PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.

Tuapeka Times, Volume V, Issue 359, 27 May 1874, Page 5

PROVINCIAL COUNCIL.

Wednesday, Mat 20. The Hon. the Speaker took the chair at 2 p.m. PBTITION. Mr. DE LATOUR presented a petition from 108 residents at Naaeby, praying that the Recreation Reserve there might be thrown open for mining purposes. QUESTION. Bsidob over the Waitaxi. — Mr. M'LEAN Mked the Provincial Secretory whether or not any communication had been received by the Government from the Provincial Government of Canterbury in reference to constructing an ordinary traffic bridge over the Waitaki river ; and, if such communication had been received, what action, if. any, the Government had taken or intended -.taking in the nutter? Mr. REID replied that the Superintendent of Canterbury did write to the Superintendent of this province, proposing to bear half the cost, of erecting a bridge over the Waitaki ; and he (Mr. Reid) understood that the Superintendent replied, agreeing to the proposition, and stating that a sum would be placed on the estimates for the purpose. The engineers, he thought, met yesterday, in order to decide as to a site ; and, should the report of the Engineer be satisfactory, and if it was found that the work could be undertaken within a reasonable sum, no doubt a vote for the purpose would be brought before the Council. BILLS. The New River Harbour Board Bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. STOUT, in moving the second reading of the Castle-street Diversion Bill, explained that some time ago, in consequence of the action of the Water of Leith, a bend or crescent had to be made. The sections next this bend were of small size, and the proprietors had a very indifferent road to their properties. The Water of Leith changed somewhat, and it was found that the bend was unnecessary ; and the owners of property fronting the street had not proper access to their properties. This Ordinance proposed to close up the bend and to make the street through, and sell the sections, possibly to the owners of the land. The Bill was read a second time, considered in committee, reported to the House, and leave to sit again next day obtained. Mr. STOUT moved the second reading of the Dunedin City Council Borrowing Powers Extension Bill. He explained that the Bill was to enable the Corporation to borrow, instead of £100,000, £200,000. It was not as if tho City Council were asking the Provincial Council to guarantee the amount. If the Council could borrow the money, and improve the city, he did not think that House should refuse to give them the necessary powers. He believed it wa3 intended to lay out the money mainly for sewerage purposes. The Bill was read a second time, considered in committee, reported without amendment, read a third time, and passed. OXAGO DOCK TRUST. The Otago Dock Trust Ordinance, 1865, Repeal Bill was read a second time. Mr. STOUT stated that the dock had not yet paid, even, he believed, the interest on the loan contracted for making it. The Bill proposed to vest powers in the Superintendent. Mr. M'DERMID said he had not yet heard any reasons given for £he change. Mr. STOUT intimated that he had been informed that the members of the Trust wished to surrender their powers. The Bill was then passed through all its stages. CLYDE. A Bill to increase the borrowing powers of the town of Clyde "v?2«> read a first time on the motion of Mr. STOUT, ordered to bs printed, and its second reading fixed for to-vofggys£.^ ~^s*-t~*~ """"KEPORTS. The following seleci committee reports were tabled : — (1.) The petition of Mr. "Grundy, late Inspector of Depasturing Licenses, Tuapeka. The petition asked for inquiry into the grounds of his dismissal. The finding of the committee is to the eifect that Government had resolved to transfer the duties of the petitioner to the Sheep Inspector's department, and that Mr. Gundry had in consequence received notice of the intended abolishment of the office. This was stated to be the sole cause of his removal. — (2.) The petition of John Mitchell, noting that the land purchased by him in the Southland district had become overrun with rabbits, to his serious loss, and praying to have in exchange an equal area elsewhere. The committee report that the grounds stated were bad, but left the question of advisability of exchange entirely as a matter of Executive action. THE OTAGO HARBOUR. The debate was resumed on the following motion by Mr. STOUT :— 1. That, in the opinion of this Council, in order to provide for the effective management and improvement of the Otago harbour, a Harbonr Trust should be formed. 2. That such Trust should have, inter alia, the following powers :— (a) All the powers that may be granted by any Ordinance of the Provincial Council under the authority of the Harbonr Boards Act, 1870. (6) Authority to borrow a sum not exceeding £250,000, for the purposes of said Trust. (c) Authority to reclaim land, raise embankments, and form docks. (d) Authority to issue debentures. 3. That 100 acres of land reclaimed, or to be reclaimed, should be set aside for the purposes of th» said Trust. 4. That the said land so set aside should be used as security for the money to be borrowed by the said Trust. 5. That a respectful address be presented to his Honor the Superintendent, requesting him to take such steps as are requisite to carry out the foregoing resolutions. Mr. DAVIE said he was pleased to find that this important question did not require to be argued on the basis of its desirability. All seemed to agree that great benefits were, likely to accrue to every member of the community if a scheme was initiated and carried, out enabling large vessels to discharge their cargoes alongside the wharves in Dunedin. But, besides that personal and direct advantage, lie apprehended ttat tliere iras another and more special benefit likely to result from the scheme, and that was that it would enable Otago to maintain that proud position which it now occupied among the other provinces of New Zealand, as the great commercial emporium — a position that Otago would not maintain,Jlooking to the activity of their neighbours, unless they were up and doing. (Hear, hear.) That point of advisability being admitted, it was only when they came to consider the question of time or mode of carrying out the work that differences of opinion arose. But when he considered the quarters whence the opposition came, he could not but fear that, instead of merely wishing for delay, the desire was to postpone the matter in order that it might lead to the non-execution of the work. The hon. member (Mr. De Latour) had stated that the only documents to guide the House were one meagre report from the Provincial Engineer, and another from Mr. Barr, giving the result of a few borings. But the hon. member altogether ignored the report of the sub-committee, of citizens, simply because the report was not supposed to be on the table of the House ; yet, at the same time, the report was in the hands of every member of the House. The hon. member had stated that these reports were not entitled to credence, seeing that they were given gratuitously. But the remark was unworthy of the hon. member. Was it possible to conceive that men of reputation — that such men as Mr. J. T. Thomson and others would sacrifice their professional reputation, and give a sort of amateur report, merely because they were not paid, especially when they understood that the reports would he published, and that they would be compwedi the one against the other ? It had been Mid that they should have reports upon the Upper and Lower Harbour regarding tidal influence*, tilting, Ac.; but whatever good him might be in a scientific of view, •o far M enabling the Council to come to a

conclusion it would not be of the slightest consequence. Never was a scheme brought down where more information was given than was now afforded in connection with this very matter of harbour improvement. All the reports regarded dredging as the key to harbour improvements. 1 ' That was the key-note of the four reports. " All that It was contemplated to do at tho present time was to erect wharves along the upper shore, to enable ships of large tonnage to come up to Dunedin, and to cut a deep-water channel a little below Burkes brewery. There was no intention to build training walls, or anything of that sort, in the meantime. Another objection which had been urged was regarding a Harbour Trust. He took it that the hon. member's (Mr. De Latour's) remarks on that point had reference to the Dock Trust at Port Chalmers, but he (Mr. Davie) considered the cases were not parallel. He said that the failure of the Dock Trust arose from the constitution of the Board. The Board was appointed without due regard to fitness for the work. The J gentlemen who constituted the Board were all men of the highest integrity and honour, and each one, in his own particular walk, possessed considerable ability; but, as regarded fitness to manage the business connected with the Trust, they were, with the exception of a small minority, not suitable men. As the Trust was now composed, however, it was hoped that a different result would be arrived at. Regarding the land mentioned for security, he would say that not an acre of such land was asked for, nor was a shilling asked. All the Council was called upon to do was to incorporate the Trust and give them the powers they required. They themselves would raise the money on their own securities, and those were the reclamations on the foreshores, and the rates proposed. Regarding the objection that the railway was sufficient to meet all requirements, he showed that if the harbour was not deepened the Port Chalmers Railway would require to be widened and straightened, besides the many additions indicated in the report on the table ; and the whole would incur a cost to the province infinitely beyond what was required to carry out the deepening of the harbour. But even with all that expenditure the Port Chalmers Railway would not then be able to meet traffic requirements, particularly when it became an integral part of the Northern line. Did he possess the eloquence of some members — Mr. M'DERMID : You do. Mr. DAVIE continued, thafc did he possess the eloquence of some members he thought he could not fail to convince every man open to conviction that the greatest advantage would be derived by the whole community by the immediate carrying out of this work. If the Council gave the powers that were now asked, he had no doubt that within two or three years they would see ships of the class of the James Nicol Fleming discharging their cargoes on the Dunedin wharves. He intended to support the motion. Mr. FISH moved the following amendment :—: — That whilst this Council recognises the desirability of improving the Upper and Lower Harbsur, it is of opinion that there are not at present sufficient reliable data before it to justify the creation of the proposed Harbour Trust. That in order to obtain the best information the Government be requested to place such sum upon the estimates as may be necessary to enable them to employ an engineer of eminence with a view of making a complete survey of the harbour, and taking proper borings, as suggested by the Provincial Engineer, and to suggest a scheme as a whole sufficieutly comprehensive to meet the present and future requirements of the trade of the province, and give an estimate of the cost of same— such report and estimate to be brought before this Council at its next session, with a view of then giving effect to the same. He (Mr. Fish) said he did not intend to go into the merits of the main question, nor to criticise the speech of the hon. member (Mr. Davie). In fact, he considered that, as a town member, it would not become him to point out the weakness of some of lv arguments urged on behalf of f lie l^otion. j It had beca said that the opposition to feh e j motion was put forward with tho. (jftjeoi of ~?fe§killg,j^^ol&4 uest i- o . n - Bu.tiJie amendment meant simply what il'said. He (Mr. Fish) contended that the report before them would not justify them creating a Trust. The late Mr. Balfour made a report, but he did so before making a survey of the harbour, and Mr. Balfour even stated in his report that it was absolutely necessary a survey should be made. Having read extracts frodti the report of the Provincial Engineer," Mr. Fish said the amendment had been tabled with the object of meeting the views of all sides, and it struck him that the plan he proposed was the best. If, for instance, a Trust was created at once, they would have to do what he proposed in his amendment the Government should do — get the best engineering skill as to the form the work should take. If the Council were prepared to lay out £200,000 solely upon the report in question, then, he said, no stronger reason could be urged against .the immediate creation of a Trust. The Government could do as much good -as a Trust. The Government could come .to the House next session with a well-digested and well-prepared scheme, and no doubt the Council would then give every assistance necessary. He knew that he occupied a somewhat invidious position in moving an amendment which in any way could be construed into offering obstruction to the proposed work, because he might assume from what had taken place at a public meeting that the citizens were in favour of the work going on, and it might be said that he should, in obedience to the expressed wishes of that meeting, go in for anything that would have for its effect the laying out of money in Dunedin ; but he did not think that simply, because a motion proposed to spend money within the boundaries of the place a member repiesented, therefore that member should give his vote in favour of the motion without question. He did not wish it to be understood that he was opposed to the scheme of harbour reclamation. What he wanted was to delay sufficiently to enable the Government to get such reliable information as would not only justify them giving the proposed Trust power to borrow £250,000, but, if necessary for the completion of the works, £500,000. If the amendment was lost he would refrain from voting against the motion. Mr. M'DERMID considered that, if the Council were determined to commit themselves to an expenditure, they should know what that expenditure was likely to be before they commenced the work ; and the only way in which they could arrive at that was by adopting the amendment. The object of those who supported the motion appeared to be to go into the matter blindfolded ; to come to that Council every year for £40,000 or £50,000 ; and ultimately .with a Bill to relieve the Trust of all responsibility, and get the province to take over the work. The whole benefit of the work, too, would be conferred on those who resided in Dunedin. He did not believe £250,000, the amount named, would complete the scheme, nor would double that amount. He believed the very smallest amount it would take to complete it was one million sterling. Then, if they took the interest at 6 per cent., they would find that they would have to throw away a very large sum of money, beside having to provide for the cost of working expenses. Speaking from memory, the working expenses of the Port Chalmers line were £9,000, but, after the channel had been dredged, £15,000 would not keep the harbour works in proper order. Supposing the money required to be balf-a-million only, there would be payment required of £30,000 per annum ; and he'was sure he was within the mark -when he said that £50,000 would hardly be sufficient for all yearly requirements. The Dunedin merchants wanted the dredging done 1 so that every bale 'of wool, should come to Dunedin ; but a lot of good a Oamaru farmer would derive from his goods being brought to Dunedin, instead of being left at Port Chalmers, 9 or 10 miles nearer 1 his home. It was simply a design to take away the trade of Port Chalmers. Mr. REEVES thought it was a great pity that members should be found opposing a work which would manifestly aid in the prosperity of the whole province. At one time lie

thought that no further statement would be of much use to them, but he now looked upon the statement placed before them as one which cast a considerable amount of new light upon the subject. That statement proved that the deepening of the harbour was not only the best thing possible for them to do, but that it was absolutely the cheapest course to be pursued. He found that a sum of £54,000 would be necessary to put the Port Chalmers line in a position capable of doing the work. Against that they had the opinion of four engineers, who estimated that, for about £10,000 more, a channel 25ft. deep could be dredged, in which case vessels drawing from 21ft. to 22ft. could be brought up to Dunedin. For these aud other reasons, he concluded by stating that he would support the motion. The Hon. Dr. MENZIES said that, in common with others in the Council, he_had been under a misapprehension as to the nature of the work proposed to be undertaken. As he understood it, a main feature of the work was the building of a trainingwall which would exercise some material influence upon the direction of the currents. From what had since transpired, it would appear that tho dredging of the channel was the principal object aimed at. He wished the Government to state definitely if that was the object in view. The Hon. Mr. REYNOLDS said that the only real objection urged against the motion was as to whether or not it was intended to make the province liable for the expense of the work. The Provincial Solicitor had stated distinctly that it was not intended to do so, but that, on the very contrary, the proposed Trust was to be alone liable, and their properties pledged as security. As far back as the year 1864 he (Mr. Reynolds) had advocated the deepening of the harbour instead of constructing a Port Chalmers railway. At that time he was the only Dunedin member who voted in that way, and down to the present time he had seen no occasion to alter his views. Mr. DE LATOUR said that he would support the amendment upon the ground that the Council was not in possession of sufficient information in reference to the work proposed to be done. He argued that the only reason the Government had for urging the immediate formation of the Harbour Trust was that they would have to go to the Assembly for the loan, and that unless that course was sanctioned by the Council the Assembly would at once look upon the proceeding with suspicion ; and the fact that detailed information had not been got would be discussed. It was, in his opinion, simply a ruse to delude the Assembly into the idea that the work had been sanctioned by the province, and that all preliminary steps, right and proper to be taken, had been taken. He further contended that the engineering reports mainly relied on the work being carried out by means of a training- wall, whereas the deepening of the harbour was now aimed at. He complained that in this, as well as in other matters, the Government had followed a most objectionable course. Instead of leading the Council they had reserved their arguments for their reply, thereby depriving members of all opportunity for criticising their arguments. Mr. REID replied that all the information on the point which had been gathered was in the hands of the Council. The real question he contended had not been fairly met by tho opponents of the motion. They were, not asked to deal with the question of deepening the harbour. What they were asked to consider was the propriety of constituting a Harbour Trust to look after harbojiv affairs, to reclaim land, ond issue, debentures. The course adopted bj "&e opponents of the motion was sip^y anoLher illustration of that jealousy TTith which they invariably viewed auv-pV O j, osa l f or taking powers out of their 'own hands, their idea being to centralise as much as possible all power in themselves. The question was, was it desirable to improve the harbour, and if so was it better to have it done by a Board or by the Executive Government of the province ? In reviewing tills point he quoted largely from speeches on the subject made by the mover of the amendment, when he (Mr. Fish) acted as Mayor of Dunedin. Mr. FISH rose to explain that he was not opposed to the motion. All that the amendment meant was that the formation should be delayed. Mr. REID continued that the anxiety of the Government to get the Trust constituted this session simply arose from the fact that they desired to see such a body commence operations at the earliest possible date. They i could get private enterprise to undertake the work to dredge a channel sufficient to admit of the largest vessels coming up to Dunedin. But if they allowed them to collect the harbour dues, the work to be done within five years, would they object to that proposal on the ground that it would be far too advantageous ? Mr. WOOD intimated that he would vote for the amendment, and, in doing so, gave as his reason that sufficient data had not been furnished. Mr. HALLENSTEIN announced his intention of voting for the motion, on the ground that he believed that it would be a saving in the carriage of goods, and would obviate considerable delay in their delivery. Mr. LUMSDEN complained that the members who had formerly voted with the Government had now intimated their intention of voting for the amendment. The grounds upon which their votes were given were a total misconception of the real nature of the proposal. It was, he argued, a scheme manifestly connected with the scheme of public works, to which, as a colony, they were committed. 1 Mr. DANIEL spoke in favour of the original motion. Mr. FISH said he wished to make a few remarks, preparatory to withdrawing the amendment. The amendment recognised, on the face of it, the propriety of improving the harbour. The difference of opinion existing between him (Mr. Fish) and the Government was whether there was sufficient information before the House to justify them in proceeding with the work. But, seeing that the Government had so warmly espoused the proposition to proceed with the work, he did not think he should be justified in pressing the amendment to a division. In reply to what had been stated by the Provincial Secretary j he had to say that what he (Mr. Fish) said some time ago, in regard to the harbour, was quite true, and, furthermore, that the amendment had not been brought forward by himself through factious or party motives. Mr. M'DERMID opposed the withdrawal of the amendment. Mr. OLIVER said he had been taken to task out-of-doors in respect to the vote he was about to give. He wished to state that he had not resolved to support the amendment from party or factious motives. He had resolved, during the session, and until parties had re-adjusted themselves, to vote on every question on its exact merits, or as they presented themselves to his mind. (Hear, hear.) Before any important work was proceeded with the usual steps should be taken which were taken by prudent people when they undertook anything that was important. No doubt his personal interest should induce him to vote for such an expenditure in the city. When, however, he embarked his fortunes in the Port Chalmers Railway, he took the statistics,, a,nd formed his own conclusions as to whether it would be a payable work ; and the same course ought to be taken in regard to the matter before the House. All that Mr Fish required was that the ordinary business proceedings should ' be gone through. The hon. member for Dunedin (Mr. Davie) had accused those who opposed the motion of desiring to shelve 'the matter. Mr. DAVIE wished to explain that he had been misunderstood. All he had said was that some of those who opposed the proposed improvements might desire to shelve 1 the question. He did not make an indiscriminate charge. , Mr. OLIVER : I charge the hon. member

with charging hon. members who oppose this motion with insincerity. Mr. DAVIE : And I deny it. The Hon. the SPEAKER said that the hon. member for Mount Ida (Mr. Oliver) was hardly acting with that courtesy usually displayed by one member to another. Mr. OLIVER : Sir, I should bow to your decision if truth were not on my side. The Hon. the SPEAKER : The hon. member (Mr. Davie) has already said he made no such charge against the hon. member. Mr. OLIVER : But I say he did. (Laughter.) Mr. DAVIE: I may say that I have no intention to impute improper motives to any man. (Hear, hear.) Mr. OLIVER then proceeded to say that, although he was convinced of the propriety of the work, he was by no means convinced of the advisability of the means to be taken for the conduct of the work. He then pointed out that even the members of the Executive were not agreed upon the matter, and that, were some of their views carried into effect, some of his (Mr. Oliver's) objections would be removed as to the appointment of a Harbour Trust. The amendment of Mr. Fish was declared lost on the voices. A division took place on the motion, with the following result : — Ayes, 23 ; noes, 7. The original motion was therefore carried. The following is the division list:— Ayes : Messrs. Allan, Cumming, Daniel, Davie (teller), Driver, Henderson, Lumsden, Menzies, Mollison, M'Glashan, M'Kellar, M'Lean, M'Neil, Reeves, Reid, Reynolds, Roberts, Stout (teller), Sumpter^ Teschemaker, Turnbull, Webster, and Wilson. Noes : Brown (J. C), De Latour, Hazlett, Kinross, M'Dermid, Oliver, and Wood. There paired, on Mr. Stout's motion, Mr. Hallenstein aud Mr. Ireland ; the former being in favour of the motion, and the latter against it. Mr. J. C. BROWN moved, as an addition to the motion, the following words — " Authority to levy such rates as shall provide a sufficient sum for the guaranteed interest on loan." The amendment was lost, and the original motion carried, on the voices. PROCLAMATION OF HUNDREDS. The adjourned debate on the Superintendent's message was resumed by Mr. JISH, after which Mr. WILSON asked leave to withdraw his amendment thereon. In doing so, he announced his intention of bringing forward a comprehensive series of resolutions in the land question. — The application was granted. Mr. REID, in reply, referring to the remarks made by the late Provincial Secretary, Mr. Bastings, said that it was all very well to talk about borrowing money for the execution of their public works, so as to husband their land reserves. He had, however, to remind them that there were two parties to such a transaction, viz., the lender as well as the borrower. Moreover, were they to stop the whole Government machinery of the province until such time as they had power to borrow, while the land remained locked up ? For reasons of that kind they would prefer proceeding as had been indicated. He would state for their information that Government intended !.o ask the Council to agree to an additional area of 40,000 acres, to be proclaimed into Hundreds — the one-half to be set aside for deferred payments, and the rest for absolute sale in alternate sections. In regard to the Hundreds referred to in the message, they could not now follow a similar course. The motion was put, and carried on the voices. The SECRETARY for LANDaud WORKS moved, " That this Council, having considered his Honor's Message No. 8, concurs in the proposals therein contained, and respectfully requests his Honor the Superintendent to recommend his Excellency the Governor to proclaim the several Hundreds therein named, with the boundaries therein described, in terms of the 96th section of the Otago Waste Lands Act, 1872." The motion was put and carried. LICENSING MOUNT STEWAET HUNDRED. Mr. G. F. C. BROWNE moved, "That an address be presented to his Honor the Superintendent requesting that there be laid upon the table any correspondence which may have taken place between Mr. W. Miller and the Government with regard to leasing that portion of the gold-fields adjoining Mount Stewart Hundred ; also any report bearing on the same subject." The motion was put and carried. Stewart's island representation. Mr. WOOD moved, " That, in the opinion of this Council, Stewart's Island should be included in one of the provincial electoral districts, and that the Government should at once bring in a Bill to effect that purpose." Mi\ WILSON moved as an amendment that the island be formed into a separate electoral district, returning a member of its own, and that a Bill to that effect be introduced into the Council. The amendment -was lost on the voices, and the motion on a division. MINING CONFERENCE EBPOETS. Mr. R. CLARKE moved, " That the Goldfields Committee be requested to consider, in .conjunction with the Gold-fields Bill, subject to his Honor's Message No. 2, the report of the gold-fields delegation of 1871, the report of the miners' conference held at Tuapeka in 1872, and the report of the miners' conference held at Clyde in 1874, and to embody the result of their considerations in their reports." The motion was put and carried. TOEEST REGULATIONS. Mr. M'KELLAR, in the absence of Mr. Hallenstein, moved, "That the petition of settlers in the Wakatipu, district praying that the forest regulations recently issued by the Waste Land Board may be modified so as to suit the forests of the Wakatipu, be referred to the Government for their favourable consideration." The motion was put and earned. A Bill entitled the Otago Roads Ordinance, 1871, Amendment Ordinance, 1874, was read a first time.