Sessional_Paper_1902 — Page 412

316

2281

( 184 )

2

co

3

4

5

6

7

By the Chairman.-Can the taking up of roads for pipes be avoided ?

A-If things are done well, it is seldom that the roads require to be taken up. In London, it is not often that you see repairs being done to the pipes. It is gener- ally some new thing that causes the road to be taken up. I should say set to work at once. I think the thing is worth considering. I should put in some pieces of this wood blocking to test it. The ashphalt has worn well in Malta and I should say that, if you get the right class, it would do as well here. There was great alarm when it was first put down in Malta but it is there to-day. I forget when it was put down—- in 1887 I should think.

Q--Of course it would not be washed away by heavy rains?

A—It would not wash away; you would have the street cleaned, etc.

Q- Are there any questions members of the Commission would like to ask Mr. CHADWICK on any other point?

Witness. I would like to point out in connection with the Water and Drainage department that, when I was here before, that department was a separate departinent and was under Mr. COOPER, and he was responsible to the Government. He was not under the control of the Director of Public Works.

By the Chairman.-When Mr. COOPER was appointed Director of Public Works, the departments were not separated?

A-I don't know what has been done recently, but, of course, when Mr. COOPER was appinted Director of Public Works, I was referred to at Home whether I considered it would be possible and suitable for him to carry on that department and to hold the appointment of Director of Public Works. I said I thought it could be done, and Mr. COOPER became Director of Public Works, but I added a rider to my recommendation that the departments should be kept separate, although under one head, that Mr. COOPER should be Director of Public Works and Resident Engineer of the Water and Drainage Department but that the offices should be kept separate so that, in the event of Mr. COOPER's leaving and somebody else getting the appointment of Director of Public Works who was not acquainted with water and drainage matters, the offices could be again separated.

By Mr. Shewan.-Are you satisfied with the way in which your recommend- ations have been carried out, Mr. CHADWICK?

A-I should say so. With the exception of these detail matters, the work has

Of course,

been well done I have no reason to believe it has not been well done, you must remember that I have had but very little official communication with Hong- kong since Mr. COOPER was made Director of Public Works.

By the Chairman.—You brought up the question of the Water and Drain- age department. Do you still adhere to your former opinion that it would be well to separate it from the Public Works Department?

A-I think so. They are much better away from the Director of Public Works, because the Director of Public Works may not be a specialist in these matters.

Q-I was looking over the correspondence to-day on that very point and I notice in the despatch sent home that it pointed out one difficulty. The Director of Public Works is in charge of the roads. The Water and Drainage Authority may want to pull the roads up, whilst the Director of Public Works wants to lay them down. If you have one Department will it not be more convenient and less expensive ?

A-I don't know. You have this same thing in England. The water company has merely to give notice to the surveyor and there is no trouble. I worked in the same independent way in Malta and it was no trouble. That was the argument of Mr. BROWN, who was always bringing that up.