Citizens Say

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 815, 8 November 1929, Page 8

Citizens Say

(To tbe Editor.)

DEVONPORT VEHICULAR FERRY Sir.— In view of the fact that Mr. Alison endeavours to cast doubt upon the accuracy of my statement regarding our inquiry as to the time of departure of last vehicular ferry, I take the liberty of mentioning that Mr. C. R. Pettit was the person who made the inquiry, in the presence of Mr. O. Nicks, his son and myself, laying particular emphasis on the word “vehicular.” Further, on a recent Sunday evening I arrived at the ferry wharf a few minutes after ten and found the last vehicular boat gone, and had no alternative but to leave my car in the street all night. The police there kindly consented to keep an eye on the car, and did not, in the circumstances, prosecute—as they may have done. There is no notice displayed on the wharf for information of motorists as to time of departures, nor is there any attendant on the Devonport end from whom inquiries may be made. H. NATTRASS. A SATISFIED WORKER Sir. — Kindly let me say something about the relief works of the Public Works Department, as I was one of those men who went up to Taumarunui to work on the road. The first fortnight we received 14s a day, and after that we were told to get our mates together for contract work. Of course, one always gets the best of mates for this work — men who will toil and do their bit and who can make good money. I was head of a gang of five men, and we did well. There were many men there who were not worth their salt. You will hear some say, “Why -not carry a slacker on our back?” I say “no.” There is nothing wrong with the Public Works Department relief works. HARD WORKER. IN DEFENCE OF POINTSMEN Sir, —■ As a lover of fair play I must reply to “Bumble,” in his (to my mind) unfair attack on the members of the City Council’s traffic department. Unfair because, naming no particular individual, his remarks affect the whole staff. “Prussianism” hits me as on making inquiry I find that practically

every member of military age did his bit with his Majesty’s Forces during the Great War. Again he mentions traffic control reverting to the police force. lam under the impression that a largo percentage of the council’s pointsmen are ex-constables. I think that “Bumble” and “Whippet .Four” have at some time or other been unfortunate enough to fall foul of one individual of the traffic department and cannot help crying out and blaming the whole staff.

I would suggest that “Bumble” compare. the number of prosecutions obtained each Wednesday, with the number of men on the traffic department’s staff, and he will see that their so-called aggressive manner does not result in over many prosecutions. Regarding the statement re pointsmen not being on duty in wet weather: has your correspondent ever seen the intersections of Grafton Bridge and Symonds Street (or any other controlled intersection for that matter;—no matter how wet—not manned during the busy hours of the morning and evening? I have seen the same inspector on duty at about 8.15 in the morning, again at 1.30 and 3.30 in the afternoon and still going strong at 9.15 in the evening—and all this on a wet Friday not so very long ago. If “Bumble” and “Whippet Four” were members of the A.A.A. they could complain to them, and possibly have no fear of “reprisals” from any member of that sadly-harassed body of men (the pointsmen of Auckland) who being public servants, must find’ it almost impossible to please all of the people all the time. Regarding the signals being inefficient and confusing, I can only say that I have yet to hear of any accident occurring at any intersection where a pointsman was on duty. If your correspondent can quote any facts to disprove this statement. I should be much obliged. I should like to know just how many miles these two drivers have done in and about Auckland City during the last three or four years. “OLIVER TWIST.” THE HARBOUR BRIDGE Sev— Opposition to the Harbour Bridge seems to b© chiefly on the part those 'who regard it as a menace to the navigation of the Upper Harbour Evidently these objectors overlook the fact that vessels exceeding three or four hundred tons seldom, if ever nass beyond the Western Wharf, excepting (Continued in next column.)

only those engaged in carrying ra» material and coal for the Sugar Company’s works. Thus it would b« these only that would be affected by the height of the principal span or archway of the bridge as shown in th« design prepared for the Bridge Associ* j ation and now open for general inppection. It is understood that, with te* exceptions, the vessels of the company’s fleet would find ample space for their passage through the bridge, while the few that, by their greater size, might find the space insufficient could easily be replaced by others suitable for the conditions available. Otherwise there appears to be no ree* son why their cargoes should not be dealt with as in the case of tie handling of the company’s output by barges. Neither is there any reason for supposing that any difficulti* 6 | which might arise regarding matters of any kind could not be settled in * friendly spirit by arrangement mutually satisfactory alike to the Bridg* Association and the Sugar Compaq It should not, however, be forgotten that the Harbour Board exercises vmost complete control over all wj > affects the shipping interests of to* port, and though it is right to adimthat its duties are usually carried ow reasonably and in the best possio* spirit in adopting needful precautio® against risks and abuses of all yet there are always circumstance* arising in which a too rigid interpret* tion of its obligations may prove un* necessarily restrictive in its °P era **S Of this we have an example in to® decision of the chief engineer of w board—that the main archway of w bridge must be at least 150 ft aboY high-water mark; a quite unnecessary, if not prohibitory, condition. one that requires very serious consideration by- those who wouldtnfinjw be most adversely affected. Wnatcy** the board’s claim may be respecuti the control of the Upper Harbour, more especially as affecting bridge, it is certain that the too axw trary exercise of this power inJJ.: interest of the comparatively stw number of people and of the » limited area involved, cannot be J" mitted as superseding the overwneiw ing claim of the many thousands * settlers who have establish* themselves and their families out the great and progressive coon ■ north of the Waitemata. To the proposed bridge signifies an lute necessity in affording q r ““J access to the land on which prosperity and steady progress. all the attendant advantages, niu»| greatly depend—a very large ma £“s —and these will gain immense*. . the greatly reduced length of roaa to Auckland on the completion oi bridge. This will mean to them distance saving of 22i miles. ** certain that the great community u. affected will use to the V tn J° S v«f!» available means, and political ence for the advancement and m tenance of their rights and with unwavering determination oi P . pose. Ahd if the Harbour should persist in its stand there s f a ur be no doubt that it can be su '' < ? e V«-c dealt with by the influence that be brought to bear, and, if n f e ,sc’ative the convincing force of j thl l enactment. But is is to be hopea any resort to methods of this ton, is j o n. not prove necessary. In t let it be plainly understood tnai. great undertaking here advocate . now being enthusiastically will certainly be brought to a su IUI ISSUe ’ ' PROGRESS’