New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-08-15

ties arc often completed on an arbitrary thickness
/ Lining is provided COR filing the interstces and
for certain thickness behind the wall ana ms IS
| allowed FOR at q separate price per cubic yard ana
! in many cases for an arbitrary quantity. Tho ok
! caVation for the wall Is also allowed for at tho
prices Of excavation and IL any Of the stone In the
! old wall is used deduction IS supposed to be
made Of the quantities 80 used al an arbitrary
price. 1t would have been much simpler and far
more satisfactory. saving the use Of arbitrary
quantities and much labor i'm the measurements. 10
! have based tno price Of slope wall the super
fetal yard As done IN street paving and - have
! specified that tho price per square yard should
/ cover the completed work including therein The
necessary excavation and lining and the use Of the
old material
IMPOSSIBLE TO VERIFY ACTUAL COST.
The same remarks apply with greater force 20
vertical walls which there additional charges
| FOR back filing and for the excavation Of old ce-
ment masonry. The charge for earth excavation
/ IS usually to an arbitrary slope line. the earth
/ often not being removed TO this line when 1t will
stand within but paid for in full when falls with
out The charge for back filing is usually TO an
/ arbitrary line. also when the earth has not
! been fully excavated with full charge for filing
outside the slope line. charge for lining is made
I'm some cases. and separate charge for the foot
| ings of timber which may be placed under the
wall. y deduction is supposed 20 be made for the
use Of any stone from the old wall az In the case
/ of the slope wall 1t Is impossible verify the
/ actual cost OF the wall II IS practicable TO so
specify vertical wall to include all work Incl
dental 10 It's construction and 10 pay for the same
at so much per yard of wall actually built.
| Had these two principal items OF slope and verti-
cal wall been treated in the manner suggested it
would have disposed OF the vexatious features
In the measurements for excavation. Earth and
rock have been so defined to lead 10 diverse
practice throughout the canal. and too much judy
mont has been exercised by the resident engineer
Usually rock is classified ateria most
nomlcally removed by blasting. and earth as ma
teral most economically removed by ploughlng. The
distinction is arbitrary and turns upon whether
a would b.ast plough in working for him
self This is believed 10 be the proper intcrpreta-
t on Of the language OF the specification. No
definite standard has been applied and the lam
guage has been construed TO mean ordinary plough
ing with two horses understood in filling ground,
and in other cases with four horses, but in very
few instances has any bona hde attempt 20 plough
been shown. The engineers judgment should con-
fine itself to the comparatively narrow zone be-
tween what is economically blasted and that which
is most economically ploughed; nor. on the other
hand. should the contractor he required In making
his bid TO discount the personal equation Of the
engineer in charge 1t is not meant to include in
rock a class Of earth the removal OF which is
facilitated by shaking up with explosives, as Is
often done in steam shovel operations.
1t would probably be wise most contracts and
in view Of the meagreness Of the excavation, to
make no classification, and invite bids for an aver
age price based on actual study Of the condi
lions. In such case special retention clause
would be required against the easy digging TO
guard against skinning the contract
Overhaul beyond limit OF one thousand feet has
been construed embankment. as hereafter noted.
and has been the subject OF abuse Had overhaul
been contemplated 1t should have been provided for
in the usual manner through an additional charge
for each hundred feet necessarily hauled beyond
he limit. full Of fca Inn
vinces that It not intended TO require the
contractor 10 haul excavated material beyond the
limit OF thousand feet. and that IL in
tended TO provide spoil banks other means OF
disposal within these limits. When overhaul be-
came necessary. therefore a special arrangement
required on some rational basis. Excavation
hauled over one thousand feet and wasted has
increased In extraordinary degree the estimate
Tor embankment~ The spoil ground should have
been located. otherwise the contractor required
10 dispose OF the material is usual In city
tracts and the bid should have been made to
HOW THE COST WAS INCREASED
Embankment was evidently intended to include
only such material actually entered tho banks
when such material was hauled over one thousand
feet, unloaded from scows. necessarily handled
twice. N filling behind walls and around fOunda-
tons. Embankment made from material taken
from the prism OF the canal within thousand
feet TO be done without extra charge above
the price of excavation. This specification for
bankment has been given forced construction by
including materials necessarily hauled over one
thousand feet and wasted. before noted /; has
apparently led 10 large use OF borrowed material
for forming the banks. which has usually been paid
for IN excavation. rather than use OF the material
from THO prism OF the canal. on the plea that the
material taken from the canal was not suitable for
the purpose Ali OF these practices have contributed
10 increase the cost.
We believe that embankment should have been
specified throughout as separate Item, meaning
actual embankment only and that II should be bid
for at price per cubic yard without regard 70 the
source from which the material was obtained Had
this been the practice. we are persuaded that the
material. with few exceptions. would have been OBJ
talned from the excavation.
Pudding is proper and necessary Item OF work
but 20 pay for the material for the same under two
three different classihcatons. and then TO pay
again FOR the actual work o: pudding in place is
bad practice. Pudding should have been specified
at price per yard in place. tho same TO include AL
the material and work required.
Lining also to be unnecessary item
which could have been entered in the specifications
requirements OF the construction OF towpaths Of
the back filing Of vertical and slope wall and OF
other work requiring lining.
We also Gear that sheet png and other
timber should be paid for in the finished work and
that much Of the timber allowed for as separate
Items IN the specifications. az in the foundations
for retaining walls Is Incidental and should be COW
cred IN the prices Of the main items
Specifications drawn in accordance with the fore
going suggestions would reduce the bid quantities
to n few leading items, which be readily VERT
fed In the completed work Such specification
Will greatly diminish the temptation to unbalanced
bidding which IL favored by quantity sheet with
q great number OF items. II would also reduce the
work required in surveying quantities and would
narrow the margin for judgment in classification
OF work.
Another characteristic Of these contracts is the
practice OF entering nominal quantities IN the bid
ding sheet II should be a we,-settled principle
that contract IS for specific amount and that
tho variations from that amount should BE within
reasonable limits, and close TO the actual guam
titles as the nature OF the Will permit.
We can only emphasize the necessity Of proper