The commercial. (Union City, Tenn.) 190?-193?, 1921-02-18

u1OllCy 1hNCOICu III oAdCW ans hO
answer was that we are, but the in
terest is included in general inter-
est account with other extensions
and improvements.
With all the discussion, however,
there seemed to be no opposition to
a general campaign of street i'm
provements of the character and ex-
tent heretofore set forth.
Before the meeting closed, Mr.
Harris, an engineer from Memphis,
entered into the details of street
construction and materials employed
in modern street work. He styled
one form as asphaltum concrete,
costing complete about three dollars
a square yard, another the sheet as
phalt, a more durable type of street
formation, costing complete about
$3.50 a square yard. This cost in
cludes base and all. 1t was figured
that we had some foundations here
that would serve for new work, but
Mr.. Reynolds stated that we had
very little that would serve for
standard street work.
So that asphaltum concrete, now
in use in the cities stated heretofore,
is the type the Board had agreed on.
Quite number of things will be
necessary to be done before the bonds
can be issued and contract made.
In the first place the Board will have
to draft an ordinance with exhibits,
etc. including the First street con-
struction district, and the name of
every property owner. This ordi-
nance will have to pass first, second
and third readings. This will natur-
ally take some time. Another fact
which will have to govern the con-
,truction of streets, and this Is, as
Mr.. Harris states, that asphaltum
cannot be laid except in the warm
summer weather, about five months
n the year.
Perhaps too there will be, as the
question is presented to the people,
/ more general discussion and may
,e some opposition to the proposed
,lan or to the kind of walks to be
,uilt But leaving that as it is, the
Board has had a very favorable ex-
,ression so far.
Mrs. j. ]. Miller was the only lady |
,rcsent at the meeting, but she was
lind enough to state that she ad-
-ocated progress in street improve
nents and made come comparisons
which showed that we are behind
ther cities in this work.
One point was made that we could
asily enough agree on the front
oct plan, and that if we were finan-
tally able we could agree on the
Ian of finances; but that extreme
are and caution should be taken
With reference to the contract we
1ake and the kind of streets we
uild. We can very easily be taken
4 by some cmooth promoter and get
urselves tied up in contract for
treet work that would involve us in
ccandal, tho like of which has been
onnected with war contracts and
lore recently with public highway
vork in Tennessee. 1t iS said to have
,aked out from reliable sources that
he State highway department let a
ontract for moving the dirt on a GER
lin part of the State highway con-
ct 81 cents a cubic yard,
lc contract being first su6let at 80
ents cubic yard and sublet again
20 cents cubic yard. The report
that the man who received the con-
act at 20 cents q cubic yard made
nc thousand dollars a mile clear on
is contract.
Now, there is always more or less
'iticism of public contracts. Some {
it is unwarranted, but there have |
ecn cases of real graft not only in {
ar times but in peace times, and the
'5ponsibility of public officials who
ave these contracts to make or have
lie authority to make them is often
sry grave and far reaching. 1t is !
'erefore very plainly and unmistak- {
)ly a duty which rests upon the
Oard of Mayor and Aldermen of I'm {
n City before entering into a gen ]
al campaign of street construction,
hich necessarily takes large sums I
money, to get the best materials /
Id construction available at the !
west market prices and to secure t
e services of competent and relia-
e road builders. To do this there q
ould be a thorough investigation v
street contracts and street con- a
and this will entail un- v
the services of committee b