Evening journal., 1916-04-22

~ oSNOiudhNt WITH the methods recon-
mended in the final report of the spe-
cial committee on Uniform Tests
Of Cement" of the American Society
OF Civil Engineers, dated January II,
1872 and that the cement should con-
form to the standard specifications
for cement a adopted by the Ameri-
ca Society for Testing Materials in
1909 (see pages $50 to 354, 1915 Year
book, American Society for Testing
Materials)
The depth of loose broken stone
for the first and second courses of
waterbound macadam road are cov-
cred by Sections 16 and 49, These
sections should be revised to REQUIRE
depth after rolling. Furthermore
both of these sections should be re-
vised with reference to the amount
of rolling required and should in
clude the provision in each section
that the course in question shall be
rolled until firm. compact and even
and until there is no movement under
the action of the roller"
Section 20, q and % provide that
3-4-inch stone and screenings shall
be spread upon the road at such
thickness as to bring it up to uni
form surface. II is bad practice to
put any appreciable amount of
screenings or small stone upon the
surface. as 1t cannot be held solid,
and will result in dust in dry weather
and mud in wet weather. The road
should be brought up to its finished
surface with the larger sized stone
as provided i'm Section 10. The pro-
vision for the application OF screen
ings which will pass through a sec
tion of rotary screen having cir
cular holes of "a inch or 5-S inch
diameter should read as follows: The
second course shall be compacted
and puddled with screenings and
water under the same provisions as
prescribed for the first course in
Section is and when the rolling shall
have been completed. the surface of
the second course shall be firm. COM
pact. even and true to the lines.
grades and cross sections After
the second course has been compact
ed. puddled and filed as above speci-
fed. it shall be evenly covered with
a thin laver Of screenings.
The quality of broken stone is referred
to in Sections 2G and p. The physical
properties. Of the rock to be used are not
stated and the contractor is allowed ia
name. in his bid, the kind Of rock which
he intends e. use. The current practices
of contractors is to submit bids on sew
eral kinds of rock and combinations Of
rock. The indefiniteness of this plan
has many apparent disadvantages. For
example. the bids of the several cen.
tractors may or may not he comparable
Furthermore, under the provisions of
the law, Section g. Chapter l39. which
reads: "The Levy Court OF the said
commissioner may reject any or all bids
if in their opinion good cause exists
therefor, but otherwise the said Levy
Court shall award the contract 20 the
lowest responsible bidder In cases
where contracts have been awarded to
the lowest bidder on a given kind Of
rock and not to the lowest bidder on
any kind of rock mentioned I'm the bids
we are of the opinion that the Levy
Court has not complied with the above
provision OF the law to the best inter
ests of the taxpayers. The present
practice of the Levy Court certainly
provides for the possibility Of awarding
contracts to favored contractors. The
following examples of contracts award
ed by the Levy Court illustrate the
practice in vogue and the unfairness to
the contractors Of the method adopted.
West Chester road. Christiana hun.
dred l.O77 miles Contract awarded
August 26, 1913, to John f. O'Neal at
Sll .452.5 the first and second courses
to be constructed of trap. The Corcoran
Construction Company was low bidder
OH this contract with a bid of SlO,1OO
for both courses to be constructed OF
native stone II should be noted that
the Corcoran Construction Company bid
Sll 100 for both courses to be construct
ed of trap rock with limestone screen
inrs. Five bids were submitted for all
trap three bids for trap with limestone
screenings. and numerous bids for four
other combinations OF stone. In our
opinion the award Of this contract TO
John F. O'Neal was unwaranted.
CIark's-Bird's Corners road, Red
Lion hundred 1.29 miles. Contract
awarded April 2S. 1914, to Alfred H.
Mcdowell at S11.55O on first course
Brandywine granite and second course
! limestone or Howellville stone. Five
bids were submitted on this combina-
ton. John A. Clark was lowest bid
der with a bid OF S10.922 for all lime
stone Mr.. Mcdowell bid $11,170 on
this combination. Bids were submitted
on total of eight combinations OF
stone. The award Of this contract to
Mr.. Mcdowell was. in our opinion un-
warranted.
Old State road, Red Lion and 81.
Georges hundreds. 3.452 miles. This
contract was awarded August IA. 1914.
to Stewart and Donohue at $32.7S6 on
combination Of Brandywine granite
for .he first course. and Howellville
stone for the second course. Burk and
Bonham we're low bidders on this COM
bination at S31.114.15. II should also
be noted that Humphrey and Bentley
bid S32 200 on this combination. Burk
and Bonham were also low bidders on
the contract at S3O.111.15 on both
courses constructed with Morristown
limestone. Bids we're submitted on a
total OF eight combinations. The
award OF the contract TO Stewart and
Donohue was, i'm our opinion, unwar-
Iranted.
The questionable practice described
above should be discontinued and
broken stone possessing certain ply
sical properties should be called for in
the specifications in order that all bids
should be upon the same and hence an
equitable basis. The paragraph of the
specification covering the quality of
broken stone should sprovide that the
broken stone shall be clean. rough sur
faced and sharp angled. of compact