Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1874-04-08
THE DISTRICT INVESTIGATION.
Proceedings Of the Joint Congressional Committee


After cur report OF the proceedings of the
District investig eating committee closed yester-
day Andrew winders was examined with refer
ence to the character of the bricks used in the
b street intercepting sewer. He thought that
one third of the brick used were salmon brick.
On cross-exsminston he said he thought the
sewer would last years, because the salmon
bricks were not all in place.
Henry Showers testified that he had charge OF
the shops of the Metropolitan Wool Preserving
c. mpaDy; that a schooner load OF wood CON
sigEed to John -. Evans landed at the com
psny's wharf at Esshy's Point; u was green
lumber. The next day the wood, without being
trea TED, was dumped on Bridge street, George
town, u street which was being paved by Evans
under a contract to use the bur lied wood.
witness did not know whether the wood WAS
actually used or no..
Mr.. wilson requested the witness 70 make an
examination OF the street and pJrt whether
the green lumber was used.
Treasurer Magruder was requested to furnish
the committee with the stubs of his check
books show ing the payments made by him in
money and In certificates, and to whom. He
replied that he would furnish the books but
they would make no such showing, as he kept
no separate accounts.
q. II. Bliss corrected his testimony in some
particulars. He testified that he made arrange
ments to furnish Frank III. Smith with chest
nut lumber at 30 cents per thousand.
W. Ii. Claggett corrected his testimony so as
TO be understood that VIM. A. Cook while he
did not draw all the bills for the legislature, did
draw all the principal bills where large appro-
pI1dtlOns accrued TO the Board OF Public Works
He also wished to be understood that he meant
10 say that he generally voted against bills in
uoduced in the legislature, instead of all bIlls
He said bis previous testimony was somewhat
controverted by VIM. A. Cook, but that he had
proof to sustain him in all the assertions he had
made concerning him.
Joseph H. Fletcher testified that he had the
contract to lay the tagging of the botanical gar
dens awarded him last July BY the Board of
Public Works; the tagging used was half new
and half old; the old material came from around
the Patent and Post Offices, and other portions
from around the street, he signed the contract
when he received the award of the work, but il
was amended about six weeks ago so as To in
clude the parking; he has not yet received his
pay either in certificates or money; the work II
nearly completed. He testified that the new
tagging furnished by the board was very in
feTiOr.
Mr.. Bass called attention to a table IN the
Governors answer showing that the work had
since.
The witness testified that he was not aware
of il.
Several witnesses, including ex- Gov. Cooke.
were called, but did not respond, and at half.
past four O'Clock the committee adjourned until
this morning.
TO.day's Session.
The committee met this morning at a quar-.
ter past ten O'Clock.
A. Watson sworn.-Witness was shown a
paper which he said he had compiled from the
report of the Governor and the Board of Public
putation purporting to show the amount of
money dsbursed for laborers' pay in two years
TIE PRICES FOR WOOD PAVEMENT.
Mr.. Merrick called attention to contract No.
293 for laying pavement on PENNSYLVANIA ay-
enue, between 18th street and Rock creek at
$3.50 per square yard. He called attention to
for their share they were charged $50 per
square yard. The vouchers signed by John o.
Evans, who did the work, chow payments at
IS 90 per square yard by the Board Of Public
Mr.: Allison.-I find in almost all instances
they have charged the government S37O-in
several instances, at all events.
Mr.. Merrick The price in the bills OF John
o. Evans, certified to and paid him, is $3.50 per
square yard.
q. Do counsel for the District admit these
Mr.. Mattingly.-Oh, presume they are cor
rect; we will ascertain, and ii not, advise the
Mr.. Christie.-we take the items from their
DE GoLYKR AND MCLRLLAN's CONTRACT.
y. ID. Quimby sworn:-Liyes in Chicago; is a
18th OF July to LIST January, 1S13 in the employ
ofDe GOlyer s. Mcclellan; was employed on
Pennsylvania avenue east; and on street
by Taylor q Filbert; was superintendent OF
street work for De G0lyer & Mcclellan was
laying for them what was known as the DE
Golyer and Mcclellan patent, No. 2. WITNESS
described manner Of laying the pavement and
Q. Was De Golyer and McClellan's contract
in writing? A. know nothing Of their having
any writings only from the book keeper,
patent is usually laid; we had no specifca-
lions from the Board of Public Works; don't
think the pavement is very desirable; COM
1871; afterwards I came here to superintend
work, In 1872; on my return to Chicago, nv
attention was called to the fact that the blocks
pecialiy on lake street; was told to take some
OF the blocks to Washington; brought some OF
them with me; went to see Mr.. Shepherd and
called bis attention to the fact that the blocks
were worthless, and it was time the people
should know IT, He said 1t didn't take a great
deal Of argument to convince the board of that
fact. Took some blocks from Pennsylvania
avenue, between LIST and ID streets, and showed
them to Mr.. Willard, making my statement to
him OF their condition; the blocks can be seen
on that street now, in all stages of decay.
2. Did the Board Of Public Works take any
acton on your statements? A. L understand
they Issued an order, stopping the use of the
blocks altogether; the order was issued in Au-
gust, 1873; came here from Chicago in July.
Q. Do you know what has become of the
property given by De Golyer and Mcclellan as
security on chattel mortgage? A. do not, only
Q. Do you know Mr.. Hopkins? Who is he?
A. He was the general superintendent of the
street. de came on the street one day aud
asked me what 1t cost 10 put down the DE Col
yer pavement-how much profit there was in
1t. Gave him substantially the figures He
told me he had a friend who could get a con.
tract, anu Wdnteu me 10 take an interest. He
brought up the gentleman, who said he was in
the auditors department OF the Board of Pub
lie Works. He told me the board would give
him contract of 10 900 yards of pavement; he
would either 60 in partnership or would sell.
he said he would sell at Is cents a ward to me-
Mr.. DE G0lyer would not release me from NV
contract, and had no further conversation
with him on that subject.
q. Where was the pavement to be laid? A.
He WAS TO have his choice OF pavement and
street; told him the most profit was in the De-
Golyer pavement. Witness gave an itemizsd
statement Of the cost OF laying the pavement
The lumber ready to lay down at the prices
here costs 81. 20 per square yard; IL costs from
12k to Is cents for laying; the gravel costs ff-
teen cents per quare yard.
Q. Do you include In the cost any charge for
grading? A. No, sir.
q. Under DeGolyer s. Mcclellan contracts
was any grading done? A. No, only what was
charged as extra. We were paid for All grading:
kept separate account. Was superintendent
Tor DeGolyer and Mcclellan when they COM
nenced to lay their pavement; commenced at
90 street and then came back to LIST street; did
TINS because We were waiting for Q decision in O
suit brought by the street railroad company;
the avenue east was graded when we began;
We trimmed up some; did some grading on Sth
street east.
Q. Can you give an estimate OF the total value
OF the grading done by DeGolyer and McClel-
Ian? A. L can not certainly; but think $500
would pay for 1t all; could not estimate the cost
Of grading that had already been done before
We commenced; Mr.. McNamara did the gra-