The Ironsand Affair.

Opunake Times, Volume V, Issue 208, 1 September 1896, Page 2

The Ironsand Affair.

(Evening Post.) Our leader of last night has brought the question of the paragraph that we quoted from the Iron and Steel Journal before the consideration of the House. The following questions have been placed on the order paper:— Mr Allen to ask the Premier—(lst) If he has noticed the following remarks in the Evening Post on the 21st August: " That the New Zealand Government have undertaken to place with any company or syndicate developing the manufacture of iron from the colony the whole of their requirements in iron and for railways and public works generally, at such prices as will give the company a bonus of 10 per cent over the imported cost, such arrangement to extend over five years"? (2) Whether the Government have entered into any such such undertaking or made any such proposal ; if not, whether they intend to do so without consulting the House ?

Mr E. M. Smith to ask the Government if their attention has been drawn to a leading article in the Evening Post of the 21st August, under the heading of " Another Job," stating that they had secretly, and without the knowledge of Parliament, entered into a contract with a company to place the whole of the iron and steel required for our public works and railways for five years, which would give the company a profit of 10 per cent over the cost of the imported article will the Government give this statement a denial, as it is not true ? Mr E. M. Smith to ask the Government if they will cable to the AgentGeneral, informing him that while the Government would treat with » cornprny or companies established in the colony of New Zealand to work up the raw and natural products and manufacture iron and steel in the colony, they would be willing to treat with any company with proper capital, plant, and skilled labour (thus proving its bona fides), for the supply of the said materials to the public storks and railways ; the Government or Parliament not having as yet offered any bonus, grant, or concession to, nor entered into any contract with any person or company for the supply of material for the public use. Mr Smith's questions are certainly very peculiar. His first question assumes that the statement made iu the Iron and Steel Journal is incorrect. We would like to know who gave the information to our English contemporary? It will be noticed that the journal publishes a photograph of Mr Smith, and makes statements tbat it may fairly be presumed could only be obtained from Mr Smitn himself. Photographs of Mr Smith and of New Plymouth are not obtainable, or objects of great public interest, in London as yet. Further, this particular number of the Iron and Steel Journal has been published for some time, and copies have reached ■ the colouy.jr.Mr Smith, we presume, has received copies and has not, apparently taken any steps to contradict the statement we have quoted. It is not the Evening Post that has made the statement. It is a London newspaper that has been supplied with information, and by whom Mr Smith should be enabled to tell. If the statements as published are incorrect, Mr Smith ought to have taken the first opportunity to have replied to the journal, pointing out and correcting the misstatements. This, however, has not been done, and, the whole matter begins to wear a sinister look.