The Akaroa Mail. FRIDAY, AUGUST 29.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume 4, Issue 325, 29 August 1879, Page 2

The Akaroa Mail. FRIDAY, AUGUST 29.

In our last issue we published a telegram received by the member of the district from Mr Austin, the Engineer in charge of railway construction in Canterbury, while will interest many of our readers. It will be remembered that, in the debate on the Bill authorizing the construction of the Akaroa Railway, great opposition was shown to the measure in the Legislative Council. The chief ostensible grounds on which this opposition was based were the great length, and consequently great expense, of the proposed tunnel. Those who opposed it were so far successful as to stop the further progress of the measure. The Government, however, were induced to consider the railway favorably, and, thanks to the exertions of Mr Montgomery and Mr Macandrew, the Minister for Public Works, the line from the Plains to Akaroa Harbor was placed in the Railways Construction Bill, and so passed the Lower House. This being a money Bill, the Council could not alter it, and the only alternative, therefore, was either to reject the Bill, and so stop the construction of all other lines, or pass it as it stood. The Bill passed, and in consequence a contract was entered into for the first seventeen miles of the line.

In the face of the strong expression of opinion of the Legislative Council, however, as to the [probable enormous cost of the tunnel, the Minister for Public Works considered it expedient to ascertain if a line could not be laid out which would obviate the necessity of making such a long tunnel as that originally proposed, and instructions were, therefore, given for a fresh survey. That survey, it appears, has now been completed as far as Barry's Pass, and the Engineer, Mr Hardy Johnston, has promised to complete it to the harbor within a month. When that survey is completed, the Engineer in charge, Mr Austin, and his chief, Mr Blair, will have all the necessary data to enable them to form an opinion as to the best line to be constructed. We believe we are justified in stating that it will by no means follow that the line lately surveyed by Mr Johnston will be adopted. All the circumstances will have to be considered, Tn the meantime, it will not be out of place to lay the matter before our readers as it stands :—■

The line, as originally laid out by Mr Johnston, acting under the authority of of the Trust, led up the central Little River Valley almost direct to the mouth of the tunnel. That, tunnel was to be about two miles in length, and Mr Johnston estimated its cost at about £70,000. The Government Engineers, however, estimated its cost at a much higher rate ; in factj more than double Mr Johnston's figures. The probability is that their estimate was too high, and that of Mr Johnston below the mark.

The great advantages of the longer tunnel would be an easy gradient all the way, the fact that the line would lead up the main valley, and that there would be no difficulty in getting down from the mouth of the tunnel to the harbour. The cost of the tunnel would be the only set off against these manifest advantages.

' Now let us glance at the route which we understand Mr Johnston proposes as an alternative line. We believe this proposed new line will commence to ascend from Lake Forsyth some distance on the other side of Olphert's Hotel ; that it will then take a very circuitous route round by the upper part of Joblin's Valley ; thence gradually ascending until Barry's Pass is reached, where a tunnel somewhat more than a mile in length will be required. The line from the tunnel on the Akaroa side has not yet been surveyed, but it is manifest that, to obtain the same gradient, viz., 1 in 50, which is obtained on the Little River side, the same distance, i.e., ten miles, must be traversed before reaching the harbor. Some of the objections to the proposed new line are these :—lt will not be of the same public benefit to the residents in Little River as the other line. A branch line would have to be formed from the main valley to the point where the proposed line leaves the Lake. This would cost money. The new line would be considerably longer than the original one. There would be sharp curves on it; viaducts would be required at some places, and at many points landslips would be extremely likely to occur, which would have the effect of interrupting traffic, and causing a large expenditure. The cost of construction on the Akaroa side would be considerably enhanced, as compared with the line which the longer tunnel would render necessary. Another very important fact must not be lost sight of, and that is that every additional mile of railway constructed entails a certain additional annual charge for keeping the same in repair, as well as extra wear and tear of rolling stock, and consumption of fuel in working it. Besides this, as the rates for traffic consist of a mileage charge, every person using the railway, whether for goods or passenger traffic, has to pay an additional charge.

We acknowledge that the data in our opinion are not sufficiently exact to enable us to give a decided opinion on the respective merits of the two routes. Still, we consider it highly probable that the additional cost, present and future, of the longer line, will be found fully to set off the saving in the cost of the tunnel which would be effected by its adoption, while the advantages of the latter route are so great that, even if the cost were somewhat in excess, there should be no hesitation in adopting it. Of course the final decision will rest with tbe Government, who will be guided, no doubt, by the opinions of their engineers, and we have no doubt that all the pros and cons will be carefully weighed before that decision is arrived at. Meanwhile all those interested in the matter (and what Peninsula resident is not interested ?) should bestir themselves, and take care that proper representations are made in the right quarter before the final decision is arrived at. We have no doubt that the member for the district would lay such representations before the Government, and see that they were duly considered, if they were backed up by correct statements as to matters of fact.