CO885-(7-8) — Page 565

89

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TC.O. 885

` ` | | / | | | | | | | | | | |!!!

8

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON!

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NÓT TO

35479

164

No. 39.

FEDERATED MALAY STATES.

CROWN AGENTS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

(Received August 26, 1902.) Federated Malay States-Defective Steel Rails: Requisitions 226 R. and 230 R.

SİR,

Downing Street, London, August 25, 1902. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 21st of March, No. 10723/1902,* relating to the complaint made by the General Manager of the Federated Malay States Railways as to the defective nature of certain steel rails supplied to the Perak State Railway in 1896.

2. In reply, I enclose, for the information of Mr. Secretary Chamberlain, copies of a letter, with enclosures, which we have addressed to the Resident-General on the subject.

Enclosure in No. 39.

I have, &c.,

M. A. CAMERON.

CROWN AGENTS to RESIDENT-GENERAL, Federated Malay States. Federated Malay States-Defective Steel Rails: Requisitions 226 R. and 230 R. SIR,**

August 25, 1902. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 11th February, No. 572/02, transmitting to us a letter, with enclosures, from the General Manager of the Federated Malay States Railways, drawing attention to the defective nature of 102 steel rails, which formed part of a supply of 11,250 rails manufactured for the Perak State Railways by the Blaenavon Company, under the above requisi- tions.

2 We referred the matter to the Consulting Engineers, and I now enclose, for your information, a copy of their report forwarding a copy of a report by the Inspecting Engincer, stating the result of his detailed examination of the sample rail sent home.

3. It does not appear, from these reports, that the nature of the defects, except those in the flanges, is such that the Inspecting Engineer could be held responsible. With regard to the flange defects, the Consulting Engineers point out that in dealing with many thousands of rails it is possible that a few which were rejected may have been inadvertently sent forward, and, in view of this, we do not consider any further action with regard to the inspection necessary.

4. As these rails, however, are admittedly defective, and as the contractors are unable to replace them, owing to a strike of their workmen, we have, on the recom- mendation of Messrs. Gregory, Eyles and Waring, called upon the Blaenavon Company to refund the £100, which the Consulting Engineers state is about the value of the rails complained of. This they have now done, and the amount has been placed to the credit of the State Government.

The Resident-General,

Federated Malay States,

Selangor,

Malay Peninsula.

I have, &c.,

M. A. CAMERON.

163

Perak Government Railways.

GENTLEMEN,

July 23, 1902. ON receipt of your memorandum, marked E. 213/6, of the 11th March, in regard to defective rails sent out to the Government Railways in Perak, under Requisitions Nos. 226 R. and 230 R., and of the sample defective rail forwarded under cover of your letter of the 18th April, we placed ourselves in communication with the Inspecting Engineer, and the rail makers, with the view of investigating the causes of the defects complained of in the letter from the Acting Resident Engineer for Railways, No. 114/02, dated Taiping, 22nd June, 1902, a copy of which was sent to us in your communication of the 11th March.

2. The defective rail was shown to a representative of the Blaenavon Company, who rolled these rails, and, with their concurrence, the technical investigation into the question was made by Mr. Stanger, the Inspecting Engineer. We enclose here- with a copy of his report, dated July 4th, 1902, together with two sheets of photo- graphs, and two sheets of sketches referred to by him. We can endorse generally the conclusions arrived at in that report, and it appears to us to be very probable that the defects in the material from which these rails were made would be confined to a few ingots, and that the remainder of the work would be of that satisfactory quality which has been supplied to you for a number of years past by the Blaenavon Company.

3. Defects in flanges of rails, such as are shown on the sample received in this country, should undoubtedly have been noticed during inspection in the makers' works, and the rails rejected. It is very possible that this was the case, but in dealing with many thousands of rails, some few which have been rejected may inadvertently, and certainly without any desire on the part of the makers, be sent forward for shipment.

4. The Blaenavon Company point out to us that they have no difficulty whatever in selling as many of our rails of this section as may be thrown out, and at a price only some 15s. a ton less than they would receive from you for perfect rails, the section in question being largely used by contractors; it is, therefore, even from a monetary point of view, not to their interest to allow defective rails to be sent from their works, which they might later on be called upon to replace.

5. Since the receipt of Mr. Stanger's report we have seen the London Manager of the Blaenavon Company, and he informs us that at the present time their mills are idle, owing to a recent strike of their workmen, otherwise, they would have replaced the 102 rails of which complaint is made. Their guarantee under the terms of the specification lasts only for three years after the rails have been placed in the line. The rails in question were supplied in the year 1896, and in giving this guarantee they urge that rails should not be kept an undue time before the guarantee com- mences, as, from climatic or other influences, damage might be caused to rails, which would not have occurred had they been placed in the line, and of this we had evidence some years ago in connection with some rails which had been stacked near the sea coast, and which were so badly "pitted" as to prevent their use, this "pitting" being, so far as we could judge, due to the chemical action of the sea air on the steel rails.

6. We think, however, that as the Company are unable to replace these rails, which are admittedly defective, they should be called upon to refund the sum paid for them by you. The total weight of the rails complained of is 21 tons 17 cwts., a part of them having been supplied at £4 11s. 3d. per ton, and a part at £4 12s. 6d.; the value of these rails would therefore be about £100, and we recommend you to claim for the return of this amount from the Blaenavon Company.

To the Crown Agents for the Colonies,

&c.,

&c.,

&c.

We have, &c.,

GREGORY, EYLES AND WARING,

Consulting Engineers.

• No. 32,