Forty Years a Liberal

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 637, 13 April 1929, Page 2

Forty Years a Liberal

LIFE STORY OF SIR JOSEPH WARD

From Telegraph Messenger to Prime Minister By R. A. LOUGIINAN (Copyright— Sun Feature Service) ENTERING Parliament in ISS7, Sir Joseph Ward is a ' veteran among contemporary statesmen and his career is traced and described in this seri<»f of articles by R. A. Loughnan for readers of The Sun. No. XVIII

Nevetheless. the people concerned regarded the district as rich; they considered that it would easily support a railway; thought a railway vitally necessary to its development. The proposal' to make the line under the Public Works system had had their approval. The condemnation of the line was to them a great disappointment. Self-reliance was one of their virtues. They decided to build the line themselves.

They got an Act of Parliament passed, generally authorising the construction of railways on the systenr of land grants along the proposed line of construction, and on this basis they quickly formed a company; the company quickly constructed the railway; and'soon (five years) trains were running from Wellington to Palmerston through Johnsonville, Porirua, Plimmerton, Paekakariki. Waikanae, Otaki, Levin, Shannon, Longburn—these and other stations becoming famous and prosperous. That railway was well-equipped and •well-managed, and very soon the vast development of the district amply justified the faith in its brave promoters. Early in its career the Well-ington-Manawatu Railway was universally recognised as the best paying line on the New Zealand Railway schedule, and probably the best paying line in Australasia. A RUNNING AGREEMENT

The Government Railway Department made a running agreement with it, very necessary for the State railway system, and soon extended through the Wairarapa and the Rangitikei Country; and friendly co-opera-tion of the public and private lines had become a vital necessity.

The State Railway Commissioners and the manager of the Manawatu line understood one another very well. For years things went as merrily as marriage bells.

Gradually it became very evident that the two railway systems must come under a single management, and the wish to see the private line acquired by the State became universal throughout New Zealand. Impelled by the pressure of generally recognised fact, Mr. Seddon brought down his Bill, as abovesaid, in the session of 1901, for empowering the State to buy the railway. The conditions prescribed were simple. The State would take over a parcel of the company’s debentures, and pay 30s a share for the 130,000 shares of the company. For this consideration of £945,000 the company was to surrender its line and all its assets. It was to be a case of “you walk out and we walk in.” There was just one little fly in this otherwise most -dear ointment. The inclusion in the assets to be surrendered of the company’s remaining land endowment —granted under the lin ii way Companies and Land Act, 1881 —on which they had floated their project to dazzling success. This was the difficulty.

Sir Joseph Ward, speaking in the debate on the second reading and defending the terms to be offered to the company against the charge of gross over-payment, declared the value of this to be £112,000, including some cash due by purchasers. Though there had been a good deal of talk about the desirability and the immediate possibility of purchase, the Bill caused a good deal of surprise. Captain Russell, then Leader of the Opposition, attacked it sharply, declaring that not more than an hour had been given the House for the study of that “important and complex measure,” denouncing the same as offering tq pay £336,000 too much for the property. He moved that the Bill be read that day six months. OUTBURST OF RUMOURS

A lively skirmishing debate followed, with inevitable reference to the share market, and the same sharp things were said. Why, it was asked, had the Government not exercised the power of purchase under the Railways Construction and Land Act? To this the Government replied that their procedure was better for all parties and the public interest, adding that it was only that day that the company’s chairman had signified readiness to treat. The Bill passed both Houses in due course. But the simple process of “you walk out and we walk in” did not come about. Mr. Seddon, in moving the Second Reading, had intimated that the assent of the directors would go before the shareholders, who would ratify as a matter of course. But the Bill was turned down by them. All further negotiation appearing hopeless, the Minister of Railways (Sir Joseph Ward) gave notice to the company for the end on a certain date of the running agreement. This was followed by an outburst of rumours of a most disquieting kind. There was something like a panic in the Palmerston district, and men talked everywhere of the sharp practice involving great hardship to the public, by which the Government was proposing to force the sale of the Manawatu to the State. A few extracts from Hansard will give an idea of the position of affairs.

On July 4 Mr. Wilford (’Wellington Suburbs) asked the Minister of Railway (Sir. Joseph Ward) "whether the Government had been advised that all the English shareholders of the Wellington and Manawatu company had forwarded proxies to New Zealand to be used on their behalf in the direction of facilitating the proposed sale of the railway to the Government. And whether the Minister is aware th«* these proxies which arrived in New Zealand were unable to be found at the date when the voting took place for the sale of the company’s property and whether the Minister can explain what became of such proxies from the time they were forwarded to the time when the actual voting took place?” Sir Joseph Ward was “very sorry he could not give the honourable member any information on the matter. As Minister of Railways he had not been consulted about any proxies or about the intentions of the shareholders of the Manawatu Railway Company, either previous or subsequent to the meeting. If the proxies were sent out here for the purpose of being used at the meeting, he took it it would be anything but the proper course for

anyone who had received them to have prevented them from being used for the purpose for which they were sent. But the Government had nothin* whatever to do with the internal affairs of the Manawatu Company, and, speaking for himself, he did not intend to have anything to do with them. His duty was to look after the interests of the State, and he in-

tended to do so.” On July 4 Mr. Pirani wanted the Minister “to explain the proposals of the Government in connection with the interchange of traffic between the Government Railways and the Manawatu Railway on the termination of the existing agreement. Sir Joseph Ward said that the intention of the Government was to retain, as far as possible, all the traffic which originated in its own lines. He thought that was the right thing to do. They had, at enormous cost to the country, constructed railways through the. North Island —from Wellington to Napier on the one hand, and from Palmerston to Wanganui on the other, and it seemed to him that as custodian of the several railways of the State it was their duty, having offered to take the Manawatu Railway over, ar what they believed to be a fair price, and the owners having determined to retain the railway for themselves, to do the best they could for their own railways in order to secure to their railways as much of the traffic as belonged to them.” INFORMATION WANTED

Mr. Pirani replied “he did not ask the Minister the intention of the department. He asked the Minister if he would explain the proposals of the department. He understood the proposals of the Government were absolutely to block the interchange of traffic between the Manawatu Company’s and the Government lines, by taking up the rails and removing the stations, so compelling passengers to walk a quarter of a mile from one station to the other, and goods to be carted that distance. This was the proposal as published and he thought the Minister would have been glad of the opportunity given him to state if either of these were or were not the proposal of the Government.”

The Minister said he “intimated that the Government intended to secure to its own railways all the traffic it could from the existing lines. That was what they intended to do. The Government had made no proposals whatever to the Manawatu Company. All they did was to serve the company with a notice of their intention to determine the existing agreement, and the right time for the Government, as representing the people of the Colony, to submit proposals to the Manawatu Company was some time before the expiry of that notice. In the meantime their duty was to get a\f the bust ness they could for their own railways.”

Asked “what about the public?” the Minister said “the public had not complained, with the exception of a few people who had taken up cudgels on behalf of the Manawatu Company before knowing what was the nature of the Government’s proposals. The Government had made no arrangements such as had been mentioned by the honourable member. They intended to look after their own interests at the right time, and no imaginary complaints or threats on the part of anybody would deter the Government from doing what they believed to be right on behalf of the railways of the State. They would do the beat they could for the large and valuable asset which was under trust to the Government in this matter.” SALE OF BEST LAND

On July 8, Mr. Field “was aware that negotiations had been carried on recently, and that they had failed through no fault of the Government. But since that time there had been an altered condition of things, inasmuch as “the most valuable portion of the company’s land had been sold.” The reason given by the Government in the past, for not buying the line under the Railways Construction and Land Act of 1881, was that the Act did not provide for the purchase of the land, and they declined to take the line without the land. Recently, however, the company had sold their most valuable land properties—namely the Makerua Swamp and the Thorndon Reclamation—and the remainder of their land was mostly rough and mountainous, and hardly worth acquiring by the Government. He wished to know, therefore, whether the Government, considering the altered circumstances, would buy the line in virtue of th«r power under the Act of 1881.” Sir Joseph Ward said “the Government had no intention of reopening the negotiations with the purchase of the Manawatu line. They had already made their position clear.”

In 1908 the time was ripe for the acquisition of the Manawatu line by the State. On one side the company had built its line and worked it with conspicuous success; on the other, the obstructions to the State acquisition, chief of which related to the disposition of the company’s landed endowment, had passed away. The public mind had become determined on the acquisition for various reasons, and while the terms of acquisition were being considered on both sides, it 4 became clear to both that the time had come for the absorption of the line by the State, even if it was suspected in some quarters the State must use its t powers to make an end of the private possession. Sir Joseph Ward had become Prime Minister. He had made clear his determination to bring the railway work of the country under State management. He had made the reason for this equally clear. That the transfer of the line to the State must be effected had become obvious. All that was wanted was patience, tact and mutual goodwill. These conditions were present. Sir Joseph proceeded about the business with great care and with a full recognition of the excellent work the compan> had done; and the directors of tne company showed themselves to he as reasonable over the transfer had been energetic and public spiri t€ ® in the construction. A bargain w * struck advantageous to both side*(To be Continued on Monday.)