South Canterbury Times, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1881.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2640, 6 September 1881, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1881.

SECOND EDITION

the last “ Hansard ” to hand we are placed in possession of a report of „bc debate in the Legislative Council on the Timaru Harbor Board Endowment Bid. Tim measure was introdared hv the Hon. Mr Wilson, who inadvertently made a misstatement in his opening remarks thiough want of local knowledge. Mr Wilson, who is

a resident of Hawke’s Bay district,said that during the last grain season twelve large vessels, varying,, from 700 to 2000 tons burden, were loaded at the Timaru Breakwater with perfect safety. The mistake was seized upon by the opponents of the Bill, and they did not fail to make capital out of it. The real fact is, that during last season English vessels had been loaded from the Breakwater. It may be as well to state that it is the general belief here that next year grain ships will be loaded alongside. Several of the speakers who opposed the measure testified to the success of the harbor works up to the present. Next-year will tell a more flattering tale. Meanwhile the thanks of this community are due to the Hon. Mr Wilson for the interest he has taken in the harbor scheme. His speech was altogether a capital one, and made a favorable impression on members. This much appeared clear tbonghout the debate, that Legislative Councillors.were satisfied with the bonafuhs of the promoters of the Bill, and that they thoroughly believe in the practicability of forming an excellent harbor in Timaru. A main argument used against the endowment was that the district itself was rich enough to undertake the work. The Hon. Mr G. E. Johnston, though he opposed the Bill, was qnito rapturous as to the future position of the Timaru Harbor Board. Ho said there was no doubt that the trade cf the port would increase immensely, and that if they gave an endowment of 50,000. acres, at a future date the Harbor Board of Timaru would bo one of the wealthiest bodies in the colony. In such case, it is only natural to suppose that the district also-would be in a high state of prosperity. It is the simplest of truisms, that the prosperity of a particular section contributes to the prosperity ©f the whole. Wc know of no better argument in favor of the endowment than the one used by Mr Johnson. It embraces two propositions of ‘ very essential importance—namely, that a suitable harbor can bo formed, and that when formed it will be the depot of a large trade. In fact, that it will be the means of developing the resources of an extensive district. Holding such opinions, well might Mr Johnson say that he shrank from moving that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Mr Waterhouse undertook the duty of moving that the Bill be thrown out. There was nothing remarkable or new in his speech. The gist of his utterance was that certain engineers had reported against the harbor scheme, Sir John Coode amongst the number. Mr Waterhouse said that lie had gathered much information on the subject, and he had reason to believe that while the pier might be of use for a lengthened period, say from ten to twelve years, the shingle travelled to such an extent that eventually the harbor would bo blocked up. He said that he got his information from the report of the two engineers lately instructed by the Government to make enquiries into the harbor works. The report was brought up at the last meeting of the Timaru Harbor Board, but that body decided that it should not be made public at present. The report, Mr Waterhouse tells us, recommends that the work should remain in its present position for a few jears in order to ascertain whether or not the anticipations of Sir John Coode os to the travelling shingle would be fulfilled. We do not blame the Harbor Board for keeping back the report. The members did that which in their judgment was for the best. But ,in nine cases out of ten matters leak out, and generally they arc not made to wear the best complexion. It would be better that the information had come from a more friendly source than from Mr Waterhouse ; not that that gentleman would pervert the facts. The opponents of the endowment will naturally pick out the strongest points in the report which tell against the harbor scheme.

With regard to the travelling shingle. That is a, legislative as well a material difficulty to overcome. At the time Sir John Coode made his report he confessed- that lie possessed very insufficient data on the subject. There is no doubt that he was guided mainly by Mr Carruthers, then Engineer-in-Chief for the colony. The latter gentleman had no experience whatever in marine engineering, but he nevertheless held very decided opinions. One of his great fads* was the enormous quantity of shingle brought down by ths New Zealand rivers. Independently of breakwaters, he was given to lecturing on the subject. Here is an opinion which he gave five years ago on the proposed harbor works at Timaru :—“ With the immense quantity of shingle which I believe to be moving, a few days of easterly swell, if followed by northerly gales, might, I think, cause such nu accumulation that a southerly wind following would be unable to clear it away. The accumulation would then increase rapidly, and in a few years the whole work would be buried in shingle.” A few weeks ago there was the most severe easterly gale which had been experienced for years. The monolith stood the gale without a flaw, and the only result to be seen was a diminished quantity of shingle to the south of the breakwater. That certainly docs not accord with Mr Carruthcr’s theory. The late Engincer-in-Chief is, we believe, now a resilient of this provincial district. When ho ventured to give expression to very strong opinions, he had but a limited experience of the action of the waves on tbo coast of New Zealand. If tic took observations at present mci compered them with those of the p u;t, he would be all; to give a v uv accurate estimate as to the alio ed enormous amount ol shingle brought down by the Waitaki, Mr Garruth«.r’s hastily-formed opinions have wrought

considerable injury to the settlers of South Canterbury. He misled Sir John Coode, and during the late debate in the Council there was persistently brought to the front the bugbear of the ’travelling shingle. Here is an instance. Captain Fraser said—.

There was a strong current running up the coast from the south of Timaru at the rate of four miles an hour, which brought with it large masses of shingle. This shingle was swept along the coast in great quantities when there were heavy floods in the Waitaki River, but since the Timaru harbor has been established there had been no very heavy floods. The Council was therefore not in a position to judge at present what might be the effect of that travelling shingle on the Breakwater now in course of construction.

Captain Fraser has read and' believed in Mr Carrutbers. It does not strike the gallant captain that the theory of the late Engineer-in-Cbief may have been wrong. Captain Fraser thinks it a more reasonable belief that the Waitaki has not sent down its usual amount of small boulders during the past two years. A flood just now in the Waitaki would do considerable service to the people of Timaru, for by knocking, the shingle theory on the head, it would dispel the chief objection to the Harbor Board Endowment Bill.