St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-03-07
is FORRESTAL ELIGIBLE ?.
HIS DEBTS MAR DEBAR Nm FROM
CITY CONTRACTS.
1T WILL BE INVESTIGATED.

He Says That He Wants the
sprinkling Contract and Other
City Work So That He May
Earn Money to Pay His Debts
Called Legal One stion-
City Attorney to Report on 1t.
The contracts awarded to Patrick
Norris, James Forrestal and Thomas
Reilly by the board of public works for
street sprinkling and the laying of
wooden sidewalks were discussed at
meeting of the committee on streets
from the assembly yesterday.
When the contracts came up in the
board OF aldermen for approval it was
stated by Aid. Copeland that the matter
should be given q close investigation.
The point raised at that time was on the
reliability of the bondsmen, but although
the alderman from the First ward was
present at the meeting yesterday, the
question of the bonds was not raised.
Mr.. Van Slyke wanted the contracts
approved, claiming that the board of
public works had considered the con-
tractors reliable before awarding the
contracts. Mr.. Reardon said there was
some doubts as to whether the comp
troiler would sign some Of the contracts
even If they were approved. As he I'M
derStOod it, there were unpaid claims
against some of the contractors, and if
this was so the board of public works
had no right to make the awards. Mr..
Doran seemed to be in a state of blssful
lUnnrnnpn II q fha fin,a 1nd inOnjrnd
as to who knew Of any reason why the
contracts should not be approved. No
one answered. and finally City Attorney
Phillips went after Comptroller Nc
Cardy. That official said there was no
objection to the award of the contracts
to Norris and Reilly, but the board of
public works had no right to let the
contracts to Forrestal. He read from
the charter portion of section which
provided that i'll the awarding Of con-
tracts the responsibility of the bidder
should be considered aside from the
suretles on the bond. II he had been
rightly informed, Mr.. Forrestal had
made an assignment some years ago.
and one of his bondsmen, Phil Reilly,
had been obliged to make good $4,000
bond. This, he thought, would prove
Mr.. ForreStal was not a responsible
bidder, and under the charter could not
be awarded contract.
ForreStal, who was present, explained
that three years ago the firm of which
he was member had failed and made
an assignment. The firm still owe some
money, and if they did not they would
not have had to fail. They had de-
faulted on only one contract with the
city of st. Paul, and in that case the
laboringmen had all been paid. Some
of the bondsmen had lost money, but he
saw no way to repay the debts except to
go into business. Mr.. Reilly was Oh
bond for work in Superior and not on
st. Paul contract He was we'll ac-
quainted with the business on which he
had bid and had been awarded the con-
tract, and if he was allowed to proceed
would soon be able to pay his debts.
Mr.. Doran said the only question
seemed TO be legal objection, and on
motion this point was referred to the
city attorney with instructions to report
at the meeting of the assembly tomor-
row night.
The contracts with Patrick Norris and
Thomas Kelley for street sprinkling
were approved, as was also the contract
with Thomas Reilly for laying wooden
sidewalks.
The letter from the city engineer in
forming the assembly that he knew of
no provision IN the charter which would
| require him to make reports of the in
SDpctDrS M civ work WAS olluNpa IN Inv
Mr. Doran in tart manner The mat
| ter was referred to subcommittee con-
| sisting Of Messrs. DoraE, Reardon and
Van Slyke TO investigate. Mr.. Reardon
| stated that at the time the letter was
written there were more men employed
than the city engineer had reported.
Gard From Mr. Weller.
l wish to state for the benefit of the