NORTH AUCKLAND RAILWAY

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 14219, 16 November 1909, Page 6

NORTH AUCKLAND RAILWAY

MORE ABOUT THE ROUTES.

CASE FOR THE WEST.

[BY TELEGRAPH.— CORRESPONDENT.]

. Wellington, Monday. Tub ' advantages claimed for the western route of the North.Auckland Main Trunk railway were enlarged upon by a deputation which waited upon the Minister for Public Works (Hon. R. McKenzie) to-day. The deputation consisted of Messrs. Gordon Coates, R. C. Smith, and W. P. Hunt (members of the Otamatea County Council), R. J. Bsiff (engineer to the Otamatea Council). Q. Bradley (chairman of the Raupo Drainage Board), and H. J. Slade (chairman of the Hobson County Council).

Mr. Slade said it had been suggested some time ago that the people interested should forward a petition in favour of the western routed He had, however, taken up the position that the Minister, having all the information before him, was in the best position to judge as to the respective merits of the two routes. Since then, however, he understood that the supporters of the eastern "mule had sent along a petition, and had asked for an inquiry by a Royal Commission. • The present deputation, therefore, was now proposing to place the other side of the question before the Minister. They claimed, he said, that the western route was the most direct and most central route. Some objection had been raised to this route on the. ground that it would touch navigable waters at Young's Point, but, in,reply to this, he said that the river would really act as a feeder to the railway if it was touched at, that point. It was also alleged that the necessary bridge would block the river traffic. The same objection . had been raised some years.ago when it was proposed to erect the bridge at Tangiteroria, but it had been shown that there was nothing in this objection, provided that the bridges were of a reasonable height. It was felt that if a Royal Commission were appointed it would only entail unnecessary delay and expense, whilst the verdict of the Commission would undoubtedly be in favour of the western route. • Mr. Coates quoted a remark made by the Hon. E. Mitchelson (a supporter of the eastern route); to the effect that the waterway on the western side was one of the finest in New Zealand. This was true, but if the railway touched the river at the proposed point it would lead to more water trade, and would probably open up new ports, as well as furthering the progress of those at. present existing. Produce could already be landed from Southern porta at a cheaper rate than that at which it could be landed from Auckland. The freight from Auckland Uras- about 30s a ton. as against 7s 6d to. 10s from the South. " The Auckland merchants, in order to compete with 'the Southern merchants, were now running a scow. The railway, by touching these waters, would also open up large arms of the river to light craft, and thus assist in swelling the revenue of the railway. Mr. Mitchelson had said that he knew the country 30 years ago, but conditions had changed sipce then, as Mr. Mitchelson would see for himself if he again traversed the district. It had been said that there were only 32 settlers residing in a certain part of the district served by the western route, but, as a matter of fact. 324 people were affected. It was not a fact that party politics had anything to do with the question of routes. - Mr. Smith spoke of the benefit that would accrue from the construction of the railway along the western route in regard to- the more rapid conveyance of stock to Auckland.

;■ Mr. Hunt said that* if the line went by the eastern route the people of Whangarei would not use it largely, as they would still have' to travel about eight miles to reach it, and they already had direct steamer communication with Auckland. Moreover, it would be running parallel with the Whangarei-Kawakawa line, and only eight or 10 miles away for a considerable distance.

Mr. St all worthy, in referring to Mr. Mitchelson's views, said , that it was probably to Mr. Mitchelson's interests, as an Auckland, merchant, to get. the railway as far away from the water as possible. Port Albert fruit wa- formerly conveyed by water to Helensville, but since the railway was made accessible it was being sent by rail from Tehaua. Mr. Mitchelson was chairman of directors of a local steamship company, and if the railway touched the water at Young's Point it might have the same effect on the steamer service as had happened at Port Albert. It was natural, therefore, that the directors would not desire the railway to go. there. The western route was the most central from beginning to end.

Mr. McKenzie, in replying, said that he had : examined the country closely, and he was satisfied that there could not be two honest opinions as to which route should be . adopted. From almost every possible point of view, the western route was the better one. As to the' suggestion of party, that had never entered into his head, as probably there were as many Government supporters on the Whangarei as on the Kaipara side. The line was now practically settled along the western route as far as "McCarroll's Gap. ' It would be some time before tHey got there, and there, would- be plenty of time to examine the country beyond that point, but, no doubt, the line would be continued on the west side of the Tangiliua Range. The official statistics he had obtained bore out the statements that had been made' to him by the deputation in support of the western route. There - was no intention of easing off in regard to the line, and the work would be pushed on as quickly as possible. In concluding, Mr. McKenzie said that lie had spoken on the subject to Mr. Mitchelson the other day, but the latter had informed him that he was not prepared to discuss the matter. • " I pay great respect to Mr. Mitchelson's opinions on all subjects," he added, " but I do not think that I would have any difficulty in satisfying him that it is better that the railway should go by the western route." ,