The Marlborough Express PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1909. THE HARBOUR BOARD LOAN.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLIII, Issue 113, 11 May 1909, Page 4

The Marlborough Express PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1909. THE HARBOUR BOARD LOAN.

In a previous issue we have pointed cmt that to secure the interest and sinking fund upon a loan of £5000 for harbour improvements the small rate of one-tenth of a penny only would be comprehended. That rate, levied upon the unimproved value in the Harbour Board's district, which comprises Blenheim and Omaka, would yield £250, the sum needed to guarantee the loan at 5 per cent. We have been careful to point out that this rate is based upon the supposition that no revenue whatever would accrue, as the result of the new work, so that the calculation is clearly an outside one. As a matter of fact, a considerable increase in the Board's income may reasonably be expected as the result of keeping the river open, deepening the channel and providing wharfage accommodation, for these improvements would naturally largely augment the trade of the port, and it would not require a very great deal of extra shipping to make up the small sum of £250 annually. It is, however, a safe proposition to base the calculations upon the assumption that no extra revenue would be collected, but whatever may be received in the way of additional dues would naturally lessen the rate. While therefore assuming a rate of one-tenth of a penny in the pound as the outside limit of the proposal, only such a rate would be really struck as would suffice to make up the difference between the actual receipts and the £250, and It is quite conceivable that the receipts would be such that no rate Avhatever would need to be collected. And it must be borne in mind that the Act permits the first year's interest and sinking fund to be paid out of "the loan itself, Parliament evidently -reco^iising the necessity for relief .'in this respect while the work is in/progress, and not earning profits. Now, assuming that even the whole sum N of £250 would require to be raised by the rate, what would it amount to individually ? We find that -three. of the largest ratepaying properties in Blenheim would in such A /case only be called upon to bear the paltry tax of 30s, 24s and 23s respectively as an annual contribution towards this necessary work. Can it, for one moment be assumed that this impost would cause the ratepayers, concerned to oppose a scheme that'would so materially benefit them?/ The largest taxpayer of all would/be in the Omaka Road District) where the property of one leading landowner would be liable for £20 a year. But that gentleman will probably consider that with an open river he would- derive such solid advantages as ;to -reconcile him to the charge if ever it became necessary to levy it. ' And he may also reflect that the necessity would be a remote one, considering the income the" Board would derive as the result of the work. These are the considerations which should weigh with all ratepayers, great or small, in guiding them to a decision favourable to the river loan.