FERRY COMPANY'S WEALTH.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVI, Issue 61, 12 March 1915, Page 2

FERRY COMPANY'S WEALTH.

HABBOtTR BOARD INQUIRIES. DISCLOSED BEFORE . ■ \- ■--■ COMMISSION. . \\.. WHABEAGE ~ , OFFeIiED JBY EIJAEB TQ GOMPANJ. The principal feature of intprest in yesterday afternoon's proceedings of the CoTimission which is inquhing into the pfpppsecTnew chargee for ferry shipping taiarfjge* wnis evidence of James Egnrr Gunson, the" chairman of-- the Aedkiand Harbour Board. At' the outset Mr. Gunson refuted the suggestion that he had inspired Mr. Bond to bring forward the motion calling for a return, relating to feny shippin'*lcharge?,, and-he "proceeded to lay bej&re. JTie ..Qommfesipiithe result of hie inquiries into the working of the -ferries ii—Sj-dkeyi-^—Kelatively- the- capital and business of the Sydney ferfie= was siS times that of the Auckland ferries, and | the relation of city to marine subu ba i "Rie agregate -charge .of the Sydney Harbour Trusfto the ferr es fot wharvW.valued At -£60,0Q0. was £S,OOO. a&a"ifl addition £800 was charged for i the Manly whaTf; while at other -parts j prthe-narbonr it had been, the -prV.cy of j tite "Trn'st' to allow the" companies to build' ffijar own.,Wliafyes. " IJ jßl.t r in?.tely. • She--Sp"ecial.<Hjmm':ttee f to re- | port "upon the , nutter la d down the j policy that in vie* of- the fact that the • provided 'facilities for private j Intefprise. it wotdd be justified m chaTg- I ifig- oil a basis of 5 per cent. The -ommittee. naturally considered that if the t Board W33 to provide all the money Jor ferry a.ecommodation»,and .the .comp-ny wafked*a:wiy- the retrurns, it was ifi"unten s «!rte- position. =-^3ie-Board wa9 ?ij,the. of' the ledger, and it ■ras tqTisjdefed -ak anomaly.- ■ - The' Commissioner (Mr. "Jnst'ce Bosiing) "But-aie.there not other parts of ihe 80-nrffs business-"which do-not bring in retjifnT- ■' " ' Mi-. Gunsonr Net where the exclusive irterest of-one private company is involved. Take~the «tse of the docks. J&eXr ire_a. -they do aut'jxiat .tor aSvantage 'bue sec-anir-two oir three companies. "jtfj-Jnsfiee Hosldnsrißnt are .f-.ese Jaeifilie&rcoltfihed" , td the; exiting «omA*e..th;ey;iioir'6pen to r any- eompartv? ■■•■-.' ' . Mr. Gtrasen: 3fot in actual practice. If another company came into existence to-nibrro*f morning,, it "Would bethe business of the Board ±6 pxoyide. accommoflatioii fofc its. traffic. The-accommbdatibn for the present cempanies would rio%'be -„, mv*, ~M _ _f,™ :: Cp^«niiiiJ?,-.Mr.-Gunat>|t^i4i% a .fe h ? n ! *P :ft e r effectoOf .tie.new. tHeVXoTtft i Shore" boron>tM, tfiFßo'f'l deeded *hat while reaffirtnin*"' Ihe "principle - already laid dbwn,.ibere misrht be some reason for leniency, and reduced the charges. The Commission then adjourned. r -aT-Etrt/E--<JF THCTB.- - t When the Commission was resumed ■&.16 morning,"Ms Honor' asked Mt. Gunson, what, principle had been followed in the ; past -by"tie; '-fiarbour' Board fiiing "the charaea-to-the ferry, .companies. Witness ~eai6L that there was no doubt "that ine old cKafge3 had been- arrived -at by rule of thumb, and that no definite J Theyt to find any records, resolutions, of de- - liHSMidris* to'-shew ,ha4r l)ee D arrived at. Tit was, "therefore, .thOagat that .tile time fiad "arrived when the -Board.might reasonably Jay down'some principle upon which come moTe adequate return might.*? derived from the expenditure which was essential to the successful carrying out of the large traffic. The 7 Board was still of opinion that the Return, from the facilities proTided siiould pay interests' and maintenance, but in view of the nominal chargee which bad prevailed so long it decided . that -H- would be aatfefied -with, five pei -eeht oh the capital pnpay " -His Honor asked .witness a number of questions' with reference to, '' differVii ie between. the.-treatment:.gf. fbe "Bevonpott <?6mpaify" and Northern Company,' wliicn haa"-almost • the 'exclusive use of r a wharf. ■. .. ■ v ■ ixGB-rHERiN COMPANY'S CASE. "• Miv punsdn pbintei out that in the '>Tese?r "oi .—thep -Northern Company it brought revenue to the.Board on. gopde, for the handling of which the wharf was not question" of- what percen"tage the NortKern Company wae paying on the" B6ara's"dutTay, because it would be illegal of the Board to raise its cargo; charges to one •company. Roughly speak- • UnV-the Board received. 16 per cent from the wharves. \Vheh his THonor asked if the Board held tliat, although the Northern Company had a virtual, but not actual exuse of one wharf, while the fer- .' rips wprp that they must use one eet of wharves only, there should Tie a difference •rn-the*~ehaTges, ."Mr. .'Gunson replied'that the position was co. Facilities provided- for the exclusive use of the ferry company produced returns in ' -wKich the Board did not share, except Jto the. .extent of charges Which did not i ..covej;...anniial outlay. The other shipping to which his Honor referred brought ...in a class of-traffic from which the! ■ Board derived a very good return. If .it for* thei goods traffic .the exunnecessary. He submitted that regard: must be had for that class of traffic; and the return from the traffic the steamers brought to harbourr If-ttie--Board got no returns from cargo"they would admit that it would be equitable to go into the--mattet.. - In further jeply to the Judge, witness said that the Harbour Board had taken f the "development of the district into con- • sideration in fixing its charges' for down ■ harbour charges. . The Judge: If you do that in those eases, does not the .same principle apply to all enterprises?—l -don't think co. Small launches ba*e small returns in •jEatering for sparse populations, but in ' .tfie case of the ferries.there is a. large, - -increasing and, lucrative traffic, Then you make a distinction as the returns go upl=-*Really the reverse is the case. -Where we find .there, is a struggling population the Board gave privileges and concessions. And when the enterprises pay, you ... raise..the Board merely asks foT'itepropoT charges, whereas in the past it has given them leniency. . ~.," JAKES. In answer %o~ further questions, Mr. •""Gunson feaid the Bdarfl had nersr said --.that -the .coet to 'the~*BaveUißg public should not-be increased. It had laid down the principle that if the fares by by Jaw. regv-":-l«.te";4&..ichargeß,v Hiif before they did " .position., the . training_ o f a reasonable 'by-law' they - ffie earoiDg

At a-later stage\ lii the examination of Hx.Gunson, his Honor intimated that he did" not think he could lay downtiie principle that these facilities' Should bear interest on the capital cost and the cost of management, while the witness intimated, that if it could be proved that the company would only be earning about 3 per cent under the new charges, as had been suggested, the Board would allow them to pass on the cost. EERKT2S NOT WANTED. In the course of his cross-examination by Air. M. G. McGregor (counsel lor the w&vonport Ferry Company), Mr. Gunson was asked if he adhered to a statement he had made that the Board would be prepared to allow the ferry companies to tiave oiieif own facilities. Mr.' Gunson j replied that he was prepared to make an ! offer. The Board would be writing off j the cost of "V ictoria wharf in three years, and wouid be prepared to give a lease to j the company if it would undertake to provide the accommodation required foT : the public. Moreover, they would pass the whole._,of the ferries over at a valuation. " Mr. McGregor: We don't want the I ferries unless it is at our valuation. j Mr. Gunson: We don't want this busiI ness. We would allow you to take it over. It is an offer, and you can come and negotiate it. I , The next witness called was Mr. Peter . ! Virtue, a member of the Board and ! manager of the Northern Roller Mills I I Company. He confirmed the policy of I the Board as "laid down by Mr. Gunson, I and declared that the Harbour Board I was only desirous of removing gross i anomalies and preventing leakages. Far from the Board trying to dictate to any ! company, they had been dictated to. I "In fact," continued the witnc --, "whenever we do anything we are looked I upon as a set of nonentities. We are j always told that we don't know any-1 thing about harbour matters. The gen-1 tleman who tells us that put himself up in the shipping interest at the last election and was turned down." (Laughter.) Continuing, Mr. Virtue said that as an i expert accountant of many years standing he maintained that the company was making a profit of £18,000 per annum. . He contended that the residents of the North Shore were getting facilities at the expense of the general public, arid, submitted calculations he : had"in¥de % 't6 the -'Commission. From these he estimated ■ that the company wasLderiving a revenue of £17,000 from | 12.000. people from concession tickets, j whereas the same number of persons! travelling once a day on a sixpenny,, ticket would be paving £75.000. Mr. Virtue contended that in fact the Devon- I port company had a monopoly. No rival ' company could stand against it'because of the cheap fares to the. Devonport people, who would naturally .sunport.it. ! and'<the fact that it had art linterest-in ' the racecourse and had control of *H ; fhe "picture spots of the Harbour. ■ ' ".' '. • - POCKETS IN SAME COAT. "Although, these interests may be in the name of Mrs. Alison, or some other! Alison, the pockets are all in the same coat," declared the witness, amid laughter. "Would it make any difference to the case if you were informed that the racecourse belongs to the Takapuna Jockey Company?" asked Mr. McGregor. - "Yes, it Would make, an important difference," retorted the witness, "because the directors are the same, and they;i naturally play into each dtheVs hand?. Mr. E. 'TV. Alison ie so .wrapped up in both of them, that it would be difficult to declare "the difference," persisted the witness. " Of course, you are not a shareholder of the Ferry Company?" queried Mr. McGregor. "I'm not; I wish I were," promptly retorted the witness. "I consider that the shares are worth £3 10/." (Laughter.) " Oh, Mr. Virtue; why not buy them?" asked counsel. " I can't," replied the witnres. with a woful expression. "The arti'l?s of association are such that- they are Ve*>t to the chosen few." { Renewed lav: liter.} Mr. Virtue was asked how lie arrived at his computation of the earnings of the*-company. " • -'< ; ; : \' "You bare asked the questiori, .and now you shall have the answer," retorted the witness. r ■ ' "Of course, I want it," softly replied counsel. "But not in the wav I shall give it to you." replied the witness. Mr. Virtue proceeded to narrate how a tally had been taken of the traffic of the eowmnv. 'both at Hip" pa'asensrer and . caTJro wharves to ascertain the earnings of the company, and submitted fisure=— dpclnred to hive been prepared with miTiute care — "aye an annual expenditure of £48000 and a profit of £IR.(inn even unrW tho new chaTffes. " And 1 row def-c Mr. Ali=on—of course. I cannot offer to bpt bpforp votir TTonor —to TPfiite -Wip.m." declsred. >Jr.. Vir f ne., "Tf Mr. Ali=on allows mc. t will vn throiisrTi his fo-Tnorrriw to w»Srm tViptri anrl the oharea will b° £3 10/ on' thp market tomorrow mom'""? , . CVfon rty laughter, in ! wTii"b the Judse s°ined.) Mr. Vvrtnp «">« cro c «-exami7ro'' on the of hv fi<njr»e wben lie ob-soj-vpd: "T am talViro? about mv ■=J<»pt. I'v>e got no time for yours. Tt's fatpd."" ! ' Mr. McOresw: Wp-11. will tou let mc <ro BTirt Jnenpct the books of the Northern -Roll"*- VHlfi? <••-;; Mr. Virtue: No; we arc-not asking for •miWic pnnreseione. ■ " ">■ ' Mr. But voti are always wh'Tiiner in thp npwewiner. Witness: T ftan't know about that. Mr. [ "Weseev caw that wp are the only feonlp who have bad any foresight or .business acumen. (Lauffhter.) "But what about rpservesf ,, queried counsel in relation to the fiVuree. Mr. Virtue renV-ed that fo?t\ aTlawed for reserves. "You arp litre the Germans," he continued. "You've eot it all . picked away. You've sot cpilars and wine casks full of gold." (Land laughter.)