The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-01-29
THE ADVISORY BOARD
Another Impotent Debate On
Williams Contract.
WHO CONSTITUTE THE BoARo9
Over Four Hours Discussion-Mr. Bens-
zette williams Positively De-
cIines to Make an Oner.

as to the best means TO adopt for settle
ment with Mr.. Benezette Williams. Mayor
White presided, and there were present
President Hall of the aldermen, President
Jones of the delegates. Aldermen Snyder.
Korn, Pontius and Wilcox, Delegates g.
Il. Kittinger, f. Hanford, 5. NJ Shipley.
CITY Comptroller Ferris, City Treasurer
Anes. Messrs. Jesse Cochran, G. II. He'll
bron and ". V. Rinehart, the board of
public works; Corporation Counsel Jacobs,
City Clerk Miller and Mr.. Benezette Will
Jams.
Upon the motion of Captain Snyder.
Clerk Miller read the original contract
with Mr. Williams, made by the old coun-
ell. which involves the payment of per
cent. of the whole cost of the water-works
system, 60 per cent. Of the commission TO
be paid quarterly, and il details the course
of the work as it was then proposed TO be
done.
Mr. Wilcox called for the resolution of
the old council accepting the contract.
The resolution of the old council, passed
November 10. 1859, was read from the min
ute book but Mr.. Wilcox said there was
later motion. A resolution of March ID,
1890, was read, adopting the distributing
system of Mr.. Williams, leaving the grav-
ity system TO be considered at later date.
Mr. Wilcox said that was his understand
ing of the matter. He thought the city
should pay Mr.. Williams in full per cent.
on his own estimate of the cost of the dis
tributing system and the cost of the Spring
Hin water-works. That would give him
$t7, 1861. Ii had been estimated that il
would take three years 10 complete, and
the cost TO Mr.. Williams for a superintend-
emit would be s., 400. As he has been paid
5000. that would leave 50, 1861 to be paid
Mr. Williams. He based his figures on
Mr.. Williams estimate of $685. ,052.6S.
Mr.. Williams was invited to speak. He
said he had no proposition to make. He
was there TO assist in arriving at conclu-
sion as to what the city owed him. They
had made "a good start, but Mr.. Wilcox
had offered 10 give him 2 per cent. on his
commission, but he had omitted to give
him percentage on the reservoirs, the plans
of which had been accepted.
Mr. Hanford's idea vas that Mr. Will
Jams was entitled to compensation up to
the point that he had completed the work,
and he should be paid all that was due,
subject 10 any reasonable deduction.
Mr.. Ferris, in reply to a question, said
Mr.. Snyder didn't care whether there
was a contract with Mr.. Williams or not
he was entitled to ? per cent, as the city
had allowed him TO go ahead with his
plans.
Mr.. Hall said If that was agreeable to
Mr.. Williams, the matter could soon he
settled
Mr.. Kittinger said that would leave
about IS 900.
Mr.. Hanford said the city had already
paid Scurry & Owens for surveys which
Mr. Williams should have made.
Mr.. Hall replied that if those SURVEYS
We're 10 be charged against him, they had
better get out an attachment on Mr. Will
Jams effects. He moved that settlement
he made with Mr.. Williams on a basis of
$50, 900 at the rate of 2 per cent.
Mr.. Hanford moved TO amend by deduct
ing $i,472.53 from that amount; that was
the cost of Typographical surveys.
Mr.. Williams suggested that they read
the contract; 1t was an absurdity that he
should take such work 1T 2 per cent and
pay for the surveys. There was a general
rule among engineers as to the rate of
compensation. The usual rate was 10 per
cent. for surveying and superintendence.
Mr.. Hall said Mr. Scurry had estimated
that surveying of the Cedar creek course
would cost per cent. The mayor. Mr.,
Ferris and Mr.. kittinger concurred in
this, and Mr.. Hall said if they adopted Mr..
Hanford's theory and settled with Mr..
Williams on the entire cost, no doubt the
engineer would be willing to assent TO the
deduction.
Mr.. Korn said if Mr.. Williams would
turn over plans, etc, he would Withdraw
his second to Mr.. Hanford's amendment
and support the motion.
Mr.. Williams said everything connected
with the plans, specifications, field notes,
etc, had been turned over TO City Engineer
Gardner.
Judge Jacobs asked who were entitled 10
vote on this question.
The mayor said he understood that all
the members of the advisory board and
the committees of both houses would vote.
The vote was then taken on Hanford's
amendment, and IL was rejected
Mr.. Jones said they were there III n con-
cillatory spirit. and he would like to know
from Mr.: Williams whether the PROPOSE
ton would be acceptable TO him
MIR. Benezette Williams related the cir
cumstanCes of his employment He said
the agreement as TO his employment and
his compensation had been made before
he left Chicago. lie came IN response
TO an invitation, knowing nobody. He
knew when he made his estimate of the
Spring Hlll water-works it would subject
him 10 adverse criticism and arouse the
hostility of q powerful interest. which
owned the water-works and which WAS
demanding a much higher price than he
felt justified IN recommending That
interest had been fortified by the entire
press without exception, until the past
lew months. and the result was that he
had been bitterly aSsailed on all sides He
had nevertheless faithfully performed his
share of the contract. The compensation
proposed was not adequate. The treasury
had quarter OF a million in its Golfers,
which would not be there had he not
rome TO the city. He then discussed tire
accept bare percentage on the amount
paid out, AS he had done work far beyond
the point at which the city had stopped.
President Jones said the city was in
mch financial condition that II could
not so ahead and fulfill the contract as II
mas originally proposed. lie thought the
,ity was disposed 20 meet Mr.. Williams
IN fair aud honest way.
Mr.. Williams said he was not in the
some condition that he was before. The
city had annulied the contract and left him
rec without consulting him as to his
squittes IN the matter.
Mr.. klttinger asked on what amount
Mr. Williams thought he should be paid
commission.
Mr.. Williams said per cent. on $4,000
,nd per cent on the difference between
hat amount and s.. 10000.
Judge Jacobs said the contract required
hat the plans for a permanent SUNNY
must he accepted by the city. The only
'ecord there Is shows that the city only ac-
septed the distributing system but ex-
arcSsly deferred, expressly refused Ia ac-
sept the system of permanent supply. He
vas never able TO find any adoption by the
aiy OF the permanent system from CESAR
liver. The distribution system has b,en
adopted. he was in favor of an honorable
lcttlcment with Mr.. Williams
Mr.. Williams called attention 70 the SC
ION by the council on November l.. iSSa.