Untitled

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVII, Issue 5680, 31 January 1880, Page 4

We are sorry to find that the few remarks we made the other day, about the best plan of construction for the ThamesWaikato Railway, should have moved both our Thames contemporaries to anger. Each writes a- column on the subject, but neither says a word in refutation of our arguments. On the contrary, after a preliminary -flourish, each proceeds to demolish the other, and between them, the correctness of the arguments we brought forward is proved to demonstration. For instance, the Advertiser says :—" We are prepared to admit that a gross. blunder was committed, through meddling busy-bodies at Grahamstowri insisting that so many acres of useless foreshore should be reclaimed before the line was commenced, but the 1 people of the Thames' are no more to blame for this piece of jobbery than our contemporary is." The people of the Thames are to blame for- allowing " meddling - busybodies" to speak and act in their name, and at all. e'vents they must expect to suffer the consequences if a wrong course has been taken. And, ;again : —''Because £ gross bungle w.as/made in, the outset, .are^'.we to be punished by the stoppage of' One of our assailants is, therefore, completely with us on the absurdity of com-

mencing the line at Grahamstown by a series of useless reclamations on the foreshore, and" actually speaks of the affair as a "job," On the other hand, the Thames Star prove 3 that work could not have been commenced at: the proper place, and that if operations had not been begun where they were, they would not hare been commenced at all. It says :—

The fact is, if the works authorised by the late Government had not been proceeded with, the prospect of any part of a line from the Thames being constructed for the next 10 years was very remote, and proceeding with this portion, of the work was the only course open for the late Government. . Committing the country to these . works hsa compelled the present Ministry to proceed with the line, although for party purposes the principal works will be confined to the Waikato end. The fact is that the Government are not at this moment in a position to proceed with the construction of the section from Shortland whsrf to the Kauwaeranga bridge, because the necessary land has not been acquired, and the Government, as stated by Mr. Whitaker, have made it a sine qua noil that all land required for railway purposes shall be first acquired before work is commenced. Why is this ? Simply because the cupidity of the holders prevent those authorised to acquire tho lands being able to close the negotiations. If such is the case now, how was it possible for the late Government to proceed with the line otherwise than the portion on the foreshore, for the land on the other side of tho Kauwaeranga has only since been arranged for with the native owners.

It is quite admitted that the work was begun in the wrong place, and the only | thing that can be said in defence is, that the Thames people, by persuading the late Ministry to do wrong, have committed the country and " compelled the present Ministry to procced with the line." Further, it seems from the simple statement of fact made that the liue cannot possibly be proceeded with at the Thames at present because, "owing to the cupidity of the holders," the land has not been acquired. And it seems too that only siuce the reclamation works on the foreshore of Grahamstown were commenced, has the land been arranged for with the native owners. Nothing could more completely prove what we endeavoured to argue. It seems too, that when Mr. Oliver comes to Auckland, and is deputationised by the. people of the Thames, it will be easy for him, from these very articles, to show that the works cannot be continued at the Thames end at present. There is one point on which we must admit that our tan temporaries are at one, and as might be expected, on that they are utterly astray. They unite in declaring that our opinions are dictated by selfishness and jealousy. One of them says we are " again inspired by Firth-Whitaker and Company," that "it i 3 unfair the Thames should be sacrificed to suit the pockets of a few capitalists, however powerful their interests, or however they may be assisted by a contemporary which has hitherto professed to devote some attention to the welfare of the Thames." The other paper speaks of "the combined efforts of speculators and land rings with their organ." It amuses our contemporaries to denounce Auckland speculators, and to fancy that they, with our assistance, are always plotting against the Thames. They have absolutely no ground for these assertions, but they have repeated them so often that probably they now honestly believe in them. What the opinions of " FirthWhitaker and company" may be about the best mode of construction of the Thames Kailway, we do not know, and do not much care, as we believe that we are quite able to give an opinion ourselves. We claim too that the opinion

we have given, and the course we have advised, .is by far the best for the Thames. If the work had at first been, vigorously proceeded with from Waikato, the Thames woulcl by this time have been connected with Waikato, the Upper Thames would have been far beyond its present position, and the townships of Grahamstown and Shortland would have received far more benefit from a healthy trade than they have from the paltry reclamation works for a railway station.