Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1912-01-10
HEAD OF STATE HIGHWAY COM
MISSION cRlTclsEs TYPE
OF BRIDGE.
OPEN COMPETITION AND
INSPECTION NECESSARY
Witnsss Testified That the Commits
sion Advocated Those Things and
Supervision Of Disintsrested Ensi-
nss-Dsnied He or Commission Was
H>..:!= 70 Stark Company.

Thomas a Macdonald, OF Ames,
highway engineer and the active head
of the state highway commission. does
not approve of the specifications or
plans for the bridge which n. ". Stark
Company, Of Des Moines, built at Mich
olsons ford for the county last fall.
Mr.. Macdonald was the principal wit
ness examined Tuesday before Judge
Nichols on the application for tempo
rary Injunction against the supervisors
and the bridge building company.
Macdonald was supoenaed by attor-
neys for c. r. Speers, who is seeking
the Injunction Mr.. Macdonald was on
the witness stand most Of the afternoon
The hearing was not completed and
Judge Nichols announced that il would
not be resumed for several weeks, or
until the jury cases TO be tried this
term had been disposed OF.
Explains Commissions Work.
Mr.. Macdonald was given an ex-
haustive ross-exanination regarding
the work and activities and purposes
of the highway commission He said
that the commission believed that there
should be open and competitive bidding
for all county bridge work: that the
plans submitted should be passed on
by come competent engineer and that
there should be a thorough inspection
OF the building while in progress.
When asked on crosS-examinaIion II
1t were necessary to submit plans to
anengineer in ctse the contractor
was also an engineer, Mr.. Macdonald
an engineer in case the contractor
also the engineer, had a personal Pc
cuniary interest in the work
Estimated Bridge at $500.
Mr. Macdonald gave s1,7I2 as his
estimate of what the Nicholson ford
bridge should have cost. He said that
this estimate was made from the plan
and while rough" it was based on
prices for which similar work was
being done in the state. In Included.
he testified, 10 per cent for the con-
tractors profit.
Asked in detail regarding the needs
of supervision from a disirterested
engineer and inspection of the work, he
said that it was the experience of the
highway commission that most bridges
built by contractors were not put up
under the personal supervision of the
contractor, but that the work was in
charge Of a foreman most of the time.
Bridge Not Approved.
He said that the type OF bridge built
by the Stark Company at the Nichol-
son ford had not been approved by the
state highway commission. He said
the reason for this nonapproval was
that the commission believed the rem
forcing in certain places IT the bridge
was not what il should De. Certain
features of the bridge are controlled
by Lutten patent.
It was his opinion, ne said. that the
Indemnity clause in the specifications
for the bridge in controversy prevent
ed competitive bidding. because the
contractor was compelled to show set
Element with the patentee before the
contractor could secure settlement
from the county. Mr.. Macdonald said
that only such contractors as had a Ii
cense from the patentee would be like
IL to bid on Specifications having such
q clause.
Denies Hostility to Stark.
Macdonald denied on the witnes
stand that he or the state highway
commission was hostile toward the
Stark company. He defined the posi-
ton in this regard as difference Of
opinion Of engineers as to types of
construction and methods Of work. The
supervisors claim such hostility, how
ever, and that the state highway com
missions chief aim is TO provide coun-
ty engineering positions for graduates
of Iowa State College.
JAMES cHiNN DEAD.