Original Correspondence.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 670, 10 February 1864, Page 5

Original Correspondence.

WEST COAST EXPLORATION.

{To the Editor oj the Daily Times.)

Sir—As I perceive you are still incorrect as to the "ground-work of the late official map," I beg to forward to you the statement of Mr Henderson, the draughtsman. Comparison by disinterested persons will prove Mr Henderson to be correct. Mr Caples' explorations were long before the public, and his personal exertions proved that lie possessed intrepidity and'moral daring ,of the highest order, which were not lightly esteemed both by myself and Mr Pyke, the Gold FieUs Secretary, to which latter gentleman Mr Caples had intrusted his papers connected with his discoveries. '-.".'

I respectfully submit that the real question »-.t issue regarding the country between Lafee'Wakatip and Martin's Bay, is, who was the first explorer, mapper, and publisher? The facts that I laid before your readers yesterday all tend to indicate the (person to be Mr P. Q. Caple?, and before any of us should attempt to ignore Caples' rights, he should be proved to have concocted his journal and map. I think no one will be so hardy as to attempt to do this injustice. Now, regarding your imputations of unprofessional and unfair conduct on my part in acknowledging and adopting Caples' explorations on the public maps, I would submit the following considerations, viz., that first explorers (however humble) have the-right of naming the geographical features. The right exercised creates a permanent record of their discoveries. Thus Captain Cook (once a cabin boy) named many parts of the world by his right of fir»t discovery. Cape Saunders, the moat prominent point in Otago, was so named by Cook. Captain Stewart, au^English "tar" (a.chip of the old English1 block, such as Captain Alabaster), gave his name' to the third and moai southlerly island in. the New Zealand group, just in the: manner that Captain Alabaster gave his name to the little island on the West Coast. 1 Captain Stokes, tin eminent marine surveyor, largely acknowledge I: the same rights and privileges to the humble but; vigorous explorers that preceded him on this coast. Thus we have the Bluff, ■ Kelly's Rock, CodSsh Island, Mount Anglow, Chuseland's mistake, the New Eiver—all names given by the first explorers, and so records of their enterprise. Again in the land surveys, we have, Mount* Stuart and Domett, the Arrow, Shotover and Locky Kivera, Lake Hayes, &c, names given by the original explorers of tbis territory, such as M'Kellar, Rees, M'Donald,■■■and others. The acts of naming these geographical, features by private explorers were held in no manner tj detract from the merits of subsequent surveyors, such as Stokes, Garvie or M'Kerrow. Intelligible, sketches have been given in by these expbrers,s and so were entered into the official maps and thus adopted. I may mention Mr Rees, the enterprising; explorer of Lake Wakatip. This gentleman, though a private individual, had the honor of naming most of the geographical features there. Thus they stand in the maps as a record of his prior explorations and public services. Tee official surveyor, M'Kerrow, sought not to blot them out, and take merit to himself. Then may I ask on what grounds; should the enterprising explorer Caples have the record of his services blotted out! Because he was an obscure man? Certainly not. This would be contrary to the practice of the first authority in such subjects, for we have the example of the Royal Geographical Society'of London to guide us. That body, while deploring the loss of Clapperton, the, master, gave the highest token of merit they could possibly bestow (the first gold medal) to the servant lliehard Lander, who continued his master's African explorations and brought them to a favorable issue. As you impute unworthy motives to me I must in defence say a word or two more. In the compilation of the map of i 864 I hold that I adhered strictly to professional practice, and while I did this in regard to the antagonistic claims of Mr Caples and Dr Hector, I was under the impression that Dr Hector's reputation could be in no way affected by an acknowledgment of the rights of preceding explorer?. Certainly the value of the Doctor's labors to the Province will not be depreciated by anything that Caples or Alabaster have done or ever caa do, and by pitching Mm against them you place your friend in an unamiable position. When a man of standing and repute contests a point with more humble individuals, they gain as much as he loses. * I am, yours, Arc, J. W. Thomson, Chief Surveyor. Survey Office, Dunedin, 9th February, 1864.

MEMO. »OR THK CHIBB1 SURVEYOR. That part of the map of the gold fields of the Province of Otago, 1864, between LakeWakatip and Martin's Bay. was reduced and drawn by me from the sketch map of Mr Caples and at a time previous to Dr Hector's map appearing in thii office. The West Coast, inclu« ding the mouth of the Awarau, was reduced and drawn by me from Mr M'Kerrow's reconnois* sance survey, which is enlarged from the Admi? ralty Survey. The cause of the slight inaccuracies that I have made is the minute scale of the published map of 1864. D. Henderson, Litho. Draughtsman.

[Mr Henderson may have drawn a copy of Mr Caples' sketch, but that Mr Thomson <j would have issued it as an official map without corroboration. we cannot believe. Mr Caples had not the facilities for mapping at command, and even if he had we are not to suppose that his observations were sufficiently accurate since he had other objects in view. It is true that Dr Hector says he is correct in his •' main features," but that does not mean that he was •orrect as to detail. In fact it was impossible that he could beso, since without a boat he could not have formed an idea of the shape and features of LnkeKakapo. If Mr Thomson has ignored Dr Hector's map s and kept only to Mr Caple's sketch, all we can say is, that he ha 3 allowed his feelings to altogether outrun his discretion. The fame remark applies to the alteration of the mouth of the Awarua. Mr M'Kerrow was never there, and the view he caught of it was not to be depended on sufficiently to found a Map. Besides, without casting any slur on Mr M'Kerrow, this gentleman cannot be deemed a sufficient authority to justify an alteration of the Admira'ty Survey. Dr. Hector's observations on the other hand would be received as authoritative by the Admiralty. The alteration in the boundary can easily be observed by comparing the positions of mount Aspiring and the Awarua River in the old and new maps. In his anxiety to clear himself, Mr Thomson forgets that the position he takes up is one that is likely to expose him to constant hoaxes. If he if to accept as official every sketch brought to him, he must nob complain if his official maps are regarded as of little value. In regard to the question of naming places, we are sorry that Mr Thomson cannot see the point at issue. It was not a matter of right we were arguiDg, si much as one of courtesy. If the names assigned by Dr. Hector were to be altered, the alteration should have been made with his connivance, and not by surreptitious interpolations in his report. We do not suppose Dr. Hector would ewe a straw what names were selected, but we should fancy he would not at all relish the assumption of the right to revise or make notes to his reports. Whoever made the foot notes must have been possessed of a considerable amount of assurance, and indeed we cannot understand why the report was permitted to go to the^ucvey Department before publication. For the rest Mr

Thomson may feel satisfied that however mu.h he may disregard JDr Hector's map and report, these will be considered superior to the sources of information he prefers. In declaring his independence of Doctor Hectors map, he simply throws discredit upon his own. The remarks in Mr Thomson's letter about station and position are in such questionable taste that we are sure on consideration he will regret having made them, aud will thank us for not further alluding to them. |—Ed. D. T.