Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-04-11

OF cnattel mortgage, and III the latter. what
curity. and what has become Of IL, and
whether you or your attorney lave taken
any steps legal or other to get possession OF
this security and make 1t avail. anleD
Is. ASss,rer.-The repair of me wood pave
ment on Pennsylvania aveyIue east was or
dered because II was require by the condi-
tlon OF the pavement TIE wood, as reported
to us by the engineer, was very much de-
cayed and worn away in many places aud
the street generally uHfit for travel and be-
coming speedily tnnpassable tor the heavy
traffic passing over the Eastern branch
bridge, and there eeing no other pa we'd streets
IN that vicinity over which to turn 1t. Messrs
DeGolver and Mcclellan were the original
contractors fox doing this work. They have
not been sued. There are several reasons
why they have not been sued. Among them
are that the contract given to other parties
pre by ias terms until o the n fs., eo Of
November, 1875, and the bills OF ex-
penditure were not made out until re-
and we have not been able, after diligent
search, through our attorneys, to find the
original OF the chatter mortgage given to
secure the performance OF this contract, II
has, however, been found of record. The
chattel mortgage is on sundry machinery,
fame buildings and other things pertaining
10 wood treating establishment. The
property was estimated at forty Thousand
dollars, $50 ,0G0 but we have no means of
estimating what can be made by the sa e of
it, We purpose getting possession of 1t as
hands Of the District Attorney
:, II. state how rEuch o. the work done by
L. Il. Evans or the Evans Concrete Co npany
IN this District have you repaired, giving the
streets on which repairs were done, an the
cost OF such repairs. State the cost per square
yard paid for doing this work, originally
done by G. E. Evans or the Evans Concrete
Company. Did G. f. Evans execute q good
and sufficient bond, with responsible securi-
ties, and have you convinced yourselves,
assuming you can obtain judgment on said
bond, that yOu can make your Judgment,
either In whole or in part, from the property
OF f. Evans or his security, If he has any?
is The Evans Concrete Company q CORPORA
tOr. or was II other than c. f. Evans aud is
not the one the security for the other? Did
not Langdon, the assignee of c. f. Evans,
Oner, IN writing, to do all the repairs required
by the contracts OF G. E. Evans or the Evans
Concrete Company without expense to the
District, and If so, why was he not permitted
l.. Ays10eT.-The detailed information con-
cernipg the work of C. f. Evans or the
Evans Concrete Paving company in this
District, and the repairs thereon, required
by This question, will be found in table No.
accompanying the engineers report &. T..
Evans did execute bond in proper form for
the faithful performance of his work, but we
are not able 10 say that IL is good or whether
we shall be able to collect the Judgment
when obtained. The Commissioners hold
from the board of audit q certificate award
ed to G.. f.. Evans for SI9,6I62j and there
are further awards TO him by the board of
audit, which have been retained on our re-
whole of such further awards amounting to
SAB go OF. We learn from the board of audit
that the whole amount OF Evans claim filed
with board of audit against the District is
S3sO,OO0. c. +. Evans has, we are ad vised by
counsel, no res, estate, so far as the records
show, IN this District. We have reason 20
think that he has property elsewhere. We
are advised that he has employed counsel
and intends to contest the suit, The Evans
concrete Paving company was not as we
understand. q corporation, but partnership
composed Of Charles f. Evans, Thomas j.
Fisher, and others.
The branch o. the question relating to
Langdon, assignee OF f. vans, has been fully
answered by us under the head of question
by rs as the one said to have offered TO do
for rOthing repair work which cost two hun
dred thousand dollars $500 ,O00) and more.
- 49, Did you offer this repair work to COM
petition among bidders? Ifso, was this done
after public advertisement; and if not adver-
Used and given TO the lowest and best bid
der, give the reason for not letting it out to
The lowest bidder? State in detail the OrigI-
nal cost of the work of both concrete and
wood pavements which has been repaired by
the commissioners and paid for in 3.65 bonds,
giving street, name of contractor, and cost of
each street, &c, and state also, from the best
evidence you have, how much you will be
able TO realize by suit on the bonds of the
original contractors for failure to comply
with their contracts, giving the names OF
each contractor and his surety, and the esti.
mailed amount expected to be realized from
edCD DODU or OjDCF security
Is iROreT-MOst of this question is an
Swered in our answer TO question NUMBER
eleven III. We repeat that this repair work
was offered 10 competition among the bid
deIs who controlled concrete pavement pat
ents acceptable TO the engineer. There is no
law to compel advertisement in the public
newspapers for bids on contracts. Adyer-
Using is eXpeDsiN e and was unnecessary as
the only persons who could bid were advised
by letter; bnt the work was given in part To
the lowest bidder and TO the other bidder
after he had accepted the lowest terms. The
work was well done and al reaSOna BILE prices
The detailed information as TO the original
cost OF the work repaired will be found in
table No. 4. The names of the contractors
and tier Sureties will also be found In that
table. We are not able to present any relia
bic estimate as 10 the amount which will be
realized by suit on the bonds of the original
contractors for failure TO comply with their
contracts 10 keep their work in repair. As the
repairs were indispensable. our course has
hNed the liability of the contractors aud
their suIeties, and saved TO the District what
ever amount may be realized from suits on
the bonds.
:. II any new work had been given out
without advertisement under so called sex
tensions or "mOdidcatiOns' of old board
contracts, state the cases, with original esti-
mates under such contracts, and actual cost
under such alleged extensions or modifica-
ttons, and whether the same were given out
TO the lowest bidder.
:. AnSlCer, (EtrSt Series I'VE respectfully
refer answer 10 this question to the answer
Whether the same were given to the lowest
bidder? All work done under contracts of
the late board of public works was paid, or to
be paid, at certain uniform rates for the va
rlous classes OF work. These were known as
aboard rates." For several months pre-
vious TO the passage of the act of June
20, 1874, these were subjected to exami-
nation by the Joint Committee of Con-
gress for investigating the affairs of the
District. This committee reported TO
Congress the bill approved as an act of Con-
gress OF June 20, 1874, in which q bond bear
Ing interest al the rate OF % one hundreiths
per cent per annum, and redeemable in cur
reDcy al the expiration of fifty years, gener-
ally Known as the District 3 IS bonds, was
fixed upon as the medium payment for work
dore al the 'board rates." bonds to be taken
at par. Work under these contracts was
continued under the Commissioners at these
rates, but with the express stipulation that
these bonds should be received al par in pay
ment therefor, wherever the justification of
a contract has been made. whether by eX.
ter SIGN or otherwise OF the amount of work,
the same stipulation has been made. and on
work done under the Commissioners under
contracts or extensions of the board of pub
lie works, or extensions or mod ifications
OF the same by the Commissioners, these
rates have been adhered to. We have had no
reason 10 doubt the business OF the decision
OF Cor gress in respect 10 the payment OF
work done at these rates, and are satisfied
That the work could not have been done AT
less rates, except by sacrificing the quality
OF The work. That these prices were favora-
Die 10 the District is cOQcluEivelV nv