The Opunake Times. FRIDAY, JULY 6, 1894. THE JETTY.

Opunake Times, Volume I, Issue 2, 6 July 1894, Page 2

The Opunake Times. FRIDAY, JULY 6, 1894. THE JETTY.

In our last issue we published the report of Mr J. B. Stewart, the damage done to the jetty by ifflffitredo, which caused the two outer spans to collapse in April last and the next span to go a few weeks ago. From the report it will be clearly seen that the damage is due solely to the ravages of the pile worm. This is made clearer still when we consider that their work has been going on, doubtless, from the very time the piles were sunk into pooition, and that for some months before the collapse there was very little solid timber to resist the lateral pressure of the sea, yet the structure stood in position. It is evideut then that, as far as the sea is concerned, a much lighter structure would be quite sufficient to withstand it, and on this account apparently the engineer recommends the use of totara, which is,'we believe, only half the cost of ironbark. The great mistake has proved to be putting down the ironbark piles in the first instance without ha'ng them prct cted with copper. Such steps for security had been taken in other places but were omitted here. The question then arises, whose fault is it ? In order to answer this we must take up the past- ; history of the harbor question a little. When it was sought to raise a further loan for the New Plymouth breakwater,, the people in this part of the district offered strenuous opposition to the proposal, and placed the claims of this port before the settlers, with the result that it was acknowledged that harbor works could be successfully carried out here at a very small cost compared with New Plymouth, and which would be infinitely superior, A survey of the bay was made by Mr Thompson, and plans and specifications prepared showing that for an outlay of £70,000 a perfectly sheltered harbor could be constructed. This, however, was considered beyond any moans which?the district was likely to have for many years to come. Then the Government had plans prepared for a jetty, estimated to cost £2OOO, and £2OOO were placed on the Estimates to do the work, but like many another vote was allowed to lapse. At the time that this money was placed on the Estimates settlement was very small in the district compared with what it is now, and if the Government then considered it their duty to assist the district to this extent how much more, in the interests of settlement, are they now bound to do it ? The project lay in abeyance^for some years, until, in IS9O, seeing that the Government did not apparently intend taking any steps the settlers resolved to see what they could do. A limited liability company was floated and 1800 shares were subscribed. The Government promised a subsidy to the company of £7OO, but eventually granted a further £SOO. A condition of the grant was that the plans prepared by the Government engineer should ba followed, aud the Government so fkr took charge of the whole affair that not a pc-mry Avas to be paid to the contractor, either of Government subsidy cr shareholders' money without the consent and approval of

the Government engineer. It therefore became, in reality, a Government work, which the people who subscribed shares were subsidising. Further, the condition was fixed that a charge of 5s per ton was the maximum that could be charged as wharfage, which meant a saving of 4s per ton, as by the lighter service previously in force it cost 9s per ton for landing charges. We therefore contend that it was and had been admitted a Government work. That the Government engineer's plans having to be followed implicitly took all choice or.direction off the shoulders of the company. That, as there was no provision for protectiug the piles,, the fault lies solely with the engineer who drew the plans. That such engineer was the servant of the Government, and that the Government are responsible for the actions of their servant and that they should in all fairness, if such a thing exists, assist in making good the damage caused through the neglect or ignorance of such engineer. Our member is pressing the matter oh the Government at present, and we hope ere long to be able to report a favorable reply.