Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1899-08-24

FOURTH WARD SEWERAGE
WHY STREET. SEWER AND DRAIN
BOARD AWARDED CONTRACT

BOARD AWARDED CONTRACT.
MT. j. II. 1ofheimer. President of the
Board of Street, Sewer and Drain Com
missioners. was seen by IL Virginian-
Pllot reporter yesterday evening and
Il full statement secured OF why the
beard awarded the contract for the
Fourth Ward sewerage TO Guild & Co
in the face OF an adverse vote of the
Select Council. This branch of the
Council. II will be remembered, was
called together for the express pur-
pose of authorizing the Board to let
me contract Tor This sewer work to
Guild " Co. OF Chattanooga, Tenn. 1t
VIII also be remembered that the Coun-
Gil refused 10 grant the authority ask
cd by this Board.
Guild X Co. are the contractors on
gagged nj present in laying the Bran
bleton sewerage system. they being the
lowest bidders by several thousand
dollars. This company. or rather Mr..
Guild. its head. submitted to City En-
ginecr Brooke at his request. an csti-
mate of what it would Icy the Fourth
Ward sewers for this estimate being
in tho same basis of their estimate for
the Brumbleton Job. with Il slight in
crease 90 cover the increase in the
| price Of pipe.
city Engineer Brooke gave it as his
! opinion that the increase would not
! cover the Increased price of material
/ & Co was $4,000 less than he had esti-
/ mated il would cost for the city TO do
the work. he recommended that the
contract be given To- this company.
The Street. Sewer ana Drain Board
looked thoroughly into tho matter. its
chairman says. and then unanimous
decided To ACCEPT Guild e co.'s bid.
which Appropriated Sli.o0O but will.
in reality be less than that sum, the
estimate being based IN 50 much per
lineal foot. The Street; Sewer and
/ Drain Board did not helive NJ that time
however, that 1t had the authority to
give out the contract. and a; the in
stance Of the Board q special session
of The Councils was He'd. but only the
select branch had quorum. Wher
that branch had refused TO authorize
contracting vi;hsCuild \ Co the BOARD
was confronted with two alternatives
Ii had either To let the contract g
ny on 10 take upon itself the authority
and responsibility Of awarding it.
Guild * co. had submitted Il letter
to the Board stating that thcy had an
option on sewer piping. which expired
ON tho l1th of this month. and owing
10 The rapid advance in this material
thcN Would he compelled To Withdraw
their bid If this option ran out before
tn" contract was wardcd them.
Mr. lioiheim"r states that several
members of the Select Council were
seen hy him and the matter fully cx-
planned To them and they at once
agreed that The Board would do righ,
in awarding the contract. They said
/ to MIR. lioihoimcr iia' they did not at
/ first understand the matter TO be in the
/ shape that 1t was.
Tho opinion Of City Attorney Tay-
lnr Was asked as to whether the Board
/ had the authority 10 grant the CON
tract under the circumstances related.
/ and he gave - written opinion, stat
ng hat it "a have this right.
Vhc arpronriGiiuu for the work was
$i' SEQ based ola City Engineer Brooke's
estimate
TIE %irco,. Sewer and Drain Board
claims that Il would probably have
been ro1t Stirring before tho city on
iis own account could have begun the
work. where : Guild x 60. will com
nlcic il before tho Winter Resides
tho Board claims that the city will be
saved about si.NO0.