187 (22)
Appendix.
Minute by the Honourable Director of Public Works on certain statements in the Commissioners' Report.
A
Honourable Colonial Secretary.
There are a few statements in the Report of the Commission on which I would offer some observations. In doing so, I have quoted the numbers of the paragraphs in the Report so as to facilitate reference.
81.-The case quoted is the only one which has occurred. The matter was rectified immediately on its being discovered.'
82.-The statement purporting to be based upon my evidence is much too strongly expressed. What I said was that there were probably some duties which could not be performed by the Inspectors.
84-89.—Mr. OuGH's report shows that he has resorted to special expedients in manu- facturing the briquettes of mortar but he does not quote any authority in support of his methods. The briquettes made by this Department are manufactured in accordance with ordinary methods. On page 5 of his report, Mr. OUGH "alleges" that certain briquettes tested by this Department were cracked before being put into the testing machine. There is absolutely no ground for this allegation,-on the contrary, all briquettes are carefully examined before being tested and it may be regarded as impossible that any crack should escape detection. Mr. OUGH's allegation may be dismissed as groundless surmise on his
part.
102 & 103.—To require the use of an equal quantity of cement in place of lime in the composition of the concrete would almost certainly result in no cement concrete being used, though the thickness is reduced by one-third.
104.-The recommendations made are, in my opinion, impracticable. The mixing of concrete must be constantly supervised if its quality is to be accepted for the purposes of a certificate. The Commissioners state (para. 96) that in 1905 about 1,760 notices were served to reconcrete. Assuming 300 working days per annum, this gives nearly 6 per day, apart from new buildings where concrete was being laid, and I presume that many of the notices served included more than one house. To give effect to the recommendations, a large staff would be required to supervise concreting surfaces alone and I gather from the report that Inspectors are considered unreliable, speaking generally, so presumably Assistant Engineers or highly-paid Clerks-of-Works would be required.
105-108.-The difficulty of making the cement rendering adhere to the walls un- doubtedly exists and, in the case of existing buildings, the modification suggested might be adopted. In the case of new buildings, the section should stand as at present.
I regard the recommendation as to the issue of a certificate as inpracticable, for similar reasons to those given with regard to concreting surfaces.
123–134. The case referred to in paragraph 124 is explained in my evidence (pp. 2086-2092). Mr. DENISON gives no specific case. It rarely happens however that a plan of any considerable work is submitted in respect of which no modification is required. The English Public Health Act specifies that some reply in acknowledgment of plans-no cessarily approval-shall be given within a month from the time of their being deposit
In the case quoted by Mr. OuGH, an extensive reclamation scheme was involved, w entailed a reconstruction of the drainage system of a considerable district. Though ae plans were not formally acknowledged, the essential points were settled and the work as allowed to proceed, practically no delay being caused by the withholding of the achow ledgment.
ion to
Mr. OSBORNE stated that small jobs are often finished before he gets pern proceed with them. He might have gone further and stated that small jobs estren completed before he submits the plaus for them.