Albuquerque evening herald. [volume] (Albuquerque, New Mexico) 1911-1914, 1911-11-25

To the Property owners Who WIN
| Pay for the Contemplated Paving
! u IL not true that the property own
ers' who wa pay these paving bills
as Responsible Tor The delays In yet.
hng tae work started. This respond.
bility rests entirely with TN. cit. cola-
ca After the paving district aad BEEN
hrailN outlined and ressrirted Ia Ia
present zone, the properly owners
Withdrew. as II were from the coniro.
Ntrsy' and no delays would have ta.xcn
place. only tho necessary ones OF pre.
hm;nary w0rN. had the council NON.
ahort II IN an honest busin.ss-l .
manner. The Specifications on which
the bidding was asked we're 80 drawn
that II excluded all other bids for ns.
phalt concrete. except the Texas Bl,u.
l'thic. unless the other bidders were
Wiling 70 take the cnnnce OF a suit by
the Texas company for an infringe
inent Of their patents.
Mr. Lanshlin put Ia a bld under
THESE specifications and was later IN.
iorhied by his attorneys thai bee wouie
be liaole for damages under the War
rem hroiher's patent, ana consequent
~ ne withdrew the hid N the coun-
eil wers In favor OF free and fair blas
"nrn TO everyone, why did they NOT
al onre re-adycrtlse for bids with
specifications that were not an In.
fringinent ~ anvone's patent on as-
phah concrete pasementn. other cit-
lss are pnttinR In miles OF asphalt
c"ncrete pavement under different
kind' 81 specifications that DO not con.
iiici with the Warren fsrotaer's bat
rn' ana some of them settlnn a nx
low aa sl,2s per Squire yard 10 nr.,
class pavement that stands The heavy
iraffic OF the bis cities
irrespective of the fnct that they
ma" by tnelr specifications excluded All
other bids except for bnulllhic.. they
attempted to let the contract ia The
Texas company and would have done
70 only for pelltiun signed by mara
than ciehty per cent of the propertr
owners protesting against 20 letting
the contract and asking the council /
!" advertise for new bids Now the
Question arises. why didn's thss do |
IhiHf They had progressed thai
Ihey wished tho property owners a. |
'eeid' upon what kind of paving The, |
wanted, price. etc, but refused 10 car
y out the program
The 1893 law on the subject pro-
'iaes that the property affected hy
'''Ning shall decide upon thn kind AND I
81 tie contracts.
THIS law was passed for - more
'n"i'hple adjustment 81 the paving
proposition than the 1908 law pro.
tWeu' why nus the six mernbers az
uf city council been 80 desirous Of
'iunE this contract 10 the Texas com.
amy % the exclusion OF other odds
nat would have been much lower. |
nd AZ least as good an article? why
"a the chairman Of the street COM
littee solicit letters from cities that
al reccnsly put IN bltulltnlc ana ,,ere
itianed ana not ask for Letters from,
tiles that had put IN bitullthlc ana Il
ere not satisfied, and why did ne nor Z
Illicit letters from dozens OF cltlea s
'nt are putting IN miles of asphait I
'ncrete similar 10 what Mr.. Laush- &
4 bid On al $3.50 por aqnare yardP
Finally, does anyoae believe thaf
cry tale that our smaH contract I
'coasarlly Gusts some $1,000 moro IL
an a Ike contract would cost In El \
lnos IL
The difference against Albaauerque !
,ulh DO this freight an what few I
loads Of cemeu, used II the foun-
ton LABOR n certainly a. cheap Z