The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-05-17

a calculation was made, I offered TO FUR
nIsh the timber at tsls per thousand Major
Myers said to Colonel Cutshaw that y
was a small amount and his company
would pay one-half. I asked Coionel
1Cutshaw who would pay the other nan
He replied that he could not bind the
city, and that would have to present
the claim to the Street Committee, claim
that he promised to recommend the pay
ment OF it. He denies that he made any
such promise Afterwards was required
to do the same thing for more than
400 feet, and my claim therefor was much
larger When I presented my bill! Colonel
tCutsfaw refused to allow 1t, ana claim
ed that the conversation only applied
y to the 19O feet, for when amour.
could present my bill to the committee.
u then presented my bill to the COM
mittee for all lumber furnished on Byrd
Street and bill OF lumber furnished at
another part Of the same sewer Colonel
Cutshnw opposed before the committee
the payment Of any part OF my bill.
upon the ground that, under my contract.
Il could be made to furnish the timber
and leave It in the trench without being
raid for It. IIe told the committee that
at the time, when he told me could
present the bill to the committee, he In
tended to oppose its payment. but dill
not tell mo so, when he ordered the work.
to be done. This also Is one of the
causes OF Colonel Cutshaw's present
treatment of me.
Alleged Change.
Regarding the alleged change Of speci-
}f1cntlons for sewer work After the
above mentioned disagreement with Col
onel Cutshnw as to the correct method OF
estimating the price Of brick sewer work
and the payment for said lumber, the
city advertised for bids on other sewers,
MY firm obtained from the engineers
office one Of the typewritten blanks,
which were furnished to all prospective
bidders. for the purpose Of putting in a
bid. Finding that tho contractor had to
furnish cement and knowing, from our
experience In the former case that the
city would estimate the price by count
Ing the bricks and not by measurement
we inserted In our bid (Which we had
undoubted right to do that We would
do said work for q certain price. to be
estimated by measurement" Of tho
bricks. This change was made In such
"a way that any one, who examined our
bid, would see that we would not build
tho sewer IL the price was to DO esti-
mated by the counting method,
No effort was made by my firm to con-
zeal the fact that the word measure
ment" had been added to the type-wrlt-
t6N WOTuS III sVlt UluHh aEIoIHl VI p|O-
posnl, for 1t was expected that tho city
engineering department. would examine
every bid carefully; and had 1t done so,
tho exact terms of our bid would have
been known when the bid was examined
or couse we never changed the speci-
ncatons. We only framed our bid rs we
were willing to offerit. 1t was perfectly
omen, common sense must teach every man
that bidder frames his bid as he Is
willing to offer It.. we put In several
bids at the same time, and they all read
to be by "measurement"
The Jug OF Whiskey.
deny most emphatlcally that my Arm
has ever given, or offered to give jug
OF whlskey, or any other bride, to the
city inspector OF sewers or to any other
city of,ictal, But, II reports are true. !
cannot deny that the city Inspector who
Is very hostile to me, has on many oc-
casions taken a drink at the expense OF
ono of my employees.
In conclusion. ! can give no stronger
proof of the satisfactory character Of
nv work, or Of my honest dealings with
the. city of Richmond than the fact that
the street Committee has, within tho
past few days, awarded my firm several
contracts for city work.
THOMAS A. BARRY.