Along the South African coast between Cape Town and Durban, a distance of 822 miles, are the two major ports, Port Elizabeth and East London. These two ports, rivals in some ways, have histories that are closely linked. Their harbours have been built at two of the most favourable spots along a coastline poorly endowed with natural harbours. East London, the fourth harbour of the Union of South Africa, is the only river port of any consequence, and had to win the mechanical fight against nature and the fight against prejudice that contended that her position was too close to a troublesome frontier. After a hundred years of growth, East London is a mature town, with the residential and industrial areas clearly defined. Her expansion will be along the lines of planned zoning. (2) Her population in 1950 was 910,195 of which 43,195 were European and 39,698 Native. Besides being a port, East London is a prominent holiday resort and, of recent years, is developing as an industrial town. A striking feature is the clean aspect of the town. Those two "miracles" of South Africa, the discovery of diamonds and the discovery of gold, stimulated the growth of East London; especially the discovery of diamonds since Kimberley was about 450 miles from this, its nearest harbour. But the river mouth at East London had very little natural advantage over the other river mouths along the coast. There was at the Buffalo Mouth no outstanding, decisive merit. In many matters, such as the railway, the bridge, the water supply, there was doubt, uncertainty and bickering, with subsequent decisions to shelve the latter or make use of a temporary expedient, because there were many mediocre alternatives but none which was supremely suitable. In 1852, Bishop Gray wrote, "East London ... .has as few natural advantages as any place I have seen claiming to be a port. I could have walked across the river without getting wet above the knee." Intro., p. i-ii.