CONTRACTORS AND ENGINEER.- DALTONS V. BLUNDERS.

Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 578, 16 November 1871, Page 3

CONTRACTORS AND ENGINEER.DALTONS V. BLUNDERS.

To the Editor of the Evening Stab. Sir -As ibis is a public and private mattec be good enough to insert same in jour dependent journal. I came across a person -o (Ihv that is connected with the Karangaliare "Highway Board, who informed uiethat there was another hitch in their affairs, viz., a row between contra, tors and engineer. Any expense arising out of such row will ot course tome out of our poor ratepayers' pockets, to rectify matters, or otherwise be involved in extra heavy legal expenses, through the nonprofessional abilities of the engineer—l mean a go-called one. It appears- (and I am well informed on the subject)—that the contract for this Road Board was completed, and ot eouiso =the contractors naturally enough applied tor payment, when the so-called engineer, after a little time, refused to give a certificate of completion of the works in; question. The contractors (who were not ignorant men in knowledge of reading &c, said, " We will soon make you pay, and dearly too." I interpret this-as the Board will be sued, and ultimately have to pay for the ignorance of their so-called engineer. It would also appear that this clever engineer gave the contractors a plan to work from that was found out afterwards to beuseless, or at any rate impossible to carry out in execution However, to unravel the mystery of tins gr«at plan, two gentlemen, viz., Messrs Daltons, were applitd to, to look into the matter and decide between contractors and engineer. Messrs. Dalton at once proceeded to the field of operations, and commenced a survey of the ground in dispute, from which they made a plan, and there found out the " ginger-beer"-l beg pardon-I mean the engineer was utterly wrong, his plan being worthless, ho having pot hold of a wrong section or level, or-something of that sort, for I am no engineer, and, what s more, don t profess it (like many others), so can t give you full particularsdf-Lheengineeringblundersj out, 1 do know the plan in question was an imaginary made one, for I bear this clever engineer was never on the ground till after the work was commenced, so I can't see how he could get up a correct plan, and expect men to carry out the work.properly, when he himaelf was to blame in givh.g the contractors an impracticable plan in design. It seems strange, but yet true, when there are any engineering or surveying blunders to be tested, it is invariably the Messrs. Dalton who are culled upon to report on or set makers and men riglit. This is the fourth or fifth job I bear they have proved the ignorance of the engineer. So much for our so-called Auckland professional men —this speaks for itself. Look at the Government surveys inspected by them found to be all wrong—vide in O'Neill v. Kelly's case. Why not give puck men as the Messrs. Dalton, who are thoroughly efficient and qualified in the profession, the work of the Board, and then we should have good walls, and spend less money? I can't help stirring when I see both public and private money wasted to try and educate or patch up the Board's engineer. I can't, sec it is anything else. I like to see fair play, which is'bonny play. Mr. Editor, you must excuse my long letter, but as I cannot shut my eyes to this wanton waste, I plead as an apology for troubling you.—i am, &c, A Ratkpayeb. Newton, November 14, 1871.