RE MANUKAU-WAIKATO CONNECTION.

Franklin Times, Volume 9, Issue 649, 12 July 1921, Page 4

RE MANUKAU-WAIKATO CONNECTION.

(To. the Editor.)

Sir, —Mi( r attention has been drawn to your leader of the 17th inst. The position is that the Auckland Harbour Board, at the request of the Canal and Inland Waterways’ Commission, placed its views on this and other patters before the Commission in a series o£ resolutions, and at the invitation of the Waiuku Town Board and Chamber of Commerce, Mr McKenzie, member for Franklin and Manukau Counties, and myself explained those views to a meetingheld at Waiuku n the 9th inst. In doing this, in addition to the resolutions, figures and numerous data, on which the conclusions were based, were given by Mr McKenzie and myself, and, the views of the Harbour Beard were approved unanimously by the meeting. If your leader was framed upon . your representatives’ report of that meeting, then I must say he was guilty of great inattention. It should surely Rave suggested itself to you that view's enuncifcaed by the Auckland Harbour Board and approved by hard-headed business men of Waiuku must have had something more substana,tial and convnicing in them than your leader would imply. A copy of the resolutions of the Board are enclosed with this, and a perusal of them will show the errors of your statement. These resolutions indicate—

(a). That the estimate of 100,000 tons of cargo a year include both inward and outward cargo, not from Auckland to Huntly only (as you stated), but be-

tween the Waitemata and Wai-

kato River ports. (b). That the £300,000 fixed by the Board as an expenditure which prospective trade would warrant, includes not only connection between Manukau and Wai-

kato, as you say, but also be-

tween Manukau and Waitemata. (e> That the Auckland Harbour Board does not wish or suggest that it shall exercise control over the Waikato river administration, and the proposals are subject the dues necessitated by improved works on the river not being prohibitive. (d) That the security rate proposed covers, on a “classification” basis according to benefits, the whole Auckland harbour district, including the Auckland Isthmus and marine suburbs as well as the districts benefiting along the river and intervening localities, by this means ensuring a low rat© to be struck and that the scheme would not be financed unless the prospects of its being

self-supporting in a short time

were definite. (e) That the honour you do me in calling v it my “scheme” is not warranted, as it comprises the views of the Harbour "Board itself.

The suggestion, of a barge railway ic to pro*/!de complete, communication

within the cost cf £300,000 mentioned above, in case a canal from Waiuku to Waikato were prohibitive ov reason of expense, leaving this latter work to be carried out when trade has increased to an extent that would warrant the expenditure. "Sou state, referring to the suggested barge railway, “with such minor details as the

strength of axles to carry such loads (barges weighing 100 tons loaded) and horse-power of the locomotive required to haul them up inclined planes, Mr Wynyard very properly does not bother us.” The inference is quite incorrect, as the matter was fully discussed at the meeting. The line suggested is of heavier metal than the Government railway tracks,, yet on that line engines weighing 100 tens are used, developing horse power sufficient to draw many hundreds of tons of freight up inclines steeper than would occur on this route. The terminal inclines would be -worked by special winches on the principle of patent slipways used extensively for hauling vessels up to 600 tons dead, weight. I may mention that special slip railways have been built to carry vessels up to 2000 tons burthen. As I have stated, the Harbour Board resolutions were in the nature of evidence of its views for the Commission. Whether approved by the Commission or not it is clear that none of the other proposals were such as, considering the estimates of cost of construction, would give any chance of becoming self-supporting for a great number of years. In this category will, I think, be found the proposed connection between Taupiri (via the Mangawara stream) and the Piako, at all events that, judging by a recent! leader in the Ohinemuri Gazette at Paeroa, circulating largely over the Hauraki Plains, is the local opinion in a district that would be benefited by such a canal.'—l am, etc., W. H. WYNYARD. .

(Mr Wynyard suggests that if the leader in the Times which has given him offence was formed upon the report of the Times representative, be must have been guilty of great inattention. Unfortunately it was not. The Times had no intimation of the intended meeting, and consequently had no representative there. Our information was obtained from the Waiuku News, a journal that supports the proposal to link up the Waikato river and the Manukau harbour, and whose extended report we took to be correct, The News certainly is responsible for making Mr Wynyard say that 100,000 tons of goods would go annually from Auckland to Huntly, and if Mr Wynyard feels he has been misreported it is to the News he should address his remonstrance. We will, however, shoulder the responsibility of calling the proposed railway Mr Wynyard’s scheme because, when he explained it to the Waterways Commission, he specially stated that he was giving his evidence '■ as a private individual, and not on behalf of the Auckland Harbour Board. The attitude of the Times with regard to the proposed canals, or railway, is probably well known to most of our readers, but there can be no harm in briefly restating it. We have no objection to the construction of the canals. What v/e object to is the attempt to rate tlie land of the farmers to construct and maintain them Certain of the mercantile community, including the “hard-headed business men of Waiuku,” appear to have come to the conclusion that the canals would be a benefit to them. Probably they would. They also say they would pay. If they believe that there is no reason why they should not construct them in the usual- way commercial enterprises are established, by means of a joint stock company. Their individual investments in its shares would be the best measure of their belief in its profitableness. The farmers, who do not believe canals would benefit them and who do not believe they would pay, certainly do not desire to pay rates, for their constructioin and maintenance, and the Times will enver be a party to the attempts that are being made to force them to do so. With regard to the Waikato river—that is another story. The waterway is already there, and only requires a moderate improvement, that would probably not cost one-tenth as much as the canal. There is another phase of the subject also that must not be overlooked. The Waikato is the only highway to large areas practically unroaded, and forms the sole means of communication with the railway It has a value

quite apart from the canals, whereas the latter have no value apart from the Waikato. Common sense would appear to dictate that it is premature to advocate canals until it is established that the Waikato is susceptible of canalisation at a reasonable cost. —Ed. Times.)