The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1905-12-19
POOL BIDS
AND DIVIDE THE PROFITS, is THE
PLAN OF OPERATION
Secret Agreement That Made the
Bridge Business Good-outsid-
ers Were Paid Not to
Compete.

eTS WeVe fdlu Not 70
Compete.
| Columbus, Dec. 15.-For a detailed
statement of the way the bridge com.
panies have managed things the tax
payers of Ohio are indebted to John
j.. Dun, prominent real estate dea
er in this city, who was formerly in
the bridge business.
| Summoned as a witness in case
brought by De Ran and Monnett in
Sal dusky county, Dun. in october,
gave a sworn statement of the facts
within his knowledge.
Dun said he was in the bridge
business from 1897 to 1901. He pro-
duced articles of agreement signed
by is bridge companies, in what wss
known as the Cleveland association.
1t was a most remarkable docu-
ment, binding the companies to pool
their bids and to divide among
themselves money that they were able
to secure from counties in excess OF
fair price.
|
was signed In Cleveland June Is, 1897.
and was to be in force for three
years.
1t bound the signers to be gov
erned by the following rules AMI
regulations" in constructing public
bridges in Ohio. New York. Pennsyl
vania. Maryland, West Virginia, Ken
| f,,n
we're 90 articles in the agreement.
DECIDE BEFOREHAND.
II provided that agents proposing
to bid for bridge contract should,
before the letting, meet in room
and decide how much each should bid
and to which of the bidders the
work should be conceded. The latter
company would bid the full amour,
that the county commissioners could
be induced to pay for the work.
Higher proposals were submitted by
the other companies. Heavy fnan.
cial penalties were provided for poJl
companies that ignored the comblna-
ton.
Quarterly meetings at the Weddell
House, Cleveland, were provided for
the division of money made In the
pools. Grievances among members
should be arbitrated. Another article
read: Members of this association
shall sell no material to anyone out
side of the agreement and working
in this territory" Here is the basis
o. division
"Article XVII-Where a concession
Is made. the party getting the conces-
sion shall be allowed to name
reasonable cost price. which shall
be done before the vote for conces.
sion is taken, and shall be allowed
so per cent Of the difference between
for his profit, and the other so per
cent shall be equally divided among
the unsuccessful bidders"
THE SIGNERS.
Signed to this agreement, as pre-
sented by Dun, were the names of
these bridge companies: King.
Wrought Iron, Canton. Toledo, Massil.
lon, Pittsburg, Bracket Penn. Cham.
pion, Columbus, Iron Substructure.
Bellefontaine, Horseheads, Havana
and Variety. He said the Youngs.
town, Mt. Vernon and j. G. Wagner
companies were among those that af
terwards signed the agreement. The
4 Wagner company was a milwaukee
concern of which Dun was the agent
from April, 1898. to November, 1899.
In continuing his testimony Dun sard
that companies outside the pool were
allowed to share In the profit tha,
was made on a contract, when they
: acted In concert with the pool.
4 During the 10 months In 1889.
that he represented the Wagner com
pany, of Milwaukee, Dun said, that
company did not erect bridge In
! Ohio. He added:
PROFITS OF THE POOL.
"They received from pools S603s
ard from Peter Schwab. of Hamilton
o., $1,000. total of $7239. The form
4 er amount was received from mem
hers of the pool as the Wagner share
4 of the profits on 80 bridge contracts
The cities In which these contracts
were made were as follows: Colum
bus. Dayton, Cincinnati, Delaware
New Philadelphia, .Marysville, Bata
via, Mt. Vernon. Marion. Cleveland
Mansfield. Lorain, Lima. Bellefon
taine, London, Washington. .Paines
vile, Troy Lebanon. Jackson. Tolo