Page:Item 9 1861.pdf/106

of great cost, and he had an idea that it would not be efficient. It would be open at the sides, so that the water would be in an unsettled state and the harbour not available in rough weather. He also said that the depth of water being only 12 feet, would not be enough. One vessel in which he was interested drew 11½ feet. With regard to the scheme being a paying one, to lay out £100,000 was a very large sum, and if they considered the smaller estimate – about £85,000, at the moderate interest of 3¼ per cent., and the sinking fund at not less than 5 per cent., an annual revenue of from £4000 to £5000 would be required. How this was to be obtained was a very grave question. They were shut out from several sources of revenue which were open to other ports. The distance at which we were situated from London would prevent traffic by steamboat; and with the shallowness of water as already stated he did not see how it could pay as a harbour of refuge for vessels of any size passing up and down channel. The principal revenue would be derived from coal. The Act of Parliament allowed 7d. per ton on all coals imported, and the importation into the borough last year would yield about £1000. But the railway would compete with them in this commodity under greater advantages. Something might also be derived from the importation of timber and bricks – he could not say how much – perhaps £500 or £600. They would thus be about £3,500 short; and he did not see how they could get up a case for the admiralty. Formerly a good deal of merchandize was brought by sloops, but which the railways had now put an end to, and he did not believe that trade would revive even if they had a harbour here. Mr. Manning had stated that if they applied to the Board of Trade they would be obliged to send a cheque for £100, and then they would send down a surveyor, and if he approved of the plans in his report, another cheque would have to be sent for he did not know how much. After again stating his belief that the scheme would not pay, Ald. Ginner moved that it should be at once abandoned. Coun. Putland spoke in favour of the report and moved its adoption. Ald. Clement said there was no chance of a harbour being constructed, there being no private party who would carry it out on their own responsibility. Ald. Ross would second the motion, because Hastings should have a harbour, although he did not approve of the present plan. Ald. Gausden said the matter had taken him rather by surprise. The Committee did not recommend them to spend money, and he thought the resolution was too open. He would like them to have nothing to do with it. Hastings was a fashionable watering place, and he hoped it would ever remain so. He moved, as an amendment, that the question stand over till the next meeting. Ald. Ginner seconded. Coun. Winter said he would vote for the adoption of the report simply because it -