The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-04-17

. 10 Testimony OF William H Hamilton. carpenter
iesthee 10 The appropriation Of The work and materials
oi Tue government for private purposes
/ II Testimony OF John HAYS.
is Testimony OF Austin O'Conner
10 Testimony OF Joseph IL Norris. carpeaer-Testi-
es 70 ,he use OF government labor and materials FOR pr
90. Testimony of George w. Payne, carpenter To
The same effect as the testimony of Joseph H. Norris
81 Testimony OF Ephraim Richmond, carpener.-To
the same effect
ALLEGATIONS OF GENERAL MISCONDUCT AND AALFEAsASCE
IN OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT.
Five af6davils az follows
! Evidence OF Daniel 0. b. Mangn.--That witness
ing that had been done get the appropriation bill for
lhe extension OF the Capitol through Congress The tax
was levied by direction OF the superintendent
O. Evidence OF Samuel Champion-As to the arbitrary
CONDUCT OF the SUPERINTENDENT, his interference in cleo
lions fayorsm. &C., SC. iAr*
g. Evidence of Nathan Kingsley, foreman and time
xeepef.-ihe laoofeIs got from 81 to 81 as per day
Witness was allowed two apprentices and Robert Strong
three Both the Witnesses aud Robert Srongs apprentices
pala 70 witness and to Robert Strong, respectively,
Christopher Adams the contractor for furnishing
me brick for the extension and he sold his contract to
Consock and Adams and Van Vottenburg as witness
understood. The money received by Hugh Donohoo
labout $l4O) from the (reerred 10 in his tesii.
nony) was for witnesses two apprentices. and for four OF
mtnt IN regard TO apprentices E t-
4. Testimony of John T. Holohan --Superntende
discharged the witness because he not favorable
The candidate of The superintendent for the mayoray-
Mr. Lenox. .#IIs. .-aHMH8 '.. : a
IN REFERENCE TO THE ARCHITECT
5, Testimony OF Peter Observation-Disclosures made
contract with Samuel Strong 10 do the brick work OF
house owned by Mr.. Walter, the architect Witness
ceved for work done this house hing like $3.50
500 was paid witness by Mr. Walter through Mr. Nor.
sell, and $40 was received by check on Mr. Latham,
drawn by Mr.. SIong. 1t. was desired by Mr., Walter
Witness was Told by MIR Walter that the house e was HIS
lWal'ers) Some dissatisfaction arose between Mr.
Strong and Mr.. Walter; hence Mr. Morseil superin,end
ed the work on The house Witness purchased lime in
Baltimore by direction OF Mr. Walter for the house. which
was paid for by Mr.. Morsell.
ANSWER PRESIDENT FILLMORE IN REFERENCE TO THE
STATEMENTS IN ROBERT SMITHS TESTIMONY BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE
A copy of Mr. Smiths testimony having been furnished
by Judge Underwood to the President, he answers in
substance that he does not know Smith, but understands
he one OF the disappointed bidders for work the
tension; submits certified copy Of the appointment
under which Samuel Strong acted as superintendent
of the arsenal building at New York; that it is
denp had difficulty in settling Srongs accounts, and
sends letter from Mr.. Stuart on the subject He was
OF the opinion that Mr.. Strong eminenty qualified
to take charge OF the employed the work direct
ed the architect to look closely TO the
conduct The President then heard from Mr. Walter that
he had discovered that Strong interested in the
tract for furnishing bricks, and that he (Mr Walte had
Immediately required him to resign. The President
presses the hope. if Mr. Strong has been guilty of any
fraud, that nothing will be left uAd0ne to bring him
justice He will chserfuly cooperate, but hopes that
Strong may have fair trial, both on his own account
and that OF others.
LETTER FROM HON. A. H. II. STUART, SECRETARY THE
ISTERIoR, RELATING TO CONTRACTS
August 10, 1852.
On the llth August, 1852, the chairman OF the com
mittee addressed letter to the Secretary, esDg "a
copy of any private contract which may have been made
for furnishing cutting, and setting the marble be used
in the extension OF the CAPITOL" as it was alleged that
private contracts had been made.
The Secretary in this letter states that private con-
tract has been entered n,o by the department. under
its direction Tor the extension OF the CAPITOL and fur
nshes papers 10 explanation and Justification OF the
ton of The department in the letting OF the contracts for
the marble and Tor the workmanship IN cutting and set
ting the same.
The committee find thai the papers sent by the Secre.
tary, with The exception OF paper c, showing the results
OF the scientific experiments stone and the speci6ca
tons referred to at the close of the Secrearys letter,
(Which specifications appear in the architects annual
pon all appended in full to the architects defence,
to which reference is made.
The only remaining paper Of Importance is the paper
referred TO, which The committee have deemed best to
publish IN full with the Secretarys letter.
DEyrscE OF THOMAS U. WALTER, TIE ARCHITECT.
This consists Of denial Of all the allegations of fraud
and Improperly made against him by other witnesses
whose testimony he was allowed full time and fair OPP
poruniiy TO examine and his denial ls accompanied by
explanatory statements and other evidence in detail As
these statements and accompanying papers volum
nous mang together l23 OF manuscript, and the
~
thor OF H. The committee have beemed il best thus merely
to refer to II here denial and explanation in detail
giving il in full in the appendix, where will speak for
itself.
DEFENCE or SAMUEL STRONG, THE SUPERINTENDENT.
As in the OF the architect, Mr. Strong makes a
denial OF all the allegations OF fraud and improperly
made against him by other witnesses; makes explana-
lions IN detail, and refers TO the evidence OF other
nesses 10 exonerae himself from blame and impicate
others For similar those regard to the
chitecrs defence the committee heve deemed best to
fer 10 this here general denial and explanation IN
detail and give he defence, in its authors own language
in the Appendix.
Four afhdaviis-Francis J. Brooks's, John s. Hutch
mss. (2) and Edward Mefs-in favor OF the supern-
,endent, and setting forth that the work was well exc
cued
Testimony OF large number Of stone masons, who
have been employed upon other public buildings both In
Washington and throughout the county. and se forth
the excellence OF the materials used and the good quail
" OF the work.
Testimony OF James Sargent denying that there
any extra OF stone, &c. on the extension
doubt the minds OF the committee that great irregular
cs and gross abuses and frauds have been practsed
in the business of directing. supervising, and executing
the work OF the Capitol extension, and that in paying for
that work. the public money has, no far been expended
in waseful and unwaranted manner, and, under exist
ing contracts, will continue to be so expended unless
prompt and proper be taken to change the plan
Of operations heretofore pursued.
The testimony 80 full and direct, in its bearing upon
every point material 10 The opinion above expressed that
nothing deemed necessary here than to indicate,
in the following brief snmmary the leading facts which
proved by the Witnesses examined and confirmed IN
many important particulars by the almost daily personal
of the members of the committee These facts
are:
l. That large portions OF the materials used ia con