Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1888-11-28

TEN-DoLLAR BILL He GAVE INSPECTOR LAM
GAN.
The military court of inquiry investigating
the aqueduct tunnel frauds resumed the
taking of testimony at 1910 this morning.
Sub-contraetor 7. F. Brennan, who was on
hand early, was first called to the stand. he
said that he was bricklayer by trade and
held sub-contract on the aqueduct tunnel.
His connection with the work continued from
about March 1, 1885, until the LIST of the pres
ent month. MIR. Emory was connected with
him in the work from about four months from
the start Up TO that time Emory had been
employed as foreman. but he did not feel
that he could work at the wages witness was
giving him, and on the LIST Of July he took him
In as partner. Lately Mr.. Palmer was his
partner.
THE sUB-coNTRAcT
was for the laying of a brick lining and pack
ing to the satisfaction of the inspectors, gov
eminent engineers, and contractors. For the
first two years the witness was engaged on
work in the east and visited the work on the
tunnel only occasionally, averaging about once
in two months. Whenever he came he tried to
visit the tunnel but at times he was plunged
up with rheumatic" so that he was unable to
go down. During his absence Mr.. Emory su-
perintended the work. Witness read a copy Of
the specifications in February 1885, in Mr..
Quackenbush's office, but he never had O copy.
BUSINESS VISITS TO THE TUNNEL.
He did not think that he ever went down
into the tunnel in company with either Of the
main contractors. He could not say that he
made a careful examination" of the work
when he went through; would get up on the
scaffolding and look at the work. In 1887 he
went down into the tunnel much more fire.
quently, but did not make any inspection of the
80 r,rfth cl-.,,h ,,ah
He had never had, up to this time, any
consultations with the contractors as to the
character of the work. but he always under
stood that the work was to be done in the best
possible manner, according to the specitica-
TONS In 1883 he spent considerable time at
the tunnel averaging about FIVE hours day in
inspection. Mr.. Emory was not here in 1883.
There were two gangs, each with foreman.
The witness referred to a law of the brick
layers union here, and in reply to question
by Gen. Ruger, said that he did not belong to
the union himself.
WHAT Mr.. BRENNAN KNOWS ABOUT BAD WORK.
"Was there any bad work discovered by you
this year2" asked Gen. Ruger.
"Only on one day. Col. Kerlin, believe,
had caught man putting in dry packing on
the quarters of the arch, and called my atten-
ton to it"
How did they usually pack it when it was
not dry?"
Very good First they would put stone in
and then put cement over it" The cement, he
explained, was put in generally from the buckets
without trowels. The packers would put in as
large stones as a man could handle. Afterward
in reply to direct question, witness said that
the cement was travelled in between the
stones. The packing above the arch was done
well this year, he said. Sometimes he would
catch the packers avoiding the use of cement,
and when he asked them what they meant they
would reply that they thought it was good
"a thar tDlk 20 do
right. The bricklayers often had to wait for
the packers but the packers had never been
told to wait so that the brick masons could get
ahead. 1t had occurred to him at times that
EXTRA VIGILANCE WAS NECESSARY
in order to prevent the commission of bad
work, and he would then have more inspectors
put on. He told Mr.. Emory that he wanted
good work done, and his partner gave such
orders to each one of the fQremcn. He never
had any talk with Mr.. Emory about bad work.
LANIGAS's TES-DoLLAR BILL.
When asked by Gen. Buyer about the $40
bill that Lanigan had said he received from
Brennan the latter said that he did give the
money to Lanigan, and, meeting him after
ward, he said: Jim Lanigan, give you that
$40, and want you to tell the truth about it,
Witness was of the opinion that the bad work
done in the tunnel was the result of
THE LAzINEss OF THE PACKERS
1t could have easily been done without his
knowledge, except this year. when it would
have come to his notice if he was with the
gang. He went between two gangs.
Gould your foreman attend to his brick
work and still see that there was no bad work
done?"
Certainly he could," was the reply.
Then you think that your fOremen neglected
their duty" asked Col. Craighill.
Yes, think that some of them did"
a. fhprn ell -,
sighting the work between him and anyone
else. There was no understanding between
him and any government inspector, whereby
the latter, should be less vigilant than he
should. He could not answer for Mr.. Palmer.
He had
NO IDEA THAT THERE WAS ANY CORRUPTION
existing on the part of any one. The work
done by him on the tunnel was at profit When
Mr.. Beckwith first got the contract he wrote
to witness, who was in Waterbury. Conn. ask
ing him to come down TO Washington to do
some work for him. He was then too busy
and he afterward met Beckwith in New York
and had a talk with him. as a result of which
he came down to Washington and went through
| the tunnel with Beckwith to whom he re-
marked that it was a good. dry tunnel, and
that there ought to be good work done. That
night he entered into contract.
He did not understand that the
packers should have been skilled
masons instead of laborers. Everybody in the
tunnel seemed to be satisfied with the men he
hired. No grout was ever used 10 his knowl-
edge. The same packers were not used on the
mortar packing as were used on the dry pack
ing that was formerly used. The change &C.
CURED after the men had been idle for some
months, and it was impossible to get the same
men, which they would have liked to do. New
instructions were given to the packers after the
change In his opinion the packers knew they
were doing bad work whenever they did it.
THINKS THE INSPECTORS MUST HAVE KNOWN
ABOUT IT.
"Could this bad work have been done with
ont the inspectors knowledge" asked Colonel
Craighill
Il do not see how it could have been DONE"
Witness said that he has done brck-work on
the New York aqueduct tunnel One man as
sociated with him in New York came to WASH
lngton-kimball, a bricklayer, who used to
take charge of the work during his temporary
absence. Witness said that he had read the
affidavit, through the papers, of the Kendall
Brothers, and thought that it was
A PIECE OF sPITE-woRK.
They were his employers. but he never had
much to do with them. The union" question
did not come into the AFFIDAVIT
In reply to question by Capt. Chester, Bren-
nan said that he would call a man who could
build good wall without having served an ap-
premiership, or who did not belong to the union,
a good mason. The time of the men was kept
by Beckwith and Quackenbush, who paid all
the men. Referring to the case OF Lanigan's
$40 bill he said that the money was for extra