CO129-419 - Individuals - 1914 — Page 179

-

13

177

•

ment, yet Mr. Chatham also described such in writing as being "absurd and a survival of some ancient practice."

I respectfully beg to comment upon the above:-

It is a fact that, the War office and the Admir- alty deal with their works in Hongkong in a thoroughly technical and practical way, yet the majority of such works are of small magnitude as compared with the building under review.

Indeed, in connection with the construction of the New Admiralty Dock in Hongkong, independent quantity Surveyors from London, representing respectively, the Ad- miralty, and the Contractors for the Dock, visited Hong- Kong for the purpose of dealing with the accounts in the recognized manner; I desire to make it quite clear that these quantity Surveyors were in addition and quite apart from the respective starr of the Admiralty and the Con- tractors stationed in Hongkong.

As regards the so-called "survival of some ancient practice," I would state that it is still in use again with other works in the Fublic Works Department of Hongkong.

In view of the statements of Mr. Chatham as pre- viously quoted, it is interesting to note that, in c.3.0. No. 1, in 1865/1911 minute, dated 27.6.11, Mr. Chatham states at the end of clause 2 with regard to the recognized pro- cedure "that it is the course usually adopted." I would, however, point out that, even at that date two large works

viz: New Post office and the work now under review were not

being conducted on such lines as stated, neither were they, (following Mr, Chatham's instructions) for years previously.

와