The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1912-03-17

of the court room. These two were
omitted when the plan for change OF
offices was adopted, items ID" and
''E," heretofore discussed.
We find no credit to the county for
omission OF these two toilets, and
while the new arrangement necessitat-
ed the two toilets in the Jury room &c
appears that the two omitted Offset
these two.
As. Furring walls, S14s.50.
We find order from architect to tho
general contractor dated June 30th.
1911. and reading as follows:
You are hereby instructed TO fur
walls OF condemned cells and padded
cell room. An extra amounting TO
S14S.50 is hereby allowed for same"
On the plans for concrete work. both
| second and third floors, both PADDED
cells and condemned cells. are pro
vided to be built Of brick and not OF
concrete. In the specifications at pare
| % ii is provided as follows:
THE walls Of the cell block building
of the women's cell. the CONDEMNED
| cell, guard room, padded cell and ex,-
cution room and kitchen to receive one
coat of cement mortar trowelld
i smooth to a thickness Of not less than
| IL inch"
1t appears from the above that wals
OF condemned cells and padded eel
| room walls OF DTlCk were not require
to be furred but cemented.
We are at a loss TO understand WHY
this change was made. and the ordc
| issued by architect. AS cement mortar
| as provided for, was all that WIS
| necessary, unless extra cost ant er-
pense was desired 10 be placed upon
| county. on examination OF thesewalls
we find that the east and west walls
in both the condemned call roof and
! in the padded cell room have been
| furred and plastered, that the aorth
and south walls in both roomshave
| been plastered with cement mrtar,
| as required by specifications. hiitem
| should be disallowed.
IS. Base OF stairs, $500.
This item is vague and indenite,
| and we find no order from the tchi-
| tect, which might throw someight
on the subject: however. i. r. lenz,
the architect, in report TO the lard,
January 81, 1912, checks this Ito as
| 20. x" Same is respectfully retired
back for further information.
There is a base for an iron str in
| deputies room, second floor, lex; by
z inches. the charge OF $500 forhis.
il this is the base referred to, lex
| cessive.
AZ. Trim for entrance doors. 500.
We find order from architect tthe
I
July 5. IA.
You are hereby instructed TO pee
trim similar to door trim around pur
| ca exterior main entrance doors. An
extra amounting to $4,000 is herebAl-
lowed for same
/ This item is very vague and indedte
| and we can see no reason for anil
lowance of this kind. or for an der
for the extras given by the archict
The specifications, at page SO, proved
| for detail as follows:
"Finish.--All the trim and casgs
| for all the windows and other on
| ings throughout the building expt
where otherwise specified, or SHIN
| differently on the drawings, shalbe
the best clear kiln dried. seasoned l.
| low pine, all finish to be put UP +
| fectly true and secured firm and =
manently to the ground All fnislo
be smoothed up, scraped and sa-
/ papered and brought to a fine I'm,
free from all tool marks. bruisesr
| defacements. All the castings, picta
moulds. bases, etc. to be of the viii
/ and other dimensions shown on a
sections and detailed drawings"
On sheet IL original plans, we ink
| typical door trim. From the abovt
appears that a full specification 4
plan was provided. and we can seeb
4
See also Sheet OF the drawings
| further details on these doors
page 3, paragraph 2, of the Gene
| Specifications, which we have quot
| already in this report, provided
! specifications and drawings to be Z
| operative and to provide -or a finish
| piece Of work and what is called I
| by either shall be as binding as II ca
| ed for by both. The contractor W
Z ~ af71rs "a, lnt
| scribed shall be complete in every q
tail, Notwithstanding every item ne
! essarily involved is not particular
| mentioned, and the contractor will |
| held TO provide all labor and materfa
| necessary for the entire completion
the work intended 20 be described ar
shall not avail himself of any man
| testify unintentional error or omissio
| should such exist.
Should any error or inconsistenc
appear or occur in the drawings
| specifications the contractor befor
| proceeding with the work shall max
| mention OF the same 20 the architect,
for proper adjustment, and in no cas-,
shall he proceed with the work in un.
certainty.%
II there was any uncertainty as n
| the detail of the trim I'm the mind OF
| the contractor it was his duty 10 have
applied for detail and directions; at
| any rate the county is not charEeable
with this extra in our Judgment
We might say further that a full dc
tail in the specifications is provided
for the construction OF coors on pages
81 and 3S of the General Specffca-
tions.
Extra Charges For Work In spselHes-
tions.
4s. Footings cells, white cell block,
$4,000
We find an order from the architect
to the general contractor covering this
item, as follows:
July IS, 1911.
You are hereby instructed to place
| footing under cells white cell block An
extra amounting to $4,000 is hereby
! allowed for same"
This item relates 10 the same matter.
except II refers 70 white mems cells
| block, already discussed by US under
/ item No. 1s. and is not proper charge
I'm our judgment against the county.
The same Is provided for IN original
plans and specifications.
| Gao r,11na Ghaa4