The Timaru Herald. FRIDAY, JUNE 18, 1880.

Timaru Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 1791, 18 June 1880, Page 2

The Timaru Herald. FRIDAY, JUNE 18, 1880.

In the face of the very exhaustive report furnished by the Timaru Harbor Board to the Government, it is not likely we shall hear much more from Mr Blackett. The Committee of the Board have done their work con amore, and not only have they succeeded m demolishing the statements put forward as facts by the Colonial Engineer, but pursuing the subject further, they bring evidence to prove that apart from the particular locale on the coast line treated of by Mr Blackett, the work of degradation of the shore both north and south of Timaru has been going on uninterruptedly for yearß. Under the circumstances of the case, this is important evidence, for it doe» more to rebut Mr Blackett than if the Committee had confined themselves solely to the question of whether or not the Breakwater was the cause of the coast line fretting away under the action of the sea by Whales Creek and its immediate neighborhood. The testimony bearing on this point is incontrovertible. In the first place, there is strong evidence that the Breakwater has very little to do with the catting away of the coast where Mr Blackett says the action of the sea is so marked and so dangerous to the railway works. Over twenty years since, the earlier settlers observed the result of the action of the sea at that particular point. They observed that the creek now spanned by the railway viaduct was at times a channel, up which the sea rushed impetuously. They observed that from time to time huge masses of the clay cliffs to the north of, and between the two viaducts, tumbled down, having been undermined by the sea. Captain Woollcombe tells us that a survey peg he put down on the Maori Reserve m 1858, four^feet from the edge of the cliff had nearly disappeared m 1869, and m a few years afterwards not only had the peg entirely gone, but some fourteen feet more of the cliff had dropped into the sea. The other evidence taken all tells the same story, that the sea unceasingly made onslaughts on the coast line of Caroline Bay long before the Breakwater took any shape whatever. Of course Mr Blackett should have been made aware of all this, and it i& charitable to suppose he was ignorant of it when lie penned his report. But at the same time he can hardly plead ignorance of facts which came under the cognisance of the Government before the line of railway near Timaru was definitely deci'.ed upon, and long prior to the build-iv.-j of the Whales Creek viaduct. In tlje first place they must have been perfectly aware of the change effected by altering the line of railway as first laid out, inland and safe, to the present one directly bordering the sea, and dangerous. They must have known that a portion of this sea coast lino north of the Government Landing Service, and also that at Whales Creek were then reputed as dangerous places, and would very possibly require the erection of substantial works for their protection. As to the first named place, Mr Stumbles— at the time, 1872, engaged m building the railway — says that m that year strong recommendations were made to have a breastwork erected for its protection; and again when the erection of a viaduct over Whales Creek was m contemplation, Mr Jones, a contractor, was asked to

give an estimate for the construction of a sea wall at that very point. "We need hardly pursue thiß part of the subject further. Ample evidence lias been adduced to show that the knowledge m possession of the Government at the time the Tiinaru-Teinuka railway was built was quite sufficient to make them pause before they placed their railway m dangerous proximity to the sea. However, contrai-y to advice, contrary to common sense, they elected the more risky route, and now it is endeavored to saddle our Breakwater with sins of commission it can Dot have been guilty of, but on the contrary, according to Mr Stumbles, it baa proved a kindly friend to the Railway Department, by saving it a very expensive outlay for protective works north of the Government Landing Service. If the Committee had confined themselves to proving the innocence of the Breakwater m this matter of coast denudation and possible destruction of railway works, they would have done right good service, and have earned the thanks of the community. But they very wisely pushed their enquiries further. Allowing, as all must allow, that the Breakwater has had a certain share m causing an increased scour on the shore line of Caroline Bay, yet at the same time this inci'eased action of the sea at Whales Creek was of a temporary nature only, and that with progression of the Breakwater seawards, the trend of the destructive current would be diverted more to the northward, striking the coast where its impact on the shore could not possibly do any material damage to land bordering the sea, or — still less probably — injure the railway works north of Timaru. The evidence showed very clearly that from natural causes only, the sea m years past, and at the present time, steadily gained, and is gaining, upon the land m the vicinity of Timaru ; but Mr Scaly stated that the same destructive agency is at work at other parts of the eastern coast. As a case m point he instanced that only sixteen years ago he was engaged m surveying the coast line between the Waitangi and the "Waiho, and from the survey he then made, he is confident that now " tho sea has encroached considerably, washing away the cliff m some places as much as five or six chains m depth, and extending north from the mouth ofj the "Waitangi about six miles." This evidence, combined with, that previously obtained, is conclusive that the whole of our eastern sea 'board, more or less, is gradually being degraded by the action of the sea, thus relieving the Breakwater of the serious charges of destructiveness preferred against it by Mr Blackett. The shingle part of the enquiry is no less important, and the evidence adduced is also curiously at variance with the statements put forward by Mr Blackett. That gentleman prophecies all manner of evil from the Breakwater stopping the supply of shingle from travelling to the northward, and m doleful language presents a picture of the flooding of lands, and the destruction of the railway works, owing to the beach north of Timaru being denuded of its protective covering of shingle. But we find m the evidence before the Committee that the beaches north of Timaru have been from time to time denuded of their protective covering, and yet no frightful disaster followed. Captain Woollcombe says he has known the beach bordering the "Waimataitai Lagoon vary " from shingle to sand, and from sand to shingle, according to the weather." And again, Mr Stubbs reports that between the Rakaia and the Wakanui Creek there was on every occasion he travelled the sea coast road m the early days of the colony, sandy beaches between these two points. And further, oddly enough, m spite of the Breakwater's action of damming back the shingle to the southward, the same witness avers that the shingle bank separating the Washdyke from the sea " has been increasing m width, and I believe that it is now two or three chains wider than it was when I first saw it m 1853." On every point, then, we find Mr Blackett's report turned upside down and crushed out of very existence as a reliable, fair statement of fact. On its first appearing, the ideas propounded were so preposterous, and its object so transparently visible, that the Government m a manner disowned it and refused to act upon its suggestions. Now that the Harbor Board has taken up the matter and exposed the more than blunders made by the Colonial Engineer, we may rest assured there is no immediate fear of the Breakwater being blown up or that the Harbor Board will have to pay heavy damages to the Government for protective works to the railway executed at the foot of Caroline Bay or elsewhere.