National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-05-21

sand, l,l0O 90 oU goa OF
1l,os2 50
Cut 10 excavation, 4lo yards clay, haul "a. q,
Cut NJ H. ios excavation, 100 yards clay haul
~ 'ss1I E1csvs atom I'll yard, clay, at
Cut IA Haul az f'0 go n yards, $50 ,es,i II .
yards, 200 feet le4 -
DItching, 1859 yards, at 90 cents
Total excavation, cubic yards l9,7es, 1854 -
kiIoai1R ! cent for 200 feet haul, at is cents
i6 GGssa a Rs ss sHSa asss h haul easos
22,sls at tS.TS, 1851 Io,Ioo oo
% 80 .,,,, rars, ls9os 70
Dec lS72 Grading lO,465 cubic yards, . 70, q.
Gravel taken from surface, 2952. OF this .ss7
yards was taken from surface OF excavation, lod
which he should be allowed 40 cents per yard OF
feet depth, which is 20 cents.
That is for the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal
Company. They wanted q towpath and had
that condemned. Mr.. Oertly put in the 'front.'
age of the tow-path instead Of putting in the
private property. / have examined 1t, and the
same number Of square feet is charged IN the
lot that is on the square west OF Fourteenth
street.
Mr.. Mattingly. How many feet does he make
! on tlaL 6QudIei n. 4AO AohSc
| IS feet inches, and ! take 50 feet 3 inches.
He ought to add 20 feet to that.
O. He makes the measurements there less
than you dot A. Yes sir; it should be more.
O. How does that affect the general RESULT
/ should think that would increase the differ
ence. A. That will affect it in this way: He
had q certain amount Of money to expend, and
he made his work correspond to 1t.
@. That is your idea of it, A. Yes, sir; after
examining that table.
Q. Would it not, in point of fact, have just
the contrary effect!
The Witness. In reference to that portionl
Mr. Mattingly. In reference to his statement
as to the cost of the work. A. think my
statement-this table is to rebuff my statement.
Mine was plain and clear; refer to everything
and every page.
Mr.. Thurman Mr.. Mattingly, l think you
had better let the witness go through with his
statement, and then you can subsequently
enter upon a cross-eXamination.
The Witness. He refers to New York ave
nue. and different avenues, and have stated it
here, and you see the different charges, and
consequently there was this amount out. And
again, he has charged-if you will examine
that table-take, for instance, page 1872, north
of Fifteenth street, siX-tcnths Of an inch-S9
| feet. That is one of those Government spaces
what they call such. Now, that is entirely
covered by wood pavement. The property
holders paid one third Of that pavement; the
General Government pay two thirds. There
| fore, the whole of it is paid for. But he comes
in and divides with this portion of his, and
multiplies that same area-39 feet alone on
the arenue-by 1910, and makes a cost Of
about 40 square yards of pavement-pretty
near $500. / think that is about 40 square
yards on that space, on Connecticut avenue.
| I'VE get the total cost of P-street circle, curb
and concrete, is So, 451 90. If you refer to
page 4O6 of the Governors answer, you see
concrete alone, two thirds of 1t cost S29 900.
| He has got Slash-run sewer at Eighteenth and
T streets The SIash-run sewer is paid for by
this general sewerage law. Then, again, the
United States has been charged for it in the
Governors bill of S2,ooo,o 600. In Louisiana
avenue be has added to that. He has added
the triangle between Ninth street and Penn
sylvania avenue. They are entirely separate
and distinct. In reference to his sewerage
tables on page 1869, have examined it care
fully, and he should deduct from that all these
main sewers. The cost of these main sewers
was collected from the property holders. That
is by q tax of ten mills in Georgetown and
seven mills in Georgetown; and while speaking
of it, they propose 70 collect some SAC, 600 from
Georgetown for their sewer; when you come to
multiply the number of area feet in George
town-the private property-by sewer mills,
you get $4,000, and some deductions, so
they collect three times as much as they
ought to.
Then, again, the sewers have been charged,
as, for instance, B-street sewer, Slash-run, this
portion in reference to Connecticut avenue and
the Tiber sewer in front Of the Botanical gar
dens against the United States; and yet again,
in this bill of So 900 900 that is sent to the Gov
eminent for general sewerage, there is Slash
run sewer and some sewers that have been paid
for three times, you might say, or have not
been paid for, but have been paid for twice,
and the bill sent to Congress for the third time.
Now, deduct from those tables these main
sewers, they foot up 1922 ,974.S7 on the Gov
eminent side; 1923 ,gT2 IS on the private prop
erty side, and deduct one from the other and
we have 500, go. Mr.. 0ertly in his state
ment states that the private property paid
about 81 900 mere than the General Govern
ment, whereas you make these deductions and
the United States has paid 500, Al 90 more
than the private property.
Governor Shepherd. Are you not mistaken
there! The Board Of Public Works, he says,
had paid 81 900 in excess.
The Witness. That is what meant to say.
Governor Shepherd. You said the private
property Owners.
The Witness. meant to say the Board of
Public Works. The Board of Public Works
have paid about one thousand dollars more,
but making those deductions and the United
States
nOFSTnOT SucpucIN. huCIo uldAc tuOSc NC
ductious7
The Witness. Strike ont main sewerage.
Governor Shepherd. Why strike that out;
would IL not be best to wait until the Govern
ment makes the appropriations and then de-
duct it7
The Witness. The assessments were. made
on private property for those sewers.
Governor Shepherd. For whichi
The Witness. Seven mills-and two cents in
this district.
Governor Shepherd. That does not apply to
the private property at all. The amount asked
of the Government is based upon its area-the
number of feet done in streets, and avenues,
and parks-just exactly upon the same basis
that private property pays.
The Witness. am talking about that gen.
eral law for these main sewers. Tha Legisla-
ture passed an act-seven mills for Georgetown.
That was to pay for all those sewers.
Governor Shepherd. Yes.
The Witness, And that was the total cost Of
theml
Governor Shepherd. Yes. The Board of
Public Works mas spent $50, 600 or 100000 on
one sewer alone in Georgetown, and they are
building those sewers now. The point at issue
Is simply this, whether the United States Gov
eminent shall pay the tax on its property as
the private hroperty-owners pay. If so, then
whatever the United States has paid heretofore
Is to be deducted from whatever the amount
would be.
Mr.. Thurman. Governor, let me ask one
question right here. Does this assessment that
has been made on private property-the ag-
gregate Of it, equal the aggregate or estimated
cost of the main seweri
Governor Shepherd. Equal the aggregated
Mr.. Thurman. Yes, sir.
Governor Shepherd. No, sir; the estimated
cost TO complete the sewerage system with the
amount already expended by the private citi-
zens and by the corporation of Washington
aggregates about four and half millions of
dollars, OF which this sewerage law recently
passed exacts from the private property-owners
&, lO0, 600; and we ask from the Government
81, 700, 600, subject to what 1t has already paid
on account of the nber sewer and Slash-run
sewer, which would reduce 1t probably to
81, 800 900.
Mr.. Thurman. When you include the four
millions as the cost of the sewerage you in
clude the street sewers, do you mott
Governor Shepherd. Yes, sir; of course.
Mr.. Thurman. But speaking about these
main sewers, have been under the impression
that 1t was stated here that the sewer certif-
Gates represent the whole estimated cost
Governor Shepherd. No; they represent the
amount 70 be assessed TO the property-owners
only.
Mr.. Thurman. Then the estimated cost of
these main sewers d more than two million