Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1901-10-17
AGAIN THE BRIDGE MIDDLE
Levy Court Accepts the Report
of the Committee.
BUT THE ACTION IS NOT DEFINITE
The Approaches Still a Matter
of Uncertainty.


So Also is the Question Of width New Pro-
posals to he Received for Washington
Street Bridge Lumber, But Not TO be Adj
vertised fort other Levy Court Matters.
--
The old combination stood together
Mt Tuesday afternoons nesting of the
Levy Court and accepted the report Of
the Wilmington hundred bridge COM
mittee conoerning the Seventh street
bridge contract. Some persons seem to
have the impression that this action is
an approval OF the work OF Contractor
Patrick Fancy, whose contention that
his contract does not call Tor the con.
struction OF approaches and wing walls
has been very much dwelt upon. To
the bridge committee had been referred
the duty OF Investigating the subject to
ascertain If possible whether tho plans
and specifications under which Seventh
street bridge was being built called
for the building OF approaches and wing
walls, and II reported to the epurt last
Thursday submitting the Elanl aud
| pecihoations under which the con
tractor claimed to he building the
bridge, and the proceedings Of the court
In connection with granting the con
tract. Then the committee went on to
| say that the plans and specifications
did not provide for approaches and
| wing walls, which statement was un-
doubtedly correct so far ns Mr.. Fhhey's
| plans were concerned: but the reference
to the courts proceedings showed that
Mr. Fancy had really contracted to
build 40.foot bridge, whereas the
bride now nearly completed 10 "a feet
wide, and moreover the contract as it
appears on the Levy Court records calls
Tor the approaches
All this seems well to bear in mind
when considering the action of the
court Tuesday afternoon. Commits.
sioner Megginson, a member OF the
| bridge committee, moved that the re-
mort of the committee DO accepted, and
air. Armstrong seconded his motion.
Mr.. Willis declared that to approve
the report CT the committee would lie
fur .reaching, and he had On impress on
that it would mean the approval and
acceptance of tho bridge, otherwise he
inquired why Mr.. Megginson made the
motion.
Messra Lynn and Armstrong spoke
as il the acceptance of the report did
not mean the acceptance Of the bridge.
Mr.. Willis recalled Mr.. Fahey &
statement that his contract did not call
for the approaches and wing walls, but
he held that the court was not hound
to take the contractor's cain without
other verilication.
President Lynn declared that the
committee reported on what it saw in
the plans and on what 1t road in the
specifications.
4 Mr.. Willis stated that Mr. Fnhey
had come to the previous meeting TO
show why he was building 2I.foot
bridge when the records show that his
contract was for a. 40-ioot bridge
Changes had been authorized by the
old bridge committee and the new com
mittee wanted the court to approve the
changes. de announced that he would
certainly oppose such o motion, and
that he thought the court had gone far
enough in receiving the report
Mr.. Chandler held that the committee
shoIld be satisfied that its report was
put on the minutes, and he declared
Co.'s working plans, revised January
9th, 1901, no other drawings had been
produced for q a,foot bridge. lie
opposed the commuters sa6dling upon
the county the expense of putting ap.
proaohes at the bridge. Besides all
this he was satisfied that the con
tractor was going ahead to drive the
piles and put up the tenders, and was
:. surprised that proposition was made
to relieve him Of that duty.
Mr.. Megginson called for the reading
of the report Of the committee.
After IL had been read, Mr.. Willis
alleged that the only plans In the hands
of the court are 10 the comptroller e
office and copy of which is in the
hands Of the clerk Of the Deaoe and he
held that 1t rested with the contractor
to produce plane showing in what way
the changes were authorized.
The vote on adopting the committee e
report was as follows: Yeas Lynn,
Armstrong, Mesley. Megginson; nays
Chandler, Elliott, Willis.
President Lynn was authorized tc
receive bids for painting the iron anc
woodwork OF the Court House.
Receiver of Taxes Rettew will pre-.
pare list of institutions, SO that the
court may decide which come under tht
exemption allowed in the tax laws t.
charitable and religious institutions,
Mr.. Knowles having decided that in
stitulions that do not charge tuition
fees should be exempt from taxation.
THE LUMBER MA TER.
Mr.. Armstrong offered the resolution
rejecting the lumber bids andlinstruct.
ing the bridge committee to advertise To-
bids of 3.inch white oak planking, Mr.
, Willis opposed the resolution and hell
that in order to save money for ad
/ pertising IL would be all right to CORE
i spond with the 10 bidders and leuri
5 whether they would make reduction
in their hids on account of the les
thickness OF the planks. He further
. mere thought 1t would be dlsrespectfu
: to Mr.. Chandler to take the matter on
5 Of his hands, as he had secured tn
: other bids.
/. When the vote was taken on MIR
9 Armstrong; resolution, Mr.. Mogeinso
!, declined to vote, and it looked like
tie.
!. WAS it tie?n asked Mr.. Willis.
n ''DoD't know, answered The chair
man, who ordered the yeas and nays
Measrs. Lynn, Armstrong and Mesle
8 voted yes aud Messts. Chandler, Elliot
;. and Willis voted no. The resolutio
It was lost on a tie.
8 Mr. Willis then moved that Nj
Is Chandler be requested to write to tn
b bidders and have their replies sent
:. the secretary Of the COURT.
b Mr.. Armstrong said: "Then otht
II people are shut out?p
b Mr.. Lynn declared that by furtht
J. advertising, bid might be secure
% that was lower than any in hand. q
d yea and nay vote the motion VT
10 carried, Messrs. Msgginsou, Chandle
J. Elliott and Willis voting yes al
}, Msssrs. Lynn and Armstrong no. NJ
1t Mealey did not vote.