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

[ MOENlGOs MAI Os
how she embsnkment terminated q second
on TO show, think, that the embankmert
was come twenty odd feet In height. he said
that his recollection was, and his notes showed
that he had measured Il perpendieularly. The
Question was asked him whether he might not
be mistaken on that point, or whether It was
possible, hardly, for bank Of that height,
composed Of different strata Of sand and gravel,
to remain without forming slide, II being on
an angle Of perhaps IS, IS or 80 degrees. He
Expressed doubt on that subject In his mind
from recollection.
The commission, after considering it care
fully, and talking 1t over an entire evening
some four or ave hours, probably, being ex-
pended In reading the testimony, &C., and
looking up-concluded that We would give
that doubt against the contractor. We threw
IL, instead Of perpendicular bank, into an IN
leline-throwing Il into square yards; and ]
think we made difference OF between nine and
ten thousand yards against the contractor, de-
Quoting It from the original measurement by
| Forsyth, and 90 made our award.
Q. How did Forsyth claim that he knew
the contour Of the ground there beforei A.
From his familiarity with the location, and his
long experience in the city, and the various
land marks.
Q. Did you have profile before you Of the
| ground before IL was touched by the eontrac-
tori A. The chief engineer, Mr.. Cluss, had .
profile Of the work as they had IL. Whether IL
was before the work was commenced or not,
could not say.
Q, Is that profile In the papersf A. IL was
from the papers OF the engineers Office. do
not know whether It was returned to the board
with the other papers or not.
| Q. Was there any evidence that there had
Il H..f
beguni Did you hear anything about the
cross-eections by the engineer A. think that
was called for, and my impression Is that this
work had been commenced IN the very COM
mencement of the new government here,
before any crosssections had been entirely
completed.
O. You had no cross sections, then, before
youi A. They were sections furnished by the
engineer corps. You ask me where they were.
We had such as were furnished Us by the chief
engineer.
| Q. You do not know, then, whether the work
had been cross-sectioned regularly by the en-
gfneer before Mr.. Connolly commenced the
work or noti A. think that there was some
doubt on that subject.
o. Do You think there were los, 900 yards
there, from what you know Of the groundi Is
that your best judgment now as to the guam
! tityl A. NV best Judgment, after hearing all
the testimony, is that Mr.. Forsyth's measure
ment was correct, with the exception Of the
correction that we made. That was my judg
ment and the judgment Of the commission, or
we should not have made the award.
Mr.. Wilson. Outside Of that
Mr.. Mattingly. They want to know your IN
dependent judgment, outside Of the testimony.
Mr.. Hubbell. Yes, we VIII hear your knowl-
edge Of the ground.
4. My own knowledge Of the ground, so far
as that goes, outside Of any act Of the commits
sion or any action Of my own at the time, IL,
that the cut was rather extensive and the iii
was very great; and my own judgment Is, that
the award that we made was not excessive.
That is my judgment outside Of the commits
sion.
By Mr.. Wilson: Q. What was the character
of the claims over at Georgetown that you ex-
aminedi A. will state that they are matter
of record, but it was for change Of grade in
most instances.
raising, or anything of that kindi A. No,
sir.
TESTIMONY OF BARTHOLOMEW oERTLY.
Bartholomew oertly, called as a witness for
the District government, was duly sworn.
Mr.. Stanton. We desire to examine Mr..
Oertly In relation to fixing board rates for
grading and hauling, and as to the necessity
and value Of cross-sections to ascertain the
amount of grading, and as to certain state
meuts made by Mr.. Wright Rives in relation to
the avenue.
To the witness: Q. What is your professionl
A. Civil engineer and architect.
Care you now connected with the Board OF
Public Works in any cspacityi A Yes, sir.
@. What is your relation to the boarii A. /
am one of the assistant engineers.
Q. Did 1t become your duty to make any cal
culation in fixing the rates Of the board for
payment for grading and hauling2 A. The
price for haul was referred to me for investi-
cation; or, rather, 1t was referred to Mr..
Cluss, the engineer IN charge, who referred It
to me. I investigated the subject and made q
report, which he approved; and, If am not
mistaken, the board approved the figures which
I had arrived at.
Q. What was that investigation What did
you do in order to ascertain the proper price
for grading and haulingl A. 1t was not for
grading. The price Of grading was not spoken
about to me. It was simply the question of
the haul. / first applied the engineering
formula generally used by all engineers in ar
irving at the haul under those circumstances.
got the result. was not quite satisfied with
the results, but ! concluded, on account of
some defects which think are IN the formula,
which is good enough for ordinary purposes.
but which does not take into account the grad
ing or condition of the streets-I concluded to
make personal observations. did. I then
IcCOiuucuucu piSc ehgHIly teSS I0hu DOtQ
these results gave me. ! recommended fair
price, think. / think it was approved by the
board.
By the Chairman: Q. What was that pricei
A. One cent and a quarter for every hundred
feet Of haul over 200 feet. If you desire, will
give you the formula. It is SO very easy and
simple Of construction, that It is hardly worth
while to refer to the book. It assumes three
things. In the first place 1t assumes an aver
age travel Of horse and cart of about little
over % miles per day, say 10 900 feet an hour.
That makes for q trip and return trip go 900
feet, or 100 feet to the minute. That formula
assumes, and suppose It Is as near correct as
it can be, that for each trip there is four min
utes time lost for loading the cart and for
dumping It. Again, It requires three cart
loads to make q cubic yard. Now, II you
divide the number of minutes contained in ten
hours-6,000 minutes-by 4, plus the number
of hundred feet Of haul, you get the number of
trips made per day; and II you divide that by
again, you find the number of yards made
per day at that particular distance. This d.
vided into two and half, the cost OF horse and
for that particular distance; and II you divide
that again by the number Of hundred feet, you
arrive. at the rate Of haul. For instance, you
have 1900 feet, which comes very near one of
our hauls. This formula gives you 5000 d.
vided by plus Sc; that is the number Of trips;
divide that again by 3, and you, Of course, get
the number of yards; and divide that result
into $3.50, and you get the cost per cubic yard
for the haul.
By the Chairman: Q. So that q cent and a
quarter was q reasonable price, counting 80
day for cart, boy, and horsel A. No, sir; the
formula gives alittle over cent and one-third,
and my actual observation which Imade-by
the by, ! would state that also measured the
carts, because was not quite satisfied whether
1t took three carloads TO the yard or not, and
found that three carloads exceed q little
cubic yard-instead of 81 feet they made %.
But Twas satisfied with the general assumption
of three loads to the cubic yard.
By Mr.. Stanton: Q. Then understand you
to say that after this careful observation and
calculation you made report to Mr.. Cluss, who
adopted your report, and your action and that
of Mr.. Cluss was made the basis of action by
basis Of tie action 81 the board.
! Q. Give Us you professional opinion as to the
necessity and value Of crQss-sections in ascer-
tanning the amount Of grading on streetss A.
There 10 20 actual necessity Of eross-seetions.
What we want to get at, and the ct,thing,
is an accurate record Of the surface of the
ground as 1t was, and then of the sufaee as it
was, and the difference, of course; gives the
actual quantity of grading done. Measures
after that are certainly very various. The
a.