St. Landry clarion. (Opelousas, La.) 1890-1921, 1913-01-04
THIBoDEAUX AFTER.
THONE SON AGAIN

L WISH W @5@rtA
tention of the tax payers to the
fact that theit money. was
rnIedged prior I'd the voting OF
the the tax, and Mr.. Thompson's s
own C statement proves conclu.
siuelv q nv CHARGES are based or
facts, when he eladmits that at g
meeting of the school board Mr..
stevens was there with plans
already PREPARED for the new
school e. house. He had the size,
kind of buildingheeded and the
price, and the plhn was accepted
without a singleI change, as adj
nitted by Mr.. q hompson, except
tho cesspool which is not a part
of the building.
Please explai1 this? How was
it Messrs. Steysns & Nelson OBJ
tained their information as to
the needed building? How could
they have madeh plan to meet
the Superintendent $ needs with
out first having obtained some
information from him? The truth
Of the matter is, 1.-The election was
held on the 10th OF June and
at about eight Yclock the next
morning, / mel Superintendent
Thompson and Suggested to him
the propriety bf placing some
mechanic on thP building COM
mittee, and bis reply was, |
have been in communication with
Messrs. StevensI& Nelson; they
have made plabs for some very
good buildings and / believe they
are the best ih the country.
To show YOU tax payers that
our SUPERINTENDENT knew moth
ing or very little about archi-
tects. / wish to state for the
benefit of the Superintendent and
the building committee and the
tax payers, that all reputable
architects of any standing belong
to the American Institute of
Architects, hnd yet Messrs.
Stevens & Neson not being mem
bers thereof will nevertheless
receive 6 per lent of the amount
of the contract, which aggre-
gates over fohr thousand dollars
of the schoolhnoney, when local
architects wotld have been more
than glad to make the plans and
specifications for half Of that
amount. Bui 1T appears from
Mr.. Thompso1's statement made
to Mr.. Steveis of the firm of
Stevens & Neson, that no one.
here was gooa enough to make
plans or to er9t buildings such
as was proposal. Mr.. Thomp-
son does not bny that he told
Mr.. Stevens hat there was no
one capable Of constructing that
particular building. It is a well
established fat that local con-
tractors have brected all Of the
buildings in tits city and that
they were alwaks the lowest bid
ders, and in this way saved
money to the lwners. He ad-
mits only two DDS were received
owing to the QUESTION of whether
or not the contract would be let
out on that dayland yet the con-
tract was let, notwithstanding
the fact that MIssrs. Ventre and
Loeb voted aEainst it's being
awarded at thattime.
1t cannot be krgued that the
contract was lwarded at this
time to expediB matters, as the
school site has mot yet been de
liyered and is sill occupied by a.
large two story building.
Mr.. Thompson seems to lay al
great deal Of Etress upon the
concrete work, when that part of
the work is donb with common
Iaborers. Conlrete is gravel,
sand and cemendmixed together
n such proportions as is fur
lished by the arthitect. Mixed
oy common laH aHorers, handled
and placed in thelWalls with com
non laborers, and yet local con-
tractors were deiied the right to |
Did, when if successful, they
were going to lie home labor, |
when every dollhr Of the money
would have rembined with the
AK payers. But as it was,
Methods Were employed whereby |
ocal architects, or contractors
lad absolutely.nd chance.
When advatising for bids, |
here was required a certified I
meek OF a ttlousand dollars as
assurance Of good faith on the
'art OF the biddes and the sue |
'essfui bidder haa to furnish aE
'olyent bono for the faithful e1-
,cutlon OF tAa work. Was not
MS sufficient to 1lake the bidder
esponsible?
Mr. Thompson WAS approached I
y MI. Livaudais! who offered to /
make Mans ora eAan;s 49,
ne new school house. He had
iot made plans prior to the vot- /
ng Of the tax, and it appears
gas J sTl not as well posted as Stevens