The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-04-21
THAT wADDEy AND sTARKE con-
TRACT AGAIN.


TRACT AGAIN.
Mr.. waddey has made a statement OF
the facts connected with his bid for FUR
nishing metallic cases to the City Hail.
and Mr.. starke has made a statement
We do not think that either has given TO
the public a complete idea Of the case,
so we state the facts in full ourselves:
The committee invited bids on hve
schedules, A., b.. c.. ID. and e. ana u
asked that bids should be made 10 iu'-
nish the articles in wood ana also ia
metals. that they might determine when
kind OF articles they would seiec''
Schedule A. was a bookcase, scheduies
r.. G. and ID. were cases for filing away
papers. and schedule L. was Tor maps
Mr. Waddey did not bid on schedules
A or T.. He bid TO furnish schedules b'.
C.. and d. for S,4074 Mr.. starke bid
On all FIVE schedules. He bid TO furnish
A. for sse94.45, and he bid to furnish b.
C.. d. and f. for slS.41S.5. Both Waddey
and Starke bid to furnish everything IN
metal. II will be seen. therefore, that
starke agreed TO furnish schedules b.,
c.. d. and Z. for a sum only sil2S greater
than Waddey bid to furnish b., Z. ana
ID.
The bids were opened by the whole
committee on the evening OF April 4th'
This found the subject involved In so
much detail that IL directed suo-comihit-
tee 10 take charge OF IL and report 10
the full committee. This subcommittee
had the matter under consideration the
5th. 9th. and eth OF April. Starke's bid
TO furnish schedule f. was sSi5. The sub
committee directed Starke to strike H.
out OF his bid so as to bring him and
Waddey into equal competition. when
starke did, and the bids then STOOD
Waddey for B., c. and D.. slS,40.l4; Starke
for B.. c. and D., s1S,O7337 on the 18th
the subcommittee ordered both bids, as
thus standing on B., c. and D., to the
City Engineer for his opinion.
Colonel Cutshaw spent the Sth, 10th and
1lth Of April in investigating the matter
and made his report to the full committee
on the evening of the 18th, when the
award was made. In making his invesu-
cations Colonel Cutshaw became salts
fed that certain specifications in the three
schedules, B., c. and D., could be dis
pensed with, and he required Waddey
to state how much he would drop for
each specification, and he required Starke
to state how much he would drop for the
same specifications. These droppings
caused Starke's final bid for schedules
B., c. and d. to be 81, 1881 What Wad-
deys final bid for these three schedules
were we have been unable 10 ascertain,
but we must say that injustice has been
done Mr.. Starke in giving out the figures
of his final bid. but Withholding the figures
Of Mr.. Waddey's final bid
However this may be. when the parties
appeared before the full committee on
the evening Of the 11th Of April, Colonel
Cutshaw stated to the committee that
after comparing the final bids of the two
on the three schedules B., c. and D.,
Mr. Starke's bid on these three schedules
was more than $500 below Mr.. Waddey's
bid on those three, and he recommended
TO the committee to accept Mr.. Starke's
goods for the reasons that his cases for
filing papers placed the papers on many
more bearings than those of Mr.. Waddey
offered, and he considered this decided
advantage in Starke's.
These are the naked facts Of the case,
and on these facts the committee award
ed the contracts for schedules b., c. and
D. to Mr.. Waddey at cost of more than
$500 to the city.
The Times submits that in doing this
the committee committed q great wrong
upon Mr.. Starke and grossly abused the
powers intrusted to II. If Colonel Cut
shaw's award was to be overruled without
any reason being assigned for 1t, it was
tom-foolery to refer the matter to him
in the beginning, and it was an abuse Of
power for the committee TO substitute
its judgment for his to the city's cost in
case that was strictly within the line
OF his professional duty, and upon a
matter requiring the very knowledge
wsAch his profession gives to him.