Untitled

Lyttelton Times, Volume LI, Issue 5601, 6 February 1879, Page 4

One of the chief counts in the indictment drawn by the Opposition against Sir George Grey appears at present to be that," lately at the Thames he has turned the first sod of the wrong railway, He had no business, it is said, to have performed that ceremonial operation at Grahamstown, but he should have wheeled his barrow to some land-ing-plaice thirty miles np the Thames, and formally there turned out its contents. The reason given is that, the late Ministry intended that to be the terminus on the Thames side, and that the present Ministry is bound by that intention. Before we proceed to show the fallacy of that assumption, and the lawfulness of the proceedings at Grahamstown on the opening of the railway from the Thames to the Waikato, we must congratulate the settlers at the Thames goldfields on the collapse of , the late Government and their intentions in the matter of that railway. In the first place, we believe that their intention was not to make any railwayin that district at all. Mr Ormond, in his last Public Works Statement, ga.ve no sign to the contrary. In the second place, a railway from the Waikato line to the proposed terminus above Te Aroha would have been almost useless to the Thames goldfields. It would have gone far to fulfil the prediction which is now freely attributed to one of the late Ministry, that the proceeds of the railway would not pay for the grease of its wheels. When the river Thames is described as a navigable river, the imagination of those who know nothing of it except by that description, is apt to run away with the idea of its namesake at London. The fact is that small craft alone can navigate our Thames between Grahamstown and Te Aroha, and that at the month of the river, which intervenes between the two places, the navigation of even a canoe has to be adjusted according to tides. It would be mere mockery to call a railway which left such a hiatus between its terminus and the centre of population, a railway from the Thames to Waikato in that sense which meets the views and fair claims of those who reside on the’ Thames goldfields, the only population on the Thames side of the district.

But we deny that there is anything to show conclusively that the line from the Waikato to the Thames, meant only a line from Hamilton to a landing place above Te Aroha. It is very probable that Mr Macandrew in his Public Works Statement, when he referred to the line and to the existence of its survey plans, was not aware that the word “ Thames ” did not mean the goldfields, but only the upper part of the river itself. That was a not unnatural mistake on the part of a new Public Works Minister, not personally acquainted with the locality and overwhelmed with public business. But, as we shall presently see, he did not stereotype that mistake in legislation by which alone he can be bound. And it is evident that, even in the survey of the line, it was contemplated that it might be continued to the Goldfields. In the last annual report, the Engineer in Charge of Northern Railways refers to the survey by Mr James Stuart of the proposed railway line from the Waikato to the Thames, and gives its substance. One part he states as follows :—“ The Omaha landing on the Thames is at 30 miles 40 chains, that is, half a mile below the point where the straight part of the line would strike the river; but if the line is to be carried on to the Thames township, S Ohinemuri, Shortland, and Grahamstown, the crossing should be at 30 miles 15 chains, or thereabouts.” Let us now look to what is really the material part of the question, the legislative authority for the construction of a railway from the Waikato to the Thames. That authority is embodied exclusively, so far as wo are aware, in “ The Railways Construction Act, 1878,” and in j “ The Immigration and Public Works Appropriation Act,. 1878.” Tho railway in question is specified as “ Waikato to tho Thames,” in the first schedule to tho Railway. Construction Act. Tho second section makes tho Act a special Act for tho construction of all or any of tho railways mentioned in tho fij’st schedule. Tho third section empowers the Governor to enter into contracts, to tho extent of tho money appropriated from time to time by the General Assembly, for tho construction of any of those railways, and to cause, for that purpose, reports and surveys to ho made, in order to determine tho best lino and direction of each railway, and to obtain tho necessary land. Tho retriotion is that no contract shall be entered into for tho construction of the railway, or any part thereof, till plans and estimates are approved by the Governor in Council, and a certificate is given by tho Chief Engineer that the route chosen for tho railway is the best available ono. So far as this Act goes, there is nothing to bind tho Government by previous plans and surveys of railway lines, —and m in this case a very general description, namely, “ Waikato to tho Thames,” is given, that descrip-

tion would certainly from Grahamstown to any T 'J 7' Waikato, The only on are that no contract shall appropriations in force at the tim?'''' 1 that no contract shall he made u !' v 1 plans and certificates of the li a ,-. obtained, and the plana Wap p^,, v the Governor in Council. Until-. ? proved that the Government ha-l fringed either of these condition! can see nothing unlawful i a ciding that one terminus of tho r u '' shall be Grahamstown. The rJj * Construction Act makes no tion, but the Immigration and Works Appropriation Act authori,,,.' 1 vote of thirty thousand pounds t 0?,,!/ the construction of, amon« railway line from “ Waikato to' 'V Thames,” Here again tacitly, a ., u T other Act expressly, the of the line is left to the Bnt we arc gravely told that tLia another formidable objection to construction of this railway if j, from Grahamstown. A railwaying will be required across the Thames a-! this bridge will be an ohstach- to •’ progress, to and fro, of a ateai?’ belonging to a Mr J. C. Firth. Curioa enough, after half a century and ahb antipodes, we have Mr Stephenson’s brated “ coo ” reproduced in the of Mr Firth and his steamer. should be sorry to treat the !a*v in the same spirit of cruel levity, Mr Stephenson displayed in refereir to its great prototype. And we wov j suggest, as practicable within the bona*, of engineering science, that Mr Firth? steamer’s funnel and masts should he constructed as to bend gracefully backwards when going under the arch of thrailway bridge. We have a great for -Mr J. C. Firth as an enterprising colonist, as the tenant of a large nj leased from the great chief William Thompson” in troublous times. Wh4 that influential Native died, Hr Firth erected upon the run a monamat, which remarkably combined a tribute!') the memory of William Thompson, with a posthumous injunction from his orave to all Natives to protect Josia’a f v.h and the run, the boundaries of whim were, we believe, carefully inscribed •; the monumental tablet. None but ; master mind could so make an epitaph twice blessed, and extract from a tributory tear to the departed Thompson < good title and peaceable possession to the living Firth. At the same time we cannot admit that the private interests of any individual, however enterprising, should postpone a public work advantageous to the whole Colony.