FOXTON HARBOUR.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1808, 22 July 1913, Page 6

FOXTON HARBOUR.

PLEA FOR LOCAL CONTROL. DEMAND RENEWED. DEPUTATION TO MINISTERS. A deputation, representative of local bodies in the Manawatu district, waited upon the Prime Minister (the Hon. W. F. Massey), the Hon. W. H. Herries (Minister for, Railways), and the Hon. F. M. B. Fisher (Minister for Marine), to submit proposals for a change in the methods of administering the Foxton Harbour. Mr. 3. Robertson, M.P., introduced tho deputation, and Mr. D. Buick, M.P. for Palinerston, also supported them. Early History. Mr. P. Hennessy, chairman of the Foxton Harbour Board,, sajd that in 1878 tho Harbour Board .was constituted, invested with certain endowments, and with power to collect charges. Unfortunately thero had been some misunderstanding, and the people of tho Foxton district had not taken up the privileges given them in common with residents of other ports on tho coast. The Railway Department finally got possession of the wharf, in the same ,-year the Act was passed, and through tho board being unable to get tho revenues of tho port, and through the hnrbour being rendered usoless by tho cut freights of the Manawatu Railway Company, little shipping hud come-up tho river for some years. In the end the board was dissolved in 188 G. About the next year, however, the flax industry came into existence, and at once the harbour became desirable. The river was found to be too shallow for easy navigation, but no revenues were available for the work of deepening the channel. The Harbour Board was resuscitated, and the board reconstructed legally, but the board had not by the new Act been given power to get the revenues of the wharf. The Railway Department had refused to hand over the revenues, or to lease the wharf, but had offered to sell it at prices ranging a? different periods from .£20,000 to J228.000. These prices the board could not afford to pay. What the deputation asked was that the board be allowed to build a new wharf, and that the Government put in a railway connection to it. Mr. .Massey: What would become of tho ol<l wharf?

Mr. Hennessy. It would still be there. Mr. Massey: Would it be of any value? ■Mr. Hennessy urged'that the Foxton Board should be given the>.»ame privileges as boards in Wellington or elsewhere. In reply to Mr. Massey he said the board would be -willing to make the Government an offer ior the old wharf, based on tho volume o'f~ business done, and he suggested that a ftiir price would be ,£IO,OOO. He pointed out that if the harbour were imnroved the Bailway Department would, t>y getting coal up the river instead of by way of Wanganui, land coal at Palmerston at Is. per ton less than they could at present. Of course the district wiuld profit very miioh moro by the cheaper freights. Several Alternatives. Mr. J. A. Nash, Mayor of Palmerston, and member of the Foxton Harbour Board, said the board approached the Government with some confidence, and they regarded thid as "a final flutter." The present deputation was the outcomo of a largely-attended meeting at Palmerston. At present, owing to lack of funds, the Foxton Harbour Board could do nothing, could not even pay its secretary an adequate salary. Undoubtedly the present wharf was in a dilapidated nnd even dangerous state, and something ought to be done to improve facilities of the port generally. The price at which the wharf was offered to the board by the Bailway Department was going up all the time. If the Government refused to sell at a price the board could pay, or if the Government would refuse' to allow the board to build a new wharf, perhaps the board might be allowed to appeal by petition to the House of Representatives. Tliis would relieve the Government of all responsibility. Failing any other relief, he suggested that the board be given some reasonable endowment. Without assistance in some shape tho l»ard could not carry on, and the keeping of the harbour open was a matter of importance to a very l>ig district. Mr. G. Stiles, Mayor of Foxton, supported all that the other speakers had said. He did not think it was fair for the Government to capitalise the value of the wharf on the net revenue. Mr. E. H. Crabbe, member of the Palmerston Borough Council, said the Bailway Department bad no Tight to divert the wharfage revenue to improvo tho railway accounts, when the Harbours Act laid it down that all revenues from a port must be spent on improvement of that port. . , Mr. L. E. Bryant and Mr. D. Buick, M.P., (supported the other speakers.

. .Prime Minister's Reply. The Prime Minister, in reply, said he had been very much interested in what the speakers had said, and he could say that as a result he understood the position of affairs very much better than ho ever had before. It seemed to him liowever that there were very serious difficulties in the way of arriving at'a settlement. • The position appeared to bo that the Fox ton Harbour Board wanted to control the harbour, and that tliey were prepared to pay .£IO,OOO for tho old •wharf, or in the alternative they wero prepared to snend ,£IO.OOO on a new wharf.. It seeijied to him the alternative was hardly worth considering, because under that scheme the present wharf would bo useless. The Railway Department said that the wharf was worth to them ,£36,000, this result being • reached b3 capitalising the net revenue, but they were prepared to take .£28,000. On tlia other hand, the Foxton Harbonir Board said they hwl previously been offered tho wharf for but this amount waa still .£IO,OOO moro than they were prepared to pay. He was inclined to favour the suggestion made by Mr. Nasli that the Harbour Board should petition Parliament. The matter could then be referred to a special committee or to the Petitions Committee, and evidence could bo heard. After a full inquiry of this kind, it was probable, ho thought, that an arrangement could be mads I>V the parties concerned. Mr. Herries, as Minister for Railways, was in the position of trustee, and it was his duty to seo that tho property of the Railway Department was conserved. He must not give away the property of the people of the whole of the Dominion to any particular section of tho people. The Hon. W. H. Herries said he had not previously heard that the wharf was in a state of'disrepair, as the deputation had suggested. His last report in February last was that the wharf was in good order. He would have inquiries made to discover which statement was correct. In reply to Mr. Nash, the Prime Minister'said there would be a difficulty about giving tho Foxton Board an endowment of land, owing to the fact that there was no Crown land neaT, and he did not think it would l>e good policy to give the board as an endowment land in another district. A member of tho deputation suggested in reply that if the Harbour Board could get the revenues of tho wharf, tliey would need no other endowment, nor would they ask for any other.