HARBOUR BOARD.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10034, 27 April 1894, Page 4

HARBOUR BOARD.

An ordinary meeting of the Harbour Board, held yesterday, was attended by Messrs H. Gourley '(chairman), J. Robin, B. G. Allen, W. Wright, W. Barclay, J. T. Mackerras, M. Joel, J. Carroll, W. Murray, N. Y. A. Wales, D. Pinkerton, M.H.R , W. Dawson, and Captain Moir.

FINANCIAL. The bank book, which was laid on the table, Showed a debit balance of £2057 6s 6d. COKftESPONBEHOS.

Messrs Murray, Roberts-, and tio. wrote calling attention to the fact that while dues on imported grass 'seed were Is fid per ton, seed brought from another port was charged 3s per ton. Owing also to heavy port charges it was, it was stated, found better to ship seed from Lyttelton or the Bluff than from Dunedin. — Referred to the Finance Committee. The Harbourmaster wrote reporting that no blame attached to the pilot for the Carrying away of the buoy at Deborah Say.—Keceived. THE UPl'fiH AND LOWER HAHBOUBS. Mr P. Barr, secretary of the Chamber of Commerce, wrote stating that at a meeting of the chamber held on the 16th inst. the following resolution was unanimously adopted:— "That this chamber regards,the keeping open of a deep-water channel from the heuas to Port Chalmerß as a matter of the most vital conssquence to the trade of Dunedin and surrounding district, and that a depth of not less than 22ft at low water spring tides should be maintained, and that the chamber will support any feasible scheme for the carrying out of this object." The chamber was not prepared at the meeting in question to commit itself to an approval of the ad ralorem duty proposed by the board, but it was proposed to hold a special meeting to consider that matter at an early date. Meantime, if there was any information which the board thought likely to be of nsa in enabling the chamber to come to a decision it would be received with thanks and have careful consideration.

The CiuinauN said : The secretary has prepared a memo, that will pretty well explain the position of the upper and lower harbours. There has been a great deal said lately, and a good deal of agitatioo caused about the money spent in the lower and uppsr harbours, and I think this memo, that the Secretary has prepared will pretty well explain the position of affairs and perhaps satisfy the public that every justice has been done to the lower harbour. I will call upon the secretary now to read the memo.

The Secretary real the memo, referred to, which was as follows !—'■-'' Memo, for Chairman of Harbour Board on Board's .'Expenditure and Indebtedness.

The audited and published accounts, 31st December 1882, show th' at the net Indebtedness : on loan account \vas then £342,120, when Mr D. L. Simpson retired from the position of engineer. His successor (Mr 6. M. Barr) reported two months after, on the 7th of February 18S3, tha,t the Victoria channel was then " completed 70ft wide on bottom and 14ft at low water," and that "the condition on the whole was favourable"; also " that a large quantity of dredging had been done in the steamers' basin, giving minimum width 145 ft and maximum 200 ft, and a low water depth of 13ft." The same report states that "dredging had been done at the Bowen and George street piers, Port Chalmers, and approaches thereto, ao as to accommodate the largest class of vessels. It is intended to continue this until bertha^e is ample." In the'same report it is stated in regard to the bar that, notwithstanding interruptions from special causes, "a decided temporary advantage has been gained in a greater depth of water to the extent of.as much at 2ift." The harbourmaster, 27th January ISS3, testifies, referring to the bar: "The improvement, no doubt, is largely duu to dredging." He farther says: "In PortCfcalmera bnyyand alongside of the wharves a large area of deep water has been obtained by dredging. Where formerly there was only lift there is now 18ft to 19ft at low water, thereby giving facilities to manuoevie the Urge steamers with comparative ease.". He further states that the a.s. Sorrento, drawing 21ft, was brought to Port, "which was done without either risk or difficulty." In the annual accounts the engineerreported an expenditure for 18S3 of £9911 10a on Victoria, channel as against £16,200 voted, £6664 being expended on dredging at Port ClnlmeTs and on the bar, the harbourmaster reporting 20ft on the bar, and the berthing of the Tongariro, drawing 21ft. The annual report by the engineer for the year ISSI showed that 173,852 cubic yards were dredged at Port Chalmers and tho bar, and ]70,!i91 cubic yards in Victoria channel. The harbourmaster reported the berthing of the British .Queen, drawing 22ft sin, and the Tongariro, 22ft 4in. Tho first pile of the staging for the " mole " was driven on 22nd September 1884. For 1885 the engineer reported 89,454 cubic yards dredged at Port Chalmers and the bar. Depth on bar 20ft 3in at low water. Tne harbourmaster reported that the Arawa was brought in and berthed (and this U worthy of special notice), drawing 23ft 6in. The providing for the large steamers up to this date was accomplished by immediate dredging, and the Arawa's draught has not yet beea much exceeded, although the water at the entrance has been increased to 24ft. For 18S6 the engineer reported dredging at the Port and bar 51,522 cubic yards. The harbourmaster gave no return of the deepest draught of any vessel of that year in his annual report, but that during Btormy weather in August the water on the bar shoaled from-20ft Bin to 18ft 6in. The mole was then in fall swing of construction. For ISS7, at Port Chalmers and ;bar, the engineer reported 48,259 cubic yards dredged; water on the bar 21ft. The accounts for ISB7 show, on tho authority of tho Auditor-general, that out of the special loans for the lower liar bour, 18S3 and 1886, £100,000 and £65,000 respectively, there was a balance of £34,030153 7d— that is, £130,970 was chargeable on the lower harbour account from the end of 1882 to the end of 1SS(! in addition to the sums that had been expended prior to the special loan 188 J-83. The expenditure in ISS7 out of special loan account, lower harbour, was £24,140, inISSS£9]J2, in."ISS9 £810, of which £342 was supplied out of general revenue, special loan account being exhausted. Since then the expenditure out of revenue on special works, upper and lower harbours, has been as follows :—

Lower Harbour. Upper Harbour. 1890 ... £6,876 ... £3,717 IS9I ... 3,623 ... 2,560 1892 ... 956 ... 523 1893 ... 1,073 ... 1,961 £12,528 £9,061

Summary of Lower Harbour Account as from end of 1882—Special loan account, £165,000; out of revenue, 1883, £342; and for four years ended 31st December 1893, £12,528; total, £177,870. To this should be added expenditure prior to the end of ISS2. To ascertain the exact amount would involve considerable labour, as the harbour had been previously tteated as one interest, and separate accounts were not till then thought of. The result of what had beon done is, however, well described in the extracts given from the engineer and harbourmaster's reports for that year, quoted s,t the beginning of this return. The amount expended on the lower harbour may therefore, I think, be fairly put down at £200,000 as a charge included in the board's present in-debtedneas-j:G56,900. The balance, £456,»00, may be approximately allotted thus :

Engineering £ 20.0C0 Plant 1150,0(0 Reclamation ... ... 45,0 0 Wharf extension 51,000 Sheds 8,000 Offices and fencing ... 3,000 Purchase of tugs 13,600 Purchase of land 2,000 Raising loans ~. ... 20,000 £292,500 Leaving a balinco chargeable for dredging against Victoria cban Del and steamers' basin, £194,400,

Supposing, then, that there had been no Victoria channel entered upon, the lower harbour, to make it as it is, would have required an expenditure to be provided for of £2U0,000, to say nothing of tho advantage that accrued to the Port of being able to provide,for the large steamers as they came. Interest upon that amount at 5 per cent, would be £10,000 per annum, and tbo dopartmontal charges, harbour, engineer, and oflice staff, and other services, such as lightship, leading lights, buoys, beacons, exchange, commission, &c, £12,000; or a total of £22,080 per annum. To this expenditure, as shown by a return furnished the chairman, of Finance Committee and laid upon the table.of the board last meeting, about £SOOO per annum (of which large steamers had contributed about one-half) has been the annual contribution from pilotage and port charges, leaving a balance of £14,000 to be provided for by rates or dues upon goods, or fully one-half the dues of the present time. Had there been no Victoria channel goods would havehad to bo railed or lightered to and from Port Chalmers and Dunedin. Returns show that there were landed on and shipped from Dunedin wharves in 181)3— inwards 99,000 tons, and outwards 44,000 tons, which, at thu minimum rate of railage (4a 6d per ton), would have been a charge upon the public of respectively £22,275 and £9900, together £32 175, which, added to the £14,009 required aa already shown, would mako a sum of £16,175 to be paid by the consumers and producers on their goods-a largor amount than has now to be provided with the Victoria channel. Travellers and their friends must also have saved a large amount in personal railway expenses by passengers being landed and shipped at the_ Dunedin wharves, but i of this I can I'orm no estimate, and therefore do ' not take it into account. The saving, however, must have reached a large sum. I may be permitted further to point out that rentals have for many veara amounted to over £7500 par annum. Total rents to 31st December 1893, £.lii 837; and reclamation, as above charged, £15 0110. That sum, at 51 per cent,, is equal to £2475, which, deducted from rents, leaves a contribution to the cost of the Victoria channel of £5025 per annum. What then, is tho final result? 'Ihe victoria channel (inclusive of proportion of plant for dredßing, walling, and reclamation), say, £300.001?, at 51 per cent., £16.500 - lets surplus of rents over interest on reclamation £5025—leaves a balance of annual burden on that account of £11,475, with a large extent of land to be leased, an inheritance for the future of great prospective value; and as against that burden £32,175 saved on railway charges on goods alone that would have had to be contributed by the public annually for the last (say) 12 years. I think, Mr Chairman, that the Harbour Board may fairly claim that, had there been no Victoria channel undertaken, the sudden advent of large steamers' requirements could not have been met as satisfactorily a3 has been done since 1882; that trade would have been hampered and crushed out for want of accommodation at Port Chalmers; for, aa things exist, have there not been repeated complaints on the score of want of wharfage there? Producers and consumers would have had to pay for tho last 12 years, as has bean shown, £20 000 per annum more tiian they h;ive had to do—£24o 000 saved to the public of our own community and district, although undoubtedly lost to tho general nurse of the colony in railway charges and in unearned increment to individual interests that would have profited had there been no Victoria channel.

The Chairman said the figures Mr Gillies had quoted were taken from the board's reporte, and if any person doubted any statement the memo, contained be had only to come to the oth'ce and see the reports from which they wero taken. He thought Mr Gillies was entitled to the thanks of the board for laying matters so clearly before them.

Mr Robin eaid the memo, did not quite touch the matter which was agitating the mind of the general public just now—viz., that deeper water was required between the heads and Port Chalmers. He did not think that anybody would deny that that was a matter of absolute importance. Of so much importance did the board consider it that they had made arrangements that the work should be done. From the letters which appeared in the papers— letters written by people who were very ansious that tho harbour should He improvfi4~ it wduld apttear that the writers laboured under fchb impression that to get 22ft of water at the entrance to the harbour waa a herculean task which the board in its present position was unable to undertake. He did not think the board would agree to that. Their engineer had intimated that with ons month's dredging, at a cost of £600 at the very utmost, they would get bstween 21 and 22 feet. And they coald get that before July. He did not think there waa any great reason to be alarmed about that state of things. At least he was not alarmed about it. A3 regarded the present financial position of the board, he did not look upen it in the same ddll and dismal light as the outside public did. Daring the first quarter of the present year the board had a surplus of revenue over expenditure of £703. That included the earnings of tbe dredge, amounting to £900; so that they would only have been £200 to the bad if the dredge had not been working He thought that if the scheme that had met with the approval of the press, to put on an ai valorem rate, were carried out the board would have ample funds for some time to meet their requirements. As ! regarded the channel that had been causing the i public so much anxiety, the board's" engineer considered that there was not the slightest difficulty in keeping tho channel open to a depth of 22ft; and if there was any more silting up the engineer had prepared plans for work which, if approved by the board, wonld, it was supposed, contract the current and keep the channel open to that depth. This work was estimated to cost something like £1700; to that he looked upon the condition of the lower channel with very great hope. He did not think there would be very much more required to keep it open to a depth of 22ft, which was the depth that shipowners or agents said it should be kept open to, and the board might be sure that they did not ask for any less depth of water than what they could do with. He would move that the letter from the Chamber of Commerce be received.

The motion, on being put, was carried. Mr MtFauAY thought the Chamber of Commerce had put itself a little out of the ordinary way to call a meeting to consider the requirements of the harbour, and, notwithstanding the moat elaborate report of the board's secretary, he was very pleased that the Chamber pt Commerce had done co. Fortunately for the board they had taken the, initiative in the matter previously, What was wanted was a little more watchfulness on the part of Dunedin to make the requirements of the lower harbour suit the times. Tha past expenditure with reference to that he did not think would stand .criticism, and at Port Chalmers it was thought that the lower harbour had been neglected too long, and he waa glad now that the public of Bunedin and the Hnrbour Board were unanimous in' thinking that the board should devote their energies to deepening the lower harbour. He also hoped they would direct all their finances, both present and prospective, to that end.

Mr Allen said the array of figures that they had before them was such as he should not attempt to analyse on the present occasion; but there was one thing he could not help referring to—that was the statement of what had been done in the upper and lower harbours for the years 1891,1892, and 1893. . Thestatementwas to tho effect that a little over £ 3000 more had been spent in tha lower harbour than in the upper harbour. Now, that waß hardly a fair way to put it, inasmuch as during the first of those years, when the board was not in great difficulties—in the same difficulties as they were now—a larger amount was spent in making the channel in the lower harbour. Only last year, when they all _ admitted—the general public and members of the board—that every penny they had to spend should be expended in the lower harbour, co as to accommodate the larger shipowners and agents, £1000 was spent in the Uwer harbour and £2000 in the upper harbour in dredging. \ Tho Chairman: I should like to call your attention to this fact, Mr Allen: What was that money spent for last year ? It was merely spent to make a swinging beith for large steamers.

Mr Allen remarked that the fact remained that the money was spent.

The Chairman said if Mr Allen differed with the secretary's statements he could verify them for himself by looking over the various reports that had been presented to the board.

Mr Mackeehas: I regret th&t this bringing of the upper and lower harbours into competition has been brought up before this board today.—(Hear, hear.) We have had this in times past unlil wo were tired of it, and! hoped that we had got quit of it for ever; bat it woald appear from the remarks of the members of Fort Chalmers that Dunedin.had no interest whatever in maintaining the lower harbour. We know to whose interest it is that the lower harbour should be maintained and placed in a proper position as regards depth, so that all steamers visiting the port are able to come in. The Harbour Board is blamed continually for neglecting the lower harbour, and for having spent so much money in the construction of the Victoria channel. It is forgotten that the Harbour Board was created for the vary purpose of making a channel so that every steamer aud vessel entering the Otago Heads could tome up ta Dunedin. That was the purpose for which the board was created, and well for the loner harbour thnt the operations to the Victoria Channel had been commenced before the era of the large steamers, becanse the board had the appliances when that era arrived, and the larger vessels visited this port, to prepare for those steamers at Fort Chalmers. And thereporfc read by the treasurer to-day shows that a large area of water has been obtained at Port Chalmers by dredging, varying in depth from lift to 18ft, 60 that large steamers coming to the Port h&d a roomy swing. No sooner was it found that the old channel inside the heads was becoming intricate by the point of sand stretching out towards the land, and making it difficult for large steamers to come round it, than tho board devoted itself (after the expenditure of all loan monej) immediately to provide a direct channel at a cost of over £6000; and the expenditure, as the report submitted to-day shows, has amounted altogether to £178,000. Why, the public would gather from the speeches and statements from the members of Fort Chalmers that nothing has been spent down there. Of loan money, about £178,000 has been expended, and but for that expenditure we could not now receive those large steamers. I wish to state that the members of this Harbour Board are just'as interested in the maintenance of the lower harbour, and that the people of. Dunedin are more interested in its proper maintenance, than the members of Port Chalmers are. I hope the assurance that has been given oat from this board—bhit it is the intention, immediately the dredge comes back from Wellington, to employ her so. as to deepen the channel to the depth required—will be sufficient to satisfy the Chamber of Commerce.

Mr Allek said no one regretted more than himself that a comparison had been made between the expenditure on the upper and lower harbours; and it was only when an array of figures—a good many of which he challenged—had been bronght before them that he rose to speak.

Mr Wales suggested that the secretary be' instructed to supply the Chamber of Commerce with any data showing what the board's prospective revenue and expenditure were, in addition to the information contained in his memo. Such data would enable the chamber to advise the board better iv regard to what should be done, if they had any suggestions to make, than a history of what had been done in the past. ,

, The Chairman said a lot of nonsense was talked from time to time which went in the direction of leading the public to bslieve that the lower harbour did not get fair play. Mr Allen : Neither did it.

The Chaibjian maintained that the statement of Mr Gillies was perfectly correct, and anyone who disputed it could examine the board's reports at the office. As to Mr Wales's suggestion, he thought it was a very good one, but the information should bs supplied by the Finance Committee and not by Mr Gillies. He had no doubt the Finance Committee would supply the information.

The matter then dropped. THE SEWAOE QUESTION,

A letter was read from the Colonial Secretary enclosing letters from Mr J. A. Millar, M.H.R., and the clerk of the borough of West Harbour regarding, the drainage of sewage from the city into tho harbour. (This correspondence was published in the report of the City Council meeting in yesterday's issue.) Mr BAncLAY said this matter had been brought twice or thrice tinder the notice of the Colonial Secretary, and he had been asked to exercise the power vested in him under the Corporations Act, which provided that in the event of a dispute arising ho should take the matter in hand, and that his decision should be final. The Colonial Secretary had been asked to exercise that power, but instead of doing so he had written asking for the appointment by the board and council of arbitrators, and stating that he would appoint a third. The council of Dunedin had declined to do this, saying that there was no dispute to refer for settlement, and the higher power had declined to act. He would move—"That the attention of the Colonial Secretary be drawn to the resolution askicg him to exercise the poirors vested in him." i

Mr Allen spoke with reference to the weir at Pelichet Bay recently constructed by the council. The efftct of this alteration was to deprive the harbour of an enormous amount of scour. It would be seen from tho reports of engineers that the more they limited the surface area of the harbour the greater would bs the loss of the scour necessary to deepen it. Au area of something like 54- acres was by this weir rendered useless and that would involve, according to tho statement of eugineera whose reports wero before the board, a loss of 7000 tons for each acre. It would, he was convinced, bs a fatal mistake to allow so much water to be dammed back and the scour to ba diminished.

Me Whight said the water was not permanently dammed back. Sluice gates had been constructed and the alteration, he considered was very advantageous. Mr Barclay,moved—" That the attention of the Colonial Secretary bo drawn to the resolutions bearing on this question that had beet passed by the board.'' Mr Allen seconded the rdotioo prdfarmd. Mr CAUttdLt trusted that the board would not permit itself to be drawn into Hip adoptioii (if the course proposed. The matter had been brought before the board three years ago by Mr Barclay in the same way as had now been done. As a matter of fact, the City Council and the Harbour Board regarded the matter in the came light; thoy had not differed respecting it, and, had they done so, every legitimate means should have been exhausted to settle the difference before appealing to the Colonial Secretary. There was no dispute between tho local bodies, and he was sorry the people of Ravensbourne could not get their membsr something better to do than to try to drag the council and the board into a quarrel. The members of the board had thought better of it since the resolution referred to had been adopted. t ,_. j is MiiMßEjt: Move the previous! questioe. , x . Mr CariSoll said he did.not want to do that and to stop discussion, but he would move that the letter be received. Mr Wales seconded the amendment, not so much that he was opposed to Mr Barclay's resolution as that ho thought it unfair to atk the City Council to act in this matter. Tb.3 fact that the matter had been brought up might do good. Other areas drained into the harbour, and what was required was tie formation of a drainago board to deal comprehensively with the matter.

The Chairman said that the council and every resident admitted the necessity for something being done, but the whole of the suburbs were concerned in it, and there was no disagreement between the board and the council; both recognised that a drainage board ought to be established. The residents of Dunedin were,

however, certainly not in a position to stand an increase in the rites of la in the pound, as would be required if tho council undertook an

efficient drainage scheme. Mr Barclay said it seemed that members of the board would not recognise the rights and interests of others in this matter. West Harbour had a frontage of something like eight | miles to the harbour, and in that borough property was deteriorating and the health of the residents was being injured by thin nuisance \ but it appeared that r that wastabe coritinued to save property-holders in DnhebHn from a slight additional rate. A great injustice was being done to West .Harbour by the discharge of sewage from Dunedin into the bay. Mr Wales: Where does the sewage from West Harbour go ?. i Mr Bakclay said that, had nothing to do with if. Hfl denied that any nuisance was created by West Harbour, and said he should persist in agitating for the abatement of the nuisance. The amendment was adopted, and it was minuted that a reply be 6ent to the effect that the board had no statement to make other than that which had been already made, KEPOETS. The reports of the Works Committee and of the Finance Committee, which have been already published, and a departmental report by the harbaurmaster, were submitted to the board and adopted without discussion. This concluded the business.