CITY AND PORT.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18682, 4 May 1926, Page 11

CITY AND PORT.

TO THE LDITOS 07 "TUB TF.ZSS." Sir.—The writers of the lengthy report in to-day's "Preys'' have certainly given us all something to think about. Tho topic is lit tar the most interesting to thinking people in this part of -Now Zealand. Uur sea cumiauunicanou is our all m all, and the way it is handled by your contributors is 110tliuig stiorc ot masterly. They make it perfectly plain what it will cost the community to stick to Lvttclton, viz., £1,390,000, including a Die.-el-elertnc traction for the tunnel, instead of electrification. ■ They certainly make a specially good case for the former mode of traction, and until we hear the thundering guns from the other side in favour of electrification, we shall once again he in the position of the celebrated Cockney de.-cribed by the lamented Chevalier. it is all ;i grand ciiiccpt ion, and would _ remove double handling, but the price -,\c arc asked to pay is a heavy one indeed. I wonder if, Lu view of this price Coode and Matthews would be inclined to revise their advice about adhering to Lyttelton. Sureilv it would not cost much to dredge out an absolute harbour on this side, bigger than Lyttelton within the moles, taking the 'stuff light out to sea. There would be no canal about it fur the scoffers to exercise their wits on. but a nlace somewhat similar to Barry Docks. Still we must all be reasonable. ]f there are hallucinations about tnc probable economic superiority ill the long run of a Port Cliristchurch, we m\M. I suppose, take our medicine.—Yours, etc. Srpp.OT»TF,R OF SCHEME A. May Ist. 1020. TO THE EDITOR OT "THE PBESS." Sir, — It is most gratifying to know that we have in our midst men who are still keen and who will give their time in so intelligent a manner to this very important problem.

Undoubtedly some of our trouble in the past has been that questions affecting Lyttelton have been left too much to the older business men, men who have made their way, and for tho want of encouragement and support have been obliged to let things slide, content for their lifetime to go on and put up with the existing state of affairs. To this fact must be added that appalling apathy of the general public so characteristic of Cliristchurch. One of the most hopeful signs to bo observed from the interesting article in this morning's "Press" lies in the fact that the suggestions are tho product of a younger generation of business men, men who have their future before them, and who rightly feel that electrification of the tunnel is a waste of public money, and that it does not grapple with tho real problem of direct communication with the sea. They emphasise that all we obtain for approximately £200,000 is less smoke j and that it will be very much a ease of I "as you were" when this money ha? j been spent. Statistics go to show that Cliristchurch doubles its population every twenty years. Then surely this recurring problem will become more complex as the years go by. Surely, again, no Government can continually denv to Cliristchurch what tho other provinces have always enjoyed—tho right of access to her seaboard, and tho direct handling of her merchandise. It is certainly a matter for congratulation that younger men, enthusiastic for their City, have taken up so good a fight.. May a sense of civic responsibility result in their able suggestions being strongly supported.—Yours, etc., CAY.