THE FOXTON WHARF.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 921, 22 November 1910, Page 4

THE FOXTON WHARF.

The following is the balance of Mr P. J. Heunessy’s evidence given before the Railway Committee in support of the petition re purchase of the local wharf: 31. Out of the general coffers here from Wellington ?—Yes. The four Boards —Waitara, Wanganui. Patea, and Foxtou —were in the same position. The Government built the wharves at these ports as well as at Foxton, but in the case of the other Boards they gave them over the revenues from the wharfages. They are paid over to the other Boards in each case. In our case they did not do so, and in trying to get the new Bill through, we put this clause referring to the wharfages into the Bill. However, the Minister, Mr Hall-Jones, objected to it, and the member in charge of the Bill, Mr Stevens, agreed to the deletion of that portion, with an idea that there would be some future settlement made about the revenues.

32. What does your Board do ? —Try to keep the river in a navigable condition. 33. Have you any revenue ? Only sufficient to pay the pilots and from laud endowment, the Pilotage Reserve, and the Marine Reserve.

34. Have you got any foreshore rights?—We have got a foreshore, but it is absolutely valueless. The only valuable part is at present held by the Railway Department. 35. Have you any harbour district for rating purposes ?—No. 3(3. Would it not be a good thing to come to terms with the Government and buy the whole thing out ? —We would do so, but the amount the Government is asking is out of all proportion. 37. For the wharf ?—Yes. 38. How long is it ? —About 600 ft. It was built in 1880.

Mr Rouayne : It has been added to until it is about double the length. 39. Mr Craigie : Would it not be better if you could lorm a harbour district, have rating-powers, and manage the whole thing yourselves ? —We are always met with the reply, that why should we ask for a rate when our neighbouring Boards have no rating area or distiicr, but are simply running on their revenue. Wellington, for instance, has no rating-area. The only ones that have are where there are artificial harbours — Timaru, Oamaru, New Plymouth, and Napier. 40. Some of those you have mentioned are a mighty success. If you run on the same lines as the Timaru Harbour, you will be doing 3.1 right?—You can go fuuhe ; down, and find one not so successful.

41. Mr Rhodes : Wanganui and Patea have the right to the wharfages ? —They have got all the wharfages.

42. How did it happen that they are allowed and you are not ? —Simply because the then Government was more generous than the present one. They made us pay the penalty. They forced the old Harbour Board out of existence, and the people did not have the backbone to fight ; they did not have an Irishman at their head.

43. What Act put your Board out of existence ? —The Harbour Boards Dissolution Act of 1886.

44. That gave Wanganui and Patea the right to acquire the wharfages ? —The Harbours Act, IS7B, conferred the wharlages on these places. 45. And the 1886 Act did not touch them ? —They were live bodies, and had their revenues to work upon. 46. It appears to me that you will be at a standstill if the river is silting up ? —lt is silting up very badly at present. 47. Does the Railway Department propose to keep it in order? They say that tney are not allowed by statute to do so. 48. Apparently they did spend upon it ?

Hon. Mr Millar: That is in front of their own wharf. It was necessary to protect their own property.

Witness: We are prepared to protect the property now if we get the revenues. At present there is a very bad shoal up close to the wharf. We were applied to by McMurray and Co., to do some dredging, and we said we would as soon as we got the money. 49. Mr Arnold : These wharves were there previous to the old Board being abolished ? —Yes. 50. Were they vested in the Board ? —No, because the Government never passed the wharf over to the Board, as in the case of the neighbouring towns. The understanding with the other Boards was that by giving the Government a certain amount of foreshore the Government would erect wharves, collect the revenues, and return the revenue, less the cost of handling and 2 l /t per cent, for collecting. The Government never did that in the case of Foxton, and these wharves were built by the Government. 51. When the new Board was set up, at what disadvantage was it placed in comparison with the old Board ?—We got no wharfages, and they are the principal source of revenue. The Government never gave them to the old Board -—that is, never allowed them to collect the wharfages, though the Board was entitled to them by statute—and forced them out of existence in that way.

52. Really there is no difference between the two Boards ?—Any more than that if the people had been alive to their interests at the time, they could, have demanded this, and the Government would have given it.

53, Mr Brown: Supposing there had been no wharf at all there, what position would you be in ?

We should have put the wharf there. 54. And you would have paid tor it ? —Yes. 55. And have got revenue ? Yes. 56. And now they are offering it to you at per cent, and you will not take it ?—No, lor ,£23,000. 57. If you had to put the wharf up now, it would cost you more than ten years ago. What wharfages are you paying now ? Two shillings on general cargo, is 6d on produce, is on coal. These are the principal items. 58. That is not very expensive, is it ? —No. 59. Can yon raise it a bit } Supposing you bought the wharf from the Railway Department, and paid 4A per cent., put 3d a ton on general cargo and 6d a ton on coal, would that make it prohibitive ? —I cannot answer the question the way it is put. 60. Would 3d or 6d a ton extra make it prohibitive for goods to come in ? —No, certainly not. 61. It would stop the trade of the port coming through the port ? —No. 62. It would enable you to borrow money to buy the wharf, and you would be under no great auxiely to improve the trade. Something was mentioned about a harbour-improvement rate ? —We have not struck it. 63. Supposing you struck it, the ships would pay it, and you would have the revenue to dredge your harbour ? —But not sufficient to keep it going. 64. It you put 6d a ton extra on your goods, you would get that revenue to dredge with. It seems to me that if you tried to be selfsupporting, the difficulty could be easily got over ? —We have offered to buy the wharf, but the price the Governmeut wants is capital on the revenue, not on the wharf itself. 65. Reverse the position. Would you not take up the same position yourself ? —Yes, we would ; but we reckon the boot is on the other foot. 66. Hon. Mr Millar: Did you receive an offer from the Marine Department of a Priestman dredge free of cost ? —Yes. 67. Did you accept it? —No, because it was not suitable for us ; we should have to build a punt. It is not the class of dredge we understand. We want a suction dredge. A Priestman dredge would be wasting time there. 68. Do you not know that it is being used by other Harbour Boards ? —We know that a suction dredge is up to date, especially in a very sandy bottom. 69. Did you expect the Government to buy you a suction dredge ? —We expect that it should be bought with our own money. 70. The Chairman : Have you an engineer ? —No.

yr. Well, on whose advice did you refuse the dredge ? —We refused it on the ground that we did not have money to pay for some punts that would be required. 72. It would entail additional expense that you could not afford? —Yes.

73. You desire the wharf to be handed over to the Board although it was built by the Department ? That is what I want to be perfectly clear upon. We reckon that we should be put on the same footing as the neighbouring ports. 74. Do you ask this because you think a precedent was established in the cases of Wanganui, Patea, and Waitara ? —Yes.

75. You think you should receive the same treatment as these places?—Yes. 76. You are willing to pay what you would consider a reasonable price for the wharf ?—Yes. 77. If you do not consider their offer a reasonable one, and they do not consider your offer a reasonable one, could you suggest how the difference between you could be settled ?—I should be prepared to submit it to arbitration.

78. And you would be prepared then to endeavour to get a ratingarea, and get the support ot the rateoayers to pay a price fixed by arbitration ? —I could get a certain rating-area, but it would be limited. I think so —that is, if I could go to the district and say that we had agreed upon a price. If we could agree upon a price, I am satisfied that I could get a rating-area to secure the amount. 79. You feel confident that the people would support you ?—Yes, in that particular thing. I should like to ask the Minister, if we could not come to terms, and built a wharf on our own land, whether we should get facilities from the Government ?

80. Hon. Mr Millar : Do you think it reasonable to suggest that if you had built a wharl and gone to the expense of putting in a siding, you would do it ? If you had a business, would you go and build a shop alongside for another man in the same business, and find him the money for it ?—That is the reason why we should like to fix the matter up in an amicable way. Bx. Mr Craigie : You think ,£23,000 too much for the wharf ? —I do. 82. What do you think is a fair price ? —Although £IO,OOO is over the cost, I think my Board would be prepared to pay that for it. 83. Mr .Brown: Then they get 7 per cent, for their money straight away ?—But the wharf is thirty years old. Hon. Mr Millar ; Only part of it, and it has all been renewed and kept up-to-date. The wharf has got thirty years’ life in it now.