§ MR. HERBERT LEWIS (Flint Boroughs)I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that a contract, dated the 27th October, 1890, was entered into with the South African Cold Storage Company for the supply of fresh meat to the troops in the field at 11d. per pound, the terms implying that it was a live cattle contract, but notwithstanding this, three-fourths of the three million pounds of meat supplied; under the contract up to the 1st February, 1900, was refrigerated; whether 1329 the contract was renewed in January, 1900, on the same terms subject to a reduction of 2d. per pound on all frozen meat accepted; whether the company has now agreed to refund to the War Department 2d. per pound on all frozen meat paid for at 11d. per pound since the war broke out; what is the date of that agreement; what is the amount of the sum to be refunded; and has the arrangement been carried out; and whether the War Office regards the refund of 2d. per pound as adequate having regard to the fact that very shortly after the 27th October, 1899, the date of the earlier contract, the Cape Government suspended the collection of customs duties upon the importation of fresh and frozen mutton and beef, and that these duties (2d. per pound on mutton and 1d. per pound on beef) would have been recoverable by the War Department from the colony had they remained in force, their suspension being pro tanto a loss to Imperial funds and a further gain to the contractors.
LORD STANLEYThe answer to the first two paragraphs of the hon. Member's question is in the affirmative. As regards the third paragraph, the company has agreed to make the refund in question, the agreement being dated 22nd September, 1900. The General Officer Commanding received instructions in December last to make the necessary deduction, but the exact amount of it has not been reported. As regards the fourth paragraph, the suspension of customs duty referred to involved neither gain nor loss to the contractors, as no duty was ever charged by the Colonial Government on meat imported for the use of the troops. The reduction in price is therefore a real reduction of charge.
§ MR. HERBERT LEWISMay I ask whether the Controller and Auditor General was wrong in saying that the reduction in the duty made no change in the circumstances of the terms of the contract?
LORD STANLEYI think the last was wrong. No duty was imposed by the Colonial Government on meat imported for the troops.
§ MR. FIELD (Dublin, St. Patrick's)Has the company refunded the money as agreed?
LORD STANLEYI have said that the General Officer Commanding received instructions in December last to make the necessary reduction.