Harbor Board and the Stone Supply.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume II, Issue 297, 11 May 1889, Page 3

Harbor Board and the Stone Supply.

ANOTHER “ENQUIRY.”

Almost sines the Harbor Board had its existence the supply of stone for the harbor works has been a subject of anxiety, and something continually occurs to renew the ratepayers’ interest in the question. The latest trouble has been the partial failure of Mr McLoughlin to carry out his contract, and his then charging the officials of the Board with obstructing him and adding to the difficulties with which he had to contend. . At the last meeting of the Board, it was decided that a Committee meeting of the whole Board should meet on Thursday afternoon, Mr McLoughlin to formulate his charges in writing. The Board met accordingly, there being present—The Chairman, and Messrs Blevwright, Chambers, Bennett, Shelton, Murphy, Townley, and Matthewson, Mr McLoughlin wrote as follows :— m sir, In reply to your letter of the Sth instant, I beg to state that I have no means of knowing who is responsible for the non. supplying of trucks, and other matters complained of by myself, but of course it must have come from the Engineer’s department. 1. March 18th, I was idle three hours for the want of trucks; March 27th, 4 hours; April 2nd, 4 hours; April Btb, 2 hours; April 10th, 3 hours. 2. Ido not think tnat I should be charged with the wages of those men and horses your Engineer has thought fit to employ, because if it was not for my line being washed away, I would have been across to the Island on Saturday last. 8. Sleepers and fastenings—lt is true that the sleepers were found were the Engineer states, but those were sleepers that were put in temporarily under the end where the steam crane stands, but when it was shifted back after knocking off. those few were forgotten. 4. Stoppages in my fortnightly payments—l think it is very unfair to charge me for hauling fascines . to the works, especially as the Board had not W been put to any expense in loading—the trucks han to go to the beach in any case to got loaded with stone. The sledges I consider I was charged too much for. Inferior stone— The Engineer refers to my supplying inferior itono. All I can say is that the men who aro working on the ceaoh now aro the same •• wore there in Mr McLeod's time, and they toll me that it la superior to what was supplied in fail time.—P. McLoughlin." The Engineer remarked that the aMetilons were all with regard to dateo previous to that Df which complaint had been made of the non. delivery of stone | complaint had only been Bade in reference to the past fortnight. Mr Chambers eaid that at the same time if the contractor could not gat the trucks at the times referred to it would be a loss to him, At the request of Mr Bievwright the Engineer quoted from the specifications, Which proved that the contractor was bound to deliver stone in such quantities (and only in such quantities) and of euoh quality as the Engineer may from time to time direct, and perform the work to his entire satisfaction ; delays of any kind which prevented the Board requiring stone had to be submitted to by the Mr Chambers said by the specifications they might keep the contractor idle a week. In reply to a remark from Mr Bennett, the Engineer said the restriction as to quantity Was tp prevent the'.contractor bringing in a Urge supply when they had no use for it. Mr Bennett: It is rough on him, The Chairman: The contractor knew that before he went on with it. Mr Shelton said it left them room for a large discretion. The Contractor: I understood I was to get trucks to keep me going at all times. The Engineer said it was impossible to guarantee the trucks at all times—some of them might be in use, Mr Chambers: Did he not get trucks when he required them ? The Engineer: He says so. In reply to Mr Chambers the Engineer said on one occasion the stone had been rpiped in the trucks, and this caused delay in sorting, whereas if the proper kind of stone had been used then would have been no such dday. Mr Shelton asked if the Board were not short of trucks and at present ordering more ? The Engineer said there (were quite sufficient for other contractors— they bad a better stock now than ever they had, _ Even supposing there were delays the specifications made provision for it, and there was nothing in the matter from a legal point of view, The Contractor: You have it all your own way, it is too one sided. The Engineer: You should have looked at that before you signed. The Chairman said there was no question that the contractor was wholly in the hands of the Board. Mt Bennett took it that the stringent Manses wer- not for the purpose of being need harshly. The Chairman thought the contractor’s only ground of complaint would be that if he wanted the trucks they were lying idle in the yard and not sent when he asked for them, pe did not say the trucks were disengaged. The Engineer said even supposing they had a dozen trucks in the yard and concrete was being put in situ they could not take the locomotive away and leave the main work. Mr Shelton said the trucks should be sent in ths morning. The Engineer said as a matter of course they always did sand them, though there was sometimes a little delay. Mr Chambers said what the contractor had to show was that he had suffered loss through Mr Thomson’s carelessness—otherwise there Was nothing for them to go upon. Mr Bennett said it would still be manifestly unfair if the oontraetor eould not got trucks

one day, and the next was celled upon to supply a larger quantity of stone. The Engineer said only the last fortnight’s supply had been complained of. — Mr Shelton asked was there not a good excuse then, that the embankment at the b'and had been washed away ’ 'Mr Townley (to Engineer): la it not a fact that you are getting stone from the seme place by drays,' and the oontraetor neglected to do it while ha was fixing up the fascines ? Mr Shelton said the contractor had been getting more atone since than than ho ever got—the supply was over 70 tone a day. ' Tbs Engineer said that was after he had got notice. In reference to a remark from Mr Matthewson, it was understood the complaints should be considered both in equity and law. Mr Matthewson said be had seen trucks »ded with stone stationed in the blockyard about a weak. The Engineer cop'd be gery arbitrary with the contractor, and he would like to see a little more harmony between them. The Engineer explained that the big block tracks were sent out as often as possible and wore mod for big stone; the large trucks were filled with boulders until they had as many loaded as possible—there was no second handling. In reply to Mr Chambers, the contractor laid he had not been to the blockyard and could not say whose fault it was he had been kept idle, or whether it eould be helped, Mr Shelton said it was plain if the con. tractor eould not get on as fast as possible his staff of men got disorganised, The contractor said the Engineer had sent him a letter one day that a larger quantity of stone was required, and he had been kept idle the following day. He could not tell whether it was possible for the Engineer to have sent him trucks. All he knew was that the trucks were not sent, and he did not think he got the assistance he expected or deserved. The Engineer said the reason the letter had been sent was that up to that date no insituations had been given to the contractor; the supply had been tailing short, but not having warned the contractor he had not been in a position to obieat. He did not know whether a sufficient number of trucks had been sent out, but if the supply had then been Short no complaint had been made, The contractor said he was an hour and a half idle on Tuesday. The Chairman wanted to know whether it

was the Engineer’s fault, -4 The Engineer gave a list of ths times the v locomotive had gone out on different occasions and getting only a few trucks to bring back and one occasion returning empty. Mr Shelton said that was the result of an accident. Mt Townley hoped the Board was set to be rtaMßiikis for the contractor's accidents. Mr Shelton thought it *»a sufficient lor tb* *4. V - r . > e, v a ’ ■* ‘ S • >

contractor to say he could not get stone because he had not the trucks, and the trucks not being available there was no reason for eomplaint. If the trucks were there the contractor eould always have some ready loaded to be prepared for any extra demand. Mr Chambers said the stuff was delivered straight away to save handling. The Engineer referred attention to the large quantity of stone delivered since drays had been put on —on Monday 94 tons, Tuesday 97 tons, etc. The contractor pointed out that a good deal was delivered by the Board’s men, and then he alluded to the price. The Engineer said there was nothing to prevent the contractor putting on his own men.

Mr Shelton: He pnt on men when pressure was brought. Mr Townley : Which is proof he could have done it before if he liked. The Chairman said the inference was that when the contractor was supplying sufficient stone he complained he had net enough trucks; when he was not supplying sufficient stone, he made no complaint as to trucks. In reply to Mr Shelton, as to whether he was now prepared to keep up the required supply of stone, provided trucks were available, Mr McLoughlin said he would not like to say until he got the embankment across to the other side. A discussion took place as to whether the contractor was not running a risk in depending on the one source. Mr Chambers understood Mr McLeod had two or three places and if one failed for a time he had another to depend on. The Engineer and Mr McLeod said there was a three months’ supply at one place before going to the island. Mr McLoughlin said there was only a month’s supply—it would not pay to get it there. The Engineer said it might not be a “ paying ” one. It was decided to take the other complaints before coming to a decision. The Chairman did not see that the second clause required discussing at all. The Engineer had to ensure the continuance of the work, and it was necessary that a certain quantity of stone should be supplied. With hie (the Chairman’s) concurrence horses had been put on. Mr Shelton Since then Mr McLoughlin supplied a sufficient quantity. The Chairman: Spurred up by the action of the Engineer. .... Mr McLoughlin denied this. The Chairman I We judge by results. Mr Shelton again asked if a supply of stone could be relied on in the future. Contractor i I could do it if I got the embankment right. Chairman i That is no answer. Mr Chambers I We want an answer, Mr Shelton (to contractor): You are now getting eo much stone everyday; can’t you go on at that ? The contractor said the supply was being exhausted. , Chairman : First he says " I can t give you stone because of the trucks.” then " I can’t give it on account of the embanklaent.” Mr Matthewson said that 70 tons were all that were wanted, yet men were employed, and the supply had reached over 80 tons. If the supply largely exceeded the demand, the contractor should not be saddled with the cost. Mr Chambers said the men wore employed in the contractor’s interest. The Chairman said there was more than the contractor to be considered. Men had gone to him in the street and told him they could only make two or three shillings a day owing to the non-delivery of stone. When men knew there were only two hours’ work for them because the stone was short, they would be inclined to take it easy and make up three hours—he would do the same himself, Mr Townley said on Monday he bad counted 40 block moulds empty, and on asking the reason, Mr Thomson said it was on account of there being no stone. Mr Chambers said they wanted to deal with the contractor as fairly as possible, but they also wanted to give their employees full time and push on with the work. Mr Bennett said there was ne doubt they approved of the Chairman’s action, but there was one point, that the contractor had been asked for 70 tons, and that had been got from him. If the Board got the extra stone from the other men should they not pay for it P .... The Chairman said the actual facts were that a certain quantity of stone had been asked for, and was not forthcoming. Things got worse, and then the Engineer went to him and told him that the work could pot go on for full time owing to the short supply of stone. The supplies came irregularly, and as there appeared no prospect of improvement! without further assistance, there were two courses open, allow the work to go on very slowly, or to put on men. Mr Bennett repeated that he was satisfied the Chairman had done right, but the specifications gave a basis of 60 tons, The Chairman said only one day that week had 60 tons been supplied—their duty was not to allow the work to languish because the stone was not there. There was a long discussion on the other points. Mr McLoughlin said that his foreman had told the platelayer to tell Mr Thomson or Mr Bicheno that the sleepers were wanted, and the platelayer said he had done so, but both Mr Thomson and Mr Bicheno said they had not been told, Mr McLoughlin said he told Mr Bicheno some days previously that some sleepers would he wanted in a few days, but had not said when or how many, Mr Bicheno distinctly denied any knowledge of his having been told, but directly he knew that sleepers were wanted a hundred had been sent round within 24 hours. There was some discussion as to whether the officers ought not to have known that these things ware required, but the Chairman said they had other and more important duties to attend to than ascertaining the wants of oontraetor* who could very easily communicate with them. With regard to the contradiction between the contractor and Mr Bicheno, Mr Chambers said it was better to allow that it was a misunderstanding because the oontraetor did it in his loose way. Mr Bennett asked why did Mr Chambers always sneer at anything on th* other side ? The contractor had not done it in a “ loose Way." Whatever he did hs was willing to stick to; not like some people, one of whom on one occasion, in referenda to a complaint made in a petition to the County Council, said, «I am not here to represent the ratepayers.’' Mr Chambers: The meeting should be called to qrder. Mr Chairman; I have got to get home to-night. The Chairman: I think you have thrown yourself open to it, Mr Chambers. Mr Bennett: The ratepayers, according to this Councillor, sent him to that place to do as he thought fit— Mr Chambers : Who was that

Mr Bonnett; Mr Chambers,—(laughter)— who a short time back told another member that if he did not agree with the ratepayers they should resign and test the feeling—(laughter), Mr Chambers: I don't often say that, Mr Townley was inclined to move that the chargee he dismtessed, a* there was nothing in them. It was early in the contract to come to grief with Mr McLoughlin. The cause of the short supply was that the contractor had been depending on one source, and that had failed him. The Board had to keep in view the carrying out of the works —if they had to keep knocking off forty or fifty men things would get complicated, besides the machinery and everything being kept idle for the want of atone. If thia responsibility ware not put upon the contractor, and fie wqre allowed to have charge of the blockyard, they would get into great difficulties. None of the charges had been maintained, anfi they ought to fisdismisssd, with the addition thai the Board would sea that the eontrget was properly carried out, Mr Bievwright agreed with Mr Townley —the whole thing appeared to him to arise from the want of organisation on the part of Mr McLoughlin, As to the charging for fascines, the Engineer's action was endorsed, as he had only obeyed instructions, but it was thought if too much had been charged the Board wftitld make a remission, After further discussion Mr Shell on said he agreed that the charges should be dismissed, Sitlt I suggeitlon that the officers of the sard should fry and sm that trucks and material' were supplied, but tso tpeotfeg

might do good service in smoothing ove difficulties. Mr Thompson had acted perfectly within his powers, but there was no doubt a good deal of friction. He considered that to a certain extent the Board was to blame, but as the contraot was now in a doubtful position they should not admit anything. Mr Matthewson agreed with Mr Shelton. The whole tenor of the charges showed there was a very considerable amount of friction between the officials of the Board and the contractor, from first to last not a considerable but a great amount of friction. He was not surprised at that, seeing the position the Engineer had taken up when the contract was let. As the conditions were very stringent he recommended that there be a little give and take. Mr Townley said the “give” seemed to be all on the Engineer's side, and the Chairman said he thought the Engineer had acted in the interests of the Board, when he heard the men had been kept idle for want of stone—he should have seen he got it. It was then resolved that the charges had not been sustained. Mr Thomson asked what he was to do in future—he would rather that the contractor put on teams himself. Mr McLoughlin : I could not do it, it Would not pay me. Mr Matthewson said they did not want the privileges of the Board exercised to the disadvantage of the contractor, Mr Townley said they would be exercising their power in a most tyrannical manner if they let their men and all the machinery go idle.

Mr Chambers said the Engineer had been so forbearing as to be almost deserving of censure, and the Chairman said that was his own opinion. The Chairman said the Board's teams had better be withdrawn, and if the supply was not sufficient, be put on again. Mr Shelton : Mr McLoughlin’s saying he would not put men on because it would not pay him has nothing to do with the Board. The Chairman did not care how it was, so long as the stone was supplied — the contractor might know a cheaper way than at present. The meeting concluded with the understanding that if the supply failed, teams were to be put on again.