New-York tribune., 1907-11-14
ASHOkAN DAM INQUIRY.
M4'YOR AFTER THE BOARD.
Pe'rce Company Bid Would Yield
Profit, Engineers Say.

the Catskills. to Macarthur Brothers & Co. and
Winston & Co at a price s2.S5O,OOO in excess of
the lowest bidder-the John Peirce company
The investigation will be conducted by john
Purroy Mitchell, whose inquiry into the admir-
1stration Of Borough President Ahearn led to
an investigation of Ahearn by the Governor.
Colonel T. w. Symons. of the United States
Army consulting engineer the state barge
canal; H. P. Gillette. D. ]. Hauer and Otto II.
Klein, chief engineer of the Commissioners of
Accounts. unanimously report that the Board of
water Supply was not justified in rejecting the
bid Of the John Peirce company.
These engineers were called in by Mayor Nc
Clellan to review the work of the Board of
Water Supply regarding the Ashokan dam con-
tract They report that the Peirce company
would have made fair profit if it had obtained
the contract and that the company was COM
petent and willing TO do the work
They say that the practice of accepting n
public bid other than the lowest is not salutary,
and If persisted in will result in complete de-
moraliZation of all public work, do away with
honest competition and bring about "a frightful
reign of collusion and graft"
The Board of Water Supply consists of ].
Edward Simmons president of the Chamber of
Commerce and president of the Fourth National
Bank; Charles n. Chadwick and Charles A.
Shaw. The commissioners receive a salary of
It Is understood at the City Hall that Mayor
Mcclellan is determined to make the investiga-
ton a thorough 1t is rumored that he is
likely to ask for the resignation of the board
and its chief engineer. J. Waldo Smith
REPORT CONSIDERED a REBUKE.
The report Of the advisory engineers is gen
orally regarded as a sharp rebuke to the engi-
neers called in by the Board of Water Supply
Professor William H. Burr Frederic Z. Stearns
and John r. Freeman. who justified the board in
awarding the contract 10 the Macarthur Broth
ers company and the Winston company.
The special report turned in to the Mayor by
the Commissioners of Accounts yesterday in
condensed form covers eighteen typewriter
pages The Commissioners of Accounts state
the grounds for ordering the inquiry, as fol-
lows:
The contractor TO whom this work was finally
awarded by the Board OF Water supply was not
the lowest bidder his bid exceeding that of tho
lowest bidder nv more than 81 300 600: that this
action by the Board OF Water Supply in award
ing to bidder other than tho lowest a con
tract Of this magnitude and at an advance over
the lowest bid of nearly S2.J00OoO. while clearly
within the powers of the board as conferred
upon IL by law. had occasioned general public
criticism. which should be either answered and
set az rest by publicly establishing facts JUSTIFY
ing the action of the board or publicly estab-
lshed as deserved criticism by proof
We accordingly instructed our chief engineer,
otto II. Klein TO make a careful and detailed
study Of tho records Of the Board Of Water
Supply relating 10 this matter. 70 interview the
persons interested and report to us at the
earliest moment
Then follows a brief review of the method OF
letting the contract, with the five bids sub
mitted including the Peirce bid Of $lo.315,35o,
that Of the Macarthur Brothers Company and
Winston & Co. Of S12.6G9.7T5. and the chief
gineer's estimate of Si2S4IOoO All Of the
engineers wrote formal letters advising against
the acceptance of tho Peirce bid John r. Free
man gives opinions concerning the awarding
OF bids which impress the consulting engineers
called in by the Commissioners Of Accounts
novel and interesting. He says:
My recommendation is that of the pres
ent bids be accepted Your board has many
large contracts still 10 be let. aggregating far
greater sum than the present contract and on
which il Is desirable to attract bids from the
leading contracting firms Of the country and 1t
would tend to prejudice the good name of your
board TO now reject all bids for the construction
of this reservoir dam and 10 call for new. and
such a course would in my Judgment be an in
Justice to the several bidders Of excellent repu-
tatiOn who have already gone into this matter
with great earnestness and diligence and careful
Investigations and spent much time In studying
the surroundings and in estimating a price which
they considered fair in view Of the severe con-
ditions imposed. and in view of their own long
experience and have now disclosed their esti-
mates 10 their competitors In the opening of the
present bids.
The award OF the contract made before
the Mayor and the Controller had returned from
their summer vacations. The law gives the
Board of Water Supply large discretionary pow
ers and the Corporation Counsel passed on the
letting Of the contract saying that the board
had acted within it's jurisdiction. The success
full bidder some time since began work.
WORK OF ENGINEERS.
After being requested by the Mayor to investi-
gate the contract the Commissioners of Ac-
counts sent Messrs. Symons, Gillette and Hauer,
regarded as experts on excavation and embank-
roent work a letter requesting them to examine
'the bids. contract and all papers relating to
the letting of the contract by the Board of
Water Supply TO McArthurs Brothers and Win
ston & Co" Then they were asked TO report on
whether the Peirce bid would insure prompt
and satisfactory results.
The new advisory board personally inspected
the site of the proposed dam the latter part of
last month and reported TO the Commissioners
of Accounts "a week ago The report is volu
n,inous each answer being supported by argu
ment and statistical data. The advisory board
reported that the Peirce company bid for exca
walton and embankment work was sufficient in
amount ia allow reasonable profit on these
items" and, taken in connection with other
items is Sufficient in amount to allow reason
able profit on the entire work" The board says
the bid of Macarthur Brothers and Winston &
Co is excessive in it's entirety and in many of
its items" Then it reports:
II is not an uncommon remarkable thing
for bids for work similar To this to vary from
% per cent below to - per cent and more above
the engineers estimate in its totality, and from
80 per cent below to 100 per cent above in some
of the items Engineers are expected to and are
prone to estimate literally to the cost of
piece of work. and the fact that good respon-
sible contractor who has carefully studied the
work offers tn take a contract at 20 per cent