Untitled

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13498, 27 May 1907, Page 3

THE WAITEMATA-MANUKAU CANAL KOUTES.

Sir, —In your issue of the 17th Mr. J. M. Mennio claims that his Canal Promotion Company , instructed its surveyors and engineers to examino the route via the Tamaki and Otahuhu, as well as tho routo via tho Whan, and without any doubt or hesitation selected tho latter as the better, cheaper, and more easy of .construction.' This appears to have been a mere superficial examination of tho surface, as he says it was after this opinion of their engineers had been given that they put up their money to havo a thorough survey made of the Whau route, also to havo shafts sunk and for ascertaining the quantities and' kinds of material to be shifted; prid that these various tests have proved that tho proposition was both practicable and 'sound. Now, 1. have never said it was* not. But I havo claimed that;.the route via the Tamaki arid Otahuhu was equally practicable and sound, and would not cost ono-third of tho route via the "Whau. .My opinion is based, not only upon a personal examination and survey of this route, together with soundings I took at short distances apart all tho way from tho head waters of the Tamaki River to its outlet into tho sea, the results of which I published as far back as 1893. but also upon an estimate of the cost of each route made by tho lato Mr. Blair, chief of -the Public Works Department, in January, 1887, which I havo had in my possession for the 'ast 20 years. In this report Mr. Blair quotes and endorses : tho opinion of Colonel Moulo, R.E., who, in Ins report of tho Otahuhu. scheme in 1860, gives tho length and average height to bo cut through, and says: "Of the practicability of connecting the two waters by means of a canal ,thoro is not tho slightest doubt." Mr. Blair goes on to say that bo thinks this, opinion of ; Colonel Moule im's also applicable to tho; Whau, route, < but when his estimate of tho cost of a canal via; the Tamaki is given, as compared with ono by the Whau, can any unbiassed. person say that the Tamaki route should not have at. least as full an; inquiry into its probable cost- as- a 'canal Via 'tho- Whau, before any decision is come to? This is all I havo claimed, but which Mr. Mounio and certain members of tho Harbour Board ;and Chamber :of '• Commerce apparently wish to frustrate by pushing the Whau schemo to tho front; to* the complete 'exclusion of tho Tamaki route, but which will not bo done if I oan prevent it. . It is the business of the Harbour Board . or tho Government, ; either separately or jointly, to thoroughly examine and practically test both 1 routes by boring, etc., and give estimates of their cost beforo a final decision is come to, and no private individual' or public . company should bo expected to do tkis foi them, j If . Mr. Mennie's Canal Promotion Company had gone to the same trouble to prove the feasibility ' and; cheapness of , the , OtaliuhuTamaki scheme as they havo regarding the Whau ' scheme, their .disinterestedness and impartiality. would have been a good deal more apparent. -.At tho samo time the thanks -of, the community are due to them for the largo amount of information regarding one of tho routes. ; I regard; tho late Mr. Blair's able report and estimate of cost of the two routes as being thoroughly impartial. It is :as follows:— ** For a canal to accommodate : coastal steamers of the Rotorua tvne (then trading to Onehnnga) via Otahuhu £250,000; via the Whau, £850,000. For a waterway , t between the two seas to allow the ■' largest mail steamer ' and man-of-war to go through tho canal at all states of the tide (if they could only bo taken over tho Jlaiiukau ■-. bar) , his o=imate via Otahuhu is £550,000; via the 'Whau. £1,250,000.'? In Hansard of September, 1900, Mr. Napier Bell's report is quoted suggesting that the canal via the Tamaki portage ought to.'be undertaken; that the distance across the isthmus is about 50 chains, and its ridge.about 40ft; above low, water, the soil, as far as can bo seen, being soft clays." These measurements are in almost exact agreement with my own, which I published seven years before. So there is also; plenty of professional opinion to support this routo. I am .sorry.Mr. ' Mennie should think I considered him prejudiced because of any property he -might own on the routo of the Whau Canal; that never entered my mind. I think, on the contrary, that it is for lack of more correct information and good judgment as to the merits of the Tamaki route. For instance, ho says it is about 16 miles further from the ; Auckland Wharf to the Manukau Heads via the Tamaki than via the Whau route, while Mr. Blair's report says it is only nine miles 'more. In the Hbbalo of May 13, 1904-, is your report of Lord Ranfurly's visit to the Whau route, under tho auspices of the Canal Promotion Company,' in which appears the following statement:— '.'The estimate of cost has not yet been arrived at, but it has been previously considered that, roughly speaking, it will not be more, than a-quarter of a million sterling." 'But in the Hekald of May 9, 1907, only three years later, at the meeting in the Chamber of Commerce with tho Minister for Marine, Mr. Mennie is reported as saying, for the Whau Canal Company, that, on a careful estimate, the whole cost would not be more than £788,000, or more than three times as much as their rjroyious rough calculation.; This vast difference is alone sufficient to warrant the demand for a careful and impartial-estimate of the. cost of each route before deciding on either. _ I prefer not to spend my money in arriving at such contrary I professional conclusions, even at Mr. Mcnnie's invitation. But ' I consider I have rendered far more; signal service to the community by originating and publicly advocating my system of a nighlevel canal, and miles of approaches thereto at continuous full-tide height, by means of locks, ever since 1893, which will save hundreds of' thousands ,of cubic yards of excavation and dredging whichever route may bo adopted, and- scores of thousands of pounds sterling. My system was opposed by civil engineers, and by the promoters and advocates of the Whau route, until 1903-4, when .the, Whau -Company v did me the honour of quietly appropriating and adopting my system, but without any acknowledgment to the originator of it. ■ Mangere, Mav 18. J. E. Tatlob.

THE LAND BILL. Sir,l should like to know, what -benefit tbe £50,000 limit in the proposed Land Bill would be to Auckland province, as there are only two estates beyond that amount in the province. I think we small farmers are all of one mind on the limit, question, that, no one person should hold beyond the amount of, say, £15,000 worth of land. If Mr. Massey and the Farmers' Union and the Opposition-General would stand out for the last-named lirfiit he (Mr. Massev) would have the support of all the small farmers. Small holdings am the only remedy for the rabbits and noxious weeds.- I hope when Mr. MeNab is in Auckland lie will be waited on by a deputation asking for r. much less limitation than that proposed in the present Land Bill. Small Farmer. Papatoitoi.

— .. .■ ~ " :T ■ [;-M ■ THE METHODIST DEFICIT. Sir,—ln /oar. isnto of tho ..17th iost ther® Appears a fitter signed by ' " F.C., Mount, ■;>' '<■ Eden," apparently • m connection with tha|j:/'gs! above subject, although it says v«ry littler that- is practical about" it. The letter is but a repetition of many f statements of a like kind which ono gees as ..regularly in the prow as the season# come and go. The writer wonders whether it is of any use • X wasting time in trying to answer such letfcera —for the 1 statements arc so foolish and so untrue—-and it is only a love for truth which suggests a rejoinder. " F.C." soon wanders . away from the Metlsodist deficit,, and -de- , plores the state of the poor (!) modern Orthodox Chuch, which ho things is the cause of it. The latter is a very wide term nowadays, and may mean all sort* of impossible things, in all sorts of queer-formed minds. However, whatever it may mean in "F.C.'s" mind, ho makes." the general charge that "congregations are made up ■ " chiefly of tho wealthy and well-to-do classes. ' Now, if tkre is any particular nocucn** that tho stay-awuy-frcm-church working man likes to talk, it is this. Ho fires orf a few Scripture texts, which, ho imageries, settles the whole btmm-ss—and the poor {•) Orthodox Church stands convicted of.'tho _ most grievous short as. He asks: "Arc our vestries drawn from the rank* of the working clashes? Do we not fin in almost every church cliques and class distinctions!" In reply to the former, as far as.the Church of England i.< concerned, yes, most decidedly yes, are the vestries mftdo no of working men. It is the working rasa who acts, almost invariably, both a? vicar's warden,-, people's warden, and working met* .-.id women who perform most of the choir woA and Sunday-school teaching. Has your correspondent been indulging in a sort of Rip Van Winkle sleep that he knows none of these things'? The writer of this letter does not profess to know much about the percentage of working men who find their way to the Methodist places ol worship, but is pretty certain they are well represented. Certainly in the Church of England is this the case, and much more so in the Mother Country, even than in Now Zealand. Can the poor vicar or minister always prevent cliques and class distinctions from forming? Not a hit of it, for, under the teachings of the most Godly men, these cliques sometimes develop. In most cases it is not tho fault of the incumbent or minister, neither is it tho fault of tho teaching, or minister's example, but. almost always it is due to tho inherent failings *it> human nature and to an incomplete conception and realisation of the Christian duty. Let these who realise tho&o Christian virtues more perfectly (who are at present standing, outside criticising) come in and join themselves unto tlio imperfect ones. By so doing they may assist, to leaven those who have not yet. reached their own ideal. The working classes are tho laity, and tho laity is part of the Christian ministryit cannot help itself. In the Orthodox Church the co-operation of tho laity with the clergy in divine worship is founded cm tho Scripture 'doctrine that all Christians aw members of a " royal priesthood," which has its duties towards God as well as the clerical priesthood. Tho Church of England does • not. recognise a system of worship in which the lay-members of tho Christian body (i.e., the working classes) have no share. Her services are of a responsive character, in which thero is nearly as much.'to bo said (' by tho congregation as by tho minister. For the latter to pray alone, and the former to remain silent, except during Collects, ami a few other prayers, is quite contrary t& the rule and intention of tno Prayer Hook; and tho habit is, in fact, a comparatively modern innovation, Iwrrowcd from Nonconformists, among whom the congregation aro not ordinarily required to open their lips, except when they are singing hymns, or saying- amen. " F.C." tells your: readers that " pure religion and undefined" is this: •'To visit the widow and fatherless in licit v aflliction." Just, bo; but does ho expect. that all this is to be done by his minister? .He writes as though the laity, havo no part of the above work. Why, sir, it is tiro work of tho whole Christian body, and not aiono that of tho minister Thousands, of vicars, deacons, and ministers of all ,denominations do this visiting—as much aa lies within their power—and, tho better, -V men they are, the less is it known''!tho : extent and scope of such work, for tho ; humble-minded man prates of it not. . One gets sick of the twaddle emanating from •• these so-called working men appearing from . | time to time* in tho press.' The Orthodox V ; Church is teaching exactly tho • same doetrino as St. Paul aid in the old days, and acting on it, too. But it is because so many f ' understand St. Paul's leaching so little that they cannot possibly expcct to not© tho connection. _ ■ ■ , - Now, . sir, it- seems as though tho posi- • tiort of the stand-outsido .working classes 'from amy of the Christian Ohurohos y is something like the Irishman who ,ing for a'job.' He walikUl lip tho"HgpTOtoli*~" * to a farmhouse and asked " whether thoi-o . ' was any work to bo bad?" and, oven whilst ! ho was being told "there was," walked ' ; . away, muttering •to 'himself, " Shiird i and there's nivor a job here; J thought not." - It is tho same with largo numbers' of people in Auckland and elsewherethey don't want to i trouble about Church or Church worship, they infinitely prefer tho critical attitude; cheap, sneers are a source I of delight to them. ; It is at times, perhaps 1 (but rarely), the fault of the minister that people should persuade themselves thoy aro - ' not welcome. \ Goodness only knows,; pretty well everything is done to dra\V people into a fellowship of brotherhood, in tno ma- v , jority of churches. And even whoro it is ■ — not so, in a few solitary , instances, it is tho . people's ; itialiariable right to claim Church membership. The spirit of stand- , aloofness finds vent in unfair, unjust, and untruthful criticisms (and always will). Tho fact that Methodism has reduced, by 10,000 since the last census does not. necessarily mean that all these peoplo havo given up corporate religious worship. It may not ' r represent a tiring of .religious teaching, but. it probably means that they have worshipped i elsewhere and joined otha:*-denominations, or perhaps returned to the Mother Church. In conclusion, F.C." says: "The world vj follows the spirit of mammon simply be- is cause ' the Church can- offer them nothing better!" What undigested clap-trap this- • „ is! But, there, Iwill not do "F. 0." the . injustice to bclievo ho really thinks so. If. T. Jkffebt, . . May 19. , >

Sir,— correspondent from MounV Eden, "F.C.," says much that is too true. It is almost a proof of the old saying; that wo can ; too easily see other's faults and not see our own. ;As a. Church of England man, I believe one Catholic and Apostolic Church to bo all true and faithful Christians throughout the world, from' Plymouth Brethren ,to Roman Catholics, on the principle that "if one member suffer, ail the members suffer with it." lam sorrowstruck at tho Methodist deficit, but thai may be only for a while! Sir, all that "F. 0." says of' the ; Churches' ih general now was said bv St. James, St. Poter and .- St. Paul in Apostolic times. Our Divino Master said, the same of defects in the professed servants of God a:; "F.C." Warner Churches and peoples here for in ' New ! Zealand. The Pharisees and the Jewish formalists, the unkind and ungracious t „*. Christiana of St. Paul's times, wore condemned, and lectured for the very faults which your correspondent rakes up" against the Churches and Christians in general in Now Zealand. Let us hopo, sir, that "F.C." is free, or nearjy so, from the faults he so. harshly condemns. Let us hop© that he is as kind, polite, and charitable to people poorer and weaker or less wise than himself. Does he call his poor or sick brothers, of any creed, into his house? Does he look with loving charity on those who differ from him? Is he living in the constant " imitation of Christ?" Is he {" F.C.") a 'concrete example of Christ," the ing and lowly Nazarenc? Docs he, if a member of the-"working class," live as the- Divino Carpenter of Nazareth lived on earth? He (Jesus) set us an example that wo should follow in His steps. Who did no sin, neither was ■ guile found in his mouth; when reviled Ho reviled , not again. Sir, a man who writes: in the tone of "F.C." should have few faults, and th© most superlative virtues should bo his! Whatever Christian body your correspondent "F.C." belongs to, ho is a too severe accuser of his brethren in general. Where does ho go to, hear a very different Gospel to Christ's preached in the Orthodox Churches? The Church of England tries to preach, teach, and live as followers of the Crucified Jesus, the living Saviour. Can "F.C." direct us to a Church ; where the faults he condemns do not exist? Is "F.C." free from them? Does "F.C." remember that rll: Churches have a frightful enemy and competitor in poor humao nature? ;: : .'a;;-;--",- ;.'-"'.''''•"./' Orthodox. ,