1.—6

16

It is unnecessary to allude to the quality of the coal, that has been established beyond a doubt. It need only be mentioned that it stands unrivalled for steam purposes; having been exchanged on the ship " Dunedin" for refrigerating purposes for Scotch coal specially imported by the " Nelson." Large consumers testify that it is 15 per cent, more economical at the same price than Newcastle coal. That the harbor can be improved to allow of the development of this large export trade, is admitted by all harbor engineers competent to form an opinion, who agree as to the mode of operations, and alsoas to the comparatively inexpensive character of the works required. Mr. Blackett, the Government Engineer for lighthouses and harbours, states that the whole work could be done for a fraction of a penny on each ton of coal in the Company's leases. Seeing the Government are getting 6d per ton royalty in addition to nearly Is 6d per ton profit on the working of a railway, otherwise useless, there should be the less hesitation in proceeding energetically with the needed works. At present the Company's output is at the rate of 60,000 tons per annum. The Company would be prepared, if sufficient water provided on the bar, to guarantee an output of at least 250,000 tons petannum. At 3s per ton this would yield an annual revenue of £37,500 or £25,000 clear profit on railway, without taking into consideration the addition to customs dues, port dues, postal and telegraph services, which would necessarily accrue from this extended trade. To put it in another way, the purely mineral railway, such as the Westport line, could be worked at a profit on present rates of Is 6d per ton, and with 6d royalty this would yield £25,000 —about 11 per cent on the money actually expended on railways, harbour, shipping appliances, and public buildings in Westport up to the present time. This sum of £25,000 earned in one year would, it is estimated, be sufficient to improve the harbour to the extent required. That an expenditure on harbour works by the Government would be wise, is apparent from the almost boundless character of the coal field. Works of the character required would be a good permanent investment on the part of tt.e Government, and form one of the chief elements to which the country should in future look for defraying interest on the public debt. It should be mentioned that certain Australian Copper* Companies have made overtures to this Company to establish copper-smelting works as soon as suitable vessels can trade to the port. The Company have expressed their willingness to assist the Government either financially or otherwise to carry out the necessary works, being indifferent to the means so long as the work is carried out, and recognising fully that while this question is one affecting their own interests, it is one in which the colony at large is still more interested. I have, <fec, W. Hay Dickson, General Manager.

No. 2. Telegram from Westport Colliery Company to Mr. Dickson. (Telegram.) Dunedin, 20th June, 1882. Gibbs, Bright, and Co. want nine hundred tons coal for " Bowen," at end of the month.—Westport Collieey Company.

No. 3. Papers relating to probable cost of Harbour Works at Westport. Mr John McGregor, C.E., states the coat of a rubble mole at Oamaru of the following dimensions :— 20 feet 80 feet at under £10 per lineal foot, and gives his estimate for Westport training-walls according to Sir John Coode's plan, but not his cross sections, at £15 per lineal foot, exclusive of haulage of stone over Government Eailway from Fairdown Quarry. This will give the cost as 10,400 feet (two breakwaters) at £15 ... ... ... £156,000 As this is a Government work the haulage should not be reckoned, but supposing one shilling per ton to be charged (distance 7 miles) gives ... ... ... ... ... 44,000 £200,000 David Proudfoot, contractor, Dunedin, states that for a rubble wall both north and south breakwaters constructed as above he would have no hesitation in undertaking the work at 7/ per cubic yard, finding all requisite plant. This would give cost as :— 500,000 cubic yards at 7/ ... ... ... ... £175,000