National Republican., 1883-07-11
THE HILL DIFFICULTY.
The Prosecution Closes tho steam Heater
Section OF tine Case, and the Defense Be
gins business.

The Prosecution Closes the Steam Heater
Section OF tine Case, and the Defense Be-
gins business.
Before the Hill investigating committee
yesterday morning Mr.. Coleman presented
some additional vouchers in the Bartlett,
Robbins & Co. case. In explanation of his
offer no said that the vouchers showed that
Bartlett, Hayward q Co. had prepared the
plans and specifications for heating apparatus
for the custom houses at ST. Louis and Chi
cago, for which thoy were paid $500 for
each building. Tho ground plans were pre-
pared by the supervising architect. The
firm was afterward awarded contracts for
supplying the heating apparatus Mt Chicago
for 1900 and Mt st. Louis for $ll60)0. In
this way said Mr.. Coleman. they became the
superintondents Of their own work.
Francis L. Morrison, u steamftter of this
city, was then oxominod and said that he
had worked for Bartlett, Haywood q Co. in
| the treasury building in this city during
! 1850 and 1881. The workmcn received 80 per
day and the helpers $l.25, Signed no pay
rolls. The prosecution announced that they
had closed so far as the Bartlett, Robbins Il
Co. case was concerned and Mr.. Thomas be-
gan the presentation of the case for the de-
! fcnso by calling Il. l.. Bartlett, of Baltimore.
| Wherever possible tho material used in the
extra work upon tho New York postoffce was
charged for at tho contract rates which were
| just and reasonable. The firm had had deal
| ings with the government for many years
! before his time.
| Mr.. Coleman. II is about time that some
body else had chance then.
! Mr.. Thomas. Mr.. Bartlett has Bartlett, Robbins
d Co. cvar paid to Mr. Ilill directly or indirectly,
any pay or percentage for settling !hese extra DIS
! since he has been supervising architect?
! Mr.. Coleman. object to the question, as lead
/ ing.
Mir Thomas Does the gentleman consent TO
| withdraw any imputali2n or charge that Mr.. LII
has been. bibcd by Bartlett, Robbins COZ
seut to proceed with the examination OF his wit
After a wrangle over the form of the question,
| Mr. Thomas was allowed to ask: "Whnt have you
| to say about any cOrruptivo connection between
Mr.. Hill and Bartlett, Robbins d Co.?
The Witness There was no corruption bo-
! tween them III any shape or form.
q. Charges have been made that Bartlett Rob.
| bhs ~ Co. have been unduly favored by Mr.. Hill.
| What do you know about it?-A. l don't know
! where we have been favored in any particular.
| We pursued no course towards him in Obtaining
contracts that We did not pursue towards the
| world.
In regard to the allegations of excessive
| charges in retitting rafters in the New York
| postOftice, the witness said that tho bill had
been made up from data furnished by Mr..
Evans, the foreman Of the firm, and not from
his own knowledge.
Cross-examination was deferred until to.
day.
Benjamin F. Kelley, formerly timel;eeper
for Bartlett, Robbins & Co., described his
method of keeping the record of the time con-
sumcd in extra work done for the New York
post)ilico in Baltimore shops. The returns
made were accurate.
The witness was cross-examined at length.
He could not tell where the time book OF
blotter, used by him could he found.
Pending the preparation of further evil
dence the committee adjourned