The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-07-26
THE AWARD OF THE BLUE RIDGE
RAILROAD CONTRACT.
What the Executive Cemnoittee have to
Say on the Subject.
ToqHE EDITOR OF THE NEWS,

What the Executive Comnnittee have to
Say on the Subject.
TO1aE EDITOR OF THE NEWS
Iu The DAILY NEWS of the 18th instant ap-
pcared letter from Columbia, containing what
p,l ported to be a statement derived from
'sirst rate sources" Of the circumstances at
tending The recent letting Of the work on the
Blue Ridge Railroad, and also of the amounts
OF the various proposals, and the prices at
which Criswen l. Co. obtained the award OF
the contract.
The writer, LUX" has fallen into few errors
Of fact and figures, and that the public may
be fully informed upon the matter, the follow
ing corrections of his statements are made
from the official records Of the proceedings Of
the Executive Committee:
The lowest bid received under the ADVERTISE
ment was 81 252 099 AZ; the highest $40, ,166, :
056 81. The other bids were intermediate BE-
tween these exremes-that Of Criswen B Co.
being S., ,66O 527 4e. The Executive Commit
tee having decided to reject all these propo-
sails under the terms of the advertisement, all
the bidders were invited to conference with
the committee, and we're advised Of the action
taken upon the bids, and made acquainted
with the reasons therefor.
At this conference we're present all the bid
ders save one. All were permitted to submit
new proposals upon the new basis laid down
By the committee. Under this arrangement four
proposals were received and considered by the
committee, OF which the highest amounted to
50 8SS, ,426 SO, and the lowest to 50 7O7651 81.
The party who made the proposal under the
advertisement OF 81 $4,000 IN which LUX"
seems to take q peculiar interest, now put his
proposal at 50 900 600.
Some advantages were offered in the details
ofthe negotiations by the highest bidders, (Cris-
well Il Co.. which led the committee to pursue
negotiations with them; an' the proposition
having been submitted to them that tbe7
should reduce their bid below the lowest, viz.
to g. zoo, 600, and they having acceued to this,
the company stil having the benefit Of the ad.
vantages OF detail heretofore mentioned, the
award WAS made to them as the lowest and
best bidders.
That there is room for honest difference
Of OPINION as to the expediency Of the
policy pursued by the committee In the
rejection Of all the original proposals, Is
not denied. It is also possible that they
erred in preferring the proposal Of Messrs
Criswell & Co., as more advintag eous to the
company than those Of the other bidders.
The committee. however, feel that they can
abundantly justly the soundness OF their
Judgment on those points to the Board OF Di-
rectors, and to the public.
But the point now made is that the letting
was perfectly fair and open, conducted accord
ing to usage, and that the committee not only
had the right, but it was their duty, to con-
s,der all collateral advantages offered to the
company by the bidIers, as well as the prices
affixed to the different items OF work.
The work was finally awarded to Criswell &
Co. at s. 7Oo, 900, or e7651 81 below the low
est bid from other parties. and the commit
tee fail TO see that in making that award they
have betrayed the trust reposed in them.
The statement OF '.Lux" "tLat there was
other bias as responsible iu every way at
q, OOO, 600 and less, but the 50 600 bid was
accepted, is wholly erroneous.
Under the caption Of ''the price OF the
work." LUX" gives the prices Of Orisuelps 5
bid as compared with other proposals. He
does not say in so many words that these are
the prices at which tho work was awarded,
but he certainly would have the public in er
that these are the pricea.
Now these prices coincide nearly with those
of Criswen l. Co.'s frat bid, bat this bid was
rejected With all others, as has been herein
before stated, and the work was awarded to
them at reduction in total amount Of $3.50, 600
below that first proposed, and OF course at a
corresponding reduction in prices for materials
and work. The Executive Committee have
accepted the bid that they believe 10 be the
most judicous and advantageous to the COM
pany, il earned out IN good faith by the cont
ractors.
II wrong, or error has been committed, let
the responsibility rast on the members Of the
committee present. The undersigned will
bear their part. j. W. H.KRIsoN,
President and er-obscjo member OF Executive
Committee.
GEO. 8. CAMFBoN,
Director and member Of Executive Committee.