OUR RAILWAY SYSTEM

Waikato Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1582, 24 August 1882, Page 2

OUR RAILWAY SYSTEM

sSP^^pQxw ago, we „ p*y eit <^ v tile 'iiigiieflit Jiutnoritiy ,5 tiuftti . no

lightened age, the Government of New 2£a}aniljhaye attempted t to make a rail : way bridge at Hamilton without first obtaining; tlie ,most essential data. ,d am pleaqed iff i see * by your , lead,er Mr Sfcep'ajit M,in.np ,way,to blame, having rq<»wmen,de4, a .one, span, (bridge, but .you datkly hint, with.. an, assumption ,of the fullesfrtinformation as to who is responsible, but that it is not for you to say who is to blame, thereby iuflicting by implication an injury on the careful and experienced gentleman who is now engineer, Mr Hales, from his public position, in, precluded from writing in his defence, but, if I remember correctly, he was not engineer when the plan was decided, and the bridge material ordered. If engineers are not in fault, the Minister of Public Works must be held responsible for such reckless waste of public money and such costly blundering, as to make a railway 10 or 12 miles longer than requisite through a district which yields no traffic and to do this, crossing the Waikato by an' expensive bridge at Ngaruawahia, in order to carry it through the rotten bog beyond Hamilton, and from Hamilton to take it back across the Waikato by a still more costly bridge to connect with the Thames, Cambridge, &c. The line as Mr Simpson, C.E., suggested 9 or 10 years ago, it is said, would have been straight from Taupiri to near Mr Seddon's estate, with a branch to the Waikato at Hamilton, and instead of a wayside station Hamilton would have become the depot of the Waipa, the Delta, &c, the southern line to cross the Waikato at a narrow place near Tamahere at a cost for bridge of less than £5,000, the Cambridge and Rotorua railway branching off near Tamahere, while the Thames junction would have been near Capt. Steele's estate, saving on 10 miles of railway say coat of construction, £50,000, saving ot Ngaruawahia and Hamilton bridges, say, £65,000, less £5,000, cost of Tamahere bridge, loss in running over 10 miles of almost unproductive railway, say £200 per mile per annum, capitalised at 5%, £40,000 of pecuniary loss, not to speak of public inconvenience and other losses. Is it surprising that our Waikato railway is not a monetary success ? Had Mr Simpson's plan of our Waikato railways been adopted, railways would have been running years ago to the Thames, Cambridge, &c, and we would have saved £100,000, nnd had better railways. What would this £100,000 have done? It could have extended the Southern, or Cambridge-Rotor ua railway, or it could, by asystein of light stcam'or horse tramways, have given to almost every part of the Waikato the benefits of railway communication. There may be no use in crying over spilt milk, but these errors have had the result of retarding the completion ( of our main lines, and while we are heavily burdened for Government squandering, we reap as benefit, and it would seem, by the remote prospect of the completion of the Hamilton railway bridge, that hope so long deferred, will sicken many of our settlers of a country highly favoured naturally, but cursed by misgovernment, from the old man of the sea, in Wellington, down to his prolitanous offspring, the innumerable local bodies. Returning to the Hamilton bridge question, some suggest to abandon it for the present, and connect with I the railway at Taupiri by a line which must eventually be made, and which could be made for much less than the cost of the Hamilton bridge, and by reasonable diligence could be running in six months from its commencement. Another is to adopt Mr Stewarts suggestion, as you state, and make a one span girder bridge : To this it might be objected if you cannot find a sufficiently solid bottom for 5 piers, could a good foundation be got for the abutments, which would have to bear the enormous weight of the whole bridge ? Of course there are ways of overcoming the difficulty, but are we to lose all the money the piers have cost ? I would suggest that test borings should be made now, as they should have been before the bridge was designed, and if the solid is still much lower than the already too deep sinking, then either sacrifice past expenditure and abandon the plan, or put a stout timber foundation inside the cylinders, and build up with brick and cement ; it may be necessary to temperorarily line the cylinders with boarding to permit the free subsidence of the building, and to weight the building to ensure its carrying its permanent load. Mr Brindley, C.E., did this successfully without cylinders, and this might save further waste, and secure the eaily completion of Hamilton biidgc, and those railways which are essential to the prosperity of the great valleys of the Thames and Waikato, and to the profitable working of the Government railways in the Province. Government has kept a balance of the loan voted by Parliament for the line Waikato to To Arolia idle and unexpended, while numbers of good men left New Zealand to make Australian railways. With this money judiciously employed the railway would aye been open. I speak feelingly, ash it costs 6s per ton per mile to send m> produce to Te Aroha, or a rent on the crop of £3 per acre, while I am taxed by the Government for expenditure in other places, and by a road board which bungles and neglects the roads. My case may be that of many, and it seems impossible to make fanning a success handicapped by such double disadvantages. — Yours truly, Wm. Akchd. Murray. Annandale, August 21 st, 1882. [We have printed the above letter in its entirety, but our correspondent will have observed that a solid bottom has at last been found for the Hamilton bridge. We must disclaim all intention of casting blame on the present District Engineer for the mistake which was made.— Ed.]