Untitled

Thames Star, Volume XII, Issue 3778, 5 February 1881, Page 2

(To the Editor of the Evening Star.)

Sie s —l perceive in your contemporary's issue (Thames Advertiser) of 3rd inst. a panegyrical effusion from the pen of L. J. Bagnall, showing the superiority of Kopu over Tararu as a harbor. It is self-evident that Mr Bagnall's only interest in this matter is the unbiassed discharge of his duty as a meriiber of the Thames Harbor Board on behalf of the public weal. It may be unction to this gentleman's soul to be assured that the same means that made the Auckland dock whare it is, will make the Thames harbor at Kopu ; and as with the Auckland dock so with Kopuas a harbor. After tens of thousands have been spent upon it, the extent of such folly will not be recognised by the public until vessels of large tonnage will be seen lying off Tararu, unable to proceed to Kopu, and will have to be loaded and unloaded by lighters. Then it will be seen that the money has been thrown away on mud-flat No. 2. Mud flat No. 1 and 2 will then stand out in bold relief as a monument of the united wisdom of our Harbor Board. I submit the following for Mr Bagnall's consideration :—l. The depth of water at low tide is equal to depth of water at Kopu at high tide. 2. Strange vessels can enter Tararu without the aid of a pilot, not so with Kopu. 3. A breakwater and quay can be formed at Tararu, estimated cost —by a thorough practical engineer—five thousand pounds (£5000). 4. Passengers landing at Tararu will be in Grahamstown and Shortland fully one hour before going by the Kopu route. And so on in every other respect Tararu shows its superiority over Kopu as being the natural harbor of Thames, and the only one that will give united satisfaction to, its permanent settlers.—l am, &c, Mabinee. February 5, 1881.