INTERCOLONIAL STEAMERS

Evening Star, Issue 18020, 14 July 1922, Page 7

INTERCOLONIAL STEAMERS

SOUTH ISLAND HANDICAPPED, UNION COMPANY POR A CHANGE. Tho Southland League has prepared a statement as to tho unsatisfactory steamer service between Australia and the South Island. Copies of this statement have been sent to chambers of commerce and local bodies and leagues, and tho general manager of tho Union Steam Ship Company has been made acquainted with its contents, the covering letter containing two requests by the Southland League : 1. That a larger and better steamer be put on the Melbourne-Bluff service, and that sailings bo arranged from Melbourne as well as to Melbourne (in fact a resumption of a similar 'service to the old! horseshoe service, but via Wellington), and that Hobart should also bo included in the service, as of old. ,

2. That the ferry steamer trading between Eydney and Wellington call alternately at Wellington and Bluff. _ If that is not possible, then an occasional direct passenger service bo instituted! to and from Bluff to Sydney to cope with the trade and traffic offering, COGENT REASONS ADVANCED.

The statement is in very direct terms, reading thus:

Melbourne-Hobart-Bluff.—This most suitable and convenient service for practically tho whole of the South Island, and in the case of Hobart, the whole of New Zealand, has been cut off for some time now. Tho only oonndction the South Island now has in this direction is by the Paloona direct to Melbourne from Bluff about eveiy three weeks. This steamer’s departure up to tlis present has been most irregular; it is now belter, but should bo timed to leave Bluff on arrival of the mail train from , Christchurch, which should have through carriages on it to go right alongside the steamer at Bluff, thus ensuring for the mails and passengers from almost tho whole of the South Island the quickest and shortest route to Melbourne, also South and Western Australia, and Tasmania. Even under the present- service and conditions people endeavoring to obtain a passage two or three weeks before the Paloona’s departure have been refused accommodation on account of its being full up, showing there is no lack of business offering. There being no service now from Melbourne to Bluff direct means that all passengers and goods have .to come to the South Island via Wellington, which in the case of Christchurch is 100 miles farther, Dunedin 508 miles further, and Invercargill 808 miles further. The result for the South Island is disastrous. The loss of time in travelling, and the-extra charges and delay have reduced passenger traffic and trade to a minimum. Tourists and visitors who used to flock over by the shortest and cheapest route to the great Southern Lakes and Sounds now, no doubt, find it impossible to spare tho time and money for the longer journey. This is a great loss to Canterbury, Otago, and Southland. B'uff is 174 miles nearer to Sydney than Auckland is. Bluff is 441 miles nearer to Melbourne than Auckland is. Bluff is 132 miles nearer to Sydney (than Wellington. is. Bluff is 279 miles nearer to Melbourne than Wellington is. Bluff is the nearest deep sea port in New Zealand to the Australian Commonwealth, and should bo the front door port, and not what tho present services are trying to make it—a back door port._ Melbourne-Bluff.—Beginning from fifty miles north of Lyttelton, the shortest route to and from Melbourne is via _ Dunedin and Bluff. Thus Christchurch is 100 miles nearer Melbourne by this route than via Wellington. Dunedin is 508 miles nearer Melbourne via Bluff than via ellington. Invercargill is 808 miles nearer Melbourne via Bluff than via Wellington. That there is no service from Melbourne to the South Island except via Wellington is, therefore, an absolutely unfair deal for ■practically the whole of tho South Isiand. The waste of time, extra fares, and extra freights that are incurred are a great handicap. Sydney-Bluff. —Beginning from thirty miles south of Lyttelton, the shortest route to and from Sydney is via Blutf. Thus Ashburton, Timam, Oamaru, Dunedin, and Invercargill are all nearer Sydney via this route than they are via_ Wellington. In the case of Dunedin, it is 351 miles nearer via Bluff than via Wellington, and in the case of Invercargill it is 661 miles nearer via Bluff than via Wellington. In other words, you have to travel more than half as far again to get to and from Sydney to Invercargill under present conditions than,-.would be necessary under a direct service to Bluff. Hobart-Bluff Service and Vice Versa — This old-established and fine service has been cut rifibt out. Tho shortest service now from Hobart to New Zealand is via Melbourne and Wellington, with the following startling comparison: Old Present service, service. Miles. Miles. Hobart to Bluff i 930 2,478 Hobart to Dunedin ... 1,080 2,028 Hobart to Lyttelton 1,284 2,124 Hobart to Wellington 1,409 1,949

This means that from Hobart to Southland the distance has been almost trebled. Hobart to Otago more than doubled. Hobart to Canterbury nearly _ doubled. Hobart to the rest of the dominion is increased by 490 miles, but, taking into consideration the Hobart-Sydney-Auckland service, this distance is reduced by forty miles. The .service to Hobart is almost as bad, though not quite so. The results speak for themselves. Traffic is practically dead, at least for the eonl-hcrn end ot New Zealand. Fish. Oysters. Timber.—The cessation of the Bluff-Melbourne weekly serviefi has had a very prejudicial effect upon the Bluff - fish ‘and oyster trade with Melbourne. The imports in Tasmanian timber, which have now to come from Hobart via’ Melbourne and Wellington to Canterbury, Otago, and Southland, have suffered ’so much from increased _ costs and uncertainty oi shipment that this trade is practically extinguished.