The Perrysburg journal. [volume] (Perrysburg, Ohio) 1853-1861, 1857-02-12
Pictures for the People to Look
UTnOmi

| upon!
In our last issue we promised our readers
that we would give them series of chapters
from the Report Of the Legislative Committee
appointed to investigate the manner in which
the contracts were made for keeping the Pub
lie Works of Ohio in repair, and in compliance
with that promi e, we give below the facts
which were elected concerning the contracts
numbered 6 and 8, together with the COM
ments of the committee, which are simply a
condensation of the testimony appended to
the Report. We give numbers and 8 first,
because they embrace those portions Of the
Public Works which lie in our immediate vi
cinity, and because there exists similarity
between the two, which not only point to a
common origin, but also renders them sub
ject to the same objections.
The disclosures made by this Report, will
show where and how certain persons got so
much money to bet on the election last fall
and is a powerful warning to the people
against the election of political demagogues
to offices of great financial responsibility
One million Of dollars would be low esti-
mate 10 put upon the amount of money fraud
ulently drawn from the State Treasury and
lavished upon political favorites within the
three years preceding the letting of the Pub
lic Works. But the Republicans have inau-
gurated new policy. They have inscribed
upon their banner, a" Economy in State and
National AFFAIRS" and during their brief con-
troll of the State Government, the expenses
have been reduced nearly half million of
dollars per year.
We are satisf ID that there is but one course
for the Legislature to pursue with regard to
the contracts made by the Board of Public
Works, and that is to declare them null and
void. But, to the Report: ...
SECTION NO. 6.
Tile Northern Division of the Miami and Erie
Canal tromhe Lake 10 the Indiana State Line.
This section was let to Samuel NJ.
Young, & Co., at per year. $4,000
There were four lower bids, viz:
John G. Allen, e. Co. $4,000
]. & w. Dickey, & Co. $4,000
H. H. FORSYTH. $4,000
j. NJ, Gloyd. 10000
We invite special attention to the facts of
this case.
The testimony of Mr.. Young, one Of the
contractors, and that of Mr.. Bsckus, show that
the bid of j. w. Dickey was Withdrawn, on
the condition that Young and company pay
to Dickey, & Co., S4, 900, and their testimo-
ny shows that this sum has since been, in
part, paid.
The deposition of Mr.. Young also disclo-
ses the fact that the bids putin, in the names of
John G. Allen, & Co., and H. H. Forsyth
and ]. NJ. Gloyd, were put in by him.
Strange as it may seem, an effort made by
Mr.. Blickensderfer, to adopt rule to prevent
this kind Of bidding, received no favor from
the other members of the Board. By refe-
renee to their report, made to the Senate
March 7, 1856, and which is published in the
Public Documents of 1855, part first, page
Gag, the following proceedings will be found I:
OCTOBER "a, 1855.
Board met present, all the members.
On the final adoption of the /" Contract and
Specifications, Mr.. Blickensderfer moved to
amend the specifications, by adding the fol-
lowing, as section No. 10: Bidders, in sub
hitting proposals will be required to state
the names, in full. and the residence of each
and every person joining in any bid, or who
expect to become interested in the contract
Lost.
YEA-Mr Blickensderf.r.
NAYs-Messrs. Steedman and Griswold.
Mr.. Blickensderfer moved to strike out the
words, "Public Works of Ohio-Specifca
tions for repairs" forming the caption of the
specifications. Lost.
YEA-Mr Bl cIensderftr.
| NAYs-Mnssrs. Steedman and Griswold.
The question then being on the final adop
ton of the form Of the contract aud specif
cations; it was adopted.
YEAs-Messrs. Steedman and Griswold.
NAr-Mr. Blickenderfer.
The Board adjourned until the 13.h da!
of November next"
If this proposition of Mr. Blickenderfe
had been adopted, this mode of lddin!
would have been prevented, and there woulc
have been fair competition but by refu
sing to adopt it, they invited bidders to prac
tce just what was practiced in this case, ant
also on Section No. 8, which was awar
ded to ]. ]. Parks, (himself bidder, in hi
own name, on a bid put in for him in tn
name of Michael Hayes.
In their report for 1855, the Board, ex
planning the principles on which they mad
the awards, say:
"The Board, in considering the bids, exer
cised the discretion which the law contempla
ted and the public interests demanded, selec
: ted those propositions which contained a
the elements of responsibility, experience
capacity, fitness for the trust, and undoubte
pecuniary ability, and awarded the contract
as in their judgment would best promote tn
public interests"
; How the Board was to find out, or how it di
find out which propositions contained all tn
oood oualitias W hich thav N anna in this eRtrac