Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1867-02-02
SHELBY COUNTY JAIL.
Report OF tho Committee Appoint
cd by the County Court to In
vestigate tho Building
of the New Jail.
lConclnded.l

proof, especially in tho full, minute
complete, careful and elaborate exam
ination of the report Of Mr. Winters, and
in his evidence in some few points cor
rected, to which we invite the especial
attention of the Court, hereinafter briefly
stated. We will take occasion here to
say that the work, though finished in the
rough, is substantial and strong, and the
material sufficient in quality. Whatever
brick has been omitted ia the work, it
is being done by the allowance Of the
Commissioners or the architect.
1t being suggested to US that Mr.. Pow
ers, as also all the other parties, the
Judge, Commissioners and architect and
directors, had acted corruptly, and be-
come party to corrupt pecuniarY con-
sideration in regard TO the matters OF
the Jail, we instituted a strict inquiry,
as intimated, into this subject; we have
not been able to find that this was more
than conjecture or supposition. We
have no evidence whatever, for which we
have diligently sought, that he has given
or promised any consideration for any
estimate of work or material he has re-
ceived that any of the Commissioners
are interested or have been so, in or un-
der the contract, or that the architect has
been paid or promised any consideration
for his estimates given, or for his man
ner of directing the work, so far as he
| did direct it, and that even showing that
he demanded or received any considera-
ton for the estimates made by him. The
conduct of them all, in this respect, ap-
pears to us in the proof as that of hon
orable gentlemen.
We find that the contractor complains
very earnestly that he has suffered great
damage by the refusal of the financial
agent to pay or give him warrants on
the last estimate furnished him, and by
refusing to give him warrants Of a less
amount than those he gave heretofore,
and that he was compelled to sell these,
to his great damage. 1t will be seen
that he has already been overpaid very
largely, and has no just cause of com
plant; in fact, we find no authority for
issuing warrants for divided sums, nor
are we prepared to say that it would be
unlawful or improper-so to say-that
if it be to the disparagement Of the party
to have large county warrants, it is only
his misfortune But we do not find that
Mr.. Powers, by the contract, was neces-
slated to receive any warrants at
all. The contract itself is sufficient evil
dence of Indebtedness by the county,
on which be could, as readily as ether
wise, recover the payment he was emit
tied to but receiving the warrants, as we
doubt not he did at his own request, they
were submitted to payment by the county
in full, and such was the condition of its
finances, as shown by the high rates of
the warrant, that their cash payment |
could not be long deferred. And had he |
used his other funds about the work, or
had he cash capital, such as is neces-
sary to such an undertaking, his loss
would, in any case, have been trihing, if |
any at all. We cannot find. anywhere,
in the contract or its intendment. that the
county undertook to furnish the means
to buy the materials or to pay for the
work, but only to pay tor the same when
the work was done, and in the manner
and at times provided in the contract
But had the county undertaken to fur
nish the means to pay for the materials,
and failed so to do, the consequent dam
ages would be justly due and reccvera
BILE
We cannot justify the financial agent
under the contract in refusing to give the
warrant on the estimate duly made and
certified to him; but in this case it up
pears that had he issued warrants, the
last claim would have been greatly to the
of the county, because the con
ND for ~ oil .Hr |
large amount We cannot say from the
proof that the County Judge knew this
act, but he stated on oath that that was
MS belief, and also that the work was net
lone according to contract, in quality or
AMOUNT We therefore have full reason
o excuse, if we have none legally to
Justify, his refusal to issue further war
ants at the time Whether Mr.. Powers
inew he was overpaid, it does rot appear,
,ut the fact was so, and appears in the
roof substantially, if not directly, and
We think he ought to have known it. He I
ould readily have done so by his meas. [
OF the amount Of work as it {
and the materials, etc But a
or the fact that Judge Leonard was, as S
UGH Judge, charged with other impor- t
ant duties, which engaged his attention, a
re would be compelled to say that he 8
las and has been, in his official relations t
D this important work, in his double 0
apacity of financial agent and Commits a
ioner, grossly neglected. of his duty in 4
OF knowing, or being personally in t,
jfmed, Of tie affairs OF matters of the d
Ill more fully than it appears he really il
as or has been. u
Of the architect, we regret We cannot a
peak in terms of appreciation touching Il
is connection with the Jail business; and a
lis is utterly forbidden to US by the con- E,
Iteration of his own testimony. 1t ap- p
ears that be did not know the contents Il
the contract, and stated that he had ja
1t so much as seen it, or called for it, Ia
I'D did not govern himself by it, or ~ 5.
~ of the altered amendments or speci- V,
cations forming and being made by its 81
yn terms, and which authorized changes W
the building. AT war with the Com of
issioners, and they with him; dis. re
eased at their modification Of his plans 81
ID specifications, Of which we have to
retofore spoken, as ia some respects &C
Judged, aud certainly to the dispar
ement Of him, he utterly ignored il
cir action and the contract adopted ca
the Court SO far as he acted at al 70
acted independently, regardless tic
them and the contract, yet in one Of CO
! reports be specially commends the pr
ntractor aud the work and materials us
substantial and the whole affair Of ihl
} building in terms most compliment be-
7. His estimates appear, from the N,
Dof, In our opinion, excessive and un ais
liable, aud q sort Of guess work, preju- ais
nal 70 the interests Of the county and ex
/. people, and beneficial 10 the con iso
ctor. giving larger payments TO him. in