HARBOUR BOARD

Timaru Herald, Volume 170, Issue 170205, 1 May 1920, Page 3

HARBOUR BOARD

MONTHLY MEETINGThe monthly meeting <rf the Timaru Harbour Board was held yesterday. Present —Messrs IT. J. Roileston (chairman), O. N. Or bell j J. S. Rutherford, D. <J. Turnbuli, T. B. Garrick. J. M. Tripp, A. It. Guild, H. Skinner, and !E. JA. Isaac. An apology for unavoidable absence was received from Mr J, Kitchener, M.P. CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT. The chairman detailed the results of the elections just held for seats on the Harbour Board, congratulated the retiring members on the good work they Jiad done, and extended a hearty welcome to the new one—Mr Guild. In acknowledging the welcome, Me Guild' said! he would not like it t 0 be thought that he had, come C4l to the Board simply with one object—in connection with cool stores for the port. His endeavour would be to do his "best to forward the interests of the port in general. The chairman, continuing, said that no nomination bad been received for a representative on the Board for the Qtaio and Pareora ridings and "Waimate County, and an appointment would be made by the Governor-in-Couneil on the recommendation of the Waimate County Council. The debit balance at the previous meeting stood at £1763, and after paying the accounts that day it would be £2200. The receipts for the month amounted to £2241 15s, the olidef items being: Ships' dues £IO3B, rents £223. wharfage £767, interest on mortgages £lsl, hire of 10-ton crane £2B- Two big steamers had called at Timaru during the month % and afforded welcome, relief to the freezing works. Tlio revenue for tb'e three months amounted to £5346 as compared with £3867 in 1919, £4628 in 1918, and £4BSO in ]917. The wharfage, showed a substantial increase on that of last year. The other charges were much about the same. The revenue had suffered during" the first thiree months of the yea.r owing to the absence of Homegoing steamers.

frozen meat railed AWAY, i Mr Isaac inquired whether the chairman could say why a large quantity of frozen meat had been railed from Pareora to Lyttelton during the month, instead of being shipped at Timaru. ! Tlae chairman said be Had been com/munieated with by one of the directors of the' Canterbury Frozen -Meat- Company, who informed him that the visit of the Suffolk to Timaru had been can-j celled on account of the draught of the j stip, and 27,000 carcases of frozen mutton had been railed from Pareoral ito Lyttelton. He had telegraphed to j the agents of the vessel, and to the j overseas shipping committee asking) why the Suffolk's call at Timaru had j bean cancelled, and he had received re-: plies stating that the visit had not teen cancelled as the Suffolk had never been allotted to Timaru. _ The agents of the vessel mentioned in their reply that the official draught at Timaru was ' 24ft, and to this he had replied that in view of recent dredging the Harbourmaster considered the port quite all right for a draught of 25ft. To this he had received no reply. He had also pointed out that no insulated steamer had called at Timaru for three months, and that a grave injustice was being done through- inability to get, meat away. Since then two insulated steamers had called here, and another one was to call next month to take the largest shipment of meat that had ever gone in one bottom from Timaxu. A week or two ago frozen meat had been railed from North Canterbury to Timaru, and it would be fair to set one against the other. There had been no reflection on the port of Lyttelton, nor was there any on the port of Timaru. Mr Isaac said that the railing of meat frlam North Canterbury to Timaru could not be set against the railing- of meat from Pareora to Lyttelton, the North Canterbury meat came to Timaru because of extensive alterations which necessitated thr> quick removal of meat from the Kaiapoi works, and there was no vessel in Lyttelton at the time. "W!i;xt he desired to know was whether the Suffolk had been kept away from Timaru because of insufficient draught. The ohairmiin said the position was that the Suffolk ha' l neve.i* been allotted to Timaru. There "was ample draught to accommodate her here. j

COOL. STORES. . The, chairman said; he .was sorry to lxave to again raise the question of cool storage at tiie port, and he hoped that this would ha'the lest occasion on which it w.ould be necessary ior iiim to do so. He explained that since, the previous meeting of the Board a conference had been held between representatives of the Board, and of the Dairy Companies interested. At that conference, Sir Clayton, Government giader of dairy produce, was present, /the whole question had r oeen gone into thoroughly, and a scheme drawn up, of which'the Government grader approved. The Board could not embark on. any scheme -without the approval of the Dairy Department. The export figures aa supplied by the Dairy Department for the season" ending 31sfc March, 1.920, were (excluding Ashburtoh) 7101 boxes of butter, and 8761 crates of cheese. As compared I with tiiie previous season the export i butter showed a decrease of about J. 500 boxes for the season, and the. cheese .showed an increase, of 2500 crates. It was, made quite clear at the conference with the Dairy Companies' that Ashburton would not be . sending any butter fop export, but if they sent cheese their output, based on the 19191920 season, would b e .2909 crates. There seemed to be a good deal of' uncertainty. .and difference of opinion, as to whether the increased 1 production thlat was anticipated in -the future would be with butter or cheese. The scheme was to utilise three rooms of .the present cold stores, which would hold 4000 boxes of butter; and in regard, to cheese, to utilise, the present grading room, and an addition thereto, both of which would 'oe refrigerated, and : would have a capacity ' of 3400 crates of cheese. The total , cost would be about ,£4OOO, that was £2500 for a new cheese store, and £ISOO for new freezer and plant. The, £ISOO for the new plant , would be repayable • bv the Cold Stores Company at the raifie ot' £3OO per annum, so that a,t the end of five years' the total- responsibility of the. Board would be, say £2500, for which they would have value ill the liew.buildings erected .on theirproperty ; The cast of maintaining-, .temperature's would be by contract with the Cold Stored Coy. ior a term of five years, at tlie end ■ of • which time the whole position, could be reviewed.v The cheese store would be built so as to allow of another storey- being added, • thereby doubling the, capacity, and the butter store could be extended if necessary.The contract with the Cool Stores Coy. for supplying the temperatures compressor, including the us© of' their stand-ay plant of suction gas engine, ammonia; oil paint .for coils, maintenance and repairs; would be £6OO per' annum. Further expenses for labour; interest, depreciation;: insurance, etc.; would amount to -'about £IOOO per annum, making a stotal;expenditure rof £I6OO lier annum. This am punt would

nob bo likely t 0 bo exceeded. The stores would be under thy absolute' control of the Board, who would fix tlu< charges and collect" the storage' a-ad contx-.0l tlie grading. The revenue from the storage of 7000 boxes of .butter at 9d per box, and 658 tons of cheese a» 8s per ton, would be £532 per annum. A handling charge of 3s 6d' per ten on cheese would give another £ll3, and, in addition there would be the rent' of cheese room in the off season, and extra storage in the winter season, say £2500, making a total of £895. If tha storage of butter was increased to Is per box, and of cheese to lis 6d a ton, and an increase 'of 20 per cent, in the output were allowed for, that would give an additional revenue of about £2OO. On these figures there Would be a loss of about £SOO per annum to the Board, but tliisi wag not a serious matter as compared with the benefit' to the district, and keeping the port : as a grading port. The loss would be; reduced toy the wharfage charges on ! tb/ e goods exported. The scheme would require the formal approval of the Dairy Department, but the Government grader, who had attended the conference between the Board and the Dairy Companies, had intimated that foo could see no objection to it. j The Board discussed 1 the scheme in 1 great detail, after which the chairman moved th e adoption of the scheme which he had outlined. j Mr Tripp seconded the motion. ' Mr Turnbull said that he was decidedly opposed to the scheme outlined by' the chairman. He went on to say that the conference called to discuss th«i dairying position had a surprise sprung on it at the start when toe chairman announced the object as: "To discuss erecting a cheese store, and to enlarge ' the existing stores." This was not. giving the project fair play; nor was | it likely to lead to any satisfactory I decision. It seemed to him entirely; 1 wrong for a chairman to endeavour to' force his own private scheme' on aj meeting without the authority of tho : Board, especially when it had not met; with the approval of the Board. Mr j Clayton, Government grader, was pre-' sent, and had given some figures which rather knocked the bottom out of the. statements made by the chairman at j the -meeting before last. Mr Clayton j estimated the revenue derivable ii-orr.; i dairy products at- £l2lO, this leaving j out apple, honey, and other cool stor-; ages. Tba chairman's estimate was'; £450 or £6OO. "When the chairman' estimated the cost under the new works scheme he added approximately 23 per cent extras, and took the total from £13,800 to £17,000, but at the, last conference he submitted Mr Pan-' ton's estimate of £3450 for the cost of adding to a doubtful old building, and' did not add a shilling for extras, and then estimated the probable loss of running the cool stores at £SOO or £6OO, instead of the thousands he hinted at in the original scheme. Mr Tnrnbuil contended that the chairman's estimates were wrong, both as regards revenue and expenditure. He now proposed to spend £3450 t D provide a makeshift building, bub it -would 'o;much better to erect a new store of larger capacity that would cost say £9500. By doing this the Board j would be faced with an extra annual i expenditure of £3OO fo r interest, but they would have their own up-to-date, buildings, and within live years would be running them at a profit. The question of finance need not trouble: theBoard, as they had £6OOO lying with the Borough Council which was money received from the reclamation, and could properly be put back there for the purpose of improving the reclamation. He would guarantee to find a J further £SOOO at 5 per cent; he was so confident that it was for the good of South Canterbury as a whole, that if the Dairy Companies were prepared to guarantee half the possible loss for three years, he would guarantee to' make good half of the Board's half ofi the total loss for a similar period, j Taking the chairman's own figures for the estimate of the new scheme*, in conjunction with Mr Clayton's figures the loss would be £1155, a.nd that was ; allowing for interest on the mouev e\--; n°nded. Assuming that they used the! £6OOO belonging to the reclamation, itwould bring the charge for interest back £3OO per annum, and further, if ■ only one engineer was emnloved (and - he was given to understand this is nil ■ that was necessary) it would bring the total net loss to £655 per annum. A .DEPUTATION.

1 A deputation consisting of Messrs G. B. Carowiight, E. Booth, M. Campbell, I — Kyne, Maitland, and W. H. Jakins waited on the Board at this stage j to state their views. I Mr Cart.wright said that all the, companies interested liad met at Temuka, and had passed; the following resolution unanimously:—"That this meeting of directors of the various dairy companies' iu South Canterbury emphatically disapprove of the proposal to extend cold storage at the existing stores, and we pledge our respective companies to offer to the Timaru Harbour Board for three' years a guarantee to meet 50 per cent, of the annual loss up to £l4O0 —£700 to the Board and £7OO to thei companies in proportion to the storage taken up by each company,—provided tliat the r,tores are erected on the water-front and according, to the resolution on tlie books of the Board, the losses incurred to be a charge against first net profits." Mr Cartwright added that they hoped there would not be any loss, but if there was the companies would pay up to £7OO towards it for the' first* three years. The Chairman: Yes, and the Board can bear the loss after that. Suppose the Board does'not give effect to-your proposal ? Mr Cartwright: Then' the companies' will support ho other. The Chairman: What about rates of storage?. ■ "Mr Cartwright: We aire prepared to pay the same as at Lyttelton. The Chairman: Yes, I suppose you are, and save the difference-in railage as between Temuka and Lyttelton and Temuka ' and •Timaru. The storage charges must be fixed definitely beforehand. Mr Turhbull (ta Mr Cartwright): 'Are you prepared to pay 3d a, month merest Timaru? ; Mr Cartwright: I .-think we woiyld be>. The Chairman said the companies were now taking up an entirely different at-ti-' tude from that which they had taken up at the conference, and lie asked why they had-asked, him to revive the.original scheme if they did not intend to support it. Mr Cartwright said the companies had since come to the decision that they would not support the- old scheme. They wanted new up-to-date stores erected on the waterfront. The Chairman: Yc.i do not like the idea, of -Mr-Caithness making a possible profit. Personally I ; think he is as likely to make a. loss. In any case, what-does it matter-who the con-tractor for cold storage is? Why did not the companies erect their own cold stores, as the dairy companies did, in Dunadin, where the Harbour Board would have nothing to do with the erection <*f-them? Mr Campbell replied that Timaru. and Otago could ' not 'be-"compared. The industry had v been long established in Otago. The Chairman, inquired' why the! deputation objected to storing at- the existing stove if it were added" to. To this he received'no reply, but the deputation made it clear that it. would have-nothing to do with other-than new stores. • Mr Orbell'said the; deputation pointed a, pistol at the Board's head., and he objected to such dictation. They had come to the Board's meeting saying that

this and that and the other must be done, and threatening that if their demands were not compiled with they wouid have nothing to do with the matter. ; Mr Booth and Mr Campbell objected to this, and asked for its withdrawal. The Chairman said there was nothing to withdraw; The deputation had done what Ml- Orbell had said, even demanding that the store be built on a site which was not approved by the Board's engineer. The deputation then retired. The Chairman . said that it was apparently not much use putting his .motion, as the dairy companies said they would not use the existing facilities. He did not approve qf the motion, passed by the dairy companies. Their total liability under it would be £2IOO, and the Board would bp left to face any further Joss. Moreover, the resolution was utterly inconsistent with the attitude previously taken up by the dairy companies, una he would never have revived the old scheme had he not been asked by Mr Cnrtwright to do so. Mr llolleston said that he would withdraw his motion, under the circumstances. He had done his very best in the matter for more than a year past, and somebody else could now have a try at it. It was not assisting in the task _ of reconstruction to erect a new building wham the facilities were already in existence. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had told the world that economy and prudence must he exercised if the world was to be saved, and it was the duty of the Harbour Board to pay heed' to such advice. The trend of the day, however, seemed to be in the direction' of reckless expenditureMr Isaac quoted what Gisobrne and Lyttelton proposed to do in the matter of harbour improvement, as showing that they were not afraid to bet progressive ; and he went into the Lyttelton c-ooi store figures to show that a. store in Tim am could be run more cheaply than the chairman's figures would imply, i Mr Turnbuil moved that it be an in- ' struction to Messrs W. Panton and Co. to prepare a modified plan for ccol store® to cost ;£9SOQ: ; The Chairman said it was useless to quote Gisborne, as Mr Isaac had done, for there they had no harbour. With ' regard to Mr Tumbuill's proposal' fora scheme to cost £9500, that scheme would I not provide an inch more space than the scheme which he (the speaker) had proposed. He utterly dissented from the view that any loss could he made up by talnhcr money from insurance funds Cor not adding further to them) in order to make up any los 9 on the scheme, , Mr Tiirnbull suggested. That was not | sound .' business. Any scheme should stand on its own basis, j Mr Isaac said he did not think there ! would- he any loss. !' The-chairman said that Mr Turnbuil's motion, was practically the same- one as was rejected at the previous meeting, and under the circumstances notice of motion would require, to be.,-given. ■ Mr Turnbuil gave notice" for next ; meeting that the Board's architects be i instructed to prepare modified plans for a building to cost £9500 and to provide cool, storage for 5000 boxes of butter and 5000 crates of cheese. 'Mr Orbell said that unless the dairy i companies modified their resolution he. would vote dead against the proposal. The companies had. no right to dictate to the Board as they were attempting to do! The Board had to consider the whole of South Canterbury. He believed in fostering the dairy industry, but the Board could not cater lor a small section of the community only. They must consider the. district as - a . whole. I Mr Guild said the dairy companies could not build the stores themselves, so he hoped the Board would not entertain any idea that they might do so. "With regard to the companies having dictated to the- Board as to the site of the proposed new stores he explained that this had been unintentional, -and could easily be rectified. Tho companies were not aware when ■ they made this condition in .their , resolution; that the Board's had reported against putting the stores on wharf. The matter will be again -discussed k at next meeting. v.

,COEE3SSPO3s T DENCE. The Town Ciei-k wrote inquiring' whktthe Borough's share of tile Harbour rate would be this year.—The rate for the year iias not yet been fixed. The resident engineer advised that 'dredge No. "350" was in need of six new buckets, and he had written .to the builders for a. quotation.—Approved. Dr H. V. Drew (formerly ot Timarii) wrote from London that a large humbqr of old battleships were to be sold cheap, andvhe suggested that ,'Ximaru might be greatly benefitted by using one for extending its breakwater. The cost of bringing it out would 'be more than covered by cargo freights^—llie letter was received. :.\ ' :; The Caroline Dairy Company r-pplied for permission to erect mi oil store on their section adjoining tlie, old: life-boat shed.—Agreed to,- subject tb the approval of the engineer. Messrs Yf. Ritchie and Son wrote asking for a two years' lease of the shed at present rented by them for iith curing, or would the Board, sell the shed and lease the ground.—Heid over till the cool stores question is settled. Members of the Harbourmaster's staff applied for an increase in their ■wages, as their present wage of lis 8d iper day was insufficient on' which to keep a family. The chairman said he did not think there was any doubt but that" the wages would have to be increased. He thought, however, that the wages should be adjusted in a comprehensive way, all the skilled labour being .paid ■on a certain basis, and the unsiCllled labour on another basis. It was decided to ask the engineer to submit proposals for. an amended scale of wages. TENDERS. Only one tender was received for. the lease of sections 24, 20,-and : 26, IVaser Street—that of Dalgety and Co., .at the upset of 20a per foot of frontage.— The ■ tender was accepted. ' - .ACCOUNTS. '• Accounts amounting to £1996 were passed "for -payment, including a bill from VF>. Panton and Son. for £337-far i>lans for. the-proposed cool stores. . ; j; Tp Cff Appsag,. ; v: ; ; His-term of office .having-expired, Mr Roileston retired from the chairmanship and intimated that he did not seek re-; election. He had been chairman of the Board for" the .past eight years, the : work_ was becoming very, strenuous, aadj he did not feel able to do jastica. In any oase he t thought a. w: ; uige of chairmanship was desirable as some members seemed to, thiak that the Board was drifting. He would not like to tell them how much time he devoted to Tiis duties as chairman, 'but he could honestly say that his solo endeavour, had been.' 1 to advance the district as . a whole. If he liad achieved any measure of success *ne. desired to share it with 'his fellow-members. Sir Turnbuil, moved tliat as four members were absent the election of a chairman be : postponed till nest meeting.' Mr Orboll said it was most unfortunate that Mr Hollestoh should retire at the present time. He had the full confidence of. .members and no other member had as good a grip of the business as lie had. ; He a&ked Mr Kolles-r ton to his decision not to , allow himself to be renominated. Messrs Rutherford, Garrick,' and : Skinner also expressed the hopi that Mi- Hollsston would again offer himself for the chairmanship;- '. ' 7 _-Mr Holleston said he did not think"? it would' be right-.for him xo .do so as -i lie had; no confidence whatever in the iiew cool - store scheme. and the Board should have a chairman who wouid be in sympathy with it, as it appeared most likely that it. was going; to .be carried. v Mr Garrick told Mr Roileston that it was bv no means certain that the scheme, as proposed by the dairy companics, would* be -carried. llolleston said lie would prefer to st:i.nd aloof.-from it, as he felt'that the : dairy /-'companies' scheme was nob one which -.the Board. should countenance. 'Eventually, it- was decided to lea.ve ; the election of chairman over till next of tha Board.