Enclosure 6.
THE RAILWAY ESTIMATES.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE DAILY PRESS.]
"HONGKONG
Hongkong, 18th May 1909,
SIR, The Committee of the China Association conceive it to be in the public interest to endeavour to dissipate an erroneous impression that Hongkong is being called upon to pay for the Colonial section of the Kowloon-Canton Railway considerably more than the work is worth.
The prevalence of this impression is indicated by certain Press comments upon His Excellency the Governor's speech in Council on the increased estimates. From the general tone of these it might almost be assumed that mismanagement had led to the doubling of the legitimate cost of construction. There appears to be a popular idea that the original estimate was for some 5 million dollars; that the work ought not to have cost much more; but that gradually, owing to a series of blunders, the figure has risen to 11 millions. This belief that the cost has been doubled by mismanagement has naturally led to severe criticism being directed against those responsible for the undertaking. I venture to submit that it is not borne out by the full circumstances of the case.
The first important fact to note is that the estimate of 5 million dollars was a mere rough estimate made by Mr. Bruce on his original survey. The line beyond Shatin planned by him, was a single line throughout, to run along the edge of the sea shore from Lokloha to Taipo.
110
The alignment which he proposed, and on which this rough estimate was based, had subsequently to be altered because the typhoon of September 1906 showed the shore edge to be unsafe. That typhoon was a revelation in many ways. It taught several lessons to others besides Railway engineers, and there is particular blame attaching to anyone for not having foreseen the possibilities of destruction reposing in the sheltered waters of Mirs Bay. If we can all now see that Mr. Bruce's original alignment was a mistake we ought in fairness to remember it was at least excusable under the circumstances.
The change in the alignment, removing the track out of reach of the sea, entailed much heavy cutting not contemplated by Mr. Bruce, and the boring of three additional tunnels, of which that undertaken at Taipo is in itself a considerable enterprise. It is also important to remember that it was subsequently decided to build all bridge cuttings, and the three additional tunnels, wide enough to admit of a double track being laid, should the necessity for that hereafter arise. Mr. Bruce had not made provision for costly developments of this sort. It was not his business to do so. His business, as described by His Excellency the Governor in the Legislative Council on the 6th February 1908, was "to make a preliminary survey and to base upon it a preliminary estimate."
How rough an estimate it was may be gathered from His Excellency's comment upon it in the same speech, in relation to the cost of earth work. He said "it is difficult to know exactly what rates Mr. Bruce had calculated at, because no drawings or calculations of quantities and rates were supplied with the estimate."
In justice to Mr. Bruce it should not be forgotten that the first and by far the most important duty which fell upon him was to decide upon the main route of the railway. At one time the Deep Bay route had been recommended. He had to determine which of three different routes should be adopted, and it stands to his credit that his decision on this vital point has been generally admitted to be sound.
The first detailed and authoritative estimate made was that submitted by Mr. Eves in his report dated 4th February 1908, and laid before the Legislative Council on the 22nd of the same month. If this estimate is compared with that made by Mr. Bruce it will be seen that the increase is mainly due to five factors:
The estimates for land resumption was increased by $1,186,038
For earthwork by $729,003
For tunnels by $579,555
For bridges by $620,927
While the expenditure on Plant, Rolling Stock, Salaries and ballast (for which Mr. Bruce had made no estimate at all) was estimated by Mr. Eves at $1,191,647
Total... $4,306,170
The reasons for the increase in these items have already been alluded to, with the exception of that due to land resumptions in Kowloon, incidental to new and larger ideas of what will be required at the terminus. Over and above this there remains an increase of roundly $500,000 accounted for by increases under the other subheads.
With regard to the difference between Mr. Eves' estimate, dated 4th February 1908, and his estimate dated the 9th March last, and laid before the Legislative Council at its last meeting, the excess of the latter over the former is just under $1,150,000. Of this nearly $1,000,000 is due to increased expenditure on Beacon Hill Tunnel. The net increase on the remaining items, as compared with Mr. Eves' first estimate is just under $150,000 - not a very formidable sum. One reason for the increased cost of Beacon Hill tunnel is to be found in the varied character of the excavation, and another in the phenomenal hardness of the rock met with in parts of the hill, necessitating the use of specially heavy drills and an enormously increased use of explosives.
The fact that the estimates have exceeded - a common experience in all such undertakings - should not be interpreted to mean that the work could have been executed for less. Unless this can be proved there is no justification for...
25670
483
3) JUL 09