FOXTON WHARF.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 1576, 13 July 1916, Page 3

FOXTON WHARF.

THE “WHARF” DEFIX ED

ROYAL COMiHS SION’S FINDING.

The following is the full text of the Royal Commission’s finding re the transfer of the local wharf from the Railway Department to the I oxton Harbour Board, a precis of which appeared in our last issue:

After due advertisement, we held meetings of the Commission at Foxton, Palmerston North, and Wellington. Counsel appeared before us representing the following; The Railway Department, the Foxton Harbour Board, the Borough Councils of Palmerston North and Bedding, the Chambers of Commerce of Palmerston North and Bedding, the County Councils of Kairanga, Pohangina, Oroua, Kiwilea, Rangitikei, lianawatu, and Horowhenua, the Borough Councils of Marlon, Levin, Foxton and the Bulls Town Board. A large number of witnesses were examined, and various documents put in. We forward with our report a note of the evidence taken and letters and documents pul in and received by us. We have not thought it necessary to forward the plans produced, nor the contracts relating to the construction of tho wharf and radway, as they can be obtained from the Government archives. The contract exhibited to us was not for the construction of the Foxton wharf alone, but for the construction of the wharf, railway station, and part of the railway line. It. was impossible from the contracts to fix the actual cost of the wharf.

1. Tho first question is, us Inis been set forth, whether it is desirable in the public interest that the Foxton Harbour Board should be permitted to purchase the railway wharf at Foxton. It is always a difficult question to deal with subjects that are concerned with public policy, or public' interest. Many courts and jurists have pointed out that what is contrary to public' policy is generally difficult, and, in some cases, impossible to detine. We have had to bear in mind the following:— (a) The Parliament has recognised that the harbour of Foxton should lie under local control. An Act constituting a Harbour Board at Foxton was passed in IS7G, and this Act was repealed in 1878, and the Board reconstructed under The Harbours Act, 1878. Later the Foxton Harbour Board was dissolved, in 188(i, and reconstituted in 1908. (b) Xo works have been undertaken by the Harbour Board for the improvement or development of the harbour, the reason being that the Board has no funds for tho purpose. There is no power to rate lands at or near the harbour, and tho dues that could be imposed would bo insufficient for the purpose. (e) Unlike other Harbour Boards, the Foxton Harbour Board has had no endowments of any great value vested in it. The small areas of land granted to it yield at present a revenue of only £241 per annum, (d) Many other Harbour Boards, such as Auckland, Wellington, Dunedin, Wauganui, Westport, etc., have got valuable endowments. (e) The Foxton harbour is not, and is not likely ever to ho suitable for any vessels save those of small tonnage. It cannot be anything but a port for small coastal vessels. (f) There is no proposal for any large works in the harbour. All that lias been suggested is that the lower reaches of the harbour, and at times the bar, might bo dredged by a movable sand suet ion dredge.

(g) There is a. harbour on the coast, at Wanganui, about 40 miles distant, which is u belter harbour than Buxton harbour can ever be, and at present goods for the counties north of Fox ton are landed at Wanganui, and some of the exports from these counties are shipped from Wanganui.

(h) The railway line to and from Foxtnn joins the central lino from Wellington to Auckland at Longburn. This railway was not; made as a branch line to Foxton. Tins original design was that the main line should run from Foxton to New Plymouth. The idea of connecting Wellington and Palmerston was long in development. In fact, a Royal Commission, appointed in 1889, reported “that a. railway''from Wellington to Palmerston should not be constructed, as we consider the proposal is premature, on the ground that a large part of the country which it would open up is still in the hands of native owners; and inexpedient on the ground that the value of the land which the line would serve has been greatly over-rated, and that the undertaking would be an unprofitable one, which the Colony would not he justified in entering upon.” What happened since 1880 has proved that the Commission did not have sufficient prevision to see how the district would develop.

SURPLUS RECEIPTS SHOULD BE SPENT ON HARBOUR.

Keeping these facts in view, the lir.st question that arises, ought a harbour to be maintained at Poxton? We must assume that this is the declared policy of the State. No suggestion has been made that the port should be closed and the wharf and other harbour workings abandoned. This being so, the next enquiry should be: Can it be maintained in its present condition with out the expenditure of money, and without steps being taken by dredging or otherwise to keep the lower part of the harbour and the bar deep enough for small vessels? The evidence leads us to believe that it is doubtful if the harbour can continue to be profitably utilised if some steps be not taken to assist the river in keeping a depth suifici-

ent for small craft's. Tho expert engineers differ as to whether dredging would he sufficient. Wo arc inclined to think, in addition to dredging, some works would have to ho erected to control and direct the wafers of the river. If such works are required a considerable expenditure would he necessary, and in view of what has taken place in other similar rivers, perhaps £50,000 will not he an excessive estimate. Hut, were this done, the harbour would he improved and would he more serviceable than it is now. In order to enable this work to he done, either Government must make a grant for the purpose, or a harbour district must he created, and the Harbour Board granted rating powers over this district. If the Government were to grant (lie necessary moneys, (hen the Government would he entitled to hold the presold railway wharf with all its earnings to recoup it for the necessary moneys required for improvements. If. however, (In* Government decline to make such a grant —and it has not been suggested to us that there is any likelihood of a. grant being given—then we are of opinion that all ordinary sources of Harbour Board revenue should he vested in the Board. Is then the charge imposed on goods for wharfage more than is necessary to pay for the handling of goods by the Railway Department from the ships to railway? It is clear that it is. The gross revenue from the wharf is ahout £3,500, and after paying for all labour for the handling of the goods, there is a balance for more

than sullicinot to pay for maintenance and for tho interest and any sinking fund charges, if required, for the construction of the wharf. If (bis is the ease, any balance that remains is strictly a harbour due, and should, in our opinion, be used for harbour purposes. It is a, duo or rale that is uot strictly earned by the Railway Department, and if the Railway Department does not undertake Harbour Board functions the money should go to the authority that controls the harbour, viz., the Foxton Harbour Board.

PRICE FIXED AT £5,000. Tiie present value of the structure was estimated by the experts at £3,700, and (bis estimate lias not been disputed by the Railway Department. Xo evidence was called by the Railway Department to show its present actual value as a structure. What the Railway Department contended was that it should be valued as a property earning a large income from a wharfage rate. That would mean that a harbour rate should be deemed a perpetual vote for railway purposes. We recognise that at present, and until the harbour work is differently organised, the wharfage rate can he most economically collected as it is collected at present. Our recommendation is that, .subject to the conditions hereafter stated, the price should be fixed at £SOOO, and the Board should have the right of purchase.

The “wharf" is to include: — (a) Tlio slruetnres themselves, (h) Tlui area leased to Levin and Co. (c) A strip of laud live feet wide behind the actual structures of the wharves. (d) A right-of-way .‘{Oft. wide • across the railway yard. The conditions we submit are: — 1. This right is not to arise until the district inleresled in the harbour shall have been consliluled a Harbour Board Rating District sufficient to provide rates of at least £4OOO a year. 2. Pending the constitution of this rating area and (he transfer of the wharf, the Railway Department shall keep an account of the income from the wharfage rale's levied, (he cost of working the wharves, maintenance, interest, and cost of (-oustruction repairs, and expenses of management, and the balance over shall he put aside as belonging to the harbour, and on the purchase being completed will he paid to tire Harbour Board.

DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE.

NOT SATISFACTORY.

-Mr W. 11. Field said that the report dealt with three very large questions affecting a section of his electorate. He had been in favour of the question of the purchase of the wharf only being referred to the Commission, and that others should be held over until the end of the war. The recommendation regarding the Sandon tramway was not satisfactory, and it would lead to a great deal of disappointment in the district affected. He was sorry also that the Commission had decided that the proposed deviation of the Main Trunk line ought not to bo considered for some time yet. This would have provided an easier route to Palmerston —15 miles shorter in distance. Now that this proposal was turned down, he hoped that a private company might make the railway and run it. The price specified at which the Harbour Board should purchase the wharf was £5,000, the same price as the board had offered. The net profit of the wharf was from £I7OO to £2OOO, and if this were so the special rating area should be unnecessary. All that was necessary to keep the river clear was a dredge, and the purchase of a suitable di'edge could be financed without any rating of consequence. The evidence given before the Commission was to the effect that all that was necessary to keep the river chair -was a dredge. They had expert evidence to this effect. He contended that there was no justification for a rating area producing £4OOO a year. He expressed satisfaction at the fact that the Commission was of opinion that the surplus revenue should be given to the Harbour Board. The trade of the port of late years had been greatly retarded owing to the Railway Department not keeping the river in order. At one time, when the liver received proper attention, at least half a dozen steamers used the port, but this number had been reduced to two. A rating area capable of producing £4OOO was far more than was nccessarv.

EATING AREA NOT NEEDED. Air E. Newman expressed regret that the Commission had made the purchase of the whai’f by the Harbour Board subject to a condition that a rating 1 area capable of producing £4OOO a year should be established. It might be possible to secure a rateable area producing £2OOO a year, but £4OOO a year was too great au amount. In regard to the Handon tramway and the question of connecting it with the main railway line, he said that (he effect of the report was that settlers would hivve to send their produce round to Wellington by the old route. The Commission, in effect, found that the interests of the Railway Department was superior to those of the settlers. The policy of the Government should be to enable the settlers to get their produce to the market with the least possible delay, and the least expense, rather than to enhance the profits of the Railway Department. He regarded the report of the Commission as puerile in the extreme.

REPORT CRITICISED. Ah'. I). IT. ffuthrie said (here was not one person in I ho Foxton district; who thought thiil. tho report ot‘ ho Commission was a jus 1 ilia bio one. Whilst it was agreed that £SOOO would be a fair price for the wharf, file laying down of the condition in rogaa’d to a rating area was unreasonable, This condition nullified the reasonableness of the report in regard 1o the value placed on the wharf. Jn (he pasf years they had had a licet of small steamers running to Foxton, but owing to tho absence of attention to the river, the number of boats running had been reduced to two. It would be a fair thing, seeing that the Railway Department had had a profit from the wharf for so many years, for the Department to give the residents some assistance in the future. He

thought it would bp almost impossible to raise £4OOO a year from the rating area. In regal'd to endowments, he thought the Foxton Harbour Board was entitled to some eonsideration. Ho agreed with the report, of the Commission in regard to the question of the proposed deviation of the Main Trunk lino by the construction of a line from Levin to Greatford. If such a. line was constructed it would not open much new country and would save only fourteen miles in the distance between Wellington and Auckland, If such a line were made it would mean that the Sandon tramway, which was useful as a tramway, hut useless as part of the railway system, would have to he pulled up. It would also ho necessary to build two expensive bridges over the Rangitikei and Manawatu rivers. It would not he worth doing all this for the sake of saving fourteen miles. If a deviation was to be made ho could name an alternative route, which would open up good country that at present was not within forty miles of a railway. In regard to the extension of tin; Sandon tramway, he thought that if the Manawatu County Council got across the Rangitikei River and into the Rangitikei County they would experience considerable opposition from the settlers, who were connected by good roads with the railway system. He was satisfied with tile Commission’s report, execept in regard to the condition imposed in regard to the rating area for the maintenance of the Buxton wharf. Mr D. Buick said lie had always looked upon the Foxton wharf and the river as the birthright of the settlers. lie thought that all the revenue derived from the port should be spent on the river. He thought that the condition in regard to a rating area would make it impossible for the Harbour Board to purchase (he wharf. As to the question of the railway deviation, he was astonished that such a proposal had been referred to the Commission. As already stated, it would save, only 14 miles, and the country that it would open up was not nearly so good as that which could be opened up by other routes. The only reason that he could conceive, for bringing this matter up was that it would create ill-feeling between the pimple who desired the deviation and I hose who were asking for the purchase of the Foxton wharf. This was a feeling which would not be forgotten when the question of arranging a rating area was taken

in hand. As for the wharf, it was worth £50(10, but the Harbour Board was willing to give that sum for it. He thought that it would not be necesary to raise more than £2OOO a year. MINISTER REPLIES. The Hon. AY. If. 1 Terries, in replying, said that the three subjects referred to the Commission had been before the House for many years. He hoped that by having the matters reported upon by a Commission composed of men of the highest ahility, finality would have been secured. Tie was therefore surprised to hear from the preceding speakers that there was a likelihood of (he controversy being resurrected, and of it being advocated that the proposed £4OOO rating area should he reduced to £2OOO. Air Herries said he did not say that he was sati.-dled with the report of the Commission, but, he was going to take it as a Him lily. He

thought thiil the value placed on the wharf was miserably small. The Commission had nut adopted the principle of capitalising the income, but had arbitrarily fixed the amount at £SOOO. This was the value of the structure, but nothing was allowed for goodwill. It had been complained that the Department had not spent the surplus from the wharf revenue on the river, hut it was not the custom to spend wharf revenue on harbours. The Foxton Harbour Board was defunct for many years, and the Railway Department managed the wharf. Now the Board had been resurrected, but it had no revenue. The Department would now have to keep a special account in connection with the wharf, and he hoped that if the Board was going to purchase the wharf it would he done within a definite and reasonable time. If the Department was deprived of the revenue from the wharf, it would have to charge the future owners of the wharf with the cost of haulage and labour, as was done in the case of other harbour boards. In regard to the Sandon tramway, Air Herries said that he thought the Commission had come to a wise decision . If

the tramway were extended to Greatford or Marton, the Commission reasonably advised that whilst it should not be connected with the railway system, it should bo allowed to run into the railway yard. This would reduce the labour involved in the transfer of goods to a mere bagatelle. As to the projmsed Lev-in-Marton railway, he did not suppose that anyone expected that the Commission would recommend such an expenditure during the Avar. If, however, they Avere going to have a large port at Foxton, the people of Levin and Marton naturally would desire to be connected Avith it. As to the rating area, the Foxton people represented that (hey ivanted a large port. If they had a large port, a considerable expenditure would be necessary. It for instance, had been said that it avouUl be necessary to have (raining Avails at the mouth of (he harbour, and if Foxton was to have a. good harbour it was absurd to say that: a. revenue of £4OOO a year Avas too much. He hoped that this report Avould be accepted as a finality.

Dr NoAvman : It Avon’! be. M r Herries: 114100 wi 11 avc have finality 1 ? Dr Newman: Ne\’er! Mr Herries said that he had secured finality in regard to the Hutt road.

Mr Wilford: For this session, but not for this Parliament.

Mr Herries said that he hoped that in the present case the report of the Commission would be. accepted as final.