PATEA MAIL PUBLISHED Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1880. BATTLE OF THE WHARVES.

Patea Mail, Volume VI, Issue 534, 17 June 1880, Page 2

PATEA MAIL PUBLISHED Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1880. BATTLE OF THE WHARVES.

The Harbor Board have resolved to again apply for an order in Council authorising the construction of wharfage, in four sections, on the town side of the river. The point was carried at the Board meeting only after a long and keen discussion, and practically by a casting vote. Mr Gibson, who opposed the application, pleaded that it might curtail the extent of wharfage to bo provided by Government in connection with the Railway, and he desired delay. He also said there was a unanimous feeling that wharfage would have to be provided on both sides. Other members who supported his opposition coincided with that view. The difference, therefore, is not as to the fact, but as to a detail. That detad takes diverse shapes with different members. Some professed to fear that the Railway wharf, for which tenders were then advertised, might be curtailed by the Harbor Board pressing at that moment for power to erect town-side wharfage; so that to lessen the risk they ought to postpone the application till tenders were accepted for the railway wharf, thus binding the Government to complete their present plan. Mr Gibson went farther, and said the Board’s money should be conserved for extending the breakwater. We take that to be the real reason for his opposition to the town-side wharf. It is a perfectly good reason, and could have been discussed on its merits if advanced boldly. We wish to point out that, though the motion for an 1 order in Council was carried only by a castingvote, every member of the Board said something more or less favorable to a town-side wharf. The project, therefore, cannot be regarded as carried by a casting vote, for the issue before the meeting was only a side issue, and did not raise the main question. If the Government wharf could be made available for cattle shipment, the town-side wharf need not be commenced at present. Wharves will be needed on both sides, but the trade might bo allowed to grow somewhat before providing a second new wharf on the town side. Hero comes a difficulty. This is a cattle exporting district, or it is nothing ; yet if the Government wharf were completed to-morrow it would not serve the requirements of this important local export. A cattle wharf should be away from the general business of a railway station. It ought to be widely separated from passenger traffic The space for yarding should be ample, and the level should be about that of a ship’s deck. These conditions are absent from the Government wharfage plan. Hence a necessity is thrown on the' Harbor Board to provide a cattle wharf, in a suitable position, of ample size, with easy access, not ranch frequented by other traffic. We presume this is the object aimed at. : The necessity is notoriously urgent. If £200.0 were spent on this work, it would give immediate facility for a traffic which is choked at present for want of loading facility. The benefit would be felt all over the ; district, and the outlay would quickly recoup itself directly, and many times more indirectly. Apply th e £2OOO as Mr Gibson would have it. Sink it in extending the breakwater, and how much difference would £2OOO make to the bar, to the district, to anybody ? The absence of that sum from the Board’s funds cannot stop the harbor works, and its presence can work only a small remote benefit to the persons interested in the question. But take £2OOO /rom the cattle wharf, and a large and important export, affecting the whole district* remains choked at the port for want of a suitable wharf. So much for the different modes of applying-the £2,000. We want to get at facts, and inake sure of consequences. The rival influences of the town party and the swamp party are nothing to us. Let them clash at every turn, if they will. Our advocacy shall be bas ed on facts so far as we can get at them ; and wo think the resolution just adopted by a casting vote was in the right direction, though :, the Board might probably have been more united in the voting if less heat and more candour had characterised the discussion.