The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED "The Evening News," "The Morning News," and "The Echo." WEDNESDAY, JUNE 7, 1876

Auckland Star, Volume VII, Issue 1974, 7 June 1876, Page 2

The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED "The Evening News," "The Morning News," and "The Echo."

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 7, 1876

For the c_u_e that lacks *ssfeiti-oc«, For the wvahg that needs resisunct. Fur the future in the nistance, And the tfood Uiat _,c c«_i df>.

RtTMouES of a very unpleasant character have lately been circulated relative to the system of supervision under which our two most important city works, the dock and water supply, are being carried out, and in order to give Mr Errington and others concerned an opportunity for explaining away, if possible, the grounds on which these rumours are founded, we propound the leading ones in a series of questions :— 1. What title has Mr Errington to rank as a Civil Engineer? 2. Whether that gentleman after obtaining the supervision of the dook, for which he is to receive over £2,000, did not employ Mr Aicken C.E., to do the work ? 3. Whether Mr Aicken was not to receive two per cent for his services,, and Mr Errington to pocket the other three per cent for attaching his name to the reports ? 4. Whether Mr Aicten did not write the whole of the reports on harbour works forwarded to the Harbour Board without Mr Errington even being aware in most instances of their contents until he was asked to sign his name to them ? 5. Whether, after Mr Aicken had taken out the quantities and done the chief work, he was not found to be in the way for certain reasons and was dispensed with ? 6. Whether the dock since the contract was signed has not been laid off afresh by the contractors^ and not by the engineer who is receiving such handsome remuneration from the Board to check the contractor's; work ? 7. Whether after Mr Aicken's services had been superseded that gentleman resolved to "blow the gaff" on a number of little transactions and arrangements likely to startle the public, and wrote two or three letters to M?: Errington intimating that intention unless his full commission was paid ? 8. Whether Mr Aicken has not likewise included in his denunciations the manner in which the water-pipes were being laid without supervision over the work or over the contractors, and declared his belief as an engineer that water would not flow freely ■ along the pipes when they were finished ? •9. Whether in pursuance of this determination, Mr Aicken did not address a letter to the Southern Gross, and that journal smothered it, meanwhile tipping the wink to . i; f/ Those whom it may concern " ? 7thout' entering at this stage into -•;7 ? lerits or demerits of these queries, ] 'nk there -are ample . grounds IKS. j ' City Council and tho Har- i 1 vs. *•,...houl"! a^e some more precau- ] oMS..-..- \*~. 'Nreß«ni) exist to secure the ful- , "Vera-B of the contracts. We 1 inn "xri-ry ° say *^a^ UP OQ c Mayor «_k> [' Am v __.jjj ,j escen( j perpetual dis- __.,„] . OL'.jrworks,-which are being iv> \ lormous cost to the rates tbortive, or so badly c0n- .... \ :'ve perpetual expense in ~.,, 7 a workable condition. . lass f . , , i. k,iu ). vb i';iaposition of oircamarif; jr< t> .T A W T^ p Errington became ;•!, and his bosom friend 7-^, I tt'wUiiSiJoJpiif.*^ GoodaU, engineer for '- i% itiioiiv. •■vt'^;tltufcca one of those S.iJSt 7rx.Jioaken public faith in jA the business. And j ,7, say, aa thoy do, have been made upon ~..,■'.... I 'Tji' ,|.'7ii JD '0 the completion of tJL* :.:•) mado a difference ■: : . « 7, r i. v, of their tondere, I ' ratepayers draw? mpply, were long I on to enable any

engineer -to fix definitely the specifications in acQoMance with which the work must be carried out, and tho whole of the tenderers were entitled to receive the benefit of any "improvements" that were likely to arise. Granting however, that Mr Errington is making the best of his position, we maintain that it is utterly impossible for him to supervise two large works like the dock- and water works simultaneously. Mr Errington is getting very handsomely paid ' t j_ e Council. He receives £300 0 and £4 000 for jUg gorv j ceSt which is quite enough Z Secure a guarantee that his whole time shall be devoted to tho work, and to preserve him from any temptation to undue leanings in the contractors' favour; but neither he

nor any other engineer can supervise efficiently two large works of the kind entrusted to his care. Every pipe and piece of machinery or material used in connection with these works should be submitted to a strict examination; and not a single yard of piping ought to have been covered up without the joints being carefully examined by the engineer or his representative. This, there is every reason to believe, bns not been done ; nor can it bo possible for Mr Errington to carry out such a minute supervision, and at '.be same time fairly earn his money from tho Harbour Board. For our present position it is not necessary to inquire whether the work has or has not been executed satisfactorily. Perhaps the contractors are animated by such an earnest desire to adhere to specifications, that no possible gain that might be secured by a deviation from the strict letter would tempt them. Bub we are not justified in expecting that human nature has received a special development in their case that should make this so. And it is quite beside the question to discuss the subject from that point. The City Council and Harbour Board are paying a very good price to have their engineering work done well, and have a right to demand that thoy shall receive full value for their money.