To the Eulitor of the Norru-Cursa Datty News, Sin,—As other competitors for the Garden Bridge have availed themselves of the advantage of the Press to bring some of ae feature. of eels ccenes, before public, we hope you will allow us space for fow remarks, ox itis well Ut ye rate. payers should be informed on the subject as fully as possible before the next meeting.
The design which we submitted was set aside by the Council solely on the ground of cost, and its advantages or defects have never been criticised; but as no limit of price was stated in the advertisement we think some comparison may fairly be made between what is included in the cost in various cases, It will be at once seen that while a part of the difference in cost is accounted for by money spent on strength and on appearance, a considerable portion arises from the manner in which our tender was made up.
Our tender included every possible charge down to the smallest detail, while some competitors sent in prices which did not even include such essentials as a road-mays, the bridge being described as prepared for metal. Our roadway was of the full specified width of 50 feet throughout, the whole of the supporting portion of the bridge being underneath, while in many of the designs the supports of the roadway for which no room could be found below crop up at intervals through the flooring, interfering most seriously with the trafic and practically reducing the width of the bridge by several feet. Our bridge was designed for a load of 120 Ibs. per square foot, many of the others were designed for 100 Ibs. only. Further than this, our tender (like some others) was signed by contractors able and willing to carry out the work; while some of the designs were accompanied by what were avowedly approximate estimates only and some of the competitors have since stated that their prices were only estimates.
Even admitting that our figures are high we may reply that it has been suggested that it would be advisable with some of the cheaper designs to increase their cost not only by the addition of ornament, but even by improving essential parts of their construction; and on this ground we think we should be allowed to show what would be saved if we cut out of our design the most expensive of the purely ornamental parts, which would leave the strength of the bridge untouched and its outline and general appearance unimpaired.
But there is yet one other matter. The Council asked for tenders for the erection of a complete bridge, and as the only two local firms who could give tenders on this bassia were competitors, it wasneoessary for us togo outside. English contractors when offering to execute work abroad are forced to state high prices and have to include the cost of sending out an expensive staff, Our tender included large allowances on both these accounts, and it is here we see our way to making the greatest saving. If the erection, etc., wore done by local contractors, and our design slightly modified as to ornament only and not even as to, general appearance, the cost would be enor." mously reduced and the total sum required would not be greater than the community could well afford to spend on a bridge which we venture to think would be a lasting ornament to Shanghai; while in many of the other designs appearance has "hardly been considered to. the extent which the prominence of the situation calls for.
Now that the Council have given some indication of the amount they think might be spent on a bridge, if we are allowed ta modify our design so as to bring it down as near that sum as possible, we are confident that our design will be accepted, unless indeed it is decided to have no new bridge at all, % decision which would be a moat marked reversal of policy and will probably not be approved of at the next meeting, We are, Sir, Your obedient servants, 11th October.
Maxnisox & Gnartoy,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.