The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1875-06-29

KNHMONU,
for i ha1 the sanction of.a former Council
when It was undertaken.
There Is nothing 10 evidence to show that
the site for this work was changed since its
adoption by, the Council beyond additional
purchases of land IN laying tpes and In con.
struciiop ;and any extra cost here should be
part OF this construction, and not sttri-
buted to q change Of site. 84e@
In the absence Of testimony in expiana-
tion OF plans of the work, either from its
engineers or other professional experts, your
committee gleaped from official reports and
visits to the work that the original estimates
were mere approximations, made before the
land was selected, and the detailed plans de-
cided upon thereafter bad little of the origi-
nalestimates 10 them. AS the first sppropria-
ton made (S275, ,000) By the Council was prior
to the purchase or selection of9aa site, it is
hardly reasonable to put the cost or extra ap.
propria,ion under this head as unnecessary
expenditure! Upon the details of construct
ing the work the testimony is more in the
nature of opinions, many Of them at wide
variance with each other; and In the absences
OF stronger and better testimony most OF the
items of extra cost, although given in the
original report as unnecessary are, HI the
opinion OF your committee, justidable.
Your committee has simply to refer to the
original report for those items wherein ex-
penditures have been considered ,nnneeessa-
~, but even these, from other and more coua-
plete testimony, might be proper under the
circumstances, and we are therefore led to
conclude shat this work 10 all its bearings
will compare favorably With any work Of like
character and under similar circumstances
undertaken in any city. - g1| .'@
Mr.. Scott addressed the Board, and said
that the minority report covered pretty much
all of the ground he had proposed to 20
over. He then proceeded to give reasons
why the committee had paid the hands S1.25
per day. He hoped the Board would adopt
the minority report, but be would thank The
committee for their ardnous labors in making
the investigation. "t..' ~ = = - ~,
Mr.. Darlington said that so far as be was
concerned he did not care which of the re-
ports was adopted. --~--~--,----.--..- :
/ Mr.. Tanner rose and moved to adopt the
minority report as an act of justice to very
worthy and efficient City Engineer aud q
very intelligent and hard.working commit
tee. .f ~ ft,l &'.-~ p. 'ts'f ~.
Mr.. Manly seconded the motion of Mr..
Tanner because the evidence taken had been
| &c parte. '...'- '...''<-t " ~ -~..'
MIR. Todd, as substitute, moved to re.
ceive and file the two reports. In bis judg-
ment the committee were divided among
| themselves. .. s,..s 49,; ..,.,.. I'd.
Mr. Williams said that the Committee on
Water bad assumed the responsibility Of the
work when they decided to pay Sl.25 per
day when the Engineer was paying 81 per
day. He hoped the minority report would
be adopted. I seap-.
! MIR. Bass moved to lay the whole matter
on the table. He was not prepared at present
to vote for either report. - =---=.----.-. :
The motion to table was lost, = II 90 :
Mr.. Meredith (Mr. Kelam being 10 the
cbair) said that the whole trouble was 10
the fact that no particular person or persons
had been entrusted with the WORK. ihe
| work ought to have been let out by contract.
The gentlemen who compose this commit.
| tee are not expected to- build 30 great a
work. he wanted to hear the testimony
read before he could vote for eitherIof the
reports. He wanted to form his own opinion.
Mr. Todd called attention to the fact that
neither of the reports were in order, as the
| 7th rule requires that all reports shall con-
clude with an ordinance or joint resolution.
BE then moved to recommit the reports in
order to have a resol ution. ',,'
Mr.. Darlington then presented the follow
Ing resolution as q part Of the msjority re-
port: ,..,. .s.ta.,
| Resolved, That while there have been
expenditures which might have been avoid
ed, and therefore we're unnecessary, yet no
| evidence was adduced to throw censnre upon
| the Committee on Water or on the Engineer
of the city for wilful neglect. of duty or any
improper conduct
Mr.. Wagner offered the following as a
substitute for Mir. Carrington's resolution
"ResoIved, That the reports of the Com
mitlee on Retrenchment and Reform be re-
| ceiyed, and the Committee on Water and the
| City Engineer are fully eXonerated from any
blame whatever that might attach to any or
all of them by reason of wiful neglect or
mismanagement in the execution OF the
work" r. - ...'.-,. 49,. ..... -..-.s. T
b. The question being taken by ayes and
noes, Mr. Wagner's resolution was agreed to
| by the following yote:- st.."a
| AYEs.-Messrs Bass, Beall, Kellam, Lipscomb
Scott, smith. spangenburg, Tauner, Todd, Wander
vail, Wagner, Williams, Meredi lh-13. -.E -
| NOEs.-NIr. Carrington-l. a
L