GOODS FOR WANGANUI.

Taranaki Daily News, 9 June 1921, Page 4

GOODS FOR WANGANUI.

ADVANTAGES OF THE NEW PLYMOUTH ROUTE. WELLINGTON’S STATEMENT REFUTED. The Taranaki Chamber of Commerce recently wrote to the Wanganui Chamber pointing out the saving to be effected in freight on salt from England by using the port of New Plymouth &s against Wellington and thence transhipping to Wanganui. The chairman of the Wellington Chamber of Commerce replied through the Press Association the other day practically challenging the accuracy of the Taranaki Chamber’s statements, which he inferred were en« tirely misleading and unfair. A News reporter yesterday saw Mr. E. P. Webster (president of the Taranaki Chamber), who said, that Mr. M. A. Carr was not justified in the strictures he had made. “We stand by our figures absolutely,” said Mr. Webster. “Mr. Carr appears to be drawing a red herring across the track in his efforts to bolster Wellington trade and belittle u». He has assumed that Taranaki is claiming that Wanganui importers would effect a great saving by having all their United Kingdom imports through New Plymouth instead of Wellington, and proceeds to quote the charges from. New Plymouth on goods classed by the railway as A, B, C (the three highest rates). Though on certain of these classes a saving can fee shown (it being purely a question of the respective weight and measurement), Mr. Carr overlooks the vital fact that the figures quoted by ua referred to a definite itfem—i.e., salt being shipped from Liverpool in June. “It is this class of goods that doeij show a saving, and with such widely used imports as slag and phosphates the saving via New Plymouth is over la more than on salt, whilst on overseas coal the saving is also considerable. The figures in connection with salt are: Via’ Wellington to Wanganui, £1 16s Id; via' New Plymouth, plus railage to Wanganui, £1 Gs 7d. “Mr. Carr states that the transhipping’ rate at Wellington is 4s 6d, not 6s, as’ stated by us; for, he says, the shipping companies bear the Wellington Harbor improvement rate. The figure we quoted, was the actual cost on a shipment to. New Plymouth via Wellington. One: can hardly think that Mr. Carr suggests that 4s Gd will cover all charges in Wellington, including storage, owing to tire long and vexatious delays so frequent there. As a matter of fact the. Union Company provides 9s Gd per ton to cover these charges when issuing a through l|at of lading from Australia, and we are of opinion that 6s is a conservative estimate for an average shipment. Even if we were to accept the is Gd reduction as Correct it would not materially alter our contention that on the bulk lines, ■specifically mentioned Wellington cannot compete with New Plymouth as a distributing centre for the Wanganui district. “All we ask is for Wanganui importers to investigate the position for thorny selves and use the port that pays them the better. “Our chamber does not desire to beguile anyone, as Mr. Carr rather unkindly infers of us; nor do we wish to depreciate Wellington; but if we can show Wanganui a way of saving money on some important lines of imports wq feel it is our duty to do so, as the result must be to our mutual advantage.”! “Wanganui and Taranaki,” concluded! Mr. Webster, “can work together in) many matters for mutual benefit, ana this is one of them, and if we can help or serve Wanganui we are going to dq| so, despite railings from Wellington