WEIGHING SHELL ROCK

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 18, 22 January 1935, Page 6

WEIGHING SHELL ROCK

CLAIM AGAINST BOARD CONTRACTORS CHALLENGE SCALES. ’ LOSS ESriAIATED AT £960. ’ A claim for £950 18s Id has been lodged with the Wanganui Harboui Board by Messrs. W. R. Rope and Co. [ contractors, who have been engaged . since Augtutt 1933 in quarrying rock at . Kaiwhaiki and conveying it by punt to the moles at* the mouth of the Wanga- . nui River. The claim is based on the fact that in August 19.34 the scales, used in weighing rock at the moles, I were not registering correctly. The , contractors consider that the scales . must have been out of order for some , considerable period and ha\ e based the amount of their claim down to a penny accordingly. At the monthly meeting of the Wanganui Harbour Board yesterday it was admitted that the scales were not weighing correctly in August 1934. At the board’s direction the scales were sent to Wellington to be tested. It was found then that a 2-ton block weighed L ton 5 cwt. and a 10-ton block registered 9 ton 4 cwt. While admitting the defect in the scales, however, the board considers that it is a moot point as to when the scales became out of order, since they were new when the contract was eommenced. It considers that the claim laid by Alessrs. Rope is far in advance of any shortage that might have occurred. It was decided yesterday that a special committee comprising Mr. W. Morrison (chairman), Air. J. Patterson, Air. R. R. Dawson (consulting engineer) and Mr. W. J. Gardner (secretary), should confer with the board’s solicitors, Messrs. Marshall, Izard and Wilson and report to the next meeting. A lengthy discussion took place at the board table yesterday afternoon, when letters from Messrs Rope, received last Friday, and an opinion of Messrs Marshall, Izard and Wilson, written last October, were read. The latter [minted out that under the contract the board was to provide the weighing machines which were to register correct weights and the board was to do all that was reasonably necessary to keep the machine in order. The solicitors considered it was impossible to say how long the scales had been defective, or how the shortage coulu be correctly or approximately arrived at. Mr. Morrison: It is very difficult to estimate what the shortage might have been. The board does not want to get something for nothing, and there must have been some shortage. The only thing we can do is to refer the claim to our solicitors. Legally, we admit no liabilitv, but morally there is a lialzil-

Alr, Gardner pointed out tlrat the contract provided that any dispute was to be settled by the engineer, and that his decision was to be final. After that had been given, the contractors had no claim against the board or anyone else. Before any money could be paid by the board, however, the amount would have to be sanctioned by the board’s solicitors, otherwise the members themselves would be liable if it were found that the money was not owing legally. Mr. Dawson said that while the board admitted there was a shortage, the contractors tihomselves should accept some responsibility also. Surely it was their business to sec that we were getting proper measurement. Afonkies were provided by the board for the contractors to test the scales, but evidently that had not been done. It was certain that the contractors had suffered a loss, and he was sure the board wanted to make it good, but it would be a very difficult matter to decide what amount they should be paid.