Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!

Sign up free
Page thumbnail for Wheeling Sunday Register
Letter to Editor April 18, 1886

Wheeling Sunday Register

Wheeling, Ohio County, West Virginia

What is this article about?

Letter defends contractors Myers and Helmick from accusations of delaying Clarksburg Court House construction, explaining the court's refusal to honor their bid's payment condition despite prior agreement.

Clipping

OCR Quality

98% Excellent

Full Text

Clarksburg Court House.
Editor of the Register:
Dear Sir: Your Clarksburg correspondent in last Sunday's Register does great injustice to Messrs. Myers and Helmick, in the matter of the Clarksburg Court House.
Before putting in their bid Myers & Helmick appeared before the Court and told them that their bid would be conditional upon the delivery to the contractors of the orders of the county as the work progressed. The matter was fully discussed and the Court stated that there would be no objection as to such delivery of orders, as it would not cost the county anything, the orders not bearing interest.
Myers & Helmick thereupon put in their bid for the work with the written condition therein that the county orders, payable November 1, 1887, and November 1, 1888, should be delivered to them monthly, upon estimates made by the Supervising Architect of the work done and material furnished, and upon this bid the Court awarded them the contract.
The contract presented by the Court to Myers & Helmick did not contain the condition as to monthly delivery of the orders contained in their bid, and the Court refused to let the condition to be inserted. Consequently Myers & Helmick withdrew their papers. They asked that a clause in the contract authorizing the architect to "supervise the furnishing of the material" be stricken out, but which left him fully authorized to inspect, approve or reject all materials. But even this was withdrawn before the action of the Court was taken, which was therefore upon condition for the monthly delivery of the orders alone. The Court gave no reason for its action in the matter.
We have the above from a disinterested gentleman who was present and who says that the above statement can be verified in any particular.
Myers and Helmick are not in the habit of evading any responsibility which they have assumed. And I am sure that the numerous gentlemen at Clarksburg who were present at the session of the Court, will hold these gentlemen guiltless of delaying the construction of the Court House.
FAIRNESS.

What sub-type of article is it?

Persuasive Informative

What themes does it cover?

Infrastructure

What keywords are associated?

Clarksburg Court House Myers Helmick Contract Bid County Orders Public Improvement Court Refusal

What entities or persons were involved?

Fairness. Editor Of The Register

Letter to Editor Details

Author

Fairness.

Recipient

Editor Of The Register

Main Argument

myers and helmick's bid for the clarksburg court house was conditional on monthly delivery of county orders, which the court agreed to verbally but refused to include in the written contract, leading them to withdraw; they are not responsible for the delay.

Notable Details

Bid Conditional Upon Delivery Of County Orders As Work Progressed Court Stated No Objection To Such Delivery Orders Payable November 1, 1887, And November 1, 1888 Supervising Architect To Make Estimates Withdrew Papers After Condition Omitted From A Disinterested Gentleman Present

Are you sure?