The Daily clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1866-1888, 1886-03-04

Sugeut & Melville aad Judge S. s
Calhoou 20 construed It. Il seems to u
100 plain for argument that they are
right, and u anything we're necessary Il
confirm as IN this view il is found in
IRE fact that the Legislature, by the Act
o. March y, 1884, having repealed al
laws authorizing expenditures for im
/ proycments, on the 10Th day Of the same
Month passed the Act in which the Ian
gpagc quoted is found.
Admitted that the Superintendent had
tic right to contract, with The approval
Of the Governor, and the conclusion Of
the majority that no contracts were
made, is entirely too technical.
We believe that no written agreements
In the usual form Of contracts, approved
by the Governor, we're presented to the
Committee; but the Superintendent
verbally authorized many Of the smaller
items of the expenditures; and the build.
ings and walls, for the price OF which
credit was given TO the lessees in their
settlement, we're constructed substan.
TALLY according TO written estimates and
specifications, and no credit was allowed
Of any kind, not approved by the Super
intendent and the Governor. 1t is not
material whether the contracts were
made by the Superintendent and APP
proved by the Governor before the
work under them was commenced, or
whether the Superintendent made the
contracts before the improvements were
commenced aud the Governor approved
the contracts after the improvements
were completed The important ques-
ton is, Did the Superintendent and the
Governor concur that the repairs were
necessary and that the Improvement
we're actually neededg' Further il
may be said that verbal contract is Al
binding az n written one.
The most serious point OF difference
between the majority and the minority
is the value of the more important i'm
provements, the majority finding tha
the prices, paid were exorbitant. They
base their conclusions on this point on
the evidence Of one l.. Scully, an archi
tect and builder who resides in Meridian
Mr.. ScullY examined and valued the
blacksmith shop, the center tower and
wall, the dining groom and the northeast
tower and wall, for all which the lessees
we're allowed $3O,4l2.1I, while he says
they are worth S13,17S.36,
The minority refuse TO accept the
statement Of Mr.. Seully, but rely on
the statement Of Messrs, II. M, Taylor,
f, w. Olin, James Swan aud Frank b.
Hull, all Of whom are familiar with the
particular Improvements above specified
aud say that they are worth what the
State paid for them.
Wcdo not know Mr.. Scully, and have
but limited acquaintance, With Mr..
swau, who is known TO be an expert.
cnced architect and builder, but Measrs.
Taylor, Hull and DIN, have been citi
zens OF Jackson for many years, and
their statement here on any matter
would outweigh that Of any one citizen
of the State. They are truthful and
honest men, and they are competent
judges OF the cost OF sucn buildings as
that referred to, In fact Mr.. Taylor is
a carpenteraud building contractor. Mr.
DIN, q bricklaycr aud building con.
tractor, and Mr.. Hull a building
contractor of more than ordinary expe-
rienee,
Until the contrary is clearly shown,
we shall believe that Mr. Scully is mis-
taken.
There are many differences between
the majority and minority which we
have not time to notice Our object
now is simply to show that there are two
sides to the question, and that as to the
most important matters referred to in
the report of the majority, their conclu'
sions are scarcely warranted by the law
Or the facts as we understand them.
rheiudgment of condemnation against
The Governor, the Superintendent and
the Lessees, which the majority seem to
invite, should be withheld until the re.
port Of the Special Committee has been
received.
A Model Settlement With the State
Auditor.