The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-04-04


General Government--Governo Shep-
herds Facility of Explanation.
WASHINGTON, April 2, 1874.
At this mornings session OF the District OF
Columbia investigation Edward Clark, the archi-
tect Of the Capitol was examined In regard to the
ruling prices OF all kinds Of tagging curbing and
sodding in Washington, and what such work had
cost him In his Official capacity. This witness was
called by the memorialists with O view to showing
that the Board Of Public Works have paid extraya-
giant and disproportlonate prices for the same
kind of improvements.
Mr.. Clark testified that he thought twenty-five
cents YARD good price for grading and sodding;
the grading on Pennsylvania avenue, done by p.
Mcnamara ought to have been DONE including the
hauling for forty cents loot; witness stated that
he had had six-inch straight curb set for twelve
cents foot and circular curb. for fifteen cents
foot His attention having been called by Judge
n Of the U re- ha
he thought that reasonable and justifabie ex-
Colonel Wright Rives testified in relation 20 the
improvement OF the Bladensburg road, and ex-
pressed the opinion that portions OF the work
was excessive; the original estimate OF It's costs,
submitted to the Legislature, was $4,000; the
passabe at times and witness had petitoned the
Board to have 1T put In order; there was heavy
grading and filing done and they paid too much
for grading and hauling. The witness also spoke
OF tue cost OF the improvements and Of the assess
near the CITY Hall, and stated that too much had
been charged to street; too much pavement had
nue. also Too much FOR grading on Third street, be.
tween Pennsylvania avenue and Maryland avenue.
On cross-examination Colonel Rtves stated that
part OF the grading on the Bladensburg road was
pretty tough work, the ground being hard and
containing springs or water; that he had OBJ
jected to the prismatc pavement on Third street
and had joined In a petition to the Board to have
1t changed, which was done after the work had
M oT soe am s sos so
wherever he had called the attention OF the Board
to errors, In charges against him they had been
Mr.. Archibald White, resident in the county, on
the seventh street road stated that material was
been condemned as unfit; he did not think that
the work had been economically done; they
% loo ,e es nan n:
the road was better for o width or twenty-four
feet before it was improved than it is now.
nearly all the roads In the county which had been
done by the Board are in q bad condition.
Mr.. q. Richards, late Auditor OF the District gov
It was MS ofiOai duty TO act on ali accounts
RRs Re az g. sha soas ea aso
rom the Board Of Public works for WORK
alleged to have been done by the Board in carry
not rs reported to Witness many OF them were
for work when the original contracts were ap-
nulled or changed; the Auditing Commission had,
as witness supposed, acted previously upon all
such claims and had those claims under consldera.
ton several weeks; he did not think that class Of
fund, i Il View of the TACT that they had
never been authorized by the old corporation;
ABOUT as It. ana nsR r
from the Attorney OF the District with which wit
q to
smosas sS sS b sa he ' oa co al
tA In
other words, paid by the Board; the Legislature
had passed law combining the witness official duty
to auditing oils which were the result Of iegsia
OF $379, O06-some $4,000 less than the amount pre-
sented; witness was relieved OF his onlce last De-
cember; Mr.. Needs Is now Auditor; the bills
referred to, witness thinks, are IN the custody
OF the Sinking Fund Commission; it was no
Should sno be paid paid out Of the sinking iund and
which out OF the four million loan. Among the
bills referred to was one relating to street
by the old corporation, ana the original plan was
changed by the Board and the cost OF the bridge
lars. This additional cost was in one OF these
bills. The Board also did the same In regard to
the SeatOn and Jefferson school buildings.
Mr. Richards was interrogated concerning. the
school iund, and notified by MIR. Wilson OF the
committee That he would be further questioned at
q future time ON the same SUBJECT.
This afternoon L. D. Merchant was examined in
relation to grievance about an alley He stated
that he had been required 20 pay for opening an
alley, which had not, In fact been opened. An ex-
animation of the bill paid by the witness, which he
produced for inspection, showed that 1t was a
charge for the value OF ground condemned by a
jury Tor alley purposes. The alley had not been
improved, but the ground condemned, ana the
property TO be benefited, IN part owned by the
witness, had been assessed therefor.
Colonel Wright Rives was recalled concerning
the work at the intersection OF Third and
streets. Alter calculating the cost OF the said
work he stated that the excess at that intersection
charged In that assessment amounted to $lS4;
also that the Board had charged for more curb
wood pavement and sidewalk on street than the
street would measure, taking the line from New
Jersey avenue to Fourth street, west. Colonel
Rives stated that he had measured Louisiana ave.
me from Ninth to Tenth streets, west, and that the
Board had charged the United States government
Tor 1000 yards more OF grading than they should
have charged.
Governor Shepherd stated that with reference to
Louisiana avenue, referred to by Colonel RIves
that charge contained an amount OF grading done
by the old Corporation which they had never been
previously paid tor, and which was provided for in
the appropriation made to reimburse the Board
for what they mad done.