The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1901-03-19
CANAL FULTON BRIDGE
4 IS TO Be PAID FOR
(Continued from Page oney

(Continued from Page Oney
made mistake, and he was honest in
the matter and no one regrets the sit'l-
alton more than he.
| The court having found as matter
of fact that mistake was made in the
plans and specifications, and that then
naturally following that, a mistake in
the estimate. and that there was a
change from the specifications as TO
some portions of the work from stone
to vitrified brick, and that the commits
sioners caused the contractor to COM
plete the work under the situation as
/ It then existed, the question is, should
a temporary injunction be granted to
prevent the auditor from issuing his
warrant on the treasurer for the bal
ance appearing to be due on that work?
That is the question to be determined.
The bridge never could have been built
under the original estimate, but would
changes had been necessary and no
extras been made.
find as matter Of fact that the
change from stone to vitrified brick in
putting up such portions of the work in
|
not lessen the value of the structure
but increased to some extent at least it's
value, as shown by the proof, and that
1t cost the contractor more to do the
work that way than it would have
cost him to have done it entirely of
stone, so that no harm resulted to any,
body but the contractor from that
change.
l find furthermore that the mistake
made necessitated the changes that
were subsequently made under the
plans and specifications as drawn by
Mr. Tilden under the direction of the
commissioners.
A temporary Injunction ought not to
be granted unless the trier is satisfied
from the testimony in the case that
the doing of the thing sought to be en-
Joined ought not to be done and there
fore ought to be prevented, otherwise
1t ought not to be granted.
Taking into account then the whole
situation as the facts were and the
statutes as they are, and remembering
that as provided by statute that when
IL is necessary to make any addition
to or alteration or repairs of any bridge
the commissioners shall in making con.
tracts for the same conform to the
provisions of the statute in relation to
the erection of bridges as nearly as the
nature of the case will permit, and
remembering also that the commission.
ers are prohibited by statute from max.
ing any levy or appropriating any
money for the purpose of building any
bridge except in case of casualty, the
expense of which will exceed ten thou
sand dollars, without submitting to the
voters of the county the question as
to the policy of building such bridge,
etc., and keeping in mind at the same
time that the contractor did a large
portion of the work before discovering
that a mistake had been made, and
afterwards under the direction Of the
commissioners, and they acting under
the advice of their counsel and legal
adviser, the prosecuting attorney,
completed the work in, a workmanlike
manner did good job and the county
now has the benefit of it; would it be
conformable to strict honesty to re-
ceive the work of Mr.. Watson when he
acted in good faith and honestly per-
formed the work. for Stark county to
receive it and on a hair-splitting tech
nicality If it could be done, prevent
him from recovering what is justly and
The language of the statute is-"And
when it is necessary to make any ad.
dition to or alteration or repairs in
any bridges the commissioners shall
in making contracts for the same con-
form to the provisions of this section
in relation to the erection of bridges
as nearly as the nature Of the case
will permit"
Some leeway is given by the statute,
A contractor with large portion OF
the work done and required by his
contract to complete it by December
1st, 1900. and on account Of a mistake
!, cannot finish it.
Mr.. Watson had the contract to do
the job at $5.81 per perch. This was
not a contract to do the work for SO
many dollars and cents but at so much
per perch.
Under the circumstances and situa.
ton what would the nature Of the case
admit? One thing 1t required was the
exercise of large stock of common
sense and honesty. Nothing more and
nothing less in this regard.
am satisfied that the nature of the
case would admit of no other rational
|, thing to be done than what was done
Any intelligent reasonable man with
the same sort of dilemma with his
own affairs would have done just what
, these gentlemen did.
A very able and distinguished jurist
in whom we all had confidence refer
; to Judge Swan, said-"Many things
may he reproved in sound morals
/, which are left by the law without rem
I edy except by an appeal to the con
science of the party himself. 1t should
therefore, be always borne in min(
that he who adopts the law of the
land as the only guide in his dealings
or the only rule for his moral conduc
{ is neither a good neighbOr nor an hon
est man."