Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-02-02

adoption yet such was the exte-
rior beauty and complete inter-
nal arrangements that they exhibited it
10 the Council, that they might consider
its merits. and if in their judgment
deemed best, enlarge the appropriation
so as to secure such building with
granite elevations. Mr.. George W.
Myers, son of E. e. Myers, represented
| bis father before the Council.
In order to have correct under
standing in this matter, it must be
borne in mind that the Myers plan
called for bricks above the first story
did not include in the estimate the
beating apparatus nor the architects
fet-and yet Mr.. Myers gave assurance
70 the Council--which assurance was
subsequently backed by his father
tnft granite elevations could be sub
stituted for brick, the heating appa-
rstus, also the architects fee, could be
Included and still bring the entire cost
within 100000. 1t must also be
borne in mind that though the engineer
and the committee favored the plan be:
cause Of its real worth, yet never did
recommend it as building that could
be built for the amount at their dispo-
sal, but, on the contrary, did, openly
before the Council, through its chair
man, protest against adopting the plan
with the idea that such could be done.
This plan was fully discussed in con-
nectioh with those of Yost & MurdOck
md McKeon, and the Council, by very
seided vote, awarded the firstpremium
TO E. Z. Myers. August 10, 1884
.egen months and eight days from the
time the award was made-the COM
tnittee received from Mr.. Myers the
detail drawings aud specifications, and
at once advertised for sealed proposals
for the erection of the building, the
same to be presented on or before the
lst Of October following. At the ap.
pointed time several builders from
ts,listahce appeared, but frankly stated
that the building could not be erected
according to the plans and specifications
within the amount allowed. Nor were
these bids of detached character suf-
ifcient to erect the building, hence the
bids were not opened.
Mr.. Myers still asserted that the
building could be put up for the
amount, and that he could, upon another
trial, bring reliable builders who would
undertake it.. He was allowed to make
suggestions as to certain notifications
in construction and finish in order to
secure the building within the limit.
December /, 1884, the second call for
bids on his plan was made. In due
time the bids were opened, and again it
was found that the building could not
be built for the sum named, though
among the bidders were toose who, he
assured us, would undertake the work.
( On the 18th Of February, 1885, the
I Nay or approved the joint resolution re-
jecting the Myers plan, it having been
found impossible to secure a competent
bidder TO undertake the construction of
the building, according to his plans and
/ specifications, for the amount agreed
upon. The Myers plan having been re-
jected on the 10Th Of February, on the
10th, only four days later, the commit
tee advertised for new designs to be
submitted June lst next.
May the 29th the committee decided
I to secure the services Of two architects
or engineers, who, with the City Engi-
neer, should constitute an Advisory
/ Board.
( They were fortunate in securing the
services of Major E. 7. d. Myers and
Colonel A. l.. Rives, gentlemen Of
! i7ell-known reputation in their profess
: sions.
The Advisory Board have discharged
their duties faithfully and fearlessly,
giving evidence that they have but one
object in view, and that is to protect the
best interests of the city.
June 2, 1885, the new plans. num-
bering twenty-seven under the second
call, were received. The Advisory
Board having examined them reported
one submitted by Wait & Cutter as en-.
titled to the first premium. They also
suggested certain notifications, which
would secure in the basement story
suitable rooms for the Hastings and
Police Courts. Other minor modifca-
tons were suggested, which altogether
would require an increased appropria-
tion of about S33, 900.
The modified plan was concurred in
by the committee and presented to the
Council, who authorized the committee
to enter into arrangements with Wait
4 Cutter for the proposed notifications
and for detail drawings and specifca-
tions Of the same and report to the
Council what the additional cost would
be.
July 7th following the Mayor ap-
proved the foregoing action Of the
Council.
The necessary arrangements having
been made with Messrs. Wait * Cutter,
they at once entered upon the duty of
preparing the detail work, at times fur
nishing pencil sketches, which were
considered and returned, with sugges-
tions. By request their time for pre-
pairing the plans was extended one
month, and on December 2l, 1885, they
presented the detail drawings, &C., for
acceptance.
The Advisory Board, seeing a de-
parture from the original elevations,
and also from the instructions furnished,
upon the examination of pencil sketches
suggested the propriety of having Mr..
Wait present with the Board and COM
mittee. MIR. Wait promptly made his
appearance. The plans were carefully
inspected by the Board. They re-
ported that the internal arrangements
we're acceptable, but the departure
from the original elevations, as well as
from the instructions given, were Of
such character as to make it neces-
sary for the lines to be altered, so as to
conform to original instructions. The
committee concurring, returned the
plans and specifications for correction.
We deem it but just to Mr.. Wait for
US to state here that in his first meeting
with the committee and Board he stated
that the alterations made were the re-