The Perrysburg journal. [volume] (Perrysburg, Ohio) 1853-1861, 1857-03-05


We have published the principal facts
brought to light by the committee appointed
to investigate the manner in which the con-
tracts were made for keeping the Public
Works in repair. The readers Of the Jour
nal are competent to Judge for themselves as
to the proper course TO be pursued by the
Legislature. There are, fortunately, some
laws which are worded so plain that even us
common people can understand their meaning
and the one authorizing the Board Of Pub
lie Works to contract with the lowest respon-
sible bidders, for keeping the public works of
the. State in repair, happens to belong to that
class. The Legislature has only to inquire
whether the Board, in making contracts, act
ed faithfully within the plain provisions of
the law or not. If they acted in accordance
with the law, then the Legislature has no right
to disturb the contracts; but il they acted in
defiance Of its provisions, the contractors be-
ing cognizant of the facts, then it is the duty
of the legislature to snnul their acts.
Section five of the act under which the con-
tracts were made, provides that the public
works of the State may be let in sections ito
the lowest responsible bidder, for any term
Of years, not exceeding five" provided, that
said Board shall in no case let by contract the
keeping in repair of the public works, or any
portion thereof, by sections as aforesaid, un-
less the same can be done at price less than
the average price of keeping the same in re-
pair for the last six years" That is plain
enough. The only question is, were the con-
tracts made in accordance with these rules :?
If there is any truth in the testimony of wit
nesses examined by the investigating commit
tee, seven of the eight contracts were made
10 direct opposition to law.
What the legislature should do, seems plain
enough; what it will do, is not SO clear. 1t
is thought by many that the bill introduced
by Mr.. Caldwell, which allows present con-
tractors the amount Of the lowest responsible
bids, leaving it for the Supreme Court to say
whether contractors are entitled to the bal
ance or not, will be adopted as compromise
by them. Had the lowest bids, In every in
stance, been made by the present contractors,
such course might be just and proper, but
we cannot see how the Supreme Court can
compel A to do job of work on BIS bid
1t presents the subject to the Supreme Court
with every advantage TO the contractors, and
amounts to very poor shift of responsibility
for weak members Of the legislature.
We have it upon good authority that an
other plan is before the Legislature, with some
prospect of success, which provides for legal
izing all of the robberies except those comit-
ted by Samuel NJ. Young d Co. and James
J. Parks, on the ground that they paid some
thing for their plunder, while the others got
theirs for nothing, or by merely satisfying the
easy virtues of the Board. Against this prop
osition we enter our protest, for reasons which
are clearly indicated above.
The people look to the Legislature for pro-
lection against fraud, corruption, and robbery.
All of these outrages lave been perpetrated.
Individuals have been wronged out of their
just and legal rights by being in effect denied
the privilege of bidding, when every letter of
the law had been complied with the Board
of Public Works have trampled law. and JUS
tice, and right under their feet, and thrown
open the doors to the public treasury, inviting
pIunder, and then close the damning scene of
villainy by contracting for the robbery of over
$30o,Oo0 of the peoples money. These
facts are before the Legislature, and they are
known to the People, who demand at the hands
Of their servants a firm adherence to Right,
and decisive, bold, and uncompromising op-
position to Wrong.