The herald., 1897-03-23
The Professor Insists That His Analyses
as Presented Are Correct
His Reasons Given In Detail for Declaring the
Material Is Worthless
An Evening Session at Which There Was
Much Talk but Very Little of
Practical Nature Is
Brought Out

At the afternoon session of the city
council yesterday there was a large
crowd In attendance to hear the final
presentation of the protests in the mat
ter of the Main street pavement. Stand
ing room was al premium In the lobby
and most of the seats In the gallery were
occupied. Inside the rail We're the con-
tractors. with their experts and attor-
neys, as were also the attorneys and
witnesses for the protestants. among
them being Prof. Thomas Price, the San
Francisco chemist. who made the last
analysis. which was so vigorously OBJ
jected to by the contractors In the CEN
ter of the chamber, between the desks
of the members and the president,
table had been placed, on which was
chemists oven and box containing the
unused portions of the samples sent to
San Francisco for analysis. From the
ceiling was long rubber tube connected
with the pipe supplying the public IL
brary and ending in a gas burner under
the oven.
After disposing of some routine busi-
ness, the president announced that the
special order, the hearing OF the Main
street protests. would be taken UP, and
Attorney Arthur for the protestants
said that they were ready to proceed.
He asked that the reports of the COM
mittees and the samples taken from the
street be produced in the chamber and
messenger was sent for them.
While he was absent Prof. Rice busted
himself in getting his oven in working
order. and in the meantime large iron
mortar and -pestle had been brought in
and placed on the table, while the pro-
fessor's samples in bags and bottles
were displayed on the desks. and the
numerous experts and attorneys gath
cred around to witness the tests.
On the return of the messenger with
the reports and exhibits, which were
handed the clerk, Attorney Arthur
stated that he wasready to proceed and
that the first witness would be Prof.
Thomas Price of San Francisco. Prof.
Price was then sworn and stated that he
had been an analytical chemist for forty
five years, and had been familiar with
asphalt tests ever since that material
had been used in San Francisco for
street paving, twenty to twenty-five
years. He had made the chemical
analyses and the physical tests on which
he had submitted his report He knew
nothing of the details of where the
material came from until after he had
made the tests, beyond the fact that it
came from the city engineer of Los An
geles. He, was not prepared to verify
his reports by tests before the council.
The professor was told 10 go ahead
with his TESTS and was proceeding to un-
tie one Of his sacks to produce one of the
samples to see If 1t was the same as
that taken from the street by the coun-
cilmanic committee at the noon recess,
when an objection was raised by At
torney Jones of counsel for the con-
tractors, and general and animated
debate ensued.
Mr.. Jones insisted that when the COM
mittee first stated that they intended to
send the samples to Price & Son for
analysis he had objected. and predicted
that the report would be just as It
turned out and the committee had said
II such was the case it would not be
considered. He thought that II the gen.
tleman was an expert he should go
ahead with his tests and give the re-
suit Of what he found without knowing
anything about where the sample came
from.
Councilman Toll, the city engineer and
the attorneys all took part in the dis
cussion. Councilman Toll thought that
as Prof. Price was only here to verify his
reports he was entitled to know that
the samples were the same as those on
which he made his report. This was only
Justice and he was entitled to 1t.
After q somewhat lengthy talk 1t was
agreed that the committee should re-
tire and make up samples similar to that
on which he had reported. and they re-
tired for that purpose:
There was another lengthy talk. In
which Professor Price said that while
he was perfectly willing to verify his
reports, II he was to make a new analy-
sis he would have to be paid first. Coun-
Gilman Toll said that Professor Price
was entitled to sustain his report, and
this was all Professor Price, on the
other hand, said that he had been told
that attorneys had declared that his
report was lie, and he was down here
to prove his position. -.
Judge Mckinley said that they still
claimed that the report was lie, when
he was sharply rebuked by President
silver, who said that this language
would not be permitted.
Judge Mckinley said he was not CALI
ing any one liar All they wanted to
know was where they stood, whether
Professor Price was paid witness by
some one interested in an asphalt hghr,
or whether he was here to defend his
reputation.
There was another long talln between
the attorneys and councilmen. and Mr..
Hutchison entered q vigorous protest
against what he said was a useless
waste of time. City Attorney Dunn
finally brought the debate to close by
stating that Professor Price had a right
to so ahead in hi1 own way and make his
tests.
This settled the matter and Professor
Price proceeded to- open up his sacks.
and after comparing the samples with
those presented by The committe, went e