The Mankato free press., 1911-02-24

! of the contractor. The contractor
had no written orders from the build
Il ing superintendent to make the
change, and the board had no right
to pay the expense incurred by the
failure to follow the plans
Mr.. Bishman seconded the motion
and spoke along the same line as DR..
Beach had.
Mr.. Davies said that the contractor
had brought the matter to the at
tention of Mr.. Pass, the building SUI
perintendent, before putting the win
dows in, and had been instructed by
him to put them where they were
put, so the contractor claimed.
DR.. Beach reiterated that the con-
tractor had no written orders as TO
where to place the windows.
Mr.. Davies said that an admission
had been made in the presence of Mr.
Chandler, and called upon the latter.
Contractor Must Follow Plans.
Mr.. Chandler said that he would
like to have Il chance to say word.
When he had arrived, the windows
were i'm and the brick work and
jOists done. He had Immediately OBJ
served the error in the location of
the windows. The contractor was
responsible for setting the frames,
regardless of what Mr.. Pass might
have said to him. If the contractor
was willing to trust TO Mr.. Pass in
structiOnS rather than follow the
plans he did so on his own respon-
sibility. If the building superintend-
ent gave the contractor wrong advice,
the contractor was responsible, for
he was bound to follow the plans.
But if Mr.. Pass had informed the
contractor that the plans were wrong,
and that it would be error to follow
them. and that the windows ought
not TO be placed where indicated in
the plans, that would be different
The contractor is supposed to fol-
low the plans, and if he does not he
is to rectify any mistakes that he
makes.
Mr.. Pass Explains.
Mr.. Pass said that asperSiOns had
been cast upon him. When anybody
said that he ordered the windows
placed in Il different place from
where the plans called for it was
an unqualified lie. The windows that
he had had anything to say about
had been placed where they belonged
In hnr hot l., Il
cover the contractors mistake al the
time. lie had discovered before Mr.
Chandler came that something was
wrong, but did not know just what
was the matter.
Mr.. Bishman asked whether the
windows could not be raised yet, but
Mr.. Chandler said that they could
not, for to take the wall down now
would always leave a bad spot there
After some further discussion, Dr.
Beach's motion was carried.
In accordance with the suggestion
of the architect and the wish of the
board, change in one of the closets
was authorized. This is the only
change found desirable to make in
the plans, as adopted.
Mr.. Davies brought up the matter
of letting the contract to Mr.. Mas
ters for putting in the conduits for
the vacuum cleaning system, but the
point was raised that the board has
n sum above $50 without receiving
competitive bids.
Would Follow the Law
DR.. Beach said that he had been
jumped on rOughshod one time by
Mr.. Masters for letting an SIS con-
tract without bids, and he proposed
to follow the law strictly hereafter
What applied to one applied to all.
Mr.. Masters waXed somewhat warm
at this, and said that the contract
referred to by Dr. Beach was for SIS
for two drinking fountains. He would
withdraw his offer to do the conduit
work for $2S5, and the board would
have TO pay several hundred dollars
TO have the work done.
Mr.. Davies was obliged to go at
this point. his wife being sick, and
this broke the quorum. DR.. Holbrook
was called away to attend lady
who had run a needle in her finger,
and as no further business could be
transacted without quorum, he de-
clared the meeting adjourned. Archi
tect Chandler had desired to bring
up one more matter, but it was an
unimportant one, and will doubtless
be attended to by the building com.
mittee by general consent
Mr.. Chandler remained over until
this afternoon. to prepare the con-
Masters.
MADE MONEY AT THE SUPPER