Show It STARTLING REVELATmN t t Mor Very Peculiar Methods of the County Commissioners Com-missioners L RECEIVING BIDS A FARCE I Contract Awarded Before the Bids Were Opened It C Davis Whiitcmoreft Defective I i Given Authority to Fnrcliasc a Machine and J h Said He Has Done So nt a Figure One Thou tmnd Dollars Above the Lowest BitC Jtcceii cd Letters fWliieli Like Those of Haylccn Require nn Explanation > i In all probability the county commissioners < I com-missioners will award the contract tomorrow to-morrow for an elevator for the countys portion of the joint building What action will be taken remains toe to-e seen but it r interesting to note a few developments in connection with the elevator problem which have recently re-cently come to light The county court last December decided de-cided to advertise for bids for the construction I con-struction of an elevator for the building build-ing Six elevator companies entered into competition their bids ranging from 3335 and upward The bids were opened at a regular session of the county court on January 27 last but the members not being versed in elevatorology decided to postpone awaraing the contract until some later day A couple of weeks passed by and still the worthy commissioners were undecided as to the proper ana cine to purchase < II A BRIGHT IDEA Finally the bright idea dawned upon their bewildered minds that they would pass a resolution in the county court of which they were a majority constituting themselves a committee to take a trip to some of the eastern J cities and inspect elevators Thus is briefly the history of the elevator campaign y cam-paign of the county court a far a the public knows up to the time of the I departure of Commissioners Roberts and Geddes for Chicago and New York borne three weeks ab r Messrs Roberts and Geddes went east ostensibly for the purpose of deciding de-ciding upon the merits of the different elevators for which bids had been previously pre-viously filed with the court The expenses t ex-penses they said were lo be borne by the company receiving the contract Now i is stated that while they departed I de-parted ostensibly to determine on an I elevator the purchase of a particular machine had practically been decided before even the bids were opened Should such prove to be true one may well wonder if this method is not entirely I en-tirely in line with the alleged proclivities I t proclivi-ties of a former county court t PUBLIC SENTIMENT In view of the unusual interest this announcement stirred up on the streets I yesterday the following communication may be taken as a fair expression of A the public sentiment Salt Lake City TTtah Feb 2 To the Editor of The Herald Dear SirA good opportunity will probably a prob-ably be afforded for the good government I committee to work into the method by which the elevator contract has been I let for the county court house The maneuvering of the Individuals who constitute the county court are suspicious to say the least I is rumored that the apparent differences in the board a to I the kind of elevator to be adopted is only to throw the public off the scent of the very harmonious feeling that exists ex-ists among them The flat has gone out that the least expensive but in this case the most costly elevator is to be purchased I pur-chased ana the outraged public will again be called on to pay more for their whistle than H is worth and it will probably never is surely be known there who gets the rake off that 1 Will the good government committee r p step In and save the county this further disgrace There are other firms who have offered t furnish a perfect machine as Is made t a much efficiency and durability and safety and durablty lafet guaranteed ad In flot all desirable features are to be I guaranteed equal to the very ridiculously high priced machine that i Is rumored has been selected and for which the taxpayers I payers will have to pay the bills Is It not significant that when any Important I Im-portant contract has to be let for the public Its officials rush off to distant points t purchase when the same articles can usually be furnished by resident taxpayers tax-payers for 50 per cent less than Is pal I the public trustees Will the by publc s public never cease to be outraged by those It t tb 1Lhf elects to protect and disburse its funds I i is not now compulsory will not the legislature enact that public purchases I g t1ug be subject to public competition A CITIZEN r While the above is not very expliplt It strongly suggests that there is something rotten in Denmark and the author may not be very fa from the truth as present developments would indicate L C DAVIS PROMINENT I will be remembered that L C I Davis figured quite prominently as the county courts Hawkshaw in the celebrated I cele-brated Hake bribery cases I is J not surprising therefore that the county court should see fit to reward him for his services At any rate he bobs up at the very time when there Is a contract to ibe let for an elevator said the following letters between the Crane Elevator company and Mr Davis Da-vis would Indicate that he had been made the aeent of the onnnfv ieunt for r the purchase of a machine long before = be-fore the bids were opened which then was only a farce to deceive the public r TELL TALE LETTERS Salt Lake City Uth Dec 2 1693 The Crane Elevator Company 219 South Jefferson street Chicago Ill Gentlemen Enclosed you will please > find copy of authority from the county selectman of Salt Lake county Utah for me to purchase an elevator for the county p coun-ty part a the joint city and county building This elevator Is io be purchased and put in as soon a possible The pres ent city aldermen will go out of office the first of next month and there is no question but what the new board will purchase an elevator for the city part of the building and both machines will be I put in at the same tme I will submit to you plans specifications c specifica-tions and all measurements for am estimate I 1 esti-mate In about ten days I will bo In your it ITTh I W5 f1 d city about the 4th or 5th of next month and I think we can come to an agreement agree-ment whereby you can secure this order I have already written your Mr Bodman of Omaha that I will call and se him on my way to Chicago a this matter will not come up until my return from the east Hoping to hear from you by return mail as to whether you want to bid on this work or not I remain Yours very truly L C DAVIS C01 McCornick Bldg The following is a copy of the authority author-ity referred to County Court House of Salt Lake County Salt Lake City Utah Dec 23 1895 L C Davis Esq TIre undersigned were this day authorized author-ized by the county court of Salt Lake i county to negotiate for and purchase an I elevator for the county portion of the I joint city and county building and in I pursuance ot that authority do hereby i request you to have prepared the necessary neces-sary plans and specifications for such elevator and to solicit for bids and proposals i posals for the same which bids and proposals I submitted to us with posals are to be submite I your recommendations concerning the I same A S GEDDES CHAS H ROBERTS lT CHRISTOPHERSON Selectmen of Salt Lake County THE BIDS The above letters speak for themselves them-selves In this connection it may be of interest to quote the bids which were a follows Crane Elevator company 43a Electric passenger elevator Two electric passenger elevators S700 Vertical hydraulic elevator complete com-plete with pumping plant 4473 Two vertical hydraulic elevators complete with pumping plant 817J One vertical hydraulic elevator complete with pumping plant for two 6157 Brodisser Elevator Manufacturing company ny Compression tank system to be operated by water power 58SO Windslow Brothers Elevator company com-pany Two hydraulic passenger elevators eleva-tors 513560 Two hydraulic passenger elevators eleva-tors with two separate pump tanks and pipe plants 13966 Sprague Electric Elevator company per C R McKay SpraguePlatt multiple sheave electric passenger elevator5500 L C Trent Co Hydraulic passenger elevator3335 Crane electric elevator 3475 Standard Elevator and Manufacturing Manufactur-ing company I Two hydraulic passenger elevators I eleva-tors 8165 From the above I will be seen that II the bid of L C Trent Co a local I firm was about 1000 less than the bid from the factory a fact that maybe may-be of considerable significance when the foregoing letters are taken into I consideration ELEVATOR CONTROVbRSY Blr McKay Replies to tIle Statements State-ments of tie Electrical Engineer Engi-neer SALT LAKE CITY Feb 2 To the Editor pf The Herald A certain individual in this city who for reasons hst known to himself prefers to hide his Identity behind the a fracliye appellation of Electrical Ee Vnd rebj veil his gin er and hoping thereby to vei personal interest in the joint city and county building elevator contracts has I recently published communications in the colunms of the Salt Lake Herald I which I desire to review as briefly as space and the subect will permit I I I am averse to noticing anonymous I statements under any circumstances I but inasmuch as one of the communications I communi-cations referred to contained a direct I accusation that the statements made I I regarding Sprague electric elevators i in the Salt Lake Tribune were solely sole-ly inspired by the agent of the company I compa-ny who happened to be myself insinuations insin-uations that a financial consideration I was received therefor by the Tribune and furthermore in view of the fact that the said article was filled from beginning to end with absurd and false statements whose entire purport was to kill the chances of the Sprague company com-pany as regards the pending contract I propose to nail that accusation ana those statements and if possible to smoke out the responsible person from the hole into which he has crawled A to the insinuation that the Tribune Tri-bune received any consideration whatsoever what-soever for endorsing tho Sprague elevator ele-vator and the statement that any agent of the Sprague company or any person in any way interested therein or personally Interested in the pending contract was responsible for said endorsement en-dorsement I desire to brand both of those allegations as deliberate and malicious ma-licious untruths and I defy the Electrical trical Engineer or any one else to advance ad-vance any excuse whatsoever as a basis ba-sis for uttering such falshoods u xne iiieciricai engineer atter assuring suring the public of his vast experience and presumably omniscience with regard re-gard to electric and hydraulic machinery machin-ery has no hesitancy in stating first That nothing can be more perfect In the way of mechanicism than a well installed rater and well built hydraulic ele I will undertake to furnish the Electrical Elec-trical Engineer with any necessary I number of test records upon hydraulic elevators of all prominent makes showing that the average hydraulic elevator does not return in useful work 33 per cent of the energy supplied to it and I challenge him to produce the substantiated record of a single hydraulic hy-draulic elevator in this country whose net efficiency of 45 per cent fll Second As to the coal bills for the hydraulic machines I will undertake hydraulc Ia < wi undertake Ito I-to demonstrate that not one elevator I I in this city whose dally service is 125 I round trips or more in a three story building is operated under normal duty with a monthly coal bill of 40 or less ThirdThe Electrical Engineer wants to know what evidence there is that the Sprague or ny other electric elevator will cost less than 1 per day for fuel In view of the fact that neither the Sprague or any other eke trjc elevator is a consumer of fuel the query of the Electrical Engineer is somewhat ambiguous but passing that slip of the pen I beg to remark that tnere are now on rue with the county I court records of the actual cost of I electrical current supplied to various Sprague elevators working on heavier duty than any elevators In this city ever handled which records show that the daily cost for current supplied to any one of said Sprague elevators Isles Is-les than one dollar and ten cents per day and that amount not only includes thecost of fuel but all the other costs of attendance boiler water interest and depreciation charges on complete generating plant and an indefinite margin of profit for the company sell inc the current Since it is a well known fact that the cost of fuel in electric generating stations averages not more than one I Continued on Page 3 J i r < > 1 STARLTING REVELATIONS Continued from Page 1 third the total cost of current delivered te on the street the Electrical Engineer will hardly be courageous enough to repeat his question It may be well to state that the fore I going figures on power cost for Sprague electric elevators cannot be assumed as applying to any other electric elevator ele-vator FourthThe Electrical Engineer also has no hesitancy in tating that the saving claimed of 150 per year in favor otf electric elevators is worse than baseless Perhaps so according to his authoritative cranial vacuum but Mr B J Arnold of Chicago consulting con-sulting engineer of the Worlds Fair and consulting engineer for the Chicago I Chica-go board of trade has undertaken with his clients to effect a reduction of 11000 in the operation nearly 100 per year operatoD of the steam and electric plants of the Chicago Board of Trade building and the largest item in that saving is effected ef-fected by throwing out four Crane hydraulic hy-draulic elevators and substituting four Sprague electric screw elevators And on this same point we may examine ex-amine an extract from the Minneapolis Tribune of March 14 1895 to the effect that the court house and city hal commission com-mission of Minneapolis through a member requested < If Mr William De ia Barre a noted hydraulic engineer and chief engineer of the Minneapolis Milling company an answer to the question How much more could the county afford to pay for six electric elevators than for six Crane elevators computations being based on the claims of the Crane schedule both types doing equal duty coal at 54 per ton interest on cost at 4I per cent Mr De la Barre replied The answer to your question is 51145466 for each elevator or 9872296 for six elevators assuming assum-ing each to work under Identical conditions con-ditions FifthThe article referred to states I that the county will be dependent upon either of the electric companies for the operation of Its elevators Since there are now in this city four central stations sta-tions and a large water power company compa-ny about to begin operations it would appear that the county must be rather hard to please if it cannot secure current cur-rent from any one df the five companies compa-nies Sixth Referring to the losses in producing pro-ducing and transmitting electricity the Electrical Engineer presents some startling conclusions as to the vast waste of the power in the electric as compared with the hydraulic systems sys-tems The indisputable and unquestioned unques-tioned fact is that electric energy is today in every part of the world delivered deliv-ered to customers upon an evaporation of less than forty pounds of water per horse power per hour while the steam pumps universally used on hydraulic elevators do not accomplish the same result upon less that seventy pounds of water evaporated Finally the Electrical Engineer concludes that electric power can be combined with the hydraulic system more efficiently than by use in a direct di-rect electric elevator Tests recently made in this city upon such a combination plant show that the cost of current used In that manner amounted to nearly six times the cost at which a local company has proposed to supply the Sprague elevator eleva-tor in the county building During the past the year Sprague Electric Elevator company was awarded award-ed contracts for more than 260 electric elec-tric elevators in each of these cases defeating the hydraulic trust companies compa-nies and generally in spite of lower bids on the part of these companies Respectfully C R MKAY S S |