NGARURORO BANK PROTECTION.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XX, Issue 3917, 28 May 1877, Page 2

NGARURORO BANK PROTECTION.

Sir, — 1 noticed in your issue of the 24th instant a letter from Mr Bennett, re the above subject, and -waited your Olive correspondent's reply, which appeared this morning. lam anything but an admirer of your correspondent's style, or of his depth of observation in a general way, but in this instance, he is, I consider, "much j more correct in his views than Mr. Bennett. As, however, he does not treat with what in my opinion are some of the most important bearings of the case, I venture to trouble you with a word or two on the subject. First, then, I can, from almost daily observation, assert that it is on the Government frontage that the river is making the most rapid encroachment and the first danger threatened, as it is here that the stream is first received on this side, shot over in full force from the point on the Maori side, and then it drags down Hamlin's frontage with less force. Second, the strip of land dividing the JS'garuroro from the Muddy Creek, and the low land on the other side of the road is much narrower at the reserve than at any other place. Of the truth of the above anyone may satisfy himself at a glance. I am confident from my experience from watching the river at this place for some time back, that anything done on Hamlin's frontage would not affect the real danger. In fact, if Hamlin wishes to do anything to protect his property, it will have to be by securing . the face of the bank above him on this same Government reserve, and thereby shooting the stream clear of his own frontage lower down, otherwise the stream would eat in above him and come behind any facing he might put on his own land. Indeed, in n ly opinion, and I fool confident most professional men will agree with mo, that to make a more perfect job of it he should go yet higher up and dress the point on thu Maori side, which is the first cause of mischief. Anything done exclusive^ on Hamlin's land, if it held at all, would only send the stream more directly through L the strip of land above named. Whether this is a work for Hamlin or the county to undertake I think there can scarcely be two opinions. For my own part, I have little hesitation in saying that the river at the place named threatens damage to the district generally, and to some settlors to a far greater extent than Hamlin. A breach in the bank here, which a continuance of rain for two or three days would occasion against all that man could do to prevent it, would convert the whole of the land lying in the bottom between the Tukituki and Kgaruroro rivers, which is the richest land in the district, into a wateiy and muddy waste. There are no two places that I know that more resemble each other than this and the Tutaokuri at the botanical reserve, and any old settler may remember the beautiful land in that locality formerly occupied by Mr A. Browne, now Mr Brandon, Messrs Williams, G. S. Cooper, Jcffares, and others, and the racecourse itself ; and what is it now 1 Anyone occup3 r ing low levels in this neighborhood who iias not seun it lately would do well to pay it a visit. i feel convinced, sir, there is no subject calls for the consideration of the Council more urgently than the one under discussion, and though the reserve and Hamlin's land only have hitherto suffered, the river has now to advance only a short distance further until it completes its work, and causes a devastation that may take a longtime to remedy. There are few who know Mr Bennett ■who will not give him credit for being a useful and conscientious public servant, but in this case I can't help thinking that he would have done better and more to the satisfaction of his constituents had ho made himself more acquainted with his subject before he acted or wrote thereon. Talcing the following clause in his letter, " The principal encroachment is in Hamlin's paddock, which, if not protected, will cause considerable damage to that

valuable property. " Does lie mean that by withholding public expenditure he expects to drive an unfortunate individual from his private means to protect the public, so tliatinthat way he would protect himself ? The reverse would be a more liberal view. Again, "Is it right to spend public money to prevent rivers en- \ croaching on private property V I say J certainly, nothing more proper, if, as in ' this case, the prevention is necessary to public safety. A breach in a river bank may do more damage to settler's at a distance than to one living in the immediate vicinity. Apologising for occupying so much of your valuable space, — I am, «tc, Ax Uninterested Observer. West Clive, May 25, 1877.