The Baltimore County union., 1882-04-29


proposed change Of grade could not be presented
TO the city authorities before sometime In January,
lss2, and that any attempt upon the part Of the
Examiners TO enforce collections by sale Cf pro-
perty pending this question would be resisted by
some Of the best friends Of the avenue and who
had already contributed largely towards iIs con.
struction, and thus the whole matter be involved
In litigation, the Examiners would. IL they could
have been permitted 10 do 90. practically suspend.
ed operations for few months until the question
Of grade. &e., could be settled, and thus stopped
cost and expenses for that period Of time.
But Hdmondson avenue. like many other i'm.
provements and enterprises before it, not per-
mitted to escape the blight Of the axiom. that they
who pay least find the most fault. aud tho disgust
Of those who pay nothing can't be measured. the
the appearance Of Mr.. Glenn and "TAs Aryus"
management.
Mr.. Glenn, who IL not assessed and pays moth.
Ing for the completion Of the avenue, by personal
applications, letters, newspaper statements and
public msetings, which eommenced In September,
1851, and IHs 1rgss tths manngsmsnt of which
pays nothing for the completion Of the avenue) BY
articles. called for public meetings, &C., which
commenced IN October. lsSl. in their respective
efforts a, sensation and buldorng, all Of which
necessarily occupied the attention and required
moro Of the time of the Examiners for the last
months Of 1881. than would have been necessary
under other circumstances.
With all this the cost and expenses Of the Tx.
aminers In the matter Of Edmondson avenue for
fifteen months, was only $l,l22.
And II is stated that In the matter Of wilkins
avenue that the cost Of collecting
the same In amount as has been collected for Ed.
mondson avenuel and other expenses paid. or 20
be paid by the County Commissioners since the
ratification aud confirmation Of the reports, plat,
&c.. Of Messrs. Holland, McCAuley aud Shipiey,
by said County Commissioners. outside Of aud
apart from any cost aud expenses for engineering
No N Tnnn will he
contract for work the avenue. nj least equals IL
II u not in excess Of the amount charged and paid
the Examiners in the matter Of Edmond.on avenue.
And showing that the total cost for wilkins
avenue is as great. IL not more. than for Edmond
son avenue for work similar In it, character and
extent.
The committee had the testimony af Mr.. Cox,
aud could have had the testimony of Mr. Stiefel II
they would have received IL. They also had the
testimony Of Mr.. Brady. tSee testimony No I, ..
,. page 33.)
Question by Mr.. Glenn--"iiad not Mr.. carman
been connected with Edmonton avenue previous
~ 20 this time that you speak Of in a capacity
which made u necessary for him 10 have much of
the information which you aitsrwari used -
Answer by Mr.. Drady-"If he had not It would
have required great deal more time 20 have got
ten il the work up than II did,"
With the fact. that the committee already had
before them without and apar, from what they
could have had upon what grounds could they
conclude that they tthe Exaninrrsl have drawn
and appropriated large sums Of money for per diem
without adequate work upon their paTtl"
That "of this amount the large sum Of 81. loo
was absorbed for per diems alone S56I for cngi-
ncering upon the same road. and much of which
the committee has discover upon both inquiry
aud testimony. was, and must have been pracii-
caly done prior to the passage Of the Act of 1850
The testimony disclosed no such facts. and 10
What the committee was pleased 90 learn by out.
side inquiry Is no, in proof and should not be
.idsrel
Aud your petitioner. submit, that ifthe ,eorE ,ra..
aHd mSsi Aarc bees. practically doHe ION Edmond.
avenue prior TO the passage of the Act Of iSSO
that by way of comparisOn the same proposition
would apply to wilkins avenue prior to the Act
Of 1876
II must be apparent that the cot illusions Of the
committee are erroneous and are not sustained by
facts or proven by the testimony.
The committee say:
Il isin evidence, Testimony Of Geo. II. Carman,)
tha, the Examiners have collected sil.4s3.l5 since
the passage Of the Act Of 1850. Chapter 4i3 Of
that amount they have expended s2.552.50. be-
tween November 18th, ISSO, and December 2Ith,
lsSl. period Of only I3i months. without. how
ever. doing single days work OF actual grading
or excavation upon the avenue aud without a sim
gle contract being let, according 10 the testimony
OF this amount. the large SUN Of $2.l06.O0 was
absorbed for per diems alons; $567 for en- gineer-
ing upon the same road. and much of which the
committee has discovered. upon both inquiry and
testimony, was. and must have been. practically
done prior TO the passage of the Act Of 1850, and
for neither Of which no itcfniTel account was pro-
duced or flied With the committee.
Your petitioners submit the statement Of the
Examiners marked du ,ument and the testimony
Of Mr.. Carman both show that the Examiners en-.
tered upon the discharge Of their duties the 2st
day Of April. lsS0. The time between the 2lsi of
April, and the ?ith Of December. lsSl, 10 over
twenty months. See Testimony No. !. 2, >, about
page and 9.l
Mr.. johnson asked Mr.. Carman-"Noveuber
18th. lsSO, what was the amount Of per diems ?"
Mr.. Carman-"lt was SSiO.0O-eng gineers bill
$j650O. advertisement S?P. so, that was from April
3tst. iSs0 TO November 18th, 1850, total 81 .jOG.-
50, and of this amount all within about $40.
90 accrued prior 10 the ratification and confrIna-
tion Of the statement. plat. profile aud proceedings
in the matter by the Circuit Court aud the County
Commissioners Of Baltimore county and the Ex-
amner' assumed the responsibility Of tha, amount.
there having been no provision in the Law 10 pay
them up 90 that time.
Noi,.-The amount thus assumed was 81 ,50G.5O
lees about $4,000: say about 81, ,366.50.
By Mr.. Johnson-"t;ive the committee a furth.
er statement 81 per diems." Mr.. carman-"From
November 18th, 1850. to January sth, issi. sl62.-
90; January sth, 1881, TO February 18th, 1881.
$ii7.00 February 18th. 1851. to April 2d. 1851,
$1,000; April "a. iSsl.t TO May 5tb. 1851, Sli5O0;
Mar 9Th, issl, to July I'd, lssI, SiGs.00 July
18th, 1881. 10 November 18th, 1851. sl5i.0O; Nov.
18th. lssi 10 December cath. 1851. $l52 90 Total
-. .io6.oo. including the amount Of November 18th.
1850. OF those amounts Mr.. Carman has received
si.iio.oo, Mr.. Rider s33o.oo and Mr.. Brady
S336o0"
With the testimony and these facts before the
committee, why say "0f that they have expended
$2.5T2.5O between November 18th, 1850. and Dec.
2ith. 1881, . period Of only i3i monthsf ?" The
testimony and the facts show that 81 So6So Of the
$?.Is2.5o had accrued prior to the 18th Of Noy.
lss0, aud was paid on that day, and that the
amount accrung and expended In the i3i months
between the 18th Of November. 1850, and the 2ith
Of Dec. 1881. was 81 .266.00 aud not $3,s.2.5O.
The foregoing statement shows the time Of each
settlement and the amount, and the aggregate
amount paid each Examiner. And " the commit
tee had 80 desired aud requested they could have
been furnished from the same statement with the
number Of days that each Examiner had charged
for In each settlement. This IL everything that
could be asked for except the day Of the week and
month.
The committee never asked the Examiners for
any items In Mr.. shipley's account and In his
examination (see testimony Nos. I, ?, ,, about
page 3sl the matter Of his account engineer vas
referred 20, and the committee did not question
him as TO any items.
In the examination Mr.. Farber asked Mr.. Car.
man-"liave you vouchers for accounts since
lssO" and Mr.. Carman answered, 81 have :" but
the committee did not ask for or examine them.
And the question again arises, with the testi-
mony and facts before the committee, why say
'and for neither Of which no itemiEei account was
produced or 6led with the eommittee!"
The other subjects referred 70 In the above par
agrsphs have been discussed and answered in
other parts of this memorial.
Mr.. Carman asked Mr. Brady-"please answer
. question propounded TO Mr.. Carman by Mr..
johnson In reference 10 Why Mr.. Carman's per
diem IL more than that Of his colleagues" Mr..
Brady-"Before We commenced the work Il was
necessary that we should have statements Of all
the previous assessments upon Edmondson avenue;
Who bad been assessed what amounts had been
paid BY the diercnt parties who had been assessed,
90 - 10 allow the proper credits under assess
- 4. k.