Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1881-02-24

salQ IL was SUCH properly In
State ought not to have; said he would Civ
and fixtures and allow the State to sell th
machinery; and argued that the $4,000 to b.
paid in nine years would be no more tina,
equivalent to $4,000, and that the State coult
sell it for that or more. They were silent
except that Inspector Butts said they had no
come for new contract but to consider thai
bid The objections of witness were ther
discussed, one by one, and at last only two
or three remained unagreed upon. One was
to the quarterly payment of the rental. Mr.
Butts or Mr. De Laittre said the machinery
could be piled up, but did not offer
to amend the contract. Some one
asked if witness refused to sign the contract
and he answered no, but that he was ready to
sign a contract in the letter and spirit of theiI
advertisement and his bid. They had moi
no agreement as to the specific terms of the
contract.
1t was no part of the purpose of witness to
avoid the contract; did not expect Forepaugh
& Tarbox's bid to come in; it remained con-
tinually his idea that if the contract was Sc
cured it would be under his bid.
At the meeting of the 31st the inspectors
said they were willing the machinery should
be piled up, housed properly, on the prison
&
payments of rents. There was some discus.
sion Of what would resultiin case of fire land af
ter talking over all the objections witness said
| he would take the contract just as they had
talked, and there was no objection. He then
| withdrew, leaving them in session, supposng
| they wished to confer
| February 4th, witness took over q contract
and bond, signed and sealed; gave it to 1nspec-
| tor Butts and told Inspectors Reed and De
T oiffro ond Warden Read oh011t II and said tn
each that it was their duty to accept or reject
this contract. This contract Submitted in
evidence) came back to him by mail. There
was no objection made to the bond or con.
tract. He had always been ready to fulfill
the contract.
Cross-examined by the attorney general Mr..
Thompson testified that his intention was to
assign the contract to Forepaugh & Tarbox
There was no agreement but an understanding
with them to that effect. On the 18th when
talking with the inspectors, witness spoke Of
Sabin's bid, when Mr. Sabin said mot Sabin's
but Elward's.'
The cross-examination was mostly devoted
to the meeting of the Goth, concerning which
witness was questioned in detail as to his rec
objections of the discussions and concessions
regarding his objections. Witness recollected
that the attorney general spoke of making all
the notifications he requested, except as to
subletting labor and machinery. Witness did
not say be couldn't sign the contract unless he
could sublet the labor. The inspectors said
nothing about correcting the contract Wit
ness quite late asked them if that was the con-
tract they expected him to sign and they said yes:
He did not hear the attorney general say, eyes,
with the notifications" or if he heard it did
not comprehend it, from being intent on the
paper. Witness did not at that meeting learn
from any of the inspectors that they would
change the contract. He understood the at
torney general was ready to make a reasonable
contract and did all he could TO have the con.
tract consummated; he could have made con-
tract that day with the attorney general, but
not with the inspectors. Recess.
afternoon Session.
The oss-examination of Mr. Thompson
was continued by Mr.. Clough the new points
being as follows:
Witness thought Forepaugh 6S Tarbox first
spoke about bidding; did not think they spoke
to him as their attorney; his, form of bid was
left in their possession. They told him they
would put in bids, perhaps two weeks before
the bids were opened. Arranged with them
for his deposit money because he expected to
assign to them; knew before that that they in
tended to bid. Forepaugh & TarboX knew he
was to fill the blanks in his bid he did not
know the exact amounts of their bid, but
knew theirs was the lowest; presumed they
knew just what his bid was. At saltwater
did not know of any other bid; did not expect
to put in my bid if there were no other bids; if
there were no outside bidders only one bid was
to be put in; that was the understanding with
Forepaugh & Tarbox; had no conference with
anyone in their interest at my house before the
bids were made. Forepaugh & Tarbox did
not find fault or express surprise at my bid
going in; told them there was such an air of
secrecy about the warden's office I thought it
best to put in my bid. Nothing was said
about future proceedings.
Witness did not think the inspectors wanted
to see him Jan. 31St. Our visit was to make
the contract if possible. Mr.. Tarbox went
assigned to them. Said in answer to Mr..
De Laittre that if it made no difference, the
contract could be made In the name of Fore
paugh & TarboX; this was after we
had gone over the speculations in
detail and virtual understanding had
been reached; did not know of any bid by
Seymour, Sabin s. Co. at that time. The
was said by De Laittre; objected, declaring
had been ready at all times to make the con-
tract, only desiring such changes in its word
ing as common prudence would demand. No
other member of the board said anything
about the bids being off, and when l said
was ready to fulfill my contract, all were
SILENT told Mr.. Sabin an arrangement (about
finishing his contracts) could probably be
made; did not tell him that if he wished to
talk about that business he could
see me and my partner in my office in st. Paul.
don't think ever heard of the bid of Sey-
mour, Sabin & Co. until after the 4th, certain
ly not until after had presented my contract
to the board on the 4th.
Re-direct-It was always understood be-
tween myself and Forepaugh & Tarbox after
the bids were opened that if the contract was
secured by either of us it must be under my
bid. All proceedings had subsequently wers
with this view. The $4,000 accompanying bis
bid was still in possession of the State treas
urer.
Mr.. Marsh-You understand you can get it
upon application?
Thompson-I do not know.
Mr. Marsh to Mr. Butts, an inspector pres
ent-Wont you go down and ask the treasurer
to appear here with the $1,000 and make ten
der of it to Mr.. Thompson?
Marsh to Thompson-But you did receive a
notice through the mail informing you that
the money would be returned to you by the
treasurer?
Thompson-Yes.
Subsequently and just after adjournment
State Treasurer Kittelson appeared with the
s., 900, and though Mr.. Thompson declined to
| receive, he acknowledged the tender.
In answer to Mr.. CIough, Mr.. Thompson
said: Never expected to employ the prison
ers myself, but to assign my contract. If an
assignment was refused by the inspectors ex-