The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1883-08-26
Coleman Of the nm Investigation

Z
WASHINGTON, Aug. 25.-The National
Republican this morning made the display
headline, "Nicked. q gain by Coleman anu
printed abstracts OF tue lawyers briefs OF tne
case. Fetten's brief Is succinct history OF
the investigation. and statement OF the
points involved as view from Hills stand
point. About tw0-thirds Of the argument
IL an exposition OF the granite contract, ana |
all explanation OF the contract system In |
the architects office. He goes into the
granite feature with much partcu-
larity and pays his respects to ex-Nongress- /
man Murch in pointed manner. witnesses
Murch and Steinmelz and Others are ar
raigned for selfish Misrepresentation and
peryersion Of facts, and the commission is
asked to disregard the testimony OF these
men in making up report. Colonel TLom-
as treats of the con-
tracts for the heating apparatus
exclusively, not touching any other points.
! He quotes literally from the printed testl-
mony, and draws a conclusion thereirom
to establish the innocence OF his client
from any completely in the scheme to sad
die on the government through COLLISION
with supervising architect. Coleman al
ter stating that the secretary OF the treas
ury, who set the investigation on loot, ala
nothing to aid or assist but on the contrary
IL, he reviews the granite contract OF the
Philadelphia, Cincinnati, ST Louis and
Hartford buildings, and shows that out OF
$500 600 paid out On the contracts Tor this
work. 100000 was clear prOht TO the CON
tractors. He claimed there was
no law authorizing the superys
ing architect TO do anything
further than to make drawings for the
public buildings, yet the amount annually
expended by Hills upward OF $1,000 600
Que third OF which, he claims, is worsted or
fooled away. He refers to the iavoritism
of Hill in awarding the contracts, and de-
votes particular attention to the history
OF the steam heat work in the Chicago
q stOm.house. He dwells with great EN-
phasis on this point and recies with clear
ness that the work was not done accordiI
d, 10 contract, That g. p. Newton, an In e&-
II. pericnced young man, two years In the EN-
u ploy OF Bartlett, Robbins Il Co, aud Bartlett
4 Haywood was app0iuted to Inspect the
work on the recommendation of Architect
v Hill. That the boy so appointed approved
OF the work. That on his report
= the bill was paid in full; that Newton then
s resigned and entered the employ OF the
d firm at increased wages, That the work Sc
inspected was shown by the testimony o
G Messrs, WOodman and King, OF Chicago
u not to have been according to the speciti
l. cations. II propose says Coleman, "tC
be minute in examining the testimony o
= this part OF the case, because some wit
nesses have committed wiltul and corrup
q perjury, and, while | am willing In tn,
i trial Of a case to take almost everything
from the opposite counsel. and when tn
e trial is over to forget and forgive neye
did or never will set down unde
an attempt to swear me out of cOur
by the evidence OF periured witness
n The committee may look at this matter a
they choose. This question as to whethe
f or not this heating apparatus, which wa
l. inspected by this young man, compile
with the specifications, is a question which
g. no matter what this commission may detel
e mine, propose TO have Investigated els'
lie where, 80 there will be no doubt in tn
,, mind Of anyone as 20 whether our witnessC
" have committed perjury" In conclusio
?. Coleman asserts that he has proved Co
Al rupt conspiracy, in spite of the oppositio
J. OF the treasury department. He thanksth
re members of the commission personally 70
le their courteous treatment.