The San Francisco call., 1898-03-06

entered Into between IlS- trict No. 349, by Henry Elliot, presi- dent of it's Board of Trustees, the Col den Gate Dredging and Reclamation Company, by Willis G. Witter its pres ident, and P. H. McGrath, representing the Board of Supervisors.
 President Witter of the dredging company desired the contract to be made with the Supervisors direct in stead of with McGrath, but was told that it was all right, to go ahead with the work, that McGrath was the representative of the board, and that the share of the county would be promptly paid. Under these representa- l tions the contract was signed, sealed and delivered, and the company's dred- gers began the desired work. McGrath was made superintendent.
 By January 1, 1897, sufficient work had been done to warrant demand for a portion of the contract price amounting to $28S0. President Wftter of the company went to Sacramento and issued demand. Not being able to wait until the meeting of the board when he expected the demand would be passed, he instructed McGrath to | draw the money In making out the demand on the county McGrath, with out authority, represented himself as | the agent of the company and received sl44O, the share of the county In the l transaction. This demand was drawn on January 2, 1897, and was paid on January 13 From that date until Feb ruary IS, 1898, the company was not able to get one dollar out of McGrath, nor out of the Board of Supervisors.
 When the work of reclamation was | finished District No. 349 paid it's share of the indebtedness, admitting that the work was properly done, and that the claims were just.
 Yet McGrath ''held out the s1440. the Board of Supervisors refused to pass resolutions authorizing the payment of 1 the balance on the contract and the dredging company was kept out of it's money Both President Witter and 1 Manager Harris of the dredging com 1 pany made repeated demands that the i S1440 be turned over. Sometimes they were met with the reply that McGrath 1 had no money belonging to the com pany, at others they were told that if they insisted on the payment of the sum drawn by McGrath they would never get another cent, as the board would stand by McGrath and refuse all payment of the claim.
 This went on for over year, and l finally the company decided that pa 1 tience had ceased to be a virtue and concluded to get its money despite the l objections of McGrath.
 President Witter and Manager Harris | called on McGrath in the rooms of the 1 State Board of Examiners in the Capi- | tol building and made a point-blank de- mand for the $1440.
 McGrath at first denied that he had any money belonging to the concern, | but when he was given the alternatives | of exposure to the head of the depart ment, indictment by the Grand Jury or a civil suit for the return of the money 1 he asked for time. He was given un- | til the next morning to pay the amount or stand the consequences.
 At the appointed time next day he produced 5000, demanding receipt for l S1440 Elated at being able to recover anything at all, Manager Harris took the 5000, and gave the receipt for $144O, McGrath promising, however, to pay the balance of $40 as soon as he was able to raise it.
 He stated as the reason he had not paid the money before that 1t had been distributed among other parties, includ- | ing Supervisors Jenkins and Morrison and Attorney Gett of the reclamation district, and that he had received very little of 1t himself.
 Believing for the first time that cor 1 rupt influence was at work in the l board, President Witter of the compa- ny decided to make a peremptory de- mand on the board for the balance due the corporation. He is prepared to show that the work was done accord ing to contract, that he has made re- peated demands for his money and will | produce evidence if necessary to show why his demands have not been paid
 So 1t looks as though there may be a hot time in Sacramento tomorrow
 Tt appears to us" said President Witter of the Dredging Company yes terday, that the time for forbearance and patience has passed. We have waited for a year for money that is justly due us, and have received less than one quarter of it. That sum we recovered because we forced this man McGrath to disgorge 1t after we had bounded him a year and more. He has told us enough to show that either the Board of Supervisors or certain mem bers of it are corrupt, or that McGrath is himself a natural-born reacher.
 He claimed to me repeatedly that the $1440 that we have demanded of him on a score of occasions was paid to Supervisors Jenkins and Morrison and Attorney Gett of the reclamation district, anI that he kept very little for himself. All of this may or may not be true but whether it is or not we are going to get our money ar raise a howl in Sacramento that will force the Grand Jury to take a hand in the matter.
 Moreover, there are other things that McGrath said that must be looked into. Several months ago when we made one of our periodical demands on him ne maue the statement that the board not only wanted the $1440 he had collected, but would also like a little bonus of $500 more before 1t would audit the demands. This was the state ment that put us on our mettle and made us decide to force the matter to an issue.
 This hold out of McGrath's was not only dishonest action, but came near causing the ruin of the Dredging and Reclamation Company. We were being pressed for money by the bank that we deal with in San Francisco, and, hoping that the money would be paid after each meeting of the Board of Super visors staked our regulations and credit on the result. Each time we were disappointed, and the bank finally became so impatient that we were com- pelled to look to outside sources for funds to tide us over.
 Since that time we have taken sev- l ia1.o