TIMARU HARBOUR BOARD.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2304, 5 August 1880, Page 2

TIMARU HARBOUR BOARD.

An ordinary meeting of the Board was held to-day. Present—Messrs T. Hall (in the chair), Studholme, Evans, Postlethwaite, Beswick, Moody, Sutter. Acton, G-ray. CORRESPONDENCE. From Messrs Finlay and Co., intimating that a member of the firm would wait on the Board re delivery of cement misunderstanding. From the Secretary to the Building Society, intimating that £3,575, balance due to the Board had been paid. From Montgomery and Co., forwarding cheque for £2O, refund of duty on cement. From Oamaru Harbor Board, forwarding cheque for £BXS, for cement returned. FromJ. Jackson, asking the Board to have Timarumade a port of Registry locally owned vessels having now to be registered elsewhere, also, asking the Board to get the time-ball at the new Post Office put in working order, so that vessels may regulate their chronometers by it. It was resolved to comply with the request. From S, Bradley, asking for permission to erect a boatshed north of the Breakwater, and applying for a boatman’s license. It was resolved that Messrs Moody, Beswick, Sutter, Evans, and the Chairman be appointed a committee to draw up byc-1 aws to meet the requirements of the Port, and to report at the next meeting. THE NEW WHARF. The committee appointed to consider the suggestions of the harbor master re the supply of anchors, chains, tackle, and other accessories in connection with the new timber wharf submitted a report recommending that four anchors, of 20 cwt, and a large quantity of chains and other tackle be procured. Mr Gray and Mr Acton pointed out that under section GG of the Act and the Board’s bye-laws, contracts over £SO must be invited by public tender, and written notice must be given to the Chairman of any motion involving an expenditure of over £IOO. It was resolved —“That the recommendations of the Committee be approved of, and that tenders for mooring appliances bo invited without delay, the Committee to have discretionary power whether they accept tenders in the colony or procure the material from abroad.”

THE CEMENT CONTRACT. Messrs Findlay Bros, were admitted as a deputation in reference to the misunderstanding that has arisen through the Board insisting on the extra price paid for cement, which had been purchased in consequence of the alleged non-delivery by the contractors in terms of their contract, being deducted from their account.

Mr J. Findlay read a letter, dated April 30, and contended that the terms entered into had been fairty complied with. He objected to the proposed deduction of £306 or any part of it, on the ground that no penalty was specified in the conditions. The cement claimed for had been received and used by the Harbor Board, and the delivery having been duly certified, ho submitted that the Board should pay for the material, and sue for any damage to which they were entitled.

The Chairman explained that unless the supply of cement was kept up, the Board was responsible to the contractor for the work.

After some discussion Mr Findlay finally offered to allow a rebate of £SO if the Board terminated their contract with the quantity of cement now lying in the bay. Mr Gray moved that the compromise offered by Messrs Findlay & Co. should be agreed to. Mr Acton seconded the motion, which was supported b\ r Mr Evans.

Mr Moody moved an amendment that the Board offer to terminate the contract with the non delivery of 1800 barrels of cement and payment of £IOO without prejudice. Messrs Moody, Barker, Bcswick, Sutter, and Studholme having voted for the amendment, Mr Gray withdrew his resolution, and the amendment was carried.

UKRTJIAGE OF VESSELS. A letter was read from Mr F. Le Cren, of the New Zealand L. and M. A. Company, complaining that the harbor master was in the habit of placing vessels—especially large ships —visiting this port, in most inconvenient and unsuitable positions, and •studying certain “ Hail fellow, well met!”' masters, rather than the convenience of shippers. The writer referred specially to the position of the Himalaya, and asked feo an enquiry. Enclosed was a letter from the harbor master on the subject stating that he considered the Himalaya was in a good position for working.

The Chairman stated that as the Himalaya was about to leave the port shortly, a sub-committee, consisting of the chairman and certain other members made an enquiry and reported as follows :

Having had the letter from Mr F. LeCrou, manager of the FT. Z. L. and M. A. Company, before us, complaining of the •want of judicious management on the part of Capt. Mills, Harbor Master, in placing the larger vessels so as not to give them all possible facility that the port can afford as well as other charges of being biassed in the placing of the said vessels, and having heard the statements of Mr F. LeCren, Capt. Colbert, of the Himalaya, and Capt. Mills, in reference thereto, we find that on the one point, namely, the berthing of the said vessel, more judgment and discretion might have been exercised by the harbor master ; that some vessels have not been placed in as good a position as they might have been, especially the Himalaya, thereby not facilitating the despatch of said vessels as much as possible. We also consider that the said vessels, on being brought up, arc given an unnecessary scope of chain for the depth of water that they rid# in, and that they therebj r occupy a larger area than necessary in the bay, and by so doing prevent other vessels being placed in as advantageous positions as possible. We| consider the Himalaya quite sulliciently in shore for her draught,but she would have been better placed further south had the ]jreeaution been taken not to have placed the John Bull in such a position as to force the heavier ship so far north, and also further off shore in order to obtain a sufficient depth of water.

We would recommend that a definite depth of water, or a line or lines by cross bearings from the shore be de-

fined, inside of which no ballast should be thrown overboard.

We do not admit any biased action to have been shown as the cause of Captain Mills’ placing the vessels as above referred to, but would draw his attention to the fact that as far as compatible with the safety of the vessels, which should be a primary consideration they should be placed so as to give them the greatest facility for quick despatch. finance. Some discussion took place in reference to a letter from the Board’s bankers relative to interest on deposits. It transpired that a sum of £12,000 was lying to the credit of current account in consequence of certain deposits falling due. It was resolved that the Chairman, Messrs Hall, Beswick, Moody, and the mover be appointed to re-arrange the finances of the Board. mr Anderson’s claim. A letter was read from Messrs Garrick and Cowlishaw, solicitors for Mr Anderson, of Christchurch, complaining of the delay that has taken place re arbitration proceedings, and intimating that unless greater expedition is displayed, they will advise their client to take legal proceedings. It was resolved that Messrs Garrick and Cowlishaw be informed that if the deed of arbitration cannot be accepted as it is they can use their own discretion as to what course to adopt. MESSRS ALLAN & STUMBLES 1 CLAIM. A letter was read from Messrs Berry and Perry, solicitors, re the claim of Messrs Allan and Stumbles for cartage of cement. It was decided that the present contractors for the Breakwater be consulted by the engineer as to the price for which they would cart cement from the shed to the works. WHARF CONTRACT. The deed of contract between the Board and Mr Philp, the tenderer for the wharf, having been read, Mr Gray suggested that certain conditions in the specifications but not in the contract should be included in the latter. The Board resolved that the deed on being amended in this way should be executed. engineer’s retort. The following report was read : “ I have the honor to report that during last month 3G feet of the mole were completed, making a total of 243 feet of present contract. Rough weather was encountered during the greater part of the month, which, although it retarded the progress of the works, was otherwise beneficial by settling the blocks before they were capped with the monolith. “ The contract for the additions to the cement shed has been satisfactorily completed. I have since bed the lloor laid with concrete. The contractor for the wharf and approach has some of the material on the ground. According to instructions I ordered a set of boring tools. They have arrived and are a useful and efficient set. lam in receipt of a letter from Messrs Priestman Bros., respecting the dredger, which states that the order will be completed and shipped by the end of this month. I have completed the examination of the ground offered by the N.Z. .Meat Preserving Co, as a quarry, I find from the borings taken that it will nbt be profitable to open a quarry there. The rock is not sufficiently thick for the purpose, and the clay above it is too deep. The adjoining land further up the gully seems more suited for a quarry, and I think if the proprietor were willing to dispose of a part of it for that purpose it would be worth while to examine it, and ascertain its capabilities. Should the Board obtain a quarry there the Hew Zealand Meat Preserving Company would join in laying down a branch line of railway. The following is the cost of dredge referred to in the report;—

One 30cwt crane and bucket ... £6OB Extra ;for bow gear 80 Extra duplicate bucket ... 70 Extra, one grab 97 Extra, 30ft. rake of crane ... 60 Packing 3.V per cent, and 21- per cent for increase of prices since quoting in November last 55 £970 It was resolved that copies of the report should be forwarded to the harbor master and Mr LeGren. Mr Sutter called attention to the statement made by Mr Goodall at last meeting to the effect that bags of concrete were laid under the blocks on the south side of.thc Breakwater. A day or two afterwards he met Mr Stumbles, the late contractor, who positively denied that a single bag of concrete had been used as alleged, or that any shelving reef had ever been discovered.

Mr Moody—Perhaps there is some misunderstanding. Mr Goodall—Some explanation is perhaps necessary. I mentioned that the reef shelved to the south, and I still maintain it. Of course we have to depend to a great extent on the report of the diver, who is sometimes only able to make his soundings with difficulty. In mentioning to Mr McGregor that concrete bags were used whenever we found uneven ground he (Mr McGregor) suggested that they might have been dislodged. From the investigations I have made since last meeting, I am almost convinced that the blocks spoken of were disturbed by hydraulic and pneumatic force. In some places air will gather, and cause pressure to be brought on the -weaker side. Notwithstanding Mr Stumbles’ denial I know for a fact concrete bags have been used, and used freely. Mr Gray—Under the blocks on the South side ?

Mr (loodall—Yes ; under these blocks. Mr Sutter—At last meeting you said they were laid by the diver. Mr Goodall —No, I said they were laid down to make the bottom even, by the men.

Mr Sutter considered the engineer had not made things much clearer. At last meeting he astonished the Board by stating that bags of shingle were laid under the blocks by the diver, and now he says they were not. Mr Goodall—l said they were not always laid by the diver. Mr Sutter—The question lies between Mr Stumbles and the engineer. Either one or the other of them must be wrong. The Chairman considered the bags might have been employed to make the shelving rock even in common with the crevices.

Mr Gray strongly protested against the employment of bags of concrete in the way mentioned by the engineer. Any engineer with half an or half a head must see that such work could not stand. The thing was ridiculous.

The Chairman deprecated the remarks made. Mr Sutter retorted that the matter was a serious one. It was a question whether they could place any credence in the reports of the Board’s engineer.

The Chairman thought unless a motion was made the discussion was irregular. Mr Moody considered the position of the Board was most unsatisfactory in this matter. Some enquiry was certainly required, Mr Acton referred to the proposal to obtain an impression of the bottom so that the blocks might be moulded accordingly and said he had ascertained from Mr McGregor and Mr Goodall that such a thing was impracticable.

The Chairman —In these matters wc must follow our engineer, Mr Moody—lt is a difficult matter to follow him.

Mr Gray emphatically asserted, from his own -practical knowledge that there was no difficulty in using templets and getting an accurate chart of the bottom. Mr Barker moved—“ That the Chairman, Messrs Evans and Moody be appointed a committee to take tbe evidence of the engineer and Mr Stumbles on the matter on which their statements conflicted.

Mr Moody supported the proposal, an enquiry being due to the late contractors whose character was at stake.

Mr Postleth waite seeonded the motion, and said the Board was indebted to Mr Sutter for the action he had taken. Mr Suiter said the engineer’s capacity was concerned, and if was in Mr Goodall’s place he would insist upon a full investigation. The motion was carried and certain accounts having been passed the Board adjourned.