NAPIER HARBOR BOARD.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 4009, 28 May 1884, Page 3

NAPIER HARBOR BOARD.

The adjourned meeting was held this morning at 11 a.m. Present: J. D. Ormond (in the chair), Hon. J. N. Wilson, J W. Neal, J. H. Vautier, W. S. Smith, M.H.H., J. A. Smith, H. Williams, J. N. Williams, and His Worship the Mayor. The Chairman said, since the last meeting of the Board, the report of the Commissioners had heen printed, and the additional paragraph which they had omitted in their report was added at their request to the report. On Saturday Mr GoodalTs notes on the report were receired and steps ■were taken to have them printed. The only thing he had to explain to the Board •was his giving permission when asked by the secretary to have the _ reply published in the papers in extenso prior to the meeting of the Board. He had given that permission, as he saw no harm but an adrantage in having such done. It was now for the Board to take up the question of the adjourned meeting , and say what steps should be taken. The notes of Mr Goodall were taken as read.

Mr W. 0. Smith said he would like to say a few words as the mover of the resolution upon -which, the Commission was a,x>pointed. After carefully going through the report and the reply it seemed to him that the Board had done a wise thing in appointing the Commission. There was a strong feeling outside that, if they went to Parliament as they had formerly stood, they should have been met with the objection that they had simply one engineer's report, which was not supported. Though that feeling was in a minority the majority of the Board felt it was the wisest course to meet the objection at once. He thought every member of the Board _ would say it was a most impartial Commission, and not a biassed one in favor of the work. Mr Bell was appointed on the recommendation of the Engineer-in-Chief, who it was known was against that class of works. They could therefore take the standpoint that the Commission was impartial. He thought the conclusions come to by the Board and the general public were that the report was favorable to the works. There was no question but the site was well chosen. An argument used against Mr Goodall's plan was that the site was not a good one. A certain engineer wrote to the Board and said the site was the worst that could be selected. The Commission said it was the best, and the structure was sufficiently strong to stand the seas, and therefore a good work. The difference in the cost between the two estimates was only something like £35,000, and the Board could see at once that the difference was not very large, and then they had to remember the designs sent Home were fixed at £250,000. Mr Goodall's estimate was more likely te be the right one than the Commissioners for it should be remembered he was engaged on a similar work at Timaru. His estimate was the result of personal experience, _ while the Commissioners depended on their general knowledge, therefore the Board ought not to consider the difference in the estimates. With reference to the shingle difficulty, the report really came to this, that they had nothing further to say with reference to that matter, that there was nothing thoy conld point out except what they Imew before, namely, that the Timaru work was a success, and had kept back the shingle, and they counselled delay. Delay meant that the whole province was to stand still, and the loss of time would be a loss to the province in everyway. They had added to the report that it would take many years before the shingle would accumulate, if it did it would only be after fifty years that the dredge would be required. The general public thought it would be necessary at once, but the Commissioners pointed out that the shingle difficulty would not be experienced till the end of fifty years, and by that time, he apprehended, the prorince would be able to stand the expense of dredging if necessary. Mr Goodall, in reference to the Whaakari, showed that there was no necessity for that, the Commissioners saw that the bluff had thrown back the shingle for hundreds of years. They had nothing before them to Bhow that at the end of fifty years the shingle would put them to expense to meet the difficulty. The main point was that by a further expenditure of £250,000 a better breakwater could be made. Everyone would understand that, if after the present expenditure it would bo an advantage to make a further breakwater, it should be left to the people who came after them. The Commission had completely supported Mr Goodall in the main features, and it was their plain duty to get the bill passed, let it tro to the people, and thoy would then have a say as to whether the money should be raised or not. They would have everything beforo them, and after that report of the Commission there would be tO difficulty in getting the Engineer-in-Chief to sign the plans when the time came. If the Commission had reported that the works were bad, or the site bad, they would have been in a bad position, but the report was so good that they should spend the money, that nine out of ten outside wero of the opinion that it was the duty of the Board to go on without delay, and leave the people to say whether the money should be raised or not. The Chairman said the course the Board had taken up to that time was to pass a resolution that the work should be carried out. A committee was appointed to take steps to get the bill ready and prepare the evidence. Those were the formal steps taken by the Board. The next step was, a resolution had been passed after the bill had been considered asking the members for the district to tako charge of the bill in Parliament. When that was being done one of those gentlemen raised the question of a further report by other engineers, and that was agreed to. The only thing desirable for the Board now to do was to get copies of these reports circulated, and it was for the Board to say whether they wished that done. It would be better to have some sort of motion, so that they would have some practical thing to go on. He supposed the Board would wish a copy of that report to be circulated with the bill. Mr W. C. Smith: It has been circulated. The Chairman: Not among the members

Hon. J. N. Wilson: Undoubtedly it would be required to circulate copies of the report among the members of both Houses. The Chairman: Some formal motion should be put before the Board. If that were not done the Board could talk and nothing -would come of it. The Hon. J. N. Wilson would move that the report be circulated. He did not think they were in the same position as before. He did not feel competent to give an opinion on the estimates. There was no doubt in his mind that the cost would be larger than was talked, of, he could come to no other conclusion. The report waa satisfactory on tho whole, though beyond any doubt it meant a largor expenditure, and they ought to face that at once. He thought some understanding- ought to be arrived at in adopting the smaller scheme and asking for the smaller amount in the bill, thatthey were involving the district for the larger amount. He did not doubt that a satisfactory work could be made for the sum Mr Goodall named. The report by the Board gave the statistics and showed how the interest and charges could be met, though it might be revised now, owing to the larger expenditure that might be expected. Hβ thought that ought to be done now. It might be worth while to take power to raise more money, because by the present bill the smaller amount named would not possibly do what waa wanted. They knew perfectly well they would have a further outlay before the outlay that will be made will have any effect, and even if they obtained power to raise that money they could do nothing till the ratepayers had expressed their opinion on it. But they would not be doing justice in bringing forward an amount as final which could not be final. The larger amount would in the end be required, and he thought, as one of the members who would have charge of the bill, tho point would be certainly raised in Parliament whether the amount was sufficient, though that wa3 no reason why the works pkouid notjbe proceeded with, as they were

not professing to make a complete• woik foi the small amonnt of money. Although he was supporting the measure, they ought to have an understanding that although they were asking for the small amount that was not all that was required. Mr J. A. Smith said the Commissioners were asked to report on Mr Goodall's plans, and not as to increased works. Mr H. Williams said Mr Wilson was out in his remarks, because Mr Goodall never thought the breakwater was all they would need in the future, but he thought it was enough for the present. As to northeast seas, which the Commissioners say would cause the waves to curl round the works, Mr Goodall says that would not be serious, and it was said that the north-west winds would also be serious. These things may be cured, and Mr Goodall thinks that the sea feels very little of these north-west winds, being a land breeze, and so coulcl not bring up much sea, and therefore at present it was not necessary to bring up that extra wall. They were not going to have a harbor so secure that it might be considered a natural harbor. They considered that Mr Goodall's plan was a feasible and good scheme, similar to Timaru. There they were threatened with all sorts of serious consequences. The thing was to be overwhelmed and smothered, there was no hope of a breakwater. Two years ago he saw the Timaru works, and he saw vessels of considerable tonnage doing good work in rough weather, though there was a heavy sea, the waves dashing against the breakwater, and the spray a long way above it, and yet the Tessels were peaceful, raid it struck him as very nice indeed, and at that time the work was far from completed. Up to the present ! the works there had been got for an ex--1 penditure of £130,000, and they had achieved such good results that they (the Board) wero perfectly justified in furthering that plan. The matter of £35,000 difference in the estimates was not very serious, and it was a matter of opinion whether the price might not come nearer Mr Goodall's limit than theirs (the Commissioners), because his judgment was more to be relied on than theirs, theirs being theory, his practice. The Board would do wrong to increase the amount to be borrowed, or to alter the bill in any way. They would find that £200,000 would make a good harbor, which might not be perfect in very heavy gales. It was not so in natural harbors, there was no inconvenience from heavy seas. They did not expect to get a smooth lake in rough weather, they wanted a good harbor for ordinary circumstances, and the Board would bo wrong to agitate for anything further. He felt satisfied with the report. It was rare that engineers gave such a report on other people's work. At Timaru the work was denounced as the work of a madman, and yet there it was a great success. Mr J. A. Smith said their pilot should be kept a little in order, A jobbling sea was caused by the wind and tide meeting making a broken sea. The pilot ought to be examined in nautical matters by the secretaiy. Hon. J. N. Wilson : You might take him in hand.

Mr W. C. Smith said any application for a breakwater had always resulted in more than one bill being brought forward. If it turned out that further expenditure was an advantage they could deal with that when the time came. He did not think it would bo wise to increase the amount in the bill; he thought they had committed themselves so far to the amount that, to alter it, would be n clzfadvantag-e. They would not be able to tell till the money was spent how much more would be required. If his (Mr Goodall's) works were carried out according to what he himself thought, the breakwater might be sufficient to last them a good many years. If the trade of the place and the snecess of the breakwater warranted it, thoy might go in for further expense. The report and reply having been circulated, the people would quite understand on what they wore voting—the smaller scheme, and the amount to be raised was only sufficient to do that, and they would be quite aware that some future Board would apply if necossary for a further amount. It would take four or five years to spend the £200,000, and they would bo in a better position to know the further cost than if they borrowed £300,000, when they might find they did not need tho money, or wanted another £100,000. The large amount of £65,000 for contingencies, he apprehended, would not be required. Hon. J. N. Wilson said Mr Smith was quite right when he said in such undertakings there were repeated applications, but it did not always follow that success followed these. In Dunedin they had altered their scheme continually, and they had got very little value for their money, and it was probabla they would have to begin again The Board should strenuously take up a scheme and let the people understand that was tho scheme required, and not bo under tho opinion that they were undertaking a thing, and if it did not suit it would be altered, and they would thus disarm opposition. He was far from wanting to throw opposition in the way, and he did not say that it would require a larger amount to make any sort of breakwater effective, but it was perfectly plain that the sum (£200,000) mentioned in the bill would not make an effective work. The evidence was perfectly plain on that point, at least such was his view of the reports. But that was no reason why the work should not bo proceeded with. They had better data than before for going on, only it would not do to be too sanguine that the work could be completed for the sum named. On tho motion of Mr W. C. Smith, seconded by the Hon. J. N. Wilson, it was greed, " that the report of Messrs Bell and Scott, and Mr Goodall's notes on tho same bo circulated with the bill presented to Parliament."

Mr J. A. Smith asked whether it would not bo desirable to circulate the reports among the local bodies. Mr W. C. Smith : "We have circulated them through the papers. Hon. J. N. Wilson said, since looking at the bill with more attention, he could not help thinking that there might be an amendment made in the rating areas. There had been a meeting- in one of the remote counties affected which was opposed to it altogether. The more he considered it the more ho thought there should bo an increasing rate. Ho did not think people on the confines of the province should bear the same rate as those outside the boundaries of the borough. He did not propose any alteration in the bill, but he thought it well that the Board should give some intimation to the mombers who would be in charge of it whether they should not propose some amendment to that effect. They knew very •well that the rating in the end might be a serious thing, and he did not think it vrould be just that it would fall with great hardship on people in the remote districts, and the people who would get the greatest benefit would pay very little. Parliament might take that on itself, but as a matter of fact it would not do so, and it would not be proper for the individual members in charge to suggest any amendment -without the authority of the Board to do so. He was sorry ho did not raise that before, but it was only on reconsideration of the bill that it occurred to him.

Mr J. W. Neal would explain to Mr Wilson that the committee went fully into that question. They first endeavored to allot certain rates to the different districts, but the values of the land would make that allotment. The property tax valuation was the basis, and the land which received the most benefit would bo tho lands adjacent to the town, and the breakwater would increase the",value of them, and lands valued at £20 to £50 per acre would bo rated at those values, and lands in the far distance would only pay on their value. Land valued at £2 per acre, with a halfpenny rate, would only pay one penny per acre, while land at "Hastings valued at £50 would'pay 2s Id per acre. The lande would thus give the rates. [Respecting the rate he was quite confident that they should very probably have no rate to levy. The trade of the port would so increase as the works went on, and the rating could only bo looked upon as a matter of satisfying the lender, it was a security for the loan only.

The subject then dropped, and the Board adjourned.