National Republican., 1874-05-13
DISTRICT INVESTIGATION
con .inaed hom SsppIsmenI

possible fOr II. -. ~ -. N.Y.
Q. Do you remember the price paidl think
matter the records will show.
! Q. Were the board controlled entirely IN
their action By the opinion OF William A. Cook
In extending the compensation to G. Z. Evans
after the completion Of his work. A. No, cir.
The board were controlled by their own knowI-
edge Of what was just and right IN the cass.
Q. Then why was Il necessary to refer that
question to William d. Cood A. That do
not know. Probably, to get his opinion as re-
q. You had only determined, then, upon the
equitable question, referring the legal Ques-
tion to William A. Cookf A. We had deter
mined that It was proper thing TO do pro
vided It could be done under the law; that they
were entitled TO the same rates paid to other
contractors for the same kind of work.
q. By whose action was the wife Of G. E.
Evans accepted al surety upon that bondi' A.
Well, upon its being established that she was
worth an amount sufficient to secure the board
In the contract.
@. Before the giving Of that bond-we pass
from the question of its suficiency or her right
to charge herself with any obligation of that
sortAthere had been q controversy between the
board and C.-E. Evans. That Is true, IL It
notl A. Well, when you speak OF a. contro-
yersy, will say that there was dissatisfaction
on the part Of the board in regard TO the atten-
tion by him paid to his work. When Mr.. Ev-
ans as here Che work was done properly and
thoroughly; when he went away and trusted 1t
to subordinates, they slighted IL, and 1t re-
uuired constant watchfulness on the part OF the
board TO keep them up to their standard. y.
q. Still there was q controversy OF that ma
ture that you explained A. There was no
controversy There was dissatisfaction about
it. Mr.. Evans was notified TO that effect sew
eral times.
O. Then there was dissatisfaction with the
work of Mr.. Evans-the manner in which II
was being done, aud you withheld payment oi
certificates from him! A. Yes, sir.
@. Now, was this condition made with Mr
Evans, that If be would execute this bond that
he should receive the certificate to which he
would be entitled from the auditor of the Board
of Public Worksi a. My impression is, Mr.
Evans was notified that he must make his
bond good without any regard to what the
Board of Public Works would do in the prem.
ises.
Q. But Mr.. c. E. Evans likewise testifies
that he made out an express stipulation with
William A. Cook, when he delivered these
bonds to him, that they should not be de.
liyered to the Board of Public Works, nor at
tach to the contract, unless the board agreed
to adjust this controversy A. The board
never agreed to anything Of the kind. Mr.
EVauS COuiu OILY gam ioi AaAASSAA
1t didn't bind anybody but himself.
Q. Then why is 1t that those bonds were moi
attached, as other bonds were, to the contract
A. His first bonds were not deemed sufficient
and he was notified to make them good, and IL
that way his wife was brought In.
Q. Then she did execute those bondsi A.
suppose so.
Q. They were produced here by William A.
Cook, and not delivered to the Board of Public
Wor4si A. don't think there was any reteu-
ton about them at all. They were sent TO him
to examine, and had been some time in his Of.
flee, and they were brought to the notice Of the
Board of Public Works.
@. Have they to this day been delivered to
the Board of Public Worksi A. Yes, sir; they
have always been In the possession of the board
He was acting as the officer Of the board-the
legal adviser ofthe board-and they were In bis
custody as its legal adviser.
Q. Then there was no reason why these
bonds have not been filed with the contracts
as in any other casei A. 1t was simply m
oversight on bis part, suppose.
O. His attention was called TO 1t some time
since in the case. Why was the act of the
Legislative Assembly, appropriatng $2+0, ,0O0
TO reimburse the Board of Public Works fol
the discount suffered on the o. 900 900 loan
not submitted to vote of the people OF the
District A. That is a matter that the Legts-
lative Assembly would have to answer, l can
not; / was not the executive officer Of the gov.
ernment at that time, nor was l a member OF
the Legislative Assembly; SO caunot answer
the question.
o. Have you brought any suits for the pur
pose of establishing your rights, the rights Of
the District government against street-railroad
companies for their Noncompliance with the
law In paying their share Of the carriageway
improvements A. Yes, sir. We have NOT
only brought suits, but we have advertised
their property, which has been enJoined and is
now in the courts. The property was adyer,
tised to be sold this winter, and they were en-.
Joined on the day Of the sale or ths day before
the sale.
O. Was not that for very small portion OIL
the streets through which their railroads rum
A. It was on all the assessments which had
fallen due-the assessments which were made
last year. It was for those assessments. One
of them, think, amounted to thirty odd thous-
and, on the Washington and Georgetown
Railroad, and on the Seventh stre't Railroad
If nv memory serves me right, the amount
was some eight or say ten thousand dollars.
O. ask the question in view of the state.
ment made by Mr.. Thompson, president of the
Metropolitan Railroad Company, where he says
that If assessed upon the principle that was
suggested to him, that It would amount to alb
soiute confiscation. Now desire to ask, In
view of that testimony, whether any arrange
ment or understanding was madeor had between
YOU on that subject, between the District gov
ernment and Mr.. Thompsoni A. None, what
ever. We had no power to do 1t and didn't 90
it.
Q. But when bills were sent against adjacent
property holders, were you not left remediless
as to the railroad companyi A. Well, in nc
case were bills sent where the railroad com
panies had their tracks down, without an as
sessment being made on the railroad company
In several instances, as appears In our answer
and which / spoke of, when we were paving
streets, the railroad companies notified us theii
charter allowed them to go on such and such
streets, and asked permission to put their tim
bers down, in order to prevent the street being
torn up subsequently,. In two or three in
stances we granted their request; we deemed |,
best, In order to keep the payements from be-
ing destroyed.
o. Then that Is not matter which has beer
adjusted between the District government and
the railroad companies, but remains unsettled
A. 1t remains unsettled. There never has
been any settlement In regard to IL.
O. Have you not used certificates issued fol
general taxes. due prior to June 80, 1873, In
paying obligations of the District government
i'm paying, for instance, the salaries of the
employees of the government
The Witness. VIII you please state thai
again. ....ar
o. Have you not used certificates, issued fol
general taxes due prior to June 80, 1873, In
paying obligations Of the District government
for Instance, in paying salariesa A. Tax
lien certificates.
Q. Yes, sir; used them In paying the indebt-
edness Of the corporationi A. The law au
thorized that disposition Of them.
O. Have you excepted those from the assets
that you have enumerated as still in the pos
session of the District government A. The
report of the comptroller shows that-the
whole matter very thoroughly.
@, Were you aware of the fact that William
A. Cook, who you say inspected the bonds
and passed upon their suficiency, at least the
form Of the bonds-at the time that he was
rendering this service to the Board of Public
Works was accepting employment generally
from contractors-the various contractors who
were giving these bonds to the Board of Public
Worksl A. was not, or should not have al
lowed him to. He would have had to servo
either as attorney for the contractors, or az
attorney for the board.
Mr.. Christy. That is good law and good
sense.
Q. Do you know of any instance in which
parties contracting to do work for the board
were allowed to purchase material that they
would use in the improvements from the fac.
tories, or the first hands; and that in some
instances, at least, taat they purchased at a
price less than the same material was furnished
to the boardl A. know Of no such instance,
nor do think 1t possible or probable.
Q. No such instance as that came to yonr
knowledgel A. No, sir.