The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1905-12-15
THE BRIDGE COMBINE
OHIO LEGISLATURE MAY INvEs.
TiGATE THE TRUST
Grand Juries May Also SEQ II There
Was Any criminallty In the
Expenditure Of Millions.

CiIiuS euOubH W tdht u man > dtttu-
tion away from war news or scandal
in millionaire families, and yet 1t is
liable, this winter, to stir the blood of
the Ohio taxpayer.
Charges on record in many courts
say that through the medium of the
| bridge contract, that prosy mixture OF
figures and legal verbiage. an appall-
ing system of graft has been conduct
cd in this state.
Suits to the number of 9S, based
upon alleged unlawful bridge contracts
in half the counties OF the state and
calling upon bridge companies to pay
back into the county treasures ST.
100000. are pending .n court.
Grand juries will investigate charges
of criminal conduct on the part of
bridge men and county officials In
connection with bridge contracts.
Steps will be taken, IL present plans
succeed, to oust the American Bridge
company, the bridge trust, from doing
| business In Ohio.
Proceedings will be undertaken to
cancel the charters of certain bridge
| companies that are Ohio corporations
| and are alleged to have violated the
law.
II is charged that there has been
| disregard of the law In the erection Of
bridges in every county In Ohio.
This disregard has been due, In
large part, at least, so far as county
officials are concerned, to ignorance.
1t has been due. in some part to con-
spiracy for the looting of public
funds.
There has gone into the court rec
ord copy of an ironclad agreement
whereby bridge companies conspired
to pool their bids in order to get the
highest possible price and to divide all
above fair price among all the bid
ders.
Proof of irregularity Is bridge in
Fulton county that did not cost the
taxpayers a dollar. 1t was erected in
accordance with an illegal contract be-
tween the county commissioners and
! the Buchanan Bridge company at u
cost Of over $1,000. The supreme
court decided that because the con-
tract was unlawful the people should
not pay the money and that they might
/ keep the bridge.
CLAIM GREAT OVERCHARGE.
! Four cents a pound is said by an ex-
pert to be an extremely high price TO
pay for a bridge. 1t is charged that
within the past few months contract
has been awarded in Hamilton county
for the construction of bridge at Is
cents pound.
From Sandusky county comes a re-
port that two bridge companies. to
avoid suit, abandoned $1,000 worth of
culyert pipe because it had been de-
livered in accordance with an unlaw-
full contract
Cases have been brought to light
where bridge companies bid from so
to 100 per cent In excess of the fair
price for bridges and ten divided the
proceeds.
In October grand jury inlvestiga-
ton was begun In Summit county. A
company engaged In the construction
of $4,000 viaduct there at once sus-
pended work. Its officials say they
have not been able to get ma
terials.
LEGISLATURE MAY INVESTIGATE.
What rake-off on bridge construc-
tion means to the taxpayers may be
gathered from the fact that. according
to the latest report of the state audi
tor. the taxes for building bridges In
the state for year amounted to ST.
225,S6l. In addition to this were bond
issues made to pay for bridges. mostly
large ones. Bridge bonds issued in
, Cuyahoga county alone amounted to
s171.056.
1t looks big enough for legislative
investigation.
The bridge companies and firms
against whom suits have been begun
are: American, Bellefontaine, Mt. Yer
non, Drumheller e Parsons, Marion.
New Columbus. Hatcher & Yeager,
Canton. King Bracket, Wrought Iron,
Huston G. Cleveland. Champion. Dun
Bros. National. Variety. Hooking,
Masslllon, Ohio and Buckeye.
They have fought. by the use of mo-
NtOuS, anu icBd
tiles TO staye off trial Of the suits.
They deny that they are guilty Of
collusion or fraud or any violation of
law.
OFFICERS REFUSE To REPLY.
Officers Of companies, however. who
have been summoned to give testi-
mony before notary and before
grand jury have refused to answer
questions on the ground that they
might incrlminate themselves.
Attorneys representing taxpayers In
the suits allege various kinds of ir-
regularities Charges that figure in the
suits are that contracts were unlawful
because Of
Violation of the law that requires
certificate from the county auditor
that the necessary money is In the