MR KINROSS ON THE HARBOR QUESTION.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXI, Issue 6978, 4 October 1884, Page 4

MR KINROSS ON THE HARBOR QUESTION.

Sir,— lt would appear that if anyone ventures to express an opinion contrary to the popular one he must make up hiß mind to be well abused. I would only now notice your attack in your leader of yesterday, in case it might be said that by silence I admitted its correctness. I am impeached under four heads. First, with regard to the Chamber of Commerce. There are a number of members with whom it is a pleasure to act, but there are others, according to your own showing, whose narrow views one can only regret. It is well-known I was re- elected chairman for a year in May, and pressed to accept, and that I only consented to hold office till August. 1 was a merchant in Wellington and a member of the Chamber for years, and required no credentials from here. The charge of posing as a member of the Chamber is paltry and groundless. It was by chance I remained in Wellington when the debate on the harbor came on in the Council, as had the Southern Cross kept her advertised time I should have left on tbe Tuesday previous. On the second count I have already expressed my opinion. On the third, I consider my suggestion not an unreasonable one. As the interest on the cost of the breakwater has to be paid out of property, a majority in value should decide. Every ratepayer, however small his contribution, would have a vote up to £1000. In the case you cite tho holder would pay,' not on his reversion, but on tho full value of the land, and the harbor rate might be the last straw to break the camel's back in this instance. Tbo fourth and last charge remains to be dealt with, and I think most of your readers will agree with my reading of the report. It says the extension of Mr Goodall- plan as advised by Messrs Scott and Bell will be necessary. The western mole will be necessary, though it may be dispensed with for a time. They estimate tho western mole at £38,775. Messrs Bell and Scott estimate tho .cost of tlie work as shown by Mr Goodall's plan at £360,000, and with their extensions £486,000. Now with regard to the '-erosion of the shore west of the work, which the report saya will take place, that surely means that the sheetpiling in Mr Groodall's scheme will be ineffectual, and that Messrs Bell and Scott's suggestion must be carried out. With your permission I will quote their report on this subject: — Protection Works. — Mr Goodall has provided, a concrete retaining wall with a facing of loose rubble blocks as far as the railway follows the coast line, and after that with a wall of sh-et piliug a3 far as the present harbor works. We ara of opinion that the beach in front of the sheet piling will be washed away, probably to the extent of making deep water in. front of it, which would lead t" its destruction unless prevented by a bank of rubble stones. But this rubble, as well as that ih front of the railway, will be washed and ground up by the sea, as is found to bo the case with much of the harder stone at Timaru. Consequently the maintenance of the whole length of these protective works will be a constant source of expense. This may be remedied by substituting crib work filled with rubble and shingle for the sheet piling, but the concrete wall in front of the railway must depend for protection on heavy blocks of stone, because the foundation is supposed to be on soft limestone rock. £etqne Spit. — The shingle bank to the north of the present works will also become exposed to the same eroding action of the waves as that anticipated above, and we have little doubt that in the course of time it will be quite removed, and the Ahuriri Lake become connected with the sea. To attempt to protect this would be out of the question, but all the anticipated effects consequent, upon the stoppage of the shingle by the construction of the breakwater, might be remedied by excavating the shingle which accumulates on the windward side of the breakwater, and transferring it to the exposed part of the coast on the lee side as hereinafter mentioned. I am, &c, J. G. Kinross. Napier, 3rd Ootober, 1884. [ftir Kinross's letter is— doubtless accidentally— so worded as to mako it appear that ha quotes the report of the Local Bills Committee, but as a matter of fact his quotation is from Messrs Bell and Scott's report, already published in full in our columns. — Ed. H.8.H.l