St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-08-07
Statement Of a County Commissioner as
to the Contract for the
Court House.
After a Day of Welded Bliss Ham Wong
Hong is Bereft Of His
Buxom Bride.
A New Kind of Bug That Destroys
Wheat in Northern
Minnesota.
Cutting in CoaI--Bank EXaminer'
Figures--State Fair Notes.
Street Sayings.
THE COURT HOUSE CoNrRACr.
why 1t was Not Ratified at the Late
commissioners Meeting.


why 1t was Not Ratified at the Late
commissioners Meeting.
The court house contract is still the sub
ject of conversation among those interested
and such persons as have kept some track
of the progress of the work through its
different stages. The idea that the con-
tractor should refuse to sign an agreement
because of fractional rise in the price Of a
certain article of building material was
pretty generally discredited, and, in fact, it
is scarcely reasonable to suppose that he
would bid so closely that such a
rise would necessitate his abandonment of
the agreement. 1t was not alleged, how
ever, that this was the sole reason, it being
one of several which were published yes
terday as likely to influence Mr.. Breen in
recOnsidering his bid. That gentleman is
mdisturbed by the various surnises which
nave been advanced pro and con. He is
willing to abide by his contract, and as he
is the one most interested, it is enough to
settle all discussion to have him reiterate
that he does not desire to recall the paper.
The real cause of all the speculation
anent the contract appears TO be ques-
ton between the courthouse commission
and the board of county commissioners.
Representatives of each body were visited
yesterday, but the majority were guarded
In their phrases, taking the high moral
ground that it Ill became them to discuss
the subject. 1t could be traced, however,
that there was feeling between the two
bodies, and it is possible that it may de-
velop into an issue when the joint session
OF the commissioners and the council is
held to ratify the contract.
From. County Commissioner Mitsch the
clearest and most concise statement was re-
ceived as to the question as viewed from a
commissioners standpoint. That gentleman
stated his reason for
QUESTIONING TIE POLICY
of ratifying the contract at the late meeting
of the joint body. He said that as he I'M
derStood the law of the Legislature which
created the courthouse commission, and
provided for the erection Of
the building, it is necessary to
submit the plans and speci-
fcations for the house to the board Of
county commissioners for their approval
before letting the contract. He said that
individually he had no feeling i'll the matter
it was with him question Of official
duty. The gentlemen composing the COM
mission are among the best citizens of the
city and above question, while the con-
tractor and himself were on the friendliest
of terms But he could not allow personal
considerations to influence him in case
where he believed his simple duty as
public officer was concerned. The law plainly
states that the plans shall be submitted TO
the board OF county commissioners for their
approval. How could he vote for the rati
tication of a contract, the specifications of
which he had not seen and consequently
had not approved? 1t was true that he
could visit the architects Office and view
the plans and specifications as an individual
citizen, but this would not be fulfilling the
law governing the erection Of the building.
Mr.. Mitsch thought that since the county
commissioners had all the bills to allow and
the money to award for the work done,
they should have some knowledge of what
they were dispensing the funds for. lie
could not assume to speak for the other
members of the board, but he did not see
how he could consistently vote for the rati-
fication of the contract, and it was his
opinion that it would not pass at the ap-
preaching joint meeting.