The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1933-02-27

/ OOAANAIA8 W00 VIZ 0AVPRSSOt V6xkt ~
had ever seen. This In the face Of tn
fact that only commentator Of tn
highest grade was heard from Mr.
Russell Deeter 6 TO the type ane
class Of inspectors under whom th'
concrete work was being performed
Mr.. DeRemer either neglected hi
duties or was incapable Of performing
the same, - one Of the architect
He added that considering thu
subject Of friction between the arch.
fleets. It would appear from the rec.
ord that Mr.. DeRemer never entered
into this work in the ole-hearted
manner that professional mar
should have done. He objected t.
everything done from the start and II
can be fairly said that he has been
consistent In that respect"
Matthaei said the evidence "indi-
Gated" that none Of our state archi-
tects who testified convinced any one
unless the four men who signed the
majority report that the North Da-
kota architects could assume such
great responsibility - the contract
under consideration entailed.
Another statement Of the majority
report Matthaei terms as absolutely
false"
Merely Made Objections
Throughout the page Matthaei re-
fers frequently to DeRemer. At an
other point In his report he said that
findings Of the committee indicated
"DeRemer was not keeping very close
track Of the work for which he was
being paid" and adding testimony
showed he did nothing relative to de-
signing, creating or constructing,
contentins himself by merely making
objections"
Matthaei said he failed ito see the
point stressed under the subject of
unit prices. All changes that have
been made 20 far, were fully covered
under allowances or alternate pro-
posals received at the time that the
bids were opened.
"Tlne so-called schedule D. upon
which 30 much stress has been laid,
has never been accepted by the board
Of state capitol commissioners. The
evidence shows that they were merely
minimum prices for certain changes
that might be made II It was desir-
able to do 50 in the future.
THE items under Schedule D. E.
Fl and G. have never been agreed
upon, nor accepted. nor is there any
evidence submitted to the investtga-
ing committee. nor In the office Of
the secretary, nor in the minutes that
the board has ever taken action
thereon. Therefore, In my opinion,
any argument based upon this Is be-
side the point and an unnecessary
waste Of time"
Matthaei said the general contract
was let to the Lundoff- 6icknell COM
pany Of Chicago and the board Of
state capitol commissioners followed
the letter Of that law in q very exact
manner In letting this contract"
Points 70 Moline
He added that E. A. Moline, the un-
successful bidder, was subpoenaed
and was In attendance at the hear
ings from Jan. Is to Feb. l at the ex-
pense OF the state Of North Dakota,
but was not called by the attorney
for the committee to take the wit
ness stand, hence I cannot other
than assume that he could not and
would not have contended that his bid
was low"
Among 30 ultimate facts outlined
IN Matthaei's report are included:
No North Dakota architects were
capable Of handling the job.
Lundoff-Bicknell company were "by
far the lowest bidders"
Agreement with the majority that
the employment Of Aaron r. Jahr by
the commission was beyond the DOW
ers Of the board.
The state neither gained or lost
anything" by failure Of the board to
permit contractor to furnish own
bond.
N. d. Labor Favored
In virtually every possible case,
North Dakota labor was favored.
There have been no premature pay
ments for material.
The very best" Judgment was used
IN the starting Of work, and continu.
ing up to now.
Criticism Of the majority that capi-
tol commissioners made many "tun-
keting" trips cannot be taken "seri-
ously."
Agreement with the majority that
the system Of allowing expenses was
careless.
Organization Of the commission is
cumbersome.
Although expense accounts OF the
general contractors "may appear ex-
orbitant" the board has not failed to
do its duty" in connection with them
for the reason they have never come
formally before the board; the same
holds good for criticism Of the major
lty that there were padded expense
accounts.
Whether the cornerstone was laid
prematurely = matter Of opinion"
Saving Premium Okay
Capitol commissioners should not be
for attempting to save the
premium on architects bond.
Agreement with the majority that
the commission 'courted" the inves-
tigation through press statements by
Bangs.
It requires considerable stretch Of
the Imagination to see how close re-
between architects. build
ers and commission reflects on "the
Integrity Of anyone
Failure to appoint superintend-
ent Is somewhat 4 matter Of opin-
lon," and that "a superintendent u
wholly unnecessary and merely en-.
falling additional ana uncalled for
expense"
Commission should have allowed all