National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-04-16

| DYES, SIR. A. Our lumber was worth to
US about twenty eight dollars thousand. II
cost Us about that cured-perhsps twenty
seven dollars,
Q. The treatment and all cost you about
twenty seven or twenty-eight dollarsa A. Yes,
| sir. z.
Q. What did the labor costi A. The labor
cost from twelve to fifteen cents square
yard.
Q. What Is the other material used in put
ting It down worthl a. Well, it varies, accord
| ing to the way you happen to have It, Some
| times you get sand and gravel for compare
lively nothing, and sometimes it costs good
deal-say fifteen cents. ---.-
Q. Per square yardl A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you think It would cost fifteen cents
| per square yard for the sand and graveli A.
Yes, sir; should thi& so.
Q. Were there any other elements entering
into the cost of putting down this pavement
than thosei A. No, sir.
Q. That is all. A. Yes, sir. Then We must
consider our works, which took some capital.
Ii cost 500, 900. We had our own time and ex-
penses to be allowed for, and we had book
keeper that we were paying $500 q month.
There sre items of that kind that would enter
into the cost of the pavement, in no sense be-
| ing any part of the material, but having to be
| accounted for. Also interest on money Dor
rowed, which at one time was something very
heavy. - ---.--. --.---
Q. Taking these contingencies into the ac-
| count, how much would that add to a square
yardl Have you made the calculation on that
A. have not. should not be able at once to
say how much Il would add. You might say g
quarter of dollar yard.
Q. Well, you might say that, and you might
say dollar. A. Well, you can say dollar,
if you like. .
Q. 1 am asking you as to your best judy
A al + ON
expert, which am not. am engaged in it.,
but 1 am not engaged as practical payer.
Q. Then you do not know what it does cost
to put this down? A. know principally from
what my partners tell me. have sat down
with them and have figured 1t up. 1t may cost
more than that, and it may cost less. You
might have examined Mr.. Mcclellan on that
last point, and he could have given you much
more accurate testimony than could. My
testimony on that point is not worth much as
an expert.
Q. DO you know what 1t costs to put down
this composition pavement! A. No, sir; know
nothing about that.
By Mr.. Merrick: Q. What was the character
of this influence which you speak of as men
toned in these lettersis.A. Oh, Mr.. Merrick, do
not ask that question.
Q. But you are to speak of the letters. A.
But do not speak Of the accuracy of any of
the letters.
Q. So far as you remember? A. It Is a long
time since / read them.
@. You destroyed them in February. They
were fresh in your mindl A. Some of them
were, but many had not read for months. AS
l said before, Mr.. Chitttenden was at times up
and then down. For instance, he would say
that he had just been to the Capitol with Mr..
Huntington and that he had gone and taken
lunch with this or that person, and so on-em-
inent persons here in Washington; giving Mr..
Mcclellan to understand that he was great
man here, and was going to come out all right;
and at the close of the letters he would state
that he had drawn upon him for $780, and he
hoped that he would honor the DRAFT when pre-
sentetr Well, when came to read these let
tiers over said that he was "stuffng" Mack,
in vulgar parlance, to have the draft paid.
Mr.. Mattingly. II the committee please, so
far as the Board Of Public Works is concerned
we, Of course. have no objection to this testi-
mony, and while we do not know to what gen.
tlemen these letters may allude, submit to
the committee whether it is q proper subject
of inquiry-mere statements made in letter,
by party not under oath, as the witness says,
for the purpose Of stufing the parties-whether
they should be
Mr.. Merrick. That is an inference.
Mr.. Mattingly. 1t is apparent, think, to the
committee, who have knowledge enough of
human nature to Judge, and, furthermore, Mr..
MIR. Merrick. Here are letters written by
party in the progress of the work that he was
doing, describing the work that he was doing,
and the machinery he had in operation for the
doing of that work. These letters were de-
stroyed. They were destroyed, as the witness
says, at or about the time that this investiga-
ton was begun--after 1t had been ordered.
They were destroyed with a view to prevent the
of the facts contained in those let
ters heinz hrOupht before the Dublic
The Witness. No, sir.
Mr.. Merrick. If they were innocent, and
proper to be brought before the public, there is
no reason why they should have been destroyed.
Our object is to get at the history of the pro-
ceedings of this Board of Public Works in all
its relations, externally as well as internally,
so that we may know not merely whether there
were corrupt influences within the board, or
whether there were corrupt influences external
to the board, operating upon the course of pro-
ceedings.
Mr.. Stewart. Would you think that state
ments of the person engaged as a lobbyist to
get any scheme through Congress or through
the board to the persons for whom he was en-
ployed, would be reliable testimony to charge |
upon the persons that he proposed
10 inculpatea
Mr.. Merrick. 1t would at least put them upon |
their probation, If the Senator please, and |
take it that whatever description a party gives |
while he is in the progress of his employment.
and the means that he was using for ac- !
the result, is competent evidence
touching that transaction.
By Mr.. Stewart: Q. Do you think the state
nent of a lobbyist before Congress, that he
,ould influence Senators and members, made
20 the persons from whom he was attempting
% get money, would it be that kind of evi-
lence that would put the Senators and men,
oers upon their probation? A. Perhaps 1t
night. It would be for them, so far as they
we're concerned, to determine whether they were
Or not imputations. But our object is to ascer-
ain the character and history OF the procure
nent of these contracts.
Mr.. Stewart. Ought they not to be under
,athi -
Mr.. Merrick. The statement is under oath as
20 document which is now destroyed. If that
were in existence, then the docu-
nent of course would be produced, and ap-
Drehend that no one would controvert that If
that document were produced; 1t would be
competent evidence to show what was done and
Enacted and said by the parties in the progress
IF that transaction. But being destroyed, the
next best evidence contained in the contents of
.hese papers is the recollection of the witness
who destroyed them, as he says, for motive
and for a purpose, In order to prevent the pur-
suit of the inquiries. The character of these
inquiries Is such that, in the nature of the case,
The transaction must be secret. Fraud and cor
ruption are always covert. They hide them
selves in the dark. The Senator knows, and
all Of the members of this committee who are
good lawyers know, that the chief attribute of
fraud is concealment. It can only be got at by
collateral and remote circumstances.
Mr.. Stewart. know, and the counsel very
we'll knows, that there is no more common
thing than for persons who are lobbyists, at
tempting to get through schemes, to misrepre-
sent their influence. / think that If there Is
any class of persons who misrepresent their in
Huence more than all others, 1t is the lobbyists,
and their misrepresentation, not under oath,
might be very damaging to persons who never
heard of them or saw them. Consequently, 1t |
seems to me that we should produce the party |
himself, and then, II on questioning him he de-
mics statements, &C., 1t might be very well then
TO call Judge Jenkins or any one else; hut be-
fore he is called, It seems to me that you |
ought not to go any further with this matter |
Mr.. Merrick. II he denies that he has made |
them, then, of course, we should have to call
Mr.. Jenkins afterward. It Is for the committee |
to determine the question. simply offer 1t, as \
I have stated. / offer the suggestion, and |
submit with great cheerfulness to whatever de-
cision the committee shall come to In respect |
to It.
Mr. Mattingly should like to make this
suggestion to the committee: That II they re-
gard that Testimony of any Importance, they |
can examine Mr.. Jenkins privately, and then,
when Mr.. Chittenden comes, If he confirms any |
of thasa al akementa and vou think IL Ia n urOTler