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


"a 10 YOU know whether Nh. Artnur shep
herd had, previous 90 that time any connection
with fixing the amount Of gradingl A. Dc
not from my own knowledge. only heard
that be had been.
Q. Did YOU understand at that time that he
had been appointed In some way or another tc
* the amount Of tia. gradei 4 I 90 moi
pointed. do not think that is my recollection
Of It. ] know nothing of 1t myself.
Q. understand that. Had there been Q
previous attempt as you understood at that
time 70 fix the amount Of the grading7 A. ]
think Il was 90 stated TO the commission.
q. How had that been donei A. Icould not
say that. g. "a zTtg & Esfl;
Q. Were any papers shown youi A. think
there were numerous letters presented. = =
Q. Letters from whom; do you remembers
A. / think there were some Official letters from
the board to some parties and some replies.
have not seen those letters. and-I did not charge
my memory at the time with 1t after disposina
Of the business, some four months ago. ny
memory is not fresh on the subject. =
q. Was any paper shown you signed BY Mr.
Arthur Shepherd showing the amount that had
been fxedi A. No, sir; think there was nc
paper signed by Mr.. Shepherd ct all. may
be wrong.
@. Did you go upon the ground when you
made this investigation. A. We did, sir. =
@. In what mannerdid you proceed to tx the
amount of grading that had been done therei
A. We heard all parties to the controversy,
and put our own Judgment upof what they
knew about 1t.
@. Who were the parties that you heard7 A.
A number of the officers of the Board of Public
Works engaged with the Engineer Corps. The
namesI perhaps could not quote correctly;
q. The papers VIII shown A. Yes, sir.
@. You took their Statements A. Yes, SIR
O.. Then the statement of whom elsea A.
The several contractors, and of Mr.. Ciuss,
chief engineer.
Q. Was Mr.. Forsyth therei A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you take this statement In regard TO
the matter7 A. We did, sir. y-f
Q. Was there any attempt, on the part Of
Mr.. Cluss, TO get at the amount of the grading
by sinking shafts or pitsl A. Yes, SIR; there
was. We went at them and examined the
entire work, In fact, the next day alter taking
testimony.
Q. Were these pits sunk at that timei A..
They were, sir. He had them sunk for our
benefit l think.
Q. Was there any controversy between Mr..
Cluss and Mr.. Forsyth IN regard to that mat
teri A. Yes, sir; there was some little con-
troversy; not to any amount however. r.
Q. What was the character Of IL; what was
1t about2 A. Well, as to who was right and
who was wrong.
Q, Was Forsyth insisting that there was
more there than Mr.. Cluss was insisting there
vast A. That was the evidence, sir.
Q. But all the testimony you took is in writ
ingf A. think the testimony is nearly COM
plete in writing. do not think It was all
taken down.
o. Who took down the testimony A. Some
young man connected with the office!
Q. Do you remember his name3 A. lido not,
indeed.
By Mr.. Merrick: Q. Had you any previous
acquaintance with the localityf A. / had been
conversant with It nearly ten years, sir.
Q. Was your judgment made up from the
testimony alone, or from your own observation
in connection with the testimony A. The YER
dict Of the commission, If you want me to
speak Of our commission, was made up, Of
course, from the testimony.
Q. Not from your own observation Of judy
ment as to the quantityi A. I could not, Of
course, do that.
Q. Were the witnesses examined under oathi
A. think not, sir; my recollectionis not, how
ever, clear; but my impression b they were
not. -. So. d. -.ar. - -.--- r.-.--.
By Mr.. Stanton: Q. Have you any positive
recollection at all as to whether it was taken
under oath or not2 A. would not like to be
positive on that subject.
By Mr.. Merrick: Q. What was the entire
amount awarded A. It is in black and white,
and / do not like to charge my recollection;
but my impression Is IL was hundred and
some thousand yards; have not seen anything
to refresh my memory about It. =
Q. Did you take the testimony of Mr.. Barney
therei A. Yes, sir.
By Mr.. Christy: Q. What salary did you re-
ceivel A. The commission are OF duty. They
Io-,,r 81, do hair
no salary at this time.
@. At that time that you were acting as
commissioner, what was the salaryi A. We
received six dollars per day.
Q. How long were you In the service as
commissioner A. Some five or six months,
perhaps. Five or six months in making up this
award.
Mr.. Christy. Oh, no;ithe assessments.
To the Witness. That was the entire amount
Of claims presented to you by citizens for
damages that they had sustained by reason of
the improvements A. That Is matter of
record, sir. -
Q. Where is the report, If you pleased A. II
Is in the possession of the board, Il presume. .
Q. Docs it show also the amount silowedl
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When was # madei A. think some six
weeks or more ago, SIR.
Q. Since this investigation A. Yes, sir.
y.
matter Of assessments-I mean the matter of
claims for damages during this timei A. Not
my entire attention; no, sir.
Q. Had you any contract under the Board of
Public Worksi A. have not had q contract
Of any kind for four or five years.
Q. What is tho explanation of this charge
against you on page Al, Of the report of James
A. Magruder, treasurer for 1873, page 4: SIT.
". PIowman, for work Western Marketp A.
AS professional architect under regular per-
centage, as any architect receives.
Q, Was that labor performed during that
.imei A. Oh, no, sir. 1t has been performed
some time ago.
Q. Prior to your selection as one of the COM
nissionsrs to assess damagesl A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are you In their employ as architect, and
ioing occasional servicei A. Yes, sir; as any
other man would.
Mr.. Christy. would Ike to have produced,
Mr.. Chairman, the claims for damages pre-
ferred and the amount allowed BY the commits
sion, which is one of the elements of indebted
ness OF which we are not yet advised.
Governor Shepherd. / have no objection at all
10 furnish It.
Mr.. Christy. The report came since the in
resignation began and since the answer Of the
Governor. s>1 So.
Mr.. Stanton. The award Is made and has to
be submitted to tho assembly for action under
he Jaw, but there Is no objection to furnish
ng II.
Mr.. Christy. The point make is this: /
want to know what claims for damages have
been presented. am more interested in that
han In the allowance, for il may be . matter
Of controversy still.
By the Chairman, Ito the wltness) Q. do
not know that understand this business ex-
aetly. You were one of the commission to
'ettle the amount that should be pad " Mr..
Connolly A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was the awardl A. It is matter
IF record, as stated awhile ago; my impress
lion is that it was about los, 900 yards, or q
fraction over 100000. II was something less
han the measurement on the one side, and
more than the measurement on the other.
@. understood you to say awhile ago that
he commission viewed the ground personally,
and had some holes dug? A. Yes, sir; the
chief engineer had them sunk for u.s.
Q. Was that award unanimousl Did you all
agresa A. The commission were unanimous in
making the award.
By Mr., Christy; Q. may not understand you
light. Do you mean that you reported all the
claims both from the city of Georgetown and
Washington about six weeks agof a. No, SIR;
We reported the Georgetown claims that had
been acted on more than a year ago; previous
20 the last session of the Legislature.
@. And the Legislature took action upon I'll
A. I could not say that, sir.
Q. You are not apprized of thati A. No, sir.
By the Chairman: Q. You say youall agreed
70 this awardl A. Yes, sir.
O. think I understood vou IN say alrn that