COUNCILLOR AND ENGINEER.

King Country Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 349, 1 April 1911, Page 5

COUNCILLOR AND ENGINEER.

I WHAT IS GRAVEL? A letter \v?.s read at the Borough Council meeting on Wednesday night ; from Mr 11. P. Julian one of the • borough contractors complaining that i the Engineer was requiring him to improve the quality of the metal supplied and stating there was no better procurable. If required to supply screened gravel he asked to be given the allowance Mr Lewer was getting. I If screened he further asked for an j extension of time. A long discussion took place on the j subject of Mr Julian's contract. Cr Julian entered into the matter ! very fully and ultimately the Mayor asked him to put a motion before the meeting. Cr Julian: I understood that we accepted a tender from Mr Lewer to supply metal at 4s on the flat and 5s on the hill and therefore this Council accepted the contract and the Engineer had instructions to go ahead. I had heard nothing further until the matter was mentioned to me yesterday. We never authorised screening to be done and I certainly thought contractor number two should be treated in the same manner as contractor number one. Cr Stevens explained that he was asked to go up and see the rejected metal. He went up but they did not see any rejected metal. Cr Young did not know what was in the specifications. He visited the spot and did not see any of the rejected metal. Cr Julian did not know whether they could get an improved quality without screening. Cr King said any councillor had the right to go and see any work. He went but there was no rejected metal there to see. The Engineer said needless fuss had been made about the matter. The metal complained of had been sold to a builder at 8s a yard. Mr Julian had suffered no loss in the matter. The Mayor said when an outside matter of this kind was brought up it would be better to do it by notice of motion. He understood the contractor i Lewer wanted the contract as a question of carting not for suppyling special gravel. The river bed had been worked out for some time. He was bound to rule that the question of quality and that of carting had no connection. The original letter from Mr Lewer was an offer to do carting j at a certain rate. It was a voluntary offer, and was considered a reasonable one by the works committee and accepted. Cr Julian said the works committee did not authorise them to load anybody with extra cost. Cr Stevens moved, and Cr King seconded, that the letter be received and the matter left in the hand 3 of the Engineer to be dealt with. The Mayor said he hoped the Council would keep clear of these troubles between contractors and engineer. If they interfered, they would land themselves in for a lot of bother. The Engineer said he went up when the second load was in the dray. He objected to its quality, and the contractor sold it for Ss. Where was the hardship to the contractor? Cr Julian said that the works committee was a working committee, and as for making a fuss and speaking out, he thought, if objected to, it was a bad state of affairs. He thought the letter read referred to the metal put down. Of course if he was wrong ! he would withdraw. ! The motion was carried. j The Mayor said, regarding Carroll street, it was found impossible to get sufficiently good metal to justify carting it. He suggested that the question of screening be left to the works committee. Cr Young said, as far as he was concerned the Engineer was quite right in insisting on good metal if that supplied would not carry the traffic.