Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 20, Number 63, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 11 April 1899 — Heinzmans’ Suit Against the County. [ARTICLE]

Heinzmans’ Suit Against the County.

The case of Heinzman Brothers against Jasper county for certain sums claimed be due them on the court house, is on the docket for trial at the present term of the circuit court, although it is but reasonable to suppose that if the case is ever tried at all it will be taken to some other county on change of venues. Briefly stated the facts pf the contention between the Heinzmans and the commissioners, are that the contractors have put in a bill for socalled extras, amounting to about $2,500, and the commissioners consider that they have a counterclaim against the Heinzmans, more than enough to offset the latter’s bill. The counterclaim of the commissioners is based on a clause of Ihe contract by which the Heinzmans were to forfeit $25 per day for failure to finish the court house by a certain time. The Heinzmans, in their complaint contend that it was not their fault but the fault of the then commissioners that the building was not finished within contract time. The stoppage of the work for 60 days, owing to the futile insistance of the commissioners that “Dark Hollow” quarry rock should be used, is laid to the commissioners, and it is further alleged that the various contracts for extras made with outside parties, by the commissioners, greatly delayed the building. As to the long delay caused by the contractors themselves in tiying to use small sized rock in the foundations, their complaint is discreetly silent. The various items of extras for which the contractors asked pay, and are now bringing this suit are specified as follows. For extra cost of hoisting all materials in the building above the sub-basement, caused by raising the foundations walls three feet higher than the specifications called for, $1,764. For lining certain radiator “pockets” and other places with Tennessee marble, when the contract called only for cement, $241.20. For making plans and drawing for walks, curbing, graveling etc., in yard, $304.67. Lumber and labor in preparing for cotner stone laying, $95.75. The complaint also sets forth the fact that Humphries & Co., the firm which had the subcontract for the roofing, has sued the Heinzmans for SI,OOO in Hamilton county, for balance claimed to be due them, but the Heinzmans contend that Humphries & Co. have got all that is rightly coming tc them. If the case is finally brought to trial, it will evidently present some pretty knotty points to straighten put. As, for instance, the fixing of the responsibility for the various delays in finishing the building, and determining what, if any responsibility belongs to the county for the claim of Humphries & Co.