I.—B.

159. Then, the Government could only have got the lease for three years ? —Government could only have it for three years. 160. Mr. Wilson.] With regard to the interest charge : you said there was 6 per cent and. -J- per cent, for sinking fund: how would that pay off the principal ? —ln fifty years. It is a £200,000 loan, repayable in 1929. 161. Do I gather from your statement that you could not put any value on this reclamation for the shed ?—At the present time. It is so altered in consequence of the shed-accommodation at Lyttelton having increased by private firms erecting sheds; and the Board has also built some sheds to meet increased requirements. 162. There must be some means of ascertaining the value ? —The only way of "ascertaining the value would be to put it up to tender. 163. Are they not valued for property-tax purposes?—No ; we do not pay property-tax. 164. Are they not valued at all?—So far as lam aware, they are not. 165. Do you not pay local taxes on them ? —No ; they are exempt from taxation. 166. Even supposing they were exempt, I supposed they would have been valued for the purpose of ascertaining the values ?—Of course, if the Board let the sites they become rateable. 167. In this case you have let them?—ln this case Government are exempt from taxation. 168. Mr. Perceval.] What do you value them at in your assets ?—I put them down at £32,000. The shed is distinct from the reclamation and breastwork. The total is put down at £32,000, less the amount refunded by the Government. 169. Mr. Wilson.] The actual cost is laid down by the Chairman of the Harbour Board, as —total cost of sheds, £6,000; cost of reclamation, £10,000 ; cost of timber-breastwork, £16,000. What is that timber-breastwork ?—The breastwork running from the boat-jetties to the Gladstone Pier. Nearly the whole is occupied by railway-lines serving the shed. 170. Do any vessels go alongside? —Yes. 171. Who gets the dues ?—The Board gets the wharfage dues. 172. Is there any return showing what you have received in respect of those dues ?—No. 173. Is there any means of ascertaining the amount ?—Yes ; I think the Railway could give it. Mr. Maxwell: The Railway could not supply the information asked for. 174. Mr. Rhodes.] Do big ships lie alongside there? —Ocean-steamers do not, but English ships do—ships up to 1,500 tons. 175. Mr. Wilson.] The Board receive the dues on these vessels ?—The wharfage dues onlv; Yes. 176. Mr. Maxwell.] I would like to ask Mr. Williams when he was appointed Secretary to the Board?—ln January, 1877. 177. When the Board began ?—Yes. Shortly after. 178. I want, also, to ask Mr. Graham how long he has been on the Board as a member ? Mr. Graham : About five years, I think. 179. You came on to the Board, then, some years after it was started ? Mr. Graham: Yes. Hon. E. Richaedson, M.H.R., examined. Hon. Mr. Richardson: There is one point which I think has hardly been made clear to the Committee—that is, as to how this arrangement was arrived at. The Committee may think it sufficiently clear, and may think it superfluous for me to repeat it, but I heard yesterday all that was said here, and it did not appear to me that, from the evidence given by the Secretary and Chairman to the Harbour Board, the Committee could possibly understand precisely the position when this arrangement was made. Of course, lam in the hands of the Committee. The Chairman : It would be as well, Mr. Richardson, that the Committee should have your statement. Hon. Mr. Richardson : I was Chairman of the Board, and had been Chairman of the Board from its commencement up to the time this arrangement was made, and for some time afterwards— a long while before the intention of the Board was announced that they were going to make reclamation, and to procure revenue by the lease of these sites. A general plan of the works in the Lyttelton Harbour were agreed upon by the Government and the Board, and this plan I have here. It shows the site which is now in dispute. As the correspondence has shown, as soon as ever the Board announced their intention to reclaim and let these sites, the Railway Department objected to the Board letting the sites, and letting private people come into the station-yard. A lengthy correspondence ensued, vvdiich you have before you. Interview after interview took place, and it eventuated in my applying direct to the Minister to see whether this question could not be settled ; and the then Minister for Public Works, the Hon. Mr. Oliver, offered to coine to Christchurch—he was in Dunedin at the time—and stop there on his way, and see me, and try to get the thing settled. He came to Christchurch, and I had a long interview with him, and the result of that interview was noted in a memorandum, and afterwards set forth in the correspondence. Ido not know whether Mr. Maxwell has the original. It was initialled by the Hon. Mr. Oliver and myself. At all events, that minute which appears in the correspondence is a correct account of what took place at the interview. 180. Dr. Neivman.] A cony of that was initialled by the Hon. Mr. Oliver and yourself? Perhaps you will read it?—"The Minister for Public Works objected altogether to allowing the store-sites to go into private hands. The Government not being in a position to carry out the provisions of clauses 143 and 144 of 'The Harbours Act, 1878'" —these clauses allowed Government to take any part of the property of the Harbour Board, simply repaying the Board the amount they had expended on it in the way of improvement—" Government, then, not being in a position to carry out these provisions, and as they considered the working of the sheds in Lyttelton should be 2—l. 8.

9