NO CANAL FOR CHRISTCHURCH.

Timaru Herald, Volume XCIV, Issue 14656, 25 January 1912, Page 5

NO CANAL FOR CHRISTCHURCH.

A HOSTILE EEPOET. ETJENISKED BY COMMISSIONERS. Per Press Association. CHPJSTCHHECH, Jan. 24. Tho report of the Commission, sot xtp to make a final investigation of iha Sumner canal project -was tabled at a, meeting of the Harbour Board to-day. It is a voluminous document of 45 • pages, and represents the unanimous | finding of Mr Mitchescn. Mr W. Feri guson, and Mr J. E. Watson, on the j whole question of harbour and shipping I facilities for Canterbury. I Summed up, tho report is a co—i pleto .vondeninaiiou of tie canal fc-heme, | and t!:e alternative wore mended is tn : extensive scheme of railway and iaxj hour _ improvement at Lytieltoa, with. ( additional yard crd shed r.eoonucodaj tion in Chri-u-hurc-h. The Commission j gives reasons for its finding briefly in 1 the foll-nviug fctateoni at lis close (J ! the report:— I _ "We assure you that we have bson I impressed -.vita the st-riims respoiia- :' oihty inseparable from the duty cast upon us by your Board.. We lava : earnestly endeavoured to "take an im- ' partial view of every aspeei of the ; problem placed before us. We lava I carefuljv investigated and weighed all ' the. evidence tendered, and the sources ■ of information available to us. qni ire S have come to the deliberate conclusion j that it is not in the interests of tho ; city and district that any artificial harbour should be constructed outside Port Lytteltcn. j REASONS FOR THE JUDGMENT. j '"'fte summarise, the principal reasons I that have led ns to <£is conclusion as ; follows.' . "'(a) Tua grave unoertaiatv, as dis- : Ciosed by the eridenoe, as to an artificial harbour trith entranoa ai ; Sunwer would prove to be a 'fiisfrdass j part,' owing to doubts expressed as to I the important question of ready aooea. > siojl.it.- icr iariie in any fajj ; moderate or calm -weather. "0>) Jie heavy financial burden thai would be imixjsed on tho community ; by the large espenditure involved m ; the proposal. i "(e) The serious loss to the conj- ! »nnrty and individual eeetions thereof . through the inevitable depreciafcoa of pnrate and public property inseparable irom any.change in the teCatfon <x the port. "(d) The certainty that no Government would consent, in the public ia- *° tie dOSine ° f I^tdt< »i « - *'< e ) living to its geographical posi-x-on, Cnnstcnurch cannot enjoy all the natural deep-water harbour, but in oiS opinion aay attempt to escape from railway cnarges by the coijstnkion, of an artificial harbour must lesritiniae exchange or one impost for a sffll greater impost. *SJu °Y coarict i<«i is that His practicable at comparatively small cost to •D improve the facilities' at church and Lyitelton as to remo™ complawed of, as well as to mafco ample provision for the prospective growth of trade for the fifty