The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1895-09-28

cation. that the resolutions award con-
tract at great variance with the spec
fieations, and even upon supplementary
specifications with radical changes. On
this application this fact appears. cans
not try the truth of this contention here.
take it as here now for the purposes
OF this application. whatever may be
which is one of great Importance in the
exercise of affairs of municipal corpora,
tionS whether the advertisement and
specifications must be adhered to IN the
award of the contract If not, then
the. advertisement IS no use Whatever
and the provision of the city charter
becomes a nullity do not pretend
to determine this point but 1t raises
question which in my opinion requires
If the advertisement and specifications
are not to be followed in the award or
beneficial and SUFFICIENT, can be utterly
disregarded in behalf of any other more
favored bidder. II becomes question
should be obeyed and enforced in max
ing contracts of this character, or en-
mo No oTESTIoN OF COMPETENCY.
ssAnother reason urged is that this con-
tract is awarded to the highest bidder,
greater than the sum offered by another
bidder No question of competency IS
made here between the bidders. Neither
is it denied but that the lower DID was
in entire conformity to the specitica-
lions upon which the proposals or bids
We're made l do not care at all to en-
abstruse calculations. The facts may pc
otherwise than as stated, but upon this
ed, if not conceded. I need not state
that if there be any facts upon which
such a contention can be reasonably Ply
based, it almost absolutely invokes the
judicial discretion of the Court in favor
Of the allowance of these 1writs.
again. it is urged that there is, is no no
i III ,-fa- of af
any ciam can be made, that the reso-
lutions award the contract to the bid
der who has offered the most advan7 3I5
tageous terms. This presents mingled
question of law and fact. Taking the
affidavits filed before me, and giving
them their naturSl force ana fid ef5eet bad 4
been made out SO far as to answer me
purposes of this application. without
proceedings Of the Board of Finance and
Taxation at the time of the formal con-
currence in this award would seem 10
clearly determine that the judgment OF
at least four of the members OF that
board was that this award was not
made upon the bid which offered the
most advantageous terms to the city,
and therefore it would appear that this
content on was founded upon reason
able basis of fact. The Court viii re
view the acts of the munlclpal authorl-
ties to ascertain whether they have
accepted the terms most advantageous
to the city. The Courts will uphold
the action if there be a reasonable basis
of fact upon which it is founded, but +
it be without this sustaining element it
win be set aside. This contention Of the
prosecutors is one sufficiently founded
here upon facts to justify the allowance
of these wrlts upon that ground alone;
81 have not undertaken to consider the
many other reasons presented TO me t6d f6r
many arguments addressed to the Court
to invoke the discretion of the Court
l noticed that upon the legal grounds
presented for the allowance of the writ
the counsel for both the city and the
successful bidder conceded that these
ton of the Court be allowed.
The writs, therefore. may be allowed
Upon application VII make tb sufh lin 0roef ef
the reasons, the taking of evidence, and
the hearing of the matter in the Supreme
Court. as will, as much as IS CONSISTENT
with justice, insure a speedy determine
NO DELAY PERMITTED.
When the Court had finished fight
arose between counsel for the city and
the plaintiffs. and to the astonlshmenf
Of ali. the opponents to the award tried
to delay the argument OF the case.
They argued to have the case put off,
while on the other hand the counsel for
the city urged an early hearing ing o;tsI Jus
counsel and made this order to expedite
'Appiica.tion having been mn made ID :, for Or
Alderman of Jersey City in awarding
a contract for a new supply of water
to the Jersey City Water Company.
'It IS ordered that the foregoing
writs' lin the cases of John J. Voor,
Hudson and Horace H. Farrier, prose
cutors) sbe allowed and made return
able in five days from this date.
'"rhat a return be made to each of
the writs and annexed to the case first
above mentioned and be considered as
the return to each of the other writs-"
''That the cases be brought up forhear.
ing at the coming. November term of
this Court.
sarhat the Prosecutors in each case
file their reasons within five days from
the return aforesaid.
ssThat any of the parties may take de-
positions to be read on the hearing be-
fore John A. Nugent, Supreme Court
Commissioner on two days notice to the
other side.
'"That the aforesaid cases be .consoli-
dated and heard as one action. but the
counsel under each writ may take. such
1epositions as they may deem wise to
sustain the reasons filed by them re-
spectively.
sThat either party have leave to apply
to me to expedite the taking of such de-
positions in order to ensure hearing
at the coming term or for any other pur-
pose -
It is understood that His Honor will
use his best er'deavors to have the
l,o1a &c n11i