CO129-402 - Governor Sir May - 1913 [7-8] — Page 211

*·""" " --་

80$

.(4)

A e'wboi..!!

.Y 100 P Y.

Enclosure 2.

t

t

یه باند گاه ما

MIOIMA ..

I

OTMUCOI CLOTde noidact tongue Cart

Hinawulfoi ad qui

full recpou

.3

AUGAV BĹ.. yu direi

*L &F*

DAMONT

k kh jap.95 10 JULMANLI313

#

a P'ION OUTIL Hub iu ¿v ni plavo4 189810VO

i-43

vy 1 min - 、

Wo...a o. b.1, ou Have I

•

.IA

MOJ HOLU SJLESOTqOI

**do :VA. I

SLUNA

(. 8)

•Idol I :i.ofob

Sir,

(B).

204

China Provident Loan and Lortgage Co.,Ltd.,

Hongkong, 15th. July, 1913.

ترية

DETODİ: RUO

We have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your

letter of the 11th. instant, giving us the jury's rider at the

death enquiry in connection with the collapse of houses 7 and 9

Upper Station Street, and asking us whether we have any representa-

-tions to make in regard to the matter.

We wish to express our sincere regret at the un-

-fortunate occurrence waich caused the loss of so many lives. With

regard to the question of "employing an Architect or competent

European overseer especially in view of the Contractor's sugestion"

we would point out that it is customary when wo have a complaint

from any tenant to first of all send round a Contractor, and if he

recommends extensive repairs or reports badly on the house in

question an architect is called in In this particular case

the Contractor employed when woking his report of, in his opinion,

the necessary repairs to be done made no mention of the necessity

of calling in an architect. It was only when we paid his fee

about a couple of days before the collapse that he stated casually

that it would be as well for an architect to have a look at the

property but that there was no immediate danger of any kind. We

had previous to this decided on having an arc.itect's opinion on the property at the half year, owing to the buildings being old, and

this would in due course have been done.

We would however point out that even if an archi-

-tect had been employed he would not have been able to ascertain

the real extent of the danger for in the evidence of the Executive

Engineer in charge of the Building Ordinance office it was stated

by him that "the defects could not have been detected before the

collapse by any ordinary examination".

We beg to state for your information that it is our

#

present