The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-12-07
A Statement o. Facts in Connection With
The AImlisss tOa Tar Contract.
SIELHlG0A'S TsLL-TllE PETITION
Addressed to the City Council, ia which
lie Makes Some Poignant Queries.
Ariuit ge's Contract Renewed Be-
fore the Old One Expired Cheap
Price Paid for Tar.


partment la the city Han. and OF which
eX-Aldorman Gum did not remember any
thing when he appeared before the In
vestigaung Committee on Thursday even
ing
In the fall OF 1859 AR John Armitasc
addressed the following letter to the
Committee on Light.
Gcntiemcn.-S j was awarded my
contract for tar some three years ago
tho methods of manufacturing tar pro-
ducts. ctc.. have changed greatly. and I
find that 20 compete with other coal~tar
distlors ] should invest from three 10
five thousand dollars in new machinery
and buildings 90 bc built out OF the reach
OF high water. as / have learned 10 my
SORROW that The frcshcts we frequently
have can destroy the profits of a years
business more quickly than they can be
made. II ] build this machinery, etc, I
speak OF. 7 viii pay from one hundred 20
one hundred and fifty dollars mOre per
month for labor than ] DO now, and at
the same time | viii Dee manufacturing
goods that at tlo present time ! have to
buy from parties in the North. As my
contract ls more than half out. / do not
feel justified iu cXpendug this money.
Therefore, under the circumstances. ! re-
spectfully ask that YOU declare my pres
eut contract null and void and grant me
new contract for "a period OF ten years.
i will guarantee 10 have tho improve
ments ] speak Of well under way within
six weeks after my now contract goes
.ntO effect. or forfeit said contract. What
J ask OF YOU As no more than the com
mittee in Washington q. O. did for Mr..
Warren. the COal-tar man OF that city.
Trusting the above VIII meet with your
approval. J remain.
Yours very truly.
JOHN Al}MITAGE.
on April "a. 1890. the following petition
e.. a g.fk
10y Mr.. Garter and referred 10 the Com
mlttee on Light for investigation and re-
port:
THE sTELMAGON PETITION.
TO the Honorable Council Of the city Of
Richmond.
facturers and dealers in tarred felt roof
ine pitch. cOal-tar products. etc, with our
principal office al No. 52j Commerce
street Philadelphia.
In tho line OF our business. in August
last We made an investigation as to the
coal tar produced at the Richmond city
Gas-W Orks with "a view 10 purchasing the
same. and asccrtaincd that the city had
entered into a contract with John Arm
ftaEc. whereby he was TO receive all the
ter produced at the works. ON the 10th
Of August. 1850 We addressed letter 10
tho President of the city Council OF Rich
mond. asking when the contract with
A vitage would expire, and stating that
va desired TO hid for the tar. To this
othe. '7ise informed that the contract with
Armifagc would expire in July 1891.
We then made no effort TO purchase
from the city. and were content 20 wait.
believing. as we ala. that upon the oXpi-
ration OF the contract. and not until then.
q new contract would be awarded after
due notice. 10 tho highest responsible bid
der and that we would then have the
opportunity of submitting a bid largely in
advance Of the price which Armita.e was
then paying.
municipal corporations 10 open 10 cOmpe-
tftion the privilege of lrchasing and
thus securing for the city the best price
for IT'S products, We were surprised 10
find that in a few months after the date
OF our letter Of inquiry and statement OF
our desire 10 become bidders that some
other agreement had been made whereby
the said Armitage now claims monopoly
in the cCal-tar produced az the Gas
Works for the next seven years We
have not been permitted 10 see the appli-
cation OF Armitape for this new agree
ment. or the agreement of the city with
him, and have no Information as 10
what representations were made by him,
or what are the exact terms OF the agree
ment but we are prepared TO show that
he made the application under the fol-
lowing circumstances.
Ills first contract would have expired,
a We have stated. i'm July, 1891. In Octo-
her 1850. there was considerable adj
vance in the price OF gas tar. During
that month a meeting OF gas engineers
was held in the city OF Baltimore at
which the advance was discussed and
ArmitaCe was fully informed OF this gem
eral advance in price Within thirty days
kfter this meeting, and more than oigh-
teen months before the expiration or his
contract Armitage made application for
another contract for seven years AT sixty
live cents pof barrel We are prepared
20 show that this price of siNty-iive cents
per barrel was at that time. ana IS now,
nearly 30 per cent. less than the market
value of the gas tar. but Notwithstanding
This fact. q new contract was. as lie
claims. awarded 10 him. thus premature
Is, without giving 10 any other person the
privilege OF making an offer IN advance
OF siXty-iye cents
n IN his application Armitage oid not
make any misleading statements cor
which we know nothing not having seen
the samcl. we do claim that tacts We're
suppressed which the Councll hau the
right 10 know. that the members OF the
Committee on Light and OF the Council
were mislcd thereby. and that the city
viii lose several thousands of dollars.
we hereby make this distinct proposl-
uou To take an the eas tar produced al
the city GGs-WOrks during the next seven
years at the price OF $40 per oarrel OF
nfty gallons. and 10 furnish ample Sc
curitv FOR % fulnlment on our part OF
the agreement this bid to hold good for
The next sixty days.
Al this price the city will receive within
the next sewn years ABOUT SlbwW more
.Vifh Armitage. This estimate or what
the city will lose is based upon the num-
her Of barrels OF tar paid Tor by Armtage
during the past year. but we claim that
,he amount OF tar should be greater from
me number Of tons OF coal carbonized,
and that the loss TO the city would be
more than Slb.uO.
POIGNANT INQUIRIES.
We therefore respectfully ask that the
CITY Council will make the following IN
uuiries: <., .ao oo,-
tract with Armitaee IN proper ana iesai
pid The city Council have the law
~ right 10 make with Armitage q new
contract before the expiration OF his old |
nnc without notice 10 the public ana ad-
vertisng FOR bids. -.
What representations were made by |
Arrnitage az the basis OF his alleged con-
tract and whether any facts were SUP |
- an inducemeut TO the Committee on 1
Light or the City Council TO award a /
. me number Of barrels OF tar paid for |
ty Armitage during the years 1887. 1883, |
4 The amount of coal carbonized during |
the same years. -, 49,. - +
-oel carbonlzed
The names OF all persons interested |
,.,,b Armifaee directly or indirectly IN |
-arrvlre on his business.
The amount Of money which the city |
will lose by carrying out the alleged con-
tract with Armitage. .-, 49,. r,.....n
we are willing TO furnish the Councll
~ inforration we can. and will appear
r. ,nerson before the Council or any com
80, ,ba,oof nj any time our presence