Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1918-06-03
CITY LIBRARY
CONTRACT VOID
Supreme Court Reverses
Award for Building on
Parkway
$2,535,O00 JOB HALTED
Clause Prohibiting Use of
''Outside' Stone Is Held
Unconstitutional
$2,535,OOO JOB HALTED

The contract awarded to John Gill G.
Son for the construction of the new free
library building along the Parkway for
s2,5a5,0oo was declared invalid by the
Supreme Court today.
The opinion was by Justice Frazer
reversing Court of Common Pleas
No. in the taxpayers suit Of
Walter r. Taylor against the Mayor,
city Councils, the trustees Of the Free
Library of Philadelphia and the con-
tracing firm of John Gill Sons, to
have the execution of the contract for
the new building enjoned, on the ground
that the ordinances of November 26,
1894, together with the amendment of
December 2s, 1895. were invalid, and
that the act of July 6, 1917, passed
specially to validate these ordinances
was unconstitutional A demurrer was
filed to the suit on behalf of the re-
spondents, which the lower court sus-
tanned.
The appeal was then taken to the
Supreme Court on which Justice Frazer
upholds the contention of the plaintiff.
both as to the ordinances and the sta
tute.
City Cut Stone hi,e Crux
The main point at issue was whether
or not specification that work of Gu, ig
anu preparing stone uSeu De uOts2f In
Philadelphia was special and locaf%eg-
islation" AS forbidden in the State Con-
stitution.
III the municipality may require stone
cutting to be done within it's boundaries
il may also extend this requirement to
all materials and supplies, and provide
for their production or manufacture
within its limits" Justice Frazer points
out
AN escape is impossible from the con-
clusion that such action would result in
a regulation of labor, trade and manu-
featuring. and must. consequently, be
special legislation within the meaning of
the Constitution
THE act of 1917 being eliminated 1t
remains to consider the validity of the
ordinances themselves. The reasoning
upon which the act of 1917 is held un-
constitutional cannot apply for the rea-
son that ordinances are not laws within
the meaning of the constitutional provi-
sons prohibiting local or special legisla-
tiCn. Consequently the only question is
whether the ordinances violate the provi-
sions Of the act of May 23, 1874, and the
act Of June /, 1885, requiring all work
and materials furnished to the city under
contracts to be let to the lowest respon-
sible bidder.
Deemed Local Legislation
This right has never been passed upon
directly by the appellate courts of this
State, says the Justice, although in an
analogous case, Frame VS.. Felix, the
Supreme Court held that provision
requiring employment Of no one not d
citizen of the United States and to pay
not less than a stipulated wage per day
to be inconsistent with legislative pro-
vision that municipal work be let to the
lowest responsible bidder.
Justice Frazier then refers to num-
ber Of decisions which he compares with
the present facts and concludes:
mo case has been found which is di-
rect authority to sustain the validity
of municipal ordinances such as are
here in question where the effect is to
conflict with an express statutory pro.
vision requiring contracts to be let to
the lowest responsible bidder. That the
cost here has been increased because OF
the ordinances cannot be disputed fr
view of the difference in the bids of both
contestants. From what has been said
the judgment of the court below must
be reversed. The record is remitted with
directions that the bill be reinstated with
a procedendo.'
Injunction to Follow
This means that the lower court WI
new undoubtedly issue an injunction
restraining any further progress on the
construction of the new library building
wcrk on which has already been begun
The two lowest bidders for the new
library building were George A. Fuller
& Co., and John Gill & Sons. the bid OF
the former being S2.570,000 subject to a
deduction of $155.00O If the provisions OF
the ordinance requiring the stone to bs
cut in Philadelphia was eliminated. The
latter's bid was $2,535,00O with a de-
duction of $4,000 II the same provision
was excluded. The bid of John Gill
Sons was accepted as being the lowes
responsible bidder for work done withir
the city. The bid of Fuller & Co., how
ever, was lower If the provisions of the
ordinance were eliminated. After the
bid had been awarded, Taylor, as tax
payer, applied for an injunction.
This was the second taxpayers suit
against the library contract the firs