The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-08-15
THE CANAL CONTRACTS.
REPORT or TIE ENGINEERS TO THE
MTEsTIGATLNG CONFUSION.

@-aA S@A
INVESTIGATING COMMISSION.
They say the Form OF Contract Was Not in
Reality n Contract, but n PrivileEe-The
system OF Dual Control and AdministrR-
ton of the Canals Il Condemned.
AIBASY. Aug. 1I.-Tho report OF Edward P.
North and Lyman E Cooley. consulting and
advisory engineers. to the Canal Invest
eating Commission has this to say regarding
the manner OF letting contracts for improve
ments under the 100000 appropriation:
TIL Constitution and laws provide that all
canal work OF the character OF this improve
ment shall be done by contract on competitive
bids that the contract shall be let to the lowest
responsible bidder: that no extra compensation
shall be allowed that changes in plans, which
increase the cost. shall be authorized by the
Canal Board. and that II the contract proves an
undue hardship TO the contractor it can be can
celled but not amended. The theory Is that
| contracts shall be specific 80 far az the nature
OF the case would permit, and this requires that
the character Of the work shall be closely de-
fined and chat the variation in quantities shall
be within reasonable limits.
"On this view OF the law. the duty OF the
State Engineer was clear. Very thorough sur
veys and careful studies OF each contract were
| required so that the nature Of the work could
be clearly specified. Tn State Engineer seems
to have taken a different view. however. and
has adopted a general specification. that does
not appear to have fitted any individual con-
tract. and OF a type coming down by hereditary
descent from the canal enlargement. and
which seems to have furnished the opportunity
for much investigation.
The specifications present an itemiZed
statement OF all the elements OF cost entering
the work. very much after the style Of the en-
Rineer's estimate sheet. The quantity sheets
do not attempt to exhibit the quantities accu-
rately. as is shown in the practical prosecution
Of the work. and on many items nominal guam
titles only are entered. the idea seeming to be
TO obtain prices on all the items and determine
quantities in the progress OF the work. The
relative amount Of rock and earth rests in the
Judgment OF the resident engineer. and the
quantity Of embankment is determined by
circumstances. This form OF contract is not
in reality a contract. but a privilege, the value
Of which develops as the work proceeds.
In the fact that close surveys for exact def
milton OF the work were not required under this
style OF specification. and that such surveys
were not made. we have great variations from
the estimates. and extra work and changes Of
plans seem to have been the rule rather than
the exception.
Under these contracts we have ayments
for grubbinG and clearing. muckinR and bail
ing and draining. which are clearly Incidental
TO the main work. or a part OF the provision re-
subjects for speciicatiSn. the cost Of the same
E. s}o be G TN11 fs s IN tas RT e the on cPp T65hiei TsFd Ite sps.
on its face. the unit price represents the cost.
It is. however. almost impracticable, to aScer-
tain the actual cost after the work Is done,
c c2r as attach aS't to the cost Of slope wall.
In measuring the %yartase, the quantities are
for a certain thickness behind the wall. and
ward. and in many cases for an arbitrary guam
tity. The excavation for the wall is also allowed
st6ne ' IN the sts Old Of wall IS used a ddesdaae1tfi0nn
is supposed TO be made OF the GUAM
V Rog!d S2 Ray Ssef BEEN AZ much mn HFS SIMPLER p and far
more satisfactory, saving the, use OF arbi-
meassurements. t. have based the price Of slope
wallo on the superficial yard. as Is done In street
P par and r to haze HSon SRsec s6ysI that tha c the FRsisSs
work. including therein the necessary excava-
ton and lining and the use Of the old material.
charges for back filing and for the excavation
@ 9.d etthRgH characteristic Of these contracts is
the Pp@TTaaestttee Of entering , n0niP ma a uan IN
principle that a contract is for a specific
amount and that the variations from, that
amour should be within reasonable limits
and as close TO the actual quantities as the ma
ture Of the case will permit
We can only en- phastze the necessity OF
proper surveys and studies on which 70 base
specific contracts, Had this been done it would
| nave given CONFIDENCE alike 10 Ile CONTRACTOR
and the engineer and resulted in lower prices
and a better administration"
1T has been found impracticable. II not i'm
possible. to keep either ordinary or extraordi-
For example. PROBABLY fully 10000 cubic
yards of silt. which should have been removed
from time TO time. has been excavated, and
over 100000 charged, on this account To deep;
ening the canal. and decidedly over one-third
of the slope wall rebuilt could have been kept
in good condition so as 10 have required only
nance on the part OF past Canal Commissioners
and Superintendents Of Public Works.
The average cost OF slope walls built on the
bernie side Of the Erie Canal, has been $261
the slope wall paid for under the Nins-million-
dollar act would be equivalent. TO forty-nIne
miles Of slope wall on the bernie bank, and 10
miles OF the Erie Canal had a slope wall on that
provement. Your engineers think in most in
stances a slope wall on the bernie side OF the
canal is not only useless but inIurious.m
The report condemns without qualification
the present system Of dual control and adj
ministration. or rather lack OF administration
and says that had the State Engineer been
accordance with his best Judgment We believe
that the work would have been greatly i'm
proved in design and in administration" The
The conduct Of work in the field has not
been sufficiently responsible. any one OF several
in authority giving orders TO the contractors.
sistant or inspector in direct charge. The con-
tractor seems to have been in a position To ap-
peal to the one whom he thought most likely TO
appreciate the nature Of his representations
This has resulted at times in great embarrass-
ment and tends 10 demoralize those in immedi-
ate charge. We believe that in the work OF i'm
proving the canals, II not also in that Of operat-
ing and maintaining the same, the entire man
agement should be concentrated in the hands
OF the State Engineer"