BOROUGH AND COUNTY CONTRACTS.

Thames Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2844, 27 March 1878, Page 3

BOROUGH AND COUNTY CONTRACTS.

(To the Editor of the Bvekihg Stab.) Sir,—At the meeting the other night an!attempt was made to throw ridicule npon some officer of the County, whose duty it is to inspect the contracts carried on by that body, but we never heard anything about the Thames Borough Council and their undertakings in the same line. It was said the, County Engineer allowed the work to be slummed (that's the word) orer, but never a word about our infallible Borough officers. Perhaps some of the speakers have reason to say that champagne covers a multitude of sins, and that there are two laws^for contractors, one being to strictly carry out the articles of the specifications, or the other to bo allowed to slum the work over. It is the general opinion expressed here among thos* who have given attention to the ■abject, that if the offer of the highest tenderer was accepted, and he carried out the work strictly in accordance with specifications it would save the Borough , at least seventy or eighty pounds on the Tarara road to the Fishing Bock; and another prevalent opinion is this, that if the County were performing the work by contract it would neyer have been talten over in the way it was by the Borough. I say, sir, the contractor should have to maintain the work for a resonable period, and that a thoroughly competent man should have the inspection of it on behalf of the Borough after being passed, and save the wage* of two men who have teed constantly employed by the Foreman of Works, and it apparently will provide them with permanent employment; Indeed, it would perhaps be cheaper to call for tenders to rebuild sixteen or seventeen chains of tlie sea-wall afresh, but according to specification.—l am, &c, Paudean O'Eaffebty. Grahamstown, March 26.