Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1874-04-17

their statements. C-They furnished me with
sSerufcates' which l herewith is append; rortity-
These certificates herewith exhibit. Or these
acttd. / believed in their truth them DO 30
still l found, however, that DeGolyer 8 Nc
Clellt n were not performing their contract
that they were using different and cheaper ma
terial than, as opposed, the contract called
for and accordingly demonstrated against 1t,
ard wrote them a letter in substance as follows.
59i MICH. Av., CHICAGO, Ill, Aug. -. lsI2.
Mr.. Dduid L. De GOlyer, Washington, d. c.
DEAR SLR: am in receipt OF your two favors
dated the 18th and 2lst. The latter this morn
Ing. hasten to reply. III there was anything
which did extol In Messrs. De. & McC. during
the i've months was trying TO secure contract,
letter and the spirit, giving TO Washington and
the District the best pavement, no mstter
the cost. 1t would be the best. 1t is With
profound regret that l have but jus;
learned that your purchase in the cas-,
was spruce in the stead OF pine, and
poor quality of spruce at that. 0urscontract
calls for pine, both in letter and spirit. Our
applications for contracts were filed desert ptive
Of the pavement, the kind of wood we would
use, the length of each block, and our price for
doing such work. The wood was to be Norway
pine, the blocks to be six inches the price 50 81
per yard, SC. Our contract would include our
application, their award and our acceptance.
These, then, show clearly Whist we are to do,
and as whole constitute our contract. We
never talked else than pine, others use spr nee.
No matter, Ii Is strong reason why We should
use pine; they use poorer article; we should
use better If it could be had. am aware you
have done this to save, to make more on the
contract, which personally would, OF course,
enhance my profits. With q high appreciation
OF your efforts to enhance profits, yet you will
pardon me IL frankly state that II will prove a
loss In the stead OF gain. Already IL is and
has been canvassed in Washington, and is found
fault with in such quarters as will result most
unfavorably to the future, while it reflects no
credit upon your firm, or any OF US who have
labored so long to put in your hands profitable
contract. 1t is not this contract alone, il is
future contracts, which, by pursuing the policy
already insugurated, will be affected. Your
letter states that it has received the approval
OF the authorities. This am glad TO know. IL
must have been granted reluctantly, for, as 4
understand IL, a spruce pavement is not as good
as pine; be that as ii may, it is not according
to the letter and spirit of our contract Further
you state that the words OF the award are
"a wooden pavement known as DEG. No. 2,
&c" True this is in reply to and in considera-
ton OF our application to the board, which
specified pine. The award for example does
not specify the length Of blocks; but the
application does, (viZ: inches). Now, because
the authorities have consented does not any the
less mare I. an errOr-it is not the best policy
to presume. You agreed TO use pine, by hook
or crook 1t is spruce. In securing such an
tanning contracts further were good, also to
secure contracts in other cities; in a word a
hrst-c practical advertisement. Now
how is II best to make IL a frst-class advertise
ment? Certainly not 10 put down an inferior
pavement, not to use spruce in the stead, If pine
is best. 1t would be to have il the best
Cn,l
excellent pavement. As is you may have put
handle in the hands of enemies and competi-
tors TO state that your concern received a large
and most profitable contract, and they have put
the pavement down with an inferior quality
may be- of spruce. bad intended 70 point to
this work as the best on the continent, in all
and every respect. How often have | told your
company TO make il the best, and how often
was assured il should be so. 1 am very sorry
that you have been so indifferent, or SO blind
as 1t were, to your own interests. 1 am very
unn nnt lat ma -IA.-
that you were buying spruce instead OF
pine. lt would have saved writing this
long letter., and would have enabled me
to state much more fully, and perhaps emphati-
cally still further reasons why you would not
act wisely to vary the contract one iota. Were
L in your place would not put down yard OF
spruce, but make it pine. No matter where the
spruce may be, II on the way to you, l would
not vary the contract, but still use pine.
What has been recommended should be
promptly adopted.
This letter L write freely and frankly for the
good and profit of Messrs. DeGolyer and Me
Cleilan and myself, and, above all, that which
should be priced more highly than profit or
money, to reflect credit upon our friends, and
thereby insure their present support and future
friendship. Very truly, yours,
GEORGE K. CHITrENDHN.
DeGolyer and Mcclellan failed to comply
with their contract as to the time and manner
of its performance. The pavement, If properly
laid and cured, would have been satisfactory
to every one. My efforts to have the contract
fairly complied with are shown by the letter
which have produced. Profits could OF course
have been made; for that we entered into the
contractwit the city. But the pavement was
patent, and as such necessarily a monopoly.
believe to-day that. honestly done, this pave
ment is the best known. But when the work il
poorly and iiciently done, no proper test is
furnished. did my best to have our contract
complied with; the failure, il failure there be,
was no fault OF mine.
Lastly, never received one dollar from these
contracts under my agreement. | expended
nearly six months OF time and thousands of
dollars in money, and have vet realized MOTH
ing but about 81 400 pai3 by DeGolyer s. Nc.
ton in part, the balance being paid by myself,
l being over five months in this city at nv per
sonal expense. No part Of the S91 ,OoO ever came
to me, nor was used to my advantage.
All which is respectfully submitted.
w GEoRsE r; CHIrTESDEN.
EXAMINATION OF Mr.. CHITTRNDRs.
The reading of the statement occupied about
one-hslf hour, after which Mr.. Chittenden was
cross-examined by the committee as follows:
Y. understood you to refer to q letter re-
lt was letter from DeGolyer's attorney to
him in Chicago; reached Washington first in
January, 1872; came here by the way Of Phila-
deiphia; when left Chicago DeGOlyer & Nc
Clellan knew was coming to Washington to
St cure contracts; my contract for one-third of
the profits with DeGolyer & Mcclellan was in
writings the original is in Chicago; when |
came to Washington 1 found forty one compel
tiers.
q: How did they present themselves to YOU?
A, ltwas stated to me that this competition was
here.
Q. When did you first see MIR. Huntington?
A. L think 1t was in February; when first Wis
tied Washington saw Mr. Huntington; either
the first or second visit.
q. Why was your attention directed to Mr..
huntington? A. Mr.. DeGolyer informed me
had better see Mr.. Huntington upon my al rival.
q. When did YOU first see Mr.. Kirkland? A.
In February, 1872. He was stopping at the Ar.
liz gton saw him after saw Nr. II huntington
q. State how you came to talk to Mr. Kirk
land on the subject? A. After Mr.. Hunting
toms death Kirkland approached me and said
he had influence, and could help me to get con-
tracts. 1 stated that was what L was here for.
Finally made an arrangement with Kirkland IL
he got the contract would give him So cents
per square yard.
Q. How did you make Col. Kirkland's &C.
quaintance? A. Casually, at the Arlington;
had no knowledge, only from his own stats
ments, that he had influence; he said he had
influence and thought he could secure that
contract; he did not say he knew Gov. Cooke,
Gov. Shepherd or any member Of the Board of
Public Works; my arrangement with Kirkland
was a contingent one; the proof of his influence
was to secure the award and get his contin gen-
cy; he never told me only the name Of MT. Page
As one of the parties with whom he was nego-