South Canterbury Times, THURSDAY, AUGUST 11, 1881.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2618, 11 August 1881, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, THURSDAY, AUGUST 11, 1881.

SECOND EDITION

The Committee appointed to enquire into the subject of the Taranaki Harbor Works have brought up their report. The conclusions arrived . at will be far from satisfactory to our fellow settlers who are located at the foot of Mount Egmonfc. The report simply recommends that the works be abandoned, and that the Government take over the liabilities and assets. There are few people who have a knowledge of the West Coast of the North Island who did not believe from the first that it would be a mere waste of money to attempt to form a harbor at New Plymouth. Not that the formation of a harbor is impracticable there. It is a question of means. According to, the estimate of Sir John Coode, between £900,000 and £1,000,000 would be required for any successful results. But the opinions of experienced engineers like Sir John Coode mattered not in the log-rolling days. Taranaki was the possessor of three votes, and those three votes at a critical period might decide the fate of a Ministry. It is a common remark that the members of the House of Representatives are but local delegates. This has been particularly the case with regard to the Taranaki members. They had been sent to the House to obtain as much as they could for their constituents, and they were eminently' successful. In the first place they obtained power to raise a loan of £200,000. Now, there are plenty of places in the colony which it would be perfectly safe to trust with borrowing powers to any extent, but the prosperity and progress of such places depend only in a slight degree upon the expenditure of colonial revenue or borrowed money. Taranaki is not one of those parts. Hitherto that district has almost entirely subsisted upon General Government expenditure. From the colonial chest has flowed all the prosperity of the Taranaki provincial district. When the Taranaki Harbor Board was authorised to raise a loan of £200,000, there were two things which were perfectly apparent to those who had a tolerably fair acquaintance with West Coast matters. It was the general belief that the money would be virtually thrown into the sea, and that

when every half-penny had been expended the colony would have fo fake over the liability. When Mr Wright moved for a Committee to enquire in the harbor works events were moat certainly shaping in the direction above indicated. At the outset, after paying charges and commissions incident to the floating of the loan, the net sum realised was £■185,300, in addition to which the Board has received from the Land Fund sums amounting in the aggregate to £42,000. Thus the available cash which should have been at the disposal of the Board for carrying out the harbor works amounted to £227,000. There is a further contribution to be paid from deferred payment land to the extent of £20,000. The report of the Committee states that, apart from the cost of plant, a sum of only £SOOO has up to the present time been spent on the breakwater. And yet it is calculated that the total amount which would be available for the construction of the harbor is only £115,000, This is easily explained. The Board has to provide interest and sinking fund to the extent of £l-1,000 annually, and, following the example of the Colonial Government, the Taranaki Harbor Board has up to the present paid interest and sinking fund out of loan and land revenue. The Board has never exercised its rating powers, and, it may be supposed, never had any intention of carrying out so unpleasant a duty. When the report of the Committee was brought up in the House yesterday, Mr Kelly, the member for New Plymouth, complained that days ago it had been stated in the Legislative Council that the report would be adverse to the Harbor Board. The Legislative Councillor who ventured on such a statement did not make a hazardous guess. Everyone knew that the moment the Taranaki bubble was pricked it would burst. The Committee appear to have made exhaustive enquiries, for Mr Kelly said their report was like a financial statement. The result of such a thorough probing could not fail to be obnoxious to the representatives from the Taranaki provincial district. It was the first time that the matter had been thoroughly ventilated. People have been content to shrug their shoulders when Taranaki and its harbor works were mentioned. Now that Parliament has full information on so wasteful an expenditure of money, for which the colony will he ultimately liable, it is to be hoped that some decided action will be taken.

It has been noticeable (hiring the past couple of years that Parliament has unfavorably looked upon all schemes for harbor works, ami yet there are no works of greater importance to'the colony. The Taranaki “ job ” was always before the eyes of members. There was a general impression that it would be better to treat all harbor works alike, and the present Ministry has done everything in its power to foster that impression. In the present session there are signs that members entertain a more proper appreciation of their duties, and that it is their business to discuss any Bill brought before them on its merits. There is neither rhyme nor reason in making such places as Timaru suffer for the sins of Taranaki. Mr Turnbull has accomplished much in bringing the House to a sense of its duties. The Timaru Harbor Board Endowment Bill opened up a large question. The discussion on the measure, showed clearly that the circumstances of this place were widely different to those of Taranaki. A great deal has been said about “ political railways,” but that does not prevent people from acknowledging that there are lines

in the colony which have added immensely to the development and wealth of the country. All railways should not be placed in the same category. No one has condemned the construction of the main lines in Canterbury because a few political railways have been made in other places. There are harbor works and harbor works as well as railways and railways. Is it well for the country that the members of the Legislature are beginning to recognise this.fact. It is the duty of Parliament to sift the good from the had.