Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1901-04-13
DECIDED SNUB
FOR KELSEY.
Council Sides With Public Works
Board in Fight With Engineer,
LATTER'S STRONG PROTEST..
protracied and Animated Debate .
Full Report OF the Proceedings
OF the Session,

the new form Of contract which was
discussed and finally passed at the spe'
clal meeting Of the Council called fol
the purpose last night. a considerable
gallery OF contractors and others more
Or less interested In the business Of the
evening had assembled and the triumyl.
rate OF the board Of public works oc-
cupied central and prominent position
just inside the rail, city Attorney
stephens was present with his assist
ant, city Engineer Kelsey and his
brother Mayor Thompson District At
torney Elchnor and other prominent
men.
The meeting, which had been sched-
uled for 1880 was not called TO order till
close on half past eight, and a little
squall was precipitated by Whittemore
just as starter who tried to introduce
Il resolution 10 call down +. d. CHIT.
for having erected fence in front OF
the building now being put up on East
Temple street between Second and Third
South, which extends four feet beyond
the sidewalk into the street instead OF
being four. feet the other side Of the
curb. Robertson at once objected that
the motion was out of order but Presi-
dent Buckle susta< td Whittemore.
Then MI Robertson launched on TRADE
against the president. said as many
mean things as he could think of about
him and appealed from his decision.
The appeal was sustained and after this
further delay the special order Of bust
ness was arrived at.
After the first little ripple had queted
down the recorder proceeded with the
reading of the form of contract which
deals with both work and supplies. At
the conclusion OF the reading Mr.
Buckle, who had called Mr.. Tuddenham
to the chair, said he would like to have
the chairman OF the waterworks COM
mittee explain the changes from the
old form Of contract. Mr.. Davis said
that he had not copy OF the old con-
tract with him. Mr.. Buckle said he
could lend him one Mr.. Davis seemed
to scent a trap and angrly babe the
president keen his copy and refer 10
II. Mr.. Buckle then went out. after the
city attorney. He said he had seen
the written opinion Of the city attorney.
indOrsing the form OF contract at pres
ent In use. Now he had before him an
other communication from Mr.. Steph-
ems In which the new form was auded
and the old one discarded.
The city attorney was granted
the privilege of the floor to reply. He
said that Mr.. Buckle was in error when
he asserted that the changes in the
contract We're made at the suggestion
OF the chairman of the board of public
works. He explained that our city gov
eminent was a trlpartite one consist
ing of the council which originated
measures and was held In check by
the mayor, the executive department
which was the board OF public works
and the advisory department which
consisted of the city engineer and the
city attorney He explained that the
changes he had made IN the contract
form he had considered necessary from
a legal standpoint, The most import
ant was that which took away from
both engineer and board the power to
alter contracts, a power which It did
not seem to him belonged TO them. but
was vested in the council. He explained
that he had eliminated the engineer
from the wording OF the old form of
contract so as TO prevent any disagree
ments between the engineer and the
board which might give rise to a dead
lock of work on contracts, He was well
aware Of the engineers signal ability
but thought II was preferable that the
board Of public works should attend to
the execution Of the work and the en-
gineer to such parts as required his
skill Referring to the heading of sec
lion IS which reads: Decision of the
board of public works final" Mr.. Ste
phens suggested that this should be
changed so as to read, "Deciison of a
referee" etc. In his opinion neither
The decision Of the board or the en-
gineer was final or a bar to litigation.
He cited the Parley's canyon conduit
case and entirely eyonerated the en-
gineer from blame in the Culmer-Jen-
nings suit
Mr., Buckle then asked If the position
Of the council and board with regard
20 contracts were not similar TO a large
extent to that Of the directors OF
railroad.
Eyes, in some degree replied the at
torncy.
Have you ever seen an important
contract I'm which the architect or EN-
gineer was not the man TO pass on al
contr8cts2 Have you ever noticed
among the directors an important IN
iividual who pulled up his chest and
said All these supernumeraries are
protoplasins. There Is none In II but
me, Even IL | have not the technical
knowledge, I am II just the sameY"
Mr.. Stephens made no direct reply 90
this. lie said that the legislature had
seen iit TO take away part of the pow
er OF the council and vest II In the
board of public works. 1.-THE en-
gineer and have about the
same rights" he continued. "and the
Council has n right to differ from either
OF us"
Mr. Buckle then asked how II was
that the city attorney had written
letter 10 the Council about twelve
months ago that the old contract was
ample to protect the city. IL was at
this tuncture that Mr.. FernstrOm in
terrupted with the question TO the chair
as 10 what was before the Council. Mr.
Buckle made some remark about the
density Of certain members. and said
he would like 10 ask two members Of
the board (Clawson and Farnsworthl
to explain the changes in the form Of
contract
Continuing, Mr.. Stephens remarked
that he had changed his opinion within
twelve months In regard to the con-
tract form as he saw the matter in .
different lght now. lie would BE- q
POOR man for city attorney, he added
II he was incapable Of learning some.
thing new in the case In twelve months
Mr., Robertson offered as amendments
that the city engineer be included with
the board In three separate sections Of
the contract but when the amendments
were voted on later they all lost ln
tact, the form Of contract was actually
adopted without change.
When finally, at the request Of Mr.
Buckle. Mr. Kelsey was accorded the
privilege Of the floor, he read a letter
which he had addressed 20 the Coun-
ri. charging that the new form Of con.
tract had been drawn up without his
having an opportunity OF being heard
on the matter. The letter was as fol-
lows.
THE ENGINEERS PROTEST.
To the Honorable President and City
Council. Salt Salt city.-Gentlemen-ln