The Press. TUESDAY, JULY 7, 1908. THE CANAL SCHEME.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 13161, 7 July 1908, Page 8

The Press. TUESDAY, JULY 7, 1908. THE CANAL SCHEME.

An interesting discussion took place at the Lyttelton Harbour Board yesterday upon the report of Messrs Coode, Son and Matthews, on the proposed ship canal, and tho alternative construction of an extension of Lyttelton Harbour at Gollan's Bay. Mr Friedlander, the most energetic opponent of the canal scheme, moved a resolution to the effect that the timo is premature to consider tho question of going outside tbe present moles for harbour extension. To this Mr Kaye moved an amendment to tho effect that tho rcjxirts of the consulting engineers and of the Board's engineers bo referred to :i Special Committee, with powers to collect evidence and to report to tho Hoard upon tho financial aspects of the

second recommendation of Messrs Coode, Son and Matthews for the construction of a dock at Heathcote, with a canal to Sumner, such committee to take Mr Williams's estimate of cost as a basis, with such modifications from Messrs Coode, Son and Matthews _5 report a.s it may deem advisable. This was lo>t nn the casting vote of the chairman (Mr Laurenson, M.P.), who subsequently moved a further amendment to the effect that a committee, consisting of Messrs iv.-iye. Cook, Scott, Waymouth, Lambie, Richardson, Quane, Hay, Miller, Fri'-dlander, and the chairman enquire into the financial aspects of the scheme proposed by both reports, which was carried, Mr Friedlander agreeing to withdraw his roo-tir-.1. U'e think it would have been a very gre.it pity had the Hoard decided, as Mr Friedlander sujested, to pigeonhole the consulting engineers' report without further consideration. Mr Friedlander, who had very carefully marshalled'his arguments against the canal, certainly brought down a very imposing _irray of figures as to tho animal cost involved in carrying out Messrs Coode, Son and Matthews's scheme, and advocates of the canal n. '-irally found it difficult, on the spur

01 the moment, to criticise those figures with effect. Tho

matter is one not to bo. decided offhand by a mere impromptu debate, but .srli-mld receive very careful examination and ..-.nsidenition. It -will bo tho duty of 1)10 committee which has been apj*oinu.l, wo take it. to obtain evident c from leading business men and others on tlio financial aspect of the question, awl to embody the evidence t.vus obtained in th"ir report. By their terms of refereneo Messrs Coode, Son and Matthews -wero debarre<l from, dealing with tliis sido of tiie question. They have treated the problem exclusively from an engineering point of view. It is apparent also, we think, that .hey havo adopted the conservative fashion, usual among English engineers of eminence, of framing their estimates and designs on the most conservative basis. Their works are designed for posterity »x>th as regards their magnitude and. durability. In a young and growing country, it is sometimes wiser to commence on more modest lines., with a viow to subsequent enlargements when the demand has arisen and tho community is in a better position to meet the additional expense. That probably was ■what was in the mind of the Harbour Board's engineer when ho drew out his plans and estimates for tho canal. The Lyttelton Harbour Board would bo in a better position to-day had.its dock been constructed in a less substantial fashion. It is a monument of engineering skill as regards solidity. But it has never .paid, owing to this heavy capital oost, and to-day it is more or less obsolete, having regard to the size of vessels trading to th© port. Had it been constructed in wood, it would, by this time, lave probably paid for itself, and it would havo been an easier matter for -the Board to extend it to meet modern rerpiirements. So, too, "t may bo that Mr Cyrus Williams's plans for tho canal, although not theoretically so perfect as those of tho consulting engineers, are hotter adapted for onr requirements having regard to tho financial position. That is a matter which tho committee will, no doubt, tako into consideration and report upon. Wo cordially agree with tho view of those members who say that tho £3000 expended on the consulting engineers' report has been money well spent. It has placed the engineering aspect of tho question bofore the public in tho clearest possible way. and the report will be of permanent value whatever may "be the ultimate decision as to the shape, which future extension of shipping facilities shall take. It is now for the committee to deal with tho financial side of the question, -freely and impartially, so that th© public may ho alble to givo tho -whole question proper consideration. Thero is no need to come to a hurried decision on _so -im<portant a question. Tho port of Lyttelton ■will he ahlo to deal with tiro trade of tho district for sortie yeans to come, witlwiit any great extension- of tho accommodation provided. If a committee came to the conclusion that tho canal is too costly for present adoption, it will 1-0 wise to allow tlve> whole scheme to rest for the present. Certainly it would be a fatal mistake to. go on at once with the Gollan's Bay extension. When tho timo comes, as no doubt it will, when tho trade has outgrown the capacity of tho present harbour works, it may be that tho. district will l_o in a sufficiently prosperous condition to laco th-e cost of the canal. That the latter, if it is found practicable, would bo far better from the point of view of public convenience goes without savins.. Win"!© the coni-

mittee are pursuing their investigations, we hope the Canterbury membens will make a strenuous and united effort to secure th© removal of the injustice under which Chrisrtchurch is at

present suffering owing to excessive railway charges.