The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1906-05-02
THE ARomoRe scNo ISSUE.
To the Citizens lpd Ta,p1ycis Of
NrdmOro.

The people OF \ dmOtC rlvh lreu
led to believe that ;bc recent ava /
Of $4,000 of school house. water
works ana sewer uonls, To- Ii.rn.
Lewis a Co. was to the highest and
best bidder. and that q large amount
of money was saved 90 the taxpayers
We assert that this is not true. and
submit the facts to prove the con.
trary
The financial statement ISSUED boy
the mayor. inviting sealed proposals
on the purchase uf the bonds contain
cd the following language
Sealed proposals will be- received
until 3 O'Clock p M. saturday. April
-. 1906 ioy the sale by the city OF
school house. watcrworks and sewer
bonds amounting 10 Sl20.Uoo. and the
purchase los The city of school house
or wat,rworks bonds amounting 60
s25.ooo, previous issue Proposals
may be- made on either uf said prop.
ostions or both u is desired. howe,
en- 10 have proposals ~ uoth to-
gother
By The language OF this call BIDS
were invited on said propositions sen
aately. Dr on both. at the pleasure
Of the bidder and &c was naturally as
sumed that full credit would be- given
each bid So made. provided IL was &C.
compauiod by certified cheek for
the piopr' amount
At the appointed time the following
hrmc entered their sealed bids. each
accompanied by certified checks OF
not less than S2.lOo. said bids show.
Ing the premium offered by each.
were as follows.
ndiahoml Realty CO.. Ard
more Observation-Disclosures. S2I5l 90
Trust Company of Dallas
Dallas Observation-Disclosures. 2.IaG uu
: II. Coffin. Chicago. ........ 1000 90
Albcr, Klrybolt q 60. chi.
cago Observation-Disclosures. 5000 On
Mason. l.,wis q Co. Chicago I.N35 ou
Rudolph Hl,ybolt q f. r.
Fulton. Chicago. ... ....... 1870 OO
Spitzcr \ CO.. New York. i.272 uU
W. J. Hays a Son. Cleveland l2Io
II will thus be- seen that the bidof the
undersigned was s6i6to more than
the bid offered by Mason, Lewis &
Co.
After the bids were read as above.
the Council went into executive SOS.
sion. and shortly thereafter, called I'm
the representative Of Mason. Lewis
a 60. All the other representatives
were waiting bu, were not invited
In ON representative asked 10 Nc
admitted before final action was
taken but was ignored. without Civ.
Ing any other broker an opportunity
To BE- heard, q contract was entered
into With Mason. Lewis a. Co..-no,
on the terms Of their bid-but. on n
now basis, to-wit. They were 10 buy
the new bonds al a premium cf 81.
100, and purchase tho outstanding
bonds FOR the city at 1915 aud in.
terest
II the bid Of Mason. Lewis & Co
was not the best as originally made.
why did the Honorable Mayor and
Council not cocsult all tho other bro
kcrs "a soc II they could meet their
new proposition?
We were ready - obligatr our
selves to buy In ,h' outstanding bonds
at any figure offered by Mason. Lew.
Is & Co.--so were the other brokers.
II will b" said that Mason d Lewis
II Will seen that Mason. Lewis a
Co had the only bid ON this PROPOSE
tiou. but this is no answer because
bids Were invited on each
Fair treatment was not accorded US
or the other firms. resulting in a net
loss TO the City Of s35lto.
ANY person with any business ex.
pericnce knows that the outsand-
ing bonds could have been bought In
at tihing cost The present bond.
holders would be glad "a exchange
their bonds for new 20 year bonds
bearing the same rate of interest
Backed by one oi the largest bond
brokers in the country with Il ceru
fed check uf s2.1O0 h. show oar good
faith, with the highest nnd best bid
offered ON the new bonds, and stand
ing ready 10 obligate ourselves 10
deliver the old bonds on as fvora.
Bile terms as anyone else, We as we'll
as all the other brokers, were re-
fused admission to the Council Cham.