THE CANAL.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16422, 16 January 1919, Page 5

THE CANAL.

NEW SCHEME ADOPTED

PUBLIC MEETING TO BE CALLED.

A dofinito scheme for a harbour in ' the Heathcote basin was adopted by the executive of the Christchurch Canal j League last evening, Mr J. J. Graham | presiding. j Previous to this, a conference was ! held between the League and representatives of public bodies with reference to the holding of a public meeting. Mr J. A. Flesher said that Mr J. !R. Hay ward and himself, and also Mr E. J. Howard (who was not present) had been appointed by the City Council to confer with the League', with a view to discussing the holding of a public meeting. They were not there to take part in the League's ordinary business. Their mission was a special one, and he suggested that that business be taken •first of all. The chairman said this was a reasonable request. In moving that a public meeting be called i& Christchurch, the chairman said he cfelt the tioie was opportune for rousing not on'y the people of . Christchurch, but the people of the whole of Canterbury, to the desirability of having another harbour for the city besides Lyttelton. Mr J. It. Hayward asked whether it was the intention of the League to discuss nothing at the public meeting except advocacy of the League's proposals. The chairman said it would be better to thresh the matter out at that meeting. The League invited public criticism, because it knew it could meet it.

Mr C. Allison, in seconding the mo--1 tion, urged that the meeting advocating the canal should be. called under the auspices of the City Council, with the Mayor presiding. Mr 1. H. Harker said all th 6 local bodies to whom circulars had been sent had, with the exception of Sumner, approved of the calling of a public meeting. The League's scheme involved an expenditure of £718,000, it did not comprise the extravagant scheme which had been reported upon by Messrs Coode, Son, and Matthows to the Lyttelton Harbour Board some years ago, and which represented an expenditure of £2,900,000. Mr. Hayward said they were not there to discuss the canal scheme. Their object was to discuss a better means of communication between Christchuxch and Lyttolton. . He had himself favoured the canal scheme. The, City Council had, however, not committed itself to the canal scheme. While many people favoured the canal scheme thousands of others were opposed to it, though they favoured better communication between Christcliurcn and its port. He took it that the object of the. public meeting would be to discuss other schemes besides the canal one. He would guarantee inac the country people would support the construction of a good motor roaa through the hills between Lyttelton and Cliristchurch. He felt sure that if the Canal League adhered to its scheme it would be discilssing it for the next ten years without advancing any further. He could not, as a representative of the City Council, go to a public meeting with them and discuss the canal scheme only. Cr. Fleslier said he could not "go" all the way with his colleague. The extent of th.eir order of reference was to discuss the order of meeting and arrange for speakers from the City Council. That was all the Council representatives could discuss that evening. At the public meeting, if anybody had a better ,proposal than the canal to make, they would be at liberty to bring it forward by way of amendment. They did not want to discuss the question of a ca&al that evening He suggested the appointment of "a committee to make • arrangements for the holding of the public meeting The chairman said they had present representatives from City Council Waimairi County Council, and the Woolston, Spreydon, and New Brighton Borough "Councils. Mr S. A. Staples said he was not representing the "Waimairi County Council, which, as far as he knew hail not appointed a representative. ' The chairman moved that Messrs E. H. Lonsdale, and C. Allison and himself be appointed to confer with the City Council's representatives with a view to calling a public meeting. The motion was carried, and it was decided that the delegates should meet on Friday week. At Mr Hunter's request the meeting affirmed that it was in favour of a public meeting being held. The City Council and other representatives then withdrew. The sub-committee appointed to consider schemes and plans that had been placed before the League at various times, recommended that tho scheme as outlined by Mr S. Jickell be submitted to the Harbour Board, with a request that they should obtain a report thereon from their engineer. The scheme provides for an entrance channel about three miles in length with entrance 700 ft wide at Sumner < head, the said channel terminating in a wet dock or basin near_ the Heathcote bridge, allowance boing made for the waters of the Avon and Heathcote < rivers flowing by the way of the pro- ]

posed entrance and discharging into the open sea. The basin from the root of the jetties to the end of the channel has an area of about 85 acres. The proposal provides for a depth of 25ft in the channel and basin at lowwater. After some discussion the motion was carried. It was decided to change the name of the organisation from "Christchurch Canal League" to "Port Christchurch League," Mr Allison strongly objecting to the meeting's verdict.