The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1929-08-27
SUIT FILED TO
ENJOIN PAYING
OF C. c. SHIPP
0YerChargeS for VentiIating
Equipment Alleged by
Taxpayer.
C0-DEFENDANTS NAMED
Excess Profit of $12,440 by
Manufacturer in School
Deals Charged.

Suit to enjoin the Indianapolis
school board from paying c. c.
Shipp, Indianapolis Ventilating
manufacturer. S12,440, which alleged
overcharges for the ventilating
equipment installed in School 3 and
so, was filed today in Marion superior
court four by Jacob Morgan. attorney
John M. Fisher, 100 West st. Clair
street, a taxpayer
The suit also asks that the J. NJ.
Roth Engineering Company, the
Bevington- Williams, Inc, engineers,
be restrained. enjoined and prohib-
tied from taking any steps recon-
mending and approving payment of
money or the issuance of vouchers
or warrants representing the alleged
overcharges to C. G. Shipp or to the
co-defendants, w. H. johnson & Son
Company and Hayes Brothers, Inc,
Indianapolis heating and ventilating
contractors, who received the con-
tracts for the schools.
Other co-defendants with Shipp
are the school commissioners;
Charles C. York, school business di-
rector; the Rotz company. the Bev-
ington- Williams company and Ster-
ling R. Holt, city controller and
school board auditor.
Closed Bidding Charged
Fisher makes the following
charges:
1. That specifications for the two
schools as prepared by the con-
sulting engineers limited bidding
on the wall boxes to the Shipp d.
Wall Box Ventilating units, to the
exclusive advantage gain and profit
of Clarence c. Shipp, said G. G.
Shipp Company, and all others with
whom said Shipp or his firm were
associated
2. "The specification written and
prepared we're 50 prepared as
to prevent and hinder anyone in
bidding in competition to Shipp wall
boxes or supply other or different
ventilating units of competitors;
and that said specifications so writ
ten and prepared by said j. Nj Rotz
Engineering Company and Beving-
ton Williams. Inc. we're IN turn by
them submitted or caused to be
submitted to the school board. ap-
proved by it and its business dlrec-
tor. with fun knowledge or by
means of full knowledge OF the
above facts.
3. That the specifications were
identical to those prepared by Shlpp
and his company and said Shipp and
his company procured j. M. Rotz
Engineering Company and BeVing-
n-Williams, Inc. as engineers to
insert said specifications bodily into
the other heating and ventilating
specifications of the schools
Thereby Shipp and his company
procured an undue advantage over
competitors.
Profit Was Normal
4 That at the same time there
we're sold through the state a NUM-
Der of competitive ventilsting units
At an average price of $50 a unit
and that "Shipp and said engineers
and all defendants except Holt knew
that Ships profit on the basis OIL
$50 per unit would be normal ana
ordinary"
5. That the engineers we're by
law obliged to prepare plans and
specifications for the heating and
ventilating work on the building so
as to incur the lowest possible eX-
penditures for equipment and in
stallations on a competitive bass,
but that this was not followed
in drawing the specifications for
3 and so.
s. That the contractors would not
have received said awards had they
not each expressed a Willingness
and intent to install Shipp boxes
as a part of their contracts to the
exclusion of all other ventilatlng
units and said school board would
not have awarded said contracts tC
said contractors if said contractors
intended to use wall boxes or venti'
lating units other than those made
and sold by said Shipp and COM
pany."
7. That the contractors are about
TO enter into the performance OF
their contracts which are alleged u
have been procured and executed
under "unconscionable conditions"
8. That Shipp and his company
chad built I'D and perfected an cr-
SANITATION or system known as the
'shipp System whereby and through
which he and his said COM
pany controlled and dictated the
construction OF public school build
inss in the state of Indiana. -. :
Q. That Shipp has caused ire
ouent and unnecessary inspection t.
Be- made of buildings where hi
equipment is not installed and y
possible caused the removal and DE
struction Of such competitive unit!
on the pretext that the same wer'
not properly installed"
10. That Shipp secured through
out the state of Indiana. but eX
ceptine indianapolis. prices approx
mating $50 to SIS. each on a com
uetitive basis, and that said Shipl
claimed TO control said school boart
and BY reason thereof could secur'
from SIS to 5000 for each such uni
in indianapolis without any objec
tions or interference. ...