MR TURNBULL AND THE HARBOR BOARD.

Evening Star, Issue 3798, 27 April 1875, Page 2

MR TURNBULL AND THE HARBOR BOARD.

To the Editor. Sir,—l observed in the ‘Guardian’ of the 23rd a letter from “George Turnbull,” and from its contents I suppose it is the person who officially signs himself “Provincial Treasurer.” A leading article in the ‘Guardian’ of same date also appears, evidently inspired from the same source, and boasts of its obtaining “reliable information.” Well, sir, I cannot say the same, as although both sides have been heard 1 want to know a little more from “ George Turnbull” and the ‘Guardian’ before I can say that I am satisfied with their “reliable information.” It strikes forcibly that the public have before them a repetition of the Turnbull-Bastings dispute of last year in this matter of the Harbor Board, but it will not be so easy for Mr T to mislead the public in this, as he succeeded to a certain extent iu doing in Mr B.’s case. I fancy he has a secretary of works now that is more than a match for him, and I am strongly of the opinion he will find trying it on with the Board will be getting out of the into the fire. The Board is very explicit in its statement of facts, which Mr i'. does not attempt to deny ; but speaks of “unfair conclusions,” while there are no conclusions giyen by the Board. Prom what J have read of the Board’s proceedings, I understand that the Government handed over the jetty dues and pilotage on the Ist December, 1874, and that since then the Board has paid all the liabilities and debts incurred by it out of the revenue derived from these sources and the sale of debentures j and that, although at one time they were led to expect revenue from unexpended votes, there does not appear to be any forthcoming. t 'an Mr T. or the ‘ Guardian ’ show evidence that these are not facts ? As the Board’s accounts, according to the Ordi nance, are .open lor inspection, I have examined them to satisfy myself, and say they cannot be denied. Mr Turnbull’s statements of the Treasury accounts may be correct; but, after last y ear’s experience, they may be wrong, and hemay claim, although he be Jhead of the department, that he is not responsible. Taking it for granted, however, that his statement of figures is corteot this time, what does his statement amount to ? Although jesuitically put (he is an adept at that), his statement does not conflict with the Board s. Take the two together with one that was made at a meeting of the Board about the end of October or beginning of November last, when a Treasury statement was submitted showing a balance of nearly LIO,OOO of unexpended balances, and what must the conclusion be? The only one that I can form is this: that the whole of that amount has been swallowed up since then in paying accounts incurred before the plant and management was handfid over to the Board, although possiblv the accounts were paid after. L 2,000 o'f that may he supposed to have gorie for the Peninsula stiamw j where fcafr

•esfc gone will be a question, no doubt, I asked in the Provincial Com ell. One thing is cer- ' ula ? ufc: of it has been paid no part of expendi- | u o incune Iby the Board. Mr T. maliciously cnarged a member, last session of ' ouncil, with being desirous of appropriating Government money, and he may say the same of the Board this yeai, but the blame of unauthorised expenditure cannot be laid upon the Board, let n m try ever so. But I would ask this question : how could the Government have carried ou from Ist December to the present time if they had no unexpended votes some five months ago. It must have been by incurring unauthorised expenditure. Instead of blaming the Harbor Board for its plain statement of facts I think the public, at all events, may be thankful that a person holding the high position Air T. does, has been spared the temptation to get out of the consequence of his own neglect of his office duties and of not knowing the true state of the Government expenditure, by impugning the conduct of one of his colleagues, as he did last year; even if he does try to throw tbs onus upon the Board, as there are more of them they can bear it better. The Harbor Board and not bis depository of “ reliable information ” has been his guardian angel, and that he would soon learn, if ha could only rid himself of that other evil spirit which so often presents him from, candidly confessing the truth Can you explain, or will George Turnbull do so, how that in the Treasury accounts laid on the table of the Council last session, tonnage and harbor dues only showed for the whole year L 1,865 14s 9d; while the Harbor Board Finance Committee’s statement shows that during the last quarter of the same year the amount paid over to the Treasury by the Customs was LI, 182 12s 9d! What! onlyL6B3 2a for the other niue months? Is this statement of the Harbor Board correct ? If so ! ah, yes, t remember there was that discrepancy in the Treasury accounts last year—Ll 4s 6d “to bs a 1 justedbut then I also remember how well tiie accounts, as presented, (corresponded—the actual with the estimated revenue, I give it up. I confers, sir, I want “reliable information,” and so will the Provincial Council, no doubt, when it meets. —I am, &c., Observer. Dunedin, April 24.