MR J. W. THOMSON ON THE

Clutha Leader, Volume XX, Issue 1036, 1 June 1894, Page 3

MR J. W. THOMSON ON THE

CLQTHA RIVER TRUST. (Continued.) TO THK EDITOR. I now corae (o a matter to which Mr Mackenzie specially referred, and with which lie justly found very great fault. I mean (he insertion of clauses regarding the. Olutha Trust and other Acts, with the result as he says that it is difficult to find out what the law is on the subjp.ct. The action complained of commenced in 1878, the Harbor Bill of that year containing various references to the Olutha Trust. The same thing happened again in 1884, the Rivers Bill of that y«ar also dealing with the trust. Both of these were consolidating measures. The Government thought it desirable to bring the Clutha Board and all the other harbor and river boards under the operation of these Acts in order, I presume, to have something like uniformity in the working df these boards. I may say that when I came to knovr in 1878 that thft Harbors Bill contained clauses relating to the Olutha Trust I endeavored to get these clauses struck out of the bill, but in this I did not succeed. As the Clutha Board was formed simply to manage an endowment, I thought that the Acts relating to it were quite sufficient for the purpose, and. that these, references to it in other Acts might lead to confusion and difficulties as to interpretation. I have always been of opinion that any necessary amendments should have been made by special Acts amending the original Acts. I therefore quite agree with Mr Mackenzie that it is very much to be regretted that the law as to the Olutha Trust is scattered throughout so many Acts, and I also agree with him in thit that the sooner everything connected with the trust is put into one Statute the better. Still I do not agree with Mr Mackenzie that the Harbor and Ravers Acts have altogether changed the powers and duties of the board. The Harbors Act repeals the provisions in the Olutha Act of 1875 relating to the harbor at Port Molyneux, and reenacts them, but the Rivers Act does not repeal any part of the Act of 1875, and there is a clause in it — the 135th — which provides that the lands described in the schedule of the Act of 1874 and set aside as endowments for the purposes expressed in the Act of 1875, ' shall be deemed to be set aside upon th« same trusts and for the same purposes under this Act ; and the Olutha River Board constituted under this Act shall hold the said lands for the purposes aforesaid." Tn so far therefore as the administration of the proceeds of the endowment by the board is concerned the law is not altered at all, and I understand that tho. board has not done anything except in connection with the endowments, I admit that outside the administration of the funds of the endowment there might be doubts as to the powers and duties of the board. There are, however, two minor points in which the Rivers Act and oth«r Acts have altered the law. Under the Olutha Act of 1875 the Council of Balclutha and the road boards whose namps 1 have given elected the members, but by 1884 Ma tau had ceased to be a road board and was simply a riding of ths county. Not being a road board it could not elect, and the power of electing was given to the electors of the riding. By 1885 also other road boards within <the Clutha River district had ceased to be road boards and were simply ridings, and the power of electing was, as in the case of Matau, given to the electors of the ridings. The other alteration is as to the thirds, which, according to the Land Act, go to the county for the purpose of making rotids. The Land Board administers the Clutha Trust lands the same as if they were Grown lands, all moneys however arising from the land going to the Clutha Board. As the Olutha reserve was an endowment doubts came to be entertained as to whether the Land Board could i legally hand over these thirds to the county for roads as in the case of Crown lands, and this doubt was set at at rest by giving to the Board power to do this. Power also was taken to apply this principle to the lands disposed of previous to the settlement of this doubt. This was the retrospective legislation complained of, but it was a good thing for the settlers who took up the land. Mr Mackenzie points to the 74th section of the Rivers Act 1884 as completely altering the powers of the trust. But if Mr Mackenzie will look at the section again he will see that this section simply means that if any work, has to be undertaken on the banks of a river yrithin a river district for the purpose of preventing or lessening damage it is only the river board that can legally undertake such work, and does not mean, as he seems to think it does, that all the power of river boards is restricted to works on the banks of rivers. In speaking of the Clutha endowment it is usual to speak of it as, an endowment for the river only, and I shall tell how this happens. The Clutha River was visited by small vessels from the early days of the settlement. For some years after the

gold discoveries a considerable trade was carried on with Dunedin and even with Australia, and for two or three years Port MolyneUx was a port of entry. The wool came down coantry to be shipped there, but as soon a? the traffic bridge was completed over the Olutha at Balclutha, which it was in 1868, all the wool and other produce from up-country went direct to Dnnedin by road, and only an occasional vessel came to the Port. By the time the endowment was made the Port was therefore considered of little consequence, but the river was looked on as a valuable highway into the interior. As bearing on this point I nmy quotti a passage from the report for the year 1868 of Captain Thomson, harbor master for the province. ' The railways,' he says, ' that no doubt will soon extend north and south from Dunedin will do the traffic that at present goes coastwise. I would therefore suggest that no more extensive works at the entrance to the river should be begun than the removal of such rocks as will render the navigation for tha present traffic less dangerous. The river traffic, in all probability, will increase, and Balclutha become its centre. A small expenditure will from time to time be necessary for the removal of any obstruction to the safe navigation of the steamer." It was for the river therefore as a highway that the endowment was obtained, but at the same time it was seen that some expenditure might be required at Port Molyncux, and accordingly authority was taken in the Act of 1875 to expend money there if necessary, but certainly no endowment would have been made for the harbor of Port Molyneux. Considerable sums of money which were spent there in the early days might just as well have been thrown into the sea. I think it right to mention these things, as some people have the idea that the whole of the endowment, or at least a large portion of it, should be applied in making a harbor at the new mouth of the rivei. Mr Mackenzie lays much stress on the representation of Kaitangata on, the bo.ircl, and considers that the town has been very badly treated in not having a member even from the first, but especially for some years past. It was the Government who, as I have said, prepared the bill of 1875. I do not know why they omit.ted the Kaitangata road district from the river district. Probably they thought that as Kaitangata was on the eve of being connected by railway with the main line it was not much interested in the river. Of, this, however, lam certain, that no slight was intended. There can be no doubt that the thing that has given Kaitangata a keen interest in the river is not the fact that it is now a large place, but the fact; that the entrance to the river is now in its immediate neighborhood. And this also is true that for years after the new entrance was formed the opinion was very general that it would not be permanent but that the river would work back to its old channel and again enter the sea at Port Molyneux. The opinion, however, now seems to be that the new mouth will be permanent. I quite agree with Mr Mackenzie that Kaitangata should be represented on the board. The mayor might be a member in his official capacity, or the borough council might have the right of electing a member. And I believe that if at any time for years past Kaitangata had expressed a desire to be represented such desire would have been given effect to. With regard to Mr Mackenzie's opinion that L2OOO would make at the new mouth a harbor that would allowlarge vessels to enter, this is a matter about which I am unable to form an opinion. It is a question for experts and the board. I should say that if a harbor could be made there — or indeed anywhere else — for L2OOO it would be well-spent money. At the same time we should not forget that a great d«al of money has been spent very unprofitably on harbors in New Zealand. All interested should therefore act with caution, and should be well assured that any works entered upon would effect the purpose for which they were undertaken. Mr Mackenzie is correct as to the income of the board, which he says is from L7OO to LBOO a year. But he is rather wide of the mark when he- says that when the present leases expire the reserves may be let for LI 600 a year. One of the runs falls in in about two years. When it comes to be dealt with I am afraid it will not bring in to the board much more than it is doing at present. There is another run which when last leased went considerably beyond the upset. I have heard that if the lease were falling in now the probability is that the run would not bring the present rental, I hope that the recent discussions about, the trust, brought about chiefly by Mr Mackenzie, and for which he deserves the thanks of the community, will result in the public good.