THE ST. KILDA BOX DRAIN.

Evening Star, Issue 7238, 14 June 1887, Page 4

THE ST. KILDA BOX DRAIN.

TO THE EDITOR. Slß,—ln your issue of the 31st ult. you published a letter by Mr Bellet on the above subject, and as it contains several gross misstatements it is necessary that I should briefly reply. Mr Bellet says that I, in company with Or Stenhouse, examined the drain on the 3rd May, and that I must have been dreaming or asleep, and forgotten all about it. Allow mo to inform Mr Bellet that I am neither dreaming nor Bleeping. I emphatically deny ever having examined the drain on that day or any other day; and if OrStenhouse says so, he states that which is not true. Mr Bellet says that lam entirely wrong in saying that the stone would lap 4in or 6in over the drain, as the stone was specified to be only 3ft 2in long. Now, I knew perfectly well what I was saying when I wrote my letter, and I repeat that the stone would have fully 6m on both sides. As a matter of fact, the arain is 2ft wide at the narrowest part and 2ft 4in at the widest part, and according to the specifications (and Mr Beliefs own statement) th« stone was tobe 3ft 2in. I will leave Mr Bellet to reckon it up. If Mr Bellet donbts my veracity he can take a walk and measure it. He also says that the Council has been taught by experience that it is not wise to accept low tenders, as contractors never do the work satisfactorily. Now, we pay an inspector for the purpose of supervising all work, and I have no doubt that he would have seen this work faithfully carried out. lam ce-tamly at a loss to understand Mr Beliefs statement, as I know of no work that has ever been done and passed without giving satisfaction to the inspector and Works Committee. I must say that the contractor (Mr Cuff) who tendered for the stone covering has done a good few contracts in the borougb. and has always given entire satisfac Son, as I, being on the Works Committee, can testify and speak from personal knowledge. Mr Bellet further says that the Council had good grounds for refusing Cuffs tender, and that he would inform me of these pounds. As I am totally unaware, of any Kds the Council had in refusing this tender, I hope that Mr Bellet will take the oroortanity of enlightening roe on Tuesday right at the Councß meeting. As regards his Btatement that the stone cannot be got from the quarry, I am wilting to refer it to any two practical men to decide, for, as a matter of fact, Sons of stone have been taken from the quarry for similar purposes in the borough. And if Mr Belle* has time I can take him around and. Sow him; and, also, works have been done outride the borough with the same stone. Mr iK denies having condemned the stone. I SuTtherefore, refer him to his letter of the Srdtf May, wherein he distinctly says that the stone to principally rotten rook and only fit for wadfoffiion* Idon'tthinkhe has overseen the quarry.—l am, etc., William Allan. JDunedin, June 13.