The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1904-10-30
MOSTBARERACEDC
THE WORK OF THE ODELL CANAL
BOARD OF 1901.
After the Court OF Appeals Made Decision
Preventing the LoOting Of the Treasury
That Board Voted 10 Contractors
6Sy,JlE Over Amount OF Their hid.


That Board Voted 10 Contractors
SSg,5IB Over Amount Of Their hid.
ALBANY. Oct. Attorney General Cum
mems reference In his New York city
speech Tuesday night to exoess payments
amounting to al ,4SO for rock excavation
by the Odell canal board OF 1901 to Grannis
d 0Connor OF Syracuse, one Of the firms
of contractors under the 50 100000 canal
/ improvement fiasco, has led to an investi-
| CATION of that case. These facts were de-
veloped:
One Of the contracts let under the pro-
visions Of the s., Oo0. 900 canal appropriation
was Contract No. s, on the western division
Of the Erie Canal. This was a contract
extending from Lock No Oh to Lock No. 81,
distance of II 1910 miles.
This was q rock bearing section, and the
mere extent Of the contract would indicate
that there was necessarily some consider
able amount Of rock on the route. The
engineers estimate Of the quantity Of rock
was by some means lost, and at the time
Of the bidding sheets being made ont there
was no estimate of rock ex cavation.
Instead Of estimating the amount Of
rock. or Of emitting that item altogether, q
| was inserted In the bidding sheet. The
result OF this was that In the computation
OF the bid on that small quantity a very
large price could be inserted with safety
and without materially raising the aggregate
oil the bid.
This Lind Of bid was accordingly made
by Granris 4 O'Connor and the total
amount of the bid, based upon the estimates
in the bidding sheets, was s2l7.1ls.5O. The
price bid for tie rock was s. per yard. The
usual price along the canal improvement
for rock excavation was about 81 per yard,
at which Price 1t was generally excavated
by the contractors at fair profit. Not
wthstanding this enormous bid, the con-
tract was let to Grannis 4 0'Connor. They
Immediately began excavating large guam
titles Of rcck
When this work had PROCEEDED to quite
an extert the Comptroller refused to pay
the drafts drawn upon him by the Superin-
tendent OF Public Works, taking the ground
that it was an unbalanced contract and
SHOULD not lie pail, and allowed tine con-
tractors 81 per yard only, which was the
usual price At that time, 1t was estimated
that 10000 cubic yards hal been eXcavttei.
This estimate was subsequently reaijnstei
rock excavatei was shown 70 be only
20,7i0 cubic yards.
lie contractors proceeded to review
the action Of tie Comptroller by man
damus. Senator Frank Hiscock was coun-
sci for the contractors. Tie Special Term,
writ Of mandamus, directing the Comp
troller to audit tie drafts at tie amount
at vi icl t. ey were drawn. The Appellate
Division affirmed the decision o. the Special
Term
vi en- TIE matter came into the Court OF
Appeals L order was reversed CHEF
Justice Parker writing e opinion, took
III position t at tie Comptroller could not
be compelled by mandamus to cl snge Lis
position. As no OF. er remedy was at Z! at
time open to tie contractors to enforce
collection OF u cir enormous price tie
State was entirely secure in its resistance
to dis excess payment for rock excava-
ton.
Tie case was decided May 1, 1900. Sub
seouently, However, at r:eeting Of tie
Canal Board, ield May "a, 1901, tie claim OF
t. e contractors was allowed, and Z Is large
ar'ount OF money. W. ich IL Court OF
Appeals cid could not be collected from
t. e State. was apparently donated to tie
contractors, and Il q t. tai amount awarded
to Il EN- under tie final estimate was STA
S3i.7G. or s57,i1j.28 more & an the amount
of Z cir bid, and included an allowance
for tie exoavaticn OF 2o.H0 yards OF rock
at SO per yard, after Il e Court OF Appeals
ed ed [ at L e State 'ould not he made
to ray more Il an reasonable price fortle
- '"n
st this meeting there were present Sec
rotary Of State Ncl'onoueh. State Treas
urer Ia ecEel .sttoney-t eneral 1avies, state
tendent Of Tuhlc Works Partridge. In
addition to this amount allowed by the
unanimous vote or the boa rd. and including
the rock exec walton, as stated, the board,
by concurrence Of all its members, ey-
cept NJ cartridge. " no opposed II. voted
TO allow the contra Ctors an additional
sum for loss o: pro- T., amounting to
i.'2l.9l on work not performed. There were
three good eascns any one Of which was
sufficient TO prevent the allowance FOR pro-
spectve pro- IL.
FIRST The contra ct. by its terms, provided
that it should he completed prior 10, the
beginning Of m vigation in 1903, and the
cc-trn ctors we're bound by its provisions
to have their work done in that time, and
WIN tever work WAS not done was on account
State Voluntarily. for the convenience and
prot OF tho contra ctors, permitted them
another year could not make the State
liable for any prospective profits which
miyht ha We accrued II the contractors had
not de'a ulted On their contrs ri.
S cond The contract in its terms. con-
ia ined an express provision that the State
might at any time suspend the execution
OF the contract for any cause
Third The contra ctors had already been
allowed ST., 900 more than their bid ca lied
for, 80 that instead OF doing less work thar
was contemplated al the time OF the bidding
they had been allowed nearly rs per cent.
more work.
80 In this case there was clearly this situa-
ti,-.
First-In n oontra ct the size Of which
Hlonewould indie tie the necessity OF having
a CT reful estimate Of the rock exca walton,
that item either hv cclusion or gr,ss
negligence. was omitted from the estimat ties
and q merely nominal quantity inserted,
the effect of which would he to invite rer-
sors acduaint with the stua ton to make
s high bid upon the sna II quantity.
Seoond-A bid, scturl lily end grossly
unbalanced, in which the price OF rock
evcav: ton ives three times the usunl price
at which It could be excavated at profit
YVES accerted.
Thrd-EnorTnous quantities OF rock were
at once exoav ted, ar the Superinten der /
If Public Works ca lmly drew his drifts upon
the Comptroller for an amount of rock
two hundred times the amount stated
IN the rreliminnrv bid
Fourth-The Comptroller, endea voring
to defend the State Treasury, fought the
matter through the courts and succeeded
in the court Of last resort in obtaining a
favorable decision which would prevent
his lootipg Of the treasury.