Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1883-06-22
L DON'T REMEMBER.
The Convenient Answer Architect Hill
Returned to All Questions Caleu.
lated to Throw Any
Light Upon His Peculiar Methods of
Awarding COBtracts-The Philadel-
phia Building Disposed of.

| ugdtlon Committee met to-day. Mr.. Cole
man asked TO be furnished all contracts m id,
by the United States for fre-proof shutters
Chairman New replied that the requisitior
was too general, and must be made more
, specific.
Mr.. Colemsn-H they will furnish US with
all contracts, we can readily see what we want
without letting them know in advance Just
: what we propose. When the prosecution is
compelled 10 depend upon the defense for
their papers it ia a pretty difficult matter 10
specify in advance what particular papers
may be required, particularly, as in some in.
stances, we do not know what papers are in
existence.
Chairman New then advtrted to the state
meut counsel made yesterday in regard
10 the conduct Of this investigation, and
characterized any statement that the Com
mItee is giving the investigation a half
hearted support, or is disposed TO impede it,
as absolutely untrue.
Mr.. Coleman-No sHch statement was
M ade. What 1 said was to show that the
administration ia not Offering or sffording
any assistance in the prosecution of this in
vestigatiou, which ia being carried on at the
expense of private Individuals, and is in great
contrast with the spirit shown ia the prose-
cution Of the Star-route cases. did not in.
Tend, nor DO desire, to reflect upon this
Committee, who are doing ali IN their power
| 10 further this investigation, and are afford
ing us every facility.
Mr.. New-Yeu are as familiar as any OF
/ us with The laws regulating the disburss-
inent of funds by the Treasury Department,
aud you know we have no money either to
pay witness or attorney fees. II you should
j 20 before the grand jury and procure an in.
/ dictment, then 1 have no doubt you would
| have every encouragement from the admin
/ ats At To uwhf Ind ~ n
partment Of Justice would assume the ex-
pence OF prosecution. but in this case il is
| totally different.
Mr. Murch then took the stand for cross
examination. In answer TO a question as 10
who he represented before the Committee
| Mureh replied that he represented himself
| alone, and that the statement attributed to
Hill that he (witness) was being paid by
| stone-cutters was absolutely false.
Question-Is not your only reason for at
| tempting 10 connect Hill with these frauds
The fact that he was a member of the COM
mission before which you appeared, and that
| commission refused to listen 10 your demands?
AnsWer-That is true. The fact that he
was a member of the commission, that he
was made awsre of frauds aud still persisted
| 10 his course, is my reason for connecting him
with the frsude.
Ques.-D. you not know that if Hill had
acceded TO your demands il would have re-
suited in breaking all existing contracts and
would have compelled the government to
fnish its buildings with fatally different
kind of granite?
Ans.-I know nothing of the kind. / know
there were twenty quarries on the coast of
Maine, owned and controlled by separate
parties, who Ware then furnishing granite,
and could and would have furnished as SAT-
1sfactory granite, both 10 texture and ap-
pesrance, as that which was then being used.
Quts.-f the fifteen per cent. contracts
had been abrogated, would not the govern
ment have been compelled TO pay the prices
which your stone-eutters have demanded
Ans.-We offered to do the work for So
per day. and Hill. under he modified con-
tracts, paid So 30.
The cross-eXaminatiou was pursued at
grea; length, and witness said the greatest
frauds upon the Philsdel phia building were
perpetTaled alter Hill became Supervising
Architect, and after a superintendent had
been put in charge by the Architects office.
This superintendent was totally incompetent,
and permitted tue grossest frauds, yet he is
in the employ Of the Architects office. In
reply TO a question by Coleman, he said his
gro and for complaint against Hill was, after
having his attention called to the gross
frauds which we're being perpetrated, Hill
still went ahead and m sde modifi ed contracts
based upon the fraudulent and excessive
rates which had been paid under the fifteen
per cent. contracts.
This concluded the examination of Murcb.
Testimony was then introduced, the pur-
pose OF which was to chow that Hill was per-
sonally responsible for certain CHI anges in the
plaus for the Philadelphia building, by
which the government was subjected, ss
charged by the prosecution, to the additional
Of
closed the case OF the Philadelphia public
building, and Coleman announced that he
was ready TO present the complaint OF Manly,
Cooper & Co., of Philads lphis, and Frank
| Taylor, secretary and treasurer Of Manly,
Cooper & Co, took the stand. He offered in
| evidence the correspondence between his
company and the Supervising Architect
| relative to letting the contract for
| 6re-proof shutters for The public build
| ing at Cincinnati, and then made a
| statement touching the charges preferred by
his company, as follows: On the morning Of
the day the bids were TO be opened he came
to Washington with Manly, president of
their company. Just before the bids were
opened Hoyt, of Springfield, Mass, one Of
the bidders, approached the witness and SAID
he had been looking for him at all the hotels,
and regretted not seeing him sooner, as he
could have submitted proposition by which
| he (Taylor) could have M ade more money than
BY bidding on the contract. When the bids
we're opened they were four in number, as
follows: Manly, Cooper d Co., $l24 666;
United States Company, f146,630; Hoyt,
$751; ,470, and one other bid, which was $780,
467. Alter The bids were opened, continued
the witness, all the other parties retired,
leaving Manly, George L. Daman, repre-
ssnting the United States Company, and my
self, with Hill. The latter gentleman said
he was tired and very busy, and asked that
we would come and see him in the after
noln. Manly and 1 left, but Daman re-
m lined behind. We returned te Phila-
delphia, and next day Daman fol-
lowed us there and offered us S450C
to Withdraw our bid The propo-
sition was not considered. We were
then told that we must submit to a test
Aft r a good deal of correspondence and the
imposition OF conditions which were very
unfair 10 US, the sd of February was AS
signed for the test; but, without making a
test, Hill ruled out our shutters, because, al
he said. they were thicker than the specif
cations required, Notwithstanding the fac
that shutters offered by the United State
Company were liable to the same objection
and refusing to make test, gave the con
tract to the United States Company.
On cross-examination the witness said hs
| Howl
inyton, and that Hoyt said 10 him that ri
would be better to let DAmsn have the con
tract for the shutters, and Hill will let u
have something else" Witness added: "
would like to have it come Gus that sine
then, "a matter of fact, Hoyt has had mos
of The inning and talking for public
} building"
Mr.. Coeman-We will bring that suit on
, in due time.
Supervising Architect Hill then took tn
i stand, and was asked by Alexander, of tn
i Committee: allow long was il between IN
, opening of bids and your notification 4
Manly, Cooper & Co. that they must submit
to testr
3 Answer-I think about four days.
t Question by Mr. Coleman-Did you kno'
, Of the bribery charge?
Aus.-I did.
Qaes.-Did you speak to Dsman about it
1 Ans.-I did, and he denied it. i think b
b. did in writing II 20, it is on file.
2 Ques.-Wss anyone present when 20
spoke 10 Damau?
Aps.-I don't remember.
s Ques-Do you Tecollect what he said?
e Aus.-I don't remember.
, Ques-HoW long did the conversation las
Ans-I don't remember.
i Ques.-Where did it take place?
Ans.-I don't remember.
9 Ques.-If you knew the United Stat
Company had offered Manly, Cooper G,
!, $500 TO Withdraw their bid, why did 20
4 not, in making the contract with them, Civ
t the government the benefit Of that amour
!. and TX the price al that much less than the
. bid?
Ans-I did not pay much attention to th
/ charge of bribery; did not take any stoc
Y | in il