Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1874-04-30
THE DISTRICT INVESTIGATION.
Proceedings Of tie Joint Congressional Committee.


Proceedings Of tie Joint Congressional Committee.
Cancellation Yesterdays Proceedings.
The Joi.t special comm tee inveStigaI u z
District affaLs .ema med in execu..ve SIS on
yesterday unt.l 80 o'rlccis wlen Il open 1T =
sion ex-GOv. CCOse was recalled, but on ac.
count Of his businC 80 engagements his farther
examination was &c e,.tr.
TO-day-s Session.
The committee was called t. order in omen
session this morning e. half-past ten O'Clock.
GOV. sBEPHErD Examined.
Gov. A. X. SheOhe d sworn and examine by
Mr.. Msttfngly:-Q. Please explsin to the CON-
mttee the clrcumst Inces OF Gen. Bahcock's
measureme hts in which Il ,2i1, 900 was received
IIom Congress? A. The estimate was ma lie up
III Septsmeet TO SO in The November report
the Board OF PuDiIc Works; in The aygre tie
NO. g work was dove than was estimlG-t the
bill had , Sed the House ard an Amendments
was II Ide in the Senate that Gen. BLbcock
Should approve the quantities and prices; toe
bill passed the Senate thus amended just alter
the Christmas holidays, and in order to have il
re ldy TO PISS the HouSe, when they convened
again, the board rtqueyt~1 General Babcock ,
have an engineer m IKE the measurements; the
h'll bad virtually passed both house, with tie
slight amendment made in the senate; there
was TO work done around eSeryation II by IL g
Boald O. Public Works.
Gov. Shepherd thought the prices charged
the government around reservation II were
high; he did not think the grading was at an
exO-bitant price.
q. Please state the connection of the Board
Of Public Works to the DeGOlyer and NJ. Cle.
'sI contract? A. The fast intima; on L had
OF the contract was made ID me by Mr.. Hunt
.ington; i think he introduced C6itterden to
He; he said to me one day, when pacsing bis
bank, "Whst are you doing about contracts?''
animation, and are doing nothing" he said, 81
have friend who wants a contract L id
Tell him to put in his bid and take his
Chances Subsequently Gov. Cooke cane >
ne and said Mr.. Parcons had friend who rep
resented Chicago firm who wanted a con
tract" told the Governor that the bid would
nave to go in, and the contract be decided upon
ats merits. Mr.. Parsons made an argument
about the patent which quite exhausted tie
subject aud exhausted the board. Gen. Garfield
spoke TO me at one time, and sIid he was en-
ployed by Parsons to represent the DeGolyer
and Mcclellan interest One of the arguments
made by him was that we should give the west
show; that all our contractors were eastern
mer.. The work was finally awarded by fun
loaId. L &C On ascert1in;d that DeGolyer end
Mcclellan were not men of the means that was
reprc sented to the board and that the work
WIS not being done satisfactorily. TIE work
was stopped. Along last year, IN 1873, Gov.
Cooke sent me a letter he received from Mr
Dcolittle. Gov. Shepherd read the lettsr, a.
follows:
DooLITTLE TO COOKE.
IPrirde.1 RACINE, WISCONSIN,,
Office, Il Clark 81, Chicago, Aug. 10, ISIS !
Dear SIR: In ne course of nv proYes. opaI
bus n . here, tterd and Client. legidipyn-
my son in this coy, has placed a very imI Dr-
tant matter in my lnr3, "a h's confidential
cornell and advi:er, and fs it concerns the
Bolrd of Public Works o. the city Of Washing-
ton, have taken the Liberty, from our frie, day
and social relations during times past, to write
you upon the subject before the matter is prL.
sented in court or is mFte public. Therefore
he he's not mentioned any nlmcs OF given any
publicity, except to his coursel in confidence
The gentleman TO whom refer IS Mr. Robert
Mcclellan, of the late firm of DeGolyer & Nc
Clellan On the 25th of June, 1872, tie board
awarded to them $50, Oco yards of wooden pave
meDt ot TIE patent known as 'DeGolyer No 3"
wood to be treated by the Samuels process
Aud also, condiiiopdly, 5000 additional yards,
at IS - yer y:rd.
This WIS by resolution in writing, upon .,e
records of the board, and it WAS accepted by
them in writing on he anne day. Itwf,a con
tract binding uI on both parties. They erect /
worl at al expeI e OF De Irly go COO, procured
rhe lumber for rhe work, aud have it on hand
But about $4,000 ONLY have b IN put down.
Frey have LOST their tire, paid large cunts
OF II crest, and IL compelled TO eli Their lum
Der and works at Washington will :, hely>
.csers by thousands upon thors Irds OF do l.
probably $50 eco ard upwprds. Tbs - he %
ua,iOn UPON the surface. But there is an irs.,'e
view of ibis matter, a, which is by far ne
most oppressive upOn my c. ,eDt.
In order 10 get the contract from the Board
Public Works the contractors we're compel d
20 pay IN cpsh S?5 900, and to give their notes
pay able to their OWL order, for S72 500 or s97
the piice bargained for at frat being - cents
rer square yard, or $780, 20, but finally fixed al
Of S5 600 have been paid-making 1872, 700 paid
in cash, which is much more than 80 cents Der
square yard upon the pavement laid down. The
the pavement was laid down. But the bosrd
from lime TO time has declined to designate the
streets TO be paved, in violation of the spirit
and letter of the contract, which contemplatc1
the period of five months for the $50 600 and TIL
other 20, 900 the same season or the next.
MI Mcclellan protests TO me that he was
ready TO stand by bis word, and pay the 80 cents
m Tvs ant Iasa
which was the underste ding when he gave
tho.e noes to obtain the contract. But as the
board have put him OF with various urfulflied
promises to designate the streets from time to
tim" withou. desis naf,ng them, he cannot and
ne Will not pay guy more OF Said nots, and his
instructions TO ms are 70 defend the notes, il
sued upon, aud If not to file a bill to cancel
tnem, uUon The obvious ground that they are
wholly Illegal and void.
The letters, kilograms aud papers shown me
In confidence confirming the statements of the
parties in the TRANSACTIONS, seem to leave no
pos bic doubt as TO the con; liberation or these
notes. liz Will be most painful professional
duty, but one from which L must not SHRINK.
deemed 1t, however, due to our former relations
to say 20 You that have ! er- onLlly no urk md
motives towards any of tce per,or living or
dead, whose names are involved IN tbis matter
would have preferred TO gay this - you in
Persor, aud would be disposed 70 m eet you half
way, and TO give you any other informs, ,en you
desire. Could you meet me at Cleveland or at
Cincinnati, or here or elSewhere, and when?
Respectfully, yours, j. X. DooLIIrLE.
The follow .pg answer was sent to the lie. er:
COOK TO DooLITTLB.
BOord Of Public Works, District Of Columbia
WASHINGTON, August %, 1873.
Hon j. n. DoolitHe, Chicago, Illinois:
Dear Sir: am in receipt OF your communica-
tic OF the 18th instant, in which you state tn at
"a very mi GRANT mat err concerning the
Bo2rd OF Public Works, has been placed in
your hands ss cor idential counsel and sd wiser
In reply, allow me TO say that there Is nothing
In the DeGolyer & Mcclellan contract which
either or arv member Of the Loard can DO si-
bly, object to have brought before the public.
The unsatisfactory manner In which the con-
tract was performed, both as TO work aud
material, virtually necessitated its abrogation,
and II, on this account, your client feels ag-
grew d, there can be no objection, on our part.
II he re- orts for redress to q court Of Justice
With respect TO the transactions OF that firm
with other parties, the board have no informa-
ton other than that which your letter fur
Aiehes-ere in no way connected with or in
VOWED In them, and can therefore have no
po sible objection TO their development before
the courts. Permit me TO assure that, altboug oh
much abused, the board rather court than
avoid investigation, and that in prosecut ing the
ca OF your client there is nothing which need
interrupt the friendly and social relations to
which you SO pleasantly refer.
Highly approciatipy the kind motiv-s vbich