Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1880-03-17
The District Investigation.

The District Investigation.
TESTIMONY TO-DAY.
The investigation of the charges made against
the District Commissioners by Treasurer Gil
fllan was continued to-day.
w. O. Roome was recalled and examined by
Mr.. Aldrich; witness furnished list of what
are known as the Fl. D. Cooke and M. G. Emery
assessments, which had been revised. He was
requested to furnish copy of the original as
seSsments, of which he thought there were 6S
assessments were made under the act of the
legislative assembly of August 10, 1871; with
the exception of one case, there had been no
certificate issued by witness for the II. ID. Cooke
and Emery assessments; more might have been
issued had the order suspending the issue of all
draw back certificates not been issued. Witness
has no knowledge where the work under the
Cooke and Emery assessment was done, there
being no evidence on file in his Office to show;
witness allowed interest OF 10 per cent on draw
back certificates issued for lien certificates
under an order OF the District Commissioners
issued January L 1850.
Q. Under what authority OF the Commissioners
did you revise the Cooke and Emery assess
ments?
Witness read in reply an order OF the District
Commissioners directing him to revise all assess
ments. whether Of the old corporation or the
District legislature; the Commissioners knew
what assessments witness was revising under
that order, for they approved OF the revsions;
this was in tie fall of 1878; witness has no evil
dence in his office to show that any OF the Eme-
ry or Cooke assessments were issued for work
done by the board OF public works; witness
knew OF no complaints which had been made by
property holders touching the I'll. ID. Cooke and
M. G. Emery assessments the contracts for the
work were made by the old corporation of Wash
ington, but the assessments were made by the
board of public works.
Q.-Cah you state what portion of the revIsions
were made under compl plaint and what proper
tion without complaint?
A.-The number Of complaints were so large
that we didn't consider it necessary to check off
those who did complain and those who did not;
the complaints were very general; they were
signed py the owners, and by others for them;
very small per centage.
Q.-Were the complaints purported to be
signed by the owners, but which in fact were
not accompanied by powers of attorney?
A.-They were not; most of the complaints
filed for arrears were filed by VIM. Dickson
some were filed by Solomon J.Fague, John Nor
power of attorney authorizing him to make
complaints for property owners; when he drew
the drawback certificates he had powers Of at
torney from the owners; as rule, though, these
powers of attorney were dated SUBSEQUENT to
the date OF the complaint. Witness said that
before the act of revision passed, brokers came
to him with powers of attorney to act for prop
erty owners, but he refused to recognize them
because an attorney could not be delegated to
collect benefits under contemplated act
which had not yet passed a.. Congress and heaee
was required to be filed by property owners; the
reviSiOnS were made, and when complaints had
been filed they were referred to, to see If there
was any particular item, such as pay for old
material, &C., was claimed. Witness said he
was not correctly reported In the statement
that VIM. Dickson had filed 80 per cent OF all
complaints; what he said was that of the COM
plants for Massachusetts avenue Mr. Dickson
filed 90 per cent; all told there were filed In his
office over $4,000 complaints of excessive assess
ments. Witness said that he issued the draw
back certificate in the name OF Thomas Wall.
who is deceased, so that the legal proof would
be required to collect the amount to whomsO-
the widow OF Thomas WALL did not present to
witness sufficient evidence to show that she
was the executrix of Thomas WALL and hence
OF Thomas Wall
By Mr.. Riddle:-After the act Of June 10Th,
1873, in the first instance the Commissioners
acted upon complaints only but the complaints
became so numerous that witness could not ex-
anime the complaints and get through with the
reviSions.
Q.-What embarrassment in the way of sue
cess was caused by strict attention to COM
plants?
Alt was an embarrassment to the work of
revision; In making revisions witness took up
Cat what time did you receive orders from
the commissioners to pay no attention to COM
plants?
filed. They became so numerous that the work
OF revision was embarrassed by the complaints.
Witness further testified that he had been MAX
ing revis1ons since the spring OF 1877, prior to
the passage OF the act revising assessments,
brokers and others anticipated that the act
would be passed, and had announced by adver-
tsement they would prosecute such claims; no
drawback certificates were issued by witness
for reVisions made prior to the law of Congress;
witness issued no drawback certificates until
after the act Of Congress OF 1879.
Q.-Wtth the force you control was 1t prac-
t1cal to take up and revise these assessments
based solely on complaints?
At would have required the complaints
filed to have been examined and checked back
The principal delay would have been in examin-
ing the papers, and getting them In order on
any one street; have them SO arranged now.
Mr.. Sanford raised the point that the Com
mlssioners conceded that they had revised as
sessments not based on complaints, and he
thought the committee was taking great deal
OF irrelevant testimony.
Judge Dent said that in the reply to the in
terrogatories OF Mr.. Aldrich the Commissioners
said that the complaints were so Overwhelming,
60 ahead and make revisionS without regard to
the complaints
Messrs Aldrich and Hunton claimed that early
had denied that any revisions We're made, exO
cept upon complaints.
Judge Dent said that denial was with refer
missioners stand by the reply to Mr. Aldrich.
that the complaints were so Overwhelming and
almost SO universal, that the Commissioners
ence to complaints which might be filed.
Mr.. Samford.-Well, It is now conceded that
revisions were made without complaints, why
We pTOCSe0 luIUueT UudU pOlnC!
Mr.. Aldric1.-We are nearly through that
point now. We want to see how overwhelming
those complaints were
Mr.. RoOme further testified that while the
force In his Office was engaged in examining the
complaints no revisionS at all were made; their
whole time was taken up In examining the COM
plants and asserting them; for three months
while complaints were coming In no revisions
at all were made; witness has no record evi-
oence OF how many complaints were filed.
Witness said that man named Peter Camp
bell came into his office and said he fled on be-
half OF all the property holders of the District
complaint against the assessment made by the
board of public works. Witness said of course
he paid no attention to such general COM
plaint.
At 1920 o'elock the committee adjourned until
Friday next.
u The flrst organization Of colored grangers
was recently perfected at Dallas, Texas, when
large number OF negroes met and formed what
tney call ''The Texas Farmers Association"
None but colOred families are admitted and the
object OF the organization is to procure home
steadS.
eE-The Indianapolis Sentinel prints some f1r
ures, purp0rting to come from q well-fnformed
source, which show that the first cost of nine
cof1ins, OF various kinds, from plain to Imitation
rosewood and extra fine cloth caskets was $780,
and the retail price was $717.50.
tB The New York newspapers are making
fun Of the salvation Army.