Evening journal., 1912-05-03
MAYOR
TURNS DOWN
CONTRACTS
Tells Board Of health he Be-
lleveS Garbage Work Was
Let Illegally
COURT MAY HAVE
TO SETTLE QUESTION


tracts presented to him by the Board
of Health, just retired from office, on
the ground that in his belief the con-
tracts had been illegally awarded.
Mayor Howell cites that the law spe-
cihcally sets forth that the contracts
shall be given to the lowest and best
bidders and contends that this was
not done He considers il is clearly
o violation Of the law in his opinion to
have let the contracts to the highest
bidders
Mayor Howell in his letter to the
Board of Health states that he has
every personal regard for the MEM
bers Of the board that awarded the
contracts. but believes they, as a
combined board, made a serious mfs-
take
Just what the members of the new
board will do in the matter was not
said today. A conference on the sub
leot will most likely be held by them
before the regular meeting of the
board on Monday afternoon
II is said by some persons that the
jurisdiction Of the Mayor in this case
is merely ministerial and that he has
No alternative but 10 sign the con-
tracts The Mayor. however, has
seen ht to return the contracts and It
may be that an action at law will be
necessary to decide the question.
Friends Of the contractors point
to the law in this respect as shown
I'm Section 3, page 797, Charter Laws
and Ordinances, which sets forth:
(a) The ordinance merely
says THE Council" shall award
the contracts The Mayor has
nothing to do with them and
when "The Council" awards the
contracts it is the Mayors duty
to sign the same and afix the
corporate seal of the city to
them. The Council awarded
garbage contracts The Mayor
refused to sign them
Chief Justice Lore in the case of
Mccormick vs.. Fisher, as set forth
j the above section. said: "As the
ordinance vests i'm the Council the
Exclusive right to determine any al
l'ged failure of performance and
ward these contracts, and the e\func-
Son Of the Mayor in signing and af-
\ king the seal OF the city is merely
II inisterial we think that he ought
II b do il.
Since this opinion Of the Court
N as handed down the power to award
/ lontracts for collecting garbage was
delegated to the Board of Health
The Mayors letter to the Board OF
Health. inclosing the returned con-
hacts follows:
To the President and Members of
the Board of Health, Whining
ton Del
Gentlemen. ! am returning here
with, without my approval. the
garbage contracts presented to me
by the Board of Health which has
just retired from Office
My reasons for withholding my
approval are that ! believe the
contracts we're illegally awarded
by the Board of Health The law
governing the awarding Of the
contracts specifically states that
after advertising in the news
papers as per the specifications
q of the law, the contracts shall be
let to- the lowest and best bidder
or bidders.
Therefore, it is clearly a viola
ton OF the law in my opinion to
: have let the contracts to the high
est bidders, of whom we have no
assurance that they are the best
bidders. If the word best" as
applied to bidders. could be prop
erly translated to mean High
est, then it is possible to mag
inc the frame of mind OF the in
dividual membe-l Of the Board
who awarded the contracts.
Furthermore. two Of the bidders
who were awarded the contracts
III tho ho -.
of my knowledge, had any pre-
vious experience as contractors
for the removal Of the city garb-
age, and 1t is unreasonable to as
sumo that they we're better bid
ders than those who have already
bad the handling Of such con-
tracts.
1t is within the province Of the
board 10 make certain specifica-
tons of the manner and form Of
contracts, and to specify the style
of cart TO be used for the collec-
tions of garbage. but it is unrea-
sonable to imagine that the tax
payers of this city are willing to
assume the cost of such equip
ment in its entirety.
Assuming that the difference IN
the bids between the ones select
ed by the Board of Health, and
the lowest bidders. who were ig
nored, il an amount equal TO $751;
00000 then il is reasonable TO
assume the amount in excess is
great enough to supply all Of the
new equipment. and relieve the
contractors Of any financial re-
sponsibility. which in my opinion
g. is unwise and unnecessary.
The contract in the Fourth
district was awarded to the con-
tractor who previously held the
contract and we have no reasoh-
able excuse to suppose that he is
the best bidder. inasmuch as the
other bidders for the work in the
same district are likewise previ-
ous contractors for the collection
Of garbage
| have personally had a state
ment from DR. Beck as TO the
reasons for the awarding of the
contracts in the manner and form
that they we're, but am convinc-
ed that their decision was unwise
and unjust towards the taxpay-
ers, who are directly responsi-
BILE for the payments to the con-
tractors.
wish to assure you that
have every personal regarl for
the members OF the Board Of
Health who awarded the con-
tracts. but believe they, as a
combined board, made serious