Holmes County Republican. [volume] (Millersburg, Holmes County, Ohio) 1856-1865, 1857-01-22

In1S contract OF tnlS SecIlOn was dWdru-
ed to Medbery & Co., at 27,5OO year.
On this there were the following bids, all
of which were lower that Medbery's &
Co.'S, viz:
Myron H. Mills. $21 900
William Miller $4,000
Nelson G oung 70, 4uU
Peter Dunn $4,000
| Samuel Doyls d Observation-Disclosures. 24,985
Joseph Cooper & Co. Co------- 22,30O
Section Number T'wo
Is tn Ohio Canal from the foot of the Wal
honding lock, near Roscoe, to the foot of
the lower lock, at Lockville, including Dres-
den sidecut.
This section was let to Doyle d Miller
at $22, $50 a year. The other bids, lower
than this, were made by
M. H. Mills $4,000
IS. Y. Prentiss- s--.- 81 800
Peter Dunn 22,00O
Cooper, Shaddinger d Co. 27,3O0
Section Nmn5er Three.
This is the Ohio Canal from the foot of
the lower lock at Lockville to the Ohio
River, which was awarded to Cooper, Shad-
dinger q Co., at $1,000. This was the
lowest bid, and this contract the Commit
tee approved Of and recommended that it
stand. 1853
Section Number -Four.
This is the Hooking Canal. 1t was let
to Dennis McCarty at S9,65o year.
The following lower bids were rejected:
Henry Miller s., ,499
Cooper, Shandinger d Co. 5000
Section Number Fire.
This is the Muskingum Improvement,
and was let to Chamberlain and Paul, at
$4,000. The committee say this bid was
$4,000, and was subsequently modified,
by what authority we know not, nor by
whose suggestion or procurement. DR..
Paul and Mr.. Gibson both appear to be ig-.
norant on this point, and doubtless are so.
1t cannot be fairly claimed that this con-
tract and that upon section number four,
were awarded upon bids at all. Chamber
lain and Paulput in no such bid as $4,000,
nor did McCarty make any such bid s9,65O
on the Hooking Canal.
The other bids lower than the one ac
cepted and rejected were as follows:
E. E. Shedd, $4,000; NJ H. Mills,
$4,000; J.J. Richardson, $4,000.
Section Mme5er Sir.
This comprises the Northern Division of
the Miami and Erie Canal, from the Canal
to the State line.
This section was let to Samuel NJ. Young
g. Co., at $4,000 a year. There were
four lower bids, which were rejected as fol-
lows:
John c, Allen d. Co. $4,000
H. II. Forsythe 28,000
]. g. W. Diekey Co-------------.--2 $4,000
j. NJ. Gloyd-- Observation-Disclosures 10000
The committee invite particular attention
to the facts in this case, and they are some
what peculiar indeed. Itappears that the
bid of ]. d w. Dickey was Withdrawn, on
the condition that Young & Co. pay to
Dickey & Co $4,000, part of which sum
has since been paid. The other bids put
in by the other parties named were mere
bogus. They were put by Young & Co.
themselves, and were withdrawn after the
Dickeys had been bought of, which of
course, left his $32, 900 bid standing solita-
ry and alone, without competitor. That
is what they call sharp practice.
Section Number ,Seyen.
This composes the Miami and Erie Ca
nal from the junction to the Ohio river, and
was awarded to Forrer, Burt & Co., for
$11e,OOO year.
The other bids which were rejected were
all lower as follows:
Cooper, Shaddinger & Co. $SI 900
J. & W. Diekey q. Co.. $4,000
Petit, Alexander d Co- $4,000
Trevitt d Knapp 10000
The Committee say that the securities
of Cooper & Co. were worth at least one
million of dollars. "But it has been said
that Mr.. Cooper would not take this sec
ton alone at that that price" which the
Committee say is contradicted by the
words of his own proposition, which they
quote and which is as follows:
We the undersigned, propose to keep
IN repair, all or portion of the public
works. according to specification, as follows,
per annum:
Secuon NO. l-.- $27 300 |