THE HARBOUR BOARD SCANDAL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 11869, 22 January 1902, Page 6

THE HARBOUR BOARD SCANDAL.

MR. A. H. NATHAN'S RESIGNATION. DISCUSSION AT THE BOARD. ; At yesterday's meeting of the Auckland Harbour Board a letter was read from Mr. A.H. Nathan, as follows:—" I herewith tender my resignation, as member of the Auckland Harbour Beard." The Chairman (Mr. Alfred Kidd) moved, "That the resignation be received, and that Mr. Nathan bo thanked for 'his past services." '. ■ ' Mr. W. J. W. Philson seconded. Mr. W. J. Napier: The cause which Mr. Nathan assigns— _ • The Chairman: There is no cause assigned in the letter before the Board. Mr. Napier said the cause which Mr. Nathan assigned for his resignation had been stated in the newspapers apparently officially from Mr. Nathan. I The Chairman: Are you justified in saying Mr. Nathan gave that information? The letter before the Board does not justify you in saying Mr. Nathan gave the information. Mr. Napier said Mr. Nathan had stated through tho newspapers that ha had resigned in order to impress on the Board the necessity for conducting its bv-iness in a businesslike manner, and that the immediate cause of his resignation was the cheque improperly and illegally drawn upon the funds of the Board in payment of an account of £211 to Mr. H. M. Niccol. At last meeting , Mr. Nathan gave utterance to very strong feelings on this matter, and he (Mr. Napier) did not think the Board should accept Mr. Nathan's resignation in the bald way proposed by the chairman. The resignation, he understood, was a protest against the Board's violation of section 234 of the Harbours Act. 1878. Tho Chairman said section 38 of the Act stated that if any member resigned his office as a member of the Board, lie immediately ceased! to be a member of the Board, and therefore there was no other course open to the Board but to accept his resignation. Mr. Napier said the chairman had proposed a motion, and ho intended to* submit an amendment. Section 234 of the Harbours Aot required that all money shall be deposited in. bank, and that these moneys shall not be withdrawn, except by cheques signed at a meeting of the Board. Well, the cheque in question had not been authorised, and was not signed at a meeting of the Board. The statement had beon made that the same thing had been done in several other instances. He had no personal knowledge of that, but he thought the Board without any hesitancy should recognise the significance of Mr. Nathan's resignation. There had been widespread dissatisfaction in the community in connection with the action of tho Board in this matter. Ho recognised that the Board oould not specifically deal with tho matter of Mr. Niccol's account, as the Board had passed a resolution accepting the chairman's explanation of the matter, but he thought something should be done to show the public that members of the Board realised that a mistake had been committed either by putting their hands in their pockets and finding the money or in some other way. Ho did not think the public should be called upon to pay this sum. He would like to movo as an amendment, " That a list of the cheques issued by tho Board in terms of section 234- of the Harbours Act be forwarded to the Board's bankers immediately after each meeting." That would show that cheques had been authorised. Mr. Philson asked if Mr. Napier was in order. Was ho discussing the matter before tho Board? The Chairman said bis position was that if he were to debar Mr. Napier from speaking it would be said afterwards that ho (the chairman) was trying to shield himself. Mr. Napier had his own sense of duty and his own sense of right, but ho was entirely out of order, and every member knew it. His amendment was not admissible because the resignation, in terms of the Act, took effect as soon as sent in. Mr. Napier: Then I move, "That these words bo added, ' and that this Board very much regrets the cause which has led to such resignation.' " The Chairman said lie would accept; that; in fact, in the position he had been placed in he would accopt anything, but the reason j for Mr. Nathan's resignation was not before | the Board. Mr. Napier's amendment was not seconded, but the chairman put it to the meeting, and declared it lost, the motion that "Mr. Nathan's resignation be received and Mr. Nathan thanked for past services, ' being passed. When the report of the Finance Commit-. tee _ came up at a subsequent stage, the Chairman pointed out that he had since last meeting signed a draft on the bank in favour of W. and A. McArthur, Limited, London, for £326, for machinery for Calliope Dock. When the account came before the committee he pointed out that it had been receipted and paid, and he thought it would be as well for the Board to deal with the question at once, and say whether in future the chairman should follow this course. On the motion of Mr. Nathan it was agreed soma time ago that the course he had taken in this case should be adopted, and he had signed the draft because he thought it best or the honour of the Board to do so; if that wjis wrong another wrong had been done. He thought tho Board should say whether this should continue. He had only another meeting of the Board to attend, but- he thought it as well that his successor should not drop into tho same fix as ho had. ' Mr. Napier said there was a technical irregularity, but it was of no moment. The amount of the account had been authorised by the Board long ago. It was, however, quite clear that the chairman had no power to sign these cheques except at a meeting of the Board. The Chairman: Then is it the wish of the Board that thoy be not signed? Mr. Napier said the secretary could easily arrange with Messrs. McArthur and Co. to get 14- days' notice when money would bo required. Tho secretary (Mr. Brigham) stated that Messrs. McArthur drew on the Board in the usual way on 'sight. Some time ago Mr. Nathan pointed out that if the money 'was in the bank available in London there would bo & saving of 1 per cent, on the exchange, and accordingly £10,000 was paid into the bank. The account was then passed without further discussion. . THE CHAIRMAN'S EXPLANATION. At the closo of the meeting the Chairman handed to the members of the Board, and to the representatives of the press, the following statement of his position in connection with the matter, which caused Mr. Nathan's resignation:On November 19, 1801, a list of the machinery arriving by the sis.' Star of England was forwarded to Mr. Metcalfe, engineer for the equipment of Calliope Dock, and he was then instructed in writing to prepare a specification for the removal of the machinery from Queen-street Wharf, and the delivery of same at Calliope Dockyard as soon after the arrival of the vessel as possible. Shortly after this Mr. Metcalfe stated that as there was only one person in Auckland who owned the scows having tho neoessary deck room and plant adapted for the removal and delivery of packages of such extraordinary lengths and weight, he could not seo tho advisability ; of calling for tenders for the work, and suggested that Mr. H. M. Niccol, as agent for Mr. G. Niccol, bo asked to submit a price for receiving the packages on Queen-street Wharf, removing the same to Calliope Dockyard, providing all labour required, taking all risk in connection with the matter, and delivering same at Calliope Dockyard, where directed by the engineer. In order to understand the nature of tho packages requiring to be handled in this shipment, it may be.necessary to say that the freight and primage paid upon the shipment before leaving London, amounted to £1702 9s, viz. : Measurement, 316 tons; dead weight, 74 tons: total, 390 tons; and owing to the great weight and bulk of many of the packages, an extra rate of freight was charged thereupon. The machinery comprised one screw, cased in wood, 73ft long by 2ft bin by Ift 7in. weighing 3 tons 18cwt 2qr; two boilers, 14ft 9in by 9ft 3in by Bft eaoh, weighing 12 tons each; five packages, from 7 tons 3cwt 2qr to 7 tons llewt each; one package, 6 tons 18c\vt; packages, weighing each 6 tons, 5 tons Ibcwt, 5 tons 9c\vt 3qr, 3 tons 17cwt lqr (these packages measured from 34ft long to 48ft long each package, and the dimensions were from 3ft 3in by 3ft in to 4ft bin 'by 4ft bin): two packagos, 4 tons lewt lqr each ; two castings, weighing 9 tons; six bars, weighing 7 tons 17cwt; four girders, weighing 10 tons 18cwt 3qr; besides other packages of different weight, ranging from 35cwt to 4cwt. Under date of November 25, 1901, Mr. Niccol submitted a price of £166 for carrying the whole of the machinery by scows from Queen-street Wharf to Calliope Dockyard. say, 158 packages (about 200 tons dead weight) of machinery, plus crane dues leviable upon Queen-street Wharf, all labour required for cranes for lifting tho machinery from Queen-street Wharf into scows, providing and rigging. gear at Calliope Dockyard, erecting temporary landing stages, furnishing all necessary gear for same, landing tho machinery and placing it where directed by the engineer. ; The offer was submitted to Mr. Metcalfe, and he minuted thereupon, " I recommend that this offer be accepted." Seeing that the packages of,machinery were of such unusual lengths and weights, and very awkward to handle, that 110 appUan-*" of

any description . were available at Calliope Dockyard for either landing or placing _ the package's where required, and ' taking • into consideration the fact that ample deck space was absolutely necessary to 'accommodate the machinery, the offer made was considered, to be a fair and reasonable one, and as the, removal of the machinery from off Queen-, street "Wharf was urgent, the offer was accepted, this being a case of emergency as ; provided for. in section 67 .of the Harbours Act. 1878. Upon completion of the work at the end of December, Mr. Metcalfe certi- . fied to the account being correct in every particular, and the account was received at the office several days after ' the last meeting of the Finance'and Legal Committee •in 1901 had been held. The amount of £45 8s for crane dues, payable to the Board, was included, with £166 in the account, making a total of £211 Bs, and it was considered advisable, .in order to bring the expenditure, within the year then current, and to secure the payment of £45 8s for crane dues for the year's revenue, that a cheque* should be issued for tho amount before the end of December. This was done accordingly, and the crane dues were paid, to the Board. At the first meeting of the Finance and Legal Committee in the new year (January 3, 1902), ■ the account was submitted, the items explained, and instead of the account being thrown out (if there had been any doubt as to' its correctness), it i was initialled as correct by Messrs. Nathan and Cozens, the only two members of the . committee present. Finally, at the ' meeting of the Board, held on January 7, 1902, after an explanation of the circumstances of the case by the chairman, such explanation being accepted, the account was passed and adopted by the Board. Mr. David Gouk has examined the' machinery referred to, and states that the price charged for removing the same and stowing it in its present position at Calliope Dockyard was most i reasonable, and that, under the same conditions, he would not have •taken in hand to do the work for the same amount, as he considers the heavy lifts alone worth the money. Mr. 11. M. ,!Niccdl has furnished particulars of expenditure as follows: —One scow, with eight men, was engaged for 14 days, and another scow, with six men, for seven days, at tho work. • The cost of labour alone was £65 ss; towages, £4; repairs to jacks and wheels of windlass, £17; providing ironbark timber for skids for boilers, £7: total cash expenditure, £93 ss, irrespective of the hire of the scow Tramp •for 14 days and scow Kauri for seven days, at £2 per day; insurance, risk of damage or breakage, new steel wire-fall, £15; and new derrick, £20.