The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1901-04-02
As Set Forth by Judge
Taylor In
FULTON BRIDGE CASE
On Which Q Decision Was
Lately Handed Down by
Judge Mecarty In COM
mon Pleas Court.

mas passed mo the annals OF Stark
county judicial affairs as one of the
most intricate cases decided by the CON-
mon pleas court. The decision is APP
parently contrary to the letter of the
law, but not its spirit. How
over that may be, record Of
the case as presented to the court by
tho defense is interesting, furnishing
ns 1t does the basis and opinions upon
which the court rendered its decision.
1t is admitted that Judge Taylor, of
the firm of Taylor & Stewart, Is en- ahle
jurlst, and the way he handled the
matter makes 1t of more than ordinary
interest. The News-Denlocrat has Sc
cured the full text of the brief of the
defehse in the case which Is as follows:
The suit was brought by Prosecuting
Attorney Day undor section 1877, ask
ing for preliminary Injunction which
vas asked upon the following grounds:
THAT the cost of .te bridge ez-
cecdcd the estimate.
2.-That after the bridge was partly
completed the plans were changed
and altered.
3.-That during tho progress Of Ihe
work brick were substituted for stone
In certain parts of tho work.
The defendants through Judge Taylor
set forth their defense as follows:
No fraud or corruption is charged.
There was no attempt on the part
of any one connected with this con-
tract to evade the provisions of the
law, but ON the contrary, 1t was be-
ieved by all that every provision of the
statutes in respect to such contracts
had been fully complied with.
What ever has been done In this
matter has been done in the belief that
1t was in the best interests of tho coun-
ty and of the public-was honestly
done.
AS to tho first proposition:
II the cost Of the bridge exceeded
the estimate, 1t was because of the
mistake in the estimate made by the
county surveyor who was employed
by the board of commissioners to make
the plans and specifications and estl-
mate for the bridge.
II the cost of the bridge, constructed
according to Hoovcr's plans, would have
exceeded the estimate then the contract
was entered into by the mutual mistoke
of the board of commissioners and the
contractor. Watson, for which mistak
He assumed, and he had the right to
assume that the commissioners had
employed a competent architect or en-
gineer to make plans and estimates
for said bridge.
Watson was not guilty of culpable
negligence or Of any negligence, In
fact.
This was a contract by the perch,
Nd q
for gross sum.
2.-As tothe change and alteration of
the plans:
This was made necessary by the mis-
take of the county surveyor, Hoover,
When the bridge was well on towards
completion and the centers were being
placed for the arches 1t was discovered
that IL the bridge was completed ac-
cOrding to Hoover's plans 1t would
bring the road way of the bridge sew
eral feet, to wit, six feet at tho west
end and three feet at the east end
above the grade of the street and public
highway and thereby do great damage
to the owners of the abutting property:
to very large extent destroy the USE
fulness of the street: make It's ap-
proaches dangerous at the west end
because OF the steepness of the grade
and the proximity Of the railroads
md that 1t would also make 1t necessary
to expend large sum of money in max
ing approaches to the bridge.
The commissioners deemed 1t advis-
able, under tho circumstances and
acting under advice of the prosecuting
attorney, to have the plans changed
II 1t could be done SO rs to utilize the
work already In place and the material
ON hand as far as 1t could be used
Guy Tilden, m architect, was en-
ployed by the commissioners to revise
the plans so far as to conform to road
levels, high and low water marks of the
stream and the work IN place.
Mr.. Tilden made revised plans and
they were so changed that by lowering
the crown of the arches he could use
the work already in place and bring
the road bed of the bridge substan.
TALLY to the grade of the street and
highway.
This lowering of the arches causad
an extra thrust on the abutments
which was provided for at the west
abutmept by concrete filing bach
of the abutmcnt and at the east nbut
ment by buttress at the back of this
abutment, making large amount oI
extra work necessary.
At the time the contract was entered
into. neither the contractor nor the
commissioners knew of this mistake
and the contract was entered into by
the mutual mistake of the hoard Of coip.
missionerG and Contractor Watson, II
this respect, caused by the mistake ol
the county surveyor.
Canal Fulton 10 o village OF some / 200
inhabitants; the street of which this
bridge forms part Is the principal
street in said village. leading from
its business part to the depot; most
of the school children pass over It IN
going to and from school::. thc
village Ia divided about midway b,
xhn ,,xa. hrxut r.ua-hof ~ A. ,,o,~