CORRESPONDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIV, Issue 26, 31 January 1902, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

[We do not. hold ourselves responsible for opinions expressed by onr correspondents.]' MR LEVI BARTE N ON HARBOUR . MATTERS. TO THE EDITOE. Sib, —You will pardon me for giving you a few facts on the report of the chairman, who appears to be, so disappointed over Mr .Napier Bell's report for not condemning the opening straight oat; but to blind the ratepayers he must put one of the most misleading statements before them without any foundation whatever. Now with regard to the report, if Mr Bell had condemned tbe opening straight out, it would have : been done with. But no! He Biysj the whole question at issue is whether the wave action at the inner root of the breakwater can shift sand placed there, and this might be tested by taking ouc a joint of the piping of the fixed sandpump. Wby couid he not give v straight answer instead of referring to some other engineer? Why did he say, "To makti' aj* opening in the breakwater 40 feet wide would eost £7BO, or a 13 feet'span would cost .£260; that there would be no danger to the breakwater from making sach an opening, as if required, it could easily be closed with rubble Btone?" Now why did be put that in if he condemned the opening ? Because he ,'earned there was a strong feeling in favour of tbe opening being made, and tiuit some day there would be a majority on the Board in favour of i 5. That Mr Bell likes to sit on a rail is evident, for he says in effect: " I will give you the coat of a 40 feiti and a "13 feet opening,, and if the Board thinks fit; to make the opening, and it answers, I am right, and if it does not answer, I cm say I did not reoommend it." So that leaves us as we were, Mr Marchant, in July 1898, when the opening was moved for, said: —" There would be no detriment to the mole, and no sand would go into the harbour." His only objection was " the insignificant amount that would go through would not warrant tha expenditure." Is appears to me Mr Bell's report is only a oopy of Mr Marchant's ideas. Let me tell the ratepayers that if the opening was made, there would be no £6O trips, there would be no supervision of dredges, no oil wanted to grease the cogs, no coal; wanted to keep up the steam, and a hundred other things, as the sand would go through without all that nonsense. Sir, »f you look a.t the cost of dredging from 1893 to 1901, you will find it set down as <£14,396 l is Bd, ahd thai is not all. That dredge is a perfect goldmine, and>no wonder they don't want the opening, and for the dredging to go oa for ever.; ' What a nice thing to have these accounts passed every month, and hav|e it go oti for ever. Then we have 'the Herald cackling over the report, how satisfactory, very full, etc. He never, said a word on Mr. Ball's report on tbe opening. He is all for a loan, but he will have to cackle a bit mote before he gets it. If the opening was made and the money squandered in useless dredging spent in placing stones over the end of the mole yuii would have the big steamers alongside of the wharf while he is cackling lor a loan. To show the value of the jphairoiaq'p report, had I not objected |o it it would have gone forth to tha \lorld that 14,000 yards of sand had bean deposited and spread out over the sheltered area of tbe harbour. Now the sand pump dnly worked 43 htjurs and deposited four feet of sand al l along under the pipes on the beach at high water mark where it now remains and cm be seen by anyone. This 14,000 yards of sand is said ; to have slip pad past the iron pegs at. low water niark, left the rocks bsr<*, and would nojb stop around the pegs for! us to see it, bjut got out in the sheltered area of the/ harbour. Fancy 14,000 yards of sine;! in the harbour when four feet remained under the pipes. Mr. Parr said He could put through lourtimes as much if he had the power to' keep steam up. Where should w« have bean;if he had oaly kept going? The member who moved "chat it is I clearly demonstrated tbat the sheltered' area oMbe harbour had silted up 18 inches,' Ihas not shown up since and noj wonder/ Kight will come to the top,i and wrong will go down. I am satisfied! that nat one ounce of sand wept back! intotheharbour. Whatadisapointmenw to tha cbaiiman »nd h s friends! andl yet me Herald says, "How sitiefactor.J are the reports of the Harbour Board.® This |is one of them, the report of C'apfl tain iNorbury, of trie Ngapulii, thanlfl irig the Board for its kindly considers toon/ re aid given in rescuing tifl dredge. But the Herald did not sfl| that " the officers and men cf tbe 'pulp declined to accept anything 1 rescuing the dredge, because it racpmmended by the barbourmast^^| TMti is ft specimen of the rtpotlm

Iy, T have no /"Board want to ?er the end of the g gome real work, ig over chairman s t«. With the reve« sy could spend ratepayers might g rate, which for two or three 510,000 a year. TM 9 done; and I say ut goto work means available. As far as the only difference bttweeii neers is that one siys "an amount of sand would go opening," while the other says, opening did some good work have little effect in necessity for dredging."—lan^^Ht I