Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1904-02-24

work, I'm which they declared not only
that the plans were sufficient but that
! IL the true intent and spirit OF them
wns carried out the State would Sc
competent to pass upon q technical
point OF this nature, we knew no high
er or better authority to whom we
could refer the matter. That we had
secured most desirable contract un-
der sufficient specifications we felt con-
vlnced and satisfied when the other
bids submitted under them ranged up
as high as $4,000, which seemed to
be the price necessary to justify that
contractor in engaging to erect the
work according to the accepted re-
quirements. The difference in the low
est bid and the one next to IL of nearly
$4,000, absolutely precluded any idea
of collusion I'm awarding the contract.
/ There is general Impression fos-
tered by this report, if not created
thereby, that the act creating the COM
mission for the completion OF the State
house Greeted that said commission
should require bond from the con-
tractor. 1t will, therefore, be q sur
| prise to most members of the general
| assembly and the public to be informed
OF the fact which is now stated, that
no such bond was required or sus-
yested by the legislature when defning
the duties of the commission. There
being an utter absence of any mention
or bond in connection Herewith, 1t
| is clear that the bond actually taken
| was one required by the commission
solely upon it's own motion and in Or
der the better to aid them in enforc-
ing the performance of the contract
which they entered into with McIlvain-
Unkefer company. We take the posi-
ton that this bond was not at any
time under the control of the legisla-
ture, and that it became, according to
it's terms, utterly null and void as soon
as this commission, acting through q
majority of its members, expressed
! itself as satisfied with the performance
OF the contract which 1t secured. The
commission having accepted the work
OF the contractor, the bond given to
secure the performance Of the contract
to the satisfaction of the commission
became ipso facto cancelled and an
nulled, when the commission expressed
itself satisfied with the job; and the
endorsement upon the bond was merely
a ministerial duty done by the gov
ernor and which we are convinced he
could have been mandamused to do
! under the circumstances. We are in
| formed by the members who belong to
the legal profession that If said bond
were now in possession of the officers
of the State unmarried by any endorse
ment the plaintiff in interest could
not recover under the facts without
alleging and proving fraudulent coll
fusion as to acceptance of the work be-
| tween the commission, the obligees and
the contractors, the obligors, and the
members of the investigating commit
tee have given public assurance that
no such collusion is even suspected.
Furthermore, at meeting held sub
| sequent to the endorsement made by
the governor, the attorney general re-
| ported informally to the commission
! that the governor had satisfied the
bond upon his legal advice.
THE OLD IRON AND OTHER JUNK.
1t was never the intention of the
| commission n
the old iron and other junk removed
from the building. Not only did they
believe that the contractor would al
low more for it in his bid than they
could get for it otherwise, but qucs-
tions would have been continually aris-
| ing as to the expense. etc, of removing
| this old material. and OF getting it out
of the way. 1t cost several hundred
dollars to get the old iron alone down
! from the roof. Besides, the appropria-
! ton for the work was limited, and the
commission desired to put in the build
ing In value all that the funds at
| their disposal permitted. Not only did
the architect, as the agent OF the COM
! mission, inform the bidders personally
that the specifications would be so con-
strued, (See opinion Of the attorney
general, exhibit ID, but there is abun-
! dant evidence that all who filed bid
! for the work did so on the basis of
| getting in partial payment the old ma
terial that was removed. Mr.. ]. b.
| Garfunkel, the man best qualified TO
! know this fact, the man whom the
! investigating committee itself sum-
moned to testify in regard to this old
material, swears that he knows Of his
own knowledge that the different bid
ders for the work filed their bids upon
| the basis that the o.d material, all Of
/ II. would go TO the contractor (Sce
affidavit of j. B. Garfunltel, exhibit D.
! If any further evidence of this fact was
/ necessary the reply Of w. a. Chester
/ man. one of the bidders. and of j. t..
! Burgess, another to the same effect. in
response to teleGraphic inquiry that
! C'1n my capitol bid l figured on all old
material being my property" See tel
! egrams, exhibit G.) should do So
NO one doubted for an instant that
| not only as n matter of right but under
the strict letter of the law and the
! contract this old material went to the
contractor, until over n year after the
contract was let, when Senator Mar
shall filed his protest. An investga-
| ton resulted. when the fact developed
that the contractors had actually al
! lowed the State a redit for this old
material in their estimate sheets.
| Thcreupon the attorney general gave
! TO the commission this opinion, which
has been completely ignored by the in
| vestigating committee. notwithstand-
! ing the fact that II was in their pos
session; that not only of right, but of
law, this material, under the contract,
was not the States. (Sec opinion at
torney general. exhibit HI
Every member Of the commission ex-
cept Senator Marshall believed had
| they attempted to claim this old ma
tcrial under all the circumstances, they
would have been acting not only un-
fairly, but dishonesty, with the con-
| tractor. The contractor had actually
! given the state value for this material,
and the specifications had been so con-
! strued and made absolutely plain be-
| fore the bids were even filed. The peo-
! pie of the State do not ask their pub
, lie servants to do n dishonest deed. In
| our opinion 1t would have been dis
honest to have attempted to take from
the contractor that for which he had
! paid.
If demand is made that the State
! shall attempt to dishonesty rctake
| from the contractor the value of DroD-