
    Roche, Appellant, v. Harrisburg Incinerator Authority.
    Argued May 5, 1969.
    Before Bell, C. J., Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O’Brien, Roberts and Pomeroy, JJ.
    
      Louis J. Adler, for appellant.
    
      James H. Stewart, Jr., with him John 0. Sullimn, and Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, for appellees.
    June 27, 1969 :
   Opinion

Per Curiam,

Decree affirmed. Appellant to pay costs.

Mr. Justice Roberts and Mr. Justice Pomeroy would affirm on the opinion of the court below.

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Cohen:

Since the building which houses the incinerator is included as part of the contract and is specifically designed to house a particular patented system, the invitation for alternative bids is a subterfuge because no bidder could submit a proposal in competition with the patented system. The form of the specification unlawfully limited competitive bidding since the building and the system were in reality one proprietary item.

I dissent.  