Sistersville oil review. [volume] (Sistersville, W. Va.) 1896-1901, 1898-10-05
Of the City Council Was Held
Yesterday Evening.
A PRETTY WARM TIME.
The Contractors of the New
Works Were There to Settle
From fridays Daily

There was a special meeting OF
the city council yesterday evening
called for the purpose of efecting
settlement with Messrs. Casio &
RosSer, who built the new water
works. There was fair represen-
tation OF the city legislation pres
ent, including Mayor Lawrence,
Recorder Sybeft, and Councilmen
Thistle, Hays and West. The
meeting was called to order at
|about $50, and on motion of West
the reading of the minutes Of the
previous session was dispensed
with.
The statement submitted by Mr..
Casio, who was present at the meet
ing of the council, was that the
contract price for the water works
was $4,o13. and he had received
on account $4,000, leaving a bal
ance of about $I,123, and he asked
that the bill less the amounts of or
ders which had been given be paid.
There appeared to be quite MUM
Der of orders and charges against
the firm of Casio & Rosser, all of
which Mr.. Casio stated they were
willing to settle if they were all
right.
Thistle wanted to know whether
the firm of Casio & Rosser had
complied with their contract.
Casio replied that he had COM
piled with the contract, as he al
ways made it a point to do so.
He also stated he was present for
the purpose of settlement and in
case the matter was settled he was
willing to allow all charges
which had been made against
them. If the matter was not
settled by giving him an order
for $1,124 he would withdraw the
proposition for settlement alto
gether. He stated that he would
pay all the bills against his family.
Some of the council were CT the
opinion that the contract had not
been carried out, but he stated also
that the plans and specifications
had been changed at the instance
of the council. That he did not
know anything ABOUT there being
any changes to be made until he
was informed by the city engineer
of the matter.
The members of the council are
of the opinion that through the
negligence of the contractor the city
was directly the loser of at least
$1,000. This was on account OF
them having to build wall at the
water works. DR.. West wanted to
know whether or not Casio & Ros-
ser had not violated their contract
in getting Jacobs & Co. to do the
work on the works, and asked to
have the original contract read.
Sybert read a clause in the contract
in regard to the matter which was
to the effect that no substituting
should be done without the consent
of the city engineer. Casio stated
that he had secured the consent OF
the city engineer for Jacobs to take
the work in charge.
Casio thought, in speaking of the
matter, that the work had been
done as rapidly as possible. He
also said that as long as it was pos
sible to do the work his people did
not lose moments time.
The whole trouble seemed to
hang on the fact that the retain
ing wall had to be built at the ex
pense of the city. DR.. West claimed
that in addition to this the contract.
ors were negligent in not having
more men at work when it was
possible to work. Casio claimed
that he had been unable to COM
plete the work in the time specified
| for the reason that the river had