The herald., 1893-08-12

that Raymond avenue between the lines
mentioned be pavedewith asphaltum
pavement according to specifications as
contained in resolutions 300 and 80.
Not one of there last four vital resolu.
tions have ever been rescinded, and |
think they stand today as the only op-
erative proceedings in this matter, and
that for each OF resembling at least No.
3l3 subsequent proceedings have no
force. My reasons for this will be set
out in my examination OF resolution No
173. Under which work was attempted to
be ordered for the third time.
May 22d a resolution was passed pur-
ported to provide general specifications,
and still not by ordinance, for street
paving with Portland cement, concrete
base, with asphalt surface. This was a
radical change of base.
On the same date, special specifca-
tions for RAYMOND avenue were passed !;
also an attempt to recorder the work,
that Raymond avenue within the limits
mentioned be paved with asphaltum
pavement according to specifications
just passed. The clerk was also in
structed to advertise for bids for all
paving work on Raymond avenue, with
out specifying limits for the work on the
avenue.
On June 10th, the time set for open
ing bids, none were received. The fact
had become known that various attor-
neys for several intended bidders had
advised their clients not to bid, it being
manifest that specifications, both gem
eral and special, all adopted after the
resolution Of intention, together with
the resolution ordering work, this se-
cured time, attempted to include extra
work in the intersection beyond the
work for which jurisdiction had been
acquired under the resolution of inten-
tion,
1t was too plain for doubt that this
extra exercise of jurisdiction that had
not been acquired was impossible under
the law and must be abandoned, or full
jurisdiction for it acquired.
The city attorney then introduced a
resolution which rescinded all previous
resolutions, except those for general and
specific specifications and the one first
ordering work. A resolution was then
passed ordering for the third time that
Raymond avenue "be paved with as.
phaltum pavement" This is found to
be irregular.
Coming down to the bid of the Perine
Paving company, the successful bidder
of the work, the report says: 1.-The GER
titled check of $500 accompanying the
bid has two Irregularities: First,
it was made payable to T. P.
Lukens, when it should have
been made payable to President Weed,
who presided over the meeting when
the check was filed. The second and
more vital error is that the amount,
$500, is less than 10 per cent of the
aggregate of the proposal as required by
law, and should have been $1563.S1 at
the very least. The language of the
statement is that the check shall be "for
an amount not less than 10 per cent of
the aggregate proposal. Words more
highly mandatory than these cannot be
written"
Comment is made upon the high
figure at which the contract was let and
thu increase is accounted for By the fact
that bonds issued under the act of 1891
are in the courts and not worth face
value.
On closing this section of the report
he says:
II fully believe, for reasons set
forth, that no valid contract
can now be entered into
between the street superintendent and
the awardee are the property owners
substituting themselves for the awardee,
and that no assessment, to be issued il
based on the present proceedings, can
be collected by law" ae 5sz
In tke closing section it is shown that
Raymond avenue has never been
officially accepted by the city and that
no maps exist, for which reason the at.
torney again expresses his opinion that
the assessment levied could not, owing
to irregularity of the council proceed
ings, be COLLECTED.