The Eureka sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1902-current, 1910-06-11
Has Nevada a Graft Scandal?

Is there to be a scandal in the building of the new State Prison?
May heaven deliver US There is SO much scandal in other cities
and States that we have become meay-mouthed writing about it,
never thinking that possible graft would be found in our own door
yard. But here come reports that are sicklied Ger with the pale
cast of suspicion, and not very pale either
Nevada is building a new penitentary-that is, will build 1t II
the money holds out; but the beginning is not very suspicious
Among other requisites OF a prison are prison cells, of course. The
State Board of Prison Commissioners advertised for bids for cells
embracing in the advertisement exact and complete specifications
The bids have been opened, and on a job that was to cost on the
outside less than s2OO.O00 here was a difference of $4,000 between
the highest and the lowest bidders. All the bids were from reput-
able houses and all accompanied by certified checks guaranteeing
that the work would be done according to specifications. As be-
tween the reliability of the bidders there was NJ choice, and under
these conditions it was naturally expected that the board would ac-
cept tie lowest bid But what was the RESULT After many meet
ings of varying duration, with the eager and gracious representa-
tives of the bidders at all times on the ground with the glad hand
and the whispering voice. the award was finally made-and made
not to the lowest bidder, whose bid was s119,S4 but to the firm
which bid $191, $50.
The State Prison Board comprises the Attorney General. the
Secretary of State and the Governor. When the vote was taken
the Governor moved to accept the lowest bid; that was defeated, and
the two opposing members voted in the face of the Governors pro-
test to accept the bid that called for an excess of $4,000. And
what made their action even more reprehensible was that the State
Engineer had reported to the board that the lesser bid in all re-
spects complied with requirements of the advertised specifications,
that the bidders had furnished a bond to do the work and do it
under the supervision of the State Engineer. He also recommended
that the lesser bid be accepted by the board.
The two members Of the board who voted for the "sweetened"
bid made no explanation except that the makers of the bid were a
Reno firm while the others we're outsiders. But this is not sf-
6cient. We're the bids approximately the same, or were there even
$1,000 difference as against a home firm, we would have approved
Of 1.-THE award But home sentiment cannot sufficiently explain the
action OF the board in making the successful bidders a present of
$4,000. This must be explained on some other hypothesis.
The story from Carson is that when the successful bidder was
thanking the board for the contract, Governor Dickerson spoke up
and declared that the contractors had nothing to thank him for, as
he had voted against giving them the bid and considered the award
an outrage on the State. This was just like Dickerson; and if we
mistake not he will resist the award, throw it into court and show
up the vermin in the wood pile if such there be-Goldfeld News.