Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1883-06-01
THE STREET SWEEPING CONTR ACT
Protest for Nr. j. :. FSlbcrt Against
the AWard-Why the Contract WAS
Awarded to Mr. Wright.

District Commissioners to L. p. Wright & Son,
who bid 298 cents per 1900 yards Yesterday Mr..
Enoch Totten, as counsel for J. s Fllbert, who
claims that his bid or 2sx cents was the lowest,
addressed letter to the Commissioners in behalf
OF his client, saying: "He complains that, being
the lowest bidder and being entirely responsible,
he Is entitled to the award OF the contract under
the provisions or the firth section Oi the act OF
congress approved June IL, 1873 Ihsve to ask, In
his behalf. that you Will designate some hour
when ii will be convenient for the Commissioners
10 give me an interview on the subject, and also
that. meanwhile, no steps be taken to consummate
q contract in the matter with any other person.
The Commissioners replied to this, through
their Secretary, that they would be at liberty to
give Col. Toiten an interview at l:so O'Clock TO-
What Commissioners EdmOnds Saws.
Commissioner Ednonds, in an interview upon
the subject, stated the grounds upoa which the
Commssonershad rejected the lowest bid, spoke
OF the satisfaction which Mr.. Wright had given
when lie formerly held the contract and COM
pared it with the Crawford machine on which Mr
Flbert based his work, to the disadvantage OF the
lat@r.Mr Crawford having lost money at the
rate OF 5000 year his contract, which he
took at % cents per 1000 yards SO Mr.. Fllberts
bid was advanced TO 2S7t cents, the basis, how
Crawford machine. Wright bid three-euarters of
cent higher per 1,0O0 yards on the representa-
had formerly used In Washington. In view II the
fact that there are various machines for doing the
work. the commissioners reserved the right TO re-
1ect any or all bids, so as to give them some dis
cret1on as to the machine to be used, believing
that it is impracticable TO do as good work with
one of the several machines as with another.
NOW, when the bids came in we found that there
was q difference between the bids OF Wright and
Filbert of about $975 for the whole year. There
were ether bidders, but their proposals were much
higher. Therefore" said Mr.. EGmonds. latter
examining the different machines and making an
nSn onselvaof tha OF tnelr respective workings and
VINO had spoken with us about the matter, we
concluded that we ought to accept wr.ghrs bid
and pay the 1915 additional for the work he would do
ratner than accept the work now being done by
the CRAWFORD machines, even at less sum. As
up the dinerence in price IL necessary
What Commissioner West Saya
THE PURPOSE Is TO GIVE BETTER SERVICE.
TO STAR reporter Commissioner West today
gave the following answer to an inquiry about
the facts In the Of the street-sweeping award:
"Yes. the action OF the Commissioners In award.
Ing the contract to Wright at 2sA cents when FIJI
bert's bid was 2sjS cents, has been CHALLENGED in
some quarters, but there are no grounds for ex-
ception to their action, unless their judgment and
good faith is called into question. The only ex-
pendltureS OF money coming under the contract
provisions of the act OF Congress OF June II, ls7s
Wnlch IS quoted by Col TOtten on behalf or Mr..
Fllbert are those relating to new pavements'
opening OF new Streets sewers 'or any work
the total cost OF which shall exceed the sum OF
$1,000 1t is not held by the District government
that there is any requirement. OF law that contracts
other Than such as relate to the character or works
quoted should be let out to the lowest bidder. Yet
In almost all instances, the street sweeping for ey
ample, 1t Is found desirable 10 invite competition
through proposals, and that course is pursued by
the Commissioners, and contracts are given as a
matter OF expediency and economy, not OF law
Sometimes proposals are invited, then declined,
and the service or supplies are obtained at lower
rates by private bargain.
Furthermore. The machinery to be used In
sweeping the streets was made an important ele-
ment OF the proposals to be submitted, as Will be
seen by the following extract from the conditions
required from bidders:
, 4. Each bidder must submit with his bid detailed
drawings and descriptons--or models preferred-of
the machines he proposes to II the machine is
patented the bidder exhibit proof of his right to
use tOe nachine IN the District OF Columbia, end will
fuTther be required to execute a bond of indemnity
holding the District harmless from any slits for i'm.
fringement of patent which may arise under his con-
tract These descriptions drawings and models viii be
award of the contract. and those machines which, in
the Judgment OF the ssoners, not suitable
or ne work required 10y this contract will be rejected.
together with the BIDS pertaining to them.'
II proposals had merely been invited for sweep-
Ing the streets without specifying that the
machinery to be used would be considered as
affecting the manner In which the work was to be
done there could only be a question OF price. But
machinery, efficiency OF service and price had all
TO be regarded. Each bidder knew tn ese con-
give the contract to Fi5ert would by a parity OF
reasoning have required them to give it to bid
der proposing to do the work by hand-broOmS at
~ cents yard, or any lesser sum than Filbert's
The citizens OF Washington have been loud COM
plainantS OF the way the streets have been swept
the past three years, and an effort is making to
VIII perform It's operations under very many OBJ
servant eyes it is 10 be hoped that there VIII not
be quite as much dust thrown into them next
year."