A NEW SLIP

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2370, 28 January 1915, Page 7

A NEW SLIP

TO MEET SHIPPING REQUIREMENTS BOARD AND COMPANY ARBITRATION MAY BE NECESSARY. Some considerable time ago, followbig upon representations made by the ironmasters of Wellington, the Harbour Board decided to call upon the Patent Slip Company, as the board had ■Jjower to do in terms of the Act under .which the Slip Company holds its charter, to erect another slip. Since then •there have been delays, and the work is not yet in hand. The Act provides that the Patent Slip Company must erect a slip when called upon by "the board to do so, but. tike size and capacity of the slip is a matter for negotiation between the board and the company. If tho two parties fail to agree the Minister of Marine must be "ailed upon to settle the question as arbitrator. The board now demands that the slip-way to be built shall have i cradle 150 feet long, and the company contends that the new slip cradle should be 130 feet long. The owners of Email ships trading to tho port are strongly opposed to the company's contention. The general question was considered by the Harbour Board last night when the cases for • both' sides in the controversy were put before the meeting. For the Company. The case for the Patent Slip Company was set forth in a long letter to the board. "The resolution of the board, which requires a slip 150 feet in length," it was stated, "is quite beyond anything we had contemplated, and is not in keoping either with tho Bpirit or the intention of the understanding arrived at between the board and the company. Apart from the fact that a slip of 150 feet in length is in excess of what is necessary for the accommodation of the class of . vessel which was the subject of discussion between us prior to making the arrangement, the result of its erection would bo that, not only would the revenue of the present slip be depleted, to such an extent as to make it lion-payable, but the fact that a special scale of in respect of the second slip ,s Provided for in Clause 13 of the fifth schedule of the Act, will probably involve both slips in a loss, or,' at the best, leave no margin of return for the capital invested in them. Argument of Figures. . "By way of illustrating the effect of the erection of a slip 150 feet,in length, and quote from our returns for the year ended September 30 last:— o' number of vessels slipped 105 2. If new slip is built to our plan, 130 feet long, it would acmodate ....: 54,8. Leaving to be dealt with'by' present slip .....' 51 If however, the resolution of the board to build a slip 150 feet in length is given effect to, the result would be: — 1. Total .number of vessels slipped during the year ..._ 105 2. Vessels capable of going on 150 / foot 6lip 70 3. Leaving for present slip only ... 35 That is to say, that the present slip, which represents a capital value of about £25,000, would be used on an average not quite three times in each month during the year 1 Ready for Arbitration. "In accordance with Clause 2 of the fifth schedule of the Act, the board itself eventually becomes ,tho owne r of both slips, and its action in rendering each an unpayable propostion at the •present time would probably result ultimately in a heavy burden being imSosed on the public through the board, 'nder all the circumstances, therefore," I regret that we axe unable to see our way to, give effect to the resolution of Iho board, and trust that after further consideration it will be rescinded in favour of our proposal to erect a slip 130 feet in length, but failing this we would respectfully request that the matter should be submitted to the arbitration of the Minister of Marine as provided in Clause 21 of the fifth schedule of the Act."

In reply to iptestiona, Mr. Marohbanks, Harbour Board Engineer, said that a slip of 150 feat would aocommodate' ships of 500\tons, or about a quarter of the weight which the present slip could carry. A slip of 130 feet would accommodate ships of from 370 to 380 tons. The difference in cost between a 150 feet slip and a slip of 130 feet would be from £1000 to, £1200. For the Shipowners. 'After the board had heard the lotter, i deputation representing the New Zea-. land Shipowners' Federation was admitted. . Mr. W. E. Fuller said the deputation wished to urge that the board should insist upon a slip of 150 feet being erected. He pointed out. that vessels recently built for coastal trade, except those built for bar harbowrs, were all over 130 feet in length, and this would be the rule in future, for owners found it unpayable to run small vessels between the larger ports. The coast ports which now admit only shallow draft vessels were being improved by works either in progress or to be undertaken, and the tendency would be for larger vessels to go into other trades. The present Blip was insufficient to cope with the work offering, and in view of the probability of the size of ships increasing, the erection of a slip 130 feet long would not relieve the pressure very much. In reply to questions, he said that a slip of 130 feet would accommodate 35 of the vessels owned by the shipowners belonging to the federation. They own. Ed 11 snips between 130 feet and 150 feet in length, and 11 ships over 150 feet long. He stated that recently the Opawa had had to wait a fortnight in order to get on the Slip. Looking Ahead. Mr. F. H. Taylor said that in making provision for the laying up of ships in the port of Wellington the board should have regard to the future rather than to the immediate present. The delays experienced now proved beyond doubt tliat .the present Slip did not adequately cope with the demands of shipping, and it was a fact that certain shipowners Lad been compelled to_ send vessels to Lyttelton for overhaul in consequence of being unable to get them on to the. Wellington Slip. A slip of 130 feet would perhaps meet present requirements, but with the increase of the number of ships over 130 feet in length, it would ue .found inadequate. That time might not come for five years, but it would surolj come before the expiry of the lease. The Tax of Overtime. Captain Peterson said that the company had informed the board that 105 ships weiit on to the Slip in the course of a year, but they aid not state how long every ship remained on the Slip. The fact was that_ owners were compelled to pay overtime rate for night work in order to get their ships off quickly. This was a serious charge' upon the small ships, which were not earning very much. As an instance of delay, he said that he had applied to have the Kaliu slipped a fortnight ago, and could not got auy date. Ho hoped the board would stick to its decision and help the .shipowners to have a useful slipway erected. The Board's Determination. The chairman, replying to the deputation, said that the board wore now

' holding out for a slipway with a cradle of _ 150. feet, and from present appearances it seemed probable that the Minister of Marine would be called ilpon to arbitrate. He-would therefore advise the Shipowners' Federation to have in readiness as much evidence as possible in support of their case, and he thought ho could assure them that they would have the support of the board. After the deputation had withdrawn, The chairman moved that in" view of the small attendance tho matter be held over for consideration at next monthly meeting. The motion was not seconded. Mr. Cohen moved that in roply to their letter tho Patent Slip Company bo informed that the board saw no reason for altering its previous deoision. Mr. C. E. Danicll, seconding the proposal, said he would much rather see the board build a 6lipway if this were possible, in preference to allowing all the work of overhauling and repairing ships in the port to be handed over to a monopoly. He saw no reason why the community should not provide facilities for repairing ships in the same way as it provided wharves and all other requirements for shipping. Captain Watson endorsed what Mr. Daniell had said as to the advisability of the board erecting a slip if this were fonnd to be.possible. Air. J. TV. M'Ewan said that it seemed to be doubtful whether the board had any such power, but the question wa6 certainly worth, investigation. He did not agree that the Union Company, which was the Patent Slip Company, should have tho' right to control all the work on 6bips in the port!' Mr. M. Cohen said that the board had only itself to thank for the position it was in now. If the board had undertaken the work of building the slip long ago it would now be in the happy position the Slip Company occupied. But lie would point out this: That what the hoard could do now it could do in 10 years' time, and if the requirements to be provided by the company 6hould not prove,adequate for the shipping of the port, the board could' then take action. The motion was carried.