable difficulties arise from time to time, and no doubt this service has had its difficulties like other services. At present, however, it seems to be very firmly established, and the time kept by the mail steamers has been very accurate. In point of fact, the mails have occasionally been delivered before their time, and we can sec that we have a service regularly performed by steamers of a first-class description, both as regards steaming power and accommodation for passengers. The position now is this : that the Company require a modification. They

declare that the service as it is "at present carried out causes them the loss of large sums of money, and they attribute that to the coastal service. They require that that service should be given up, not only on account of the inconvenience and loss of money, but because they consider that these large steamers going along the coast cause a risk which might entail a loss upon them equal to a whole year’s subsidy. These ships are • valued at from £IBO,OOO to £200,000 each, and are insured for £IOO,OOO, so that, if one of them should be wrecked, it would cause a very heavy loss' to the Company. I now come to the question of those proposals which have been made by the Company. They are these ; that the subsidy, instead of being £90,000 a year, should be reduced to £80,000; that the number of services should he reduced to twelve services a year, and that the coastal service by the large steamers should be given up. That proposition was submitted, or very nearly that proposition was submitted to the Committee ; but the Committee considered it was not a proposal which would be accepted. The Government came to the same conclusion, and I presume the House will do so too. I apprehend, therefore, that that may be placed out of consideration altogether. The Sydney Government have proposed that the coastal services should he given up ; that the mail steamers should not call at Fiji, and should call only at Honolulu and the Bay of Islands. In the alternative services first proposed, there , was one known as No. O, in which it was proposed that the steamers should call at Auckland; that there should be thirteen services in the year ; and that the coastal service should be done by small vessels, the large steamers going on to Sydney. That proposition is very nearly the one now made by the Government, and contained in the motion I am about to move. The House is now in possession of three different propositions—the proposition of the Company, the proposition of the Sydney Government, and the proposition of the New Zealand Government. What I desire to-night is, that this Assembly should come to a conclusion whether they will accept any one of these proposals. The proposition this Government makes, and which appears on the Order Paper, would reduce the subsidy of New Zealand to £37,500 a year. That is the proposition, that £7500 should be taken off the New Zealand subsidy—in other words, that the subsidy to the Company should lie £75,000. That was the proposition originally made by the Company for this very service, when they sent in their. tender. If hon. members will refer to some papers laid before them in an early part of the session, they will find a comparative statement of the cost of the service by way of Suez and San Francisco. The House will understand that not only the service by way of San Francisco but also the service by way of Suez is subsidised. On a reference to the papers before them, hon. membeis will see the precise position in which these services stand. The statement is as follows, and is based upon the correspondence exchanged between the United Kingdom, &c,, and New Zealand during the year 1875 ; SAN FRANCISCO SERVICE. Hit. £ £ Subsidy to Pacific Mail Company .. 45,000 Interprovincial services 2,000 .. Mail Agents 1,000 Oil Postages from London Post Office .. 10,600 Postages collected in Now Zealand .. 11,232 Recoveries from non-contracting colonies - •* .. .. .. 1,500 Net cost .. .. .. £24,668 SUEZ SERVICE. Hr. £ £ Payments to Victoria .. .. .. 8,490 Intercolonial service 6,000 Gratuities, &c. .. .. .... 510 Ca. „ Postages from London Fojt Office .. 3,711 Postages collected in New Zealand .. 3,680 Net cost £6,609 In the event of the colony deciding to abandon the San Francisco Service and to rely solely on the Galle Service, our payments and receipts would be, — , Ds.“— £ £ Payments to Victoria 34,119 Intercolonial Service (Melbourne, Bluff, and "Wellington) .. 5,000 Intercolonial Service (Sydney and Auckland) 3,000 Interprovincial Service .. .. .. 2,000 Mail Agents .. . - ' .. .. 1,000 8 Cb. Postages from London Post Office .. 14,311 Postages collected in New Zealand .. 14,912 Net cost .. .. .. £15,896 Assuming, merely for comparative purposes, that this colony forwarded and received the whole of its mails by the San Francisco Service, the result would work out thus : Hr.. £ £ Subsidy to Pacific Mail Company .. 45,000 Interprovincial Services .. .. 2,000 Mail Agents .. .. .. .. 1.000 - 48,000 Cn. Postages from London Post Office .. 14,311 Postages collected in New Zealand .. 14,912 From non-contracting Colonies .. 2,000 Net cost .. .. .. £16,777. If the present proposal were adopted and the whole of the letters were sent by San Francisco, and none by Suez, then we should have to pay £7OOO or £BOOO more than would be recovered in the shape of postages, after allowing the now proposed reduction of £7500. On the other hand, if - we used the Suez Service entirely, the cost would be £15,895 ; so that, in point of fact, the San Francisco Service, if all the letters came by it, would be a cheaper service than that by Suez, if all the letters came by that route. Then let us look at the advantages of the two services. The material advantage is this : that every additional letter we have by San Francisco reduces the cost of the service, whereas every additional letter by Suez increases the cost. So there is every hope that in a very short time the income and expenditure by the San Francisco Service will equalise themselves. I have no doubt that within a very short time—within two or three years—the service will really cost us nothing; whereas if we used the Suez Service the only result would be that we should have an everincreasing amount of postages to pay, and the coat would become very heavy with the correspondence increasing as it does now with great rapidity. Now, we come to the cost of the two services. Thecoat of the San Francisco Service is 9s. per mile, and the cost of the Suez Service is Us. 4d. permile. That is a very considerable difference, although we gain nothing by it. Now, I come to another very important part of the subject, and that is the question of time. At the commencement of the session honorable gentlemen had placed in their hands all the postal papers,, and amongst them will be found a very elaborate table showing the time of the arrival of all the steamers during the year, and the number of days occupied in the voyage. There is, however, a very great saving of time effected by employing the San Francisco boats. I have had a short table prepared showing the time allowed by the official time-tables for the delivery of mails between London and the places 1 shall refer to presently. Via San Francisco the contract time from London to Sydney is 48 days, and the shortest time in which the mails have been delivered is 46 days ; the contract time from London to Auckland is 45 days, and the shortest time in which the mails have been delivered is 41 days ; the contract time from London to Wellington is 49 days, and the shortest time in which the mails have been delivered is 45 days ; the contract time from London to Dunedin Is 51 days, and the shortest time in which the mails have been delivered is 48 days. Via Brindisi, the contract time from London to Sydney is 49 days, and the shortest time in which the mails have been delivered Is 47 days, as against 46 days via San Francisco ; the contract time from London to Auckland is 60 days, and the shortest time in which the mails have been delivered is 55 days, as against 41 days via San Francisco ; tho contract time from London to Wellington is 66 days, and tho shortest time in which the mails have been delivered is 61 days, as against 45 days via San Francisco ; the contract time from London to Dnnedih is 63 days, and the shortest time in which the mails have been delivered is 49 days, as against 48 days via San Francisco. If tho mails were brought by way of Southampton there would be a much greater

delay in their delivery. . The contract time would then, instead of being 45 days to Auckland, be 67 ; instead of being 49 days to Wellington.it would be 63 ; and instead of 51 days to Dunedin, it would be 60. Now as regards tbe cost of . each letter, sent , by the different routes: via San Francisco it is 6d., and via Brindisi . Bd.; and each newspaper which comes in the latter way coats 2d., as against Id. in the former, , Therefore the San Francisco Service gives a saving of 100 per cent, on newspapers. Besides, there is a great saving of . time "by the San Francisco . Service in the . northern .parts of the colony, and a considerable saving in" the southern parts." I think enough has been said by me to, show that by the San Francisco Service we effect a considerable saving both of time and money. ; The advantage of having the two lines is of course very, considerable, especially if one line; should happen to break down. I should not propose, therefore, to give up the Suez Service,_ but consider that it would be well to allow it to stand as at present. By having the two lines we are afforded the facilities of forwarding duplicates of our letters. If we abandon the San Francisco Service we shall be left entirely at the mercy of the Victorian Government; and I must say that we have not found that Government in these matters nearly so favorable to deal with as the New South Wales Government. The latter Government has met us in a very fair and liberal spirit in the matter of the mails ; and therefore we should continue to work with them, in connection with the San Francisco Service, as far as we can. No fault can he found with the ships that have been supplied ; for as regards convenience, speed, &c., they are everything that can be desired. They afford us direct communication with America, which, I think, is a great advantage. We have direct communication with the East by the Suez Service, and with America by the San Francisco Service. I have no doubt that honorable gentlemen coming from Otago feel there would be a loss by taking these large steamers off the coastal service ; but, during. the last five years, the Government have persisted in forcing them to go down to Otago. The matter is simply in this condition at present: Either the coastal service must be stopped, or the whole service must be discontinued altogether. Mr. W. P. Clyde, the President of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company, in a letter to Messrs. Gilchrist, Watt, and Co., of Sydney, puts the matter very concisely. He says, “ Under the former direction of this Company, an abandonment of this service had been seriously considered, with a modification of the route to the direct O. service was permitted, and the service continued.” It will be remembered that tbat modification was made, and, under it, the service was found very satisfactory. And then Mr. Clyde goes on to say, “The necessities of the case present to my mind the following alternatives:—A modification of the route to what is known as the C route, which avoids the difficulties and dangers of the coastal service, and the stopping at Fiji.” No doubt the stopping at Fiji is one of the most serious difficulties the contractors find in their way. They can only go among the reefs by daylight, and at great loss of time. Mr. Clyde continues: “The substitution of ships fitted for the coastal service and Fiji navigation, which steamers would scarcely be fit for the long sea service, in place of the popular and able steamers now performing the service.” These are the alternatives, or otherwise the service. will be abandoned by the contractors. Therefore it is clear either that the coastal service must be given up or that the service will be abandoned altogether. The Government have, as I have stated, endeavored to get the company to carry out the coastal service as hitherto ; but they fully realise that the service, as it at present stands,will require modification. When we are in committee, I shall have an opportunity of affording hon. members any other information which may he required. Among the papers relating to the service there will be found a telegram from Mr. Stewart, of Sydney, to the Colonial Secretary at Wellington, It is as follows :

Sydney, 12th October, 1876. Hope that, in obtaining sanction from Parliament to "modification mall service, you will secure option to call Bay of Islands. Please reply. Alexander Stewart, (For Colonial Secretary, Sydney). My answer to this was— Wellington, 13th October, 1876. Great difficulty about coastal service if Bay of Islands port of call. Auckland will probably be fixed. Difference of time to Sydney few hours. Fredk. Whitaker, Postmaster-General.

When I first went into the question, my opinion was that the Bay of Islands would be the proper place. But, after careful consideration, I and the Government have come to the conclusion that it would not he desirable to make the Bay of Islands the port of call, as the coastal service from the Bay of Island instead of Auckland would involve a large extra expenditure. The last telegram the Government have received is as follows : If you wish onr co-operation, you had better seek alternative permission. Auckland twelve hours longer, most objectionable. The whole matter is now before the House. Hon. members have all the papers relating to it in their hands, and they will be able to see the exact state of things. The New South Wales Government, in their last telegram, dated October 13, ask us to take the alternative of either Auckland or the Bay of Islands as the port of call. To enable the Government to give a definite answer one way or tbe other, ! now move the resolution standing in my name.