East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1912-09-11


county court insofar as there being
any alleged illegality in the proceed
ings which led up to the construction
of the Umatilla bridge at a cost of
$l3,O70 is concerned, the grand jury
this morning concluded its delibera-
tions and submitted its final report
to the court. The jury finds that the
old court was compelled to cancel its
| original contract with the Atlas Brirge
company because of an error in the
profile submitted by the county sur
veyor which underestimated the
length of the bridge.
The grand jury also construes the
action of the court in having con-
structed an entirely different sytle
of bridge by the same company to
have been in accordance with that
provision of the law which gives it
the right to reject all bids, purchase
the necessary material, hire labor and
secure a superintendent to assume
charge of operations.
However, there are a good many
points in the transaction that the
jury does not explain in its findings.
points which County Judge Maloney
raised when he first charged that the
proceedings were Illegal and points
which many taxpayers have express
ed a desire to have explained Judge
Maloney, when informed of the ac-
ton of the grand jury this morning,
was indignant and intimated that he
would soon make answer that would
give the people a chance to judge for
themselves of the transaction.
Among those who are familiar with
the details of the Umatilla bridge
case, the explanation offered by the
grand jury in its findings is entirely
| inadequate inasmuch as it apparently
ignores certain evidence which has
become public property and which
was unquestionably introduced. 1t is
rumored about, with what authority
! is not known, that the action of the
| jury was against the advice of the dis
| trict attorney who, it is said, gave
| his opinion that the proceedings of
the old county court were contrary
to law.
That part of the report which refers
to the bridge case follows in full:
We have examined into the matter
| of constructing steel bridges through
out Umatilla county and more in par
ticular the building or a bridge at
Umatilla. We have found that the
county court existing in 1910 adver-
tised for the construction of a bridge
at Umatilla, in response to a heavy
demand through petition from cit-
zens in the west end of the county.
Plans and specifications We're based
on a profile prepared by the county
surveyor that was incorrect. After
the bids were opened and the con-
tract awarded it was discovered that
the bridge under the specifications
was ninety feet too short for the
channel OF the river. Two spans 1853
feet long each were contracted for
but ninety feet more or total of 996
feet were necessary to extend across
the river Besides this, approaches
to the length of 124 feet were neces-
sary before the public could use the
bridge. In the beginning of this
work the county court had estimated
that $4,000 was all the county could
afford to pay for the Umatilla bridge,
and when the error in the profile was
discovered. it was found that the cost
of the original bridge would be about
$16.500. or too great for the county
to undertake, The contract, how
ever, had been awarded and signed
and a bond filed and the county
court began to negotiate some method
of avoiding this additional eXpendi-
ture. The law was construed to mean
that If both parties to the contract
agreed the contract should be an
nulled and the work done by the
county buying the material and build
ing a bridge under the direction of
superintendent.
Accordingly. a contract, or an
agreement for material and labor
was entered into or a written order
was given to the man who still held
the contract for building the first
proposed bridge, provided he would
release the court from the first con-
tract, and the present bridge at Una
tilla was constructed under this pro-
vision of the law at cost of $13,-
$1,000.
We find that the entire county
court visited the site of the present
bridge at Umatilla and agreed with
the leading citizens of that place as
to this bridge being sufficient for all
practical uses prior to the construc-
ton of the bridge, and, that after the
bridge was built, all three members
received the structure and approved
the work.
1t is signed by the full grand jury,
including Robert L. oliver, foreman,