LOAN. OF £1,000,000 FOR HARBOUR IMPROVEMENTS.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIX, Issue 81, 3 April 1908, Page 2

LOAN. OF £1,000,000 FOR HARBOUR IMPROVEMENTS.

(To the Editor.) Sir,—Whea the Chairman of the Har- i bour Hoard introduced this loan of £1,000,000, he stated most emphatically ' that the wharfage rates or dues would l not be increased, as the present increasing revenue, due to expansion of trade, would be ample for expenses, etc., and we all felt pleased. I have it on the best authority that it is being worked quietly to revive the vexatious question (which has already been blocked on two occasions) of the Harbour Board receiving all cargo at a : cost of 1/ or 1/6 per ton; the revenue ; from same would be large and load our i wharves and sheds, with brass-bound ' generals outnumbering the privates—at j whose cost? Why, the consumers. i I understand the excuse that will be i tendered will be, that in consequence of ' the large quantity of electricity about ' wharves and sheds it would be danger- . ous for importers to handle their own ' goods. t I assume, with the raised platforms, the cartways between will be free from . electricity, and the goods and officials in sheds will not be charged with this, ; reviver.

I trust I am not correct in saying that the proposed receiving charge is to raise revenue to cover up some serious oversight when working out the cost and expenses of the £1,000,000 loan? I am strongly opposed to the Harbour Board receiving our goods, and I feel sure I am voicing the views of the consumers of Auckland, for the following reasons:— 1. The steamer or sailer is supposed to stack all goods inside the wharf sheds, or where, directed, keeping each consignee's marks separate, in terms of bill of lading, and why should the Board relieve the ship from its undertaking and tax the consumer for what is already included in rate of freight ? 2. A receiving charge would bo. a serious tax on low-priced goods of heavy tonnage, such as coal, chaff, potatoes, grain, cement, salt, iron, timber, fruit, manures, sand, etc., etc., but on highpriced goods of small tonnage, it would not be felt. This charge would also be levied on all goods entered for Auckland, whether delivered in stream or at outside wharves. What would the consumer get in return? ffi 3. Transhipments of perishable goods and produce for early and casual steamers for the North and South Coasts. At present these are interfered with quite enough, but goodness knows under the charge of Harbour Board officials how they would fare.

In conclusion, if the importers of Auckland hold the Dominion record for alacrity in taking delivery of cargo under the past.and present trying circumstances

of being hampered in every conceivable manner through want of wharf'accommodation, what ought they to do with up-to-date wharves and sheds ?—T am, etc.,

P. .VIRTUE,...; :;•...:. Manager Northern Roller Milling Co,