Great Falls weekly tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1894-1???, 1895-05-24


COMMITTEE REPORT.
In view of the great amount of criti-
ciem regarding the construction of the
high school building the board Of trus-
tees at "A recent meeting asked that Il
and impartial investigation into the mat
ter. Several we'll known citizens were
found who were willing to accommodate
the trustees and the result of their la
bors will be found in a report submitted
last night and published in other col
umne. 1T is a report that is of interest
to every citizen and taxpayer in the dis
trict and should be read. The report of
tho committee is based upon careful ex-
animation of the work by competent
persons and upon sworn testimony, the
latter being very voIuminous The tcs-
timony was transcribed AZ given and to
make the entire history public and com
plete it will be published in future mum
bers Of TUE tribune.
The documents speak for themselves
and show that an investigation did not
take place any too soon. They disclose
a most reprehensible condition of affairs,
and indicate that the trustees were
either a party to gross frauds or were ut
terly incompetent and we're outrageously
imposed upon. The many instances in
which it was discovered that thu work
varied from the plans and specifications
admits Of no cus 1t will
not do to say that the changes
do not interfere with the solidity or
worth OF the building. The fact is the
architect submitted plans and speciiica-
tions, which were accepted. and for
which he was paid, and tho bid of the
contractor was based upon them, and
the work should have been done in ac-
cordance without deviation. That the
changes were all made in favor Of the
contractor is made apparent by the re-
port, in spite Of the attempted explana-
tions OF the architect to the contrary
That the foundation as constructed will
answer the purposes may be true, but it
is also true That the work is not what
the contractor agreed to do, and for
which he was paid. The existing condi-
ton leaves no other conclusion than that
there was collision between tho archi-
tect and the contractor, and the dieap-
p~earancc of the original plans and speci-
fications lend color to this reasonable
belief. Tho architect admits certain
changes and denies others, but insists
that they did not benefit the contractor,
while the committee insists that they
did, and Civ. the figures.
Not the least interesting and impor-
tant part OF the testimony OF the archi-
tect is his statement that in bis Original.
plans and estimates he included the cost
OF steam heating and plumbing, but he
adds that the board in accepting the bid
of Mr.. Mckay eliminated that item from
the contract, This places Mr.. White in
the curious position OF having underesti-
mated the cost OF d 10000 building by
at least $4,000. This ia a remarkable
discrepancy and has not been explained,
but it rensws the generally believed and
accepted statement that the total cost Of
the school was to be 100000.
The figures on the work Of the base
ment also need lots Of explanation on
the part OF the architect and contractor.
On the estimates OF the former
the latter received for the work
S~l3,214.S7, while after careful meas
urements Mr.. Anderson says that
the sum was s4,3Gs.5l in excess OF
what it should have been and
City Engineer Swearingen places the
excessive sun at S1,l21.S7. Both the
gentlemen will be recognized az com
petent authority. Still another feature
OF the report is the statement that there
was no need to sink to bed rock for "A
foundation; that M amply sufficient
could have been secured by going down
six or seven feet and putting in a proper
concrete base. This may be Il matter Of
opinion, but 1t is an opinion that ia
entitled to consideration,
There is no need to discuss the report
further in detail. As is said above every
citizen should read and consider il and
then draw his or her own deductions
THE TRIBUNE is Of the opinion that the
committee has done it's work we'll and