The Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR P.M. Resurrexi. SATURDAY, JULY 8, 1882.

Thames Star, Volume XIII, Issue 4218, 8 July 1882, Page 2

The Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR P.M. Resurrexi. SATURDAY, JULY 8, 1882.

Thb question as to the erecton of a wharf does not seem to be a very wholesome condition. The matter stands thus: At the last meeting of the Harbor Board, the members decided—it seemed to us more from sheer desperation to do something than through any well founded judgment, nay, more, any judgment at all—that the engineer be instructed to prepare plans for £3000 worth of stone wharf at Rocky Point. Notwithstanding that tenders were before the Board for the scheme previously adopted, consisting of a wharf part of stone and part of wood, none was accepted. The reasons were two-fold. Firstly. The engineer, Mr Beere, wrote a private note to the Board, to the effect that from further observation he felt bound to condemn a wooden wharf at Eocky Point; in other words, than any structure at that place should be wholly of stone. Secondly, all the tenders were considerably abore the estimate. Now, with regard to the memo from Mr Beere, we contend that for,a public body to receive it, and act upon it as a private communication was wholly wrong in principle. This was t subject of public importance; it was a matter between the representatives of the people and a paid official, and relative to a most important public work, and should have been as free to all interested—the-community—as is the canopy of heaven. Mr Bagnall, another Coriolanus, fought the whole strength of the Board; he was defeated, but not conquered. He had the best of the argument, and the" worst of the voting— therein he stood aloue. He asked," Hasany engineer reported in faro* of Eocky Point P" but none there was to make reply. It was tacitly admitted that no one had. But he went further; he promised his hearty support if an engineer of fair reputation did give a rerdict in its faror. Evidently the Board were their own advisers, and had done as Israel in days of the Judges, what wetted best in their own eyes. Why this mysterious private note should creep in so late in the day requires explanation. Mr Beere was no doubt complimented to hear the present Chairman of the Board stand up §nd insinuate that the memo, was not bU at all i the gallant Colonel was quite lore of that by two words used io it, We

! have good reason to believe that Cot.: I-Eraser, is of opinion that Dr Kilgonr was

its author. One result of this memo, j undoubtedly was that a number of ten* , derers were put to considerable expense for* naught, some of them having came from Auckland, through the Board not having taken the precaution to obtain competent professional advice. Mr Beere, it would appear'; was originally called in to carry out a foregone conclusion, namely, that

the wharf should be at Rocky Point. His functions were, not ta give an opinion as to the advisability of constructing a wharf there, but to prepare the most suitable plans for one. Whether the wharf should be there or not was none of his business; that did not come within tha range of his engagement. But haying fulfilled his instructions, he was not satisfied with the prospect; his conscience troubled him, and he concluded ultimately that he should enter a protest against the | wharf as proposed. We honor him for protesting, but what a pity it is he did not make up his mind to. do so a fortnight or three weeks sooner. And, as we hare preTiously stated, he adopted the wrong course in making it private, and the Board was much more to blame in receiving it as such. The decision arrived at seemed curious, and does not improve upon consideration. No one attempted to show that the amount named would. do anything in particular. If stone wharves were made ' by the mile for sale/and that £3000 worth might have been cut out of the one chosen the resolution could have been understood. The Board asks Mr Beere to supply £3000 worth of wharf just as a house-wife would ask a tradesman for a shilling's worth of goods. We have a strong conviction that the Board should hark back and "bide a wee," ruminate over the matter a little longer, and endeavor to evolve something more feasible. This £3000 worth of wharf resolution is of an uninviting character, and possesses all the characteristics of hastiness and immature consideration.