HC Deb 07 May 1885 vol 297 cc1852-4
MR. W. J. CORBET

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, with reference to the failure of Arklow Harbour Works, and the preliminary Report sent to the Treasury, which was alleged to be most re-assuring, Whether the preliminary Report has been borne out by the Report of Mr. Manning, Engineer in Chief to the Board of Works in Ireland, just laid upon the Table, in which the following statements are made:— On the 4th January a Report was received from the Superintendent of the works that on the previous day he observed cracks in the parapet of the sea wall, and that some of the face blocks had moved out. The principal Assistant Engineer was at once despatched to the Harbour, which he visited on the 5th, and reported that for 90 feet in length (of the 458 feet constructed) the face blocks had moved out from 2 inches to 20 inches, and had sunk a few inches, and that the sand had been scoured away from along the sea face of the Pier… I visited the work myself on the 6th of February, when it was in the same state as reported by Mr. Greene, and although it was to be regretted that any damage whatever had been done, still the amount of it was comparatively little, and its repair presented no difficulty, but it was obvious that the sand foundations had been scoured out…on the 3rd March fresh subsidence was re- ported. On the 9th March, Mr. Henry Keating, Assistant Engineer, was sent to Arklow to make a survey, but the weather was not sufficiently moderate to enable him to take soundings till the 14th and 16th of that month. This survey shows that for about 130 feet in length the sea slope had been more or less damaged, and that the sand foundations had been scoured out by the sea, forming a trench parallel with the Pier from 40 to 50 feet wide, and of an average depth of about 6 feet under the previous level of the bed of the sea. I need not here enter into more detail; it is sufficient to say that the damages described are to be entirely attributed to the scouring out of the sand already described, and which extended under the foundations of the storm wall for its entire width of 19 ½ feet; whether he has noticed the following in Mr. Manning's Report:— It has been stated that the mode of construction adopted at Arklow was objected to by the members of a local committee; I have only to state in reply, that for the nine years during which I have been engaged on the subject of the design and erection of Harbour Works at Arklow, I have never upon any occsion received any suggestion of the kind from anyone; whether in consequence of this statement he will lay upon the Table the protest and objections submitted to the Board of Works by the local committee of Arklow; and, whether he will put a stop to the works until the opinion of a competent engineer is obtained as to what is best to be done under the circumstances?

MR. HIBBERT

The hon. Member's quotations from the Parliamentary Papers are accurately given so far as they go; but I do not know whether he disputes the statement which he omits to quote— that the local objections related to the general design, not to the method of execution. As the Question only appeared on the Paper this morning, I have not been able to look over the Papers bearing on this point; but I will obtain copies of them from Ireland, and show them to the hon. Member. The suggestion regarding the suspension of the works at the present moment seems to me inadvisable, as it would involve the loss of the favourable summer weather and incur the risk of exposing the works in an unfinished state to another winter's storm.

MR. WILLIAM REDMOND

asked whether, having regard to the fact that the official who reported was an employé of the Board of Works, and consequently interested in screening that Board, the Treasury would consent to the appointment of an independent engineer to give a Report on these works?

MR. HIBBERT

I would be glad to consider such an application if the Local Authority bore the expenses of it.

MR. PARNELL

With regard to the matter, I would ask the hon. Gentleman to consider again the desirability of sending over from this country some distinguished English engineer, so as to see how the Board of Works executes these undertakings.

MR. HIBBERT

I will consider the question of sending over an independent engineer to report on the matter.

MR. W. J. CORBET

asked, did not General Sankey make a special inspection of the works, and why was not his Report published?

MR. HIBBERT

General Sankey's Report is not considered of any great importance; but if the hon. Member wishes to get it it will be given.

MR. WILLIAM REDMOND

If an independent engineer is appointed, why should the locality be asked to bear the expense, seeing that the whole thing has arisen from the failure of the Board of Works' officials?

MR. SPEAKER

Order, order!

[No reply.]