The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-03-07
ELLESsBURG NORMAL SCHOOL.


Trustees wholly Unssrssained.
Olympia. March especial Following
II the report OF the joint legislative COM
mittee appointed 10 investigate the affairs
Of the Eliensburg Normal school:
We repaired 20 the city of Eliensburg.
~ Instructed By the legislature. on FRI
day. February e. and on Saturday morn
Ing, February .. we met In the Normal
school building. where we Immediately
summoned the complaining parties. aud
began an investigation as set forth In
the sworn statement OF John Shoudy.
which charges were then In the hands of
your committee. We summoned and cx-
amined twenty-five witnesses among
them the trustees OF the institution and
many of the leading citizens of Ellens-
burg. and after careful examination of
Hli the evidence then taken your commit
tee finds as follows:
sFirst~-We find none II the charges, as
set forth In the charges and speciflca-
lions. snbstantiated. except that we ind
that the trustees had. as the erection of
the building progressed. made some de-
partures from the plans and specifica-
tons upon which the contract for the
construction of the bniiding was let; viz,
that the foundation OF the building was
made OF ruhbia store and cement, In
stead OF brick and cement. as called for
In the plans and specifications. We are
wells are Ia every respect good and SUI
ficient. both In material and workmanship.
and that In making said change no
wrong tc the state was done, nor In
tended 20 be done. We also find that q
few thousand brick were placed I'm some
OF the fnteriH walls Of the building
which were not or the quality called for
In the contract. but that by reason Of
those bricks being used no Siniury was
done or Intended To he done the state
We find that In the construction of said
building minor changes were made In the
plan of the building differing from the
original plans and specifications. but we
believe that said changes were made In
the best interests OF the state.
I'VE find that the board OF trustees
consists of three representative men OF
the city of Elienshurg, We also believe
that the charges preferred against them
are to some extent the outErowfh of feel
taEs OF venom snd revenge because OF
the refusal OF the board TO allow certain
claims for compensation alleged to be due
the architect and superintendent OF the
building. said claims being based upon 4
percentage of the contract price for the
baiidsng. We find that the hoard did
right In rejecting the claims both of Mr..
Nash. the superintendent and Mr.. Price,
the architect. for the reason that said
percentage was figured upon each ar.
tiNsc w expenditure sum rs HbtftQs WASH
Ing windows and floors. aud for window
shades. chemicals. furniture and every
article going into said building, instead
OF upon the original contract price for
the construction of the building A per
ccntage was also demanded by them
upon the money paid out for freight on
the various shipments or material.
We fiud that the bond taken by the
old board OF trustees. which let the con-
tract. % which only one member Is still
on the board. was not sueh a bond as
would protect material men ana iahorers
In tteir claims against the contractor
and that by the changing OF the site
uron which tho building was erected said
bond was practically nuilef. for the rea.
son that II was never renewed SO as "a
describe the new site. A "a consequence
many material men and some lahorers
were unable 20 get their pay from the
contractor. All of these men feel that
the board failed Ia making an efort "a
protect their interests We do not think
the hoard could have done more thar
u ala do IN this particular.
We fnd THAI the allowance made shs
hoard Of trustees by the cmergeucs
board was expended In the purchase N
furniture and necessary work upon ths
grounds and building. and that IN th'
purchase OF furniture and material. ant
sn the contracts for labor. the hoart
emergency certificates ISSUED In paymen
thereof could only be sold at a discount
az - PER cent. ana that thu tznard fol
this reason raised the vouchers so tina
claims would net the respective clsifnaast
cash 10 the actual face Of their claims
we ind that the cid hoard ald guar
antea 20 several merchants OF Ellsnsharg
who were furnishing supplies 10 N,
Matchmaker. that their claims sxataS
him would - raid TO the extent of tai
value Of Seea brick. which the cantrAc
for the erection Of the building ConpSlles
the contractor 10 take at the price o
asa per thousand. and that all % suel
eA1skatsons were met zad paid by the Of,
heard oar af the contract prize. We So,
thai tuzt after the contracts ana axre<.
nents ahaye set forth were entered iaS,
two members 81 the board rendered shef
designations. aaA that two ether gentle
men were appointed % I'll the vacancies
aHi that x was the rev board which eosn
rleted the contract made and eEsassssa tat
~ TIE ell eezrd fcr the construction q
the building. bat that the new heard as
rex guarantee any further payment =
merchants. or 70 any ether person farm
sshtne material Or lanor 90 the eant-acto
ard THAI 10 Claim was made against ~
present naara pktsr - the fnsi settle
neas With the contractors. but that "a
she tiFsAe % she final settlement naariy al
cf these elatsas against said csntraefo
were - litigation AMI shxi the contracts
Mss = ExsagSsee defendant tn ali % thea
salts ard that said beard Soai3 nos &C
esheFstse thar il did
's1sar eonmistee tFezt respectfully aa.
easpaasiealis ssgcSsest that we eesieS'