ONE HUNG A WHARF TARIFF.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9047, 7 May 1888, Page 5

ONE HUNG A WHARF TARIFF.

At the Onehunga Borough Council Chamber on Saturday morning Mr. C. Hudson (District Traffic Manager), under instructions from the Hon. the Minister for Public Works, met a deputation relative to wharf charges, which are said to bo very much in excess of those charged at Aackland, and to report upon the matter. There were present Sir G. M. O'Rorko (member for Manukau), Dr. W. R. Erson (Mayor), Councillors Jackson and W. Shaldrick, and Messrs. W. Bray, J. Sullivan, and J. Shaldrick. Sir G. M. O'Rorke, in explaining tho object of the deputation, stated that for a very long time the Onehunga peoplo had complained about the excessive charges levied on the wharf, and frequently he had endeavoured to have a reduction made, but without success, and in tho end, in order to meet tho difficulty, he brought a Bill (Manukau Harbour) into Parliament, which provided for the wharf and harbour being nanded over to local control. At tho same time the Auckland Harbour Board put in a claim, and Mr. Tole introduced a Bill to vest the control in the Auckland Harbour Board. Ho stated to tho House the object of his Bill, and Mr. Richardson (then Minister for Public Works) promised that if both Bills were withdrawn he would assimilate tho wharf charges. On that distinct understanding, ho consented to the Bill being withdrawn, but he regretted to say that tho promise had never been fulfilled, and that was tho reason ho_ asked the deputation to make their complaints. Mr. J. Shaldrick put in a long statement which he had prepared, showing the difference in tho import ohargos, in some cases being four timer as much as is levied in Auckland. He also pointed out that in all cases of grain passing over the Onehunga wharf, ten sacks wero only allowod to the ten, while in Auckland, with tho exception of wheat, flour, and maize, twelve sacks were allowed ; on seed twenty sacks, and on chaff forty sacks were allowed. The cart tolls, and the minimum charge on parcels, he also showed to be objectionable, stating that, in tho cmc of boxes of fruit being brought from tho North, it would cost' Hincponeo for toll and wharfage, as against nothing In Auckland. He also stated that the charges for the use of hand cranes were excessive, and materially fleeted baulk timber being brought from tho North.

Mr. Bray complained of tho charge levied on ship's ballast, also of the charge of '2s fid per ten on goods takon from the wharf to the town station, a distance of half-a-mile. This charge was made unless carts were in prompt attendance at the ship's slings. Mr. Hudson explained that this was one of the disadvantages arising from a wharf being used by rail and carts. He had frequently reported against, it. Still he would arrange that, goods could remain on the wharf for a reasonable time (if they would cause no inconvenience to the working of the wharf), providing the consignee or his agent gave the department a written indemnity from all responsibility for the goods so left. This mot with the hearty approval of those present. Mr. Hudson* then took a note of the difference in the charges, and promised to forward his report to the lion, the Minister for Public Works, urging that the charges should be assimilated.