National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-05-01

wero two classes Of deposftors, some I've hun
-dred and some one thousand dollars. could
easily verify that.
O. We viii pass from that Was It auy part
Of the duty Of yourself and your associate to
pass upon the character Of the improvements
character Of the various carriageways, for in
stance5 A. No, sir.
O.. Then your instruction was to take all bids
that were made, without reference TO the fact
whether o deposit had been made or mott A.
received no specific instruction whatever.
Bids were Just handed to me, and was told to
please arrange these and classify them, and
did 90 TO the best Of my ability without any
formal instruction In any shape or FORM
O. Did you IN your statement include the
bids of John G.. Stafford for the Smith concrete
pavement A. include In the concrete pave
meut one bid Of John G.. Stafford for S2.25, one
ut $3.50, one at $50, one ct s2.81, and one at
s2.5o-six bids made by John G. Stafford
q. Then you made an average and reported
the boardl A. Yes, sir. Those bids Of Stat
ford were for six different streets, bis prices
varying on the different streets.
4 Q. And you reported the average amount,
you state, TO the boardl A. Yes, sir.
BY Mr.. Wilson: Q. Was he the only bidder
for that description Of pavement A. Yes,
str. -.
By Mr.. Christy; Q. Who prepared the adYer-
ttsement OF which you speak, A. do not
know.
O. Was it not the expectation Of all persons
connected with the Board of Pubhe Works that
the awards would be made to the lowest bid
dersi Al do not know. 90 -
the reports a. made By the person opening the
bids, that Is was to ascertain who was the low
est bidderi A. No, sir;'I knew the contrary.
Il was the delberate intention not TO take this
schedule and treat Il In this manner. The idea
was to get at fair price for good work.
Q. When did you ascertain that faeti a. Be-
fore made ont this schedule.
O. am, not speaking Of the schedule that
you made up; but you stated that when the
bids were read OF by the person whose name
you have forgotten you had then no knowledge
OF any intention to arrange scale Of pricesi A.
Yes, sir. -1
Q. So that In the first Instance you took it
down with reference to the work subsequently
done to fix the scale of pricesl A. Yes, sir.
Q. At that time did you not expect that bids
would be let to the ones who proved upon the
opening Of the bids to be the lowest biddersl A.
No, sir. CIT --a- 80. -..-.-.
Q. Had you any opinion on the subject, A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Derived from any member of the boardi
A. could not specify any member, but knew
OF q discussion in the board In relation to
frauds that had been perpetrated under the old
government by reason Of bids being put in for
one kind OF pavement and another kind of pave
meut being put down of an inferior quality.
When made up this schedule, as you will see,
each different pavement Is scheduled by itself,
and the number Of bids, and that they vers to
determine as to which kind Of pavement they
would put on certain streets. There was moth
ing in the opening Of those bids by the Board
of Public Works, to my Knowledge, that prom
ised TO any bidder work under his bid.
Q. Do understand you to say that, prior to
the opening Of the bids on the LIST of Septem-
Der, you had received Information that the
awards would not be made to the lowest bid
ders, but that a scale Of prices would be estab-
lshedi A. No, sir you do not understand me
to say so. - ..
Q. You say, however, It was a matter Of dis
cussionl A. Yes, sir; after the receipt of these
bids; after these bids were opened, and before
they were classified.
@. And affer you had taken them down. A.
Yes, str; IN this book; not this taking down.
Q. I understand that. So Il was not in fact
until after the opening Of the bids that this
matter of fixing prices by the results Of these
calculations was determined upoO A. That
Is to my knowledge. .
Mr.. Stanton. You were asked concerning an
increase In price in the laying Of brick pave
ment. Do you know anything Of the reason
OF that increased A. Yes, sir. -
great dc al of difficulty In obtaining brick, and
believe there was combination attempted
among the brick men, they knowing there
would be very large quantity Of brick pave
ment, to put up the price of brick, There was
a clause subsequently inserted In the contracts
by which the board fixed the price OF bricks at
S1l and 81 so q thousand, and would furnish
10 contractors at that price. Where they failed
to furnish, or where the brick on the street
cost more than S1l-50 thousand, the differ
ence per square yard was taken by counting
thirty-six brick to the square yard, and If there
were . thousand yards of brick pavement, that
represented thirty-six thousand brick. Tho
difference between si1 so, the board price, and
the price actually paid for the brick, was al
lowed. ans ...-
@. When this increase was made from &c
cents to 81 per yard had the price of brickS
actually gone upl A. ! know nothing about
the increase of price to 81 yard; that was
done after lelt the board. When the price
was fixed at so cents, contractors then fur
nished the brick. Subsequently, there was an
attempted combination among the brick-men,
| and the board undertook to break up that COM
bination. They would purchase brick. think
they bought some at Philadelphia, and some at
Baltimore, and they cost about Sill so: they
were put to the contractors at that price. After
while the board could not get brick, and they
permitted contractors to get brick wherever
they could, and gave to them the increased
price per yard represented by the difference
between sl1.5o per thousand aud the price
actually paid. ....
| Q. You were the first auditor Of the boardl
| A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long did you continued A. Up to
December IA, 1879.
\ O. Explain to the committee the manner OF
auditing accounts that was established and
f9lloyso A. Es spgPeer y9uld traPsnit to
tain street for work done by the c6ntraetof.
took the schedule Of prices and carried out the
extensions Of the different items that appeared
on the engineers measurement, with the prices
| fixed by the board. then made out eertif-
cate that had that day examined and allowed
the account of John Smith, contractor, for so
much money for work done on such q street,
between such and such points. That went to
the treasurer, with . duplicate Of the measure
ment. and the audit Es made up ~ my office.
O, A duplicate Of the measurement Do you
mean duplicate certifestei A. No, sir;
mean q duplicate measurement. ] meyer made
duplicate certificate.
@. mean q duplicate certificate of the
engineer. A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then, In any case, did you audit bill
without having the engineers certificate to
the correctness Of the measurement A. No,
SIR. I could not tell what to audit without the
engineers certificate before me.
Q. You always required thntl A. Yes, sir.
Q. The payments were made upon your
audit of the billsl A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know OF any case IN which pay
nents were made except upon which measure
ments were furnished by the engineer and
afferward formal audit BY yourself. A. No,
sir. i-
BY Mr.. Christy: @. What was your mode
1 of ascertaining the amount Of assessments
against any particular piece Of property upon
the street, A. I had nothing TO do with the
assessments beyond making up statement of
the amount that appeared on my books as
having been audited Tor work done on the
streets.
Q. And without regard to the parts of The
streets upon which the work was donel A. Oh,
no, sir.
Q. That Is true. isn't ~ A. No. sir.
Q. Let US take lot No. 100. Is-there any
thing in your statement separating the cost Of
the Improvement in front Of that lot.
| Witness. OF that immediate Ioti
@. Yes, sir. A. No. sir.
9. That isThat ! mean. Didn't that result
In this: that improvements were much more
expensive on certain portions Of street than
npon other portions, and yet the entire cost
was distributed upon all tho property on the
street, A. know nothing Of the mode of max
| Ing out an assessment.
BY Mr.. Wilson Q. There were different