The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-02-04
Highest Of al Leavenng Power-Lates u. s. Govt Report
Re-! B Bsxsss9
PURE

cans. Replying 20 the mayor. he said that
he had come TO the conclusion that the
excavation Of the sewer cost from ~ 10 80
per cent too much. He thought the cost
OF trenching shoaid be about 20 cents per
cubic foot. including replacing.
J. A. Bailey gsve pretty much the same
sort of testimony. his objection to the
opening UP of so much of the
trench being the cost of lumber. the han
ding of the xaser and the additional cost
through slasnping OF the. earth. The uu-
necessary cost of lumber was about one
half The only new feature was tina: he
had seen \ number of men working in the
lanterns. bat the work could not have
been done 10 advantage.
Mr.. Thompson asked if il was not true
that work done for a city was always
done at cost greater than TO an individ-
uai. lie replied that that was his expert
enee and that the more bosses there were
the worse the work was. Laughter
Considering that men on the public
works do less than on private works for
the same cost, what was still the add.
tional waste BIZ the system pursued ?"
asked the mayor.
About 20 per cent. was wasted, replied
the witness
Mr.. Mcdonald, the contractor. was then
examined on much the same lines and
with similar result He said he had 10
fault to find with the men in the sewer if
there had been any body 10 direct them.
I. II. Whitworth. the engineer. testified
that the brick used on the inside of the
sewer was of fair quality. but that used on
the outside vas coarse and poorly burned.
This was the case on Commercial street,
and the result must be that il would have
soon rotred. 1t was OF great consequence
10 have sewer brick well ground. we'll
mixed and we'll burned. The greater the
porosity the more rapidly the acids of
sewage could destroy the brick. The we'll
burned surface of a brick was TO prevent
porosity. As to the opening up OF the
sewer he supposed the object was to give
work To as many men as possible. but IL
certainly was not the mos. economical
way.
Mr.. Thompson asked If the objec. of
doing so much work at once was on the
side of mercy and not Of stinginess. TO
which witness replied that it might be
looked AZ that way. In reply 10 further
questions, he said that the work being
done In the rainy season was an additional
reason why only a short distance should
be opened.
Mr.. Thompson asked witness if il was
not true that the oldest building in the
United States was built of unburnt brick
Mr.. Donworth retorted by asking if wit
ness had ever heard of sewer being built
of unburnt brick.
Alderman Carrie was then put on the
stand. and testified that he was a civil en-
gineer. He noticed pile of brick going
into the Brook street sewer. Van Brock
lin. who was present, told the men that
the brick had been rejected. and asked the
inspector If /. was not true that he had re-
iected it. He said he had, out Wolfe had
told them TO go ahead and use it; il was
none of his business. the inspector said,
what was done after he rejected it,
Replying to Mr.. Thompson, he said be
knew that there was great need of the en-
ployment OF men, but he opposed opening
Brook street on account of the soil: he
thought other sewer work could have been
done to better advantage.
As 10 the brick, he answered Mr.
Thompson that the foreman paid no at
tention TO Mr.. Van BrocKlin's orders. Wit
ness afterwards spoke 10 Wolfe about it.
Alter Scott's testimony was taken. the
hearing was adjourned until Monday
morning.