HC Deb 23 June 1890 vol 345 c1630
MR. SYDNEY BUXTON (Tower Hamlets, Poplar)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether complaint has been made that the plastering, or a portion of it, at the new Metropolitan Police Office has been sub-let by the contractor to a piece-master named Charles Peak; whether complaint has been made that the subcontractor is an unfair employer; whether his attention has been called to a report of a case tried at Bow Street on 10th June, when the said Charles Peak was summoned by four plasterers for money due to them, and condemned to pay the claim and all costs; and whether complaint has been made that the plastering is being done in an imperfect manner, and with adulterated or inferior material, so that the Clerk of the Works has been compelled to condemn some of the work?


Charles Peak was employed by the contractor to superintend the work of the plasterers at the new Police Offices. He was not a subcontractor. He was paid a weekly wage, and he did not pay the men or supply the material. He engaged the men, and had the power of dismissing them. No complaint has been made to the Receiver of Police that Peak is an unfair employer. I have not seen a report of the case in question, but I am informed that it had nothing to do with Peak's employment at the Police Offices. Complaint has been made that some of the architraves and mouldings had not been done in accordance with the specifications. They have been condemned by the architect, and will be made good by the contractor. The further services of Charles Peak have been dispensed with.