The Baltimore County union., 1882-04-22

done since isso. regardless Of anything that was
done before"
The Examiner had Mr.. John D. Williams,
chairman Of the Board Of Street Commissioners of
Baltimore city, and who has been . member Of
said board for over Eve years, subp9ned, and he
was present at the examination of Mr.. Coz, and
would have sustained him in his evidence, bat
there being frequent objeetions To what desig-
mated ~ aeeumuIative testimony, &c the Exam-
iners did not have him sworn.
II will be observed that Mr.. Cox was not exam
ned 10 time required and value Of services after
tho report. statement, 4e., Of the Examiners was
finally ratified and confirmed by the Circuit Court
and the County Commissioners Of Baltimore eoun.
~, from the fact that after such proceedings are
had aud taken In the city Of Baltimore the Street
Commissioners have nothing further TO do In the
premises, the collections being made BY the City
Collector aud the grading, &e., done under the
management Of the City Commissioner.
Mn. EDWARD W. sTEIFrL.
(TestinOny No. 5, about page es.)
Mr carman. on behalf Of the Examiners, asked
-"Mr. Steifel. you are the President Of the Board
Of County Commissioners Of Baltimore county ?"
Mr.. Steifel-"I am. SIR" Mr.. Carman-"Mr.
steifel, how long have you been County CON-
missioner" Mr.. Steifei-"This is my 9Th year,
third term" Mr.. Carman---"Mr Steifel, We believe
that you, one of the County commissioners Of
baltimore eouniy, know so,ps,hing q the prpces1-
iags for openihg and construetinK Wiikens avenue
ian avenue In the same section Of Baltimore conn.
~ as Edmondson avenue.) under the Act Of the
General Assembly. 1876, chapter IOl, and Of the
amount of benefits assessed. the amount collected
aud the amount due, the amount paid examiners.
engineers, and the cost Of collecting assessments
and other proceedings do you. or do you noti'
Objectedio BY Mr.. Glenn. and ruled out on account
Of irrelevaney.
Il will be observed that Mr.. Glenn objected and
Mr.. sieifel was not examined further.
The Examiners In their question to Mr.. Steifel
as 10 his knowiedge as - Wilkens avenue matters
proposed 10 lay the basis for the following proofs
That after the Examiners in the matter of wiik-
ins avenue had made their report and plat, and
returned the same TO the County Commissioners,
on the 10th day Of July, 1876 that the whole
matter of the completion Of the avenue was under
the control and in the power Of the County Com
missioners Of Baltimore county that the amounts
paid in the matter ofwilkens avenue, 90 the Ex-
aminers, Engineers and for collecting assessments
and other expenses. was much larger 10 compaFi-
than that which bad been charged for and
paid on Edmondson avenue for similar work.
That th' order Of the County Commissioners
making corrections and finally ratifying and con-
Grtning the report, 1e., Of the Examiners was
passed October 90. 1879: that the appeals taken
settled in the Circuit Court, in the Septen-
ber term. lsso. THE same term as Edmondson
avenue.l
That a considerable portion of the assessments
left after a large reduction BY appeals) still re
mains uncolecied, and that up TO the present time
the County Commissioner, have not sdoted coer
Give measures aud sold single piece 6f property
upon which assessments are due.
That the assessments collected expended,
and there Is still large amount due the eontrae-
tor. and the avenue Is not completed.
That there is not sufficient assessments due 20
build a bridge over the Baltimore and Potomac
railroad aud 90 complete the avenue.
That Mr.. Steifel. from his long general knOwl-
edge and his special experience this avenue,
would not consent again to spend assessment, from
time to time collected on portions Of \ work and
the risk of not collecting the remaining assess
ments as 20 complete the whole work. And that
he woHli not recommend others having charge of
n similar work 90 do 80.
To b. continued aeTf icssk.l