be looked on askance by the owner and his engineer; and such a competitor should not be awarded the contract, unless he possesses an exceptionally fine reputation for doing good work and for not quitting his job before finishing it. It is true that during very hard times many worthy contractors are willing to work almost for actual cost, in order to keep their workmen employed; and in such cases the good intention should be recognized in making the award. Nevertheless, it nearly always proves to be unsatisfactory to both the owner and his engineer to let a contract for any piece of construction at a figure below its real value.

Eighth. The contractor will feel during the progress of the construction that the client is a partner on the job, and that, therefore, he and his engineers will not be likely to be unnecessarily severe in their requirements, also that they will permit the adoption of all legitimate expense-saving expedients, and will not demand too many frills on the finishing.

Ninth. Owing to the justice and equity involved by this method of contract-letting and profit-sharing, all concerned in the execution of the work will labor whole-heartedly and good-naturedly, avoiding petty squabbles and disagreements; and the result will be earnest, honest effort, a satisfactory piece of construction, and the general contentment of both parties to the agreement.

Tenth. While this method may at first glance have the appearance of being complicated, it is quite simple; and because of the clear manner in which it is explained herein, it is easily utilized in any actual case by following one step at a time the directions given. The nomenclature of "sums" and "schedules" renders the application of the method very easy. Moreover, it must be remembered that it is to be used only once for each contract, and then only after all the work is completed and the accounts are in proper form. Again, the keeping of the accounts is in no way any more complicated than it would be in case any of the "cost-plus" methods were used.

Objections That Have Been Raised to This Method. A few objections, both orally and in print, have been raised to this proposed method of contract-letting and profit-sharing; but they could not have been well considered, for they are not valid. It will be well before closing this discussion to mention them and show wherein they are untenable. They are as follows:

A. It has been asserted that there would be special difficulty in keeping the accounts; but there would be required therefor exactly the same work which would be necessitated by any of the "cost-plus" methods. They all involve a correct record of the amount of every legitimate item of expense to which the contractor is put; and the book-keeping in any case would certainly require an account with each employee, so as to show how much money had been paid him from start to finish.

B. It has been claimed that the method is too complicated to be useful. On the contrary,  as  explained  previously,  it  is simple;  and the pecul-