Lewiston evening teller. [volume] (Lewiston, Idaho) 1903-1911, 1908-09-09
FAR
FORM AGREEMENT
PAVEMENT QUESTION HAS Mem
BERS HOPELESSLY DIVIDED
MOVEMENT TO ELIMINATE
BITULITHIC DEFEATED.


the three holdover members have
been aligned against the three new
members, was broken last night over
the pavement question when Coun-
Gilman Booth offered motion to
eliminate all Of the paving bids of
fered except the bids OF Nayior &
Norlin, which provided for laying
creosoted wood blocks and vitrified
brick. The motion was seconded by
was seconded by Counc::man SAILS
berg. but when brought to a vote
was defeated by Phillips, Emery.
Bollinger and Wisner.
Councilman Salsberg, but when
brought to vote was defeated by
Phillips Emery. Bollinger and Wis
ner. Councilman Salsberg seconded
the motion on condition the Moran
bid for asphalt be included.
The discussion of the motion
brought out charges by Emery and
Bollinger to the effect that the pans
such q manner as to discriminate
against the bitulithic pavement. At
the time the bid of the Warren Con-
struction company for the bitulithic
pavement was submitted the COM
pany addressed letter to the coun-
Gil in which ii was stated the plans
and specifications prepared for the
Lewiston paving We're prohibitive 70
their company. but a bid on thu
plans and specifications unler which
the bitulithic pavement was laid
was submitted.
Councilman Booth did not con-
slider this a legal bid, as it did not
conform with the specifications pre-
pared for the Lewiston pavement
1t was stated the Lewiston plans
and specifications were drawn ~ "
those provided by the Seattle engi-
neer, and Councilman Bollinge"
stated these plans had eliminated
the bitulithic pavement from that
city.
A delegation of prominent citi'
zens composed of DR.. ]. B. Morris.
M. A. Means, j. Alexander. E. j.
Hall, l. NJ Binnard and others ap-
peared before the council and ex-
pressed their preference for the BIZ
tulithic pavement. The bitulithic
company was represented by Attor-
ney Geo. W. Tannahill. who advised
the company relative to the bid sub
mitted by Mr.. Shannon and Frank
Reese, who have represented the in
terests of the company in the can.
vass of the city.
| The result of last nights meetin.
leaves the paving question where II
was and when the bids were first
submitted but another meeting will
be held Saturday night, at which
IltimeI it is expected some definite
action will be taken.
k The bids, embracing all classes 81
paving, were submitted last Friday
night, and last night was the timt
fixed for taking action on them. A
soon as the minutes were read Corn
missioner Salsberg stated that thu
4 figures compiled by the city engineer
4 showed the five lowest bids on thu
four classes of paving to be as fol
lows: Brick, $3.49; creosoted wood
4-inch block, 1926; creosoted wood
3-inch block, $2.76; asphalt, 1901
bitulithic, $2.88. He said that h,
i lad sent out 11S letters to secur
data relative to brick. bitulithiC
asnhalt and. wood block Dayement
and had received replies from sc
Thirty-four replies on brick showe'
PA favorable and ten unfavorable
80 on asphalt showed 20 favorabl
and 10 unfavorabIe; 20 on bitulith
ic showed 16 favorable and sevel
unfavorable; Is on wood bloc
showed IL favorable and three u
favorable The letters received b
commissioner SalsberS war" sui
mitted to the council for considera
It;Cn