These four items consumed practically all of the amount appropriated, and the other items of the original plan were therefore omitted. The bid of T. L. Stouffer and F. E. White, of Florence, Arizona, covering the four items, was accepted, and a contract was made with them, under date of May 9, 1891, for the execution of the work for the sum of $1,985. This contract, together with the specifications, plans, and other drawings which formed part of it, accompany this report. It was transmitted to the Director of the Geological Survey, and by him approved and forwarded to the Secretary of the Interior June 6, 1891. It was approved by the Acting Secretary June 20, 1891. Finally, on July 20, 1891, it was placed on file, together "with the bids, proposals, and all the original papers."
A time limit of two months was made in the contract, expiring August 20, 1891, but it was changed to four months from July 1, 1891, expiring October 31, 1891. Before the time expired, however, Mr H. G. Rizer, then chief clerk of the Bureau of Ethnology, was ordered to proceed to Casa Grande ruin to examine the work done and, if in accord with the terms of the contract and the specifications, to certify the amount due the contractors. He submitted a report, under date of November 24, 1891, which is appended hereto. He also obtained six photographic negatives of the work as it stood a short time before its completion, and two of these (reproduced in plates [CXX] and [CXXI]) have been utilized in the preparation of this report.
Mr Rizer found that a considerable amount of work had been done by the contractors in excess of that authorized, and also that not sufficient work had been done to render the repairs permanently effective. Under the terms of the contract, no amount in excess of that stated ($1,985) could be paid, and payment of this amount was made late in 1891. On January 7, 1892, the contractors filed a claim for extra work on the ruin amounting to $600.40. The work was actually performed, but the terms of the contract were clear, and the claim was therefore disapproved January 28, 1892.
It would have been desirable to have had a supervisor of the work, but as the contract consumed practically all of the amount appropriated no provision could be made for one. It is fortunate, therefore, that the Reverend I. T. Whittemore, who had in the meantime been appointed honorary custodian of the ruin, generously undertook to look after the work without compensation, and on its conclusion the small sum remaining ($15) was turned over to him, thus exhausting the appropriation. In the sundry civil appropriation act for the year ending June 30, 1893, provision was made for a salaried custodian of the ruin, and Mr Whittemore was appointed to this position. Similar provision has been continued from year to year to the present time.
It is to be regretted that the necessities of the case, imposed by the limited amount appropriated, compelled the fixing of a maximum amount of work so far below the amount necessary that the repair of the ruin is incomplete. Had it been possible to carry out the plans, it is believed that the ruin would have stood unchanged for many decades, if not for a century. Should further provision be made for the continuation of the work, it should include an item for the fencing of the area covered by the ruins or of the reservation, and possibly an item for the construction of a roof.
It is not clear that a roof is absolutely necessary, but it is certain that it would be very undesirable. The region where this rain occurs has probably less rainfall than any other part of the United States, but it must not be forgotten that while rainstorms are infrequent they are sometimes violent, and what damage they do may be done in a few hours. All the items for the repair of the ruin, except that pertaining to a roof, were so devised that the ruin was not materially disfigured or changed, and were they fully carried out the ruin would present much the same general appearance as before. It is important that this appearance should be preserved as far as possible, but it can not be maintained if a roof is erected over the walls. As four years have elapsed since the completion of the work, it should be possible now to determine whether atmospheric erosion has played a material part in the work of destruction.[3]
In the original plans and in the specifications which formed part of the contract (although this section was not operative) a plan for a roof was included. Such a structure, if erected at all, should be made as inconspicuous as possible and should be supported entirely from within the building. The system of framing employed might safely be left to the contractor if he were made responsible for the strength of the completed structure.
| [PLATE CXVII] |
|
PLAN SHOWING GROUND-LEVEL EROSION, TIE-RODS, LIMITS OF WORK, AND LINES OF GROUND SECTIONS |
RESERVATION OF THE LAND
The final step in the execution of the law quoted was taken June 22, 1892. On that date the recommendation of the writer to the Director of the Geological Survey, referred by him to the Secretary of the Interior and by the latter to the President, was finally approved, and it was ordered that an area of land sufficient for the preservation of the ruin, and comprising in all 480 acres, be reserved under authority of act of Congress approved March 2, 1889. This area is shown on the map reproduced in plate [CXXV], the base of which is a map accompanying the report of Mr H. C. Rizer.