The Hawaiian gazette., 1905-01-13
P|NKHAM'S
UNINvENTED
MACHINE
CONTINUED from Page ~
tendent of Public Works.

III suCn course were attempted WIN
out the consent OF the government. the
Superintendent OF Public Works could
refuse to pay under the contract. II
the superintendent consented, IL would
be the duty Of the auditor to refuse
payment. and IL he did not do so, any
taxpayer could. in my opinion, entoin
payments OH the contract.
The reason for this opinion is that
the estimate of cost of hand-tanping
apparatus is $500. The lowest estimate
Of cost of a power press Is for the So
called "Pinkham" machine, which is
valued at $1,000.
The cost of the blook-making appa-
liatus must be included in the cost of
the building.
In the case of the "Pinkham'' ma
chine this is specifically so, as the only
proposition to the contractor Is that 1t
shall pay $1,000 with which the ma
chine shall be built, and for the use
of II, and when the asylum is complet-
ed the machine shall revert to the in
ventor, or whoever the owner may be.
1t is therefore manifest that the
building viii cost at least $4,000 more
| IL
than If made with blocks made in the
ordinary way.
| The taxpayers are entitled to this
saving anG not the contractor.
The law does not permit the advertis-
/ ing of bids on one basis, and the car
ryfng out Of the contract on a radical
| ly different one. This would prevent
fair competition, which is required by
| the general law, as well as by Ha-
waiian statute.
The recent supreme court decision in
the Brewer wharf case is conclusive on
this point. 1t says:
| THE object of all such statutory pro-
visions Is to prevent favoritism, cor
Eruption, extravaganza and improvi-
dence in the awarding of all public
contracts"
1 II the contractor was permitted tC
| ignore the pressure clause 1t would be
rank favoritism, and unfair to Other
contractors who based their bids OF
the cost of pressure blocks, or who
might have been prevented from bid
ding by the presence of the pressure
clause.
made by at least five responsible con-
tractors that the pressure clause pre-
vented them from bidding, and one OF
them has assured me that he will begin
injunction proceedings if the Americans
Hawaiian Company attempts to con-
Istruct the building with Handicapped
blocks.
If it is impo sslble to carry out the
pressure clause, the contract Is void
and the only course open Is for thu
government to re-advertise the con
tract, emitting the pressure clause.
Answer to question 3: If it is phys
ically impossible to make the blocks
required by the contract, the contrac
tor and its bondsmen cannot be re-
lquired to do impossibilities, and would
be absolved from going on with the
contract.
If 1t is impossible except by means
of machine which has never beer
built, and which exists only in the
brain of it's inventor, and concerning
which there is still we'll founded
doubt as to whether it will do the work
! or not, 1 am of the opinion that the
contractor is absolved from the obli-
cation to go on with the contract
Reliable engineering authorities state
that serious doubt does exist concern
ing the ability of the Pinkham machine
to do the work required, and that
whether it is ultimately successful or
not, it will doubtless require much ex-
perimenting with before 1t can be made
a success. / do not think that the con-
tractor can be required to depend upon
the possibilities of Mr.. Pinkham's the
oretical invention being ultimately sue
oessful, or to pay for the experiments
| necessary to prove ii, and no other
method of making this machine avail
able is suggested.
| Another phase of the question is pre-
sented If there are machines already
| invented which are physically capable
of making the blocks in question, but
which cannot practically and CONNER
cially do so, by reason of the great
cost.
on this point the authorities differ;
some holding that the contract must
be performed If 1t is physically possi-
BILE, even though the cost is ruinous;
| others hold the more moderate view
| that 1t must be reasonably practicable.
In the case in question the evident
| intention of the parties was that the
blocks should be made here. In fact,
the Superintendent of Public Works
required an agreement from the con-
tractor that such would be done, as a
condition of signing the contract.
From the evidence laid before me II
appears to be conclusively shown that
although for long time past attempts
have been made to invent portable
pressure machines to make concrete
blocks, no such attempt has as yet
been succe sful,
| The Superintendent of Public Works
| furnished the contractor with the
names of four machines supposed to be
capable OF doing the work. The con-
tractor has communicated with them
all. Two make only hand machines
One makes only large factory ma
chimes. and the fourth. although adver-
Using TO furnish portable pressure
machines. stated that they had dscon-
tinued making them, as they were un-
| satisfactory and needed further per.