202 THE LAW AFFECTING ENGINEERS 



covered and included all that the production of the light cost 

 the contractors, and nothing more. With regard to deprecia- 

 tion, they adopted the words of the Chief Justice of the Cape 

 of Good Hope, who said : " The cost of the plant forms part 

 of the actual cost of generating the light, but, as the use of 

 that plant would extend over several years, it could obviously 

 not have been intended that the whole of that cost shall be 

 charged during the first quarter of the contract. But the 

 same objection does not exist to a distribution of the actual 

 cost of the plant over the whole period of the life of such 

 plant. The effect of allowing a certain sum for depreciation 

 in the quarterly accounts of the plaintiffs would simply be to 

 distribute the actual cost of the plant over the whole period 

 during which it would, in the ordinary course, be of any 

 service in the generation of electricity and light." They also 

 came to the conclusion that the cost of insurance, which 

 came within the same category as rent, rates, and taxes, ought 

 to be allowed. 



5. Liability for fire and accidents. In cases where the 

 works, on completion, are a source of danger to third persons, 

 the employer may sometimes seek to recover damages from 

 the contractor for injuries so sustained. To determine the 

 question whether the contractor is so liable it is necessary to 

 consider the terms of the contract with some care. To take a 

 clear case : if the contract provided that dangerous machinery 

 was to be guarded, the contractor would be held liable for any 

 accident arising owing to his omission to provide a guard. 

 Questions of this kind sometimes arise in relation to wiring 

 contracts. In one case (Fulham Borough Council v. National 

 Electric Co., 1906, 70 J. P. 55) a contract for the installation 

 of electric light in a building to be used for the purposes of 

 public baths and wash-houses provided (inter alia) " that the 

 whole of the work is to be carried on in accordance with the 

 existing rules as framed by the Phoenix Fire Office." Kule 5 of 

 these rules provided that " Where a system of metal tubes is 

 employed, the metal tubes should be earthed, except in those 

 cases where earthing would not be desirable." A system of 

 metal tubes was employed for the work, and in consequence 

 of such tubes not being earthed a bather received an electric 

 shock which caused his death. The local authority, which 

 owned the baths, paid damages in respect of his death. In 



