THE HARBOUR BOARD MEETING.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume III, Issue 6, 18 December 1912, Page 4

THE HARBOUR BOARD MEETING.

Yesterday's meeting of the Harbour Board was exceptionally interesting from several points of view. In the first place it proved that Messrs. Butler and Langridge had ’played the game." At the last meeting they asked that the engineers should guide the people by saying straight out which harbour they (the engineers) recommended. The reply came to hand leaving no doubt whatever that the harbour recommended by the engineers was the Inner Harbour. Speaking yesterday, Mr. Lane said he would like to know if the members who asked this question were now satisfied and the answer from Mr. Butler was, "We are quite satisfied.” This leaves the board practically unanimous in its support of the Inner Harbour proposals. Air. Carnell appears to have a nebulous idea that he should oppose the Inner Harbour, and that he should treat with suspicion anything and everything which comes from the party of progress. But although Mr. Carrell's vote counts at _ the Board it does not carry much weight, and with his exception the board is unanimous in the desire to push on development. Before leaving this point, however, we should like to say that it is a very unsportsmanlike action to use an old man to fire bullets east by other people. Air. Carnell is accepted as a straightforward old gentleman, ’and the members on the board have treated him not only with respect, but exceptional tolerance. He is allowed to do and say things which would be tolerated in no other man. Why I Because the members respect ami like him, but it is, we repeat, a paltry policy to use an old man to fire bullets, and Air. Jull was quite right when he gently and kindly suggested (in the face of painful insult) that Mr. Carnell would consult his own interests, and the interests of the people, if he asked to be relieved of his duties on the board. They are not imaginary foes which Air. C'arnell has to fear, but alleged friends who try to make a fool of him. However, let Mr. Carnell's share in yesterday's proceedings be forgotten : lie has done much to win a men sure of tolerance. Turning to more important matters it will be semi that Mi'. Jull made an able and trenchant reply to the amateur engineers who have been discussing the harbour question, ami that Air. Chambers, who represents an imi pert ant section of the ratepayers in i the county, stated that while in the j past he had not been in favour of ! making any harbour at all. lie could now see that they could afford to make an Inner Harbour. The words of this country representative should bear weight with the people ■ of Napier, especially when he says that it should be remembered that a great many people in the country do not care whether there is a harIbiiur or not, and Napier residents ' should join issue with the board to i secure the carrying of the loan. Air. jjull's statement of the position and liis trenchant answers to footpath

critics are worthy of close attention. I Thioughout the whole of this harbour controversy Mr. Jull has kept himself absolutely impartial. In all discussions that have taken place he has stood for neutrality and fair dealing. Having matured his judgment, the chairman of the Harbour Board is not one to sit by with folded hands. He has come to the conclusion, guided by engineering advice, that Mr. Nelson was right when he urged investigation of the Inner Harbour and consequently he does not propose to let the position be misrepresented without, a protest-— a protest, let it be remembered, that carries weight. In onr present article it is not possible to deal comprehensively with all the points raised, but we may briefly refer our readers to the report upon the soundings supplied by Mr. I). Kennedy. This report from an entirely disinterested engineer should be about the last word on the channel question. It has been shown by engineering calculations that in seven months ‘the total deposit of silt on the patch dredged amounts to 11,000 yards ! This is a grand justification of the Maxwellian or ocean drift ! Just fancy, under the disadvantageous conditions at present prevailing the patch has re-shoaled at the rate of 11,000 yards in seven months ! As Mr. Jull says, a modi rn dredge would clean this out in 24 hours, and the dredging of the channel in connection with the harbour scheme becomes a negligible quantity. Then let us remember that Mr. Nelson has proposed to still further reduce this shoaling by trapping the silt before it reaches the harbour, so that if we take the 11,000 yards in seven months as the shoaling bases and deduct the silt trapped and allow for the influence of an increased scour, , how much of the 11.000 yard will'be left for a modern dredge to handle ? Why. the little J.D.O. could almost do the work. There are many other interesting points from the board meeting which require notice, and the interview with Mr. Fraser, Minister of Public Works, has also to be touched upon, but space is not available at this moment for further comment. We are pleased to-day. however, to be able to congratulate the district upon the strong evidence that progress and development are coming.