The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1933-02-20

mo matter how broad their wisdom
and experience" he stated, no other
body or tribunal can acquire the In.
formation now possessed by the capt.
tol commission except BY long study
and experience, during the period Of
which the work Is without experienced
guidance"
The fee paid the architects, = point
questioned during the investigation.
rs reasonable and proper" according
to Bangs when the character, reputa-
ton and standing Of the architects
employed and the nature Of the work
to be performed by them Is given con.
sideration.
Bangs recited the reason for placing
the general contract with the Chicago
firm Of Lundoff- Bicknell, say ing
there was no legal method" by which,
IS could have been given to the Moline
Construction company at jamestown.
He said the Lundoff bid was $1.575. 900
and Moline,s was $l,659.4 34.
Moline Too High
Giving Moline the benefit Of tho
three per cent North Dakota prefer.
entail, Bangs said Moline still was
$37.l84 higher than Lundoff- Bicknell.
and "the law requires the commission
to accept the lowest responsible bid"
He explained the contract was sign.
ed in Chicago because 1.-The season had
become advanced" and 1T was abb
solutely essential that the steel, gravel.
sand, cement and other basic and
fundamental materials should be pur-
chased at the earliest possible moment
in order to expedite the building ana
cut off the rental charge which was
running to the rate Of something like
$4,000 per year."
Every effort was made to give the
steel contract to North Dakota firm,
Bangs reported. but the contractor re-
fused to take it at the low bid Of the
competitor. plus the North Dakota
preferential Of three per cent.
"The question of common brick ia
be used in the capitol has not been
settled" according to Bangs, adding
that bids have been submitted by
outside brickmakers at q price lower
than the lowest bids heretofore SUBJ
mitted by the North Dakota brick
makers and the matter has not yet
been brought to final determination. y
1T Is the purpose Of the board "a
submit to the North Dakota brick
makers the prices offered by the out
side brickmakers." Bangs said. sc
they can have the opportunity to OBJ
tain the contract at the lowest fig
ure. plus the preferential"
The statement by Bangs contains
Is pages devoted to the friction among
the architects with frequent reference
70 DeRemer and his "misunderstand-
ing" Of the contracts. Bangs said
many of the letters DeRemer sent
objecting to various phases Of thu
capitol construction, seemed almost
unworthy Of the time required to eth
er write or read them"
Thought Concrete o. X.
He said though DeRemer testified
the concrete work on the foundation
was the worst DeRemer had seen II
years, that lat q conference held 81
2:20 p. m, on October IS. 1882, bott
Joseph Bell DeRemer and Samuel J
DeRemer expressly and explicitly sale
to me that the concrete then beini
poured was just as strong as though
Mr.. DeRemer's Interpretation Of TIL
specifications had been complies
with; that the difference was o
minor importance and would not Il
any way effect detrimentally tn
strength, durability, or efficiency Q
the work."
Bangs said the basis Of q charg
that one contractor had been overpail
SIC, lO3.43 was a refusal by Mr.. De
Remer to acquiesce In the ruling o
the board authorizing the paymen
for material on the ground but no
yet brought into the building" though