The Temuka Leader TUESDAY, JULY 20, 1886. THE DISTICT RAILWAYS SCANDAL.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1534, 20 July 1886, Page 2

The Temuka Leader TUESDA Y, JULY 20, 1886. THE DISTICT RAILWAYS SCANDAL.

Ik oar last issue we commented on the District Railways scandal, holding that there was nothing ycry immoral in Mr Steward’s conduct, and that the action of the Committee who reported on the matter was cowardly, inasmuch as they had not the courage to defend their opinions. What has taken place since has put a different complexion on the affair altogether, bir George Grey resuscitated the subject last Friday evening, and new facts were brought to light which alter the case considerably, and place Mr Steward in & more awkward position. It appears now that the space left blank in Mr Slee’s letter was in reality filled in with the name of Sir Julius Vogel, and that the Committee left bis name out of it. That makes a great deal of difference. In onr last issue wo stated that it was supposed that it was Sir Julias who was referred to in the blank, but we did not believe it, and it appears that many looked upon it in the same light. There is no room to doubt it now ; the cat has teen let out of the bag. Mr Blee’» letter should hare read as follows ;—“ In the event of yourself and 1 Sir Julius Vogel’ effecting this sale, the Directors will treat it as a matter of business. You may remember my speaking of it to you before. I perfectly remember what was said by me. Although the loss to the Company will be a heavy one, this will not preclude their seeing and acknowledging your and ' Vogel’s * services.” This is outrageous, A more glaring instance of bribery and corruption has never come under our notice in New Zealand politics. With Sir Julius Vogel’s name omitted from the letter it was nothing, taken in connection with other facts. Mr Steward had about three years previous'y been commissioned by the Directors of the Waimate Railway Company to sell their debentures, but failed to do bo, and if Sir Julius Vogel’s name bad not been coupled with bis nowit could reasonably be said that no bribery was meant. To most people the letter would appear as only fresh instructions to sell the debentures on the same terras as had been previously arranged, and there would be nothing wrong in that. It would merely amount to giving Mr Steward whfct anyone who could effect a sale would be entitle! to, and nothing more. But when Mr Slee offers to remunerate Sir Julias Vogel as well as Mr Steward for his services, a different aspect of the case is presented altogether. And il is made worse by the fact of Mr Slee saying “ You may remember my speaking of it to you.” Speaking of what ? one most naturally ask, and the answer must be “ Speaking of rewarding the services of Sir Julius Vogel and Mr Steward fordispoiingof the debentures.” It is true that Mr Slee does not in any way anticipate that the Governmen would buy them. He suggests that Mr Steward should try the Government Insurance Association. But let it not be forgotten that Sir Julius Vogel was then Chairman of the Governmen* Insurance Board. The case is not altered therefore because he suggested to offer them to the Government Insurance Association, and is the same in every way as offering him a bribe as Colonial Treasurer,

It. is a distinction without a difference. Now it is said that Sir Ju'ius Vogel, neror knew of the existence of this lethr. If ao Mr Steward has been guilty of more than one offence. First, it is evident he hod some conversation with Mr Slea on the subject beforehand, but what that conversation was must be left to the imagination of the reader. It is not at all probable, in fact, it is not consistent with common sense, that Mr Slee would have named Sir Julias Vogel in the letter only that he had been encouraged to do so by some previous conversation with Mr Steward. Secondly, in his evidence he stated ho had not shared the commission ho got with anyone, It is evident that Mr Slee intended the commission to be divided between Sir Julius Vogel and Mr Steward, and, according to his own showing, he has pocketed all of it. Taking these things into consideration wo are obliged to reverse the decision wo previously arrived at, and to believe that the report of the Committee was not at all too strong. But what a fool Mr Steward must have been to give up such a letter at all. Could not anyone see that such a letter would not only condemn himself, but also leave Sir Julius Vogel open to. the suspicion of having shared the commission 7 It is very hard on Sir Julius Vogel if bo knew nothing of this letter before, and instead of deserving blame he is entitled to every honest man’s sympathy. And now, as regards Mr Slee, if he cannot be punished in any other way his name ought to be removed off the Commission of the Peace at once, and such of the Directors of the Wuimate Railway as are J.P.’s ought to be similarly treated. Mr Slee is only their Secretary, and it is not at all likely that he would write such a letter without the Directors’ knowledge. It is more than probable, therefore, that the Directors were privy to the transaction, and if so they are equally ns guilty as Mr Slee, and should share in his punishment. The offence is a serious due. It is an attempt to bribe, through their representative in Parliament, a Minister of the Crown to purchase from them a very bad bargain, and any men who could contemplate such a thing are not fit to be entrusted with the Commission of (he Peace. We have not at all altered our opinion of the Parliamentary Committee on the matter. They had no right to suppress Sir Julius Vogel’s name. In doing so they did him injury, because it has misled people, and made the matter more suspicious, while if they believed him guilty it was very wrong of them to try to screen him. It was also very cowardly on their part not to have defended their report on the first evening, and to remain silent on a matter of such a serious nature till driven to it by Sir George Grey, On tbe whole it is a very discreditable affair, and if Sir Julius Vogel bad bo knowledge ot Mr Slee’s letter he is certainly deserving of general sympathy,