A Harbor for the Thames.

Thames Star, Volume XIII, Issue 4212, 1 July 1882, Page 1 (Supplement)

A Harbor for the Thames.

Snooks—His Sentiments.

At the present time this seems to be all and the only idea of certain of the Thames inhabitants, and all sorts of visionary schemes are proposed just according to where the proposer has his interest. Rocky Point, Burke street, Shortland, and Kopu have each and all their advocates. The people of the dis* trict have at last awakened to the fact that via Grahamstown is the shortest route to Rotorua. What a long time they have been in finding that out, and now that they are aware of the fact, many are doing their best to keep back a work of some kind that will be of benefit to the district as a whole. If you spend £4000 on the wharf at Rocky Point you must spend a like sum in Shortland, or we will object. Kopu must also be looked after, or some other objection will be raised to the borrowing. Just let us take a calm and disinterested view of the different proposals, their probable cost, the benefit to be derived from each, and the cause that has led to the necessity of improving the harbor. ,

Start with the Kauaeranga Creek. For years this was found suitable for all craft trading from Auckland, but of late has gradually silted up, and now it is nothing unusual to see the old Enterprise stuck in the mud. This has has been brought about, in my opinion, by the driving of timber in the upper portion of the river, as acres of ground have been washed away, and as the debris must find a lodgment somewhere, this has rendered the natural channel shallow, and the effect of piling the channel will be just to shift the debris a little lower down the stream, unless the work can be carried into deep water. As a proof of this you have only to look at Napier to see the effect of sheet piling. What was once a fair harbor for small craft was totally destroyed after spending £70,000 ; and from what I can learn the same thing is taking place in other parts of the colonies, as according to a statement made in the House during the present session, £700,000 have been spent trying to improve the channel between Port Chalmers and Dunedin, and it is little better than when they started, and another £300,000 is wanted to go on with.

Plan No. 2 is to erect a wharf at Eocky Point, to cost £4000. But such weather as took away the old Tararu Wharf, would make small work of the proposed structure, and even if this should not happen, it will take some £7000 to con-' nect the proposed wharf with the business places of Grahamstown and Shortland, and I doubt if that sum will do it, for it is of no use laying down a line unless it can be connected with the main line without transhipping. The same trucks must be used to forward all up-country merchandise, for if you have no upcountry traffic you want neither wharf nor railway to Eocky Point.

No. 3 proposal is to make the harbor at Eopu; but this is objected to on two grounds. First, the shallowness of the bar. I can remember the time when an attempt was made to prove that there was 16 feet of water on that same bar, but this seems to be now forgotten. The second objection is that the steamer? would have to go past the district a few miles. I cannot see what difference that can make so long as goods are delivered as cheaply and quickly as from Eocky Pomt —the distance being much the same as it is to Eocky Point. And there is a great difference: while the ratepayers are called on to make the connecting link to one place, the Government are doing that to the other. But the Government can be asked to do the line to Eocky Point; at all events, it 19 worth while asking for. If they can be prevailed on to do the work, it would be a saving to the burgess, who are already taxed as much as they ought to be for improving other people's property. What has now got to be decided is : Do the prospects of the district justify the Proposed expenditure; will the Borough c any better off by the expenditure than they are at the present time; and will the sum asked for do all that is.required to better the harbor for traffic ? If it will, the money will be well spent; if not, it will be another case of paying too dear for your whistle, and the place can ill afford that at the present time.