TOWN EDITION. The Daily Telegraph FRIDAY, DECEMBER 23, 1881.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3269, 23 December 1881, Page 2

TOWN EDITION. The Daily Telegraph FRIDAY, DECEMBER 23, 1881.

MAILS CLOSE

At the meeting of the Harbor Board last Tuesday, Colonel Lambert made a speech tbat showed that be, at all events, keenly appreciated bis duties as a member of tbat Board. His remarks went also to show that in his opinion the Board bad not done its duty iv the past, and was not making up for lost time at the present. No doubt his remarks wounded the susceptibilities of the members, because it is the nature of all public bodies to regard themselves as perfect in their composition and efficient in the discharge of their trust. Hence Colonel Lambert's motion was treated with scant courtesy. It was seconded by Mr Tanner pro forma, treated with contempt by Mr Vautier, and subsequently negatived on the voices. When, however, an independent gentleman of Colonel Lambert's age and experience feels himself called upon by a sense of duty to take the stand that he has done single handed, it behoves ua to examine the ground of his complaint. It appears to us that his speech conveyed a charge, made " more in sorrow than in anger," that powerful influences existed in the Board to prevent, or, at least, to delay the advantages to be dtrived from the present works by the improvement of berth accommodation for shipping. Colonel Lambert said the harbor works were of such vital importance to Napier that he felt compelled to say that the Board was not doing what it should. He was convinced tbat if a breakwater or a harbor were constructed south of the Tuki

Tuki Napierwouldbe "snuffedout." And, he added, if this came about, it would be the fault of the Harbor Board for not having done its duty. He thought the people were being deluded by a belief that an artificial harbor could be constructed at the Aburiri Bluff, and that they were spending their money with a: view to strengthen that delusion. He did not think that MrGoodall stood upoa a professional equality with Sir John Coode or Mr Carruthera, and he, therefore, held to the opinion that the harbor works we have are the best adapted for this port, and onlj required to be completed to fit the harbor for the whole of our wants. Colonel Lambert is as much entitled to his opinions upon the practicability of an artificial harhor at the Bluff as any one else. There can, however, be no doubt about this : that the Board has soent thousands of pounds where hundreds would have secured all that was necessary * that it bos been culpably dilatory, and, apparently, shamelessly indifferent both to public opinion and to the requirements of the sbippin? trade of this town. Colonel Lambert's concluding remark that "no one connected with shipping should be a member of the Board" sufficiently indicates the spot where the shoe pinches. As a matter of course Mr Vantier could not maintain a discreet silence when Colonel Lambert resumed his seat. He failed to see in what respect the Board had neglected its duty; it had carried out the plane of the Government engineer, and it was now time to stop useleFS expenditure in the improvement of what nature had so designed that it could not be improved. Mr Vautier certainly deserves credit for consistency. He has from the first persistently opoosed the present works; he has continued to decry any advantage that might be derived from their completion ; as a shipowner he has by advertisements endeavored and not unsuccessfully to give the port a bad name. Have we far to seek for a reason for such action ? Mr Kinross, another member of ihe Board, is known to be the owner of one steamer and three sailing lighters. Increased accommodation inside the harhor, so as to ai'mit of evpn the partial loading and unloading of English ship l ), would mean 10 much less work for lighters. We therefore agree entirely with Cononel Lamhert in the opinion that it is not to public advantage to place men in positions where their interests clash with those they are supposed to protect. Cr. Swan, in proposing the toast of the Mivor on Wednesday night, said that " Mr Vautier bad done a good deal for the borough; in the Harbor

Board he had etood alone on many occasions against the country members in fighting for the interests of the town in respect to a breakwater." Thi9 was either apiece of ab«urd fhtfery, or an exhibition of ignorance as to what is to the interest of the town. Mr Vautier knows well enough that he need not fear competition in a branch of trade that he has made his own as long as we have a harbor into which foreign vessels are afraid to enter. If a breakwater were commenced to-morrow it would take very many years. ten at least before it could affect the character or the utility of the port. If he merited all that Mr Swan aaid of him, Mr Vautier would first make the best use of what we hnve got, and that which we have got—bad as it is—is capable of being converted, with the aid of dredging and wharves, into a commodious harbor. But Mr Vautier would not, if he could help it, spend a sixpence to improve that wbicb, apparently, it is to his interest to defame. If to cry out after a thing is done "I told you so," and to proclaim " stinking fish " to all the word, then Mr Vautier has been a public benefactor.