1.—9

84

respect of " way-leave ") when they charge only fd. per ton per mile in respect of both haulage and " way-leave " over the Government line from Mokihinui to Westporfc'? or, seeing that fifteen years ago they charged the Westport Coal Company only 3d. per ton for haulage and " way-leave " over the Koranui Company's line, and refunded Id. per ton to that company in respect of " way-leave " ? If, as has been suggested, the Commissioners based their decision on an estimated value of that section of the Mokihinui Company's railway over which it is proposed to run our coal, and the necessity of providing a profit to that company thereon, then we submit it was unfair to this company to accept the Mokihinui Company's valuation of the section, as it is said they did, at £16,500, without affording us an opportunity of proving, as we believe we could, that it could be built for less than £10,000. Still more unreasonable was it to proceed, as we are informed they did, on the assumption that, no matter how small our output, we must be compelled to pay such a sum per annum as would yield that company a profit on the alleged cost. We submit that this also was wrong in principle, and that it is too late now to take either valuation or output as a basis for fixing haulage charges on any part of the Westport Section or its branches, seeing that it has already been determined by long practice that all haulage rates on that section and its feeders shall bo one initial rate of Is. lOd. per ton for 8 miles and under to the Government—as haulage authority—and the remaining mileage charged at fd. per ton per mile. It may be urged that the Mokihinui Company can reasonably claim such a rate as will insure them interest on their outlay. We maintain that such an argument is not entitled to any weight in determining this question, for the following reasons : — (1.) The Mokihinui Company's line was originally constructed without any legal authority, and to enable them to ship their coal at their own wharf on the Mokihinui Eivor— a purpose which has entirely failed of its object—and but for the construction of the link-line from Ngakawau tq Mokihinui this line would have remained as it was, utterly valueless. (2.) The construction of the said link-line at the public cost, the validation of their railway, the opening of this company's coal-mine, and the prospect of further developments in the same direction, have given the Mokihinui Company's line whatever value it now possesses. (3.) Moreover, it must be noted that the Mokihinui Company has no rights as against us or our coal, except as they may arise from the use of their section, neither can it be said that they were induced to construct their said line by any promise or expectation of traffic from us. (4.) The Mokihinui Company's railway w ras constructed along and over, and occupies to the exclusion of all others, the narrow and only available track round the Bluff. As your Excellency's Government are aware, it was constructed along a public road, and is the key to the Mokihinui Valley. There can be no doubt that if the construction of the Ngakawau-Mokihinui Section had been authorised or in contemplation, and proper legal authority had been sought for the construction of this line before it was put in hand, that company would have been put under very stringent conditions as to the charges to be levied on the coal of other companies coming over the said line. (5.) The Mokihinui Company will derive a considerable revenue from the carriage of goods and passengers, which revenue has already been, and will further be, largely augmented by the influx of population owing to the enterprise of our company. (6.) These facts we submit are weighty reasons why the Mokihinui Company should be compelled to submit to and content themselves with a " way-leave " contribution out of a through haulage rate of fd. per ton per mile, which is the tariff now in force on the Westport Section and its branches, and one which will afford some encouragement to the coal-mining industry in the Mokihinui Valley. Even in the case of the New Zealand Midland Railway Company, whose line was authorised by Parliament, and constructed under exceptional conditions, the charge made to the "Black Ball Coal Company" is only 1-ld. per mile for haulage of their coal a distance of eight miles, the company supplying the haulage-power and the whole work of maintenance. The extension of the line from Ngakaw,au to Mokihinui was constructed by the Westport Harbour Board out of its own moneys at a cost of close upon £36,000, and that section is, so far, as much a private railway, and as much entitled to an initial or special rate in respect of " wayleave," as the Mokihinui Company's railway. The rate at present fixed for carrying coal over the said Ngakawau-Mokihinui Section, about eight miles, is fd. per ton per mile, equal to 6d. per ton for eight miles ; whereas the Commissioners propose to charge us Is. Id. per ton for " way-leave " only over 1 mile 22 chains of the Mokihinui Company's line. If it is fair and reasonable to charge fd. per ton per mile, or 6d. per ton for haulage and " wayleave," of the same coal eight miles over a public line costing £36,000, how can it be either reasonable or fair to impose a charge of Is. 4d. per ton for hauling and " way-leave " of the same coal less than two miles over a private line of the same description worth less than one-third that amount, particularly when, as in this case, the whole value of the private line has been created by the expenditure of the above-named £36,000 on the connecting line ? If the haulage of our coal over less than two miles of line at Mokihinui is fixed, as proposed, at Is. 4d. per ton, then, supposing we are able to carry on business and comply with the conditions of our lease, the result will be that on our compulsory output of 50,000 tons for the fifth year, and from that time forward, the Mokihinui Company will receive a minimum sum of over £2,560 per annum from us for " way-leave " alone, or equal to about 15-J per cent, on £16,500, the alleged capital value of less than one-third of that company's line. In addition to this, if they comply with their own output clauses the Mokihinui Company will receive a similar benefit from the carriage of their own coal, besides the larger share of the earnings