470
It seems incredible that an Engineer should invite the Public and myself to contrast the cost of two years, and shew under each class of work the decrease in cost in the latter year, without mentioning that the former year included all those special items. But apart from this matter the fact remains that after over a year's experience of the tunnel work he submitted to Government an Estimate which was approximately a million dollars less than his present Estimate. He was already aware that the cost per foot was increasing. He was not at that time aware that better labour from (S.Africa), less sickness, an increase in the length and other causes which I need not dilate on would operate to reduce cost, and yet he submitted an Estimate of $2,503,415 as against the present Estimate of $3,499,824 which he remarks (in the margin) "will probably be exceeded". This probable further excess he says will be met from savings in earthwork and bridges but he shews an anticipated excess in both of these items and the Estimate purports to be his definite anticipation of the final cost under each head.
In my statement to the Council I had to deal with this excess of a million "which will probably be exceeded" and I endeavoured to do so with as little damaging criticism as was compatible with a truthful statement but I fear that these inaccuracies are likely to damage the reputation of British engineering in China.
The increase in the cost of the tunnel was not due to any action by the Local Government (as in the case of land), and it would appear to be necessary in accordance with the Colonial Office Memo re Consulting Engineers for this increase to be formally intimated by the Consulting Engineers for the sanction