National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-05-07

who viii guarantee TO have this Terry large
amount Of pge SLs0o tonsl deliyefsd hefye tho
desired; and, krthsf, because THAR BIB teas
1850 is the lowest 81 s1o,o0o.
RGt sssss s <. sS 81. Iss
fh1 the SSs.SI he, been t
acts which Fsss}ats FL p' assi. Ssls III
irIet OF COiGmSia; sad nc. 81 .ks UsIssd sts.ss.l
ssHls .a.f siSssi 'gss Shsshst
yfs q my sSS liz sarsu
ss.d IN sssSsti & ~ g. any 1s.f
Of the bidders who did not cetnply with the 'in-
SP the T. legally to
lay Il, or esp have valid ground on which to base
. suit for dsmags. either against the District oil
/ inOiOss herewith the printed blank form Of
land ing
the laws Of Congress on the SUBJECT of the new
main. (See printed form of contract, &C., PIP. 10
and II, or Major Eliot's printed report for 1s7l,
/ also tncloss copy Of the law Of the District
Of Columbia. (See Major Elliott's printed re-
sent to each Of the bidders An early reply is re-
GEoRsE H. ELLIOTT,
Major OF Engineers.
tFirst indorsement.l
OFFICE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS,
Respectfully submitted to the honorable Score
tary OF War, with the Recommendation that the
question raised with the within papers Of Major
q. H. Elliott, concerning thu letting OF the con-
tracts for the So-inch main for the Wa shington
Aqueduct, may be referred for opinion to the De-
partmcnt of Justice, A. A. HUMPHRRY'S,
Brigadier General and Chief Of Engineers
OFFICE OF WASHINGTON AQUEDUcT,
WASHINGTON, ID. c., August n ISL.
In the matter OF acceptance Of Informal bids.
l. The practice has been to waive tnformality In
the lowest bid, If the bidder is willing to adhere
Z In practice, not one bid in ten is strictly
formal 1. e., fills all of the requirements OF the
advertisement or the circular, inviting proposals;
g., OF all the bids for pipe, there was only one
which complied with the notice to bidders;
some omitted one thing, some another. Want of
education is frequently the cause Of irregularity
in bona fde bids by competent bidders.
8. II tho rule should be that Informal bids must
be thrown out, and that tho Government agent
cannot waive his own regulations and accept the
lowest responsible bona de bid, It will, whenever
ment. A general example Of this injury is the
case under consideration. The rule would make
It necessary to weigh the value Of time against
money. The difference between the lowest and
the next lowest and entirely formal bid In the
present case is about SIS OoO rejection OF all the
bids and Reimbursement would involve the loss
Of much time: and time in this case Is important
Such q rule In the present case then, would make
it necessary either to pay the $4,000 additional
for the work to Suuer the delay.
l. The rule would never be brought to bear ex-
cent against tho lowest bid If the lowest bid is
entirely formal there would be no question of Its
Respectfully submitted.
GEORGE H. ELLIOT,
Major Of Engineers.
commended that ought to be able to waive
formalities were the waiving would be in favor
of the United States. The Attorney General
decided against it. I would like to have that
ID In init IN IN
Cooke, also as showing the basis Of my action,
as suppose he was governed by my advice to
some extent.
BY Mr. Stewart: Q. Was a copy of this
original bid in that letter of General Hum
phreysi A. A copy was submitted with that
letter, and the committee now have similar
copy. The Governor, as understand, was as
ISOLATED with me simply as the financial agent
of the District of Columbia. lie was not as
ISOLATED at all by act of Congress under which
laid the pipe, but by the acts of the District
of Columbia, which were supplemental to the
act of Congress.
Q. Was the publication in your own namel
A. Yes, sir; but the Governor signed the con-
tract.
Q. And when this bid came in you declined
to let it without taking advice? A. Oh, GER
tainly. have here also q copy of my letter to
the Governor making the same abstract that
is contained in the letter to General Hum
phreys.
Q. You submitted the question to the Gov
ernor and to General Humphreys bothi A.
Yes, sir; and the Governor submitted the
question to his legal adviser; that is, Mr.. Cook,
the attorney of the District of Columbia.
Q. Did he make a decision! A. He made a
decision also, sir.
Q. Which way did he decided A. He decided
the same way as the Attorney General; and
the Attorney General had before him at the
time of his decision the decision of the attorney
of the District of Columbia.
By Mr.. Jewett: Q. The Attorney General
had that of the District attorney? A. Yes, sir.
Q. The District attorney made his first! A.
Yes, sir.
By Mr.. Stewart: Q. When you made these
informal bids, then, understand you, you adj
dressed Governor Cooke and your superior off,
Ger, General Humphreys A. Yes, sir.
Q. To take their views as to what you ought
to do! A. Yes, sir.
Q. The Governor submitted this to the Dis
trict attorney, and General Humphreys sub
mtted it to the Attorney Gencrall A. Yes, sir
z. Then you got these legal opinions, and
acted according to the Reimbursement A. Yes,
sir. There was great contest in the matter.
l do not remember Mr.. Evans at all, but he
was one of those who submitted papers. have
no doubt that the bid was In good faith; but
not being signed, considered it no bid at all;
because bids much less informal than that are
a cause of great deal of trouble to Govern
ment officers who make contracts. They take
advantage of the informality which they make
themselves.
The bid being thrown out, the contest came
between Starr and Wood. Starr claimed the
award under his contract, and Mr.. Wood
claimed that award under his bid. Starr
claimed it on account of informality, and there
was a strong indication that Mr.. Starr would
commence an injunction suit if l should make
the award to Matchmaking an injunction
against the District of Columbia on account OF
the stringency of the condition. The city was
very much in want of water; they had been for
long time without water on Capitol Hill and
the higher parts of the city. twas very neces-
sary to get the pipe In without delay, and
wanted to avoid that legal contest, if posi-
BILE.
By Mr.. Stewart: Q. Hence you took this
advice! A. Yes, sir.
By Mr.. Mattingly: @. Do you remember
whether, between the first and second bidding,
there was a material advance in the cost OF
ironl A. Iron advanced during that time, but
how rapidly, or how great the advance was, l
do not know. Ny remembrance of it is that it
was advancing rapidly at that time.
By Mr.. Christy: Q. The District govern
ment likewise passed an act upon this same
subject, and will call your attention to this
part of section Q, appearing in the printed tes-
timony, page 400.
That the United States engineer in charge Of
the Washington aqueduct be, and he is hereby,
authorized and empowered, in conjunction with the
Governor of the District OF Columbia to enter
into contract for the laying Of the 36-inch cast
iron main mentioned in the first section Of this act
and to adopt the following route for the same.
So that you were to act in conjunction with
the Governor in making the contract A. Yes,
sir.
Q. The subsequent history understand to
be this: that you pronounced the bid of Wood
& Co., Of Philadelphia, as void for uncertainty?
A. Yes, sir-no, misunderstood you, sir.
Q. These are not your exact words, but
understood you to say, that in your Judgment
the informality of that bid, of course, released
you from am obligation to accept it7 A. No,
sir; on the contrary, claimed that should
accept it, and made the argument to the At
torney General that ought to be able to &C.
cept it-that lowest bid of Wood g. Co.
Q. That was the question that you first sub
mitted to the attorney of the District of Colum-
bia Omitted StatesO A. Yes, sir; precisely.
Q. And he pronounced against you3 A. Yes,
sir.
Q. Did you likewise submit to the attorney
of the District of Columbia the papers sub
mitted by Thomas Evansl A. No, sir.
Q. That, then, was not q matter of discus
sion between youl A. Not at all, sir.
n W, adu hot he