The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-02-10
THE STATE-H0USE INQUIRY.
Contractor Denig Is Subjected to a
Rigid Examination,
In Which He Accounts for the Structures
Made by Ex-Superintendent Wedges.

The state-house investigating committee held
another meeting last evening, at the Bates
House, with a full membership present. Mr..
Joseph R. Robinson, cement contractor, was the
first witness, but his statements had little or no
effect toward a solution of the State-house prob
lem. He said that the workmen were not prop
erly handled, and that they did not work with
sufficient energy and diligence. The basis for the
statement was that he had occasionally observed
wOrkmen lettering about and not properly at
tending to their duties.
Contractor Denig was recalled and subjected
to vigorous cross-examination on the subject
matter of his testimony Wednesday night. This
portion of the examination did not differ mate
rally from that already published. Some new
matter was elected, which was substantially as
follows: The cost of bricks in and out of the wall
was referred to, in which connection the wit
ness sp oke of the rejection of material. Many
of the bricks were rejected because they did not
look as hard as Others when in reality they were
flrst-claes stock and afterward used in the con-
strnctiOn of three houses-one back of the State
house and two on Tennessee street. He said
these houses are the property of the
firm. When asked who constituted
the firm. he replied that Howard & Denig was
tho oopartnership referred to.
Mr.. Mccormick asked il mistakes in estimat-
ing the probable cost of completion OF the build
ing would not readily occur as did the :
neOus calculations in the beginning. Mr.. Denig
replied: "By means. We know now just
what our material will cost and are more famil-
lar with our surroundings than we could have
been at first"
He was asked about the quality OF stone used,
and replied that 1t was superior to that used in
any courthouse in the State-most of the mate
rial employed in the construction of the Marion
county courthouse would be below the standard
required for the State-house.
Mr.. Mccormick said: ''Were you not sure that
your bid was too low when you made it,"
Mr.. Denig-We did not, although we knew 1t to
allow but small margin. Competing bidders
offered TO buy our contracs, among whom were
the Lansing firm and Hinsdale & Co.
The question of ex penditures for labor was then
canvassed. According TO Mr.. Denig's account,
the wages paid during the five years the work
has been in progress, aggregate for the sever al
years as follows: 1878, $4,000; 1879, between
1924, 900 and $25, 900; 1880, between $55 900
and $4,000 1881, $4,000; 1882, $1l7 1000.
Wages paid the third year were from % to so
per cent higher than the preceding year, and
continued to increase to the present time He
then gave the total expenditures and receipts
which it was shown that the contractors lost
money nearly every month. Mr.. Denig had pre-
pared paper OF figures taken from the books OF
the firm, showing the monthly cash account
for every month from the commencement
of the work, which was left for
examination by the committee lie was asked If
he had vouchers for all money paid out, to which
he replied 81 have vouchers for every item of
expenditure"
what is your total loss thus far, according to
your estimates2"
Up to Jan. l, 1888, we have lost S2s7, 434. 10"
Does not this amounS include the money paid
to Mr.. Kanmacherf"
at does not. 1t, however, includes everything
but that, covering all machinery used and the
one lawsuit for damages"
r ninip az ha IN Lob
well as the stone-cutters, were good as
any employed anywhere. He then
adopted by theS BY Which Sai each %orF
man was required to report every day
the amount and kind of work upon which he
clashing had occurred between the State SUPER
visor and those of the firm, he said "Mr.
Vodges, being better pleased to condemn than
receive material and work, | considered him
altogether captious, and anxious to make us
lose money. l have been in State work for ten
years, and never before saw such unfair treat
ment."
He then stated that Mr.. Wedges was connected
with one of the competing bidders, and he be-
heved he had secured the position of superiu-
tendent for the sole purpose of annoying the
contractors cont he, He said that Mr. Hns,
often Remarked that he would c ona
plete the building, and that every visit to the
city was attended by long conferences between
Mr.. Hinsdale and Mr.. Vodges
The examination concluded with an interest
Ing exhibition by Mr. Mccormick, which was a
little out OF the regular order of business He
turned his batteries upon the witness with the
question, "Mr. Denig, did you not endeavOr to
keep me from being member of this commit
tee3"
Mr.. Denig replied az did not.
"Did YOU not have parties in the House work
ing against my appointment"
al did not"
"Did you not say that you would never con-
sent to my appointment"
The same question was repeated number of
times, invariably ellcUlng a negative
He then said that he wished the witness to IN
derstand that there were honest people in the
world who were not connected with him. Mr.
Denig was not at all disturbed by this assault
and his questioner figured as q laughipg -stock
before the committee. Mr.. Denig will be re-
called at the next session.