St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-01-27
PERTINENT QUESTIONS.
A Working Man Who Wants to
Know About Certain Things.

Editor of the Globe
Will the new city council kindly con-
sent to weigh the evidence for and
against the contract system VS.. day
work. as applied to municipal work?
And if they find in favor of the contract
system, please tell the public by what
course of reasoning they arrive at such
a conclusion? Come up square," gen
tlemen; 10 broad assertions. Give US
facts. Board of trade opinions are not
facts. What Bill King thinks won't
influence the poor taxpayer. Com
mence, if you choose. by answering the
following questions: 1t is often asserted
that in the contract system II loss was
entailed the contractor had to stand it,.
What about the Tenth avenue bridge?
The contract called for eXcayating to
sand rock. When a pier or two had
been put in and the contractor cried
baby, did the contractor stand the loss
or did the city allow him to place the
piers on top OF debris in the river bot
tom? Again. when some of the false
work went out, did the contractor stand
the loss, or did the city give him a few
thousand to help out?
How about the stone bridge connecting
Central avenue on the east side with
Nicollet island? How many thousands
or tens of thousands did the city pay On
that lob above contract price?
Give particulars about the North Min
neapolis tunnel. Did Hawkins Bros,
who took the work by contract land had
to give it up stand the loss, or did the
city kindly take the work off their hands
and pay them handsomely for the few
old traps they had on hand? How near
Engineer Rinker's estimate was the con-
tract price of the Washington avenue
tunnel, and how much less than two
thirds of the whole sum did the con-
tractors pocket as clear profits.
In the meantime give us little infor-
nation about the intake pipe at the
West Side pumping station, in which d
city father figured as contractor. Was
the pipe placed on the ledge as specified
in the contract, or did he gently lay it
OH several feet of mud? How much
money did the city pay Dan Day to
watch him do the job?
Tell us also about those sewer con-
tracts. Who stood the loss when the
contractors backed out?
Finally. what was that rumor about
cayations made for shore piers at one
vicinity cost the railroad company by
contract? Were not the shore piers,
two in number. put in for less than
$4,000, all by day work? Did not the
center pier cost over S24, 900 by contract?
Was it not an easier job than at least
one of the shore piers?
The workingmen are apt to think that
it is more just for the city to pay labor
ers living wages than to pay out the
same amount OF money to contractors;
who, in return. pay iaborers the small
est pittance, eXacting at the same time
the greatest possible amount Of work.
The result is usually that the contractor
carries out of the city handsome sum
of money.
I challenge any citizen to cite one
single instance where saving was
surely effected to the city by contract
work; while point to the instances
cited in this letter and could mention
several others to show that contract
work in Minneapolis has been a con-
tinuai humbug. While we need only
to refer to different departments of city
work to find numerous instances where
big money has been saved by day work,
besides giving the laborer fair chance
to live. WoRKNGMAN.
Minneapolis, Jan. 26.