REPLY TO MR BIGNELL.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12711, 23 March 1911, Page 7

REPLY TO MR BIGNELL.

To the Editor

Sir.—l have hitherto looked upon Mr A. Q. Bignell as one of Wanganui?s most progressive- citizens, and I must confess to have been taken aback :by his letter which appeared in your issue of yesterday and intended as an answer to mine. At the outset, I may say that I made no mention of what had been accomplished by t,he Maui. I simp'y pointed out .-tjiat* Gisborne was gc-ahead enough to purchase a dredge, and, if results have been as Mr Bigliell says, I am very sorry for Gisborne. though I am endeavouring to get to the bottom of this matter of the dredge's alleged failure. The figures Mr Bignell quotes may be right or they may bo wrong. I mentioned that there were a number of people m Gisborne (in fact members of the Harbour Board) who were decidedly against a dredging policy, and possibly die prominent citizen Mr Bignell quotes was one of these. Mr Bignell surely does not think on the same lines as ■■this gerwJemau with reference to Wanganui. He must admit that the small experience of dredging we have had here* with- the bucket dredge has been j_ good one as otherwise there would ■tiie- flats" be now but for it? If he does not, Mr Bi<inell is not the man 1 take liim (fa be. No donbf- every port which is progressive enough to obtain an expensive dredge, especially a small port, finds its annual upkeep a serious item of expenditure But as I suggested in my letter, surely generally speaking, the money spent in this nay would be made up" by the benefits •obtained from a bcr.ter elites of vessel v'.sitinjrbere s ny We coulcl accommodfite within the harbour, whether it be at, Castleeliff or at town, the liners visiting our roadstead, anl now paying practical!y nothing towards tlhe'*n£ venue of die Board, would not the revenue rise with a jump? And how is tvs "harbour" to b« made othcrwi.se than by dredgmg? And for how long i* this work to ho left before a commencement is made? Surely we are not comg to nave the Field's scheme business over again, whereby a harbour

"M Promised for a small amount of money, and years were Masted ovor fiOiiabWina about it, Ido not snv <ih^ b'.eU s ficheme was no aood, but that it was too late to think of it. If tlio v-ork was undertaken many y eais a «r,> p./js.blv tlia port would have been^a ftood deal further aliead than it is. But U- VtVf-UUn° n for + tlie intorost ni^sed Hobably have gone in the way of its fathers. Field's mn.le tlie.n do rft'" ol>dei; hold then- seats Ac should know by now that, a noi j ; cannot be ma ; 1o of Wnn^.nui spondniff a deal of money, and the sooner we commence to sj^d it the hetter-nt least, 1 presume evorvbolv wants a harbour, especially Hio«« *iih large interests a* stake. If tho town Pr?P SSIVf\ eMOUQf]I t0 Ko "i for trjim. the T) W , P i o s]lonW b gessivo still, to pnsli f OI -,va,r7 the conduction of the harboni. Would tho various Harbour Boards wHoh We heon in office t'.e^e ,nanv voark J-^ nlloworl tho improvement of tl,-. port tX |«ra ff on hi i^ woy it ]ias ,; f it j d lipon tlu-ir own bnsinoss? T think ™ cn.n take Mr Hatrick's opinion as 1 eior some worth, thoimh he mnv be das^ od j.s an "^mateiir enjrinoer" for advorah.i.n: dr.?dmng as ho has c7on«» "ml I Imve been very niuoli stnwk with 11k- tone of his Jettons. [ .smicov^lv W that Mr HatnV* will oll^hVni-.-elt to bo nominated for a ,^nt nn tlm lioard, nsh? would be a splendid »?- ZP^ i*",- 1!' If " 'nlain tint iho Ronrd did not, exnect this crop of anonymous and o'lki- corro.snon lence, wb'ich has shown that ihe Board X in a yerv unprepared state to m ™>t Uio Rectors For many years tl,I Roarcis have boon trying, "in a tired sort of. way. to reach the "min. eninrn .. ° * r,«? 01% aml ?'OIV far bnro t,».— got-18f+. on the bar. How muc h

longer at the same rate will it take them to obtain 36ft. What has done the most good here for shipping? The dredge has .—Yours, etc., DREDGE.