27

1.—7

Court Practice and Procedure Act Amendment Act, 1866," or to an arbitration to be conducted under " The Government Contractors Arbitration Act, 1872," provided certain amendments are first made in that Act. The principal amendments which I would suggest on Messrs. Brogden's behalf are —■ Repeal section 4, which is practically inoperative, as it relates to disputes between the Engineer and contractor, which can only arise during the progress of the works. Repeal section 8, which seems inconsistent with section 26. Repeal sections 12, 13, and 14. Section 9 gives the Judge power to summon witnesses at his discretion. Repeal sections 27, 28, and 29, and add a clause embodying such of the provisions relating to arbitration and references in the Supreme Court Practice, &c, Act, 1866, as are not inconsistent with the previous provisions of " The Government Contractors Arbitration Act, 1872." Repeal section 31. Add a clause negativing operation of Act as regards all future contracts, if any, between the Government and Messrs. Brogden. Perhaps you will be good enough to consider this proposal, and let me hear from you thereon. I have, &e., H. D. Bell, Esq., Crown Solicitor. Chaeles W. Cate.

Mr. Bell to Mr. Cave. JBrorjden v. Queen. — Invercargill and Mataura Contract. Sie,— Wellington, 30th Jane, 1881. I am not prepared on behalf of the respondent to consent to an order of reference under the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Acts, as suggested in your letter of the 20th instant. In reply to that part of the same letter in which you suggest certain amendments to be made on Messrs. Brogden's behalf in "The Government Contractors Arbitration Act, 1872," I am directed to state that the Government see no reason to recommend Parliament to repeal any of the provisions of that Act. This letter is without prejudice. I have, <&c, H. D. Bell, Charles W. Cave, Esq., Solicitor, Wellington. Crown Solicitor.

Messrs. Beogden and Sons to the Hon. the Ministee for Public Wobks. Sie,— Grey Street, Wellington, Ist July, 1881. We have the honor to forward you herewith Petitions of Eight in respect of thefollowing contracts, viz,, Newmarket-Mercer, Auckland Station, Auckland to Newmarket, Onehunga Branch, Napier and Pakipaki, Dunediu and Clutha (Taieri Contract), Picton and Blenheim, and request that the Government will be good enough to recommend that they be indorsed by His Excellency the Governor. We forward them notwithstanding your letter of the 3rd June, and we cannot believe the Government will refuse to allow us to bring these claims before the Courts of justice in the colony. We have, &c, The Hon. the Minister for Public Works, Wellington. John Beogden and Sons.

The Undee-Secretahy for Public Wobks to Messrs. Beogden and Sons. Gentlemen-, — Public Works Office, Wellington, 13th July, 1881. I am directed by the acting Minister for Public Works to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the Ist July, in which you forward six Petitions of Eight in respect of the contracts therein named, and request that His Excellency the Governor may be recommended to indorse the same. In reply, 1 am to inform you that, having given your request due consideration, the Government do not see any reason for modifying their decision conveyed in the Acting Minister's letter of the 3rd June, and the six Petitions of Eight above alluded to are therefore returned. I have, &c, Messrs. John Brogden and Sons, Wellington. John Knowles, Under-Secretary for Public Works.

Messrs. Beogden and Sons to the Hon. the Ministek for Public Wobks. Sir,— Grey Street, Wellington, 14th July, 1881, We have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday's date, P.W. 81-2212, No. 2770, together with the Petitions of Bight which were forwarded to the Government by us on the Ist July. We may here mention that there are only five petitions returned, and not sis as stated in your letter. Wo hold ourselves free to take any course we may be advised. The Hon. the Minister for Public Works, We have, &c, Wellington. John Beogden and Sons.