Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-07-27

vhcn it will relieve the public services
rom interruptions by repeated collec-
ions"
THE YOORHOUsE BARN.
rho COntracs for Building it--Hss 10 Beon l
Legally Awarded:
AS stated in yesterdays INTELLIGEN-
;ER, tho board Of poor directors have
awarded the contract for rebuilding the
poorhOuse barn to Mr.. J. NJ. Bacl,mal,, Of
Willow Street, whose bid was -, 12O,
while Ed. N. Smith, Of Columbia, bid
%, ,S51.s7, and was the lowest bidder.
Mr.. Landis, one Of the directors, cx-
plains the action Of the board by saying
that when Mr.. Bachman's bid WAS opened,
and its specifications examined, they were
found to contain u number Of improve
ments not set forth in The specifications
prepared by Mr.. Shiifcr, tho architect en-
ploycd by tho directors The board, there
fore, rejected all the bids received in re-
sponse to the specifications furnished by
their architect, and accepted the proposal
of MIR. Bachman for 4 structure of quite
different character. Following are some
Of the alterations that appear in Mr.. Bach
mans plan. Instead Of the ventilators de
scribed in the specifications, Mr.. Bachman
proposes larger ones, with 4 ventilating
cupola that will add greatly to the appear
ancc Of the barn. He also proposes eight
dormer windows instead Of six, rs called
for in Mr.. Shiffer's plan; fourteen blinds
Of tnr, th6.
stalls instead Of hemlOck (there will
be required 125 or 13O of these) the sills
also are to be of white oak, by II inches,
floors of the NOW are t" be laid with floor.
ing boards, nailed down, instead Of
loose boards there are to be large star
openings at each end of the barn instead
of tho half moon slat opening proposed in
the specifications, and all the windows are
to be furnished with blinds such as are
used in dwelling houses. These improve
ments on the plan advertised for, Mr..
Landis thinks (and in this the board agreed
with him), are worth fully $500, and there
fore Mr.. Bachman's bid was more favor
able one than Mr.. Smiths.
The "Other fellows by no means agree
to this, and insist that even if Mr.. Bach
mans ':plan" is a better one than that
furnished by the directors architect they
(the bidders) ought to have had q chance
to compete for it's construction. They bid,
I'm good faith, to build barn, exactly in
accordance with the plans and specifica-
tions furnished by the directors. 1fthe di-
rectols afterwards discovered better plan,
they should have rejected all the bids for
the old plan and given all the bidders a
chance to compete for tho new one. Per-
haps some of them could have built it for
= good deal less money than Dir. Bachman
proposes to build it for.
These points seem to be we'll taken, and
there is still another and perhaps more
important ono urged |; namely, that the
board of directors having rejected all the
bids offered for the barn in accordance
with the plans and specifications furnished,
have no right to accept a bid for the cree.
tion of different kind of building without
advertising for proposals, and giving CON-
| peting mechanics an equal chance to pro-
cure the contract.
Mr.. Ed. n. Smith, the lowest bidder, de-
clares that he has been very unfairly dealt
with, and Fred Bletz. who seemed to be
interested in the furnishing Of the lumber,
is outspOken in declaring that the award
of the contract was a set-up job between
some of the directors and Bachman. In
addition to the fact as published yestcr.
day, that Bachman's bid was not handed il
until after several of the other bids were
opened (although he was present in an ad
joining room, within hearing distance)
and even when handed in was not tha
lowest bid, it is said that Mr.. Bachman':
interest was earnestly championed by Cap
tain Brickcr, of Warwick, who is largely
engaged in the lumber trade, and who cx
ercised 10 small influence in securing tin
nomination and election of Mr.. Evans as :
director Of the poor. In = word, as tin
"outs ~ say, the lowest bid was rejectet
by Mr. Evans and his ''wicked partners,
and the job given to Mr.. Bachman, SO tina
Mr.. Bricker, who elected Mr.. Evans, might
have tho profit III the lumber used on the
barn, and Mr.. Evans be enabled thus t.
| OlSCNlrSc u pOlIClcdl OcDt.
Another objection raised to MIR. Bach
mans "plan' is that notwithstanding hi
oak posts and sills, OH which the Director
laid so much stress (although they di'
not advertise for them), he will use in th'
construction Of the barn more common
hemlock, and less good pine than woul'
have been used by any Of the other bid
ders. Fred Bletz declares that there vii
be moro hemlock than pine in the building
as proposed by Bachman.
The great objection after all is that tin
directors have, without legal authority, &C
copied bid for the construction Of tn
barn without giving any other bidder
chance to compete with the man to whom
tho contract was awarded.
An experienced builder who has exam
ined Mr.. Bachman's plan and compared
with that of Mr.. Shiffer's, informs us th;,
there will be from 900 to $1,000 feet les
lumber in Bachman's than were asked 70
in Shiffer's plan, and that the Bachnia
barn. with all Its alleged improvements
can be built at less net cost than tn
Shiffer barn, and that il proposals for tn
building of it had been ask ed there wOul
in all probability have been bids as low o
even lower than Mr.. Smiths rejected bi
of So, s51. .S7-thus saving to the count
not less than 1858. IL, and perhaps cOnsid
erably more.