National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-05-25

this whenitw spread on the books in your
ONCE amer IL was donef A. Shortlv after.
3. When you saw this upon the book in this
way, was this word "infsrmal' written there
Whcn you frs. sawi.i Yes, IL: I think no g;
likely by the same clerk who wrote the whole
transaction here.
O. The clerk who entered III A. Yes, Sir
Q. What clerk entered III A. think It
must have been Mr.. Stimson.
Q. Did he call your attention TO 1t at ana A.
q. But you saw it few days afterwardf A.
Yes, sir.------z------
O. When you saw # few days aftcrward
entered on the books did you find what had
been done-ff the surveys requested there had
been unadc9 A. spoke to Mr.. 0ertly about
. 1t, and told him that he must not do this
again. prohibited him from doing work con-
cealed from me-ofiicial work.
O. Was this concealed A. In work like
this expect that any one Of my assistants In
form me what was going on.
Q. Was it not spread upon the records In
your Office before the surveys were nader A.
After the surveys do you meant
Q. Well, at the time, was there any conceal
ment about IL? Here n is dated 2Sth of Au-
gust A. Yes, sir; and here again. y
4 q. Was not this entry made-the request of
John o. Evans put here on the 18th of Au-
gust, when this was received A. Well, 1t
might have been; you see that sthe date of
the paper, 1t does not show the date Of the
entry; it might have been entered several days
afterward. The date OF Mr.. Evans letter is
shown here, the date of the entry is not shown,
i Q. If paper came into your Office inform
ally, .whoees duty was itto correct that Inform
ality and see thatit went straight through the
office! Amy duty.
o. Did YOU ever call this to the attention Of
tho board-the fact that paper had passed
through your Office that was not addressed to
the proper head of the office-to you? A.
Well, have stated before have complained
SO often about these little things ,r,
Q. Well, il you can say yes or no to this par
ticular question we can get along much faster.
Did you call attention to the, fact that this
paper was not addressed to you, hut was ad-
dressed to OertlY and Barney2 That is the
informality If it had been addressed to you
it would have been all right, would 1t noti A.
Yes, sir.
Q. So that the request being made to the
subordinates was what you complaiped of A.
And sending a subordinate out on such import
ant work, without the knowledge OF the head OF
the office. .r.
Q. lift had come to you you would have
given the order to send them out! A. Yes,
Sir; would have looked at this before it went
through, it was such a large voucher.
Il Q. You would have let them measure It in
any event? A. Oh, yes, sir; of course.
Il Q. No matter If 1t had been addressed to you
| Won wouId have sent out, and had the measure
ment madei A. Yes, sir. 5 70 g. a.
O. And when Il would have conc in YOU
would have looked at It. A. l should have
sent out one of the regular men on the street
with measuring party. should not have
sent Mr.. Oertly out with taps-line- -.
0. Did you, at every time when an order
came for a survey, always see that orderi "A.
Yes, sir; unless was sick or was absent. III
@. Did not orders co ne for surveys to the
office, and was 1t not the duty of those In the
office TO take them up, and go and make the
surveys as soon as they could-howeyer, you
have not answered my question yet whether
YOU called the attention Of the board to this
particular irregularity of not addressing the
Communication to youi A. As to Mr.. Shep-
herds action =. -. Cd. - '.- =
Q. No matter about that; did you call the
attention of the board to that' A. At later
date discovered -, .-s..-..s.5I . . o..
Q. At this time did you speak about III A.
No, sir; did not. s9il,'r'-'f' O. --o- s-r
By Mr.. Wilson: @. Did you consider It par
ticulariy important that you should call the
attention of Governor shepherd to the fact that
he had directed Oertly and Barney to do this
work. A..No, I did not: thought by pro-
hibitine Mr. Oertly from following the Cover
nor's directions In the same direction / had
done my duty. .---.. . .t-.,--- co
| By Mr.. Stewart: O. If any member of the
board was doing business irregularly, was 1t
not important that you should call the atten-
ton of the board to IL at once3 A. Yes; but,
Senator. would have had to speak all day II
wanted TO take offence at everything. I'D,
By the Chairman: @. Did you call Governor
! Shepherds attention to It'll A. No, 1 did not.
ByMr. Wilson: o. understand you to pre-
sent this. not as showing that there were any
| fraudulent measurements made. but showing
irregularities In the manner of doing the busi-
ness in the office of til. Board of Public Works.
A. Yes, sir; especially this public money
United States money = -.
@. That is the purpose for which you pre-
sent tbisI A. Yes air. ~ ''' f,N
/ By MIR, Mattingly: O. Now understand your
/ complaint to be this partial measurement was
done by Mr., Oertly, on the order OF Governor
| Shepherd, without your knowielrei A. Yes,
sir,
Q. That Is SO, Is III A. Yes, sir.
Q. If II had been done with your knowledge,
would It not have been done in the same wayi
A. 1t might have been done in similar wsy.
Q. Would It not have been done in the same
way? A. do not know that.
Q. Is not your record full of cases where
with your knowledge both Mr.. Oertly and Mr..
4 Barney have made partial estimates on which
payments have been made in the same wayf A.
If It would have been made in the regular way
by my assistant, it could not have been made
by Mr.. Oertly; it would have been made by the
regular assistant on the line Of work who has
seen the work proceeding.
Q. Was not Mr.. Oertly that mani A. No,
sir. $50 ... ......-.
Q. Who ,wasl A. That would have been In
Mr.. Franklin's! district; then Mr.. Franklin
would have reported it to Mr.. Barney, Barney
would have checked It, and then it would have
tgone TO me for approval; that is the regular
system. Instead of this, Mr.. Oertly, not sub
4 ject to anybody, sent 1t in, and such q system
is liable TO abuse. This is the complaint
make, l do not say fraud, but 1t is an improper
system connected with iarge. sums of public
money. = 49, is-t ~. e.--- Ss-s,S,S--;
Q. Do You, or not, know that the final
vouchers for the same work on which final
p&Emeuts were made, the vouchers being APP
proved byeyou, -amouHted % $4,000; that
these partial measurements did not amount to
the fnll value of the work by $40,O00l A.
could not say that. --1 800. -.-...-.. ~
O. Can Won tell If YOU look at the youchers2
| A. According to this measurement, when It
went down there approved. the author won d
have been justified in paving the whole amount.
| IF for some reason or another part of Il was
NOT Maid That rs not question of principle: the
question of principle which / have mooted I
have clearly stated. = 80 :
| o, Was il not rule of the board to forbid
| -