Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-09-22
ONLY ONE PROPOSAL
70 Remove the Garbage for the Rest Of This
Yenr-Mr. Cranes Letter Of Protest.

To Remove the Garbage for the Rest OF This
Yenr-Mr. Cranes Letter Of Protest.
| Another solution Of the garbage problem was
attempted today.
| Promptly at noon the Commissioners threw
open the doors of TIE board room and an
nounced that they we're ready to open bids for
the completion Of the garbage contract which
Contractor Draney threw up some time ago.
Before opening the bids Mr.. John H. Crane
entered an objection to the method of proceed
uro and filed the following letter in explanation
| thereof, which Commissioner Douglass read:
Mr. JOHN n. CRANES PROTEST.
| The Commissioners Of the District of Columbia,
Gentlemen: have before me a copy Of the
| specifications for removing garbage and dead
| animals from the city Of Washington and its
immediate suburbs during the unexpired por-
| ton OF the current fiscal year.
infer that these specifications are author
| izeu by the District Commissioners, though so
| far as tho document itself is concerned it con-
tains nothing to show that it is authorized by
any one, as II bears no date and is signed by no
one. forfeit of $1,000 is required to
| be deposited with each bid, but the
| requirement. does not say where with
whom the money is TO be deposited. except in
case of a certified check, which is required to
| be made payable to the collector of the Dis
trlct OF Columbia" As there are several ''col-
lectors" in this District, it seems to me it
would be we'll to state definitely which one is
meant.
| These specifications observe arc an exact
| copy, word fer word, from the unexpired five
years contract for collecting garbage in this
| District. except that the words requiring pack
| ages to DO of uniform size are left out.
The contractor should have guarantee that
| II his bid is accepted the health officer will
cause the garbage to be placed where he can
get it without delay.
would like to submit a bid for the removal
| OF garbage in reply to your advertisement, but
before doing so would prefer to have the re-
quirements stated little more definitely.
serious If not fatal defect in the said five
years contract is the omission to state how
often garbage shall be removed from commits
restaurants, oyster houses and board
Ing houses. which accumulate more
than one.hGlf the garbage in the city.
| Having called attention to this defect in
an article published in Tue STAR some time
| ago am surprised to see the same omission il
the new specifications. Why particularize how
often garbage shall be collected from
dwelling houses, hotels and market houses
and make no mention OF how often
| 1t shall be removed from commission houses
green groceries, oyster houses, restaurants and
boarding houses, except what is implied in
the language of the first specification. which re-
CURES the contractor to furnish all necessary
labor, materials. &C., &C., for the
prompt execution OF work OF collecting all
matter called garbage?"
will not undertake to say why this i'm
poTtant omission is allowed in these specifca-
tions. but the effect of it is to give the health
officer power to enable contractor to make
| money or subject him to great loss solely on
| the construction he may place on the words,
for the prompt execution Of work of col
Letting all matter called garbage" as applied
| to commission houses, green groceries, oyster
houses, restaurants and boarding houses. II
| ne CONSTITUTES prompt removai Of garbage from
| said places to mean once Jr twice per week,
| the contractor can make money even on a low
\ bid. If construed twice per day. he might
| lose money on high bid.
II the contractor to do this work had been
picked out in advance the specifications could
| not have been drawn to fit his interests any
| better than they do. do not mean to saw that
| such is the case, but II the proper corrections
| are not made in the said specifications, SO that
| they will read in accordance with business
principles, citizens will be justified in coming
| to that conclusion.
understand the law prohibits the Commits
| sioners from making contracts in advance Of
appropriations. Also. that by the LIST of next
| month there will not be over $40, 600 or $4,000
left of the garbage appropriation for the present
fiscal year In case the appropriation gives
| out would like to know what assurance the
| Commissioners can give the contractor that he
| will be paid for his services.
Respectfully yours,
]. H. CRANE.
COL. ROBERTS EXPLANATION.
In answer to one of the objections Col
| Robert explained that he had carefully consid-
| cred the matter with the assistant attorney for
| the District, Mr.. S. T. Thomas, and came to
| the conclusion that it would be unwise
to change the specifications in the slightest
| degree, as that would relieve the old
| contractor of his bond He said the health de-
partment did prepare specifications that obvi-
ated all difficulties But they could not DO in.
corporated in this years contract Next year,
| however, the whole thing will be changed.
| ONE PROPOSAL ONLY.
Then Commissioner Douglass called for the
bids and Secretary Tindall handed him over
one proposal. 1t was from Mr.. r. B. Rusk and
| he guaranteed to do the work for the remainder
Of the fiscal year for the sum Of S34, 200.
The bid was taken under consideration. De-
| fore leaving Mr.. L. W. Smith who was present
| suggested that in the new specifications the
| large wholesale dealers and commission mer-
chants be made to remove all of their garbage
| at their own expense.
Commissioner Ross thought this an excellent
| suggestion and promised to consider it when
| the new specifications came up for discussion.