The San Juan islander. [volume] (Friday Harbor, Wash.) 1898-1914, 1906-07-14
THE COURT HOUSE
FOUNDATION
GRANITE ROCK USED INSTEAD or
CONCRETE
Substitution Not Approved By Board
of County Commissioners But Ae~
cepted BY Their Agent Upon Con-
tractors Verbal Statement That It
Was Authorized.


H MOST unfortunate and rather
- serious controversy has arisen
in the construction of the new court
house. The contract says that the
building shall be erected according to
the architects specifications, which
provide that the foundation and base
ment shall be of concrete. There is
nothing ambiguous about it. The
language is plain and leaves no room
for any misunderstanding. Notwith-
standing the plain terms Of the con-
tract and specifications, however,
the foundation has been built of ordi-
nary--very ordinary, granite boul-
ders, laid in coarse lime mortar, no
cement being used except in point
ing up" the exterior The work has
been under the supervision of the
county's duly authorized agent, Mr..
]. P. Paine, appointed by the commi-
sioners to superintend the construc-
tion. He has approved of it and
upon his report and estimate $1,000
has been paid to the contractor.
Mr.. Paine says that the contractor,
Mr.. Shockey, told him at the outset
OF the work that he had been author
lied by Mr.. White, the architect, to
build the foundation and basement Of
rock instead of concrete. It does not
seem to have occurred to Mr.. Paine
to ask for any written authority for
such change or to question the au-
thority Of Mr.. White to sanction it
even if he was disposed to do so.
Mr.. White, who was here Wednesday,
having been sent for by the commits
sioners, says emphatically that he
did not authorize the substitution and
could not have done so even if he had
wished to. He admits, however,
having told Mr.. Shockey in Belling-
ham that he would not object to the
use of rock instead of concrete, IF
THE COMMISSIONERS SHOULD CONSENT
TO THE CHANGE. The commissioners
say that they not only did not give
their consent but that Mr. Shockey
never asked them to do so. They
simply relied upon their representa-
tive, Mr.. Paine, to see that the work
was done according to the contract
and specifications.
There is no reason to doubt that
Mr.. Shockey believed that the substi-
tuition of rock for concrete was under
stood and approved by the commits
sioners. He seems to have misunder-
stood Mr.. White and to have been
rather careless of his own interests
in neglecting to have so important .
change authorized in writing. Mr..
White examined the foundation close
" when he was here Wednesday and
pronounced it all right, and strong en-
ough to sustain the weight of q much
heavier building than the one pro-
posed. A Victoria contractor who
was here on the Beatrice excursion
also expressed the same opinion.
Mr.. Shock ey offers to put q heavy
coating of cement on the entire ex-
terror of the foundation wall above
the grade line and block it to give it
the appearance of cut stone. C0mmis-
siorers Sandwith and Doaahue are in
clined to favor the acceptance OF this
proposition, inasmuch as there seems
to be little room for doubt that the
county is bound by the acts OF its
agent in approving the work and au-
thorizing a payment Of 81 ,OW upon II.
Commissioner Graham, when he LETT
here Wednesday, was opposed to this
.compromise and insisted that the
wall should be taken down to q level
q little below the grade line and re-
built Of concrete, as provided in the
specifications. He had not then been
advised Of the county's liability, the
prosecuting attorney not having been
informed al the time that payment
Of 81. 900 had been made on the con-
tract. It is only fair to Mr.. Paine 70
saw that his honesty and good faith
in the matter are not questioned.
His mistake was in not requiring
written authority for the rock sub
stitution instead Of accepting the
contractors verbal statement with
out consultation with the commits
sioners.