New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-02-19
WHAT THE EXPERTS UNCOVERED.
VALUE OF THE ASSEMBLY CEILING WORK NOT
OVER s1o5 5ooo-THoUSANDS IN IT FOR !
SOMEBODY.

VALUE OF THE ASSEMBLY CEILING WORK NOT
OVER s1o5 50oO-THoUSANDS IN IT FOR !
SOMEBODY.
| Albany, Feb. Is-The following is the report
of the experts who examined the Assembly ceilings
New-York February 1e 1889. s
To the Assembly Of the State Of NewYork. |
Having appointed by your honorable body to exc
anime the ceiling in the Assembly Chamber OF the
Capitol Albany and the construction Of the same a. res
ouired by with John Snaith dated Juno 2-
1885, we have the honor to report a. follows:
The original contract and specifications and
drawings were submitted February 9, 1889 su.
pernendent Andrews stated that these were the original
plans upon which the contract awarded and that ne
other plans had been made As matter OF fact. only
three OF twenyseven drawings were prepared prior
70 the awarding tho contract The three drawings arc
neither signed dated No scale sppears on them ana
they represent very small portion OF the work required
ander the said contract The remaining twenty-four
drawings the contract executed spS
parently used In the construction Of the work .
On February 49, 1885, after repeated requests for the
necessary plans Superintendent Andrews Contractor Snatk
and Architect Rowe submitted different times tbs
twenty additional drawings most OF them I'm pencil but
examination proved that only six Of these made
prior TO the awarding Of the contract These additional
drawings neither signed dated. and nearly all
the drawings without titles. The nine drawings
which been identified and being the ori
gnas copies of the originals. prepared prior TO the
awarding Of the contract vague asd Incomplete as
to render any competitive bids made upon the
1885, the committee received six proposals ranging fro
s27050 $3.50 $40 doing the work according to the
original plans and specifications II these were bona
ade proposals bidders have had submitted 10 them
plans which we have been unable TO obtain. We ars
doubtful as to the bona nde character %
these bids and suggest that rigid investigation this
line Is desirable.
The specifications are general character They as<
mot ADEQUATE for the purpose unless accompanied by r<
pete, clear an6 carefully prepared drawings.
UNLAWFUL CHANGES IN CONSTRUCTION.
We ind that in direct violation Of the authorizing
this improvement, material changes have been made sn
construction from the requirements OF original plans
and specifications without the consent Of the committed.
namely:
(A) The iron construction OF the ceiling as erected
entirely different from that described in the spccca-
tions and far can ascertain from tnsnincient
data 1t considerably less material than
required by the plans aud specifications referred 70 In
he neither has the iron been painted as required
B The plans prepared prior 70 the execution Of tho
contract and sworn to in the evidence, call for .
ceiling Of 70s panels whereas one containing but Sao
panels has been constructed. This change from the
original ceiling OF 7eS panels considerably reduced the
cost OF this portion Of the work.
20, According % tho plans eight ppasters Of cne
stone were to be properly heightened and capped ta
correspond with the granite columns. Uncapped- and.
therefore unsg;y extensions have been made instead
ID Tho woodwork Of the ceiling does noe cosi
sespond vita tas specincaions In not bang sssi Il