The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-03-30
EXPLANATIONS BY ENGINEERS.
TWO MILITARY. AND THREE CIVIL
ENGINEERS TESTIFY FOR CARTER

ing Ont Contracts and in Inter-
pretinE spccifcatiOn-Najor RIOS
sell Explained Many Things About
Fascines-The Bad Work of Doc
tors and Engineers Compared.
Major BInndford's Testimony.
Two military and three civil engineers
composed the list of witnesses before the
Carter court martial yesterday. The days
proceedings were quite interesting, but de-
void of sensational incident.
Col. Ludlow's little talk upon The matter
of discretion that should be allowed an en-
gineer in carrying out a contract and in
interpreting the specifications, was one Of
the most interesting incidents of the day.
Mai. William T. Rossen of the engineer
corps, stationed at Mobile. Ala, in charge
of the harbor works there, was the first
witness sworn. Mai. Rossell was asked
a number of questions on engineering
points in connection with the subjects be
fore the court and his ideas were in line
with the theory of the defense. He con-
sidered the phrase well-trimmed to mean
the cutting off of projecting branches and
twigs and not of all leaves and twigs on
the brush used in fascine.
There was nothing in the contracts, he
said, to prohibit the engineer from putting
in the multiple mats If he could get the
contractor to do it. 1t would be a great
advantage to the government, he consid-
cred, If the engineer in charge could get
the contractor to put in the multiple mats.
Mai Russell also sustained the other wit
nesses for the defense with reference to
the manner in which the work was done
under the Cumberland sound contract.
Col. William Ludlow, corps of engineers,
in charge of the fertilization work in New
York harbor, followed Maj. Rossell on
the stand. Col Ludlow is a tall man of
distinguished military bearing. He made
a good witness. answering clearly and
promptly. Col. Ludlow was formerly mill
tary attache at the London embassy.
He was first asked to interpret the
phrase, well trimmed" with regard to
the brush to be used in the fascines under
the contract. In his opinion, it did not
mean that the leaves and twigs should
all be trimmed off. He did not consider
that the specifications called for military
fascines or fascines of small rods. There
is nothing in the specifications TO prohibit
the use of six or eight course mattresses,
Col. Ludlow said, and if In the opinion
of the engineer in charge. they were BET
ter for the work than the single mattresses
and the contractor was willing to put
them in, he would say they were entirely
IN accord with the specifications.
al uvac elr IN
struchon of the Cumberland sound specl-
flcations, with foundation of brush mat
tresses. He interpreted the specifications
as requiring about six courses of mat
tresses. This was. in relation to the ia
nous mattress hearting," about which
there has been so much talk.
When asked about the practical con-
struction of fascines, Col. Ludlow said kt
had never had any experience in making
them He thought a fascine could be
choked with the small choker introduced
from near Augusta, he did not consider
complied with the specifications. He
would report to the chief of engineers airy
radical change i'm the construction of mat.
tresses, but would not consider Ii neces-
sary. except from historical standpoint
IL the chief of engineers were frequently
on the work and saw the form of con.
struction.
Suppose the fourteen courses spoken al
by the Judge Advocate were used only
here and there in a few
places where the structure, from
unexpected causes, had gone down
would you consider the engineer of
ficer in his discretion had authority t
lay six or seven courses on top of those
below" was asked by Mr.. Blair, in speak
ing of the Cumberland sound work.
Il should think he would be derelict i
he did not, If ii imperiled the safety o
his work" was the reply.
Suppose more than half had been laiC
with fourteen courses and the balance
We're ordered?" Col. Barr asked on IN
cross-examination.
1T is very difficult to answer that be
cause SO much of necessity must be veste,
in the professional knowledge and discre
ton of the responsible officer. In othe
words If you will permit me to state
can only state generally in regard to thi
matter-but l would say in regard to IN
drawing of a contract, or the interpreta
ton of a contract, IL is Indispensable tina
the officer who is engaged in that worl
and who is responsible for lis success an
execution, must not be hampered to an
greater extent than is absolutely neeessa
ny to secure a proper accounting. Yo
must give him rather wide discretion,
large limit, just as you would a doctor /
case of sickness. You would not pre-
scribe what medicine he should use i'm ad
vance, you would give him the run of tn
drug-shop and let him use it, but you woul
see that the patient did not pay for NOR
drugs than were actually used. The rigid
ity of the construction must come in whe
il comes to the amount of payment, Their
you cannot be too particular, and too rigiC
to see that the payments to the contraC
tor shall represent work actually dom
But when it comes to the details of III
work, you must consider, when you PIT
q man in charge of a very difficult enter
prise, one involving all the abstract law
of hydraulics, NEST of which are down OF
of sight, he knowing the force he has
contend with and the inadequateness {
resources in order 10 meet IL, that
must set his brain and profession;
knowledge, energy and ambition to wor
against those forces; he is engaged in
struggle: do not hamper him too much. l..
the contracts be drawn so that a Lbe, IS
discretion may be given him. and in cor
STRUNG the contracts give him the san
right"
THE bad work Of a doctor and III
bad work in a jetty are both apt to /
out of sight?" Col Barr asked.
Sometimes" was the reply.
There is a greater accountability res
l.