The sun., 1900-01-17
GARBAGE CONTRACTS
DON'T MEET FAVOR
HITH CITIZENS
Objection Way be Made to the
Adoption Of Crematory
Committees Awards.
TOO MANY BIDS REJECTED
Low Bids We're Thrown uut and
High ones Accepted. Some Citi-
zcns I7ayor,he Rejection orAH
Proposals and Adyertis.
ing for New Bids.


Il was reported last night that in view
81 the dissatisfaction being expressed
over the awards Of the contracts for tie
collection and removal of garbage made
by the crenatory committee On Monday
night, and the fact that the majority ii
the bids had been thrown ont for various
reasons, together with a namber of pecu-
liar circumstances connacted with the
whole matter, an effort would Be made
to Gdiice sufficient number If council.
men, to vote against adopting tile report
Of the committee at the meeting of Coun-
Gil an Thursday night.
There is growing sentiment that tie
city should not De the loser to tie
amount 81 large snm Of money because
a majority NUMBER 81 tile bidders and e.
pecially the low bidders had not made
out their bonds properly or failed 10 pgt
on sufficient revenue stamps.
There is quite a general opinion that
tie city could have awarded the con.
tracts even where the bonds we're de.
fectivc on condition that the defects were
remeGlcd, or il they did not desire t9 do
that the bids could have been rejected
and others advertised for.
A member Of tile committee stated To
a representative of TIE SuS last nigh.
that when the committee lAat to con-
slider tile bids on Monday night, Before
anything was done, it @as unanimously
decided 81 throw cut all bids which were
irregular ii any Nay. This was to in-
cpde those where the bonds were not
properly stamped Oh where the stamps
were not cancelled aud where the bonds
were not properly signed.
critical examination was then made
oi all l.ls. Some bonds we're found to
have no stamps, some not enough and
OIL some there was no signature at tile
bottom, and on others there was 10 name
at the top; the bond starting out with
the pronoun ~, " followed BY blank
instead Of the name OF the bidder.
When the examination was concluded
but eight ont II the twenty.one bids
were, HI the opinion OF the committee,
considered regular.
a. q. Is. Anderson, the present aeh
contractor, had pnt HI i bid III 800. 00O
far tile entire city, ANA VI. j. Dougherty
S32, go
Anderson's bond INA no revenue
stamps on il at ail, although 10 cents
were required ia the bono aud 25 cents
on Tie power III attorney accompany ing
the proposals. His bid was, therfore,
thrown out.
Dolgherty's bond was fonnd defective
in that it had not been properly signed.
He had also bid on tile fourth district.
but his bona given with that bid was
found to be all right.
Inc members of the committee voted |
unanimously to award the contracts N |
the First, Second and Third districts as
fplloWs; First, George g. Slaughter |
So, 400; Second, Martin Z. Keogh, S7,g,0:J
Third. Henry Nitail, 50 lCO. When II !
came ID the Fonfth district, Hamilton
Stewart favored NJ. J. Doueheny, while !!
the rect of the committee favored James
}. Riley AMI Daniel Mccormick. The I
bids We're the same, SIS, 800
Alter the contracts were awarded. d 1
motion was made to make them unani- I
m9ps and this was agreed to by all the /
members OF the committee.
Thomas Pagan had bid $li, 900 for the I
fourth district, but his bond was rot
signed. II was property |
stamped, however.
The committee found that 1--WE or Xix
bonds of bidders had been written IN tile
same handwriting. Tic writing vas
peculiar and there wae no mistaknr |
that i vas written by the same person.
But some ol the bonds apparently writ
ten by the same person were all right /
and some were defective. "Sere some /
ot tho bonds made defective 81 pur-
pose! is question That is being asked. I
Mr. Fagans detective bond, il IL said,
was wntten il this handwriting.
\ discrepancy has apparently been I
discovered ~ the reading of tile bids Oh
last Thursday night ii tie meeting of /
Council. Wtsi's bid was recorded in |
the news s.1apers as $3.50 instead cf |
", 100, tile figure at which lie was award |
I'd the Third district, Mr.. Riley's bid I
vas read as Sl6. 800 instead of Sl5, 500, /
the figure at which he and Mccormick !
iecrNtl tile Fourth district.
Mr. stewart, it is said, agreed to throw I
1ut II. j. Dousherty's bid for the entire /
oity after lie found the bid to be defco.
tive.