Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1896-03-25
WORE ABOUT SHELLS.
ur. Grimes Proves That The City Saved
Money by His Contract
o,,r moxEy-LESprNG NATTER
u.,,,c.sc. Testify That the MARSHALL
ward Member Befriended Them }"
~ uo,-The Case VIII Probably
&c closed Tonight.

.,.f.uco OF Mr.. John r. Grimes,
,,,r.aall-Ward member on trial be-
fore o. ... ..... hoard and
,..-. evidence OF a beneficial character
,....i i'm Mr. Grimess behalf. II Is
.., that counsel for the defence Will
,. ta close their case tonight. as
rtt.e other testimony is TO be Of
i ford .-,--,. -. ,,.o.,.
clover brought down his gaveL
OBJ. council 10 order, and the call
.l tr. ron began. There was not
,,-.y SD nrcc a crowd Of spectators pres
.... ms on the previous evening, but those
hand manifested considerable interest
... Obi. pro.c, .luqs. The members answer
4..-t, their names were: Messrs. Bloom
,.-- Briggs. Brock. Davis. CottrelL
r..rc. U.ac1nt. Donieavy, Epps. Ferriter'
...rn Grimes Gunst, Hobson, Lander
|n Iavlcr. Mcdowell, Trower, Waller
..n Williams. Woody. and President
rant.in George u. Wise and Hon. b. B.
,rrflrf. counsel FOR the defence, and the
rr, Attorney were on hand.
d.
stand by City-Attorney Meredith. VINO
asked him regarding the purchase Of the
r.u bushels OF lime I'm 1888. Mr.. NIIn'a
s.l he dld not think the lime was plr-
CHASED by him. lie remembered when the
lime was bought Seeing IL being deiNereu'
I. asked tie foreman why ne was pH
chasing lime. and received the reply that
De- Was running short
DID NOT RUN THE GAS-WORkS.
.Now Mr. Grimes the Superintendent
rl,urt shows that IN the month of Janu-
a. fS5. 1000 bushels of lime were made
.- tr. aas-works. while only GOO bushels
v.-, used Can you explain why you
should be buying lime at this time when
,au had O surplus of 900 bushels on
larIr' asked the city Attorney.
.I Vas not Superintendent of the Cas-
Works and do not know why the lime
was bought" replied the witness.
H.ue examined by Mr.. Munford, Mr..
Grus explained the duties of the Com
mite. on Light
.Uh1 awarded that Smsot contract?'
cut-sI Nr Munford.
"Ih. Committee on Light
AIR. SHELTON TEsTIF1ES.
ST. Joseph NJ shelton. City Gas lnspec-
t.- nIo for many years filled the POSI-
t.r .t clerk TO the Committee on Light
was the next witness He was closely
composition of the Committee on Light
a.I fhe manner iu which il had transac-
a. business which had come before IT,
Thc witness was finally brought down
f1 .he meeting of that committee held
October IA. 1S9i. when the shell contract
w8. Jet 20 Mr. SmOOt. and he was asked
90 read from his record that part which
referred TO the opening Of the bids. This
record stated that bids were received,
a- follows.
George W. Smoot. 5000 bushels shells,
more OF Jess. 90 be delivered n such guam
tucs end at such time as the committee
m.glt desire. az 7-S cents a bushcl.
A. l.. Montgomery. such quantity OF
shells. TO be delivered al such time, es
tfe superintendent might direct, at .
cents per bushel. ON motion of Mr..
S-arke Mr. Sm00t was awarded the con-
tract
lr Munford: Who opened those bids?
'I d.l. SIR" replied Mr.. shelton.
Nr Wallersteln: I would like 20 ask
N- shelton question: do you remem-
.er az the time of the letting OF that
heu contract that some member Of the
committee asked the question, "WhO rs
It man. Sm9ot' and hearing two mem
.0r- ~ the committee reply TO that i'll
t,fro-ltiouY
o. Io not Such an incident may have
occurred. hut ! have no recollection or
,rrfAMs OF the SORT" was Mir. Sheltons
t,.y.
HOW BILLS ARE APPROVED.
@r Shelton was asked to give the pro-
,c.-f. necessary % have a bin approved
3g tao Light Committee and he replied
hat while ne knew what was customary,
b. could not give 10 as his personal know
l lie stated that bill would first be
presented io the superintendent for his
lrt. and thon 20 before the Auditing
'l,-' '.mm fteo Of the Committee on Light.
lt would ,hen 20 before the Light Com
mtt. AND. II approved. the chairman
Wot.l lo authorized TO sign a warrant
Nf ih amust involved.
Nl. comps sed the Auditing Commit
l,c. ash. Mr Nunford.
"Mr p. ID Starkc."
ho you regard him to be an honorable
man."
"Nhy. certainly. sir"
Nr NJ Mr.th here cross-questioned the
s'ness He caused Mr.. shelton to go
Nrr Dds explanation OF how bills We're ap-
proves, and ho put the question: sup
ono ~ the bills presented TO Mr.
>.'t. tor approval was his own bin in
Nf Smoots name, would you think him
l1 honest man ? he passed that bill on
20 Gre commIIceY'
WhE / could not suppose such & thing,
9r Meredith"
"r shelton stood aside. after having
answered several other unimpOrtan, Ques-
ions.
FIGURES AND SHELLS.
Nr u. c. Boudar was put upon the
sl as the expert accountant who
ha- taa examination Of the books az the
t'-N..ts when The first investigation
Ne n.e ln reply 10 questions pro-
,H. ly SIR Munford. the witness said
li during the Montgomery shell con-
la.t f'aw October 1893, TO October, 1894,
'" bushels of shells were delivered at
t.- works. while under the Smo0t
'IIi. 'l13 bushels were delivered from
N-...-r l0t. 10 March 1885 Durrg the
'it- between October, 1885, and March,
~ -a-.e the Montgomery contract, 81
bushels were received at the works.
-.e-e Was then an approximate
consumption OF 6.500 bushels OF
The number Of shells on hand
p T. 1896. were 2l,150 bushels. and
were 500 bushels OF lime on hand
e. iIe time.
i- answer 20 one Of Captain Wise's in
atoms, Mr B0udar stated that ac-
tf 90 the books. II ths use of shells
''- been suddenly stopped by the intro
'.9n ~ pyrtes In March. 1884,. Instead
.- Atich. 1856. the city would then. under
nanieomery shell contract. have had
".'Vt iA") bushels OF shells on hand.
SAVED THE CITY MONEY.
TIE witness was requested to give the
'-A totals paid under the Montgomery
a.i Smoot contracts. respectively, for
ele.f. lie replied that under the Mont
kmory contract the city had paid Sl.909 p
.'i fie "a. while under the Smoot contract