The daily Cairo bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1878-1???, 1883-06-16
WASHING TON NEWS.
The Coils Being frightened about Hill
Star-Route ltems-0tfer National
News

WASHINGTON, June l5.-The Hill in
man, counsel for Muic h called attention ~
request heretofore made upon the super
yising architects office for all papers reiat-
ing 10 extra work performed 10y Bartlett,
Rooblns * Co., upon the New York post
office and intimaled this request had not
been complied WITH Thomas, for Hill,
piled counsel had not specified what parllc-
ular papers were required. The
charges were not sufficiently definite or eA-
plicIl.
Coleman replied that the charges and
specifications were Is definite and specific
rs would be required tor an indictment ia
half the states Of tue Union, that
an investigation oil TINS Guar
! ,r,cr. ,hoaid open the dourh for the
| fullest n INT upon the official acts OF defend .
| ant. lie would, therefore, renew his re-
| quest, and would ask the committee 10
make the order ON the supervising archl-
;ecl for the production Of all papers rcial
>sg to the extra work performed by Bart
lett, Robbins II Co. upon the New ! ork
| poslolrce; also copies VI all contracts made
L
| out ruling upon the question, the commit
tee decided TO resume the examination Of
Slelnmetl IN connection with the charges OF
1 fraud ana corruption III the construction OF
| the Philadelphia pOstolllce. Witness bad
| concluded his calculations and wn<nplc'
pared 10 show the difference between the
| price paid by the Government " con-
tractors Tor dressing stone tor
the eulre building and the actual cost o!
work, based upon liberal estimate OF Ia
Dor. The total amount paid ny the Gov
eminent 10 contractors was 1918, Nv. The
cost ~ contractors, allowing u liberal csti'
mater At least thirty per cent. for proit, was
s443, 40, leaving II balance OF $40, 900 un'
necessarily paid by tue Government. he
basement and portion OF the second story
having been begun under titeen per cent.
contract and completed under modified
contract, these portions could not be m
cIuded in the calculations, but rough en-
innate OF the difference between these two
prices would add about sl2O, 900 10 the pre-.
vious totals.
inns concluded Stenmetz' testimony and
the question arose whether the committee
and defense would admit that The same eX-
cess, relatively, existed In the cost OF other
pubic buildings erected under Hill, or
Whether the prosecution should be required
to repeat their proof with expert testimony
as TO each. Alexander, OF the committee.
suggested that rs the same principle won id
extend to all the buildings II would seem
TO deyoye upon the prosecution TO connect
inn with the fraud charged In this alleged
extravaganza in the erection OF the PIMA.
deIphia building. Coleman rep4d that 1t
might be rs bad principle TO steal s50, 900
AS s, 100, 900, but tue defense might say rs
to one building: "We admit extravaganza,
but have you connected Hill with any
lraudy' The prosecution were able ana
proposed to prove tho same extravaganza,
mislnanagement or fraud were shown IN
connection with all the buildings, and that
contracts continued to be made after the
supervising architect had been repeatedly
warned and advised Of their unIarncss
to the government.
A long discussion ensued, Favored y It'll
several sharp passages between the coun.
sci. The point, however, was not decided
and the committee adjourned until to-
morrow, when Sleinmetz will be cross
| examined.