CORRESPONDENCE. SYDNEY SQUARE. TO THE EBDITOR.

Waikato Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1543, 25 May 1882, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE. SYDNEY SQUARE. TO THE EBDITOR.

Sue — A few words in reply to Mr Sarnies' letter in your last i<-sue. The total amount of receipts fiom all sources, (excepting teams in lieu of coin) was £77 G's Gel ; the amount of contract ,£BO ; extras allowed (removing heaps of siufance soils) £4 10s, £84 10s. Mr Sancles has been paid £74 cash, and teams supplied as per letter, £i 10s, but I believe that it is neaier if Jnot more than double that amount. I have been unable to see apaity who can give correct information about this item. liefoie leaving money matteis, glass s>eed and fi eight on same cost £7, leaving a balance owing to me (after subscribing £.">), of C 3 13s u'd. I cannot but admire the ofliontry of .stating thefc ho dtil Jitw>h the uoih auoxhrnj to plan, when the borough engineer and a host of otheis, nut inyinwn, know very well it would have cost about double the amount of contract money, to finish the Squa-ie according to his ot< it plan. The eastern portion oi the Square, aecoiding to plan, wa& to have been made up from nothing to nine inches. The rewas not as much a b.inowload in this direction. The committee had in fact to accept the inevitable ; those who Avere doing the work knew that the contract .money was ab&oibcd, and did not like the prospect of going on and looking to the contractor for the balance that would be requn ed to finish, according to plan so the difficulty, or rather -the Square was smoothed over, and allowed to pass, of which fact the engineer and the public are cognisant, and I scarcely think the contractor can plead ignoi.uice. Kegai ding the note of warning about letting people know what sort of "pei&ons" they had to deal with, the woid " conti actors '" might have been appiopriately inserted. Anyone acquainted with Mr Sandes would not for a moment doubt that ho paid some men employed by the committee out of Ins o\\ n pocket ; but why do this and leave feed supplied to his horses, hire of plough, and at least one man a\lio was di i\ ing the horses, still unpaid ? It is peifectly tine that I have moie than once piomiscd to try and collect some more money and give it to him, knowing or believing that he was out of pocket, or lather that even the woik done amounted to more than the contract money, he having taken it at a ridiculously loa\ figtue. In conclusion, he will find on coinpaung notes that my statements at the public meeting, although not given out as exact, uciemuch nearer the mark than suggesting that pipes at least fifteen inches in circumfeiencc should be used in cairying the borough water, ayuuiU nature, into Cook-street. Thcßoiough in veality only contiibuted £20 towaul h veiling the Squaie; the public can decide the matter of "slinking out of benefiting property, not cai mg about contra utovs, &c, &c. Know- ' ing the facts as almost everybody does, | they cannot but conclude that it was veiy rash of the contractor rushing into piint on the Squaie. — I am, &c, AY. Gumming.