The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-10-07
ROBINsON,s AFFIDAVIT.
Charges Sworn to Before NOtnries
PubIic Yeeferdnv

Public Yesterday.
The affidavit made by Royal Robinson.
vice president of the contracting company
yesterday, includes his affidavit made sew
eral days ago. 1t reads as follows:
State of Indiana, Marion County, ss.:
HoyaI Robinson, being sworn, deposes
ana says that he is the person of that
name referred to in the Indianapolis News
and in the Sun of Oct. g. 1897 and the In
dianapolis Journal and the Sentinel of Oct
Fulmer-Seibert Company had paid to Ster-
ling K. Holt the sum of 5000 for his services
IN procuring a change in the grade Of the
Whlte river interceptor.
The aftiant further saws he did make such
an aflldavit and true copy of the same
is as follows
State of Indiana, Marson County. SIS:
Royal Robinson, being first duly sworn,
says that he is a resident of the city of
indianapolis, and has been for tWenty-six
years; that he is director in the Full
business as contractors in the city of In
dianapolis; that he is the vice president
and bookkeeper OF said company He says
that said company received the contract for
building the sewer in the city of Indian
apolis known as the White river interceptor
lie further says that said company proceed
ed to build said sewer according to the plans
and specifications furnished them by the city
civil engineer; that when they reached the
intersection of the Michigan road and the
canal it became almost impossible TO nro-
ceed with the building of the sewer accord
ing to the plans and specifications on ac-
count of the water collecting and standing
in the sewer; that he is informed and be-
lieves that George w. Sebert, member of
the said company, called on the city engineer
to get him to raise the bottom of the sewer
two feet, and said City Engineer Jeup in
formed him that it was a physical mpossi-
bility to do so and make a good sewer:
that he is further informed and believes that
George w. Seibert a member of the com
pany, as aforesaid, called on Sterling r.
Holt to see If he could not help them out
in the matter
HOLT, TAGGART AND SEIBERT
Affiant further says that he is informed
by Mr.. Seibert that Mr.. Holt took Mr.. Sci
bert to see Mr.. Thomas Taggart, mayor of
the city of Indianapolis, and had some
conversation with them about it; that Mr.
Seibert told this affiant that both Mr.. Tag
gart and Mr. Holt said to him that they
would see what they could do about il, and
that Mr.. Seibert would lose nothing. At
fiant is further informed that Mr. Holt pro-
posed to Mr.. Selbert that if he would pay
him (HolD five thousand dollars
$4,000 that he could have the matter
fixed for him in such way that they
hereupon Mr.. Seibert told this affiant and
Mr.. l.. A. Fulmer, a member of said COM
pany the conversation he had had with Mr.
Holt and Mr.. Taggart and a consultation
was held over the matter Affiant further
says that said company, realizing that un-
less something was done they would be
financially embarrassed, concluded that it
was necessary for this company to pay said
sum of money to Mr. Holt. 1t was agreed
between this attiant, Mr.: seibert and Mr..
dollars $4,000, as aforesaid. Afiant
further says that on the 30th day of
September, 1896, he drew a check on the
State Bank of Indiana, where the said COM
pany was doing its banking business, and
that this afiant gave said check to George
w. Seibert, who. in company with this af-
fiant went to the State Bank of Indiana
and said George w. Seibert drew out of
said bank on said date the sum
cash; that together this aftlant and Mr.. Set
bert proceeded to the Union Trust building,
in which building is the office of Sterling
r. Holt and that Mr.. Seibert went up
stairs to Mr.. Holt's office and this affant
returned to the company s office in the Bald
win block
HANDED OVER THE MONEY.
Afiant further says that within a short
time said George w. Seibert returned to
the companys offices and informed this af-
fiant that he had paid over to said Holt
the said sum of 5000. Afiiant further says
that he is informed and believes that within
a few days thereafter Mr.. Holt, Mr. Seibert.
City Engineer Jeup and City Attorney Cur
tis went to the Board of Public Works of
Curtis advised that the sewer be raised
two feet from the bottom and to be finished
in that manner as had been requested by
City Engineer Jeur long before the matter
set forth in this affidavit took place. At
iant further says that within a few days
after Sept 30 the sewer was raised two feet
from the bottom at point close 10 where
the Michigan road and the canal intercept
and was continued in that manner to the
end of the sewer, under the direction of the
city engineer and by the order of the Board
of Public Works. Affiant further says that
this sewer has been completed, according
tc the plans and specifications furnished
by the city engineer in accordance with
them as far as can be, and the change made
by the Board of Public Works as above
stated That said sewer has been completed
for a period of three months and that the
city engineer has failed 10 accept said
sewer. although often requested so TO do
and keep putting the matter off from time
to time, without any just cause whatever.
Affiant further says that on The night of
Continued on Third PageJ