Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVIII, Issue 8010, 15 February 1887, Page 2

Mb John Pender, chairman of the Eastern, and Eastern Extension Australasia and ‘ China Telegraph Companies, has issued a circular criticising the scheme for a Pacific Ocean Cable. His criticisms are those, of course, of the head of an established business on the proposals of a likely rival. Mr Pender denies that, if the new scheme were carried out, it would attain the object for which it is advocated, namely, “a substantial and permanent lowering of the tariff, and the

providing of a reliable alternative route, especially in time of war.” The promoters of the Atlantic Gable propose that in consideration of an annual sdbSidy of LIOO.OOO made Up by the Various colonial Governments, the irate fdr messages should be a woi-'d. Mr Render siiys th&t Ms compknies 3)aVe oneted a 4& irate in consideration pt L75,0f11) a jfdkr. Mr Pende’r stktps Ifist it is admitted that to lay k slngls line Of cable from Vancouver to Australia Will coat L 2,000,000, but to duplicate it, as in the case of the , existing lines, would cost douftlo that sum, and infil this is do’tie the new line cannot oner the tsiC&a kocirity as the old. : Ho considers the estimate of L 50,006 a year for working expenses as too low by' L 85.066, and says that, assuming the! Pacific cable would take half tfie coasting; traffic with 100 percent. inei;eite In consequence of the reduced tariff, the result would he St llet revenue of L 175,000 a year, or only just enough to meet de-i bentura interest and working expenses. With regard to the argument that the new line would be-of great advantage in time of war, Mr Pender denies, that it would be t possiblefor the Imperial Government.to protect cables laid across the Pacific, far away from usual routes of Vessels and from coaling stations. He says also that the cable would necessarily have to stretch across enormous nnsurveyed depths, ending on coral reefs, and would consequently boliable toconstant interruptions, which would render maintenance costly and difficult. As it is likely that the Australasian colonists will be asked to provide an annual subsidy of Lloo,ooo New Zealand’s share of which, according to population, would be L17,454—it is well that all arguments for and against the new scheme should be duly considered. No one has a greater interest than Mr Pender in discouraging it, but he gives figures and arguments, and it is the business of the promoters of the scheme to show that he is wrong before they can expect the support of the public.