The San Francisco call., 1895-12-03
]. D. Spreckels and Four Super.
viSors Heard at Last
Nights Session.
LAGUNA STREET PAVING JOB.
Superintendent Ashworth Accepted
Bad Work Assuring the Mayor 1t
Was First Class.

believed that the poolroom manage rs OF
San Francisco have contributed sack of
$1,000 a month to influence municipal leg
islauion against the passage of an ordi-
nance to prevent pool-selling. 1t is the i'm
fpression in certain circles that to the Solid
Eight of the Board of Supervisors has
been assigned a portion of this Doodle.
The question which is now agitating the
Grand Jury is the plan of action that
should be followed to ascertain if there is
truth in the ugly rumor.
1t is well known that some hidden yet
potent influence has been exerted to delay
action on the ordinance, and to discover if
this influence be corrupt one seems now
to be the purpose of the jury.
Street work claimed the attention of the
session yesterday afternoon, yet word was
given out that an evening session would
be held to hear the testimony OF Super
yisors.
One of the first witnesses called in the
afternoon was w. H. Clack. Under Sheriff.
He appeared before the jury at his own re-
quest to explain discrepancy betwee n
his own testimony and that of the court
bailiffs regarding the method employed in
summoning the Ashworth jury. An in
teTVleW III 1HE OALL Q6SCTlDluS CQ6 pldQ
followed by Mr.. Clack did not tally exactly
with the story told by the bailiffs. Mr..
Clack explained that the names of forty
business men were taken from the Direc-
tory. Envelopes containing the subpenas
were given to the deputies, but the Under
Sheriff does not know that these were
ever served, wherever found. Twenty-Five
jurors were subpenaed by the deputies
themselves under the general instructions
to get good business men.
At this stage of the proceedings Mayor
Sutro, Private Secretary Rogers and Super
visor A. b. Spreckels came to the ante
room of the jury in response to subpenas.
1t was then supposed that the pool ordi-
nance inquiry would proceed, bu: whis-
information was impaired that the inquiry
as to crooked street work would occupy
the rest of the afternoon session.
Fisher Ames explained at some length
to the jury how Superintendent Ashworth
had accepted a sidewalk at the corner of
Harrison and Hayward streets, although
the lumber used was of inferior quality
and the workmanship defective and in
utter disregard of the specifications. A. l..
Lille, another property -owner, gave testi-
mony corroborative of Mr.. Ames' state
ments.
Robert Leibert, a property owner on
Laguna street, between Oak and Fell, was
on hand to tell the jury that specifications
for paving that block had been shamefully
violated by j. j. Dowling, the contractor.
In this case the Grand Jury is believed
to have conclusive and overwhelming
proof against Superintendent Ashworth.
The work on the job of paving the street
with bitumen was begun under Ackerson's
administration, but was finished and ac-
cepted by Superintendent Ashworth. Mr..
Leibert refused to pay his assessment of
oh = 70
or cement had been used under the pasalt
blocks on the gutterways. The specifica-
tions distinctly required five inches of
concrete and one inch of cement. An
opening was made and proof produced
that the blocks were laid on sand. The
contractor laughed and bluffed the other
property owners into paying.
Evidence was given by Mayor Sutro and
his private secretary, as well as by George
T. Gaden, to the effect that Ashworth as
sured the Mayor that the work had been
done in accordance with specifications;
that he had inspected the work himself
and knew the job was all right On this as
surance Mayor Sutro approved the assess
ment, although Mr.. Gaden dissented from
the statement of the Superintendent OF
Streets.
Grand Jurors hearing of this crookedness
examined the work and procured samples
of the material used. George w. Elder,
the expert of the Board of Supervisors,
also made careful inspection of the work
They found the condition worse than Mr..
Leibert represented.
It is thought that the proof in this case
is so positive and overwhelming that an
accusation against Ashworth can be sus-
tanned before any intelligent and unpreju-
diced jury.
The Grand Jury convened again at 80
P. M. The witnesses in waiting on street