OCR Text |
Show RESTRHIN GIF I Advocates of Utah Rock Asphalt As-phalt for Paving Get Tem- porary Injunction From District Court. . THREE EXTENSIONS INVOLVED IN CASE Contractor Heman May Proceed Pro-ceed With Work in One Division; Di-vision; Allege Bids Were Incomplete. WITJTTN five minutes after, May-or May-or Samuel C. Park yesterday noon signed the last of twen. t3--four printed contracts, covering cov-ering thc street paving which the city comniisHioncr.s had awarded to G. A. Heman, St.. Louis contractor, Attorney Elias Ashton rushed into tho mayor's office, introduced himself and informed the mayor that Judge C. W. Morse in tho Third district court had just signed an order restraining him from signing of the contracts. "They have been signed and have gone to tho city recorder for his sig. nature," said tho mayor. Attorney Ashton never stopped to say good-bye, and within a few minutes Noble Warrnm, citj' recorder, was enjoined en-joined from signing the contracts. Kecorder Is Enjoined. The restraining ordor had been issued is-sued by Judge Morso on the complaint com-plaint of Thomas Homer and was directed di-rected against tho mayor and citj' commissioners, com-missioners, individually and collectively, collective-ly, and tho city rocorder, enjoining them from entering into fotmal contract con-tract with Heman for tho- paving specified spec-ified in extensions 78, 79 and 80. Por a short whilo after the papers were served on Rocorder Warrum tho improssion prevailed that the cit' could not proceed with any of tho work which had been awarded to Contractor Heman. Later it was discovered that the injunction did not affect extension 2so. 8i and the commissioners held a special meeting yesterday afternoon, approved IMr. Homan's bond, and thc contract with him for that work was formally and Jiuallj'- closed. Extension 81 comprises the paving of Fourth South street from Rio Grande avenue to West Temple street and from Second East to Filth East streot. Contractor Heman 's price on this cxtenusion alone and ho was the low bidder by about $800 was $81,-OiSA'l, $81,-OiSA'l, which represents almost one-half one-half of tho entire amount of the paving pav-ing includqd in all of thc extensions under consideration. Ground for Petition. The basis of tho injunction was the alleged incompleteness of Mr. Heman 'a bids for extensions 7S, 79 and 80 and tho fact that the city engineer's ollico in tabulating the bids, both those of (Continued on Page Nine CITY IS EiJOIIED li PAIS CONTRACT (Continued from Page One.) fl Mr. Heman and all others who bid, JJ used in the omissions the figures ot ill the highest of the three lowest coutrac- jll According to Thomas Homer, the ill plaintiff in tho action, the entire pur- jfll pose of the proceeding is to have the 91 bids of all the contractor? thrown out 191 in order that the city commissioners jll might order the readvertising of the notice of intejntion. specifying the usd of Ctah rock asphalt. Attorney Ashton ycslcrdiiy admitted that while he wns representing Mr. llomcr, the fees in the case were being be-ing paid by tho Pittsburg-Salt Lake Oil company, the concern which owns the asphalt bods in Carbou county and which is making n fight to have its li material used in this work. j While denying lhat Strange & Mr- Guirc, Smith Brothers, tho Campbell if Building company and P. ,1. Moran jr were in any way interested in tho ao- S tion, he admitted that the Bird-Men- j rienball compnny, successful bidders on jl extension number 7-1, and A. A. Clark. I another of the bidders were interested. rail One Extension Approved. U The motion which authorized the II mayor to sign contracts for tho city for fl paving in all five of the extensions, If spociticd that one of the contracts, that a of extension number 74, should go to l the Bird-Mflndcuhall company. The ac- jl tion brought by Mr. Ilonicr'in no way 1 interferes with that companj-, altliougn it tho material jt proposes to use tor the f work is precisely the same ns that I! which the injunction seekers arc fight- u ing. II In lieu of a bond for $5000 Mr. M Homer deposited a certified check for J that amount. Talk of Damage Suit. J At the commiion meeting ye3terdnv J afternoon Commissioner w. H. Komi's lj inquired of City Attorney Dininny just ij what rights the city would have in the ij mnttcr of damages should Mr. Homer jjj bo unable to make his suit stick. Jl "You can proceed against the $3000 If bond," replied Dininny. "Well, it strikes me that we owe it mt to the city to bring a suit for damages ma if it is found that the work involvpd Hjl is in any way damaged by reason of mU the action, particularly after tho com- ) missioners, the contractor and tho on- jflil incor all have said nnd still say that ma 'tali rock asphalt will bo used if it bo Btt found satisfactory." In Allegations in Complaint. n Among other things, tlio complaint II upon which the petition for .the injunc- HI tion is based, says: HC That the bids and proposals of the HI said Heman at the time the same Hi were submitted and tendered by him HI as aforesaid were Incomplete In this: mm That certain portions of the work HV prescribed to be done and certain ma- Ml terlals required to be furnished by the HS plans and specifications referred to lu H9 said notice to contractors were not HI estimated by the said lie man and no HI estimates or prlcoa whatsoever were HI contained In the sftld proposals or Hjl bids of the said Heman fixing the HI prices or sums at which he, the said HI Heman, proposed to do certain work KB and furnish certain materials speel- HI fled and prescribed by the said plans HI and specifications prepared and fur- HI nlshcd by the engineer of Salt Lako HI City to govern and be the basis of HI the work covered hy pavlns exten- HI slons Nos. 7S. 70 nnd SO. That the HI omissions above referred to are as HW follows, to wit: On page 15 of the HI proposal of said Heman on extension HI covering the Improvement lo "00 mads HI tinder paving extension No. "S blank Dn spaces were left by the said Heman In the places designated for tho In- fl scrtlon of prices proposed for th I Items designated on said page, as corrugated Iron pipe water ways, I half section 24, In which diameter, D- I W. C. 5557 per lln. ft. I And also nn page ID, after the 1 words "furnishing and setting guard timbers per lineal foot 4xG 4x10" 1 ommlslons were left and no prices fi designated at which the said Heman m proponed for said Items. Allegation is made further that tnere H were other omissionB and that nil of D theso omissions are necessary and cs- M sentiol parts of said paving extensions. Hearing July 19, M After citing the commissioners to ap- HI ponr in court n July 10 to show cause, HJ tho commissioners nro enjoined front mm proceeding further with the work in HJ the following langungc: Huj It is further ordered that said de- m fendnnts above named, together with their agents, servants and employees. H and each of them, be and they ure H hereby restrained and enjoined from entering into and executing any con- M tracts for the construction of any curbs and gutters and asphalt pav- ia Ing extensions Nos. 7S. 79 and SO, m and from taking any steps to carry out any contract relating to the lm- provements described in the Hpecl- M flcatlons particularly referred to in the complaint herein on file and al?o from paying out any moneys on ac- count of any contract made relating H to said extensions or any of thorn. |