The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1892-02-07
WHERE RESTS THE BLAME
The High School Building Will Cost
One Hundred and Twenty
Thousand Dollars.
No One Ventures an Opinion as
to When Tt Will Be Com
pleted.
to the Contract some Ono Has
Been Derelict In the Duties They
Assumed.

e'"S
Assumed.
That the high school building will cost
The Helena schOo district $120,OOO at least
there is now nc question. When the peo-
pie we're first asked to vote money for the
structure had it been deemed possible that
the cost would have been even $780, 600 the
proposition would have been voted down.
So far the total paid out on account of the
high school building, including the salary
of the superintendent of construction,
money paid the architect and all other ex-
penses ia $50, 600. The trustees and super
intendent of construction say the total will
be at least 1920 600 before the building is
ready for occupancy. While the cost is
thus almost definitely fixed, AS to the time
Of completion no one will venture an opin-
ion.
The original bid for the construction Of
the building was $40, 152, exclusive Of the
steam heat, plumbing and cut granite. The
plumbing was let for $4,000. the heating
for $4,000 and the granite for $22, 800, a
total Of ST. 52. The plans as furnished
by the architect were accepted by the
board, after being passed upon by an ex-
pert, but scarcely had this been dom than
the changes began. The foundation was
altered. the building turned around, two
towers we're put on instead Of one, and the
roof was changed. On some of these
changes, before they were made. the con-
tractors were required to place q price, but
not on all. But on non of them
was there any time fixed for their
completion. All the payments SO far made
the contractors have been on account of
the original contract, estimates being fur
nished every two weeks by the architect, j.
@. Paulsen, of the amount due. These es-
Inmates were based on data furnished the
architect by Superintendent Williams. Ac-
cording to the contract with the architect
the latter was only to go upon the school
ground and look after the work when called
upon by the trustees or their agent. the
oversight of the work being left to the su-
per%intendent. The claim is made, and
only an official investigation can determine
its truthfulness, that a large part Of the
extra work the district is called, upon to
pay for is the result Of not compelling the
contractors to 60 By the specifications. One
instance is given where, instead of a stone
At the entrance being in. n piece. as. re-
quired by the plans, it was furnished in
two pieces. This necessitated the building
of four brick wallis as supports. where the
plans called for but two. In another in
stance it is charged that extra masonry
work was occasioned by the fact that the
contractors made q mistake in the length
of some ioists and to make them reach put
in more wall. On the other hand, the con-
tractors claim that they have been delayed
by the architect. who has not furnished de-
tail drawings on time. That there has
been Il great deal of see-sawing batween the
various people engaged on the high school
building there is no question, and between
| the various contending elements the school
board and the taxpayers have got decidedly
the worst of it. The taxpayers suffer, not
only in the great cost Of the building, but
in the delay neoessltatlng the renting of
| outside schoolroomH.
The contract between Whalen IL Grant
and Il. H. Howey, S. G. Fitzpatrick and WI
H. Guthrie. representing the school dis
trict. was made Aug. 4, 1890. 1t called for
the completion OF the building by April l,
1891, and if not completed by that time the
contractors were to forfeit $25 a day for
every days delay. It is ten months since
/ April l, 1891, and allowing one half the
time for extra work, the contractors it
would seem are in debt to the board at
least So, 500 for the delay.
The agreement between the school board
and the contractors is a very comprehen-
sive document. There would seem TO be
no occasion for a contest over the changes.
as the third article of the agreement pro-
vides for changes in the plans as follows:
Should any alteration be required i'll
the work shown or described by the draw
inps or specifications, g fair and reasonable
valuation of the work added or omitted
shall be made by the architect, and the
sum herein agreed to be paid for the work
according to the original specitioa-
shed as the case may be. In case
such valuation is not agreed to. the
contractors shall proceed with the %altera-
ton, upon the written order of the archi-
tect, aud the valuation of the work added
or omitted shall be referred to three CD
arbitrators (no one of whom shall have
been personally connected with the work to
which these presents refer}, to be appoint
cd ns follows: One by each OF the parties
to ibis contract, and the third by the two
thus chosen; the decision of any two of
whom shall BIO final and binding. and each
of the parties hereto shall pay one-half of
the expense of such reference"
Tho seventh section provides for an allow
ance of additional time III case the contract
ors ore delayed through no fault of their
own. But, i'll order to profit by this SEQ
ton the contractors must make Il claim in
writing. The question arises: Have the
contractors ever made a claim in writing
for extra time? This section reads:
'.Should the contractors be obstructed or
delayed in tho prosecution or compilation of
the work by the neglect, delay or default of
any other contractor; or by any alteration
which may be- required in tho said work;
or by any damage which may happen
thereto by fire. or by the unusual sction of
the clements or otherwise; or by the nban-
donment of the work by tho employees
through no fault of the contractors, then
there shall be al allowance of additional
beyond tho date act for tho compile
ton of the said work; but no such allow
anoe shall be made unless h claim is pre-
scented in writing at the time of suoh OBJ
struction or delay. The architect shall
award and certify the amount of addi-
tional time to be allowed; i'll which case the
contractors shall be released from the pay
ment OF the stipulated damages for tho
additional time SO certified. and no more.
The contractors may appeal from such
award to arbitrators constituted, IA pro-
vided in article third of this contract"
The ninth section of the agreement is
devoted to claims for additional work, and
it would seem from it that the trustees
should have no difficulty in arranging with
the contractors for the additional work. 1t
reads as follows:
"The contractors shall make no claim for
additional work unless the same ahall be
dnna in nnraunnea nf n written order from |