The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1888-01-13

Reed. Ring * l..
June 22.................S 52.67 ........$ 45. so
June 2S................. 5S.42.......... d .6S
July 23................. 58.42........... 6O.23
July 29................. 58.42..,....... 105.6l
Aug. L..,................ S3.76........... 2S6.01
Aug. 3l............... 351 OF ........ 351 .16
? Reed considered that Ring & Tobin
should have paid the cost oftaking down
and setting up again corner stone that
had been condemned. This accounts
for the difference on July 10Th. This.
however, was balanced by some items
which Reed included and the contrac-
tors did not
No serious snags were encountered
until charge for coping was made and
then the contractors surprised the COM
missioners by bringing up point which
had never been considered before. 1t
seems that Thomas Russell did not COM
plete his contract to lay the foundation,
not having laid some of the coping.
Ring < Tobin claimed that their con-
tract was to build the structure above
the water table and that laying the cop
/ lhS Was CAtId "OIhs AhC SOhbioSIb
were produced, there being two with
Ring & Tobin. The first contract ex-
cepted Ring & Tobin from doing what
was called for in Russell's contract, but
the second contract, made April %,
1887, did not mention the matter. The
County Attorney held that the latter
contract was binding and that the con-
tractors were required to complete Rus
sells contract.
The county commissioners still retain
$500 on Russell's contract, so the coun-
ty is safe.
Ring 4 Tobin claimed that they did
not understand the contract that way
and that the advertisements for bids did
not include Russell's uncompleted work
and that they had figured too low if they
must finish the other contract.
Mr.. Ring became excited and claimed
that it was being made question be-
tween Mankato and St. Paul and Min
neapolis and that the commissioners
were attempting to poke up disturb
ance and to find fault with the work.
Mr.. Haley read portion of the con-
tract which declares that the architect
''shall be the sole Judge of the plans of
the work and of labor and material fur
nished and as to whether the terms and
details of the same comply with the
terms and details Of the plans and spec
ifications of the contract or not" He
said that he was ready to hear any argu-
ments on either side of the question
under discussion and proposed to de-
eide it in accordance with his right.
The Board thought that he was getting
too previous and tried to shut down on
him. 1t was claimed that he did not
have authority over questions of wheth-
er certain thing was in the contract or
not. He vigorously asserted his author
ity, however, and declared that Ring &
Tobin were not entitled to anything for
raising or lowering stone that had been
condemned.
Seeing the drift of things, the board
became pacified and allowed Mr.. Haley
to have his own way for the time being.
The latter proceeded to lecture the
contractors for using a stone that he had
condemned. The contractors replied
that the stone had never been con-
demned and that it was not includ-
ed in the contract anyway. As the
money in question was only S7.63
it was but small and doubtful sop
thrown to the commissioners. Mr..
Haley then ruled that Ring & Tobin had
charged twice too high for the coping,
having put in bill for S. per foot, or
$47S.33, while Reeds estimate was STA.
He also ruled that there vas no ques-
ton but that the county should pay for
this item.
Reed and Tobin here INDUCED in a
fierce wordy war, ending up by calling
each other various pet names. The oc-
casion was their relative ability to figure
on contracts and vague references were
made to Minneapolis jobs where each
party had lost their thousands and the
former had failed in business.
Mr.. Haley then took up the item of
the difference In price between the
white flint ledge and the cut stone ledge
and thought that $4,000 looked like a
reasonable figure.
This matter proved to be rock upon
which Mr.. Haley's authority, character
and reputation were equally badly de-
moralized. 1t led to a heated discus
sion and complete exposure of the
practices of the architect
In answer to question, Mr. Haley
! stated that he had ordered the change
in stone while acting for the county, but
) made the statement that the white flint
ledge was substantially as good for the
purposes required as the cut stone ledge,
r and would have saved the county the
bill which was now presented. 1t was
i one ledge lower and was harder to get,
, and had caused the delay in completing
r the court house.
! This was more than the commission
: ers could stand, and Mr.. Haley was ask
ed why and upon whose authority he
, had made the change, if the new stone
!. was no better than the old. He stated
that Commissioner Hannay, Mr.. Wal
lace and himself inspected the rock the
evening of July 9TH, and that Mr.. Han
nay decided to make the change.
This brought Mr.. Hannay to his feet
with blood in his eve, who yehem.
emily declared that he had gone to the
quarry in an informal way, not acting az
commissioner, and without any author,
0 ity of the Board, and that it was through
r Mr.. Haley's own arguments that he wal
r brought to believe that the cut stone
: ledge was the more suitable. He thought
: that Mr.. Haley had better take the re-
{ sponsibility upon himself.
: Mr.. Lee stated that he had heard Mr.
a Haley state that he had right to select
n the stone, and that the cut stone ledge
d was the kind that he meant when the
t specifications we're drawn up. This wal
e corroborated by other members of the
a Board present.
: Mr.. Haley now became excited, anG