PARITUTU.

Taranaki Daily News, 10 May 1921, Page 5

PARITUTU.

A MEETING OF PROTEST. PRESERVATION LEAGUE FORMED. In response to the invitation of the president of the New Plymouth Beautifying Association a well attended meeting of those interested in the preservation of Paritutu was helci at the Soldiers’ Club last night. Mr. N. K. McDiarmid was elected chairman of the meeting, which, lie said, was called for the purpose of pleading with the Harbor Boaru lo spare •‘Taranaki’s grand old sentinel Paritutu.” Apologies for absence , were received from Mr. Percy Smith, Archdeacon Evans, Mr. G. W. Brown, and others. Mr. R. C. Hughes considered there was no need to debate upon the enormity of the proposed vandalism in destroying Paritutu. The position was critical. Paritutu was the property of the Harbor Board, whose primary duty was to construct a harbor, and if there were no way to construct a harbor but by the destruction of Paritutu, the board must do so. He did not, however, think such was the position. He thought further investigation might show that even with the destruction of Paritutu there might not be sufficient stone available, and, further, t'hdt other sources of stone might be found. He hoped the., meeting WouM discuss the matter freely, without indulging in criticism of the Harbor Board, the members of which, he was convinced, regretted as deeply as themselves the necessity for the destruction of Paritutu. They must also remember that the financial position of the board was very critical, but he thought that this financial stringency might make the board willing to accede to their wishes, by postponing further interference with Paritutu in the meantime. WHO OWNS THE ROCK? Mr. J. 0. Taylor dissented from the view that the board owned Paritutu. He considered Paritutu was merely property held in trust by the Harbor Board, not only for the people of New Plymouth, but for the people of New Zealand as a whole. To destroy one of the national scenic features was, outrageous. The Fine Arts Society of Wellington had every right to protest on behalf of the people of New Zealand generally, and the Harbor Board treated it with discourtesy. The board was too much dominated by its engineers.

Mr. J. Smith considered stone should be obtained from the Kaitake Ranges, or better still, irortsand slag blocks should be used and which could be made cheaply. Mr. P. B. Fitzherbert, speaking as a comparative outsider, strongly supported the protest against the destruction of Paritutu. He considered that a railway should be laid to the Pouakai Ranges. It could be done for £lOO,OOO, the grade would be downhill from the quarry to the foreshore, and there was stone enough there to build all thfc harbors in New Zealand. The fault of New Zealanders was that they did not look ahead far enough. It was not only the construction of a harbor but the preservation of the whole foreshore at New Plymouth that would be necessary. Even in his short residence here he had seen effects of erosion along the foreshore, and he was satisfied that if Paritutu were destroyed there would be insufficient stone for both the harbor and the foreshore.

Mt. H. Cocker said that as Paritutu belonged to New Zealand and not merely to New Plymouth they wished to be quite certain all possible steps had been taken by the Harbor Board to avoid its destruction. PETITION SUGGESTEI). Mr. Lightband, speaking as a stranger, but as a descendant of early settlers in New Zealand, dissented from the view that the Harbor Board owned Paritutu. It was merely the trustee of it for the people of New Zealand. He had heard it was proposed to utilize what was left of Paritutu upon which to build a lighthouse. As it was so striking a landmark, it was almost what might be called a natural lighthouse, or at least of much more value than any lighthouse would be. He believed the Harbor Board was doing its best to make a harbor, but when the harbor was made, the day might come when it would be necesary to defend it, and Paritutu was the greatest natural defence the harbor had. He would move a resolution that a monster petition he prepared to be signed by residents of Taranaki, and possibly elsewhere, protesting against the destruction of Paritutu, such petition to be sent to the Minister responsible with a view to an Act being passed prohibiting such destruction. Mr. J. 0. Taylor, in seconding, considered it was nonsense to say the Egmont stone was too dear. If the Harbor Board put a reasonable proposition for the use of Egmont Stone before the Government he felt sure an economical way of obtaining it was possible. Mr. W. 11. Skinner, whilst yielding to no one in his iesire to save Paritutu, could not support the resolution. There was no question in his mind that the Harbor Board had full power to deal with Paritutu as it saw fit. Only an Act of Parliament could take this power from them, and no administration would interfere with powers conferred upon a local authority unless the fullest possible reasons could be shown. It was for those who wished to preserve Paritutu to show the board some way out of the difficulty which faced them at present, viz., to construct a harbor, which meant, of course an economical supply of stone. The meeting had so far failed to show any better way the board could adopt. Replying to a suggestion that Paritutu might be declared a scenic reserve Mr. Skinner said such was not possible. If it had been, it would have been done long ago.

WHAT ALTERNATIVE?

Mr. Etherington said there were two ways of preventing the destruction. One was by Act of Parliament, the other by creation of public opinion so strong that the Harbor Board would not be able to ignore it. They should at once definitely organize public opinion. if to save Paritutu meant increased cost in constructing the harbor they must be prepared to put their hands in their pockets and pay for it, either by subscription or by rates. Mr. S. W. Shaw pointed out that whilst he gave place to no one in his affection for Paritutu, there had been no practical suggestion made of an alternative. When he saw the gap recently made in Paritutu it made him feel sick, but he knew that every member of the board regretted it as much as he. Briefly, the question was harbor or no harbor. All Taranaki was intereated te the construction of the harbor.

and if it came to a question between keeping Paritutu or having a harbor then Paritutu must go. It was all very well to speak of paying the Increased cost of constructing the harbor by rates, etc., but those who remembered the heart-burnings caused in the past over rating for the harbor wanted a definite practical alternative to be placed before the board. It was easy,to suggest a railway costing £loojooo to

bring in stone, but where could the board obtain £lOO,OOO at present? Mrs. Stuart Russell considered that public opinion, if strong enough, would carry the day. Speaking as a comparatively recent arrival in this wonderful country, she had been struck with the lack of forethought which hadi sacrificed beautiful forests and built a railway alongside the foreshore. They should form a strong committee, and if they put their backs jnto it they would be able to prevent another instanoe of lack of forethought in the destruction of Paritutu.

Mr. R. C. Hughes moved, and Mr. W. H. Skinner seconded, the following amendment to Mr. Lightb’fcnd’s motion:—“That this meeting respectfully submits for the consideration of the New Plymouth Harbor Board the suggestion that in view of its financial position no further attempt to tqst or utilize the stone of Paritutu be made until the board is able to provide sufficient money under its borrowing powers to justify the renewal of its operations on a comprehensive scale, and that in the meantime the board renew its efforts to obtain stone from the Mt. Egmont quarry or elsewhere.” On being put to the meeting Mr, Lightband’s motion wa4 lost, and th« amendment carried. After some desultory discussion, Mr. P. B. Fitzherbert moved -hat “All here constitute a Pari* tutu Preservation League, to conduct propaganda in the Press, and to work for the preservation of Paritutu in everj legitimate manner,” which wa4 carriec unanimously. It was resolved to adjourn the meet ing of the league to a date to be fixed Mr. R. C. Hughes to be the convenor.