THE DOCK SITS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXV, Issue 53, 3 March 1908, Page 3

THE DOCK SITS.

■ . ♦ BIS3USSION AT THE HARBOUR BOARD. -'•■ PROPOSAL TO CHANGE DEFEATED. The suggestion that the dock site should be changed from Clyde-quay was further discussed by the Harbour Board ■ yesterday, when Mr. R. Fletcher moved — ■ '•That the secretary be instructed to ascertain from the contractors for ths dock, and report to the board, whether thsy are willing to cancel their present contract, and upon what terms." This was seconded by Mr. J. W. M'Ewan. •'-Mr. C. -Wv Jones considered that the , dock question could not be re-opened, and opposed the motion. The change, •if made, would involve the board in £50,000 or £100.000. The present site had b:en' favourably commented on by I experts. j Mr. F. G. Bolton also opposed the motion, and held that it would be improper to consult, the contractors in the way proposed. He could not help observing that their tender was £60.000 below the nest lowest. The contract- - ors' opinion, whatever it was, should not influence the board. They the expert opinions of Mr. Ferguson, Mr. Napier Bell, and Captain Holliday in favour of the present site. It had been said that the land round the dock was insufficient, but he was informed that there were eight acres there, and the dock itself- would only occupy 1A acres, so that there would be 6A acres left *for buildings and other purposes. His own feeling «as in favour of having a deck, but he could not say whether it would be a financial success. /If not so at first, he had no doubt it would be later on. No expert opinion had been given in favour of a > change in the site. Mt. J. G. Harkness declared that it ' would be a sign of intense weakness on the part of the board to approach the contractors in the way suggested. Mr. Wilford (chairman) said he did cot intend letting the motion go without a word. It was originally his own motion. Mr. Fletcher had stated __ prey viously that the contractors desired on public grounds to have the work at the present site discontinued, but he (the chairman) had in mind that the contract price was £54,000 below the next lowest: At the same time there was a good deal" of outside -agitation, and he believed the motion would get to- the bottom of things. The motion would not aftejt the site of the dock. It would require en Act 6f Parliament to do that. After Mr. Fletcher had replied," the motion was lost on the voices. NAUTICAL .OPINION* WANTED. Mr. Fletcher then moved :—: — - "As in the opinion of a large section of the community it is alleged that the present site of the dork at Clyde-quay, owing to its -ufisiiitabil1 iry, is likely to prove a, gigantic blunder, the board should at once obtain expert opinions (engineering and naufiral) on the question, with a view to having the matter fully reported upon at the earliest possible date." Ths mover reiterated his opinion that a mistake had been made in locating the dock at Clyde-quay. He did not • care who_ the experts appointed, were — they might appoint the ongineer of the Auckland or Dunedin Harbour Board, or 1 ' their /<own ' harbourmaster.. Notwithstanding th engineer's report, •he believad .that silting had taken place at the present dock site.. Mr. Macdonzld had made out. that it would cost £195.- , CQQ'to abandon the present i irorks, % but only one item, oi\ his list need bo takon seriously into account, and that was compensation to ths contractors. It would be better to sacrifice £40,000 of £50,000 than to spend £350,000 «j* i dock that would be merely a moinmint of folly. ' -, - The motion was seconded hf Mr. M'Ewan. The Hon.. T. K. Macdonald c'aimed that the wej^ht of expert, evidence was nil ,in favour cf th 9 Clyds-quay siic. Wha,t expert opinion was more esteemed in New Zealand than that of their own engineer, Mr. Fergus'on ? Mr < Bolton also spoke against the motion. Captain Holliday had expressed his approval of the site, also Mr.,. Coffey, who was chairman of the board at . one \ime. -There was no expert opinion against the present, site. Tho motion was lost.