The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1899-01-10
/. THE LAW INVOEAp.
Robert Davis Aftef the
Freeholders' Dry Goods
Contract.
GETS 4 RULE TO SHOW CAUSE
Democratic Leader Shows
How This County Has
Been Victimized.


LAWYER M. I. Fagen. representing Rob
ert DAVIS and the Democratic Executive
Committee, made an application to Justice
Lippincott last night. for a rule TO show
cause why a writ of certiorari should not
be granted to remove to the Supreme
Court for review the resolution of the
Board of Freeholders awarding the dry
goods contract to ~Ignatius Noonan. The
facts were submitted to Justice Lippincott
in this affidavit made by Robert Dayss:-
State of New Jersey
County of Hudson. IS.
Robert Davis, of full age, being July
sworn according to law, on his oath says
that he is a citizen Of this State, and a
resident and n owner Of
Hudson; that q meeting of the Board Of
Hudson was held on Friday, the twenty
third day of December, one thousand
eight hundred and ninety-eight, at which
bids for supplies were received in Eur-
lance of an advertisement heretofore
made, of which the following is a true
copy
Then follows the official advertisement
for bids, and the affidavit continues
after the bids were opened at the aid
meeting one of the members of the Board
presented a motion that the bid for dry
goods, of which the above is a copy, pc
consideration which was carried: On
Thursday, the fifth day Of January in
slant. h Board Of Chosen Freeholdsrs
m nela 5noth moy meet MAI 6 t wsiS 6id 0 for OF d dns
goods, of which the above is a true copy,
be accepted, and the contraction furnish
ing dry goods be awarded 70 the bidder.
Mr.. Kelly. This motion was defeated ~
voIe of the members of the Board on rsA
call; thereupon 4 1e. ter, of which the fol-
lowing is a true copy, was presented and
read
Hon. Board of alders:-
Dear Sirs-On December % last I pre-
sented a bid to your Board to supply dry
goods to the Snake Hill institutions, in
which l made a mistake of one Q,0OO
thousand dollars in one item, by charging
n thousand Q,000 dollars less for the
articles in this item than / had intended
to charge. The total of my price, as
stated at the foot of my bid, is $3.50; this
is the total price that / intended to bid,
TOO. But owing to my mistake OF a mis-.
charge in one of the items, the total of
the price shown on my bid would make a
total of 1850. Besides, since | put in my
bid l Nave learned that | will be unable
to procure the articles in two other items
at the price for which l was given to un-
derstand before I put in my bid that l
could procure them. This will make it i'm
possible for me to take the contract under
my bid and I therefore ask you to relieve
me from the same.
.Tt is true that IN error was mace in
footing the total figures of this bid, and
the total SHOWS one lnUuSdUu uplldIS
more tina it should be, and the statement
OF this letter in ma. .sgar1 is true; the
item in which the mist:tke Of IN thou
sand dollars was made IS not stated n the
letter, nor does the latr2r state which Two
iIsrns they afs. which canno- he secured
at the prices on which said Kelly sub
mitted his bid
After the reading of the letter above
copied, one of the member present moved
that the furnishing of dry goods be award
ed to the next lowest bidder upon this
motion the roll was called and the motion
was carried; the next lowest bidder, or the
person submitting the next lowest bid for
dry goods, was one Noonan, the total OF
whose bid, as presented. was $10,Cl5, or
81, 665 more than the total OF the bid OF
said Kelly.
The bondsmen proposed with the bid of
said Kelly were Henry p. Simon and T.
3. Kinkead, both responsible fresholoels 5;
were the said Kinkead n Carl H.
Ruelnpler. Th sad Kelly is a brother-in-
law of the said Noonan, and Opponent
is informed that he is not in the bust
ness of furnishing dry goods.
Deponent shows that the excuse given
by the said Kelly in his letter upon which
he asked to be relieved from Ais bid, is
a mere pretence; that the award of the
contract for furnishing dry goods to
others thar the said Kelly is contrary to
law, and is not for the best interests q
Noonan is contrary to law and should be
so declared, he not being the lowest re-
sponsible bidder.
..Deponent has been familiar with the
proceedings of previous Boards OF Chosen
Freeholders of this county, and his re-
collection is that this procedure has been
followed before. to the great detriment
Of the county; an individual wishing to
submit two bids presents on in his W
name and another, for smaller amounts,
in the name of another person; in case
no bids are presented for amounts inter-
vening between the amouts of these two
bids. the lowest bidders asks to be re-
lieved from his bid, alleging some excus
such as is contained in the letter above
copied, and the Board thereupon relieves
him from responsibility under his bid
and awards the contract to his principal,
Justice Lippincott granted this rule:-
New y-rsey Supreme Court.
1.-THE State Robert Davis, Pros. vs..
the Board of Chosen F'reeholders of the
County of Hudson.
"On reading and Alag the afidavit II
Robert Davis in the above entitled mat
ter, and after hearing the attorney tor
the Prosecutor.
1T is ordered that the Board of Chosen
show cause before me, on Tuesday, the
seventeenth day of January, instant, why
a writ Of certiorari should not be allowed
to review sthe resolutions of the said
Board adopted on the fifth day of January
instant, whereby the said Board un!er-
took to relieve one Kelly from responsible
the county Institutions for the period end
ing November SO. 1899, and awarding the
contract for such supplies to one t=natids
p. Noonan,
ION motion of Pagan & Murphy and
John j. Mulyaney, Attorneys OF Prose
cutor."
The rule is made returnable on January
The special meeting of the Board of
Freeholders which was to hav beeen held
on Thursday to reconsider the award of
the contract. has been postponed until
next Monday. Clerk Egan sent out the
notices Yesterday afternoon. 1t is UNDER
stood that all the Freeholders who voted
for the award will vote to reconsider It
with the exception of Messes Riordan ana
Heating.
AS the call specifies that the special
meeting Is for the purpose Of transacting
such other special or general business as
may come before the Board IT IS sald
that the committees may be ~reorganlzed
and Riordan and Keating relegated to
back seats. It is also probable that IN
the event of the resolution pelng re,
scinded the certiorari proceedings Will
not be prosecuted to a finish. +,
Mis- Bar2in.
A Scottish minister observed one of his