Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-07-16
BoARD OF PUBLIC Works.
jackson Street Paving Award--The Rice
Street Sewer Trouble.

Jackson Street Paving Award--The Rice
Street Sewer Trouble.
A special meeting of the board of public
works was held yesterday afternoon, all the
members being present.
THE JACKSON STREET PAVEMENT
came up again for consideration. In COM
muncation the city engineer reiterated his for
mer statement that the bid for the Alexander
Miller pavement was much the highest, and
that he did not consider it enough better than
the others to be worth the difference in cash.
Besides, the bid incomplete. The other
bids were for the 'Storr" pavement, patented
December, 1872, The only difference in the
three bids was in the depth of the sand founda-
| ton. The engineer preferred the largest depth,
as specified in the bid by Mr.. Mcleod, but the
| three had been equalized by computing the
matter as earth-work, when the bid stood as
| follows:
| James Starkey. 50, 94O IL
| Il. III. Patchen. Observation-Disclosures. $685. 81
| A. A. Mcleod. ......... l,U39 bU
| Both Mr.. Starkey and Mr.. Mcleod claimed
| there was no patent. while Mr.. Patchen agreed
| to pay the royalty, if any and to procure the
city the right to repair and renew.
| The contract awarded to James Starkey,
the lowest bidder, on condition that the city
be protected in the matter of patent rights
In response to the invitation of the board
that bidders would express their views regard
| ing the payments they offered, Mr.. VIM. M.
Tileston gave details of the Alexander
Miller" pavement of which he is the duly au-
thorzed agent. He claimed for 1t the highest
points of excellence. Stress had been laid by
the city engineer as to the depth of the foun-
dation sand of the different bids, as to whether
four inches or six inches were specified. That
officer had declared his preference for the
greater depth and he CTileston) offered in his
bid to put in four inches of sand
and two of wood thus making the
foundation depth preferred by the
engineer, and of more substantial character
than the others. As to the i1fformality of his bic
in not itemizing the various points of the
, specification, he showed that his proposal in
, cluded the whole, paving and grading, and hs
had thus submitted it under the instructions
of the city engineer. In the opinion of Mr.
Tileston, it was high time the city should pu
down something more satisfactory and durable
in the way of pavement than the rickety
: always-out-of-rcpair arrangement that dis
graced Third street. This, the Miller pavem en-
would furnish. He concluded by requestin.
g liberty to Withdraw his bid, which was granted
THE INTERMINABLE RICE STREET SEWER
1 was again on the carpet. a new complication
had arisen. The men had struck for thei
wages. Again, the contractor Patrick Nash
l claimed there difference between tn
| plans and the specifications the latter calm
for higher class of work than the former
| which would neCessltate longer time in tn
construction. The city engineer acknowledge
the discrepancy, but said the specification
would legally hold over the plans. MIR. Mas
was directed to proceed with tn
:, work according to the engineers instructions
and any extras would be q matter for subse
. quent adjudication.
MISCELLANEOUS.
A washout North street, emptying on til
track of the st. Paul & Duluth railroad was II
o ferred to the Fifth ward member with powe
, to act
!. The clerk was directed to advertise the frs
IS assessment notice for the Bedford street graz
} ing.
The grading of L. Orient street was referre
/ to the city eng ineer for plans and estimates.
n Jacob Manzers bill for abstracts Furnished
/ previously referred to the clerk, was returne
e by him showing overcharges to the amount
o $34.l0. Bill allowed less that sum-
IS The preliminary estimate for grading Il
y fayette avenue was ordered to the council.
l. The usual estimates were allowed, as unde
1t Ohio street grading, $13l.75; st. Peter sire
sewer, $S6.62; Ninth street sewer, $534.65; ar
q the Rice street sewer, S3,055.75. The last WI
n granted on the condition that the contractor D,
a on a sufficient force to warrant the board
II believing that the work would be accomplishe
10 on time
L. The board adjourned.