The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-12-01
A Contract with the City Declared Illegal.
suPERroR CouRT--GENERAL TERM.
p4fnro a rnll nanah


Nov 2s-James B. Bruiy, respondent, w. Ts Mayer,
DC aygsllau,s This action brought 10 recover the
sum a. o. 1856 H. balance alleged 10 be due 10 the re-
spcudcut upon contract executed by the Street Commits
souer on the part Of the appellants, with the respondent
On the llh of August 1854 for setting curb aud gutter
stones and Tagging sidewalks in Eighty third street, be-
tween Third avenue and A. ON the 27h Of July
1854 the street Commissioner, in pursuance Of resolu
ton &c the Common Council, issued specification or ad
vcrtscen 20 contractors that sealed proposals would be
received his office, until August = 1854 for doing this
work. which specification or advertisement contained this
clause
Fs,ina,ors viii their proposals the price for fur
nishng curb and gutter per running foot
ns or frp,.hng earth Il required The price per square
foot for aFrns including The regulating e he sidewalks
laid and covered also The removal q Az surplus material ~
yard Tor removing rock " any should be found
The ordinances the defendants (appcllants require
that all proposals. issued for work Or supplies the guam
uf the work required shall he stated. The charter OF
1853 requires that All the work 10 be done or supplies TO
be urns he'd for the Corporation involving expenditure
Of more than $3.50 shall be by contract, founded upon
sealed bids proposals, made uron an advertisement
o. ten days and when made shall be gwen 70 The lowest
bidder. The respondent among others, bid upon the
For setting curb aud gutter stones IS cents per ncal
foot
For tagging per square foot, II cents
For rock excavation, f2h per cubic yard.
There were three other bidders, VINO bid slightly high
Tagging. Two of them did net hid upon rock excavation,
the other bid IS per cubic yard for rock excavation
II will be seen that the lowest bid under the estimate
contained in the specification could not he determined
party might bid s. 900 or setting curb and gutter
and tagging aud u per cubic yard for removing rock
Another might bid 81 600 for curb and gutter and Tagging,
and in this s25 per cubic yard for removing rock Yet
the standard by which the bids tested being the
prices for setting curb and gutter and tagging l. clear
that the latter would he declared the lowest bidder al
though in fact, whether he would be the lowest
bidder weud depend on the quantity crock which
should matcly be found. The con,frr wac awarded TO
the respondent nominal bid of SO 1ee The respcfy
dent went aud did work under the and the
surveyor returned pas cubi yards Of rock excavacd
by linn and the 9th or August 1856, Notwithstanding
enc objections Of the Comptroller and opinion ~ Mr..
rslon the late Corporation Counsel, adverse TO the
validity of the contract assessment Cor 1914 for The
work was confirmed by the Common Council AMI ap.
proved by tho Mayor The Comptroller paid the respond
eu ~ r cent of the contract price previous 70 suit,
The cause was referred ~ Judge Cowtes who rensrcd
Judgment avpr ~ respondent or - 500 ~ from which
Judgment the del, 'ants AZ pnalcd.
ludg, roOdrnf delivered the opnion OF the Court, re-
yorsug the judgement the ground that The contract
was void IN ~ inception because there were no iaa
stated IN tic Advertisement Of tn street ny