Wanganui Chronicle. AND PATEA-RANGITIKEI ADVERTISER. "NULLA DIES SINE LINEA." MONDAY, AUGUST 16, 1880.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXII, Issue 9197, 16 August 1880, Page 2

Wanganui Chronicle. AND PATEA-RANGITIKEI ADVERTISER. "NULLA DIES SINE LINEA." MONDAY, AUGUST 16, 1880.

The term " Government stroke " has been used to express a very inadequate amount of work in proportion to the pay, and now that so many of those denominated the " unemployed " are being engaged for public works throughout the colony, anything tending to throw light on the probable result of the experiment is of interest. Of course it is only reasonable to suppose that men unaccustomed to pick and shovel work would do it far more slowly and worse than regular navvies, whilst the extra number of overlookers necessary would tend to increase the cost. The extent of the increase arising from unskilled in place of skilled labour is, however, of considerable importance. From a philanthropic point of view it is better to find a man work than to keep him in idleness; and yet, if the work supplied be of a kind to which he is unaccustomed, and for which he is possibly un suited, the latter might; be really a cheaper course. We have been led into these remarks by what, so far as we can learn, has been the result of the experiment in this part of the colony. If our information be correct, which we have no reason for doubting, the employment of this miscellaneous labour has certainly not thus far proved a success. The Government placed sums of money at the disposal of the Rangitikei and Wanganui County Councils towards the construction of roads leading inland from those points, on condition of some of the Wellington " unemployed " being engaged for the works. In the former case we learn that work whjch had actually been tendered for at 22s 6d per chain, cost about £7 per chain when done by the Wellington men, and that after they were discharged, because they refused to work, the remainder of th.c length was let at 17s 6d per chain. The Wanganui case has attracted more notice, and we therefore give the following, which we believe to be a correct outline of it. The County Engineorreported, presumably in consequence of some wish for such information on the part of the County Council, that the work for which the "unemployed" were engaged was costing four or five times as much as it would have done if let by contract. The wages paid being so small, it is not surprising that an idea should have arisen that he must be mistaken s and, as he waß clearly right as to the actual cost, the next question was whether he had not undervalued the work. Some of the Councillors, and particularly the Chairman, who had visited the road, evidently thought that such a mistake had been made, basing their opinions on what similar work had cost two or Uiree years ago. The en^accr, on the other hand, asserted that his valuation wat, bo(; oaiy a sufficient but even a high

one, and quoted recent contracts to prove it. To teßt the question, it was agreed to let about a couple of miles by contract, and the result was that the lowest tender was nearly twenty per cent below the engineer's estimate j while several tenders from well-known contractors approximated very closely to it. Of course such a result could not fail to be gratifying to the engineer, as a eorroboration o( his statements, but that is not tho point to which, wo wish to draw public attention. An examination of the tenders brings to light some facts deserving the serious notice of thinking men throughout the colony. The very men, with whose labour lighter work had boen costing from £4 to £5 per chain, tendered for the contract length at 22s Cd per chain — a tacit, and no doubt unintentional but no less a most self-evident admission, that in spite of their inexperience they were capable of accomplishing four times as much work aa they had been doing. The price at which the contract was let to experienced men was under 15s per chain, and, putting these results of the tendering together, we arrive at the conclusion that the work previously done by the " unemployed " on the road must have been costing six times its value, a close correspondence with the Eangitikei case. The recent report of the' Railway Commissioners asserted that the railways of New Zealand, as a whole, were not paying half interest on their cost, and an intimation wa3 given that even this approximate half only accrued through appropriating to interest moneys which ought properly to have been set aside to cover wear and tear and general depreciation in the value of the lines. These railways have all been constructed by contract, and some of them at prices which, as several cases hereabouts testify, have been ruinous to the contractors. If then, as the result of the use of unskilled labour, those now in progress are likely to cost six times m much, what but utter financial ruin and collapse threatens our Railway Department? It seems perfectly clear that if the labour of the " unemployed " is to be utilised in this way, some means must be devised to prevent " Government stroke," and the enormous extra expense which it entails ; and it is so notoriously difficult to get work out' of unwilling men that the problem is not an easy one. Small contracts, or piece-work at fair prices fixed by the engineers, appear the most likely solution.