The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1883-04-25
THE HILL INVESTIGATION.
Some OF the Charges Made Against the
Supervising Architect - S1O,oOO,OOO


Some OF the Charges Made Against the
Supervising Architect - SO, 100000
Squandered.
WASHINGTON, April 19.-The Special Com
mittee appointed to investigate the charges
against Supervising Architect Hill held
another meeting to-day and concluded the
reading of all charges on file in the Treasury
Department. These include charges pre-
ferred by Hon. T. H. Murch, A. B. Mullet,
| Charles Roberts, William A. Nicholson
Representing Manly. Cooper g. Co.., George
w. Billings and the Poulson & Eyer Archi-
tectural Iron Works, Of Brooklyn, N. Y.
Billings charges CORRUPTION and frand on
the part of Hill in the contract with Bart
lett, Hayward & Co., for work on the New
York Postoffice. He alleges that Hill al
ways allowed this firm to furnish pipe of
less thickness than the specifications called
for, and allowed them to submit without
competition supplemental bids to accepted
proposals for continuance of the same work
at their own rates. He also charges Hill
with incompetency and suggests he be sus
pended during the investigation. The
charges preferred by PopsSon aud Eyer. re-
late 10 their treatment by Hill in regard
to the contract for work on the Postoffice at
Austin Tex. They allege they made m
explicit charge of fraud and misbehsvior on
the part OF the Superintendent in charge of
the building, which were accompanied By
proof. Ttese matters were entirely ignored
by the Supervising Architect, and never
ELECTED the slightest response from him.
Accom- panyiDg the charges fled by A. b
Mullet in letter addressed BIZ him to
En1rrar frOun Nouy (ffxv
November %. 1881. in which, among other
things, he Gays: II believe that l keep
strictly within the bounds of truth when i
say that the Government has lost between
the incspacity and dishonesty of Hfil and
his associates, not less than $40, DOC, eco, and
this can be proved to your entire satisfaction
and so clearly that it can noe be
denied. The spec icAtions TO Mullet's
charges allege acknowledgements or corrup-
ton in the following particulars: a. In
the matter of the sale of old material at Dix
Island and its repurchase At an enormous
price; (2) in the matter of L. f. Cannon,
who, Muilet Gays, was proved to be corrupt
aud guilty Of n penal offsnse, yet permitted
70 resign and practice as agent and attorney
in the Office OF the Supervising Architect;
t3) expenditures made on the Postofiice
Department building under the direction Of
the Supervising Architect, by A. ]. Thomp-
son; a. unnecessary and colluSive expendi-
lures tor the reconstruction of the healing
apparatus of the Treasury building; (5)|
changes in the plans Of the basement Of the
Philadeiphis Postofiice, made for the bene-
mt of the contractors for GRANTEE
(6) forgery of pay rolls in
me Office ~ me Supervising Architect Nv
Charles Williams, foreman; (7) the offer
of the Superintendent Ot Ine CONSTRUCTION
Bureau of Engraving and Printing to award
the cOntIscs for brick for g consideration
the said Superintendent being under the
immediate control and supervision Of the
Supervising Architect; tS) removal of the
Superin tendent of Repairs ct Pittsburg or
false charges TO the Supervising Architect;
(9) substitution of the proposal
at increased prices by the c0usen.
Of Supervising Architect Hill; (l0)
attempt To destroy the Custom House al
Chicago; t1D cancellation 81 percentage by
Secretary Sherman, and substitution there
for OF specific contracts ~ frEudu!s Mt rates
The Committee will not meet again mill
Monday. unless something shonld occlr in
the meantime to cali them together. A let
ter has been addressed by tho Committee 70
all gentlemen preferripg charges. noiifyina
them that the Committea is resdy az t0ejr
convenience, TO hssr and inspect suca proofs
IS they may present in substantiatiJl OF the
charges made by them.