Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1877-10-30
COUNTY RIDGE
Letting Brldge-Bnllding Oat to the
Highest Bidders Instead Of the
LoWest7What a CerrespOn.
dent Thinks OF the
System, Etc.

OOmmiootOueE auu MS dhSOClhleb lmpe.
riously demands a candid investigation
on the part of the citizens Of Shelby
county, who have the honor Of footing
sundry bills for county expenses. 1t has
come to the ears Of many citizens residf
ing in the interior OF this county and
surely it must be known at these head
quarters" that in awarding a contract
for the building of the bridge over Wolf
river, near the city, the very excellent
rule Of letting the contract to the lowest
bidder (hitherto practiced), was revers d,
and the job vas given to the highest bid
ders. The plain matter, as it comes 10 the
rusticS in the rural "deestriets" is, that
at the July term Of the oworshipful Coun-
ty Court there was passed an order for
the building Of the bridge over the river
where the Groves Graham ferry had for
merly accommodated our citizens. At
the same term Of the said worshipiul,
Mr.. 0glesby was, in due form Of Law,
elected to the important position Of
bridge commissioner, whose services
we're deemed in~dispensably necessary to
the hest financial interests of the
county. Now, it had long been a
matter Of disputation among the
members of the County Court as
to the necessity Of this new semi.oficial.
The doubt was solved, at least in the
minds of a majority of the Court, by the
freaks of Neptune in the spring Of the
year of grace 1877, when nearly every
bridge in tie county was swept away by
the angry streams Of the county thet
sought TO unite with the turbid waters Of
Mr.. Calhoun's great internal sea-
Mr.. Oglesby was selected in preference
to his less fortunate rivals for bis sup.
posed integrity and capacity, faithfully
and efficiently to subserve the interests
Of the county of Shelby. The objection
to the appointment of a bridge commits
s%ioner, which was pressed on the minds
Of the Court with great earnestnsss by.
Justices Walker, Jones, Pulliem and
other prudent members Of the Court
whose Vigilence doubtless has saved the
county annually thousands Of dollars,
was that the commissioner might himself
become the center Of a ring which,
instead Of the exercise of a ~scrupulous
fidelity and economy, might possibly
combine and confederate With jobbers 10
contracts, and thereby fleece the county
out Of thousands Of dollars that 10 the
exercise of an honest economy could be
saved to the taxpayer. lIgl.} 80
There were many circumstances whis-
pered about soon after Mr., 0glesby COM
menced his career, which if true fully
illustrate how unwisely the members of
the court exercised THAR discretion in the
selection Of our commissioner. 1t was
rumored, and spoken of without reserve,
that a letter was sent to Esqnires Hun,
ter and York directing them to award a
contract for the building Of all four or
five bridges OF Big creek to one contrac,
tor, when there was hut one bid for them.
Now your correspondent does not know
the facts, but writes what was the report,
and it was atithe time said that the jus.
tees were very indignant at the action
of the commissioner. 1t was, and is yet,
the belief that the commissioner has
been interested through his sen in many
of the most important contracts. 1t is
further believed that the commissioner
has drawn but few of the plans of the
bridges, and that designing bidders would
putin specifications totally impracticable
and never intended to be performed, for
instance in the bridge across the river at
the ferry above referred to. One of the
specifications is that the piles are to be
driven twenty (2O) feet below the bed
of the river or surface of the
earth. Who does not know that there is
not a driver, perhaps, in the whole State
high enough to do such work. But what
is the effect2 An unsophisticated bid
der, taking it for granted that a full
compliance would be required, would put
in bis bid for a sum greatly 10 excess Of.
what it would have been with fair speci.
6cations. But not to extend these few
lines beyond the tolerance Of the LEDGER
editor, | will close by referri g again to
the circumstances of the letting of the
bridge over Wolf river, at the bridge
The bidders we're Tate, McGavoek &
Co to whom the contract was awarded;
Hitchcock & Co, L. P. Judd & Co., and
one, two or three others, whose names
are not now recollected = the bids
ranging from $4,000 to $4,000, the latter
being the bid of Tate, MeGavock & Co
that of Hitchcock & Co. being about
$1,000, Judd & Co, $4,000, and others far
below anyJof the above. Intending TO
do no one injustice, your scribe consult
ed a gentleman who knows full we'll what
be speaks Of as to the cost %(actual) OIL
the building Of such a bridge; his figures
are: for lumber, $500; for irons, $500;
for labor, $1,000; for piles, $1,000; total,
$4,000, If the above is a correct cslcu.
%lation, in what light should the bridge
commissioners Of this county be viewed
by the honest citizens who have to foot
the expenses incident to the acts of al
public servant whose highest vanity and
aim should be to guard the interests of
the county with perpetual vigilance and
fdelity2 RusTIoUs.
Wiggin, 3lS Main street, has
inst wnhn~nAG E-- A. NJ