St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-04-14

are likely to be stolen blind by their
fellow citizens"
Aid. Markham then brought the mat
ter to a head by submitting two ques-
tons to Assistant Corporation Attor-
-ney Phillips for an opinion.
: 'First-Is the bid of the Gillette
Herzog Manufacturing company for
NAL and proper under the advertise
ment, plans and specifications?
"Second-Does the bid of the said
company for sidewalk as matter of
law contemplate that they shall re-
ceive SIS per 1000 feet board measure
laid, including bolts, spikes, ETC., fig
ured at II feet inches in length?"
: Mr.. Phillips answered both questions
in the affirmative.
Aid. Markham then spoke in favor
of awarding the contract to the Mime
apoiis concern, but before sitting down
he also took occasion to express his
sentiments regarding the behavior of
Minneapolis towards st. Paul during
the present session of the legislature.
Il feel said Aid. Markham, "as
strongly as any man in this city that
Minneapolis has treated us in the most
shameful manner, and if we could.
without doing violence to our sense of
fairness and justice, award this con-
tract to other than Minneapolis COM
pany, l would vote to do so, even if it
cost the city more money. We have
been enduring the slars and slaps of
Minneapolis and turning the other
cheek too long. While entertain moth
ing but the highest respect for such
oil ~ A 1c1a, ath
whom I might mention, the conduct of
that city as a whole has been
MOST REPREHENSIBLE.
but our duty in this matter is plain.
I therefore move that the committee
on streets concur in the action of the
assembly in awarding the contract to
the Gillette-Herzog Manufacturing
company"
Aid. Hare thereupon arose to re-
mark that things had got into a mud
die. AS to the respective localities of
the two bidders, the alderman de-
clared that he felt partial to Mime
sofa as against Wisconsin.
LAS for Minneapolis" continued
Aid. Hare, 81 believe in the Christian
idea of returning good for evil"
This declaration of the golden rule
led everybody to expect that Aid.
Hare was going to second Aid. Mark
hams motion, but much to their sur
prise he moved that the committee
recommend all bids to be rejected and
that the city clerk be instructed to re-
advertise for bids. Aid. Wolf second
ed the motion, while Aid. Milham
seconded Aid. Markham's motion.
Aid. Murphy spoke in favor of re-
advertising.
Aid. Hare then asked the represen.
tatives of the two firms if each would
agree in case of securing the contract,
to purchase all material possible in
st. Paul and to employ st. Paul
1aborers.
Vice President Heinrichs, of the
Wisconsin Bridge and Iron company,
said that his company certainly would
make such an agreement, and Mr..
Gillette, of the Minneapolis company,
gave similar answer to the uues-
ton
Mr.. Gillette took occasion to add.
however, that as far as readvertising
for bids was concerned, that he
deemed it only fair to award the con-
tract to one or the other of the bid
ders then and there. IF their OPP
ponents were deemed the lowest bid
ders then they were entitled to the
work; Otherwise the Minneapolis
company should receive the award
The vote was then taken on Aid.
Hare's substitute motion to reject all
Dds and readvertise. Contrary.
evidently, to Aid. Hare's expectations.
his motion was lost by a vote of 5 to
2 Aid. Murphy being the only mem
Der aon his side, Aldermen Markham.
;M1lham, Lindahl, Wolf and Chairman
Ulmer voted mo-
Aid. Markham's motion to recon-
mend the award of the contract TO
the Gillette-Herzog Manufacturing
company, was then put, and carried
by a vote of to O, Aid. Hare. at his
own request, being excused from vot.
ing. Aid Milham, in casting his vote
remarked that his skin was not so
tnin that he couldn't vote to award q
contract to a Minneapolis concern.