The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-08-05
MONEY FROM T0MBST0NES.
nov THE VAR DEPARTMENT WAS
COSDUCTED ny BELKNIP.


,,ou-- How Contrncts were Awnrieo'
w.sutxGroN. Aug. 4-The Committee
.r Military Affairs presented this mornin.
,n.,t,,o,,s report I'm the matter Of the con &c
a, furnish beadstones for soldiers cemeteries
,,tcr tho act Of Congress OF March 3, iSI3 Tue
vcport pears very h, I'd upon the late oeCfe'p
ef War The report Ia plain statement VI 'uo
fects and shows that there was de hoer-te pun
n,se 10 favor a bidder who was trlehu ! the
Secretary OF War, and this purpose was accom-
,ii.ucd Nv plain violations OF law, ana through
yiful dsreear Of army regu'atons' ihe
,,tsunanimously agreed upon by the con nit
a., src 10 ore damaging to the Secretary OF War
,n,o TIE s lie OF the Fort sill pos, tradershIps,
,.cau-e ii Is meaner to speculate In tonibstones
,,tbe ,ad than TO rob the living soldiers.
Mr. Banning from the Committee on Military
An irs h wing taken the testimony Of various
attn. sscs In the matter Of contracts to furnish
soldiers headstonee, reports that Congress nav
INK aturopriated one million OF dollars I T the
erection of soldiers headstones at the eraves OF
soldiers buried In national cemeteries, the
o .artcrmaster General, on June 25, 1873. Invited
proposals to furnish these stones In an adver-
lis mcnt, from which the following is an extract
PROPOSALS FOR nEApsroSrs ron NATIONAL
MILITARY CEMETERIES.
QuARrz RsAsrERUrs.aALs OrIIoE
MAsHtSoTOS. June ~ 1870. ;
sse 1ySs 5S H.1T % tHs
w Of ID March 1873. Of which the following an eH
Proy ded that the hcsd.tones required BY an act en-
titled Ana 10 estaeliss snd protect nseonsl eene
ior hersoi aggsoysd JaaS isi hal O. Ss aSFsss
sed ne Soerssi for st ,es
IN, NV eristnien ia ten newspapers Of general
circulation, come responsible person or ersons
son n,nc ,Rc elements Of darsbiw, decency,
etapnes. and the sum OF ne million dollars IL hereby
1uff4 IgI sal
1ftssury nI oth tN.S spb.pra,es hnu ~, M ys,i
srs CEMETERIES tue Sic and lei Tor such heaoscnes
me sSr and Sd ana c0S. OF MADE sna
s'cided Win reference thereof snd contracts ns
ioae ana the contrses made undet ths ~ sls rro
~ So n Re s sssTssa exceed the sum hereby
me total nS%SsT 70 81 c farn ,s1 hs S
Known 100 Sqi Specifications de, crlbng IN detail the
S asSo nAf 81 q e 'Sf 70 s nee where ss
men viii te placed on exhiniuon within few esys
f e.ss o fGSSs ne o sons sr ce%e
nq 'HS vii opened
Of p osr % p ,n s.srSsy sp' q 1873 COM
GENERAL United s,ates Army.
On Sept o. 1879, the various bids to furnish
headstones were opened at the Quartermsster-
G, nerals ONCE. The following is a schedule OF
the bids coming within the terms OF the adver-
tisement:
Number Of slabs, IA, number Of blocks
lc5,3e4. c. NJ. Howell, total cost, se9e,99e. j.; G
total, ss4.ii6.a d. v. Howell tiC5, slabs
Eas6le U co%psuy@sasS sisSs IS, 6lceEs to
tal coat. ss,3,o6i.a5 J Psrke.-fs sS, sla6s; S3S
n""..i s.ss, STATS; ssS5, blocks; total cost
@ T. sr%Ss q sis0. co' t s
total cost, $500 99.t0 Charles 5 Jonss, 90 ~
tlabs; 1880, blocks; total cost, 1857 500 So Knox
Total cost, 1891 rs
HOLDING THE BIDS.
For some reason not explained. the con
tract w's not owarded gns the ln OF MO
and half months after the bios were opened
The award under the provisions Of the law
VINO Superintendent the advertising. the receiv
ing and opening OF hids, but the then secietsr,
give the contract to the lowest bidder. The
Knoxville Marble Companys bid was $3.50, l54.' rs
being 6l,34g II lees than any other bid, although
this was the lowest Did, and one that vas deemed
within tue terms Of the advertisement for pro
Rotary Of War, in the exercise Of his discretion
ruled this bid out because the color Of the mar
Die dd ne! .u, S his b IS 20 81 'ss S5
Marble Company Cos. the Gove5nmen, tei, sts !.
fsIan marble. The duty On Italian marble
duty would be paid TO the Government. the
claimed that they would only receive for III,
work fT-s]27l.25 The rulinR out OF this Did b.
the Secretary Is best explained in the testin on,
Of Mr.. Walsh, which reads:
o.wlere were the s5,i9ss scndueisd, AaTa
go P.e q The od; that T Ter9 wsss
Iccomuehded my specimens OF marble as being IN
best Inside o. the ,ppr2prsnon ana Vac Ey.n 20 ~
shsi snect. Tue seereiafy Of Var tod me shat Gel
Nsp ny 70 . on. a. se ns os and
@ ; . dd nS . si be te e Ss451e 40
my security. he sala no. | ,old hl@ that 4 be dd
o ss e% sse RI, 5 ssf1 n. w.. to me IL
,rogpe 1aI ,st The Presiaeni had g., tod him that
Gao solaiers asked the Secretary whether .ae set
set responsible.
Charles S. Jones, whose proposal compile,
with all tie requirements Of the advertisement
was ne next @we s 6idder for the entire w9Ik
was I. 7. Morgan, being ts60, Osj4O. The ne 1t 1
The bid Of Samuel q, Bidges Of keokuk, lows
This was bid "a gross for the entire work 70
sg0.0,0, being $4,000 more than Morgan's lid
$500 more than Joness, and 10000 more thai
the uid of the Knoxville Marble Co.
among the bidders was ID. Z. sage, whose biz
Tor the entire work was 1904. 1854. Mr. Sage MI
70 furnish tue slabs AT s. each, and the blocks 70
&c; 10 frnish ali the blocks AZ A. tsescs 'I III
awarded to Charles ;. Jones contract to fur
nsh ~ ~, slabs q s3;g each g Morgan con
lract 10 furnish 1887 slabs at $40 each, and u
bfiges contract 70 furnish $500 slabs at S35
ca. Why Mr. Bridges sho uld receive a contr c
en- Mr.. Morgan only got $40 for the sam
Al is and MIR. Jones only t33 Is matter unex
blamed ~ either Ar. Bridges or any OF the wit
Iesacs eX mined. But II IL just to say that th
cret IS 81 ar was not examined before thi
rommuee. why the contract was not given {
the lowest Responsible bidder, as the law re
quireC, nd Nhh Ne contract for the slabs "
kNcn q three different persons at three uiferen
Lt,ces who were not tie lowest bidders, the ties
hnoni Goes not exilaiu, and iustines the con
unfair and Illegal,
LOWEST DIppPRs
Mr.. Charles 5. Jones, the lowest bidder Tor tn
entire contract except the Knoxville Maroi
Company, TO whom contract for about Que
thrd 81 the slabs was awarded says:
On the 2ith - oct ber 1873 n, ary two months afe
the optuihg VI ine BIOS receiy. communicate
IRON tue ncilnR Qnartermaster- General 81 The my
COPY ol lis ietlsf lsaPpeudrd, marked Al de, nng,
AnVH whether would agree ~ iutaisi about one
f.Lrth the lOta NUMBER - Aus required Ia the cen
cr lee at tie tamr Irre each, for which | lad IN m
bad u scut. offered to furash both slab, and bock
And blocks as TO prlce, a. nAd nost of the uiuutr
kuOvlbH fu well that while very little would be mad
nv prce on the former, there was a con- IdrrAhi
lAargil VI PROFIT on the LATER. Could have anu pa
any suyh ayi' ION OF my proposal woulG have b =
stated a 80 Tor saoe, az ~ for blocks hut su
pooling that all such the aggregate uolrii
ana cents would b. tue controlling elemeut IA n mi
sSarl ~ tue contract averaged the bld for the ~
descriptions Of Work as mere matter OF convent
taiUriltion. Three days before the receipt Of III
on rs O october u. c. Page, one Of the bidders VII
then 10 TIE Guy, Informed me that he was au no
lied TO state that would only he given portion
thc work. aud u Oiu not accept Nhat Was OneI vi