A COMPLAINT.

Gisborne Times, Volume V, Issue 130, 12 June 1901, Page 2

A COMPLAINT.

To tho Editor.)

Sir, —Would you kindly insert iji your paper, tho following letter :—Having seen an advertisement in the Times, re “ Mangatu contract,” apply to Mr A. Ford Matthews, at his oilico (Civil Engineer), and living 25 miles from Gisborne, I decided on going to seek information. I arrived at the oifico nine days previous to closing of tenders ; tho oflico was closed. After a diligent search, I found Mr Matthews, and asked for information required. He told mo ho would meet mo at tho Whatatutu Hotol on tho following Tuesday, with specifications, and show mo over proposod work, which I informed other intending contractors for samo. I rode five miles to the Whatatutu Hotel according to promise, and waited thoro until after noon, when Mr G. B. Oman informed mo that ho had a telephone messago from Mi Matthews, stating that ho would not bo up until the following day at lunch. I then went to Whatatutu Hotol tho following day, and waited until evening, and ho again did not arrive. I again went the following morning (Thursday), and he was not there. Through having a good knowledge of the country I decided on going and finding tho surveyed road lino myself. I met on tho way tho successful contractor, who informed mo that he saw Mr Matthews at Te Ixaraka tho evening before, and he produced a sketch of specifications. Ho also stated that Mr Matthews returned to Gisborno from To Ilaraka. Wo then wont over tho road togethor and returned homo. I decided not to tender, as I was never treated like this by any Engineer. My son was dissatisfied at my losing four days'and riding somo ninety miles; and he was determined to tender if I did not. I gave him all necessary information, and if successful the use of my contracting plant. Ho went to Gisborne, 60 miles (coming and going). Ho tendered in the usual way, and enclosed deposit required, tho amount of his tender being £54. Ho met Mr Matthews in Gladstone road, and was told that it was ridiculously low, and impossible to do tho work at the price. I find now that Messrs Dillon and party’s tenQor o£ olv.ty odd pounds has been accepted. Last year I complotcd a track similar to this on part of tho same block, Mangatu No. 2, joining Mangatu No. 1. The amount of my tender was £75, accepted. Tho other tender was £145

(one hundred ahd forty-five pounds). This contract paid me well. It seems strange that when my tender was accepted by one Board at such a big difference that his tender being only a few pounds lower would not bo accepted by Sir Matthews.

I may state that there are other contractors who havo complained to me of tbo

same contract. My object in thus writ-

ing is for the benefit of other contractors, as I am determined not to tender undor

Mr Matthews in the future.—l am, etc.,

Edw’ard' Deverv. [Mr Matthews informs us that ho was \ v duly represented by Mr Paltridge, a thorough competent man, who advised him that Mr Devery’s tender was so much under the cost that would be entailed that it would not be fair to entertain it.—Ed. Times.]