The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-03-14
'INTERBOROUGH WARS
ON SUBWAY BUILDERS
Objects to Daniels Company's
Bid, Allowing Only $12,-
900 for Safety.
SUONTs WRITES TO MCCALL
Dangers to Public in Old Tunnel
Cited-Subsidiary Seeks
Contract.

Theodore p. shonts. president OF tho
marlborough started war yesteruay ''
,he Oscar Daniels Company. subway co"'
tractor. In a letter to Judge MoS''''
Hartman OF the public Service Conh'S'
.,on. Mr. shonts showed how easy I"
would be for the Marlborough to Keep 'h'
panie,s company from getting SUP
INV contract on which II was the low
90, bidder. The letter was taken to DE
,re,,v much OF n threat that the Inter
no-ourh would do that very thing
Tho dirpu;c centres on the bids foT
saor, cec,ien Of subway under Ii'no'
Square, where the rev Seventh nvenu,
limo will connect wish the present sun
why. Tho Daniels company bid was $780,
aoi. allowing Only $4,000 fer safety. y
row lte-, IN subway construction.
Tho Rapid T.ans.t subway Coastruc-
IN, Company, an 1nterbcrough SUB
s;dsry. bid &4es.o3s. allowing $4,000
FOR SAFETY TINS Item covers the cIs'
OF protecting the present subway us
trains and passengers from danger aris
ins from tho work Of excavation AMI
track connection.
INC ny, contractors who bid on the
work varied largely on this ono Item. TINS
hlrhest rsurc was 100000. from Smith.
| ifnuser C. MclIaac.
rni:s 20 Conceive Dangers.
This "a what Mr.. shonts thought OF the
! Daniels bid:
"Ou- examination OF the bid submitted
by tho Occa. Dan.e.s Company leads US
20 believe tina; that company has no'
tho slightest conception OF the diflcultics
70
limb tina. NUS: b guarded against In tht
/ work 10 be dono OF the present subway.
"t'rdc? the RAPID transit act the com
mission has tho right TO reject all bids
ard rcadvcTtsc 70. proposals or 10 &c
ccpt any proposal that Will In the Juds-
nent OF the commission best promote
the publ.c Interests. and the invitation Z,
contractors on which the bids were pas'''
clearly reserves to the commission TN
light 10 reject any bid which seems detrl-
mental to the oity's interests. The con
seouences that may ersue are OF such
magnitude that we request an opportunity
To- be heard before the commission lakes
Gnal action In awarding the contract.
The propo sed contract provides that
before commencing work on the present
subway the contractor must obtain the
. permit OF this company, as condition
of which the contractor will be required
10 give a bond for 100000. with sureties
approved by this company.
''Threat" IL Seen.
1T IL no, provided that the sureties
on such bond are TO be named pr.or 10
! the execution OF the contract. but IN our
opin.on IL would he advisable to ms st
that before the contract Is awarded the
suret!es to be offered on The lnterborough
bond he submitted and approved. as other
wise the contractor might have the con-
tract. but not I've able 10 supply satisfac-
/ .ory suretiss"
/ THIS was assumed Yesterday to he n
/ threat on the part Of the lnterborough
I to withhold its permission to the Daniels
company 10 break the wall OF the present
! subway Incidentally Mr.. Shonts hints
| that surety company might think the
| chance OF getting such n permit was too
remote 10 justify giving bond for the
completion Of the line.
| No officer OF the Daniels company In
Now York was able TO discuss the matter
I asst night II was suggested at the Of
| nee OF the commission that even n the
! Daniels bid is turned down the Interior
| ough is stu one number away from the
| .op OF the list. The HolbrooN, Cabot and
Rollins Corporation pat in the next bid
| the Daniels company, s41l,39l. Bo:h
| companies are now dong work on the city
| ,ubNays.