Untitled

New Zealand Mail, Issue 422, 13 March 1880, Page 24

We are decidedly of opinion that the Government made a mistake in dealing as they did with the tenders for the Auckland steam cranes. Tenders were called for in the usual form for the construction of three cranes, and with the specification "for delivery at the nearest port." There was no intimation that the acceptance of tenders would begoverned by the consideration of cheapness of delivery at the port of Auckland. The notice was to be construed one way only, viz., that the lowest cost of construction would, in accordance with rule, meet with the greatest favor. The several firms who tendered were guided by this, and in the case of the lowest tender, that of Messrs. Robertson and Co., of this city, we know that it was framed in order to secure acceptance, less for profit than to provide work for the employes of the firm who had been kept on in expectation of the tender being accepted. Whilst we are prepared to admit that the Government had reasonable pretext for accepting the tender of Messrs. Fraser and Tinne, of Auckland, we must yet maintain that a mistake was made in not clearly stating the conditions upon which tenders were to be based. Instead of " free on board at the nearest port," the notice calling for tenders should have stated "for delivery at the port of Auckland." This would have clearly stated the case, and tenderers outside of Auckland would have understood the exact position they occupied, and, whatever the result, there could have been no cause for complaint. As the matter stands outside tenderers were unjustly left in the dark, whilst the Auckland firm tendered at considerable advantage. The phrase "for delivery at the nearest port " conveyed but the one meaning : the port nearest to the place where the crane might be constructed. Firms, therefore, tendered in good faith in accordance with that condition, and we mast say that it should have received the fullest effect, and that the onus of the mistake in not specifying the port of Auckland instead, ought to have rested with the Government, and not have been cast upon the shoulders of the firm who sent in the lowest tender, but only for rejection. It is to be hoped that greater care will be exercised by the Government in future transactions of the kind, so that no misconceptions may arise out of them. Tenderers for works are guided by specifications, and the latter should be open only to plain straightforward interpretation.