National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-04-10

mer Of 1872, Mr.. Quinby had madts aSy state
ment as to the uorthlessDess Of this pavement
"A. Yes, sir; he had.
2. Was that while he was in the employ of
DeGolyer q Mcclellan, or sfter he had t.en
discharged He was there employed at the
time.
Q. At the time he made these statements,
A. No, sir.
Q. Then understand you to say that prior
to bis being In their employ here, IN the sum-
mer Of 1872, when this work commenced, he
had stated that the pavement was worthlessf
A. Well, / won't say he had stated the pave
ment was worthless, but he had stated that
the curing process was worthless. He had
stated that TO me.
Q. Do you know ANYTHING about the state
ment made by him sferwsrf. in the fall Of
1873, A. In the fall Of 1S7S-thst was last
fall. No. sir. I have not seen Mr. Quinby st
All this morning. Oh, yes; saw him In JAN
uary, in Chicago, for q few minutes. / have
not seen him since, I think, until sometime last
september, and I have had no conversation
with him.
Q. Did you have charge of the correspond
Snee OF your firm with the Board Of Public
Yes, sir.
". Were complaints made by the board that
me WorK was not being properly donei A.
sAaHn sno II % oNct nearQ was the letter that
you have just read, or of which tha. "a sub-
stantislly copy. do not remember post
lively. -'..... =. =.
Q. You have got the originals Of these letters
in Chicago, understand you'll A. Yes, sir: I
have all Of them.
The Chairman. What original letters arc
these you speak Off
Mr.. Merrick. The original letters that were
communicated to them by the Board of Public
Works, Of which Mr.. Mattingly proposed to
submit to him certain copies from their journal.
The Chairman. Is there any objection to sub
hitting the copiesl
Mr.. Merrick. No, sir; only thought If the
witness Is to bring the books he might as welI
bring the original letters at the same time.
| By Mr.. Mr.. Mattingly: Q. wish you would
examine this entry here on page 1877 of the
Journal and see whether about that date, 25th
OF December, 1879, you remember of receiving
letter to that effect
The following Is the entry referred to:
"Messrs. DeGolyer & Mcclellan were notified,
In looking over Pennsylvania avenue east, it Is
found In terrible condition, and immediate
steps are requisite to prevent a disgrace to the
board, and they were requested either to finish
the work Immediately in good order or relIn-
guish the job, and to be done this week, or the
board will be obliged to adopt course that
will be disagreeable."
The Witness. No, sir; have no recollection
OF letter Of that purport ever having been re-
ceived.
Q. You do not remember that? A, There ia
portion of it, substantially the same as the
one received, but taking 1t altogether don't
remember 1t as being
Q. What Is your recollection as to the state
ment Of the letter you did receive! A. don't
remember that. The only thing that strikes
me now as being familiar in this letter is this
portion Of 1t: "Or the board will be Obliged to
adopt 9 course which will be disagreeable"
! remember receiving letter with a clause
like that, or one substantially like It. The
other part do not remember; it does not strike
me; it does not seem familiar TO me.
Q. Do you remember, in January, 1873, max
ing application to the board for 81 ,OO0l A.
Yes, sir; for Peter McNsmars, think.
Q. Was 1t 81 COO you wanted to pay MeNa-
maral A. Yes, sir; I think so.
Q. Do you remember the reply to thatl A
I do.
Q. What was IT. A. This entry that YOU
showed me, dated November, 1872, is not it.
Mr.. Msttingly. I am aware of that, for as
you will notice, that is dated the 25th of No
vember, 1872. I did not make any reference to
that. If you do not remember, never mind
We win introduce the press copies of all this
correspondence.
Q. Do you know what this machinery and
everything In connection with It cost, that was
included in that mortgage to the Board of Pub
Lie Worksl A. Substantially.
Q. About what was III A. About S23, 900.
Q. Who put the valuation upon it that was
put upon it in that mortgsgel Do you knows
A. don't know. guess it was done to give
that security.
By Mr.. Merrick: Q. You do not know any
thing about It'll A. Not actually. did at the
time, but have forgotten. L think suggested
it to Mr.. Cook, the attorney of the board, and
there was some correspondence had In regard
to It. Mr.. Cook stated it could be done in that
nw.1 L. ~
Clellan executed 1t personally, and executed
It for DeGolyer, if / remember Alright, under
power of attorney. Mr.. Cook fixed the amount
of the mortgage. 1 don't know whether he
fixed the valuation or how that was.
By Mr.. Msttingly. Q. In estimating The cost
of this pavement that you laid here on Penn
sylvania sVenue-the cost, as actually laid by
you-have you included that portion which you
had to take upl A. No, sir.
@. How much of that pavement did you have
to take up7 A. On Pennsylvania avenue we
took up nothing, substantially. On Eighth
street, l think, 1850 yards. do not know,
unless we should go over and measure it
again.
Q. Do you remember the portion of the pave
ment that was washed outl A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where was that A. It was on Eighth
street. do not remember any on Pennsylva-
mia avenue.
Q. Have you included in the cost any expense
for keeping it in repair for period of three
years2 A. have not
Q. Can you state what that would be-a
reasonable estimated A. Yes, sir; a reasonable
estimate, if a man was on the ground, would
be ten cents yard and the pavement was
properly laid That is his lookout WHEN he
lays it, of course.
By Mr.. Merrick: Q. That is to say, If the
pavement were well put down, it would not
exceed ten cents per yard to keep 1t in perfect
rppair thrpa yaars2 That ia wi he,
fault could be traced to the man, and he was
shown to be properly chargeable with the re-
pairs.
Q. As this pavement was laid, do you think
it can be kept in repair for three years at a cost
of ten cents yardl A. I do not.
Q. Can you state what it would cost, reason
ably, to keep this pavement in repair for three
years! A. No, sir. The great fault of that
pavement was there was never crown enough
given to the street to suit any of our folks.
We thought it was laid too fiat.
Q. Did it not have drainage enough A.
Yes, sir.
Q. In these other contracts to which you
have alluded, these other streets, did under
stand you to say that the two feet of grade
there was included In the work done by you
under the contract A. 1t was.
Q. And any extra grading for which you
were allowed, under these contracts, were for
that beyond the two feetl A Il was.
By Mr.. Wilson: Q. What streets are thosei
Mr.. Mattingly. He mentioned several streets
where he had done work other than Pennsyl-
vania avenue and Eighth street.
Mr.. Merrick. want to ask one question.
Q. You say you only remember one entry Of
SIC, 900 to Browni A. That is the only name
! remember.
Q. Were there other entries respecting the
persons to whom any of that S97 900 had
been paidl A. None whatever. The S72, 900
in notes was merely q general entry that so
much had been paid for such purpose, l think.
The only thing there is anything definite about
Is the So, 900 In cash.
Q. The other seventy thousand and odd dol
lars; there Is no designation or indication what
ever as to where any part Of it wenti A. No,
sir; none whatever. That Is my recollection
now.
By the Chairman: Q. want to ask one other
question. Perhaps you have answered it. 1
think I understood you to say that you laid
about 81 900 yards in all of this pavement A.
By DeGolyer & Mcclellan and W. 81. Whitney
there was that much laid.
@. Have you explained why the remsirdsr
Of the 150,0 900 yards have not been laid A.
have not.
Q. Now, viii you not explain to us why the
balance of this pavement has not been laidi
A. One reason is that the board had not desig-
nated any more to be done. In the second