The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1921-12-31
UNLAWFUL DIVISION
OF PUBLIC FUNDS
CHARGED IN PETITION

road was held in allegiance pending a
sale of these bonds.
Nothing was done, 1t is set forth,
until September 81. 1921, when the
board of revenue prepared an elabo-
rate resolution authorizing the chair
man of the board to execute a con-
tract with the Dunn company for
construction of the road and refer
ring to an award of the contract
made in May, 1920, and resembling a
resolution of the board passed on De-
cember, 1920. annulling all awards
of road work previously made
Resolution
This resolution Is setsout in the
petition as an exhibit, parts OF which
are as follows:
Whereas, the said board did meet
at the time and place mentioned IN
said notice and did publicly open and
read all the bids submitted to and
filed with the said board for the said
project above mentioned, and did
thereupon adjudge and determine
that the above bid submitted to and
filed with the board by the Dunn
Construction company for the said
project was duly and properly made
and complied in all respects with
al, the requirements of said board,
and the proceedings under which
said work was to be let, and did adj
Judge and determine that the Dunn
Construction company was the low
est responsible bidder for said project
and the said board did at Its meeting
on May I, 1920, by the unanimous
vote of the board. duly taken as re-
quired by law, duly accept said bid
and did duly award the work to the
Dunn Construction company under
said project; and
whereas, the Dunn Construction
company in consideration of the rec
ognition OF the validity OF the salu
award and contract. the signing OF
said contract by the clerk of the
board for and in the name of the
board an extension of time in which
to complete the work under said con-
tract, will release and forever dis
charge the county from and against
any and all claims and demands aris-
ing from or growing out of the fall
ure of the county to heretofore per-
form and abide by any of the terms
or agreements on its part in said con-
tract contained or to permit the
Dunn Construction company to do
any of the work required or furnish
any materials therein agreed to by
it, Now, therefore, be 1t resolved. by
the board of revenue of Jefferson
county, Alabama
"G) That said resolution of the
board adopted on December 10, 1871,
resembling and annulling said award
and contract be. and the same is
hereby rescinded, annulled and held
for naught insofar only as it relates
and pertains to the heretofore men
toned contract with the Dunn Con-
struction company for the construc-
ton of project Ia. Cd That the
president of this board be and he IS
hereby authorized and directed lot
in the name and on behalf OF this
said board, to execute said contract
heretofore executed by the Dunn
Construction company covering the
work to be done under said project
Ia upon the tender of the same to
him by the Dunn Construction COM
pany for execution, and that one
duplicate original of said contract
when so executed be delivered by
him to the Dunn Construction COM
pany. go That the Dunn Construc-
ton company shall begin work UNI
der said contract within 10 days
after being notified in writing by the
board that the board has on deposit
sufficient cash proceeds from the
sale of bonds issued for road con-
struction work with which to pay es-
Inmates for said work. and that IL
shall be and is hereby allowed 20
months from the beginning of work
under said contract in which to fully
complete said contract according to
said plans and specifications"
II is then alleged that the resolu-
ton adopted by the board December
TO- 1920. that "all outstanding con-
tracts for road building not com
pleted or signed be annulled" was
intended to include the Dunn con-
tract on the North Bessemer road.
Under the statute providing that
all contracts for construction Of
roads where the estimated cost ex-
ceeds $3.50 must be let to the lowest
bidder. it is alleged, a money con-
sideration is necessary, and valid
contract cannot be made based on a
consideration of surrender of causes
by action alone.
The petition then alleges that the
board of revenue has no money with
which to pay for the construction OF
the road either on the 1920 price
basis or on the basis of prices exist
ing at the present time, but have
worked out a scheme by which they
purpose 10 allow the Dunn company
to proceed with the work.
This scheme. II is alleged, was car
ricd out by advertising for bids on
Saga 600 worth of 5 per cent county
road Improvement bonds and award
iise them to Dunn & Co. at par and
an additional premium of I per cent
II is alleged that as part OF the
scheme IL Is proposed to go through