The Hawaiian gazette., 1912-04-26

sufficiently thorough, the decision ought
not to be disturbed for the reason
alone that the meetings were not open
to the public. Assuming, without de.
Gliding, that the point is well taken, and
conceding that there was no evidence
that any improper motive influenced
the action Of the commission, yet the
record shows that the investigation
made was not conducted with that fair
ness, impartiality and thoroughness
which should characterize proceedings
of judicial or quasi-judicial nature.
At the meeting of the commission at
which the bids were opened a general
discussion was had in the course of,
which the statement was made that
Wilson had failed to fulfil certain con.
tracts which had been awarded him at
previous times, but no action with ref
erence to awarding a contract was
taken. At the next meeting, after
further discussion, the chairman was di.
rected to investigate and report as to
the responsibility as contractors of the
three lowest bidders"
Charges Against Wilson.
''The evidence shows that the prin.
cipal charges made against Wilson
and the only charges which need be
referred to here-were his failure to
complete the work under the outfall
sewer contract and the Kauai road con.
tract. With reference to those matters
neither the commission nor its chair
man made any attempt to get from
Wilson any statement as to why he
failed to carry out his contracts. No
opportunity was given Wilson to pre-.
sent his side of the case though he was
available and, apparently, anxious to
explain.
''At the hearing in the court below
Wilson testified in explanation as to
why he had not fulfilled those two con-
tracts and adduced testimony of dis
interested witnesses as to his skill,
ability and experience as builder of
roads, as well as to his business in
tegrity, and if an opportunity had been
given him to present the evidence to
the commissioners it would probably
have suffieed to convince them of Will,
sons responsibility. The commission Is
Investigation was not q thorough one
Its action was arbitrary and unfair be-
cause it was done in secret and was
based on what amounted to no more
than an expert hearing at which nc
opportunity was offered for an explain
alton or showing of any kind to be
made by or ON behalf Of the lowest
bidder in the interest of taxpayers.
"In considering tenders for public
contracts under a statute providing fol
the letting of contracts to the lowest
responsible bidders, the awarding of
ficers have wide discretion. But
that discretion must be exercised fair
ly, honestly and judicially. The phras,
responsible bidder means one who Il
not only financially responsible, bu
who is possessed of the Judgment, skill
ability, capacity and integrity requis
lite and necessary to perform the con
tract according to its terms. The 'dut,
of such officers in considering and de
termining those matters is an impor
tant and responsible one, and one upol
the performance of which the taxpay
ers have the right to insist The re
fusal to award n contract to the low
est bidder can be justified only whel
= it has been made to appear upon
proper hearing and investigation tina
he is not a responsible bidder. . Dill
Ion, Nun, Corp. (5th ed.) Sec. s1l.n
: In concurring opinion Justic
n Perry went into details regarding tn
$ specifications, concluding his opinio
e with the statement that he based hi
J, concurrence in the decision "upon tn
e sole ground" that the specification
l were fatally defective.