The Patea Mail. Established 1875. MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1883. MR MACE ON THE HARBOUR.

Patea Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 1011, 19 March 1883, Page 2

The Patea Mail. Established 1875. MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1883. MR MACE ON THE HARBOUR.

We think that the public are indebted to Mr Mace for his able and instructive question .printed, in our, last issue. It is a healthy sign v^tien' I those outside the Harbour Board -CQmei.iQtward .to ,-,give,us;the benefit of their ideas. The question of. harbour irhpmvemeht is of so much importance to the community at large that thanks are due to whoever contributes anything which may tend to the better understanding of our requirements or ithe settlement of tbe all-important problem of'what works are required arid what money has to“ be raised to carry them out. We agree with our correspondent'that Mr Thomson has placed too high an estimate upon the selling value of the plant, but, on the other hand, it cannot altogether be regarded as a speculative lino ” in the; sense spoken of by Mr Mace, because plant which would cost £3OOO would surely be worth £ISOO even after two year’s wear. Mr Mace’s principal objection to Mr Thomson’s 1 proposal to construct 500 feet of the western pier seems to be that it would leave us with an entrance to the river 700 feet wide, ; and would not assist the scour to any appreciable extent. We should imagine that a great improvement would be effected, because the pressure upon the present mole would be so relieved that instead of expending its. force upon that structure, as it does now, the river would have a chance of going straight out to the -bar. Besides, after all, it. is not so much the scouring power that is required as the protection to vesse’s on entering. That is forcibly put by Mr Mace, who says;—“ The channel, which, was narrowed by the ! encroaching sand, compelled the mariner to “hug” the present breakwater, otherwise his vessel was in imminent danger , of; .running on the north sandspit and probably fetching up where the s.s. Patea did. The other danger which exists is if he: “ hugs,” the breakwater he is in constant danger of being ruthlessly smashed against the wall (as was the case of the Wakatu) by the heavy north-western seas.” Now 500 feet of the western pier, as proposed, will overlap the eastern one by nearly 300 feet, and would foi m an excellent protection from the north west seas. There is plenty of water in the river, arid What is wanted is something to take away the risks ennnmerated by our correspondent above. The guide pier proposed by him would not do: this. It would probably deepen the river somewhat, but it would not remove the danger of being “ cracked up” on the breakwater in heavy north west weather. Sir John Coode, in consenting to this guide nier. said that if we abandflneiLall

hope of constructing the western mole, then we could fall back oh the lesser work. But time has shown beyond all doubt that the guide pier can be dispensed with altogether, and therefore in constructing it we should be almost throwing away a sum sufficient to make from 200 to 300 feet of the western pier. We do not want a canal 220 feet wide; what we want is a harbour tolerably accessible, and even 500 feet of the western pier will go a long way towards that end.