The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1870-03-03

The contractors undertook to execute,
within eight months from the date ftheir
agreement, not less than S700, 900 worth
Of work, which amount they agreed to
advance, taking only as collateral an
equivalent sum in the bonds of the CON-
pany, with the understanding that said
bonds were not to be disposed of without
the consent Of the company, until after
the meeting of the Legislature. Thegreat
inducement to make such contract, was
the fact that the Engineer, having repor-
ted that the cost of construction would
be between eight and nine million of dol
lars, that an absolute sale of any portion
of the bonds necessary to carry on the
work until the meeting of the Legisla-
ture would have prevented that body
from authorizing, by an amended Act, the
issue of sufficient number OF the same
class of bonds, to wit: First mortgage
bonds, to complete the undertaking. The
company were fully convinced that if the
road was to be finished, it could only be
done by State aid through guaranteed
bonds, and that disposition, absolutely,
of any of the four millions would have
compelled the Legislature, in granting ad-
ditional assistance, to issue second class
of mortgage bonds, which would have
materially deteriorated in value and un-
necessarily injured the interests of the
road and of the State. Hence, the OBJ.
ect of the agreement with Messrs Cres-
we'll & Co., was to compel an advance by
them of 100000 for work done, in addi-
ton to the S3OO,O00 first alluded to, and
thus to save the Blue Ridge Railroad
Company all of the original bonds, to the
end that when the Legislature took
further action in the matter the addition
al issue of bonds requisite to complete the
road might be of the same class.
Upto 4th of December, the sub con-
tractor under Messrs. Creswell & Co.,
notwithstanding their agreement, had
done but little of the work. The Drec-
tors of the Company met in Charleston
on the 10Th, and the Stockholders on the
10th of November, and declared the con-
tract of Creswell & Co., invalid because
of their failure to perform it's stipulations;
but al the same time, in the resolutions
which were adopted, they authorized the
Executive Committee "to give the contrac
tors an opportunity to withdraw from
said contract, if they prefer to do so, and
also to make such indemnification for any
outlay to which the said contractor may
have been subject, which may be agreed
upon by the two parties, and which, in
the event of disagreement, may be deem-
ed to be just, by disnterested persons Sc
lected by both parties"
Subsequently, the Executive Commit
tee met in Columbia, and the contractors
made claim for very large indemniica-
ton for outlays, and expenses already in
Cured, as we'll as for profits, which they
claimed would have been realized by them,
had tho contract been fulfilled. On an
examination of the contract, it was found
that the Company had right, in case of
unreasonable neglect or failure to per-
form the contract to serve written no.
tice upon the said parties, setting forth
the grounds of their apprehensions, and
specifying the manner, together with
reasonable time, in which said parties
might cause such grounds to be removed,
and if, at the expiration of such time,
said grounds of apprehension were not
removed, then full power and authority
was vested in the Chief Engineer, to place
such force of men on said work as would,
in his Judgment, secure q completion of
said work in the manner and time speci-
fed by the contract, deducting the ex.
pense so Incurred from the estimate of
the amount due, and payable to said par
ties of the first part"
Under this clause of the contract, Cres-
we'll & Co. having failed to do the amount
of work required, it would have been COM
potent for the Chief Engineer to have let
the work to other parties; but it was
found, in consequence of the very great
depreciation in the price of gold at that
time, as compared with the price of gold
when the contract was made, that new
contracts could be entered into at so much
lower rates as would have saved the Com
pany more than 100000; yet, while
the Engineer had the right, under the
contract with Creswell & Co., to employ
labor he would have been compelled by
it's terms to pay them the full amount
therein stipulated; hence, Messrs. Cres-
well & Co., having the advantage, under
the contract, first by reason of their ad-
vance of 100000 although the Company
have not deemed it prudent to use the
same J and, secondly, by reason of the
depreciation in the price of gold, have
claimed large damages, should the con-
tract with them be annulled.
The Executive Committee, considering
the advantages which would accrue from
annulling the contract, and making
another that would save more than
81 ,O0O,O 900, for the cause already stated,
the Acknowledgement of the State land the
solicitor of Creswell & Co. were invited
to appear before the Board of Directors,
and both of these gentlemen presented
their views. The principal point of the
controversy discussed was, whether
Messrs. Crcswell & Co. had forfeited their