New-York tribune., 1911-01-19
GIVES LIE TO BENSEL
Hooker Says Some OF Engineers
Statements Are False.
DIX GIVES OUT LETTERS
Chairman Of State Highway
Commission Accuses Bensel
of Desire to Hinder Work.

Of Desire TO Hinder WoFh'
AIbanv. Ian Ex-Governor Dix made pub
| rc to.de,, sone acrimonious letters re-
ceived hv him from state Engineer Bensel
and the state Highway Commission at;s'
| the Governor held up the opening or bids
for road improvements valued at S25O"o
until the plans could be examined ny Nr.
Ren.el. The state Engineers criticism OF
the commission brought from D Percy
Hooker. chairman OF that body the re-
| tort that MI Bensel's desire was only 70
criticlse the commission and not 70 ala IN
rs work. Mr. Hooker declares some OF the
state Engineers statements are talse ana
that he has misrepresented certain laws.
This answer was sent by Governor Dix 10
the State Enaineer, and the latter inme-
diately sent back letter In Wnlch ne
reiterated the statements made by him IN
| the first report. taking exception 70 many
things I'm the answer Of the commission
In his criticism ~ the manner IN when
the contracts FOR good roads are let the
State Engineer first declared that the specl-
fcatlons as issued by the department OF
highways for the building Of roads are
defective III that they provide that the
|
and in addition thereto that the item prices
for which additions and deductions are 10
be charged must be within IL or :" per CENT
Of the estimate OF prices
This charge the state commission an
sverei by quoting Section 10 OF the hisH-
ay law. which provides:
Each proposal shall specify the gross
sum for which the work will be performed
| and shall also include the amount 70 be
CHARGED tor each item specified in the esti"
nate
| state Engineer Bensel, in response 20
| this. wrote: "While II may be said that a
pretence OF observing the law was on
served IN the letting Of contracts accord
ire ~ the lump sum bid, the speclncatlons
provide that payments may be made other
than in accordance with the lump sum, ana
! therefore, in my opinion, while the letter
of tho law may he followed, the spirit or
the law is not followed in that payments
are not made In accordance with the lump
sum bid by the contractor.
! His second criticism was that the
amount of detail In construction is unnec-
sarv." The State Engineer referred to the
fact that in a road of about six inches in
|
five TO six different layers Of stone" He
alleges that the cost of engineering amounts
( TO something over ~ per cent of the con-
tract cost The commissions answer IS
| that repeated experiments have proved tins
TO be tine best method Of construction and
saws this is a feature indorsed by all road
| builders.
Mr. Bensels reply 10 this is that he has
had an analysis made OF the wording OF
the contracts. and still reiterates that the
contracts provide for the number of layers
of stone which he specified in his letter TO
| the Governor.
Chairman Hooker Of the commission then
stated that Mr. Bensel had been misin-
! formed when he said the cost of the en-
gineering was more than 10 per cent OF the
! contract cost. The State Engineer replied
that the last published report OF the High
way Commission gives the expenses OF the
commission as SJ5227 7S and the cost OF
construction OF roads as S,S46.262 80, from
which he submits that the cost of the
various items, salaries, travelling expenses,
etc. IS about 10 per cent OF the amount
paid 10 contractors
The next thing taken up IS tho State Eli
eineer's criticism that tho specifications
OF the roads are drawn with little regard 10
the local material which could be used"
The answer OF the commission to this is
that It has standards for stone which
NAV be used as road material and cites
instances where such stone has not been
used and the results were disastrous. II
also declares that the use Of the word
local" Is indeterminate and that In some
.fpxf
| more than the imported variety.
| The State Engineer replies that he feels
the matter must stand as stated in his first
report
The ratrol of the road between the time
! IT, IS finished and when accepted by the
| state, the cost Of which IL given by the
state Engineer az ian indeterminate sum,
| saws tie state Bureau Of Repair has no
| right 70 patrol such road, the state En-
sineer comes back with the remark that
| "the matter stands as put In his report and
| the contractor should not be compelled 10
! subscribe 10 indeterminate figures OF cost"
Mr. Bensel declared that the law provides
| the contracts shall he drawn by resident
engineers The commission says "the law
| states that the division engineers (en-
tjrely different persons than the resident
engineers are 10 prepare the plans, and
| they have done so in every instance. The
state Engineer answers that this is not
the case and that the plans are prepared
in the Albany office
The commission says In regard 70 the
eighth criticism "tho law which provides
| dat contracts shall not be awarded unless
the state has secured the right OF way has
Leen Gisregarded," that this is mis-
statement both ss 10 the law and fact.
There Is no comment on this statement in
the final answer OF the state Engineer.
lie also failed 10 reply to the commis-
sion's answer 70. his criticism that the
present method Of construction is entirely
TOO costly for ordinary county requirements
and that from 30 m 50 per cent Of greater
mileage Of road could be secured for the
same money h. following his advice, in
which II wa stated that there is in mis-
Cneaning Mr.. Bensers) entire report an
absence OF advice as TO how the commits
sion could improve the present construc-
ton Of roads" and that "tne purpose Of the
report lie not 10 improve road conditions
or safeguard the state, but merely 20 criti-
nisn fke nn1n1rni sihn -