Emmons County record. [volume] (Williamsport, D.T. [i.e. N.D.]) 1884-current, 1908-10-22
THAT ''ExPlANATl0N. +"


IN tue second O1y VI July A13I tbe
Record had its 6rst article regarding
the peculiar transactions that had
taken place in this county in the mat
ter Of letting the contracts for build.
ing bridges. In that article it Val
shown that contracts TO the value Of
four thousand six hundred and
twelve dollars had been let to the
Hennepin Bridge Company, Of Min
neapolis. without the shadow Of IN
attempt TO comply with the laws o.
the sia.e- Three months passed from
the publication Of that article until
in last weeks Advocate, the personal
organ Of Mr.. G. A. Herolx. and the
only one OF the four papers Of the
coun;y that Is supporting him for the
legislature. there appeared one o. the
most remarkable productions in the
way Of Al explanation that il has
ever been our fortune to peruse. Al
though Commissioner Sherwood and
Treasurer HeTolz, whose united gen
ius produced the Statement" spent
considerable time over the production
during court week. We have not yet
found 4 single taxpayer Who under
stands what il means. The two gen
tlemen named did not furnish the
Record with copy: but, as it Is the
wish Of the Record that light from
every direction shall be turned on
this bodybuilding matter. We pub
lish in full the statement OF the
county commissioners which appear
ed in Mr.. Pat,erson's paper last week
1t is as follows, being signed by the
commissioners:
We the undersigned Board Of Coun-
ty Commissioners of Emmons County,
North Dakota, wish to say with refer
ence to the heavy criticism to which
We have lately been subjected, that
the two bridges let on the 18th day
of August last, and the ones which
have caused the criticism are IS cents
per lineal foot cheaper than any
bridges OF like dimensions and ma
terial ever built In this county.
Mr.. Roberts did state to the Board
that II We would give him the con-
tracts without advertising, he could
save the county 5000 or 500 on the
three bridges. This We thought the
taxpayers Of Emmons county would
appreciate, and on his proposition we
did let three bridges without adyer-
Using one 20 feet long, one Is feet
long and one 80 feet long for $4193,
or &20.45 per lineal foot. This action
We rescinded at our July meeting
under the advice OF the Assistant
States Attorney who instructed US
that 1t mattered not how much more
the county had to pay for the bridges,
II would exonerate US. At this time
the county was not out one cent nor
has 1t been since. as We will en-
deavor to prove. Acting on the coun-
SCI Of our legal advisor. the Assistant
states Attorney, on the 18th day OF
August We let the contract for two
bridges by advertisement previously
given, one 10 feet long and one 6 feet
long for &349S. the 20 foot bridge be.
Ing only one Of the three bridges frst
let that has since been reiet ana
built. The IS foot bridge was built
instead Of the IS foot bridge first
let. and an entirely different place.
IT was a different bridge. These two
bridges cost 1851 per foot an ex-
cess Of $40 per foot more than the
bridges let without advertising. but
the last two bridges let have steel
piers and concrete abutments, and the
amount Of concrete work is almost
double that of the bridges first let.
How the county has lost 81, O5S is
more than we can figure out since the
bridges originally let without adyer.
Using were never built and the only
bridge of the same dimension vas
q very different bridge.
We will compare the cost OF thu
bridges under consideration with the
bridges built in other years. On Nov
ember 18th, 1904, with five bidders
present there was let in this county
bridge 5S feet long for $1,000 or
s2s.7s per foot and @2.S7 per foot
higher than the bridges let ON Aug.
18th which have caused SO much con.
troversy.
On August 23rd, 1906. with nine
bidders present there were three
bridges let. one So feet long, one So
feet long and one 4s feet long. q total
OF 100 feet for 1929 or 326.3e pei
foot and IS cents per foot more thar
the bridges let on Aug. 18th last.
II our critics will show US that ",
have been paying more for bridge
than has been paid heretofore for Xix
bridges or that We are paying NOR
than other counties in the state the
we will thank them and try to prof
by such criticism.
Weeks-yes. months have passe
since the Record first called attenti0
to the following facts:
That the board Of county comml
sioners Of this county were buildll
bridges without regard for the nss