The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1889-11-20
LIB. SMILES MISTAKE.
He Says He Bid Too Low on
the Courthouse.
THE CONTRACT YET UNSIGNED
II ne Does Not sign. the Beard win
Held HIS $4,000 euarantee--
Questions In Dispute.

The courthouse contract mudale viii
probably Be settled today. The conference
Yves kssps up yesterday and assumed more
definite form for final settlement. Con-
tractor similie submitted proposition yes
terdal' which vas in effect that either the
commissioners accept the contract be filed
With them. or else return his check for
$lo00l and he would waive all claim 10
the consraet and allow the next lowest bid
der 20 step In.
Mr.. Smile positively refuses to accept
the contract rs drawn up BY Architect
Richie. he said yesterday that according
TO the National Builders Association and
the California Association. such thing rs
a buiiler's sureties signing 3 contract was
never heard OF. and he could not, with JUS
tice - himself or his bonasmen, consent
10 siga.
But this was not The only hitch. After
the commissioners accepted Contractor
Smiles bid. aud he had arrived in town,
he discovered an error IN his calculations,
wholly due to snb-Cantractor W. j. Dough-
erty, of Seattle, who gave him the wrong
figures On the stone estimates. Mr.. Dough-
erty. contractor. telsgraphed Mr. Smile
his figures, giving an estimate Of S. so In
stead of 81, 900 Mr.. Smile suppcSing that
it meant only one branch OF the stone esti-
mates, figured on that basis. tie discovered
that the mistake. figuring in the stone
and valuable work, would stand him 8
loss Of about 81 900. enough askhe said, to
wipe louthis expected profit OF ~ per cent
on sNSs .0c0
But Mr. Smile SAYS be will 10 ahead
with the work If the contract which be
presented as an alternative is accepted by
the commissioners. he stated in his
proposition that he wonld be willing to
make any just aud equitable changes that
the commissioners desire. But the
changes that tue commissioners want 10
make would bring Mr.. Smiles contract
right back 70 their conditions, and those
he won't accept.
Mr.. Smile objects to the architect being
sole arbitrator Of the work. He wishes TO
have COMMITTEES of three arhitfators APP
pointed in case Of disagreement, This Of
course would leave q way clear for innu-
mersble delays in the construction of the
building.
Another objection Of Mr.. Smiles is that
in regard to the monthly payments on the
work. In event he architect does not fur
nish bis estimates fer the preceding month
within the first three days. he proposes 70
make up his own estimates and demand
payment from the commissioners. This is
objected to that in case of disagreement
the architect viii withhold bis estimates
and the contractors figures would have TO
be accepted by the terms Of the contract.
These are some of the differences. 1t is
safe to say.that Mr.. Smile viii not sign the
contract and that either Nelligan & Clarity
or the Pauly jail Company Of ST. Louis
will 30 called in.
II Il understood that the agent OF the ST
Louis house viii reiile their check this
morning and the bid wiu be considered, as
tie ageEt viii probably make certain modi-
fcations 80 that II will meet tho commits
sionssrs' requirements.
Nj. Smile Is still much concerned over
bis $1,000 check. which the commissioners
viii hold until . point of law Is decided. or
until he signs on their requirements.
Today will zee his connection with the
COURTHOUSE contract settled one way or the
other.