QUEEN'S WHARF. THE EXTENSION SCHEME.

Evening Post, Volume LXXV, Issue 08, 10 January 1908, Page 3

QUEEN'S WHARF. THE EXTENSION SCHEME.

FULLY DISCUSSED. MATTER TO S^AXD OVER. Discussion on ill". Shirtclifie's , motion —That the provision of increased accommodation' at the Queen's Wharf bo treated as a .matter of urgency, wa3 concluded at a special meeting of the Wellington Harbour Board after The Post went, to press yesterday. . - Mr. M'Lellan, continuing the speech which was partly reported in yesterday's issue, said he felt that it was nvuch more important to Wellington to meet the needs of the export trado than to trouble about the import trade more than it did already. Tho £75,000 involved in the proposal, could be much more profitably spent in erecting another export -wharf than in improving the Queen's Wharf. ;It was natural enough ' for' merchants tV continue agitating "for centralisation of everything at the Queen's Wharf, but it was time now that Wellington got away from the fishing village outlook, and to recognise' that the wharves must spread about the city. The merchants of Wellington had no real cause for grievance. They wero given facilities in Wellington that tho merchants of no other Now Zealand city enjoyed. He said, without ' the slightest fear of. contradiction, that in the handling of import cargo the Wellington, Harbour Board took less than half the time that was occupied in the other' cities. v AT OTHER PORTS. He spoke specially of the consignees. In Auckland, at the present time, one could not 'get cargo in anything like the time it could be got in at Wellington; more than double the time was required. Here we got it in five or six days ; at Auckland some two weeks were required. In Lyttelton, for another instance, there was great delay, and he would assure them that no merchant would get his cargo' out of tho Athenic in less than two weeks. The ships- put the blame on the, railway, but whether that was right or wrong tho fact was that tho merchants did not get their goods without the delay he spoke of. As to Dunedin) there was no merchant there got- his bulk cargu under three weeks. Mr. Shirtcliffe : Nonsense. Mr. M'Lellan repeated his assertion, with the qualification that "he knew for a positive fact that t^oor three weeks was the average time." If the position in Wellington was as acute ah Mr. Shirtcliffe and Captain; Evans would make out, the speaker would vote for the> motion, but" the position was by no means afs urgent as those gentlemen tried to make out. ' He would- like to see both export tfhatves (King's ancMMpitea) completed before tho work of increasing the Queen's Wharf was put in hand. None of the other centres had anything liko ' the , accommodation at Wellington. , "We are," he said, "getting beyond the fishing Village stage, "and '-we *must expect' to see the wharves extending' round* 'the place. The time has arrived' whsn we will have to spread out;, not io congest everything at the Queen's Wharf." ' He "added that it would be wise to postpone this question for a year or .18 niqnlhs.' 4 • " A -AN AMENDMENT. MOVED. \ Mr. 'Wood .said the board had first 'of aIU to considoV the, export ntrade. The Queen's,'' Wharf had' done gbod service, and ' it', was still capable, of." • doing 'good' service. The- suggestion thrown 1 out by Mr. BeaHcha'mp was a' .good one.. He , (Mr. WqdaT'itfdvcd' (is an" amendnigfjt^-That era the completion ['.of' the" King's ' Wharf arid the commencement "of the- election pf . a' similar structure, .to be .known as the .Pipitea' Wharf, the enlargement of the"' Q«e'en'§ ,Wharf be treated as a matter of'spe'cjal urgency > and that be the declared t policy oi'-tW' board. ■ ThJB ' \ras socon'de'd ' by- Mr. F- H ; - Fj-aser: v ' . ' " ; i * Bov'cfrUng-'to Mr- SKirtcl'iffe's remarks about the alleged^ unnecessary expenditure-, on, shaalJ \\'h.arvbs.^lr. J t - M'Lellan pointed put ! thdt 'riot more" 1 than £25#00 | had' 'been 1 spent in ' th|§ , way;.. I' Mr. C- "IE: -Pan.U]l- agreed -with Mr. Shirtclifl'e. t . .Th's work*«'h.e ,• suggested should be put in, hand was I . a very necessary one, The, board had put it on' for four or "five 'years. He 'could not support the amendment. » , ,Mr, '.Woo,d stated, ( tha,t , the pang's Wharf w'quld be .'.completed in ,12 [ months' time. W.h'cn/- that Was" ,dono I there would, bo an. opportunity for rej lieving tho Queen's Wharf. | ENGINEER REPLIES "TO QU-E6- \ TIONS.i ' • ■ 'In reply tc- a question. by Mr. Beauchanip, tho engineer' 05.x. Targuson) said lie 'was' of opinion that tenders for the construction of the Pipitea, Wharf could probably- be called -for in "six months, and "it would take two years in all likelihood £o complete the' work. ' Plan's could.be prepared for ths' enlargement of the Queen's Wharf, and tenders-call-ed by the end of thjs'.year. .. Mr. Shirtcliffe asked whether inconvenience would result if the enlargement of the Queen's Wharf was put in hand at opce. ' Mr. Ferguson replied tlvit it .would be impossible to close any , portion -, of tho Quean's Wharf at the present time. Eveu" .if' the King's Wharf were completed -he thought there would be a crush. The wprfc of enlarging the Queen's Wharf -would have' to bo done in .two or throe; .contracts. Probably the northern end could bo put in hand first, then tho middle portion, and tho southern, end could be > done™ under a third contract. A very large portion of this work would have to be, done because of thei condition of the wharf. It. would take probably two years to complete the work. ■ . ,ME. FLETCHER'S VIEWS •Mt. Fletcher was very much iv 'svragathj\ with Mr.",Shirtc]irle'K motion iv regard to , its aspect -of giving increased accommodation r on the Queen's. Wharf, for there' was no doubt that congestion took place on' the wharf. He did' not agree ■with Mr. M'Lell&n's estimate of the difference .in time required for handling cargo at Wellington and other ports, but ho did say that cargo was handled as' rapidly here as anywhere else ; ' and his experience had shown him that ;f; f a- maon had five tons of cargo in a steamer he generally expected' it to be put out immediately. All the room possible was needed on the side of the Queen's Whaxf where it was proposed to -widen it. That was an aspect •which none of the niembers 1 of the board had spoken uppn, but it "was a very important pne. He was convinced that befbre"anything definite was done in the matter a report should be got as to what the effect on the- movements of vessels would be if the Queen's Wharf wiin widened by 62ft in the' manner proposed. There Avas" another aspect. The wharf, they had been told,, was built in 1865. Was it' worth" while to 'spend this big su m oi money on so old a stiucture'.' He ie,gretted as much <<s anyone, that the impoit trade of the city would hare to go to Pipitea. before many years, but it was no uss blinking the fact. Mr. Shirtcliffe was to be commended upon having broupht the matter forward, , but to -bettei ths (.roubles he must look fnr * renvHy <••> n ditfereot direction.