The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-01-24
THE MINNEAPOLIS JOURNAI.
CARELESSNESS
BUT NO GRAFT FOUND

which is copy Of letter written by
Charming Seabury, vice president and
acting secretary of the board on May
25. 1898. written to D. Henning Cor
anch, wherein he apparently infers
that the board anticipated subsequent
legislative enactments increasing the
original appropriation Of $2,000,000 for
the building
Unit Prices and Extra Work.
1t is obvious that the state paid well for
extra work, when applied on contracts caused
by modification Of specifications and designs of
the architect These extras amounted to in the
neighborhood of 100000, and the most of 1t
was paid to the Butler-Ryan company. This
firm was awarded contracts aggregatins over
In majority Of the contracts 1t was pro-
vided that for items Of extras or credits, where
unit prices have not been given, the net market
price at the date Of the order plus 10 per cent
shall be taken as the unit price. This was
sometimes modified by inserting after the word
market price, "as determined by the archi-
tect.n It must be remembered that the state
was paying profit to at least two contractors
when the work was sublet by the Butler-Ryan
company or other contractors, and these firms
did not in many instances do any of the work.
The state has paid approximately $1,000 for
extra work for removal of rubbish, which should
have been charged to the various contractors
The awarding of the interior stone and marble
work and the interior woodwork was done with
out proper discretion having been exercised, and
it was discovered when it was too late that
they had put themselves at the mercy Of the
contractors, SO far as: obtaining proper credits
for any deductions to be made WAS concerned,
and we find that the board did cut down the
contract for the interior stone work about
$40, 900, but adjustment had to be made without
schedule of unit prices.
In the contract for interior woodwork there
was little else but additions, extras which
contract amounted to more than 35 per cent
of the original amount of the contract.
Taking up the matter Of extras, we End that
up to Jan. /, 1901. the percentage was COM
paratively small, amounting to 1.S per cent of
the aggregate work completed at that time
whereas the percentage Of extras on contract for
the remainder of the work, emitting mural dec
! orations, amounts to nearly s per cent of the
whole at this time.
It is opinion that great many of the
extras should have been the subject of pro-
posals, or have been included in the specifca-
| lions in order to have met the requirements Of
| the law.
| A letter is given from Charming Sea-
bury to Cass Gilbert, complaining that
under the conditions Of the interior
stone and marble contract, 1--WE are
almost completely at their Mercy He
found them allowing only $749 for a
change which had been estimated at
$500. and said: eff this is sample
Of the way they have figured up the
whole list of changes it is plain that
they are going to make more money
out Of the state on these changes alone
than on the entire contract itself,
| things"
Higher Than Market Price.
The examiner charges that the prices
charged for extra material and labor
| were much higher than. current prices,