The Opunake Times. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1895. OPUNAKE WHARF.

Opunake Times, Volume II, Issue 63, 8 February 1895, Page 2

The Opunake Times. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1895. OPUNAKE WHARF.

We publish a letter from Mr A. H. Moore on the above subject in our correspondence columns. He would like to know what the term “ beautifully indefinite,” which we applied to his previous letter means, and we cannot do better than answer it from the “beautifully indefinite” letter before us. Mr Moore states that “he endeavored to get a better scheme and a stronger company floated, foreseeing that disaster was more likely to attend a weak company. , . . Disaster has come upon the company with all its allotted shares paid up.” Now that is what we call “ beautifully indefinite.” Half a truth is said to be worse than a lie, and that is what this statement of Mr Moore’s amounts to. The present company has a nominal capital of £SOOO in 5000 shares ; 1800 of these shares have been subscribed and fully paid up, leaving 8700 shares, representing £3700 capital, still to work on. It only requires 1000 of these shares to be taken up to do the work of re-erection and a certain amount of extension, which would still leave 2700 shaves of the present company unallotted. In the face of the facts we should like to know what Mr Moore means by a stronger company to do the work. We may mention that the general impression, at the time he proposed the company with a £20,000 capital in lieu of the present one, was with a view of testing the Lewtbwaite patent breakwater for which Mr Moore was understood to be the local agent. We shall pass over the little compliments which Mr Moore pays us, as we think we shall be quite safe in leaving them to the judgment of the public. Mr Moore blames the company for not taking any steps, during the nine months which have elapsed since the unfortunate collapse of the jetty, to reinstate it. Mr Moore must know that this statement is untrue, as we cannot believe that a man who takes such an interest in the welfare of the dislrict, as he professes to do, could possibly be unaware of the action taken. Two surveys and two reports have been made and the reports published. A deputation proceeded to Wellington from Opunako, and subsequently the Chairman of the company visited Wellington and attended to the business of the company when there. Possibly these steps should not have been taken without first consulting Mr Moore and obtaining his approval, and although reported in the press because they were apparently not officially notified to Mr Moore he considers that no steps have been taken. Mr Moore asks us if we have a scheme to out with it and let the district hear it. We think the district, with the exception of Mr Moore, knows it already. Ours is ; Put your hands in your pockets, as we see no other way to get the work done. If he has a scheme which will save the people putting their hands in their pockets let him out with it and let us hear it. He says the district must step in and endeavor to preserve and extend the remains of the wharf. What district does ho refer to ? Be plain, Mr Moore, and do not utter such unmeaning generalisations. How is it that the opportunity existed for so many years, prior to the formation of the Wharf Company, for him to have used his foresight and formulated a company or scheme to provide w'hat he now considers such an essential work -without his having taken any steps on behalf of the public or place to accomplish it? Consideration for the Lighter Company, we presume. Show a little originality, Mr Moore, and strike out something new emanate ing from your own brain, as carping at actions of other people, whilst the easiest method of obtaining cheap notoriety, is really very mediocre employ moot.