THE N.Z. MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10289, 21 February 1895, Page 6

THE N.Z. MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY.

(Fhom Oub Own Coiibespondent.)

London, January 11,

At the meeting of the Midland Railway Company there was only a small attendance. It had been expected that there would be some sultry utterances touching tho action of the Now Zealand Government, and the refusal of tho New Zealand Parliament to pass the bill reported to have been introduced with somewhat tepid advocacy by the Government. Eat the speaking was virtually oonfined to the chairman, Mr Tbouas Salt, who was as a rale studiously moderate, only once " letting himself go " when he said that were h« not speaking of the Government of a British colony, but of some firm or individual in business, he should feel bound to coll the shareholders that they had beea " outrageously cheated." This then was Mr Salt's view of the New Zealand Government's conduct. "Outrageous cheating " is a tolerably strong^charge to bring against any Government or individual, but certainly Mr Salt adduced some very awkward facts in support of his accusation.

The Government, ho sisid, had placed all sorts of obstacle in the way of thiß company's progress with its work, and had so acted as to , make it very nearly impossible for the company ! "either to sell land, to hold land, or to earn laud." So they had bean driven to arbitratisn, and Sir Bruce Burnside, formerly Chief Justice of Ceylon, had been nominated as the company's arbitrator. Mr Salt said that "every olsim placed before the arbitrators would be thoroughly substantiated by documents of the most authoritative and important character." Mr Salt added that from the first the directors of the company had been most careful to put before the New Zealand Government that tor tha undertaking to ba carried out successfully the " warm and consistent support of the New Zealand Government" was essential, as was also thoroughly harmonioss working between the New Zealand Government and the managers of the company. But he maintained that these conditions h»d not been fulfilled. He had also poiatad out that in a contract between parties at oppesite sides of the globe relative to an enterprise of much difficulty and long duration, liable to be affected by many changes of oircumatancea, it was essential that there should be modifications from time to time as the circumstances altered, and that this should be dealt with in a spirit of mutual " give and take." "Circumstances," said Mr Salt, " were bound to alter. The requirements of the colony or our necessities were certain not to .■remain throughout a long period exactly the iarae," and now they looked for considerate and liberal and generous treatment, which they certainly did not get. Mr Salt expressed his conviction, and " not without reason," that "a great part of our fellow-countrymen in New Zealand will consider that thi* undertaking has not been dealt with fairly." He referred to the serious personal inconvenience at which he and Mr Burchell (ths company's solioitor) were going out to New Zealand te represent tae company's interests in the arbitration. Mr Bcodie Hoare, in seconding the adoption of the report, dwelt on the debt of gratitude which the shareholders owed to Mr Salt for the " immense sacrifice of his publio and private business and family interests" which he w&s making to go out to New Zealand on the company's behalf, and a vote of thanks was passed by the meetiag. The retiring directors and auditors were re-elected.

Mr Salt and Mr Burohell sail for New Zealand, via Australia, in tha B.g. Austral from Plymouth to-morrow.

Some exceedingly severe strictures are indulged in by the Financial News on the conduct of the New Zealand Government in reference to the Midland Railway Company. It says that Mr Salt—whose reputation as a financier stands so high, and who is so well known for his moderation of expression that he was unlikely to exaggerate—was entirely warranted in accusing the New Zealand Government of having "outrageously cheated " the company, and "did not in the least exaggerate the case." "The New Zealand Government," says the Financial News, " has behaved so badly, indeed with such a complete disregard of good faith, that it may even become a question if the Stock Exchange Committee ought not to exact its powerful influence in the interests of the shareholders in the railway by insisting on justice being done them before giving its sanction to the quotation of any more New Zealand loans."

" Under the Administration oE Sir J. Vogel and Sir H. Atkinson a disposition was shown," says Financial News, ''to act loyally, but when a chaDga took place in 1889 a very different policy was initiated." Tho News accuses the Government of " picking out the eyes { of the company's land, and of endeavouring to "starve them out," so as to acquire their 75 miles of constructed line on tho cheapest terms. "Bat," it continues, "however laudable this object, it can scarcely be gratified at the expense of English investors." The procseding is likened unto the disreputable acts of certain South American States, and a prediction is hazarded that the " English public will be very chary of taking up any securities of a Government which seems to glory in having defrauded investors." The Financial News asserts that "political considerations have influenced the Government, and that it has committed a series of acts of bad faith in order to catch votes," but the New Zealand Ministers are recommended to " reconsider the position and to reflect whether it is worth thoir while to throw away colonial oredit and colonial reputation for honesty in order to save a couple of hundred thousand pounds in the purchase of a trunk line."