The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1893-01-06
EAST JERSEYS WORK.
That Company Blamed for
the Rejection Of the
Water Bid.


The rejection Of the bid of Moffett.
HodRkins & Clarke Co. for the furnish
ing of new supply Of water, by the
Street and Water Commissioners yester-
day afternoon. has given rise to much
curious comment throughout the city.
Many persons, who have interested them
selves in the proceedings, are very much
dissatisfied. Innuendoes are freely made
that the East Jersey Water Company has
played a very shrewd game and won
very notable victory.
The Street and Water Commissioners
decline to discuss their rejection OF the
bid. They assume mysterious air and
remark. "Well. we were not ready to
make contract"
One of the members of the Board when
approached on the subject said, w g
were compelled to act. We received a
letter from Moffett, \ Hodgkins q Clarke
that made it necessary"
THE COMPANY'S LETTER.
The letter spoken of could not be OBJ
tanned from Clerk Bouton. out following
is an exact copy OF it,
To the Board of Street and Water Commits
CONTAMINATION November 81. 1892, in accord,
ance with the advertiseinentfo for new supply OF
CITY, we submitted our bid TO- fur
nish water at the price OF Sao per
million gallons for the first twenty-five m illion
gallons delivered. and thereafter upon down.
ward scale to $25 per million gallons, dependent
upon amount required from day to day. We
also deposited in the depository chosen by your
Board the sum of 100000 in cash.
Since that time we have besn
ready and are still ready to execute a. proper
contract, complying with the terms OF the spec
ifications. We now tender ourselves ready to
execute such contract We have expended a
large sum of money, in making prem-
rghys aahy n snf'sgs fSs aae Rockaway water she'd
We have also entered into agreements for the
purchase of lands and the necessary cast-iron
structing such works. All this has involved and
constantly requires the expenditure OF larg5
sums of money. Other propositions from other
cities for waler supplies are being submitted to
us from time to time for our consideration, but
we have been unwilling to tie ourselves up with
other work which might cause delay to
ing your city was determined. We
feel constrained, however, to make immediate
arrangements for work in our line of business
either for Jersey City or elswehere, ana must s
the contact to us or decline our proposition.
Unless the contract Is awarded BY you to us
on or before January next, we Shall CONSIDER
our proposition declined, and will expect you
then to return to us the deposit made by US and
release US from any further duty in the
tns We aase
of such an important matter to
Jersey City, but we submit that sufficient time
has already elapsed for an examination OF the
sources of supply proposed by us, and OF our
ability to construct the works according to
plans and specifications within the
time limited therefor, and to supply water at
submit that no fair or proper criticism has yet
been made of our plans, or Of our ability to
comply with the terms of the same.
MoTErTT HoDaK1Ns b CLARKE Co.
By V. CLARKE, Treasurer.
WHAT TREASURER CLBRKE SAYS.
saw Treasurer j. V. Clarke of the
Water Company, at his Office, in the
Delaware, Lackawanna and Western
Railroad building this morning.
"Can you assign any reason tor the re-
lection of your bid?" I asked.
''No. cannot. We showed our good
faith by depositing the money the Board
asked. We have lost time and money in
the deal. We could not afford to have a
contract like that one hanging fire. We
have business in other sources to attend
to. and we wanted the contract at once,
or not at all"
"Will you bid again If the Board re-
advertises?" / asked.
II cannot say. but 1 doubt 1t very
much. There was considerable talk
about our bid being the only regular one
presented. AS u matter OF fact we were the
only persons who complied with all the
provisions of their advertisements. We
had the money and the water. and
doubt if the city will ever get the pply
we would have furnished"
Ibid your company have any misunder-
standing with the Commissioners
4s"None whatever, we ira nsacted our
business openly. What the trouble was
do hot know nor do care particularly"
Mr.. Clarke has withdrawn his money
from the New Jersey Title Guarantee and
Trust Company. and is now attending to
a water supply for Rochester. Corpora
tion Counsel Edwards is one of the per-
sons who is much surprised at the rejec-
tion of the bid Of the CLARKE Co.
'Do you know why the bid was reject
ed?" asked.
Il do not," he replied. 81 was in the
caucus but short time. but while there
I assured they Commissioners that a
better supply of water would never
be obtained by the city. The company
was reliable one and the price named in
the bid was lower than water will ever
again be purchased for. feel satisfied
that water. if procured by contract in the
future will cost the city lat least $50 per
million gallons. The contract / had pre-
pared was ironclad and the city was
amply protected.
'"There will be thousands Of persons
who will regret the rejection of the
ClarKe COmpany'S pld. Inc EaSG Jersey
Water Company will never supply
water at the price Clarke & Co. could.
The action of the Street and Water Com
missioners has virtually shut out the
Clarke & Co. from bidding. No more
bids will be received from that source"
A member OF the Board of Trade said:-
ST knew Clarke & Co. would never get
the contract. The whole matter has been
played into the hands of the East Jersey
Water Company, and contract with
that Company means dissatisfaction and
much trouble"