National Republican., 1885-01-14
THE DISTRICT IN CONGRESS.
Discussion OF the Contractors Claims
Bil by the Commissioners and the
Houap Con,nn,ttcc

u
morning TO present tho protest of the
municipal commission to the passage of
Mr.. JoGords's bill ITO define the duties
and liabilities of the District of Columbia
under certain executed contracts" The
| contractors interested woro represented
| by Gen. Eppa Huntun, Gen. w. III. Arm.
strong, Col. John Hancock, Reginald Fen
dali, Col. Robert Chrlsty, V. B. Edwards,
| Col. S. G. Neale. and Judge Cole, of Iowa.
! There were, besides, several of the OK
contractors present. There was full
attendance Of the committee.
Commissioner Edmonds, as president
of tho board, was the first called upon for
| his views. lEo protested in Its name
! against any more legislation in regard to
| these claims under former municipal
administration.
II THESE CLAIMS WE'RE ALLOWED
| II would probably take more money to
pay them than all the real estate in the
| District was to-day worth. No work had
| been done under many of the contracts rep
resented as ready to come in under this bill.
| lie cited an instance in which he had
paid for sewer under his own property
which was afterward found to exist only
| in tire contract for its construction. He
| did not know that this fraud was ropro'
sentod in one Of the claims OF not. The first
section ofthe bill which provided that any
contract, written or oral, heretofore made
| by tho board of public works or any mem
bor thereof on its behalf, and which shall
| have been wholly or in part executed, for
the hoimprovemont and keeping in repair Of
streets, avenues, alleys, sewers, roads,
bridges, or other improvements Of the
| District, shall be deemed and held to be a
| valid contract, as if IL had been in writing,
signed by the parties, and copy had been
filed in the Office of the secretary OF the
| District, and notwithstanding no nppro-
priation had been previously made for
| the work TO be done, had the effect of val
| idating illegal contracts, all the illegal
claims would be given legal status and the
district would have to
PAY FOR WORK NEVER EXECUTED.
Gen. Hunton denied this last statement.
Mr.. Spriggs, of the committee, asked
what then was the meaning of the section,
and Gen. Hunton promised TO state when
his turn came to be heard.
! Mr.. Edmonds asserted that it was so
represented by the attorneys who appeared
| before the board Saturday aud called upon
Gen. Armstrong to corroborate tho state
ment.
Gen. Armstrong denied It, explaining
! that mon who had bought large quantities
| of material upon requests to hold thom-
selves in readiness to execute contracts
aud had afterward been prev ented doing
80 would come in.
The second section was then taken up
| by Mr.. Edmonds, providing that when
ever the board of public works or the
commissioners, by general orders or rules,
have fixed or established higher or in
creased prices or rates for work or labor
or material performed or furnished under
| contract than the prices mentioned, such
rates be taken to bo the rates applicable
TO the contract, as If inserted. This he
objected to as involving the difference in
the value OF cash and District paper pro-
vided for in the increased prices. Tho
commissioners desired all cases in dispute
to be t,ken into court, as the Strong case
had been.
GEN. HUNToN FOLLOWED
in support of the bill. He said he repre-
sented poor men who had spent their all
in improving the District, one man being
in the poorhouse after spending $250,000
in that way. The case Of Mr.. Jones, who
had q verbal contract for $4,000 yards OF
block pavement, and who had been called
upon frequently to hold himself in readi-
ness to execute the contract, that he had
bought all his material and then had not
been given the work to do was made the
basis of tho argument.
Amendments to narrow the scope of
the bill. and leave less room for danger
Gus constructions were suggested and
agreed to by the counsel.
Judge Edmonds suggested that many
of the contracts were obtained by fraud.
He had heard, though it might not be
true, that tho Jones contract was obtained
by payment of $4,000 and the De Col
yer contract would come under the bill.
These should not be given standing in
court
GEN. j. II. WEST
said he differed somewhat from his col
league. He was opposed to pleading the
statute of Limitation, and thought that
tho District could not afford to owe just
claims. If the contractor has done the
work he should have his money. But
many of tho contracts were involved in a
cloud. When $4,O00,000 was authorized
$24 ,000, 900 worth of contracts were made
and the contractors should have been on
, their guard and not undertaken illegal
contracts. They had ample notice in the
common notoriety OF the condition Of
.. things. He thought the bill should bC
restricted to what tho
CLAIMANTS SAY THEY WANT.
Gen. Armstrong then proceeded to state
q the case for the claimants, taking up thu
proposed bill by sections. When he hat
explained the operation OF the first Gen
West remarked that it was all right"
"Well," said Col. Christy,
THAT'S ALL l WANT"
"But that's the one that gives specu
lative damages" exclaimed Judge Ed
/ monds.
Gen. Armstrong resumed his remarks
defending the provisions Of the third sec
tion, that no claim shall be considered by
the court which was rejected upon il
merits by the board of audit, after ful
hearing, and no sot-otf or counter CLAIM
be allowed on behalf of the District OF
, account OF any claim paid by the Dis
trct, unless IL Is shown that the amour
! was procured by fraud or misreprosenta
, tiOn.
This, he explained, was to provid,
4 against the pleading of a payment unde
I the increased rates provided for the On
J HANGED cost of labor and material on on,
I contract as an offset TO claim on another
Section 4, which provides that any judg
ment entered upon contract made by thu
! board of public works or any membe
{ thereof shall be roopened, was the
LAST ONE DISCUSSED.
Con. Armstrong defended this on tn
, ground that it only affected such cases a
: had beon adversely decided upon unjus
technicalities, which this bill proposed I
remove.
Chairman Barbour hore declared til
hearing adjourned to Thursday.
The Louisiana Lottery Drawing.
New ORLEANS, Jan. l3.-The follow
a | II 4 Z. IL.