The Birmingham age-herald., 1921-12-09

county with reference to the contra
 According to MT. Benners hls firm represents a number of taxpayers who have retained 1t to fife proceed ings to prevent the board from car rying out the contract according to It's original terms. His clients be- lieVe. he states, that 1t would be a wanton waste of the public money to pay the s367,659.75 for the construc- tion of the road as called for in the original contract when cost of labor and materials have so decreased that, according to his statement, the work can be done now for approximately S115,000 less.
 Members of the board of revenue on the other hand. declare that this figure is too high and that $60,00o would more nearly represent the diff ference in construction cost than the amount given by Mir. Benners.
 Question Puzzles Board
 Members of the board declare they will be glad to have the matter settled in the courts in order thai they may know what their liabilities are or whether any exist, in damages to the Dunn Construction company fl they finally refuse to carry out the original contract. Threatened on one hand by injunction proceedings tc prevent their carrying out the con tract and with damage suit on the other by the contractor if they re- pudlae it. board members declare thai they want a legal interpretation oi their status in regard to the matter
 However. it Is rumored, 1t is mol
 I.s tfsa a.R will be finally carried out unless the Dunn Construction company agrees to bid in Jefferson county road improve ment bonds, proceeds from the sale oi which will be used to finance the work, not only at par, which is pel cent, but at a sufficient additional premium to offset the difference be- tween the cost of construction under conditions in the material and labor market as they existed in April, 1920 when the contract was let and now thus taking care of the difference ir cost between that time and the pres ent. This matter will be determined it is expected, December 16 when bids on the bonds will be received by the board.
 What the attitude of board mem bers with reference to this phase oi the situation Is has not been dis closed and they decline to discuss their attitude in regard to 1t, but II is believed that the matter will re- ceive heir consideration at that time
 Save on Oher Jobs
 However, members of the board point out that while to carry ou1 the original contract with the Dunr Construction company would cost the county considerably more than to re cefve additional bids based on pres ent material and labor conditions, by carrying out that contract they wil be released by the< Dunn company from all obligations to carry out foul other contracts with that concern lei at the same time as the Bessemei project. These four contracts involve approximately S415.000. they state and Dunn has agreed to release then from these contracts if they will car ry out the Bessemer contract upor its original terms. Release from tho four contracts, on which they believe they would be liable in damages Il they failed to live up to them, vii save the county approximately ss5, GOO, they declare, representing the diff ference between cost of construction at the time they were let and now which they say will more than offse the difference complained of on thu Bessemer road.
 "The controversy in reference tt the Dunn contract on the Bessemei road originated In the spring of 1920 board members declare, when thu former board of revenue awarded tn, contract before effecting a sale O county road improvement bonds. As surances were given the board by tn, bond company handling the bond that they had been placed at par. Act ing upon such assurances the boar, advertised for bids on the Besseme road and, other projects.
 Shortly after awarding of the con tract to Dunn and company, the low est bidders, the increased demand 10 loans and the fall in Liberty anr other bonds and many other thing rendered impossible the sale of Jei ferson county bonds at par. bearing per cent interest. This made ! impossible for the board to permt Dunn to proceed with the contract a that, time. Subsequent to this. on ad vice of the state examiners. this con tract was annulled by the board . revenue.
 May Ask Damages
 Dunn and company now claim ,ha they have been ready at all times t carry out the contract and that it | through no fault of theirs that ta county did not effect the sale of il bonds. Dunn's counsel advises .ha the only recourse he has is to file sui for damages if the county repudate | the contract.
 Since the awarding Of the contrac