TRAINING WALL EXTENSION.

Gisborne Times, Volume X, Issue 1019, 12 October 1903, Page 3

TRAINING WALL EXTENSION.

DISCUSSION ON CONTRACT, QUESTION a

!Ait adjourned meeting of the Harbor Board, was held on Saturday afternoon to consider the subject oi tenders lor the extension of the training walk The following tenders had been received at the meeting on (Wednesday Py McLaughlin and Co., £16,624 13s 4d ; Mackrell and Colley, £17,208 5s 4d ; J £ McLean and Sons, £17,460. There were present: The Chairman (Mr Town ley), and Messrs Cooper, Sievwright, Hepburn, Harding, Clark, and Captain Tucker. The Oiverseer (Mr D. A. McLeod) reported that he had gone through the specifications, and was oi opinion that the Engineer’s figures might safely be relied on, with the exception of the item with respect to concrete, and also the item for machinery which would be required sp that the John Townley’s force-pump would not be needed. The item, £1285 for contractor’s profit and contingencies, would be mostly absorbed in providing fori other things not mentioned in the estimates,.such as laying tram, providing trucks, ce-ment-shed, the services of a diver, and wear and tear on punts and gear. With these additions it would he as follow:—Concrete as per sample shown £6597, labor in boring

and driving piles £509, working up other timbers £648, ironwork per schedule £661 18s, spikes £3 10s,

rubble filling £1354, tarring timbers £l2O, canvas and tacks £65, removing sand, etc., £SOO, gantrey piledriving plant £550, contractor’s profit and contingencies £1285, machinery £I2OO, total £13,493 8s 6d. Appended was an estimate of the concrete mixed with clean sharp sand and with fine beach shingle, In the proportions of one part cement, two parts clean sharp sand, and three parts broken stone,- which would cost £9035 4s, also in the proportion of one part cement two parts fine shingle, and three parts broken stone —which would cost a total of £6597. The Overseer stated it seemed clear from the Engineer’s figures that ho never contemplated that the amount of cement should he used which worked out according to his specifications. He suggested that this part of the specifications should be altered so as to read : One yard of concrete shall mean so many feet of broken stone, so -many feet of sand or shingle, as the case might be, and so many feet of cement. His estimate worked out about 37s per cubic yard of cement. Samples of the sand and the gravel were shown, the sand being from Wainui.

The Chairman said that the proportions, he had learned since the previous meeting, were the same as the Government were using for the tunnel on the railway. Mr Clark': Does that apply ? .The Chairman A good deal of our work is in water, and therefore requires more cement than if it were dried in the sun. Mr Clark said that the concrete in the tunnel was requ red to stand heavy pressure. The Chairman : I think there jvill be a good deal heavier pressure on ours. . i Mr Clark said that neither he nor the Chairman, as non-professional men, could say how far it would apply. The Chairmanlt applies this

far, that while they would save all the cement they safely c.ould, to make ours weaker, so that it will require repairing later on, would bo no economy. There is no doubt the better it is made the better it svill stand.

Mr Sievwright: Is there any chance of getting Mr King to carry out this work ? The Chairman said that he'could not' say—Mr King' was not doing 'anything at present. Mr Cooper said he had the same -feeling as Mr Sievwright in tne matter. He feared that they would be getting on the breakers with the work. He did not question Mr McLeod’s capacity; but they had to look a little beyond that.. In such a piece of work there was a good deal of risk. Things might be all right so long as everything was going smoothly, but when anything went wrong there would he trouble. He did not care about taking the responsibility. He moved that they ask Mr King to carry out the work. He would no doubt know exactly what to put dowp. He was a professional man.

Mr Clark ; In what respect 7—a marine engineer ? Mr Coouer,: Yes, I will go that far—as a "marine engineer, and what I say I am quite prepared to stand

by. Mr Clark : Ob, yes, you will stand by anything. • * Mr Cooper I know, what I Will stand by. Mr Harding said that they had threshed all this out before ; it was all gone into when the appointment of Mr McLeod was made. It was understood then that Mr ‘McLeod was competent to carry • out the work, and he was sorry that tne very moment Mr King had virtually left them they should wamt him to come back again to carry out this work-. He was quite prepared to stand by, the responsibility he took in 'tne matter. ■ He thought that ‘Mr McLeod was willing and capable of carrying out the work as well as ,Mr King or’anyone else, as long as he had the plans and specifications to go by, and he understood that they had all that-othcrsvise his opinion would agree with that of Messrs Sievwxight and Cooper. He thought they had as good a man as they could get. , , , . Mr Sievwright: I understood that Mr McLeod was to say whether or not he would carry out the work.The Chairman : And he has not said so yet. Mr Clark said’ that he had very great respect for Mr King—he was a very good man —but if there was one prayer that lie should put up it was that lie should he protected, from his friends, who did not know how far to protect his interest. The majority of the. Board had decided that they could do without him, hut since that had been carried the other members wanted to get him hack. They had heard a lot about professional advice and marine engineers'; there was no question of a marine engineer about it. /Mr King’s prayer should be, “ Save me from my frie.nds.” He had Va good opinion I of Mr King and always liked him—tile only tiling was he thought lie was a little slow' in driving work ahead. The- Board had tlic plans and specifications for this wprk, and the man who could carry it out. B!ut the minority of the Board did hot want him to do it. They Wanted to force Mr King on them. For the first

time in two years the majority of the Board had had a say (The Chairman laughed).-

Mr Clark-: The Chairman may laugh.- He has had the say for a long time—he has had control of everything. Now the majority will have their say * Mr Copper : I would like to see what the majority has done except to keep back work. The Chairman again laughed and said : Better, leave it at that. “ Yes, I will leave it- at that,’’, replied Mr Clark. You are all talking,” rejoined Mr Sievwright, “ and there is nothing before the Board. I want Mr McLeod to say whether he will Mr Clark : It’s all Mr King you don’it give Mr McLeod a chance to say anything.; You want to get Mr King there. Mr Sievwright : I am quite willing to let Mr McLeod have his say— Mr Clark : Then why don’t you give him a chance to explain himself ? Mr Sievwright : There is the report. Mr Clark : Give him a chance ; you’re like the lawyer—trying a hit of bluff.

The Chairman; Mr McLeod’s report is there. 'Mr Clark : You won’t- give him a ch’ancc—you want to block him. ,The Chairman: I have not said a word. Mr Clark: Oh, you have said enough. Mr Sievwright: If he puts it an writing Mr Clark : If you had put it that Way at first “ I waited for him to answer, •’ Mr Sievwright protested. “It is not fair,” he went on to add indignantly in reference to what Mr ClarK had said. “ It is very unfair of you,” retor-

ted Mr Clark. “ Order !” interpolated the Chairman, and then Mr Whinray threw in a little humor which was understood to be to the effect that the Chairman should take reiuge behind the door. “ The chairs here will stand a lot of knocking about,” Mr Clark replied, laughing s - The Chairman, restoring the discussion to its original course, said they had Mr McLeod’s report there. He had previously advised that the work be let by tender, and that the work should not go beyond the breakwater. They had disregarded the latter advice, and now they had the tenders to deal with. Mr Harding: He recommended tenders.

The Chairman : Yes. I Mr Harding : The tenders came in, and the meeting was adjourned for something else. The Chairman (holding up the report) : There it is. Mr Clark: The Overseer should be supported, and you have never given him a chance. “ Excuse me ; that is not the position,” said Mr Sievwright in an indignant tone. “Mr McLeod was asked to say whether he would undertake the work, and il not ” “ Here is his report,’-’ said Mr Clark. “ But he does not say,” added Mr Sievwright.

“ You did not give him a chance,” retorted Mr Clark. “ You asked for Mr King .straight away.. Let the Chairman ask Mr McLeod now.” Mr Sievwright : I will accept it verbally. Mr McLeod said that the reason lie had not stated in his report that he was prepared to carry out the work was because the tenders were still under consideration. He was quite prepared to stand by the figures he had given ■.< We have got it now,” said Mr Sievwright. The Chairman said they should first dispose ol the tenders. The estimate of the Overseer was £13,493.. Mr Hepburn : And the plant .will belong to us at the finish.: Continuing, Mr McLeod said that the only point he had any doubt was as to the quantities o£ cement. He explained the tests that he had made, and said he believed the proportions he had given would be satisfactory, but he did not consider himself competent to say until further tests had been made. The Chairman said be ass.umed the intention of the members was to have the work done by day labor ana in order to clear the way he would move that the tenders be declined. Mr Sievwright seconded the motion which was.carried unanimously, and this was followed up by the rescinding of the previous’ resolution JLu regard to having the work done by, contract.. The Chairman: Now I am open to receive a motion from any, member.

Mr Clark said that they had an estimate of what the work could be done for, and now. the question as to the proportions of cement to be used had to be gone into, and he thought they, should have some, further information on the point. In reply to Mr Sievwright, Mr McLeod said it was a matter lor expert opinion as to whether or not the quantities given would suit—lie 'thought it would, but the block might he porous., Mr, Whinray said that it was a work of such importance that they could not afford to set about it in any haphazard manner. “ Hear-, hear,” interpolated Mr Clark and the Chairman.. Continuing, Mr, Whinray said he thought the'Board would be safe in having some guiding hand in this matter—they would- save money by doing so. Mr McLeod admitted lie had not got the necessary experience as to the proportions required. In doing the work themselves they could watch its progress, and if they thought necessary stop at any point. In "reply, to Captain Tucker, the Chairman said that Messrs John Wilson and Co. had written offering to tender for the supply of New. Zealand manufactured cement. The Chairman said that [that would he a matter of detail. Captain Tucker said that colonial cement should be a great saving if it ■ was satisfactory. The Chairman said that although tlie writer stated that the Napier Board was using it, ho noticed that that body" had recently ordered two or three thousand casks of Portland cement - from Messrs Duthie and Co. I-Ie thought that w;liat they were doing was mixing it. The Secretary said that he Wil been informed that ithc cost was about equal. The Chairman said lie thought it was better to keep to the established article. In the course of remarks Mr McLeod said that he had 'used New Zealand cement for the I-likuwai bridge, and had found it very satisfactory. In reply to questions the Secretary .said that Mr McLeod had allowed in his estimate for Portland cement at Ids, but the latest quotation from Wellington was 12s Od, which would amount to about 14s landed in Gisborne. The cost for the original breakwater work was 6s Od. Mr Clark said that the last meeting had been adjourned to consider this matter, and now lie-would like a further adjournment. Mr McLeod had given them some quantities for the concrete, and ho would like to have those proportions confirmed and also further information as to the local cement. It was well worth getting further information before deciding anything. Mr Sievwright : Move to that effect, and I will second it. Mr Clark said lie would move accordingly. He did not wish to rush the Board into anything. The proportions for the concrete should be submitted to a competent man. Mr Sievwright : I suppose an engineer. Mr Clark : Some competent man ; perhaps Mr Fergusson, of Wellington. .. Wc might also have enquiries made as to the -value of the local cement. Mr Sievwright seconded the motion. Mr McLeod was a good man to carry out work, hut he did not | believe that he was capable of tc'ilI ing them scientifically, as to the proper proportions for mixing the concrete. Yet they meant to go on with this work, He was quite certain they would have to call iu expert advice as to the quality of the cement. That was the only anxiety he had about Mr McLeod. Mr Clark : ’I cannot understand why you want to put it in the other man’s hands. I Mr Sievwright went on to speak very highly of Mr King’s work, and ' MX Clark ridiculed some of the opinions expressed. H'e is one of the best engineers in the colony—there is not a better man in the colony,” declared Mr Cooper .with emphasis, adding: ‘‘And’ I nni prepared to stand r ou are prepared to stand by ling, so long as it does not cost my tiling,” retorted Mr Clark, itaiiv Tucker intervened as the maker, pointing out that they hreshe’d this subject out before, it was unfair to Mr King to bringing him on the tapis. shall always bring lvim on ' said Mr Cooper, with enthushen he will have to take what els ” replied Captain Tucker, [link wc ought to leave Mr King -no purpose is served by albringing his name up. Ido lten-d to "open my mouth as long :an keep it shut.” r is a case of ‘ save me from friends 1 with Mr King,” added lark. , • b only leads to unpleasant ; being said,” remarked Capt. T. members then changed the subo the most suitable date for looting, and it was agreed that lould he held on .October 22nd,