THE PROPOSED CANAL.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 13546, 6 October 1909, Page 7

THE PROPOSED CANAL.

PUBLIC MEETING AT HIS

MAJESTY'S

A fairly well-attended public meeting was held at His Majesty's Theatre last night, to discuss matters connected with the proposed Sumner-Christchurch Canal. The Mayor of the City (Mr C. Allison) presided, and there were aiso oii the platform Councillors G. W. J. Parsons, W. H. Cooper, G. Hyde, Dr. Thacker, and T. N. Horsley; Messrs J. Hayes (Mayor of Woolston), G. W. Russell, M.P., E. Howard (President or th» Trades and Labour Council), J. LScott, 'J. Richardson, and A. Kayo. The Mayor said the supporters of the canal scheme had come to the conclusion that nothing could be done until tlu constitution of the Harbour Board war, altered. That object, some thought, would be achieved by the Bill to bo introduced by the Government this session, but he (the chairman) urged that th<3 League should not incur any risk by neflecting to introduce a Bill itsolt on the. lines stated. The speaker closely criticised the figures and deductions contained in the "majority" report ot ti-.o Harbour Board's special committee, and in speaking of the e&timated balancesheet pointed out several discrepancies, stating that 60 per cent, of the present handling charges on imported and exported goods would be saved if tho canal were constructed. He added that the recent concessions had been made with the object solely of weakening the canal agitation. Ho contended that the construction of the canal would savo the people £'44,182 per annum, and if the ships -worked their own cargoes, as was done in European ports, a further £30,000 per annum would be saved —a total in saving of over £70.000 per annum. (Applause). Mr G. VV. Russell, M.P., moved:— "That this meeting affirms its confidence in the proposal to construct a canal from Sumner to Christchurch, the Canal League to urge legislation to that end." Continuing, ho claimed it was to be expected that, having gone so deeply into the financial aspect of the project, he would, upon being elected to tho Harbour Board, 'have been appointed to the committee eet up to enquire into the financial aspect of the canal and thus be able to meet the opponents of tho project face to face. The only committee on which he had been honoured with a seat was in connection with the Sailors' Home. When an individual of his experience was excluded- from the Canal Finance Committee and the Finance Committee of tho Board, while others -wero given scats upon them who had had no experience of finance of any more importance than that of a school committee, it was not giving fair play to the canal scheme. "* (Applause.) Tho speaker strongly criticised the constitution of the Harbour Board. Lyttelton, /with a population of 4000, ho said, had two representatives, the Mayor being an ex omcio member, while the Mayor of Christchurch was not entitled to a seat. Tho villages of Kaiapoi and Itangiora combined had a population of 3.5G0, while- another village called Ashburton had a population of 2500—a gross total of 6000. Now those 6000 people returned as many members to the Harbour Board (two) as the Central and Linwood Wards of the city, -with a population of between 27,000 and 30,000. It was time the constitution of the Beard was changed. Ho would support the whole of the seats being made elective. If that could not bo obtained, at least the Mayor of Christchurch should bo an ex officio member. Two now constituencies should be lifted outj of the Selwyn County, one consisting of Heathcote, Spreydon, and Halswell Road Districts, and tho other of Avon and Riocarton Road Districts. The Central Ward of Christchurch, should have two members, and Linwood a member of its own. If that were done, instead of there being twelvemembers on the Harbour Board against the canal and seven in favour of it, there -would be eleven in favour and ten against it. Mr J. L. Scott, in seconding tho proposition, said he was a member of the Canal Finance Committee, and he could —but it would take too long—tell them a tale of tie manner in which the work was blocked* They (the minority) agreed, in order to facilitate business, to take the railway return as a correct basis, and that the question be considered from the point of view of a port at .Heathcote. Mr Scott claimed that not one of the charges he had levelled against the. majority of the committee had been disproved by Mr Friedlander. The speaker' then went into figures to support his contention, and complained that supporters of the canal on the Harbour Board had been prevented from getting out all the facts by the imposition of a time-limit. Mr Scott declared that even with the port at Heathcote the scheme _woul3 be a financial success. The majority report, however, had killed the proposal to stop the port at Heathcote. They were going to have the port at wood. (Applause). .The motion was carried with one dissentient.

Dr. Thacker moved:—"That this meeting requests the Government to introduce during the coming session an amendment to the Harbour Boards Act providing that the members of Harbour Boards shall be elected by ihe people, and that such representation shall, bo upon a pooulation basis, the xolls to be those used at local elections by the local authorities." In commending the proposition. Dr. Thacker said he thought when he was elected to ihe Harbour Board he would have been cTiosen for tie Canal Finance Committee, but he was not. Ho said that, after all, it was the citizens of Chrlstchurch who had to decide the canal question, and judging by the mamwr in which the scheme had been received by th,j citizens present that night, they had decided in favour of it already. (Applause.) The only remedy for what ha<l gone on in the Harbour Board recently in the direction of blocking supporters of the canal from' being , appointed in any numbers to the committee was to give the people a direct vote on the matter of tlie constitution of the Board. The speaker commented upon the absence of Messrs Davey XlI, and "Witty, M.P.'s, all of whom ht? said wero in favour of the canal.

Mr E. Howard, president of the Trades and Labour Council, seconded the motion, and said he was extremely pleased to find himself on the same platform with, those eupporting the canal that evening. The scheme ,was one that had been advocated by the workers for years.

The motion was carrietf with one dissentient.