National Republican., 1874-04-02

Sohis foreman told me.
Q. Do you recollect his namci A. DO not.
9. Who was the thirdl A. John o. Evans
eublet il TO Albert Gleason.
Y. The third contractor was John o. Evans,
and the sub-eontFactor was Albert Gleasonf A.
That was the Information obtained from the
parties around about there doing the WORK
Q. Do you live in that neighborhoou a.
Yes, sir.
day.
.. What kind of material was used in lay
ing the carrisgeways and footWaysf
The Witness. How do you mean, the woodI
Mr.. Jewett. Under the wood, was it graveli
The Witness. What did the specification call
for-sandl 2
Mr., Jewett do not know; I ask you what
kind was usedl A. There was not wheel
barrow load of sharp sand in the whole ten
%. what was usedI A. Clay loam.'
O. What was the character of the brick for
the Iootwaysl A. Hard brick, sir.
Q. Hard brickl A. Good, substantial brick,
sbut rather rough; not what we would call paw
ing-brick by any means.
Q. Not paving -brieki A. Not what could
call paving brick. .
Q. But they were hard, substantial brick1
A. They were hard brick, yes, sir.
Q. What kind Of material was put under the
brickl A. Rough gravel.
there.
Q. Was there any sodding done around that
,street2 A. None BY the Board of Public Works
A1nti the recent cut-away between First and
Second streets.
G. When was that donel' a. The first work
That told you of was in 1872; the last job was
done in 1STS-last year.
Q. When was the soddins donei A. We all
shad to do our own sodding and lay our own
movements l think we had our sodding done
;,, Nav 81 nril aEt
Q. Last yearl A. Yes, sir.
0. Tie property holders had It donel A.
Yes, sir; all oft on-I believe the whole entire
line.
Q. What did they pay for having it donei A.
Well, sir, it cost them fifteen cents. 1t would
not quite average that.
O. Fifteen cents q square yardl A. Yes, sir;
sInine did not cost me that; 1t was done by the
Same party.
Q. Was it done by any of the parties who had
contracts with the Board Of Public Worksl A.
They had sub-contracts afterward.
Q. With the Board Of Public Worksi A.
Yes, sir; that is not with the Board of Public
Works
O. But with the contractors A. Yes, SIR
Q. The same parties who did that, laid yours
at fifteen centsl A. Mine did not cost me that,
but on the streets it was generally about fifteen
cents.
O. What did this cost youl A. think about
eight cents.
Q. Did you get that done by eontracti A.
Yes, sir; paid S28 for my job, and where
reside is 4s by 40, and on the opposite side Of
the street IS by &C again. paid S2S for it,
and have the bill receipted.
Q. Was the sodding done on that street by
the property-owners equal in quality to the
soddlng done by the Board Of Public Works.
a. Better, sir.
Q. Do you. speak of special cases, or was it,
upon an average, better7 A. On an average
I u-nrld cfo of fha M
Andrew Gleason, who did the last grading
there, his contract required him to do the sod
ding AMI the parking also. He hauled soil
fhere. They put on an average about four
Snches Of soil on both sides Of the street. This
man that did the sodding for all of US had to
;faze it over and in great many instances put
sfresh soil both under and on top Of the sod and
beat 1t down well with spade.
Q. That was done at Is cents a square yardl
a. Yes, sir.
Q. Did the street railroad in laying its part
pay for the improvements A. No, sir. It was
all assessed to the property holders, and it was
"a much more expensive piece of work for the
reason that in my square the blocks were lsil
on the sand, and the railroad blocks laid
entirely on boards from one length to the other.
However, it was more costly pavement.
Mr.. Mattingly. would like to inquire OF
- counsel on the other side whether they make
any charge here that the Board of Public
Works has specially favored these railroad cor
iporations as to eIempting their property from
the taxation to which it was liable by law.
The Witness. We property holders do.
Mr.. Jewett, Ito Mr.. Mattingly.) 1 do not
understand you.
Mr.. Mattingly. want to know If there is
any charge by the gentleman on the other side
that the Board of Public Works has specially
Favored this railroad corporation In exempting
THE streets within their tracks from taxation
Tor special improvements, contrary to any pro-
vision of lawf
Mr.. Christy. We are complaining of exces-
sive and unequal taxes, and you will find
charge corresponding to that.
Mr.. Mattingly. Witnesses are brought up
here TO prove that the railroad company did
not pay for the paving between the tracks.
Mr.. Wilson. The witness, as / understand,
says the property y-holders were compelled to
pay for this pavement that was laid, that
should have been laid by the railway com
'pany. rrr- r'-
The Witness. Properly holders do complain
of It, sir.
Mr.. Wilson. I understand you to say that
that is the facti
:; The Witness, Yes; sir; we got up petition,
.pnd nearly every property-holder on the street
'Egned It, and that petition Is before the Sen
ate, to prevent the extension Of the line, unless
they do comply with what we consider to
be the law of the case.
Mr.. Mattingly. If the gentleman will make
a charge to that effect we will answer 1t with
ipleasure, and it will save, apprehend, good
deal Of this class of testimony; that is, II they
have got any more Of it.
Mr. Jewett. Do you claim that the rail-
roads were compelled to pay, and did pay,
for paving between their rails and two feet on
each side in all easesi
Governor Shepherd. II the committee will
sRllow me, will explain It so that they can un-
o derstsnd it, l think. The complaint yesterday
was about Ninth street, and now the complaint
is about East Capitol street.
Mr.. Jewett. Just answer this: do YOU claim
that the railroad companies were required, in
each case, 20 pave between the rails and for
two feet on each sidel
Governor Shepherd. No, SIR
Mr.. Jewett. Then there were exceptions.
Governor Shepherd. The company had |
charter to run on these streets. When we gave |
the contract out for paving, they came and said |
thst they had charter to lay the tracks on |
aheee streets, but were not prepared to do 1t |
then. We said TO them: "You had better pu. |
down your sleepers in these Streets so that the |
pavement will not have to be torn up again" !" |
and that was done in both instances. The |
road was not completed until some time after |
ward But the sleepers were put down at the |
request Of the board in order to prevent the |
pavement being torn up again.
Mr.. Jewett. Now, do you claim that after |
the rails were laid allowances were made to |
property holders for the taxes and charge which
DocA AA4oNAS alusb LuO5e improve /
mentsl
Governor Shepherd. No, sir we claim that |
we had no right to levy any taxes against the |
railroad company; that they had no railroad |
track down. They merely had the sleepers |
down. They were put down at our request, in |
order to prevent the streets being torn up. We |
took legal advice about it. .
; Mr.. Jewett. Were those tracks subsequently
used by the railroad!
Governor Shepherd. Yes, sir.
Mr.. Jewett. After the railroads then used1
them and laid their rails did you charge them
with any proportion Of the pavement
Governor Shepherd. No, sir; because the as
Sessment had been made
MI. Wilson. Did you require the property
holders to pay for paving that portion of the
street, the line between rails, and for 2 feet on
each side. - |,
Governor Shepherd. Yes, sir. |,
The Witness. Sixteen feet Il
Governor Shepherd. There were no rails laid
at that time, though; there was nothing but
sleepers laid on those roads.
NJ parhaDa 1-oy1 |