TIMARU HARBOR BOARD.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2505, 20 May 1893, Page 4

TIMARU HARBOR BOARD.

The monthly meeting of the Timaru Harbour Board was held yesterday. Present—Messrs D. Stuart (chairman), W. Evans, J. Hill, G. Stumbles, F. R. Flatman, T. Tescheraaker, J. Manchester, J. Talbot, R. Rutherford, J. Sullivan, and E. T. Rhodes. CORRESPONDENCE. The manager of the Bank of New Zealand wrote that a deposit receipt for £SOO with interest £ll Is 4d had been credited to current account. Also that a draft for £4500 had been sent to London and notice had been cabled to withdraw the stoppage of payment on account of the tug-dredge; the board had been charged with the cost of the cable, £2 11s. From the clerk of the Mount Peel Road, forwarding cheque for £lsl 3s Id, half year’s levy for harbour rate. —The letter was stated to be three weeks behind time, and Mr Flatman said the board ought to be plain with the local bodies. The Mount Peel Board put off payment in order not to interfere with their balancesheet. Is was unfair to the local bodies who pay promptly. THE TUG DREDGE. Mr John Darling, wrote under date March oth, as follows : —“I am in receipt of your letter dated 25th January, also a cablegram of yesterday morning. I now wait with anxiety explanations by post of your extraordinary and apparently unreasonable actions in this matter. Immediately on receipt of your message I went to Lobnitz and Co., and together prepared my cable reply as per copy enclosed. From this you would gather that Lobnitz and Co. mean to carry out their contract in terms of their offer of sth October, which was sent to you, and explained in my letter of 13th October as clearly as possible, that their offer was for a dredger to be built to Lloyd’s class, to their own specification, and equal to the best they had supplied to the Danish Government and Buez Canal Company. Our conditions were to be accepted as we had them on our specifications, and though these got mutilated as explained in my last, no evil consequence could have followed to us, because the uuderstrnding I came to with Mr Lobnitz on the point was duly recorded and would have protected us if we had been called upon to claim for defects. Otherwise the alterations in specifications upon which Lobnitz and Co. based their very low offer, and which you authorised me by cable to accept, are very much in favour of the vessel, but until I hear what is troubling you, it would be premature to attempt criticism of what may be in your minds. Feeling as I do, however, that every honest effort has been exercised to get an efficient machine at minimum cost, the position you have placed me in by sending such unreasonable, distrustfullooking cables, is a very uncnmfortable one, and if there are doubts at all about my faithfulness in your interest, get rid of me at once and I’ll be quite prepared to go without pay if the majority of your board consider censure would suit me better.” The letter was passed, with the remark that subsequent correspondence had put the matter right. The report re wharf charges which we published a few issues ago was then read, also a letter from Mr G. Bullock, who said that for the Rimutaka staying two days in port and working 500 tons of cargo, these would be—At Wellingtou £4B Is Bd, Timaru £7O, Lyttelton £BO 2s fid, Oamaru, £llß 12s Id, Bluff £127 8s fid, Port Chalmers £lB5 6s 3d. At Wellington, Lyttelton, and Port Chalmers, the charges would not be increased for a longer period or more cargo.—'Members expressed gratification at the position of Timaru in the statement. THE SHINGLE. The plan of soundings south of the breakwater showed the ‘‘toe” or bottom of the shingle bank, to be 1020 ft from the root of the breakwater; low water mark at 800 ft, and high water mark 700 ft from the same point. (The Commissioners Messrs O’Connor and Goodall, marked the“ toe ” on their plan, dated April 2nd 1891, at 730 ft from root of the breakwater.) The chairman remarked that the plan would be a basis for them in the future ; it would be their first standard. Mr Talbot moved <( That lithographed plan marked so as to show the position of the shingle accumulation, together with a copy of of Mr O’Connor’s report to this board of April 1891, be furwarded to each county and borough council, road and town board, wiihin the harbour district.” He wished the ratepayers to be aware of the true position of matters, which he looked upon as one for grave anxiety if not for alarm, He referred to Mr O’Connor’s report to show that in the last two years or so, the bottom of the shingle bank has gone out from 730 ft to 1020 ft, nearly 300 ft, and there was only S'SOft of the straight feft for it to go before it began to go round Mr Manchester seconded the motion but did not xo4 anxious about the shingle now, as they had a machine coming out which was 1 4ieved to be able to cope with it. F ; s object in seconding the motion was simply to give the local bodies accurate information, Mr Evans ridiculed Mr Talbot’s statement as to the progress of the shingle ; it had imt gone more than 30ft in 12 months. If they accepted the statements nf the other side, that it was going out 125 ft per year, it would bo 2000 ft out now. It was no use talking about a “ toe ” when there was deeper water there than there was inside the harbour or t«*lh.er out Messrs Stutnojpg and Hill accused Mr Talbot o" having made statements and showed he was lyropg. Mr Flatman also deprecated the tendency of the mover’s remarks, and took them m » reflection upon the majority of the board aod of the ejectors. The motion came too late now ; it ought to have come before the last election. Ho was very sorrv they had raised such a at all, and Mr Talbot a remarks would do no good as they \vould he jnokod upon the outcome of prejudice. . The chairman »nggMtod that the reference to Mr report should be struck out of the motion, SO that Hie plans sent out would show only thff present position of the shingle, and mover and seconder agreeing to this, the motion was put and carried unanimously, members who had opposed the motion in its original form saying there was nothing now to object to. ACCOUNTS. The railway return of net wharfage collected during the four weeks ended March Slat was £653 IGs fid. It was stated that the Timaru Borough Council and the Temuka Town Board had not yet paid the half year’s levy upon them, but all the other boards had, and the secretary was instructed to again demand payment from the defaulters. Accounts, amounting to £583 10s Id were passed for payment.