C
270
hiefyra gl
forure
on the subject of the building, and it will be most convenient to do so paragraph by paragraph.
Paragraph 7. On the death of Chan A Tong the elder the business of the firm of which he was head was continued by two of his sons. The eldest of these applied in the name of the firm to be allowed to carry on the contract and on the recommenda- tion of Mr. P. N. H. Jones, then Acting Director of Public Works, the application was approved. I can myself testify to the difficulties the Chan A Tongs, both father and son, experienced in obtaining the abnormal quantities of first class granite required for the building and the necessary labour to work it. I am not aware that Chan A Tong the younger neglected the work. He was very slow over it but the style in which the building has been finished is very satisfactory.
I enclose a copy of the letter addressed on the 24th of December, 1907, by Chan A Tong to the Director of Public Works asking for favourable consideration of the tender he had made on the 17th of that month. Only three tenders were received. Chan A Tong's was for £132,000 in round figures. The othersvere for £136,000 and £138,000 respectively. In a minute dated the 26th January, 1908, Mr. Chatham recommended the acceptance of the ' lowest tender pointing out that the tenderer "is the Contractor for the superstructure and it will tend to avoid friction and
trouble if both works are in the hands of the one Contractor".
He added that it was possible to effect certain reductions in
the cost of the work which would reduce the amount of the tender
from $132,000 to 124,000.
Both I and Sir F. Lugard agreed that Mr. Chatham's recommendation should be accepted.
Mr. Fisher, who must have assisted in the examina-
tion of the tenders, raised no question at the time as to the
desirability of employing Chan Tong.
Paragraph 9. I find that Mr. Fisher's statement that he
had no assistance towards the close of the year 1902 is not
accurate.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.