Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1916-11-15
TAYLOR MAKES
PROTEST over
PICANCO' 'SBID
Tells Loan Fund Body That
Rival Firm is Not
Competent.
BOARD WILL ASSEMBLE
+. ON FRIDAY TO DECIDE
PiCanCo Declares That His
Purse Will Cover All
Difficulties

| this morning in meeting of the Oahu
| Loan Fund Commission held shortly
| before the noon hour TO decide wheth
er or not the low bid of Picanco <
Comes on the IIillebrand Glen ditch.
laying project should be accepted
against filed protests. The commits
sion adjourned after a lively session,
naming next Friday morning at 10
o'clock to decide definitely upon the
awarding of the contract.
James T.. Taylor, special engineer
on the project since 1t first sprang into
existence and now a bidder for the
contract, and ]. c. Pincanco of Picanco
& Comes, spoke feelingly on opposite
sides of the question.
Tayler's remarks were strengthened
by formal protest which he had filed
with the commission, while ,Picanco's
speech was long and rambling, often
filled with broken English that was
difficult to understand.
If Picanco is thrown out as a bid
der. however, it must be because of a
decision by the board that he is in
competent to carry out his offer. The
attorney general has ruled that the
slight mistake that he mad in filing his
bid cannot be considered enough to
bar him. He was instructed today
by Chairman Charles r. Forbes to
bring any further testimony next Fri
day, while Taylor was told to bring
witnesses to bear out statements he
made today, or in tReir absence, affi-
davits.
Taylor Enters Protea
Taylor's protest as read before
the commission and IS as follows:
Il hereby respectfully protest
against the consideration of the bid
of Pieanco e Comes for constructing
the Maole conduit, &uuanu valley,
under bid of $1S,353, submitted by
them upon%the following grounds:
81 That said bid IS irregular and
informal in that the amount of said
bid does not correspond with the unit
prices shown.
80. That said Picanco & Comes are
not responsible bidders as required
by law, in that (a) they do not pos
sess the requisite judgment, skill and
capacity required to perform the con-
tract according to its terms; (b) that
they did in 1906 secufe contract for
the construction of lao valley road at
Wailuku, Maui, which they failed to
complete, forcing theF completion of
the work upon their bondsmen at
substantial unrepafd loss; (c) that the
work cannot be completed within the
time specified in their tender, to wit,
SO days; nor at the price bid, to wit,
SIS. 1885, which latter sum is $4,000 less
than the next lowest bidder and is be-
low the actual costS (d) that the
total financial worth Eof the partner
ship property, according to their own
statement, is less than $500, and in
the event the company could not COM
plete the work for contract price they
would be forced to turn same over to
bendsmen with the delay and expense
incident to such procedure.
AS a competitor of said company
and $as "a taxpayer of the City and
Coultyof Honolulu, protest against
awarding said contract to Picanco &
Comes, and respectfully suggest that
in the. event their bid is considered
sufficiently regular, that they be called
upon TO establish that they are res
ponsible bidders within the definition
laid down by our courts.
Respectfully submitted,
+ JAMES T. TAYLOR"
Submits eondsman's Letter
Taylor submitted letter from Cy-
rus Green, bondsman for Picanco, in
April, 1911, on a job of laying curb
ing in Nuuanu, which stated that
Green, and his partner one C. o. Hot
tel, had been forced to take over work
which Picanco had not finished, and
that the latter had refused to assist
in any matter"
Picanee declared that he was at the
time partner of Green, and said to-
day that he had left the latter here
to finish up the work when he him.
self had been called to Kalaupapa to !
a contract there He told the COM |
that he has ample funds to !
back his offer and certified check, no
matter what difficulties may-arise in