THE CANAL REPORT.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 14268, 2 February 1912, Page 9

THE CANAL REPORT.

TO .THE EDITOR OF "THE PRESS."

Sir, —I notice in your issue of yesterday the long-expected commissioners' report condemned the above scheme lock, stock, and barrel.

1 have perused the various headings and their contents, but fail to find anything to justify their ruling, and, to my mind, the whole matter is now as uncertain as ever; indeed, I may say tho advantage is with the Canal, for behold now all its disadvantages, wildcat schemes, etc., as the opponents call them, are fully ventilated and exposed, and tho very '%. jrst that can bo brought against the project has been said. But, still, to my lay spite of expert evidence and vested interests, the Canal is not quite dead yet, for certain reasons", one or'two of which I will now state. ' In the old days, as a boy, at Woolston. I have seen largo numbers of craft cross the crooked and difficult bar at Sumner, and proceed through tho winding river to the various wharves (miles away from the mouth), viz., the Ferrymead Steam Wharf, Aikman's Wharf, and the old Quay (now RadleyV some of the vessels being-,-in fact, three-masted barques, and I n. : .-<Jr" heard any great complaint about the difficulty of entering the Estuary from the sea beyond the need of caution on the bar. There must havo been hundreds of arrivals and departures, but 1 cannot recall many wrecks (I can at present think of only two). Now, as in those days sailing craft crossed an angry bar by a shifting and crooked channel, I should like those highlypaid experts to explain, in these days of steam and electricity, what difficulty would prevent a modern steamer or ocean-lmcr from going through welllighted moles in any weather, in the same way as Timaru is entered, and, surely, when the old wind-jammer in our ancient days used to delight in displaying their seamanship, cannot onr present seamen enter an artificial harbour without dread? If such there be, which I cannot believe, perhaps it would be better for them to stick to Lyttelton, or better, say, Akaroa, which is safer still, and leave Christchurch to its fate.

The commissioners also comment on tho heavy wind a big or small steamer would encounter in going through the Canal to the Basin. I wonder the trams are not blown away crossing the embankment over tho Estuary, nor have I heard of any buildings being blown away on the hills, but I suppose being only land lubbers wo do not dread the wind as a sailor would in a land-locked harbour. Also, strange to say, I have not noticed in the report any mention of vessels straining at their ropes in the hill-sheltered port of Lyttelton. I presume it never blows thero except in gentle zephyrs, for I notice that our present member has a scheme in hand of making a township on the other side of the water, so as to get the sun, which refuses to shino very often in Port, and surely ho would not tako his beloved voters Over in a gale of wind. The report does not touch upon the horrors of the tunnel, and the cost of* its duplication or enlargement in the near future, nor of the silting up of Lyttelton Harbour, two very vitat matters.

Now, sir, in conclusion, I maintain the report has not enlightened the nublic in any way, and the uncertainty still exists, and, in my humble opinion, the large sums of money that have been spentby tho Board "for advice at various times have been wasted. It now only remains for the people to try and accomplish what our business men have failed to ,do, and make our city of empty shops and houses a city, of imnortance, which can never be accomplished until Christchureh has a port at her door. We are very proud (and rightly, too) of our forefather's mighty deeds, but I wonder what our descendants will think of us?— Yours, etc., ~ - .= ;•■. V. -■' J. SCOTT. Bamford street, Woolston.

to the nnrron or "the press."

Sir, —I wish to draw the attention of your readers to clause 109, page 34, in the Canal Commissioners' report, as follows: —"As so much depended on the cost of cartage over tho four miles intervening between. Heathcote and the city, and as some of the witnesses entertained very sanguine ideas •as to the low rates at which tho cartage could be done by the use of motor wagons, . . .we have carefully considered this aspect of the casci, and have come to the conclusion that it would be found that thero would be Httlo or no saving as against horsehaulage." I further wish to draw attention to an article that appeared in your issue of 18th inst, entitled "Motor v. Horse," in which it is stated that only four years ago the horse Omnibus Co., in London, was faced with disaster, but now, having transferred to the motor 'bus, their receipts amounted last year to £1,890,500, enabling the directors to pay a dividend of 8 per cent, after writ>inKoff depreciation, etc., and also to establish a pension fund for their employees, and actually granting small pensions to old servants, who were thrown out of employment by the transition from horse to motor traffic. I am informed, by friends, who have visited England lately, that wholesale houses and others supply their customers by motor van, even at long distances, thus avoiding tho double handling that would bo incurred by sending by railway. I would also draw attention to articles that have appeared in " Oasmer's Magazine" for' May, 1911, entitled "The great transformation," detailing the results obtained by generating power by explosion of petrolwithout which man could not fly as he now does. They contain fascinating reading. ~ Again,, I refer to clause 13, page 7, as follows:—' c The suggestion made, by more than ono witness, that coal and timber can be economically convoyed from ship to yard by means of an aerial ropeway, does not commend itself tq us as being, under tho present conditions of tho trades, practicable. With respect to coal, it is at present carried by steamers for several consignees in one and, moreover, generally! more than one quality or description of coal „is carried in each hold, which fact must necessitate a frequent change of berth. The vessels employed in the New Zealand colliery trade are not constructed in a suitable manner for the adoption of mechanical methods of discharge, and in any case where the conditions are quite suitable for the use of mechanical appliances, through the employment of special vessels, and special discharging p-ear, the capital outlay involved is so great, that no saving can be effected, except where the process is carried out on a much larger scale than is possible in this Dominion."

1 have shown this clause to several coal merchants and men, and they. have expressed the opinion that they fail to see how the aerial ropeway will in anyway interfere with the objects aimed at, viz., delivering to the right consignee the quantity and quality of coal that is due to him, in the same way as is effected by any other system. The only difference is, that instead of the ship load being tipped into the cart alongside of tho ship, it is tipped, automatically, into the merchants yard, be the distance what it may, by means of the ropeway, which "is an endless rope traversing the various merchants' yards, and returning with empty skips to the ship. The ship requires to meet the mechanical appliances. If it has hatchways, both fore^ and aft, the skips can. by means of the shunt rail/ be <jonnect©d with the ropeway at both points, thus a change of berths. The capital outlay is moderate, and it can be erected

and taken down w | . * quote from tho man " ■'—" "We think that f" from'the point at d,s ' charged from vess ' place near the dist-ibi m ™ those yards, the 10na | cableways or ror ' fo °?'| convenient and initial outlay and cost However, th< > controversy on the re <■ >c Harbour Board a > where coal vessels h* be erec tion and woik c- 10 " 0----be left to tl f s in *i er ested. But question of oconomv c „ at Heathcote, the C< * o supplied the followir >- wing into carts 6d pc o coal yards at Heather ' ng Is 3d." and I con; latter item would be . * opeway. I mako no .. " drawing attention to these reiu« r in tho Commissioners' report, as they emphatically stated that they wero anxious to arrive at the truth. —Yours, etc., / JOSHUA LITTLE. 27th January, 1912.