Untitled

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume II, Issue 118, 25 May 1863, Page 2

The accident which happened a short time since to the schooner Sea Shell has led to a great deal of unnecessary talk, and that, too, of a nature most unascountahly bitter. The evidence adduced out of this talk does not, however, throw much light upon the subject. One says that the version of the story published in these columns is wrong, and another says it is right. One party, more righteous in his own eyes than the rest, accuses us of want of “ honor and honesty” in this matter;

but it strikes us that those two rare articles do not happen to have much to do with the matter. The question is, did or did not the Sea Shell run foul of the breakwater ? If the Herald’s honest correspondent had accidentally found his honorable body in the place where the vessel happened to strike, it is our opinion that that worthy would have found that what little virtue there is in him over and above the common stock laid in by his fellows would have, under those pressing conditions, been let out of him in one irresistible squelch; and he would have discovered, when too late, that although an honest man is the noblest work of God, yet that he is not so tough as a piece of Mr. Wright’s piling. It is certain that the vessel in question did run foul of the breakwater, and it is therefore evident at a glance to all unprejudiced individuals that the extent of the damage done was to be attributed, whether that damage be great or small, to the fact of the vessel, from some cause or other, at this time not explained, running into the breakwater.

The question turns upon the harbour itself. For any person to stand up in defence of our harbour in its present state is ridiculous in the extreme, for unless they are immediately interested in the maintainance of that harbor in its disgraceful condition, there can be no doubt but that they must at once pronounce that it is indeed a melancholy sight. We are not supposed to be up in nautical matters, but it nevertheless appears to us that a knowledge of that particular branch of science not having been vouchsafed to us does not materially affect our judgment in a matter which depends entirely upon the decision of our own eyes. We are inclined, therefore, upon the whole to think that it is hardly necessary for a man to have passed Trinity House, or circumnavigated the globe on his own account, to be able to form an opinion as to the difference between a vessel running into a breakwater, and a breakwater running into a vessel. We believe, notwithstanding our want of nautical skill, that this last catastrophe has not, up to this date, been recorded as having come to pass.

A person signing himself “Win. Lechner, 1 ’ writing in the Herald, seems to take an active interest in the subject of the collision in question ; but who he is, or what he is, we are at a loss to make out, —we never before heard of such a party ; hut for all that it appears that he is laboring under a confusion of ideas upon the matter, and allows the subject of the collision to merge in rather a foggy manner into the subject of the harbormastership. Who knows ? perhaps Wm. Lechner has an eye to that office. However he does not assist us with any new light upon the matter under discussion, and in fact does not appear to know any more about it than his neighbours. If a vessel runs away with the pilot we are not surprised to hear that officer say that she is unmanageable; but if a pilot runs away with a vessel, then on the other hand we are not surprised to hear people say that the pilot is unmanageable. The question again is, which of these two conditions is the right one in the case before us. It is our intention to point a moral to this tale, without which intention we should not have taken further notice of the subject. The moral, then, is this. Our Harbor, as we call it, carried away by the magnificence of our imagination, is a mistake ; it is not a harbour, and never will be a harbor unless some steps are taken to make it one. We believe, and have good reason for believing, that if it was possible to do anything with the public money without giving rise to a job, nothing would be easier (minus the jobbery) than to make a respectable and safe receptacle for vessels of tolerable tonnage (say 300) of this harbor of ours, and that, too, at a cost quite insignificant by comparison with those sums already spent upon it to no purpose. The Iron Pot, that sacred and time-honored vessel, that fountain of mercantile bliss, will Lave to go, that’s certain; its doom is fixed.

If we may fairly judge of the amount of nautical knowledge, and knowledge of bar-

Lor works and harbor management, contained in Napier from the quantity of opinions of one sort or another generally volunteered upon these subjects, whenever opportunity offers, it seems rather remarkable that we have not, amongst so many good judges, one whose opinion is considered of sufficient value to warrant its being asked. It would seem from this, that although there are many councillors, there is not much wisdom amongst them.