The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-03-03


agement of the City Gas-Works. His re-
port as to the neglected and rotten con-
dition I'm which he found those works
clearly portrays how negligent and how
culpable Mr.. W. c. Adams. Superinteu-
dent and Mr. T. J.Walsh. foreman, We're
In their discharge OF the trusts coniided in
them and the duties assumed by them.
Your committee speaks well within bounds
when 1t t.says that. had the late admin
istration continued. what would not have
been stolen would scarcely have been
worth stealing on account OF It's rotten
ness.
THE ARMITAGE CONTRACT.
Your COMMITTEES examined forry-odd
witnesses upon the different lines of in
vostigation pursued by IT, The principal
lines OF investigation were as follows:
As to violations of the city ordinance for
bidding employees to give orders upon
their pay: the violation OF the State
statute forbdding a councilman to enter
into contract with committee or an
agent Of the city: sales OF junk: the setal-
ing OF coke. and the frauds connected with
the contracts for oyster shells.
Your committee also made such an ex-
animation as IT could as TO the purchase
OF the water-gas plant. and as TO the max
ing with Mr.. Armitage of the gas-tar
contract, and also as to the ammonicai-
liquor contract The lapse Of time since
the making of those contracts pretented
your committee from being able TO get
as much light they desired upon those
transactions But your committee feel
assured that they were conceived and
consummated i'm fraud. The ammonical
contract was, as your committee believe,
let TO a straw bidder. who never intended
to exercise any right under H. IL was let
10 Nlr. Joseph b. Davis. who assigned IL
TO Mr. ArmitaEe, thereby carrying out
what was the original intention or the
parties Upon this point We call atten-
tion to the testimony Of Mr.. ). Dabney
Crenshaw, herewith returned The fraud
surrounding the giving OF the tar contract
Is still more patent. In lN9 Mr.. Armitage
was allowed to get from the city con-
tract for the gas tar, 10 last seven years,
at a price far below the then market price.
The contract was made without any at
tempt TO get bids even after the super
intendent had been notified by Mr.. 5. ID.
Crenshaw that he knew of parties who
desired 10 bid on the contract In lMO
an investigation as 10 the awarding OF
that contract was asked by a Mr.. Stall
wagon, Of Philadelphia, who had written
20 Mr. Thomas p. Campbell the then pres
ident of the Common Council, asking 10
be notified when the contract would b'
awarded. A so-called investigation was
held by the Gas Committee. IL was ear.
ried on I'm the most useless and perfuncto-
ry manner The chairman of the Gas
Committee AT that time was Mr.. W. ;.
Gum Instead Of assisting such an inves-
tigation. by having Mr.. Campbell state
what he had done with the letter, he I'M
peded it by asserting before the commit
tee that Mr.. Campbell had informed him
that he had never received any such let
ter from Nj. Stalwagon BY the testi-
mony Of Mr.. Campbell herewith submit
ted. il will be seen that Mr. Campbell de-
nies ever having made any such state
ment. 1t will also appear that when Mr..
Gum was asked 10 account for his state
ment about what Mr.. Campbell had told
him. he could only assert a most distress
ing failure Of memory. From his state
ments il would appear that his mind was
almost a perfect blank as 10 the whole
invesfigationi From the minutes Kept OF
that investigation IL seems 10 your COM
mittee that Mr. James u. Ferriter alone
Of that investigating committee showed
any desire TO have the fraud properly IN
quired into Your committee believe that
n a propor investigation had been made
in 1890 the exact connection OF all par
ties TO the fraud would have been made
known.
Your committee submit herewith copy
OF a letter dated April y. 1892. from the
Western Gas CONSTRUCTION Company, the
builders OF the water-gas plant, 10 MT.
W. .. Adams Superintendent, statng AT
what prices they would furnish certain
apparatu, needed for the said plant. IL
would seem, from reasonable cons'ruc-
.iou of that letter that he city paid That
comoanv more for its waer-gas plant than
the company stated i'm that letter II
would. Your committee. however. has had
no onnur,unity or means of taking any
testimony which would shed any hght
upon thas letter. The Western Gas Con-
struetion Company was awarded the con-
tract upon a bid put IN by IL after all the
bids. ifs own included, had been opened
II made iis second aud lower BID upon |
the assertion that its president had been
Informed by telegraph that me company |
could get certain material at lower figures
,ban those upon which it based its first |
bid ....-
VIOLATED EVERY MONTH.
Your committee finds that the city ordi- |
nance approved November l5. 1884, was |
violated every month from the day OF |
its adopiion until the election OF the pres
ert SUPERINTENDENT Not only did MT |
Walsh the foreman. take orders from |
the emploves Of the Lower Gas WORKS |
for a few dollars each month during that |
period. but Mr. John X. Grimes, chair
man Of the Gas Committee, received or /
ders upon the wages of the employees az |
th. Gas-Works for money he loaned them |
during that period. amounting TO A,is5.o-'
averaging a little over 500 month. your
com,uittee called on Mr. Grimes 70 eN-
plain why he had so flagranuy ana ire
creutly violated this ordinance. Ills tes-
,iuouv is herewith returned. He attempt |
cd 10 excuse himself upon the ground that
he did ft As a charity 10 the employees az |
the Gas-Works. who needed money. your |
committee. however, submit that no act
can be- a charity. capable OF covering even
one sin. when the fruit Of the charity Is
usiIrv at ten per cent. month. 1he EVIL
dence shows that in most Of tho loans
made bv Mr.. Grimes, he charged the enor-
nous and shocking usury OF ten per cent
a month Whatever may have promptcd
Mr. Grimes, IL was not charity that slim
uIated him 10 so persistently violate the
city ordinance above mentioned.
Your committee further reports that the
testimony herewith returned shows that
Nfr Iohn Mann. "A member of the Board OF
Aldermen. in contracting for and doing
the brick work for the water-2as plant
violated the State statute forbi1uins
councilmen to contract with a committee
or an agent OF rhe city. The evidence
shows that Mr. Mann knew that the sta
tuta forbid his making such contract
Your committee submit that Mr. Mann |
,n an contracting acted improperly, espc-
ciall,, so as ne was member of the very. |
committee ordering the work TO be done
While your committee think that Mr.
Mann acted with improperly, yet they