THE GRAVING DOCK.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2601, 19 June 1871, Page 2

THE GRAVING DOCK.

Tina morning at 11 o’clock, the members of the Dock Trust had a conference with his Honor the Superintendent and Executive, to explain the position of affairs between the trustees of the Graving Dock and the contractors. There were present, the Superintendent, the Provincial Secretary, the Provincial Treasurer, and the Provincial Solicitor, members of the Government, and Messrs 15. 13. Martin (Chairman of the Dock Trust), Burns, Hill, .Rattray, Taylor, and Captain Thomson, members of the Dock Trust, as well as Mr J. S. Webb, Secretary; and Macgregor, Engineer; and Mr Haggitt, Solicitor to the Trust.

Mr 11. B, Martin said at the last meeting of the Trust it was suggested that probably he had committed an error in not sending to His Honor, with other documents, the reports of Messrs Brunton, Millar, Simpson, but those documents wore hardly before the Trust. It appeared from his Honor’s remarks that ho had read them, and the object of the conference was to put the Executive in possession of all that had taken place in the dispute between the contractors mid the engineer.

At the request of the chairman the engineer read the report, and comments, upon the reports of Messrs Brunton, Millar, and Simpson. The document is already before the public.

The Secretary read an account of what passed at an interview betiycep a deputation from the Dqok Trust, with oqp qf the contractors, Mr Connor, which is also published. v

The Superintendent said he had read Mr Bmpton’s report, but Mr Millar’s he had not seen. He presumed the better way would be to leave the documents with the Executive to enable them to examine them at leisure, as they evidently required consideration. In wiiting the letter he was entirely led by a desire for the interests of the Province, as it was not at present in a financial position to construct the sheds and workshops required for the work of the Dock, and still less to throw money away in litigation. Some members of the Trust had taken him to task for writing the letter that had led to that conference. If those gentlemen would indemnify the Province against the expense of legal proceedings, they might nail their colors to the mast if they chose; otherwise ho was not disposed to go into legal expense, which he believed to be the most unprofitable of all expenditure. It was much to be regretted that a work so much admired by everyone who had seen it, was not handed over by the contractors completed, as it was so evidently an advantage to them to do so : , that he thought they would have jgone somewhat outside the contract to have effected it. (But it was no use to disguise it, the contractors had no confidence in the Engineer.: He was not justifying or condemning either opinion, but, under the circumstances, he thought it would be better to refer the matter to a third party—say Mr Blackett, the newly appointed Colonial Engineer, Mr tfrunton had stated that for fifty pounds he would undertake to stop the leak; and although Mr Macgregor had reported strongly against Mr Brunton’s opinions, that gentleman was of high standing in his profession, and had great experience in public works, if therefore ho made an allegation, it would not do to pooh, pooh it. Ho was not in a position to decide upon the opposite views ; certainly it was not a question for a lawyer, and, if for ,ui engineer, it was one of common sense and experience.

The .'-eCRETAHY to the Dock Trust read the minutes of conference between the Dock Board- and the contractors. His Honor asked who would be responsible if) on opening the concrete at the bottom of the Dock, the consequences foreshadowed by Mr Brunton took place ? He understood the leak occurred in a spot in which the engineer had allowed a departure ffrom the terms of the specification as to the thickness of the concrete, and, if so, the -contractor would be exonerated should it prove to have been the causa. Mr Macgregor explained that, although the water rose at that spot/ the water was forced in from the pressure without. Tiie Superintendent : It might be presumed, if the original speculation had been adhere I to, the leak would not have occurred.

Mr Burns said, if Mr Brunton would stop the leak for LSO, his offer would be accepted.

The Superintendent explained that the offer was to lay down LSO pn condition of the other party laying down LICK), and that if he did not succeed in stopping the leak, he would willingly forfeit his deposit. The offer was made to the contractor, not to him. What did the trustees think to his suggestion of calling in a new doctor ? The Secretary said, as matters stood it would be fruitless, as Mr Connor refused to take up the stones.

Mr Ta,yi.on believed; the contractor open to conviction, and he, tfiereforeiimought it better to call in an unprejudiced engineer. If he reported against the contractors there would be an excuse for going to law., It was singular that live engineers should have been called, who each reported in fkvor of the party who paid him. Captain Thomson suggested, that a block of concrete mixed according to specification should be made, and subjected to ’pressure of water, to ascertain whether it vyas impervious 1 1 it of not

Mr Rattray explained that the Board, not being engineers; had been especially careful to abide in every respect by the terms of the specification.' He referred his Honor to several clauses in confirmation. The Pr vvincial Solicitor did not think the Board had formed any opinion as to the right or wrong of the contractors. Every member of the Trust sympathised with them. As he understood the matter, the contractors wanted to wring conditions out of the Board which ought not to be conceded, otherwise the Board might be in* volved in a serious difficulty.

Mr Martin said everything had been done under the advice of their solicitor.

Mr Hagoitt, solicitor to the Board, said that on two grounds the Board were justified in taking over the works : First, because the contractors refused to finish tbg work by taking means to stop the leak; and, secondly, the time for completion cf the contract was considerably past due, and therefore the Board were justified in taking over the work iu terms of the contract.

After some farther conversation, Mr Haggitt. pointed out that- Mr Mac* gregor would be quite justified iu inviting Mr Blackett’s opinion on the cause of leak without consulting the contractors. Mr R. B. Martin said it appeared to him three alternatives should be laid before the l-.xecutive, to which the Board should re* quest answers Ist. Whether the Executive would recommend consulting a neutral engineer ? 2nd. Whether the couise adopted, should be persevered in ? 3rd. Whether the Dock Trust should throw up the sponge ? It was evident ithat it was absurd on the part of the Dock Trust to take any course opposed to the Government. The Superintendent hoped the Trust would see that the Government was not unreasonable in calling the attention of the Board to the matter, as they would have to pay the cost. He could assure them that there was nothing political involved in the matter, although the contrary had been in: sinuated. Mr Rattray explained that no stch idea was expressed. It was merely in reference to the Government having the money to find. The Superintendent said the Board, in the first instance, were appointed to find the money, but they did not do so. The money was found for them.

The documents were left with the Executors for consideration, and the Board withdrew.