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

ging across The mall. claim that IL Is not the
same work. I claim, since II is old tagging, Il
Is taken out OF wind already It Is joInted
also. II may need occasional rs-joIntinq.
BY Mr.. stewart: Q. You say that It is not
the same work. 4. No, sir.
Q. You were In the habit of looking over
these books once @ week. This entry Is
August Al A. Yes, sir; and that date Is
August Is. / wish to cali attention to the fact
that August 1 is the date OF the letter that
Mr.. Fletcher wrote to the board. 1t may have
taken three or four days until 1t came up to
me.
o. You say, then, that It is not the same
kind of tagging. How long after your atten-
ton was called to this, and after you knew OF
It, was II before there was any payment made
under thati A. wish to call attention now
to this abstract. The abstract is not in strict
correspondence with the letter which / read.
The abstract reads here:
'"Fletcher has commenced work on hts contract
70 Joint and set nag footvay around the Botanic
sdsS' S out ewing 70 the price not being nfeo
does the grading, furnishing the sand, cement,
lointing and setting the stones In fact, overy-
superintendent Of the Botanic garden, wants two
cution OF this work"
There is no statement showing that there
was old tagging to be relaid. It is LEFT out
here In this. The letter which has been read
just now stated that this was old tagging,
while in my abstract, which you have had an
opportunity to see, does not show that
BY Mr.. Mattingly Q. The material fact In
this matter IL beyond that. You testify ia
these words, page 2059; as q member of the
here and stated under oath: -.
And the prices for the contract were nxed by a
private corrsspondence bstwesnsMr. shepherd
and Mr.. Oertly, Of my ofics.
Now want TO know of you what opinion
would naturally be inferred from such a state.
ment as that made by youl A let Others
draw conclusions. have stated my case !
may have unfortunately worded this; by pri.
vate correspondence, l have repeatedly said, !
meant an Official correspondence kept private
from me.
Q. know upon cross-examination you have;
but you are a man of more than ordinary intel
ligence. A. do not know that; am glad to
hear H. from you.
Q. Well, 1 think you are in a certain way.
Now, you have stated that you appreciated
what you were doing, and you stated that the
prices for the contractors were fixed by a pri
vate correspondence between Mr.. Shepherd and
the deputy engineer of the Office.
The Chairman. Mr.. Mattingly, think Mr..
Cluss has sufficiently explained that to-day.
He states now that he did not mean to say that
1t was a private correspondence, but that it
was Correspondence of which he had no
knowledge.
Mr.. Mattingly. understand bis explanation,
sir: l only want TO get out Of him his intention
in stating as he did.
The Chairman. You can put that question.
The Witness. l have stated that my inten-
ton was to express official correspondence
done through private channel.
Mr.. Mattingly. That was your intentioni
A. Yes, sir; it certainly did not mean anything
else.
Mr.. Black. The Board of Public Works had
been established, and the District government
was in full operation for q year or so before
you were appointed? A. Yes, sir.
Q. At the time when you were appointed had
you any doubt that it was the object of the
President and his advisers. the Board of Pub
lie Works and others, to procure the services
of competent and upright mani A. No, sir;
none at all; on the contrary.
Q. You accepted the compliment contained
in that letter which you read yesterday as
being sincere, did you nota A. Mr.. Black,
am too old for vanity. l accepted. showed
it only as q record.
Q. You supposed, at all events, that they
were sincerel A. Yes, sir thought they
were sincere, and think so still.
Q. Then you had no idea that this was an
invitation to you to take the part Of set of
rogues, who would promote their own private
interests at the expense of the publici A.
should certainly never have Joined them If l
had had that idea.
Q. You never would have accepted it if you
had not believed that that was the purposel
A. No, sir.
O. Is not the Office of engineer to that board
one Of the most important in it! A. Certainly.
Q. Was 1t possible for them to cheat the
public-for the contractor to cheat the public
either as to quality or quantity of the work, or
the price Of the work, without your concur
renee? A. The United States, yes; the con-
tractor, no.
Q. A contractor might cheat by getting
higher priest A. mean that the engineer
has pretty full control In seeing that a con-
tractor gets no more quantity than what he
actually lays, and gets no more price than the
board fixed.
O. As to the measurement of the work and
the quality of it, it was necessary that the en-
gineer should approve the bill before the con-
tractor could be finally paid and settled witha
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then there are estimates to be made that
nobody can make without the engineers ap-
provali A. Yes, sir.
O. Therefore as regards these estimates, and
as regards the measurement of the work after
it was done, in order to commit fraud upon the
Government or upon the public, it would be
absolutely necessary to have the concurrence
of the engineer. He must be an accompliee in
it before II could be perpetrated, must he mott
A. / have stated not against the United States.
Gross errors have been perpetrated against the
United States without the knowledge of the
engineer of the board, he not being priyy to
the transactions as 70 the measurements.
@. As to which Of theml A. ! have stated
quite a number Of them.
Q. Do you mean now those estimates that
were made upon work upon which the 81 ,2i0,-
900 appropriation is basedi A. That is It.
Q. They were made before you came In.
Was that done with your concurrence, or was
your concurrence necessary to accomplish thati
A. A letter was read here this morning of Jan
uary 5, 1873, when was a member Of the board,
and at that date the vice president told Mr..
Oertly to take charge Of this. He did not In
form the engineer in charge that he had depu-
tized Mr.. Oertly 10 do It., but went to his assist
ant and told him 10 do It. So the engineer In
charge is not responsible for those errors.
q. After you were in Office could that be done
without your concurrencei A. It has been
done.
Q. And 1t was done without your concur
reneei Yes, sir. have demurred to it, but,
of course / did not see, until the Governors
answer came out, whether these measurements
for the Government were right or wrong. So,
of course, had no These measurements
upon which all this money was paid-and you
remember that yesterday number of vouchers
were shown here which were balances for the
Q. Wait sir; was II not illegal for them to
proceed with those measurements and esti-
mates and lay them before Congress without
first getting your appreciation A. stated
that this was my humble opinion;
not exactly Illegal; but thought that at least
he spirit Of the law was that the Board of
Public Works shall measure this work-that
The engineer should do SO.
Q. That you thought was your dutyi A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Now, whether It was your duty Is one
question; but did you perform that dutyl A.
was debarred from performing it.
Q. You think now, and you thought then,
hat IL was your duty and you did not do itl A.
Your question does not convey the right i'm
preston.
Q. The question does not, but perhaps the |
answer will. A. 1 mean TO say that within |
six weeks after these appropriations were |
passed the majsr part of the money was |
irawn, and It went so fast that hardly any
body could recover from the shock Of seeing
What was going on.
Q. Hardly anybody could recover A. Could
'ecover and see, after he came to his senses,
What was actually done. After the main part
If the work was done II was not worth while
or me to trouble about the little balances.
Q. This was done, then, clandestinely and
Without your knowledgei A. Without my
will not say clandestinely.
Q. Well, without your knowledge. Was It