CORRESPONDENCE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume IX, Issue 923, 5 March 1881, Page 4

CORRESPONDENCE.

[JUe do not hold ourselves responsible for opinions expressed by our correspondents}. INFORMAL TENDERING. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Through your columns I should like to ventilate what I consider a just cause of complaint against our Borough Councillors. They advertised for tenders for fixing the kerbing from Read’s quay to Grey-street, both sides. The conditions were that 5 per cent, upon the total amount should be deposited as a guarantee, of bona fides. Mr. James Wrights tender was accepted, although the deposit came short of the amount necessary to be lodged to render the tender formal. 1 was the next lowest tenderer, and forwarded the amount

required. The difference in the totals of our several tenders is only £3 15s, and although I grant the Council has a right to be as saving as possible, still I scarcely think that special conditions should be set aside for such a paltry sum. Each tenderer has an amount of time lost by perusing specifications, making calculations, procuring sureties, signing bonds Ac., to say nothing of collecting money to deposit, and I argue that if informal tenders are sent in, they should at once be thrown out, and not considered ; whilst those who have complied in every particular, should only be received by the Corporation, — I am &c., < • 1 Allan Taylor. [As Mr. Taylor has affixed his name to the letter, we publisli it. But on enquiry we find that Mr. Wright’s tender was only in part informal, in having calculated the per centage of deposit for 45 chains of kerbing, instead of 50 chains. The Council evidently thought that as he had originally complied with the spirit of the tender, and ultimately with the letter of it by paying the balance, his offer should be accepted.—Ed. P.B.S.]