National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-05-07

by Nv. Etewsf.i O. would like 10, sir. A.
] make ttat skateheBt 10 show that the sp
proximsse pfies which had siYen In the star
was hos hadeh out Of the way, do not CIV
10 q voucher against the Government.
O. Can yea explsin how YOU ascertain
whether your approximate prics, which yoI
give IN making your estimstes-how did yor
compare them With the real cost, - you saiC
you did, by the vovohsri Explain the process
how you mado the comparison. You sail
that the real price exceeded the approximate
price about Q thousand dollars on this work
how did You ascertain the comparisonl A. i
was by taking all the sewers together. W.
calculated brick sewer feet, 8 feet inches
8 feet, Q feet o inches, and all the large pipe
and also the small sewers.
Q. Explain how you made the comparison
A. Just by that table. The Government meas.
urement took one price; small, aud up to fou
feet, at s4.7o. Now, By going over those streets
find that the total 10 not much OF variance
with the average price which had assumed
Q. The average price only exceeds your esti
mated price about u ,000 A. That Is what
think do show.
0. You examined all these vouchers, did
youi A. examined all these vouchers, sir.
Q. And then took the number of feet from
tile L1apf a. from the map.
by Mr.. Hubbell: Q. understand you made
q comparative table TO show the difference be
tween an estimated cost and the real cost A
Yes, sir; did It to show that my assumption
was not very much out Of the way.
By Mr.. Jewett: Q. Please take that vouchel
and state how you tested the measurement bJ
that voucher. A. What measurement
Q. The measurement that you give In you
first column. You give there a measurement
Of some $50 feet. Now, state how you TESTED
that by that voucher. A. That Is not testet
Samo had made; on the first page Of my table
did not give the measurement as Colone
Samo, whom assisted and whom Mr.. Forsyth
assisted, had given It.
Q. Very well; now, in the second column
you give different measurement. How die
you find that measurement from that voucher
how did you find that number of feet of WORT
done was increased, as stated in your secont
column from that voucher3 A. In this In
stance it was increased.
o. say, how did you find It from tina
voucheri The voucher itself gives it.
Q. How do you make 900 feet out Of tina
voucherl A. Eight hundred and seventy -threa
feet of 12-inch pipe and 81 feet Of 1Sinch pipe
Q. Does that make 900l A. Nine hundret
and twenty -four.
@. Now, go down little further; how man
more feet are therel A. The others do no
come in because they are connections.
Q. Do you make 900 feet out of that voucher
A. Nine hundred and twenty -four.
Q. Well that is not 900 feet, Is it, A.
would have to look at the map in this case
Q. Very we'll; but we will get though will
that first. A. By the bye, that is not tn
voucher corresponding to the first 900, is it
This D. R, Smiths.
/ @. D. X. Smiths is the first onel
Mr.. Wilson. Follansbee & Smith, 900 feet
By Mr.. Jewett: Q. Can you make it! A
Well, all can say is that kept under th
mark.
Q. Then your statement is not based upo
| the measurements as certified by Mr.. Barney
A. Well, yes; but 1t is not that measurement
used the voucher to get at price per Inca
foot.
Q. Your second statement, in point of dis
lance, Is not based upon that youcher7 A
No, sir.
Q. Then you took it from the mapl A. Yes
| sir.
Q. The map, then, does not evidence meas
urement made after the work was donel A
No; would not say that.
Q. Well, do you not know It does noti A
No; 1t Is no measurement. 1t is as good as
measurement.
Q. It was not made after the work was don't
| A. Yes, sir; the sewers were entered on the ma
after the work was done.
Q. How entered on the mapi Was the seal
on the map changed A. No, sir; the scale wa
| not changed,
Q. Very well. In taking distance from tn
map you used the original scalei A. used th
original scale.
@. So there was no change made after th
work was donei A. No, sir.
BY Mr.. Stanton: Q. Were the sewers pu
down on the map after the work was donel A
Yes sir; in few instances we had-they di
not come up to the completed work.
BY Mr.. Bass: Q. Will you look at you
schedule again, on page 1869. There Is a
item about the middle Of the schedule, on tn
right hand Of the second column, from Bartlett
1885. suppose that is the voucher whic
you have for the purpose of getting your avel
age included In this charge against the Cox
eminent as part Of the Tiber sewer, Is It moi
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now look down little further. You Sc
another voucher Of Bartlett & Williams, Tibel
It's feet, s102.50; making 81, $3.50. Is tha
part of the Tiber seweri A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now show me where, as against th
of the Tiber sewer at $40 footl A. thin
l explained the other day that in this state
ment took In all the sewers.
Q. But the point is this: You are making
scale upon which you base your testimony,
the effect that your average of $4.70 was a jus
charge against the United Statos, and for th
purpose of establishing that you produc
vouchers which cover the cost of the mai
sewer, that have been charged against th
United States at vastly enhanced price. Ifyou
scale is worth anything at all you should ii
clude in your second column simply those sew
ers that have been charged against the Unite
States at s4.70, should you not2 A. Mr.. Bass
the result will be the same; because in thos
cases we charged the exact cost at the TINT
and again charged them.
@. Has the District government ever charge
| Tiber sewer against the United States at 81 a
per lineal foot! A. No, sir; neither do I stat
| SO.
@. I so understood you to state by thi
schedule? A. No, sir; this schedule include
all the sewers. Perhaps 1t would have bee
clear If had deducted
By Mr.. Bass: Q. You say that before 20
commenced to make out vouchers against th
United States Government, you made an est
mate, upon which you concluded that an Il
inch sewer was the ayerage-sized sewer, an
that the average cost per linear foot, charge
able against the United States, would be s4.7(
A. Yes, SIR.
Q. And that, therefore, you concluded
would be fair, as against the Government, I
| Vi lilo dCLudI CObL VI III
sewerage, the average price of S470f A. Ye:
| sir.
Q. If that was so, then you ought to hay
charged the other sewers, and the smalle
sewers at the same price? A. Yes, sir.
| @. Now, then, you seek to prove to US ths
your average was fair average by produein
this schedule, do you notl A. Yes, sir.
@. And this schedule, then, should contai
the vouchers simply Of those sewers that wer
charged at s4.70i A. No, sir. 49,.
@. Certainly they should. A. 1t would hay
been clearer II had deducted the others, bU
the result would be the same; If you did Nc
those large sewers.
@. In both columns which are charged
both columns the same, the footing, of coursl
will be lessi 4. Not at all.
Q. Have you included anything in this fri
columns there anything included in you
first column except those sewers, which 70
have, in fact, found charged at S4.70 agains
the United Statesl A. Yes, sir.
@. Wherel A. You will find It on page 1871
@. VIII you refer to the pages of the Co
ernor's answer where there Is an instance {
the first columnl A. Page 1870. There
Missouri-ayenue sewer, Governors answe
page 429, $21, S72.5Q.
O. That Is charged against the United State
at St3.48 square foot, 625 feet. A. Begi
on page 456 of the Governors answer. It is 9
the bottom Of the column. Those two items al
all large sewers. -
Q. Now, right In connection with the precis
charge, those are both charges for the B-stret
intercepting sewer7 A. Yes, sir.
| Q. Now, in the frst instance, you hay
4 49,