Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-10-07
STEVENS SCHOOL BUILDING
Revival of Controversy Over the Appropria-
ton for Its Construction.
Question of JurisdictiOn Raised by
Attorney Thomas md a Sugges-
ton of Interpleader.

Once again the Commissioners are strug-
Cling with the Stevens School building.
which was taken away from the. contrac-
tor because Of certain shortcomings on his
part and finished by tine District at his
bondsmen's cost. 1t will be- recalled that
quite balance Of the appropriation re-
manned, and those who had claims against
the contractor put in applications to the
auditor for payment. Recently applica-
ton was made for 4 distribution of the
fund, ard the matter wdS sent 20 the at
torney for recommendation.
In his reply to the Commissioners today,
he says:
THE difficulty with this case is the au-
thority of the Commissioners to dispose of
the fund in question without .he consent of
the parties in interest. The retain clause
in the contract authorized the Commits
sioners in their discretion to require the
contractor to furnish satisfactory evidence
that all persons who had done work for
him or furnished materials to be used In
the building had been paid, and that if
such evidence WAS not furnished, then such
sum or Sims as were necessary for such
payment might be retained until such
claims should be fully satisfied. IL appears
that the contractor defaulted; that the
Commissioners completed the work, and
that there is an unexpended balance of the
appropriation.
S"uSe IN Denc1cncy Bill.
by clause in the deficiency bill, ap-
proved July 10. 1897. it is provided:
That the Commissioners of the District
of Columbia are hereby authorized, in their
discretion. to use the unexpended balances
of the appropriations made for reconstruct
ing the Stevens School building il. settle
ment of claims filed with the auditor of
the District of Columbia against the con-
tractor for labor and material furnished to
him in the work of reconstruction
Tine object of this legislation. as indi-
Gated by its language, was to permit the
Commissioners to use the unexpended bal
ance of the appropriation for the Stevens
School building in payment of claims
against the contractor for labor and ma
terials filed with the auditor. Of the Dis
trict. There Is some question whether, In
view of the fact that the, Stevens School
building had been completed on the 10Th
of July last, and the balance of the ap-
preparation for reconstruction, being money
belonging to the contractor subject to what
ever rights his creditors had to it.
Power of Congress.
Congress had power to confer upon the
Commissioners jurisdiction to dispose of
the fund. it not being public money, but
money already earned and belonging to
the contractor. 1 am inclined to think
Mr.. Uhler is material man, and entitled
to participate in the distribution of this
fund.- notwithstanding he went upon the
bond of the contractor. the object of the
bond being to indemnify the District, and
not laborers and material men.
THE serious question in the is the
one of jurisdiction on the part of the Com
missioners to dispose of the balance of the
appropriation in payment of the claims
filed with the auditor, without the consent
of all the claimants. and l advise the filing
of a bill of interpleader. and the transfer of
the fund to the court where the parties in
interest may interplead, touching it and
have their several claims judicially ad-
justed. This can be done without cost to
the District, and in my opinion is the best
and safest course for you to take