Untitled

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13996, 31 August 1907, Page 9

THE CONTROL OF THE POUT. It is iiupossiblo for anybody reasonably to cavil at tho decision which tho Harbour Jionrd has adopted in rospect of tho request of tho Dock Trust for a conference for tho consideration of tho present position and future prospects of the 'rust. Tho Hoard, while readily agreeing to tho proposal for a conference, expressly dissociates itself from tho suggestion that tho Union Steam Ship Company and tho Port Chalmers Borough Council, aa guarantors of the Trust's loan, should ho invited to send representatives to tho conforenee. JSven if tho only question for discussion was that, of tho financial position of the Trust, which in present circumstances is undoubtedly a matter Qf concern to tho guarantor;), it is obvious that their interest in tho business of tho conference would ho loss direct than that of the Hoard. For, while tho Union Steam I Ship Company and the Port Chalmers borough Council are guarantors of any deficiency in tho interest fund of the Trust, and while, as suoli, neither of them has, according to Jlv Fergus, yet boon called upon to pay anything, the Board is an actyal cash contributor of £1000 per annum to the Trust towards the payment of tho ohargo upon that body's loan indebtedness. But Mr Barclay informed tho Board that the Trust seeks a conference on grounds not confined within the limits of a discussion upon tho finances of tho Trust. Himself .1 .member cf tho Dock Trust, he claims to rpeak with authority derived from a knowledge of the opinions that are entertained by his colleagues when ho says that tho Trust recognises that the port and all its interests can be best aervc«!l by tho amalgamation of the Harbour Hoard and the Trust. "Wo pro very glnd to hear it. Thoro onn !>o little doubt" thi\v economy in working can bo secured if ths whola control of tho port i» rested in oso t.ody, pncl it is highly

J probable, also, that greater efficiency : in working will be the of the merging under a single strong management of tho functions that arc now dis- > charged by two public authorities. It-

t is unfortunate, of course, that this view 3 did not appeal touch sooner than it has > done to the members of the Trust. • Probably we may conclude that the fact ) that it has been rejected in the past. E was attributable to the existence of the i parochial element, to which Mr Barclay i referred, in tho personnel of tlio Trust— I an element he unhesitatingly declares to i have been "at the root of all the ■ trouble/' Hut although it would cer- • tamly havo been preferable that the i Harbour Board should havo taken over the 1 nut's functions before' the new ! dock loan was negotiated, since the 1 Board would have been able to obtain the necessary funds on better terms than the Trust could secure, and since the expenses iucidental to tho construction of the dock would have otherwise been lessened, and although some feeling may have existed at the Board table respecting the manner in which tho contribution towards the Trust's funds was exacted from it-" jockeyed " out of it, Mr Fergus holds,—wo are pleased to observe that the sentiment of the Board at the present time is apparently favourablo to the suggestion that an amalgaHiafcion should ho cffectetl between it. ami tho Trust, The management' of a dock falls so naturally within the scope ol tho duties of a Harbour Board that an absorption of the. Trust by the Board may be said to represent, more corlectly than the idea of amalgamation conveys, tho process that will, if negotiations run smoothly, have to hp effected. There is, however, no occasion yet to on tor into details. The - broad question will have to be discussed at the conference, and, as it is a qnestion in which the guarantors of the Trust have no immediate interest, it seems to.us that' the opinion of the Hoard that, whether or not they should be invited to be represented at the conference, they should have no standing at it equal to that of tho Board and Trust is absolutely sound. j ! 1 ' '