TOWN EDITION. Evening Post. FRIDAY, AUGUST 19, 1881. THE NEW PLYMOUTH "HARBOUR."

Evening Post, Volume XXII, Issue 43, 19 August 1881, Page 2

TOWN EDITION. Evening Post. FRIDAY, AUGUST 19, 1881. THE NEW PLYMOUTH "HARBOUR."

New Plymouth is in a ferment. The citizens of the Taranakian metropolis are living in a giddy round of indignation meetings, monster petitions, and deputations to Government. If they hear of a local meeting being held 40 or 50 miles away, at which the prevailing sentiment may probably be adverse to their views, they charter special trains forthwith, and go by hundreds to " swamp " those meetings and to burke the free expression of the local opinion on the question under agitation. They send "influential deputations" to Wellington to worry Ministers and button-hole members. They darkly hint that if the grievous wrong with which they are threatened is really inflicted on them, something unspeakably dreadful will surely happen. We incline, however, to doubt the probability of their persuading Parliament to take a view of their case different from that arrived at by tho Select Committee to which the matter was referred Briefly the matter stands thus : New Plymouth has no natural harbour — only an exposed, inconvenient, and sometimes dangerous, open roadstead. It has long been the cherished fancy of its peop'e that if a trifle of some .£200,000 or so was expended in erecting breakwaters, <fee, a harbour would be erected such as should render New Plymouth worthy of its name, and, indeed, the "Plymouth of the South." So an Act was passed by the Taranaki Provincial Legislature conferring an endowment on the New Plymouth Harbour Board of 25 per cent, of tho proceeds of all Crown lands sold in the province. On abolition, the Colony necessarily inherited this engagement, which was further construed so favorably to the interests of the New Plymouth Harbour as to be stretched into including the gross proceeds of confiscated lands as well. Hence the recent payment to the Board of onefour h of the gross sum realised for the West Coast land, acquired by the Colony at such vast cost. Under these circumstances, a Parliamentary committee has investigated the whole matter, und taken copious evidence, Ist, as to the practioableness of the scheme and the ability — financially and otherwise — of tho Board to carry it out ; 2nd, as to its value if completed. On the j first head, the committee found that to car. y the work to tbe first point at which it would bo of the smallest practicil use would cost at least .£115,001) more than tho funds available, wnile, according to the estimate of fcir John Coode— a high authority — the deficiency would be .£150,000. The only way to provide this additional sum would be to increase tho borrowing power of the Board, and bo to entail still heavier burdens upon the whole railway district, a large proportion of which strongly objects to being rated i for a purpose of such questionable local value. Now, bearing in mind that even a substantial proportion of the Taranaki settlers strennou*ly object to this New Plymouth Harbour scheme, which might be supposed, at ieast, to benefit them if anybody outside of .New Plymouth itself, and that the scheme is a burden on tho whole Cobny, let us sco what the experts who wore called on to give evidence, say to the practical value of the work, which its proprietors have always represented as providing a Colonial '" harbour of refuge " First, the Board's own engineer, Mr Bees, admitted that, "if the work were limited to the -500,000 referred to by Sir John Coods [the extent of the Board's funds], the accommodation would be limited to one or two vessels drawing from 10 to 12 feet of water." Captaiu Kennedy, of the s s. Hawea, speaking f com 28 years' knowledge of the locality, stated that the works in progress would only afford a refuge to " small vessela with local knowledge," and that not in the heaviest gales and seas, or those most prevalent ; also that "no ship would run down for a place like New Plymouth in a gale," while " the anchoraga is not good " in the holding ground inside the

proposed harbour,~and|" only a very email vessel " could safely come alongside the jetty. Captain Faibchild, oi the Stella, who has 21 years' acquaintance with the place, asserted that there would not be much shelter, "unless Sir John Coode's work [costing i>9 28,7301 is carried out entire," and that " the whole will have to be done before it will be Paf3 for a ship to lie under." Captain Faibchild further stated that vessels approaching from the westward " could not possibly get into New Plymouth in stormy weather; no vessel conld do so without danger of going ashore," and that even as a harbour of refuge, it would only be useful for small vessels. He added, "I / do not think that even the captain of a sailing vessel, who was acquainted with the harbour, would run for it in bad weather. I think a vessel drawing 11 or 12 feet could lie at the extremity in fine weather," and said if the work wore carried out as proposed, "it would not afford protection, and no vessel could lie there except in the very mildest weather." Next came Captain Johnson, the Nautical Adviser to the Government, and commander of the Hinemoa, whe can Bpeak from 23 years' knowledge of the coast. His evidence was very clear. He said, " I do not think a harbour of refuge is wanted in the locality at all. If the whole of Sir John Coode's plan [costing .£928,73u] wa3 not adopted, I do not think veesel3 would make use of it as a harbour of refuge, except in exceptional cases, and then only by smalt steamers The present plan will give very slight protection, anrl then only in fine weather. The wind that sets the heaviest sea into that bight is W.N.W., and that sea wonld prevent vessels lying alongside. There might be slight protection, but very little." Captain Johnson added that "no warps could hold a ship there in bad weather ; if a ship had a warp strong enough for bad weather, it would tear out the ship's ' bits ' ;" that the work would afford no refuge for vessels running on the coast, and " if completed in its entirety, small steamers might occasionally use it as a harbour of refuge, but veryji.seldom ; an English ship would never make for that harbour; without further extension it would afford but little shelter, even for small steamers, from a N.W. wind, on account of the range of sea which would be running in; the class of vessela which could make use of it in ordinary weather would be about the size of the Hawea, drawing about 14ft in fine weather, but in rough weather there would be too little water — too lit*le margin under the bottom for safety ; supposing the work is not continued beyond the site of the nearest pier, it would be practically useless except in fine weather for small steamers ; tho Hawea could only be taken there safely at tho top of high water in fine weather ; sho could not lie there at low tide." Mr Blackett, Colonial Marine Engineer, was the next witness, but was very cautious in his replies to the questions. He disclaimed all responsibility in the matter, and judiciously declined to express any opinion until full information was before him. He made the following complimentary remark in reference to the committee of tho Legislative Council which investigated the subject last year: — "The questions asked at last year's committee were of such an extraordinary character that I cannot charga my memory ; they never seeme 1 to get at the true bearing of the thing at all." Even one of the Taranaki members, Colonel Teihble, in his evidence said : " I have always been of opinion that the work will be of no material advantage to the general public. 1 think tho works that are possible with the money at tho c >mmand of the Board will not afford protection in anything but the finest weather to shipping." He farther stated that 300 of the Taranaki settlers had petitioned against the work on the ground that the expenditure could not be afforded and would not produce a harbour of material value. " The project," he said, "was mainly supported by the townspeople of New Plymouth and farmers immediately round. the town." It further transpired that the Harbour Board were carrying on the works under the supervision of a mere foreman, without the guidance of any engineer at all. On this, however, and other irregular and extraordinary proceedings on the part of the Board we do not purpose commenting on the present occasion. Our chief object now is to draw full attention to the plain and positive evidence given by the three experienced shipmasters, Captains Fairchild, Johnson, and Kennedy, speaking from respectively 21, 23, and 28 years' knowledge of the place. Their evidence seems absolutely conclusive as proving the New Plymouth " Harbour" to be an utter delusion and snare, and a very costly one too ; that its benefits, even for purely local purposes, would bo of the most limited and doubtful character, while as a harbour of refuge it would be wholly us°less. Th s testimony completely bears out 'he committee in its report (already published in our columns), and entirely warrants the opinion therein expressed, that " tho results from the proposed works would be altogether inadequate to the expenditure required;'"' and the recommendation that "as but a very limited sum, not exceeding £0000, has been expended upon the breakwater apart from the plant, the Legislature should at once take steps to stop the further progress of the works, to take over the assets and tho liabilities, and, after provid'ng for tho latter, to devote the land fund to its ordinary purposes." The sense of the colony thoroughly supports the committee in this wise and I roper recommendation. It will come up for consideration in the House this evening, and we heartily hope Parliament will adopt it by a decisive majority, so putting an end to this monstrous and indefensible squandering of public money by literally " throwing it into the sea."