CO129-356 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1909 [4-6] — Page 483

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

year's experience his Estimate was practicably a million short, I therefore asked the following question:

"By the end of 1907 it had been ascertained that the cost per lineal foot was $680. Estimated length 7256 ft which gives a total cost of $4,934,080. To this must be added the cost of tunnels 3,4 & 5 included under this Head and estimated at $491,700 (p.10 of report). Total $5,425,780." The Estimate submitted to Government on 8th February 1908 was $2,503,415 viz less than half. Please explain." To which I have received the following reply:-

"The actual driving of the tunnel heading cost less in 1907 because the work was easier, but the cost of a lot of preliminary work in 1907 from which the heading &c. is at present reaping the advantage had to be charged against the various minor heads, such as headings breakups &c. for that year. For instance a lot of timber which was used in the heading in 1907 was taken out and re-used in headings of 1908 without charge to the actual heading driven in 1908, or credit being given to the headings driven in 1907. Innumerable instances could be given of this sort of expenditure which unduly increases initial charges on large works. For instance cost of erection of plant, houses for dwellings for staff, coolie lines, roads to tunnel, & anti fever drainage &c. The statement on page 2 of the report, read by the light of this reply, is so misleading that it is hard to get away from the conclusion that it was intended to convey the impression that work had been done more cheaply in 1908 than 1907.

The C.R.E. there states the cost of the tunnel-driving was very much reduced in 1908". He here states "The actual driving of the tunnel cost less in 1907". I am under the impression that Mr. A.J. Barry was similarly misled for he spoke to me of the great decrease

Edit History

2026-06-08 05:51:22 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
year's experience his Estimate was practicably a million short, I therefore asked the following question: "By the end of 1907 it had been ascertained that the cost per lineal foot was $680. Estimated length 7256 ft which gives a total cost of $4,934,080. To this must be added the cost of tunnels 3,4 & 5 included under this Head and estimated at $491,700 (p.10 of report). Total $5,425,780." The Estimate submitted to Government on 8th February 1908 was $2,503,415 viz less than half. Please explain." To which I have received the following reply:- "The actual driving of the tunnel heading cost less in 1907 because the work was easier, but the cost of a lot of preliminary work in 1907 from which the heading &c. is at present reaping the advantage had to be charged against the various minor heads, such as headings breakups &c. for that year. For instance a lot of timber which was used in the heading in 1907 was taken out and re-used in headings of 1908 without charge to the actual heading driven in 1908, or credit being given to the headings driven in 1907. Innumerable instances could be given of this sort of expenditure which unduly increases initial charges on large works. For instance cost of erection of plant, houses for dwellings for staff, coolie lines, roads to tunnel, & anti fever drainage &c. The statement on page 2 of the report, read by the light of this reply, is so misleading that it is hard to get away from the conclusion that it was intended to convey the impression that work had been done more cheaply in 1908 than 1907. The C.R.E. there states the cost of the tunnel-driving was very much reduced in 1908". He here states "The actual driving of the tunnel cost less in 1907". I am under the impression that Mr. A.J. Barry was similarly misled for he spoke to me of the great decrease
Baseline (Original)
JAK ZAMIJAH KO UTUMIN DUBOTOMI se avedo 00GI A VIS:adel to edawid.7 efft + .MAI.I boauouosh nood Bari bre 791 exub to desid gevo 850,630,14 10 eldelafduurt at cameront efft „súsmite? It! 9d3 af 988$ ban goob id sawberi od dnoшnevod to moiutos" end of och bre ᎠᎯ add to edin and evom ou brio,"abperiosid" sword tariw ved od eneeqqs ji .Beofi gordutise to Mtroll of IaniwieT .etombent -YƉvo 000,000 DAY 020 000.00 e16.20.CI (Isvenez) edab of qu bread no hobueget 'peedfoale not bLI .eti Jantumel got bing od of ,et numeriuper veriðqut vot algteli eJonijel (odamija? to eaeuxo Riv) golvsu .3 britvou e beweria 8001 yrstidet to etsuitel edt .BIOWUMAR end) .408,care to (roer smut) odemisol Isniętro ed7 nove weed ybsenin gutveri [Low-san to noljoon deal grid 20 3200 JunisgA (.del 0.0% xo edon s'v.2.0 .udov atrið of bodideb -:adidob galwollo? odt oma patrae milit .4.0 oxT) grifėtuo zid to oqola guiterol 10% eriod ed drag a no Ile jaid daopava Jammievod zd boo.30% 100,0% In Legia 20 tofrioo Alo snittwo, 10% to saivat a wort cele bivoria ajov utrú glumeYATTA Mo0,3rd eael usoy deel goivee butzmijue B98,051\alv) 838,18ệ ai gaivno o .Grieg yd boagononi ravowed ni di (evoda es elda:ibers VZOV jera to duno ont dørs zodade droqǝr a’4.1.0 ext . BISWAUT .5 * Inoul dog swollol La 8001 galmub booubes aaw Ieumut gid 9.800 CTS 60.040 # CA.OV # gation TOGL 2001 To odamit. ein savo 804,000₫ an evneront ne ¿AT ajuntana Domiî aid of assoqqa 300! yzounded o notte auf a1ook 409 year's experience his Estimate was practicably a million short, I therefore and this in spite of decrease in cost per foot. asked the following question: - "By the end of 1907 it had been ascertained that the cost per Estimated length 7256 ft which gives "lineal foot was $680. "a total cost of $4,934,080. To this must be added the cost The Estimate "of tunnele 3,4 & 5 included under this Head and estimated at Total $5,425,780. "$491,700 (p.10 of report). "submitted to Government on 8th February 1908 was $2,503,415 Please explain." To which I have received "viz less than half. the following reply:- "The actual driving of the tunnel heading cost less in 1907 "because the work da easier, but the cost of a lot of "works. was "preliminary work in 1907 from which the headinge &c. is at "present reaping the advantage had to be charged against the "various minor heads, such as headings breakups &c. for that "year. For instance a lot of timber which was used in the "heading in 1907 was taken out and re-used in headings of *1908 without charge to the actual heading driven in 1908, "or credit being given to the headings driven in 1907. "Innumerable instances could be given of this sort of "expenditure which unduly increases initial charges on large For instance cost of erection of plant, houses for dwellings for staff, coolie lines, roads to tunnel, & "anti fever drainage &c. Th statement on page 2 of the #report, read by the light of this reply, is so misleading that it is hard to get away from the conclusion that it was intended to convey the impression that work had been done The C.R.E. there states more cheaply in 1908 than 1907. "the cost of the tunnel-driving was very much reduced in 1908". He here states "The actual driving of the tunnel I am under the impression that Mr. A.J. cost less in 1907". Barry was similarly mislead for he spoke to me of the great "game, decrease
2026-06-08 05:51:22 · Baseline
View content

JAK ZAMIJAH KO UTUMIN

DUBOTOMI se avedo 00GI A VIS:adel to edawid.7 efft

+

.MAI.I

boauouosh nood Bari bre 791 exub to desid gevo 850,630,14 10

eldelafduurt at cameront efft „súsmite? It! 9d3 af 988$ vá

ban goob id sawberi od dnoшnevod to moiutos" end of och bre

ᎠᎯ

add to edin and evom ou brio,"abperiosid" að sword tariw

ved od eneeqqs ji .Beofi gordutise to Mtroll of IaniwieT

.etombent -YƉvo

000,000 DAY 020 000.00

e16.20.CI

(Isvenez) edab of qu bread no hobueget 'peedfoale not bLI .eti Jantumel got bing od of ,et numeriuper veriðqut vot algteli

eJonijel

(odamija? to eaeuxo Riv) golvsu

.3

britvou e beweria 8001 yrstidet to etsuitel edt .BIOWUMAR

end) .408,care to (roer smut) odemisol Isniętro ed7 nove

weed ybsenin gutveri [Low-san to noljoon deal grid 20 3200

JunisgA (.del 0.0% xo edon s'v.2.0 .udov atrið of bodideb

-:adidob galwollo? odt oma patrae milit

.4.0 oxT) grifėtuo zid to oqola guiterol 10%

eriod ed drag a no Ile jaid daopava Jammievod zd

boo.30%

100,0%

In Legia 20 tofrioo Alo snittwo, 10%

to saivat a wort cele bivoria ajov utrú glumeYATTA

Mo0,3rd eael usoy deel goivee butzmijue B98,051\alv) 838,18ệ

ai gaivno o .Grieg yd boagononi ravowed ni di (evoda es

elda:ibers VZOV

jera to duno ont dørs zodade droqǝr a’4.1.0 ext . BISWAUT .5

* Inoul dog swollol La 8001 galmub booubes aaw Ieumut gid

9.800

CTS 60.040

#

CA.OV

#

gation TOGL 2001

To odamit. ein savo 804,000₫ an evneront ne ¿AT

ajuntana Domiî aid of assoqqa 300! yzounded

o notte auf

a1ook

409

year's experience his Estimate was practicably a million short,

I therefore

and this in spite of decrease in cost per foot.

asked the following question:

-

"By the end of 1907 it had been ascertained that the cost per

Estimated length 7256 ft which gives "lineal foot was $680.

"a total cost of $4,934,080.

To this must be added the cost

The Estimate

"of tunnele 3,4 & 5 included under this Head and estimated at

Total $5,425,780. "$491,700 (p.10 of report). "submitted to Government on 8th February 1908 was $2,503,415

Please explain." To which I have received "viz less than half.

the following reply:-

"The actual driving of the tunnel heading cost less in 1907 "because the work da easier, but the cost of a lot of

"works.

was

"preliminary work in 1907 from which the headinge &c. is at "present reaping the advantage had to be charged against the "various minor heads, such as headings breakups &c. for that

"year.

For instance a lot of timber which was used in the "heading in 1907 was taken out and re-used in headings of *1908 without charge to the actual heading driven in 1908, "or credit being given to the headings driven in 1907. "Innumerable instances could be given of this sort of "expenditure which unduly increases initial charges on large

For instance cost of erection of plant, houses for dwellings for staff, coolie lines, roads to tunnel,

& "anti fever drainage &c. Th statement on page 2 of the #report, read by the light of this reply, is so misleading that it is hard to get away from the conclusion that it was intended to convey the impression that work had been done

The C.R.E. there states more cheaply in 1908 than 1907. "the cost of the tunnel-driving was very much reduced in 1908". He here states "The actual driving of the tunnel

I am under the impression that Mr. A.J. cost less in 1907". Barry was similarly mislead for he spoke to me of the great

"game,

decrease

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.