NEW RIMUTAKA DEVATION

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 31, 31 October 1919, Page 5

NEW RIMUTAKA DEVATION

CONFLICTING OPINIONS EXAMINED

THE FACTS (By Coleman Phillips.) Although, it would bo much better if your comv-poiidcnt, "Oiie Who was uit the Survtiy" signect hw nniue ] in order to let us nil know wlio he is, in this important controversy, which is now becoming better wulerstooil by r.he Wellington public, yet h.is erroneous statements eimhle me to sheet the issues home, ami ina.<e the Mayor, Jlr. J. i'. Luke, realise wherein he is iiuiiitentionaLy injuring the city's highest interests. . i'uri'hermore, tlie time luia now arrived for Air. K. \V. Hohuts, the En-gince"-in-Ch.ef, to remember that he is our cliiei' public wuii'S officer, aud that it is for him frankly to tell the public, not only that the lb'9B turvej was wrong in every particular (as alleged now by "One Who was on the Survey")' but also that his own fcheu summing up of the pos.tion was wrong. His summing up is clear and distinct. The following are his words, and I make no apology for quoting them fully, as I think 1 am performing a great public duty in putting the issues fairly before the publ.c. Air. Holmes 'then resident engineer) stated with regard to the AVainui deviation:

Tho chief points in favour of this route are: (1) Shorter by 3 miles 17 chains than constructed line; (2) low summit level—viz., 560 ft. üboyo sea level; (3) only one 'bridge of any magnitude—viz., that over the Jlutt Kiver; (4) easily maintained; (5) very easy grades; (G) does not interfere with present lino through Feather6ton.' Now the great icsues before the city are three: 1. Whether the trair. service via thb Kimubika shall crawl over the hills in *he wretched manner of the past ffl Veal's; or through them by tunnelling. 2. Tho city milk supply. 3. The. city iratev supply. As to tho first issue: Your correspondent's present statements contradict abthe then Biii?inM'r-in-Chief's (Air.' I\ S ITay) report. Air. Hay showed how impcssibl'e it was to iessen the grade between th*, Upper Hntt and Knitokf. Throe separate linos cf deviation nro shown on'tho plan, but the fact remain-, cd, that all traffic would h.ivo to be /carr'fd B.'iGft. above Wcllinßton to reach Kaitoke, and very nenrly 1000 ft. to get over the Tnuhereuikau divine. That was why (in Wellington's interests) I abandoned the Tauherenikau deviation, after proposing it. Now "One Who was on tlie Survcv" goes back upon every chain of work then done, and proposes that a new l'ne can ba obtained from the Upper Hutt to TCaitoko, via the l'akuratahi, bv abandoning the present Kaitoke Station for a site 200 ft. lower. If this is true, why were wo not told so by Messrs. Hay and Holmes 20 years ago hi their report? My opinion is, that it is true, although not ol any advantage to Wellington's highest interests, which demand the total abandonment of tho "crawling over the hill," or may-I dub it for short the "Crawling" as against the "Tunnelling" policy. L'or the crawling policy will inevitably throw a part of .Wellington's future trade into Wanganui or Taranaki ports. Jt so happens that Air. W. J. O'Aleara, manager of the Carterton branch of the W.l''.l'.A., our foremost fisherman of these parts, had olteu said to mo, "Why cannot you let the rail deviation eoiuo up the l'akuratahi to Kaitoke. There is a capital grade to be had that way." And I nave answered: It cannot bo done. iWessrs. Hay and lloiinos, our chief engineers, tried it, and their reports prove tliat- it cannot be done. But what if their reports were wrong—ns wrong as the work of the previous chief engineers, who gave the present wretched Summit railway abortion over tho Hiuiutaka, from which we have suffered so patiently for -10 years?

Your correspondent says: "That the grade from Kaitoke to Woodsido is all good/ solid country, with good nnd easy curves." *The 1898 survey shows two viaducts in that section,; one 250 ft. high and the other 159 it. 1 contend that an express service cannot be maintained over such viaducts. The high winds in the liimutaka••constantly necessitate breakwinds in places along tho present line, and ballast trucks attached to cur passenger trains. Can a 250 ft. viaduet bear the wind pressure of a break-wind like vhose in present use? I hardly thinkso. According to your pr:-se:it conespondeiit, there are no such -iaduots. What becomes, then, of Aiessrs. Hav and Holmes's IS9B survey? All we can .do is wait for the present survey, nnd see •v'iio is right.

Admiral Lord Jellicoe gives us a practical seaman's report as to what we should do to establish a great Pacific Float for our own protection. But there is a higher issue than that, \iz.:-Lessen-ning Pacific armaments. This is exactly my position. Tho late survey may show (I do not say it will) that the 1898 survey was all wrong. But my contention is that Wellington's highest interests are superior altogether to these erroneous surveys, and present Summit mistakes, and that we must tunnel through the hills, which the wise heads of Canterbury did 50 vears a«o, at the initiation of our railway policy, by connecting Christchurch and Lvtteiton with a three-mile 17-ehain tunnel (a great work for those days, and far greater than an exactly similar length of tunnel at Wninni would bo now), and not crawling over the intervening hill. lour correspondent says "That (he Jauhereniknii deviation will run on 1 in 70 and 1 in 80 grades, instead of 1 V,n 13 aml l m ]5 - as in the hi]l n(W " \\ liy was not ■ this shown in the 1898 survey.? 1 am very glad to hear such a statement (if correct), as tho Masterton people are not considering tho rest of the Wairarapa by having the Taitheronilcaii, and not the Wnitiui deviation constructed

He further asks me:, "Why I say that an express service could not be run at 30 miles an hour via Tauherenikau." My reply is, that Air, Daniells, 'of Maelerlon (late Harbour Board chairman), told me that Air. It. W. Holmes assured him that an express service out of llio city could only be run via Wainui. The cost ft the AVninui deviation in IS9B wns estimated at ,£103,517. That bv the Tauherenikau at .£385,000, being the average cost of the three lines then surveyed.

Your correspondent quite ignores Air. Maxwell's deviation via Pigeon Bush. 1 havo not done so, but shown that the Alaxwell tunnelling would almost equal m length that by the AVninui. Also that the Pigeon Bush line continues the old bad policy of crawling over hills, Your correspondent says: "That'no selfrespecting engineer, would run a lino along a narrow strip of land between a large lake and a mountain runae." This refers to the short section from "Mr.Matthews s | homestead (AVnirwignmaij iffld Cross Creek. To anyone who knows (lie country, could any vMi statement be more uncalled for?

He also insists: "That the Wainui deviation cannot lie less Minn 40 miles in length (in, place of S» miles CO chains), and, indeed, near 50 miles, as it will have to cross the lake, and follow it nloni the car>forn side, crossing rivers, etc., 'passing Mr. Bidwill's homestead; thence on and passing Mr. Phillips's old homestead at the (vtinll; «»;.-, taking a left angle turn buck to Feathcrston." Could anyI'lung' possibly be more erroneous?

Ho further proposes to make Feathorston a branch line, as that town litis always been the trouble in onr deviation. I wonder what the people of the Lower Valley will shy to. this! I strongly advise them to be up mid doing, when they see the danger ahead. It is hardly fair to leave the battling for (ho right alone la me. There are plenty of them, more able than I ain, to say what is bciit. If they do not do w> judgment will go against them by ' default. The Dominion has fairly kept an open column on the question, and allowed each side its say. This matter is actually a hundred times more important to Wellington and AVairarapn than the hydro-electric question. My wish for 2? years past has been to throw it into its right perspective. Mr. Luko lias openly stated "that on no account; must the Wsinui deviation he entered upon.'' So Featherston and the Lower Valley peoplo may soon find themselves relegated to a branch service. I can nsauro the Mayor, Mr. R. W.

Holmes, and your correspondent thnt I have every respect for their opinions, but my wish is to act for the right. Ono person cnu do very little good in this life. Ho can onlv contribute his small quota of good. That is why I trouble tho newspapers at all. Fentiierston happens to lie almost tho chief wool-re-ceiving station in tho Dominion. During tho war it w.is one of tho busiest stations in the Dominion. To relegate it into a position of a branch line is absolutely 11 mistake. I must conclude my reply to the questions your correspondent'has raised re the city's water and milk supplies in another article.