MISTAKE IN BRIDGE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19809, 2 December 1927, Page 8

MISTAKE IN BRIDGE.

POSITION OF PILES. ALLOCATING THE BLAME. WARM WORDS AT MEETING, ■ ■ " ■ FINALITY NOT REACHED. ■ [ST TELISGEAfH.— OWjt CORBESI'ON DENT. ] | TE AROHA, Thursday. . I There was another fairly warm debate at last evening's meeting of the To Aroha | Borough Council, when Mr. Stanky Jones, ; of the firm of Jones and Adams, en giaeers, Auckland, Jtnd Mr. T. J. Jamen, clerk Of Works for the Waihou Rivrer Traffic Bridge, now in course of erectioi, near Te Aroha, appeared in person to eDable the council to fix the blame for the driving of a number of piles 3ft 6in. out of the longitudinal position. The contractors, Wilcox and Company, Auckland, wererepresenfced by Mr. Lopdell, of Auckland. The foreman, Mr. F. Blank, was also in attendance. At a previous meeting Ma*. Jcnea had declared that th«i mistake in the driving of the piles was dug to carelessness on the part of the dark of works, Mr. James, and the foreman, Mr* F. Blank, but "particularly on the part of Mr. James." At last evening's meeting Mr. Jones also reported that thisre had been " certain minor errors in setting out various parts of the work due io the carelessness or inefficiency of tie foreman and the clerk oi works." Denial of Allegations. The mistakes, which involved the addi- | fcion of a considerable amount of .concrete, had all been made good by the contrac- f tor, at bis own expense, and did not in any way affect the strength or permanency of the bridge, reported the engineer. The dark of works had lnadß a categorical denial of the allegations and of responsibility for the mistake, for which he blamed the engineer and the foreman. He farther alleged that Mr. Jones had over-ruled his objection that the bending back oi certain steel rods would weaken the structure. Mr. James asked the council to clear him by rc-solntion of the charge of carelessness made by the en- | gineer. In a letter to the engineers tho contractor intimated that he would require » financial adjustment from the coin cil a3 to (I) width of piers; (2) depth of thickness of concrete in certain spans; and (3) amount of concrete required on the jo';> on the score of alleged incompetency of the clerk as an employee of thfl council. Mr. Jones tad replied to thu effect that . the council was not liable in this connection. Statement by Engineer On ihe reading of the correspondence last evening, it was decided, after an argument, to deal with the allegations oi carelessness before considering the position in regard to the alleged " minor errors." Replying to Mr. McMahon, the clerk admitted it was part of his duty to sea that the work was carried out according to plans. Mr. Carroll :. Who is" the person to lose by the delay? . Mr. Jones: The contractor is the man who must foot tho billMr. Carroll:.Do you still maintain the mistake was. due to the of the clerk of works? _ Mr. Jones: If the ci»rk had checked the position of the piles the error would never hax'e Occurred. ■ . , Mr. Jones dealt with a -statement by Mr. James to the effect ihat he, Mr. James, had discussed the driving of the wrongly-placed piles with SliSssn>. Jones, Lopdell and Blank on the spot between May 10 and May 27. " I emphatically state," said Mr. Jones, ? that I was no, on the job at any time the piles wens being driven. I submit, sir, that this is a pure fabrication." - Mr. Jones produced a diary to show that he had not visited Te Aroha between the dates mentioned. " Engineer Hot Present." The clerk asked the contractor if he remembered a visit of the engineer when piles were half-driven, befcwesn May 10 and May 27. Mr. Lopdell: I have.a diary here which proves conduaively that ou the occasion referred to by ijr. James, Mr. Jones was not present. ... When referred to, the foreman saia he remembered the presence oi Mr. Lopdell, but cooid not remember a visit- oi Mr. Jones in the period under question. Mr. James was given permission to refresh his memory regarding dates with the aid of his diary. ■ ' The foreman was given permission to refer, to a statement by the derk that hj« (the foreman) had suggested be covered with concrete, so that it Would not be noticed. " I would like to ask the Mayor to get the -felerk to withdraw that statement," said Mr, Blank. It is a deliberate lie." Mr. James: I could not withdraw iw It is only his word against mine. Mr. Lopdell : I have the greatest respect for the integrity of my foreman, and if the derk does not see fit to withdraw Ins allegations I am prepared to finance the foreman to the ©stent of £SOOO sarv to fight the clork in a case of libel--3 Mr. James: If it was £50,000 I woOld not withdraw it. , Mr. James stated that he was nnabta at the moment -to place the date of the alleged visit of Mr. Jones to the bridge. Mr. McMahon moved that the incident be regarded as closed, but this was defeated in favour of an amendment to adjourn the proceedings until the nest meeting of the council in a fortnight. | -i I