The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1911-03-29
Sewers.


nit same when received 10 thts Coun-
Gil for consideration.
Sewers.
MINORITY REPORT.
To the Honorable the Common Council:
Gentlemen-Your COMMITTEES on Sew
ers TO whom was referred the matter
OF the petition of James Hanley, ask
ing to be relieved OF his contract for
the construction OF the Fairview Ave-
nue. Sewer Sec. 1. and also asking Tor
damages in connection with the work
he has done there, by reason or the
fact that he was mistnformed or mis-
lead by the City Engineers estimates
or suffered by reason or Information
being withheld from him In regard
the nature OF the soil. by the City En-
gineer, respectfully reports We nave
carefully Investigated the matter, lis
tened 10 the testimony of Mr.. Hanley
and his witnesses also OF the City En-
etneer and Department OF Public
Works. and can see no good reason
why Mr. Hanley should be relieved or
ley had the same opportunities Tor
obtaining Information that other bid
ders had and bid on the work with his
eyes open; that the specifications OF
the City Engineer under which Mr..
Hanley bid advised contractors to WIS.,
IL the location. examine into and de-
termine for themselves the nature or
the soil and the character OF the work
TO be done. and II Mr. Hanley failed
20 do this IL was his own business
that the contention Of Mr.. Hanley that
II was the duty Of the City Engineer to
acquaint him with the character or
the soil and the difficulties pertainin z
TO the work Is silly and childish. since II
Is the universal practice OF contractors
selves and not depend upon others.
The Investigations made by the City
Engineer were shown TO be solely for
his own use in making his own esti-
l III - Il alNKra -
willing TO give contractors the benefit
for the asking-out Mr., Hanley failed
to avail himself OF this opportunity
and did not ask the City Engineer
that Mr.. Hanley Is an old and ex-
perienced contractor who at one time
| held the position OF Commissioner or
Public Works himself, and Is not AZ
| all ignorant In regard TO such matters.
Mr.. Hanley further declared before
| your committee that he Is now out or
pocket some ten thousand dollars on
| the construction OF this sewer so far
| as II has gone and that he cannot COM
plete the sewer without suffering great
| financial loss. But there was nothing
| I'm the testimony TO show that II was
necessary for Mr. Hanley to lose so
much money on this job. On the con-
| trary the testimony OF City employees
! tended to show that Mr.. Hanley did not
provide himself with the modern
| equipment necessary for such an un-
dertaking and that the work was not
prosecuted in a practical. economical
manner with up-to date tools, but that
the most primitive methods were used.
such as hosting water out OF the sew
er In barrels. etc. Furthermore. MIR.
Hanley gave Surety Company bond
OF six thousand. one hundred and nifty
OF this sewer. and this bond. we think
the Commissioner OF Public Works
rightly contends should be forfeited
to the City and the proceeds used to
IL L.. he .v.Ia efatz - he
whereas. Mr. Hanley's attorney con-
tends the bond should also be released.
Your Committee, In its discharge OF
its sworn duty TO the City; falls to
ed of this contract since we believe
II would establish a precedent also,
whereby any contractor who stands
to lose any money on a City contract
he should. would have as good grounds
as Mr.. Hanley for coming TO this
Council for relief.
Your committee. therefore. recon-
meds that the prayer OF the petitioner
be denied and that the Commissioner
OF Public Works be instructed TO or
der Mr.. Hanley TO proceed with the
con str uction OF Fairview Avenue. Sec.
1. TO completion and I'm the event OF
his failure to do so within reasonable
time to declare his bond forfeited to
Respectfully submitted
HERMAN SCHULTZ
SHERMAN LITTLEFIELD,
Aid. Walsh moved the adoption OF
the resolution and majority committee
report.
Aid Schultz moved as an amendment
that the minority report and resolution
AID Field moved to lay both reports
on the table. which motion was lost. as
follows:
Yeas-Ald Brozo. Field, Koenig.
Knapp, Littiefleid. Mason. Schultz. YER
nor. Watson. Zoeller-l0.
Nays-Ald. Allan, Burton. Deimel,
EMS Garvey. Grindley, HARPER, Hindle,
Keattng, Keusch. Lodge. Lynch, Nc
Carly Merritt. o'Brien, ostrowski,
owen, Rosenthal, skrzycki, Theisen,
Tossy. Walsh. and the Presi-
dent-24
The question was then put on the
adoption OF the minority report, which
was lost, as follows
Yeas--Ald.Littlefield, Schultz. Vernon,
Nays-Aid. Allan, Brozo. Burton. Del
mel Ellis, Field, Carney, Grindley.
HARPER. Hindle, Heating, keusch,
Koenig, Knapp, Lodge, Lynch, Nc
Carly. Mason. Merritt, OBrien. Ostrow-
Thompson, Tossy. Walsh, Zoeller, and
the President-30.
The majority report was then adopt
ed, as follows.
Yeas-Aid. Allan. Brozo. Burton. Del
HARPER, Hindie. Ksatins Keusch.
Koenig. Knapp. Lodge. Lynch, McCarty.
Mason. Merritt. OBrien, Ostrowski.
owen. Rosenthal. schultz. Skrzycki.
Theisep. Thompson. Tossy. Walsh, Zoel-
Nsys-Ald. Littleneld. Vernon. Wat
Aid. Grindley was called to the
chair.