The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-03-30
ASPHALT CoMPANY's CLAIMS.
The City's Proposition Submitted to
Warren-Scharf People.

Warren-Scharf People.
Mr. A. L. Alexander who represents the
Warren-scharf Asphalt Company in sa-
vannah, has submitted to his company
the proposition made by the street and
lane committee in reference to the pay
ment of the charge for last years main
tenance.
The reasons for the refusal of the COM
mittee and the Commissioner of Pubic
Works to approve the bill for the full
amount were given in yesterdays Morn
ing News. The committees proposition is
that the city will pay the maintenance
charge of cents per square yard per an
mum on portion of the asphalt pave
ment included in the contract, about 5000
square yards, but that on the remainder
about $1,000 square yards, it will pay 50
per cent. of the charge, on the
ground that the streets included in
the latter amount were maintained
In proper condition for only one-half
the year. But the committee will not rec
ommend any payment unless the company
accepts the proposition as a whole.
Mr.. Alexander and Commissioner Will
link have reached no understanding as
yet as to the matter of repairs to the as
phalt pavements where such repairs are
required for private purposes. AS already
stated, Mr.. Alexander has Withdrawn his
demand that the city assume the respon-
sibility for the payment for all repair
work of this character, but demands that
all work of this kind on streets now under
maintenance contract with the Warren
Scharf Company be done by the company.
THE Warren-Scharf Company is under
contract to maintain these pavements for
a certain period of years. said Mr. Alex
9nder, when asked by a Morning News
reporter yesterday 10 state his position
in the matter This being the case it
would be manifestly improper for the city
to allow any other company to make re-
pairs on these streets. Any other compa-
ny making such repairs might use a diff
ferent material from that used by us and
its work might be poorly done. Its work
might be purposely poorly done in order
to embarrasS us. If the work should not
be properly done we should be the losers,
as we are compelled to maintain the
streets under the maintenance contract
and it is only justice to us that no paving
work should be done on those streets ex-
cept by our company.
las to the point of the city's RESPONSE
biity," Mr. Alexander said, 81 have no
doubt that the city is responsible for all
paving work done on the streets under
contract with us. Our contract Is with
the city. We have no contract
with private parties. The streets
are not private, but public property.
No one can make any cut in the pave
ments without securing permit from the
city. If such a party should fail to re-
pair the damage done by him, the city
would be compelled TO do SO. There is TO
reason why we should be required to do
paving work for irresponsible parties.
wrote Mayor Meldrm on March l. calling
his attention to this matter, and request
ing that the city should pay the com
pany direct for all paving repairs done by
it, this being the manner in which such
business is transacted in other cities. 1
received a reply stating that the matter
had been referred to the Commissioner Of
Public Works. heard no more from it
until March Is, when l was asked 10 at
tend a conference a the Mayors office, at
which were present the Mayor, the city
attorney, Mr. Willink and Alderman Davis
The city's representatives took the position
that it had been customary for the paw
ing company 10 make these repairs for
private parties and collect direct from
them before the maintenance contract was
entered into and that the same custom
had been continued since the contract was
in force, and that, consequently, the city
had the right TO expect its further con-
tinuance.
Mayor Meldrim addressed a letter to
me TO this effect, which I referred to the
vice president, Maj. Whitney. He replied,
saying that while the paving company
considered the contract to mean that the
city was responsible for such work. the
matter was not of sufficient Importance
to have any dispute over and the COM
pany would continue the work on the same
plan as heretofore"
Mr. Alexander said that the reason the
company had not proceeded to do the paw
ing work for the Street Railway Company
on Broushton street was that it has re-
ceived no order from Commissioner Will
link to do this work. When the order
was received the work would be done. he
said