Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1917-04-21
NEITHER ITTNER NOR
LLOYD SELECTED
CONTINUED From First Pagel

Boyd. of the American Seating Com
pany.
Sensational developments featured
the meeting from the beginning. When
a vote was called to give the entire
architectural work to Mr. 1ttner the
ballots were: For-Directors Bacon,
Enders, DR.. Yates and President
Stamm: Against-Directors DR.. Keene,
Bretz, Boil, Boyer and Werner.
The lineup when the vote was
taken to employ Mr.. Lloyd for the
entire work follows: For-Messrs
Bretz, Boil, Boyer and Werner Against
DIR. Keene. Bacon, Enders, DR.. Yates
and President Stamm.
Behind Closed Doors
What happened behind closed doors.
while it would probably help solve the
question for the people of Harrisburg,
may never be known.
That charges and counter charges
were made because of a statement of
Mr.. Ittner which it is believed tells
of meeting with well-known Har-
risburg man in Chicago, was rumored
After the second executive session. it
became apparent that neither side had
won.
Motion after motion to divide the
work between Mr.. Ittner and Mr..
Lloyd with attempts to compromise
by giving some of the remodeling to
c. Harry Kain and NJ. l. Kast, failed,
either because there was no second,
or by a 5 to vote. The ballots in
each case changed according to the
amount of work given Mr.. Lloyd and
Mr.. Ittner
The 5-hour-2 30 minute session start
ed at $50 o'clock yesterday afternoon.
Members of the Municipal League,
Rotary Club, Chamber of Commerce
and trade organizations of the city
were present.
Arthur d. Bacon was the first one
to open the subject after a lengthy
statement from the Municipal League
had been read reviewing the high
school question from the time the
loan was decided on.
Questions and Answers
Mr.. Bacon first read the six ques-
tions presented two weeks ago by DR..
c. E. L. Keene and gave the answers
of the special committee on the selec-
ton of an architect.
Dr. Keene raised objections to an
swers to some of the questions claim
ing they were unsatisfactory.
The answers objected to were the
stated its only function was to select
and recommend an architect, not TO
act on the acceptance or rejection of
plans.
Following a short discussion, Mr..
Bacon read the report of the special
committee, recommending Mr.. Ittner
for the entire planning work, with q
nVe per cent commission.
Before the vote was taken Directors
keene, Bretz Bacon, Enders, Yates,
and President Stamm had a lengthy
discussion about the work which Mr..
lttner did in Washington. Directors
Boil, Boyer and Werner did not enter
into this talk
While the debate was on II. M.
Brooks, of the Central Labor Union
and Union Trades Council, of the city,
asked to be heard and was given the
the floor. He declared the union men
of the city were not against Mr.. Ittncr,
but wanted the contracts to be let in
Harrisburg so that local workmen
would be given a chance to get some
of the work.
President Stamm explained the
architect would have nothing what
ever to do with awarding of contracts.
The vote was then taken on Mr.. Itt-
ner's employment. The vote was 5
to 4 against this. The five voting
against the committees recommended
tion were Keene, Bretz, Boil, Boyer
and Werner.
Mr.. Bretz then moved Mr.. Lloyds
employment for all designing except
the Camp Curtin remodeling, which
he gave to Mr.. Kain. Mr.. Werner in
seconding the motion said:
who should control this school
board? The members, the Chamber
of Commerce, the Municipal League
the special committee or the taxpay-
ers? There has been much talk about
'isms" in connection with this archi-
tect question. l hate one of those
''isms" and at one time 1 voted against
Mr.. Lloyd as architect for the Steele
building. But so long as he did his
work legitimately l have nothing
against him and will second the mo-
ton that he be named as architect"
President Stamm intervened before