Untitled

New Zealand Mail, Issue 243, 15 July 1876, Page 12

The question as to whether the mail steamer City of San Francisco did or did not touch on the bar when last she left Port Chalmers, is, in consequence of the efforts of some foolish writers on both sides, being magnified into an utterly undeserved importance. It is qtiite plain that the running of enormous ocean steamers up and down the coasts of this colony, for the conveyance of a couple of dozen passengers and a number of mail bags, is quite ridiculous, and that the sooner such a service is put an end to the better, in order that it may be replaced by one which shall leave the coastal portion of the service to the colonial steam fleet, that can do the work more cheaply, and far more efficiently. There seems indeed to be a pretty unanimous opinion throughout the colony, that the change we have indicated should be brought about; and in due time we have no doubt but that it will be accomplished. Sir Julius "Vogel, in the House on Thursday afternoon, pointed out that as New South Wales would not at present consent to any alteration in the terms of the contract, some time must elapse before the Government of this colony can consider the change which so many deem desirable. It would be well if those writers who, honestly enough, we expect, are anxious to see the desired alterations accomplished, would lend their gigantic intellects to advocating the cause, without squabbling like so many schoolboys over the merits of Port Chalmers. The Otago papers, instead of discussing the main question from a colonial point of view, are incessant in their endeavors to show that Port Chalmers is one of the finest and safest ports for entrance or exit on the globe ; and, as they have to reason of course in direct contradiction of fact, their's is a somewhat difficult task, and compels them to substitute misstatement and abuse for argument. On the other hand, some Northern journals seem to think that it is only necessary to prove that a mail steamer touched on the Port Chalmers bar, in order to show that the present coastal service should not be continued. The result of all this is that certain literary representatives of different towns are now scolding each other with all the virulence of fishwives and the copious vocabulary of Old Bailey lawyers. This is a state of things much to De deprecated, as tending to keep alive that wretched district petty jealousy which has often been the curse of the colony. There is no doubt whatever but that Captain Waddell and his officers are distinct in stating that the City of San Francisco did touch on the bar the last time she left Port Chalmers, and, considering the character of these gentlemen, there is no reason to believe that they are mistaken. But we would point out that whilst the inadaptibility of Port Chalmers for such vessels as the City of San Francisco is a very good reason why the ocean-going mail steamers should not go there, it has really nothing to do with the main question, which is, that no matter how excellent a harbor Port Chalmers may be, the coastal service in connection with the Pacific Mail Service, as it is at present carried out, is thought by the majority of colonists to be perfectly unnecessary, and, indeed, not a little ridiculous, compelling as it does steamers of two thousand tons to do the work that could be done far more efficiently by vessels of

quarter their size. This, as we have said, is the real question at issue, and its solution will not be advanced by mutual abuse on the part of the respective New Zealand ports, or by calling each other unpleasant names.