TIMARU HARBOR BOARD.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2190, 18 April 1891, Page 3

TIMARU HARBOR BOARD.

The ordinary monthly meeting of the Timaru Harbor Board was held last Wednesday. Present Messrs R Acton (chairman), J Manchester, J Hill, G Stumbles, I L Morris, J S Gibson, P R Flatman, and Captain Woollcombe.

The reports of the engineer and harbor master, which were unimportant, having been dealt with, the chairman reported on an interview with the Railway Commissioners chiefly with regard to railway freights. Recently the Commissioners cheapened the railway freights so that goods which came by steamer now go by train, and consequently is a great loss of revenue to the board. In reference to this the chairman said :—“ On the question of the recent- alteration in the tariff, it is pointed out by the Commissioners that they, as public carriers, are required to compete with other public carriers, that they have no wish to injure the revenue of the port of Timaru, but that since our interests are analogous to and bound up with the coastal trade we may have to suffer. On its being represented that the railways which are public property were thus being used to the detriment of harbors which are also public property, the Commissioners appeared to regard the harbors as enterprise for which limited districts are solely responsible, whilst the rail ways are the property of the colony. The differential rate now made as between to or from Timaru has as its object to centre the import trade in the larger ports and reserve to the railways the distribution, by discouraging the transhipment of goods and their subsequent carriage by coastal steamers.” —After some conversation, in the course of which Mr Gibson urged that direct shipping from home should be encouraged, u vote of thanks to the chairman for the trouble he bad gone to was passed,

I On it being proposed to reduce wharfage on coal from 2j to Is 3d per ton the secretary, in reply to a question, said the loss would be £750 per annum. Considerable discussion took place, with the result that Messrs Gibson, Woollcombe, Stumbles, and Hill voted for it, and Messrs Acton, Talbot, Manchester, Morris, and Flatman against it, and it was lost. Mr James Bruce wrote offering to submit a plan for the travelling shingle.—The letter was received. Mr Gibson moved Standing Committee be requested to take the necessary steps to carry out the suggestions ef the Commission re removal of the shingle, and are empowered to arrange for the necessary plant for that purpose so far as it applies to a test removal by the Priestmaa dredge ; the Committee to collect data and all information necessary in anticipation of the purchase of a hopper dredge as suggested by the Commission ; the Committee to report progress at the next ordinary meeting of the board.” Mr Morris seconded the motion.

Mr Hill urged that before the plan suggested by Messrs Goodall and O’Connor was adopted the matter should be submitted to the ratepayers. He argued that the plant would cost I £IO,OOO, and that the annual ex- ' penditure would be £3400, whereas if they spent £50,000 in extending the mole the interest would be only £250. Mr Stumbles said that 700 feet of a mole would meet their requirements for 50 years, and they would be increasing the size of their harbor at the same time. He would certainly oppose the Commissioners’ plan. Mr Manchester favored the pro posal of the commissioners, and Mr Talbot opposed the resolution on the ground that plenty of time had not been taken to think over the matter. If they were going to get a plant able to cope with the shingle they should get it, and not throw away money by tinkering at it with the Taniwha. There was nothing to lose by a little delay. Even Mr O’Connor gave them 41 years. A great many men in tbe country—men who would be respected if they were on the board—were disgusted at the idea of shifting the shingle. He thought the report satisfactorily showed that there was no immediate danger. As to allowing the shingle to overlap the works it was not to be thought of. The export of wheat alone would cost 6d a bushel more, at least, to ship it at Lyttelton, and they must bear in mind that but for the port there would be no special reduced rate. The saving on tbe wheat and flour alone was something like £40,000 a year, and with frozen meat, wool and coal, the advantage to tbe district of haying the port could not be less than £IOO,OOO a year; from the very worst aspect of the ease, the cost of maintaining the harbor would be nothing to the loss of losing it. He proposed to consult Mr Napier Bell on the question. Mr Hill seconded tbe amendment, A long discussion took place, in the course of which Messrs Hill, Stumbles, Fiatman and Talbot favored delay if not an enlargement of the harbor, and the chairman, Messrs Manchester, Morris and Woollcombe spoke in favor of adopting the plan suggested by the engineers. The chief question discussed was which it would be better to extend the mole at an expenditure of £50,000 and pay £2500 a year as interest, or adopt the engineers plan, which would cost £IO,OOO and an annual expenditure of £3400 a year. Ultimately the amendment was carried, Mr Manchester having come round to vote in favor of it with those ’ already named. Accounts to the amount of £Bl5 4s lOd (including £157 13a 4d as Mr GoodalTs expenses as commissioner) were paised for payment, and the meeting adjourned.