The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-12-20
Furthel Hearing of University Case
Postponed.
MORE EVIDENCE TAKEN
ENTIRE DAY OCCUPIED BY PRO
CEEDINGS. =.
Interest Conferred In the Testimony
Of. Architect Kletting Who Was
Placed On the Stand-Bruback
Wins His Suit Against Nebo
Brown Stone Company.

Judge Eiiles yesterday afternoon post
poned further hearing in the case of
Thomas Morris ct al. VS.. University of
Utah until Jan. 3 The entire day was
occupied with the taking of testimony
in the case, the principal interest CEN
tering in the testimony of Architect
kfetting, who was repeatedly called 10
the witness stand by Attorney J. II.
Moyle. Judge 1iles maintained his fo-
sitioh of Monday. and repeatedly or
dered evidence struck out on the
ground that the materiality of admit
ting testimony consisted in connecting
tie board to the extent that they knew
that the architect was furnishing super
Tor information to any particular bid
der, thereby placing the other contrac-
tors at an unfair disadvantage. As
plaintiffs did not allege fraud on the
part of the university regents, but SIM
ply an error in the matter of award
ing the contracts, considerable time was
consumed by the court in sustaining
the objections OF Judge Henderson.
The stand taken by the defense wasi
to the effect that kletting had author
ity from the board to supervise the
bids but did not authorize him TO give
any hints to contractors to place them
at undue, advantage over the other bid
ders 1854
Plaintiffs attempted to show that
William H. Roney, the Chicago con-
tractor was not the lowest aggregate
bidder, as claimed by the regents; on
the other hand, they asserted that
Grunford e. Atkinson. when their bid
on the boiler house tunnel was taken
into consideration. were the lowest ag-
gregate bidders by 1928.
Roney, according to the testimony,
produced bid on both the Zig-zag and
straight tunnel. when the notice for
bids, as published, called for only the
former. In explanation. Mr.. Kletting
said that he had notified all bidders to
estimate on the right-angled and
straight tunnel separately. In answer
to the question of Attorney Moyle, wit
ness stated that he was not sure that
he notified all contractors concerned.
but he made il his business to inform
all those who called at his office.
roundup of those concerned devel-
oped the assertion that he had not done
so. On being asked by Attorney Moyle
why only Roney's contract bore eSti-
mates on the two-tunnel propositions,
Architect Kletting said he did not
know.
Plaintiffs contended that the fact that
Roney's bid bore a written additional
bid relative to the tunnel in question;
that it was at variance with the fol-
lowing clause in the published call for
bids in the newspapers:
Bids must not contain conditions.
qualifications, propositions or any other
thing in addition to those mentioned in
the plans, drawings, contract and bond.
and bidders must use the printed forms
of bids without change. which will be
found in the Office OF Richard KIetting
and no other form of bid will be re-
ceived"
The testimony produced i'm court dur,
irg yesterdays. session tended to prove
-Ors in specifications such as in the
of the library building, wherein
ee steps were called for. when a
Der stairway was ultimately bid on
At , O'Clock Judge Hiles adjourned
the ease until Jan. > when further evil
Gence viii be produced.